Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
Primary Links
Colorado Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Association for one Democratic Secular State for Palestine/Israel - Colorado Section
Between the Lines
Islam Denounces Anti-Semitism
Israel Imperial News
Jewish Friends of Palestine
One Democratic Secular State for Israel and Palestine
Organization for Democratic Action (Israel)
Other Palestine Links
Addameer
Al Awda: Palestinian Right of Return Campaign
Al Bushra: Palestinian Catholic Community
Al Haq
Al Nakba / The Cataclysm of 1948
Al Quds Palestina (Spanish)
All About Palestine
Alternative Information Center
A. M. Qattan Foundation
American Association for Palestinian Equal Rights
American Committee of Jerusalem
American Council for Judaism
American Federation of Ramallah
American Muslims for Jerusalem
American Perspectives on the Middle East
Americans Against World Empire (Conservatives)
Americans for Middle East Understanding
Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights
Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem
Arab Human Rights Center
Arab Thought Forum
Arabic Media Internet Network
Artists Against Occupation
Association of 40 (Israel)
Atlanta Palestine Solidarity
Australian Friends of Palestine Association
Australian Jews for a Just Peace
Badil Resource Center
Bat Shalom
Birzeit Institute of Law
The Birzeit Society
Bitterlemons.org
Black Laundry
Brighton Palestine Solidarity Campaign
B'Tselem (Israel)
Cactus48.Com
Canadians, Arabs, and Jews for a Just Peace
Center for Research & Documentation of Palestinian Society
Center for the Study of Islam & democracy
Christian PeaceMaker Teams
Citizens for Fair Legislation
Citizens of Israel Against the Fence
Coalition of Women for Peace (Israel)
Comité Palestine 33
Committee for Peace in the Middle East
Compassionate Listening Project
Communist Party of Israel
Council for the National Interest
Courage to Refuse
DC Palestine Solidarity
Deir Yassin Remembered
Demographic, Environmental, and Security Issues Project
Divest from Israel Campaign
Economic & Social Development Center - Palestine
Electronic Intifada
End the Illegal Occupation of Palestine (Christian)
End the Occupation
European Jews for a Just Peace
Eye to Eye: Palestinian Refugee Children
Foundation for Middle East Peace
Free Palestine
Free Palestine Now!
Freedom Now! (Israel)
General Union of Palestinians Students - Chile (Spanish)
Gush Shalom (Israel)
HADASH: Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Israel)
HaMoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual (Israel)
Harvard/MIT Divest
Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee
Health Development Information and Policy Institute
Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation
Holy Land Trust
Humanity On Hold
Institute of Jerusalem Studies
Institute of Palestine Studies
International Action Center
International Center of Bethlehem
International Solidarity Movement
International Women's Peace Service
Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Islam Denounces Terrorism
Islamic Association for Palestine
Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
Israeli State Terrorism
Jerusalem Forum
The Jerusalem Fund
Jerusalem Media & Communication Centre
Jersualem Quarterly File
Jewish Voices Against the Occupation (Seattle)
Jewish Voice for Peace
Jewish Women for Justice in Israel and Palestine
Jews Against Oppression and Occupation
Jews Against the Occupation (New York)
Jews Against the Occupation (Rutgers)
Jews for a Just Peace (North Carolina)
Jews for a Just Peace (Vancouver)
Jews for Global Justice
Jews for Israeli-Palestinian Peace (Sweden)
Jews for Justice for Palestinians (UK)
Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel
Jews for Racial & Economic Justice
Jews Not Zionists
L'Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique
Mandela Institute - Palestine
Middle East Children's Alliance
Middle East Council of Churches
Middle East Research and Information Project
MIFTAH: Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue & Democracy
Ministry of Higher Education (Official)
Movement Against Israel Apartheid (Israel)
Neturei Karta USA
Neturei Karta UK
New Jersey Solidarity
New Profile (Israel)
No Apartheid (Israel)
Not In My Name
The Other Israel
Oznik.Com
Palestine Activist Forum of New York
Palestine Central Bureau of Statistics (Official)
Palestine Children's Relief Forum
Palestine Children's Welfare Fund
Palestine. Dying to Live
Palestine Media Watch
Palestine Planning Center (Official)
Palestine Red Crescent Society
Palestine Remembered
The Palestine Report
Palestine Solidarity Committee of South Africa
Palestine Solidarity Group (N. America)
Palestine Solidarity News
Palestinian Academic Network
Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs
Palestinian Centre for Rapproachment between People
Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group
Palestinian Institute for the Study of Democracy
Palestinian Non-Governmental Organization's Network
Palestinian PMO to the United Nations (Official)
Palestinian Refugee ResearchNet
Palestinian Rights Programme
Physicians for Human Rights (Israel)
Pittsburgh Palestinian Solidarity Committee
PLO Negotiation Affairs Department (Official)
Public Committee Against Torture in Israel
QUIT: Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism
Rabbis for Human Rights
The Rafah Reports
Ramallah Online
Rave Against the Occupation (Israel)
Refusnik Solidarity Network
Remember These Children
Rencontre Progressiste Juive
Sambar Trading
Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Shaml-The Palestinian Diaspora & Refugee Centre
Shministim (Israel)
Add this banner to your site
Stop US Military Aid to Israel
Students for a Free Palestine
Support Sanity
Ta'ayush (Israel)
UN Office of the Special Coordinator in the Occupied Territories (Official)
Union of Charitable Societies
Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees
UNRWA: UN Relief and Works Agency
University of California Divestment Campaign
UT Austin Palestine Solidarity Committee
Visions of Peace with Justice in Israel/Palestine
Voices of Palestine
WAFA: Palestinian News Agency (Official)
|
| Allies warn Bush that stability in Iraq demands Arab-Israeli deal |
| 06.10.04 (4:07 pm) [edit] |
By Rupert Cornwell in Georgia
10 June 2004
President Bush yesterday was bluntly told by European and Arab allies alike that a serious new push for a Palestinian-Israeli peace solution was vital if his vision of a stable Iraq at the heart of a reformed Middle East were to have any chance of success.
Boosted by the unanimous United Nations vote on sovereignty, Mr Bush used the first day of the G8 summit here to try and advance his agenda for Iraq, seeking to widen the role of Nato, gain relief for Baghdad's debt, and launch a much-touted initiative to promote democracy in the Middle East and the Islamic world.
But the Palestinian-Israeli conflict quickly leapt to the centre of proceedings, as Tony Blair attempted to secure a US commitment to revitalise the virtually moribund "road map" towards a comprehensive settlement. President Jacques Chirac of France - the fiercest critic of the 2003 invasion of Iraq - warned that "real progress" toward a peace deal was a "precondition" of any successful attempt at reform of the region.
But despite some nods of assent, there was little sign that Washington has agreed to a major rethink of its Middle Eastern policies, and its embrace of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's controversial plan to withdraw from Gaza.
This latest annual gathering of the G8 powers, at the exclusive and massively guarded Sea Island resort, takes place in a much improved atmosphere from its predecessor a year ago, in the angry aftermath of the invasion of Iraq, which had split the Security Council and caused the worst rift in trans-atlantic relations in decades.
The recommended attire was 'business casual,' as a sports-shirted Mr Bush drove Mr Blair to their breakfast meeting in a new model fuel-efficient golf buggy, painted with the stars and stripes. Most leaders chose to go without ties. M. Chirac alone wore a formal suit and tie.
And the political content for the leaders - from France, the US, Britain, Russia, Italy, Japan, Canada and Germany - is also much more relaxed this time. The priority is mending fences, rather than rubbing salt into old Iraq wounds, and Monday's unanimous UN vote has given the occasion an ideal send-off.
However each of the main US aims is likely to run into difficulties. Cancellation of the $120bn of foreign debt run up by Saddam Hussein has been resolutely opposed by France, which argues that Iraq should not be treated differently from other, and even poorer, countries in the developing world. Moreover M. Chirac declared yesterday that this was not the time for Nato to become more involved in Iraq.
But the biggest disappointment may prove to be the so called "Broader Middle East" initiative, even as the G8 opens its doors for the first time to a group of Middle Eastern and Islamic leaders, including the new Iraqi President, Ghazi al-Yawer.
From highly ambitious origins, the scheme - intended to throw the collective weight of the G8 behind a bid to foster economic reform and democracy in the region - has been steadily diluted since it was first floated earlier this year, amid a chorus of objections and criticism, from Europe as well as from sections of the Arab world.
Once modelled on the 1975 Helsinki accords which imposed human rights obligations on Communist Europe, the latest version is non-binding in any way, and is focussed on economic and educational issues.
King Abdullah of Jordan, President Karzai of Afghanistan and the Turkish Prime Minister were among those in attendance. But Saudi Arabia and Egypt - two countries crucial for the initiative - refused to come, as did Morocco.
The scheme is no more than unwanted Western meddling, they complain, and a high handed attempt to impose foreign ways on the Middle East.
Mr Blair however denied the charges. "What we're doing today is to say, 'Look, sensible people sitting down and looking at the situation in the Middle East know there needs to be a process of reform and change,'" the Prime Minister said after a private breakfast with Mr Bush. "Now, that's not for us to dictate to people, but it is for us to help them get there."
But after the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, Washington's moral credibility in the region has rarely been lower. US officials increasingly acknowledge that without progress on the Palestinian-Israeli issue, in a way that suggests the US is not irrevocably tilted towards the Israeli cause, prospects for any wider democratic initiative in the region are dim.
Before he left for the summit, the Jordanian monarch - one of the staunchest US allies in the region - said "no programme on the broader democratic initiative is possible, until a resolution of the [Palestinian-Isaeli] conflict has been achieved".
But Washington, outwardly at least, is hardly changing its ground. Once again US officials stressed that the Sharon plan to pull out of Gaza and parts of the West Bank was a "hugely significant" step, whose importance was missed by many countries, among them Britain.
In yesterday's opening session Mr Bush gave an upbeat review of the strong US economy, now growing at an annual 4 per cent or more, despite the sharp rise in oil prices.
Many countries regard the soaring US budget and trade deficits as another threat to world prosperity. But Mr Bush defended his massive tax cuts, a prime cause of the budget deficit, as essential to start the present recovery.
The US believes it is up to Europe and Japan to boost their own economies, to reduce domestic unemployment and take the weight off the US.
Today's session, to which several African leaders have been invited, will deal with debt relief, the fight against poverty and AIDS, and helping international peacekeeping operations in global trouble spots.
------------------------- ------------------------- --
|
|
|
| |
| Scary: Evangelicals, Bush & Israel |
| 05.18.04 (9:56 pm) [edit] |
[b]The Jesus Landing Pad[/b]
Bush White House checked with rapture Christians before latest Israel move
by Rick Perlstein
Village Voice, May 18th, 2004 10:00 AM
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein .php" title="http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein .php" target="_blank"http://www.villagevoice.com/i...
[i]It was an e-mail we weren't meant to see. Not for our eyes were the notes that showed White House staffers taking two-hour meetings with Christian fundamentalists, where they passed off bogus social science on gay marriage as if it were holy writ and issued fiery warnings that "the Presidents [sic] Administration and current Government is engaged in cultural, economical, and social struggle on every level"—this to a group whose representative in Israel believed herself to have been attacked by witchcraft unleashed by proximity to a volume of Harry Potter. Most of all, apparently, we're not supposed to know the National Security Council's top Middle East aide consults with apocalyptic Christians eager to ensure American policy on Israel conforms with their sectarian doomsday scenarios.
But now we know.
"Everything that you're discussing is information you're not supposed to have," barked Pentecostal minister Robert G. Upton when asked about the off-the-record briefing his delegation received on March 25. Details of that meeting appear in a confidential memo signed by Upton and obtained by the Voice.
The e-mailed meeting summary reveals NSC Near East and North African Affairs director Elliott Abrams sitting down with the Apostolic Congress and massaging their theological concerns. Claiming to be "the Christian Voice in the Nation's Capital," the members vociferously oppose the idea of a Palestinian state. They fear an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza might enable just that, and they object on the grounds that all of Old Testament Israel belongs to the Jews. Until Israel is intact and David's temple rebuilt, they believe, Christ won't come back to earth.
Abrams attempted to assuage their concerns by stating that "the Gaza Strip had no significant Biblical influence such as Joseph's tomb or Rachel's tomb and therefore is a piece of land that can be sacrificed for the cause of peace."
Three weeks after the confab, President George W. Bush reversed long-standing U.S. policy, endorsing Israeli sovereignty over parts of the West Bank in exchange for Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip.
In an interview with the Voice, Upton denied having written the document, though it was sent out from an e-mail account of one of his staffers and bears the organization's seal, which is nearly identical to the Great Seal of the United States. Its idiosyncratic grammar and punctuation tics also closely match those of texts on the Apostolic Congress's website, and Upton verified key details it recounted, including the number of participants in the meeting ("45 ministers including wives") and its conclusion "with a heart-moving send-off of the President in his Presidential helicopter."
Upton refused to confirm further details.
Affiliated with the United Pentecostal Church, the Apostolic Congress is part of an important and disciplined political constituency courted by recent Republican administrations. As a subset of the broader Christian Zionist movement, it has a lengthy history of opposition to any proposal that will not result in what it calls a "one-state solution" in Israel.
The White House's association with the congress, which has just posted a new staffer in Israel who may be running afoul of Israel's strict anti-missionary laws, also raises diplomatic concerns.
The staffer, Kim Hadassah Johnson, wrote in a report obtained by the Voice, "We are establishing the Meet the Need Fund in Israel—'MNFI.' . . . The fund will be an Interest Free Loan Fund that will enable us to loan funds to new believers (others upon application) who need assistance. They will have the opportunity to repay the loan (although it will not be mandatory)." When that language was read to Moshe Fox, minister for public and interreligious affairs at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, he responded, "It sounds against the law which prohibits any kind of money or material [inducement] to make people convert to another religion. That's what it sounds like." (Fox's judgment was e-mailed to Johnson, who did not return a request for comment.)
The Apostolic Congress dates its origins to 1981, when, according to its website, "Brother Stan Wachtstetter was able to open the door to Apostolic Christians into the White House." Apostolics, a sect of Pentecostals, claim legitimacy as the heirs of the original church because they, as the 12 apostles supposedly did, baptize converts in the name of Jesus, not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Ronald Reagan bore theological affinities with such Christians because of his belief that the world would end in a fiery Armageddon. Reagan himself referenced this belief explicitly a half-dozen times during his presidency.
While the language of apocalyptic Christianity is absent from George W. Bush's speeches, he has proven eager to work with apocalyptics—a point of pride for Upton. "We're in constant contact with the White House," he boasts. "I'm briefed at least once a week via telephone briefings. . . . I was there about two weeks ago . . . At that time we met with the president."
Last spring, after President Bush announced his Road Map plan for peace in the Middle East, the Apostolic Congress co-sponsored an effort with the Jewish group Americans for a Safe Israel that placed billboards in 23 cities with a quotation from Genesis ("Unto thy offspring will I give this land") and the message, "Pray that President Bush Honors God's Covenant with Israel. Call the White House with this message." It then provided the White House phone number and the Apostolic Congress's Web address.
In the interview with the Voice, Pastor Upton claimed personal responsibility for directing 50,000 postcards to the White House opposing the Road Map, which aims to create a Palestinian state. "I'm in total disagreement with any form of Palestinian state," Upton said. "Within a two-week period, getting 50,000 postcards saying the exact same thing from places all over the country, that resonated with the White House. That really caused [President Bush] to backpedal on the Road Map."
When I sought to confirm Upton's account of the meeting with the White House, I was directed to National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones, whose initial response upon being read a list of the names of White House staffers present was a curt, "You know half the people you just mentioned are Jewish?"
When asked for comment on top White House staffers meeting with representatives of an organization that may be breaking Israeli law, Jones responded, "Why would the White House comment on that?"
When asked whose job it is in the administration to study the Bible to discern what parts of Israel were or weren't acceptable sacrifices for peace, Jones said that his previous statements had been off-the-record.
When Pastor Upton was asked to explain why the group's website describes the Apostolic Congress as "the Christian Voice in the nation's capital," instead of simply a Christian voice in the nation's capital, he responded, "There has been a real lack of leadership in having someone emerge as a Christian voice, someone who doesn't speak for the right, someone who doesn't speak for the left, but someone who speaks for the people, and someone who speaks from a theocratical perspective."
When his words were repeated back to him to make sure he had said a "theocratical" perspective, not a "theological" perspective, he said, "Exactly. Exactly. We want to know what God would have us say or what God would have us do in every issue."
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- -----
The Middle East was not the only issue discussed at the March 25 meeting. James Wilkinson, deputy national security advisor for communications, spoke first and is characterized as stating that the 9-11 Commission "is portraying those who have given their all to protect this nation as 'weak on terrorism,' " that "99 percent of all the men and women protecting us in this fight against terrorism are career citizens," and offered the example of Frances Town-send, deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism, "who sacrificed Christmas to do a 'security video' conference."
Tim Goeglein, deputy director of public liaison and the White House's point man with evangelical Christians, moderated, and he also spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage. According to the memo, he asked the rhetorical questions: "What will happen to our country if that actually happens? What do those pushing such hope to gain?" His answer: "They want to change America." How so? He quoted the research of Hoover Institute senior fellow Stanley Kurtz, who holds that since gay marriage was legalized in Scandinavia, marriage itself has virtually ceased to exist. (In fact, since Sweden instituted a registered-partnership law for same-sex couples in the mid '90s, there has been no overall change in the marriage and divorce rates there.)
It is Matt Schlapp, White House political director and Karl Rove's chief lieutenant, who was paraphrased as stating "that the Presidents Administration and current Government is engaged in cultural, economical, and social struggle on every level."
Also present at the meeting was Kristen Silverberg, deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy. (None of the participants responded to interview requests.)
The meeting was closed by Goeglein, who was asked, "What can we do to assist in this fight for these issues and our nations [sic] foundation and values?" and who reportedly responded, "Pray, pray, pray, pray."
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- -----
The Apostolic Congress's representative in Israel, Kim Johnson, is ethnically Jewish, keeps kosher, and holds herself to the sumptuary standards of Orthodox Jewish women, so as to better blend in to her surroundings.
In one letter home obtained by the Voice she notes that many of the Apostolic Christians she works with in Israel are Filipino women "married to Jewish men—who on occasion accompany their wives to meetings. We are planning to start a fellowship with this select group where we can meet for dinners and get to know one another. Please Pray for the timing and formation of such." Elsewhere she talks of a discussion with someone "on the pitfalls and aggravations of Christians who missionize Jews." She works often among the Jewish poor—the kind of people who might be interested in interest-free loans—and is thrilled to "meet the outcasts of this Land—how wonderful because they are in the in-casts for His Kingdom."
An ecstatic figure who from her own reports appears to operate at the edge of sanity ("Two of the three nights in my apartment I have been attacked by a hair raising spirit of fear," she writes, noting the sublet contained a Harry Potter book; "at this time I am associating it with witchcraft"), Johnson has also met with Knesset member Gila Gamliel. (Gamliel did not respond to interview requests.) She also boasted of an imminent meeting with a "Knesset leader."
"At this point and for all future mails it is important for me to note that this country has very stiff anti-missionary laws," she warns the followers back home. [D]iscretion is required in all mails. This is particularly important to understand when people write mails or ask about organization efforts regarding such."
Her boss, Pastor Upton, displays a photograph on the Apostolic Congress website of a meeting between himself and Beny Elon, Prime Minister Sharon's tourism minister, famous in Israel for his advocacy of the expulsion of Palestinians from Israeli-controlled lands.
His spokesman in the U.S., Ronn Torassian, affirmed that "Minister Elon knows Mr. Upton well," but when asked whether he is aware that Mr. Upton's staffer may be breaking Israel's anti-missionary laws, snapped: "It's not something he's interested in discussing with The Village Voice."
In addition to its work in Israel, the Apostolic Congress is part of the increasingly Christian public face of pro-Israel activities in the United States. Don Wagner, author of the book Anxious for Armageddon, has been studying Christian Zionism for 15 years, and believes that the current hard-line pro-Israel movement in the U.S. is "predominantly gentile." Often, devotees work in concert with Jewish groups like Americans for a Safe Israel, or AFSI, which set up a mostly Christian Committee for a One-State Solution as the sponsor of last year's billboard campaign. The committee's board included, in addition to Upton, such evangelical luminaries as Gary Bauer and E.E. "Ed" McAteer of the Religious Roundtable.
AFSI's executive director, Helen Freedman, confirms the increasingly Christian cast of her coalition. "We have many good Jews, of course," she says, "but they're in the minority." She adds, "The liberal Jew is unable to believe the Arab when he says his goal is to Islamize the West. . . . But I believe it. And evangelical Christians believe it."
Of Jews who might otherwise support her group's view of Jews' divine right to Israel, she laments, "They're embarrassed about quoting the Bible, about referring to the Covenant, about talking about the Promised Land."
Pastor Upton is not embarrassed, and Helen Freedman is proud of her association with him. She is wistful when asked if she, like Upton, has been able to finagle a meeting with the president. "Pastor Upton is the head of a whole Apostolic Congress," she laments. "It's a nationwide group of evangelicals."
Upton has something Freedman covets: a voting bloc.
She laughs off concerns that, for Christian Zionists, actual Jews living in Israel serve as mere props for their end-time scenario: "We have a different conception of what [the end of the world] will be like . . . Whoever is right will rejoice, and whoever was wrong will say, 'Whoops!' "
She's not worried, either, about evangelical anti-Semitism: "I don't think it exists," she says. She does say, however, that it would concern her if she learned the Apostolic Congress had a representative in Israel trying to win converts: "If we discovered that people were trying to convert Jews to Christianity, we would be very upset."
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- -----
Kim Johnson doesn't call it converting Jews to Christianity. She calls it "Circumcision of the Heart"—a spiritual circumcision Jews must undergo because, she writes in paraphrase of Jeremiah, chapter 9, "God will destroy all the uncircumcised nations along with the House of Israel, because the House of Israel is uncircumcised in the heart . . . [I]t is through the Gospel . . . that men's hearts are circumcised."
Apostolics believe that only 144,000 Jews who have not, prior to the Second Coming of Christ, acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah will be saved in the end times. Though even for those who do not believe in this literal interpretation of the Bible—or for anyone who lives in Israel, or who cares about Israel, or whose security might be affected by a widespread conflagration in the Middle East, which is everyone—the scriptural prophecies of the Christian Zionists should be the least of their worries.
Instead, we should be worried about self-fulfilling prophecies. "Biblically," stated one South Carolina minister in support of the anti-Road Map billboard campaign, "there's always going to be a war."
Don Wagner, an evangelical, worries that in the Republican Party, people who believe this "are dominating the discourse now, in an election year." He calls the attempt to yoke Scripture to current events "a modern heresy, with cultish proportions.
"I mean, it's appalling," he rails on. "And it also shows how marginalized mainstream Christian thinking, and the majority of evangelical thought, have become."
It demonstrates, he says, "the absolute convergence of the neoconservatives with the Christian Zionists and the pro-Israel lobby, driving U.S. Mideast policy."
The problem is not that George W. Bush is discussing policy with people who press right-wing solutions to achieve peace in the Middle East, or with devout Christians. It is that he is discussing policy with Christians who might not care about peace at all—at least until the rapture.
The Jewish pro-Israel lobby, in the interests of peace for those living in the present, might want to consider a disengagement. [/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Ha'aretz: No sign of fatigue |
| 05.17.04 (8:45 am) [edit] |
[b]No sign of fatigue [/b]
17.05.2004 0:01:00 Ha'aretz
By Danny Rubinstein
http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040517/250261.html" title="http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040517/250261.html" target="_blank"http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
[b]Bold emphasis mine - CPSC1[/b]
[i]This Sunday, Palestinians marked the 56th anniversary of the end of the British Mandate in Palestine and the establishment of the State of Israel - the day of their Nakba (catastrophe). Processions, assemblies and demonstrations were held throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Yasser Arafat delivered a gala speech in which he called on his people to persist in the struggle, and the Palestinian newspapers issued special supplements with pictures of 1948 refugees who still carry with them the keys of their homes in Jaffa, Lod and Haifa.
A small demonstration was also held by a few dozen protesters in East Jerusalem, near the American consulate on Nablus Road. One of the diplomatic commentators holding court in a coffee house in the nearby market told the story of an Arab with serious troubles, who was disgusted with life. He went to a fortune teller, who informed him that for the next five years, his situation would be even worse. And what about after that? asked the man. After that you'll get used to it, said the fortune teller. After 56 years, the Palestinians have also become used to living with the catastrophe, said the coffee house commentator.
Each year, the Palestinian Authority, PLO institutions and various refugee organizations organize commemoration assemblies for May 15.
This year, the Nakba assemblies were much better attended than in the past, with a commensurate increase in media coverage of the subject. Why? "Because the Nakba continues," explained Palestinian spokesmen who wrote and spoke about it. Lines such as, "It began in Jaffa - and continues in Rafah" widely appeared in the Palestinian press, and the newspapers ran photos of residents of Rafah and Gaza's Zeitoun neighborhood pulling their possessions out of the ruins of homes and carrying them on their backs, side by side with similar photographs from 1948.
[b]Fifty-six years after their catastrophe, and three-and-a-half years into the intifada, it can be stated with certainty that in spite of the increasing suffering and distress, the Palestinians are revealing no discernible signs of fatigue or crisis. There may be rises and falls in the national mood as expressed in public opinion polls, but it is patently clear that all the means of collective punishment employed by Israel - siege, house demolitions, economic ruin - have not helped to reduce morale. All of the closures and cordons, roadblocks and searches, arrests and targeted assassinations have done little to curb Palestinian motivation to continue the terror attacks. Perhaps the opposite is the case: the public in Gaza and the West Bank is demanding more revenge, and the atmosphere of rage in the street, which constitutes an important infrastructure for continued terror, only grows more intense.[/b]
There is no escape from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. There were estimates last year that approximately 50,000 people had left the West Bank since the start of the intifada. These were Palestinians with foreign citizenship, usually Jordanian, who had crossed over to Jordan or had left the country. That trend has ended, for the simple reason that residents of the West Bank and Gaza have nowhere to go. The borders are completed sealed off, and Jordan has imposed heavy restrictions to stop the entry of Palestinians into its territory.
Palestinian society has largely become a society of welfare cases begging for handouts across the globe. The Palestinian Authority pays salaries to 150,000 people or more, from contributions from abroad. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency supports tens of thousands of families. An international organization called Food For Work has initiated relief work projects, and distributes food packages. A Saudi Arabian emergency program supports some 12,000 Palestinian families through monthly stipends. Dozens more relief organizations operate similar programs.
Palestinian data indicate more than 60 percent of the population live below the poverty line, and there are reports that 17 percent of the children in Gaza suffer from malnutrition. In many locales, the government has collapsed, and gangs have power over day-to-day life. [b]Nevertheless, even when their situation is so terrible, there is not even a hint of public demand to end the struggle against Israel.[/b] [/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Israeli torture experts condemn US practices |
| 05.17.04 (8:15 am) [edit] |
[b]Sex abuse is poor interrogation tool, Israelis say [/b]
17.05.2004 14:57:00 Reuters World Report
http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040517/250349.html" title="http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040517/250349.html" target="_blank"http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
Excerpts:
[i]JERUSALEM, May 17 (Reuters) - Sexual humiliation of the kind practised by U.S. military police at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq does little to help interrogators gain useful information from prisoners, Israeli counter-terrorism experts said on Monday.[/i]
[i]"Under questioning, a terrorist should be made to yield. Sexual abuse goes too far by breaking him, so it's not an option," Ami Ayalon, former chief of Israel's Shin Bet domestic security service, told Reuters. "A broken man will say anything. That information is worthless."[/i]
[i]For many in Israel, the case recalled charges by a Lebanese guerrilla leader, Mustafa Dirani, that he was sodomised by an Israeli interrogator while in captivity in the mid-1990s.[/i]
[i]Ayalon said the Dirani case was exceptional as he had been held by Israeli military intelligence, whose top-secret foreign missions secure it virtual freedom from judicial scrutiny, while the Shin Bet works in Israel and the Palestinian territories under strict Supreme Court guidelines.[/i]
[i]According to New Yorker correspondent Seymour Hersh, some of Abu Ghraib's abused inmates may have been photographed in the hope they could later be blackmailed into becoming U.S. informants. Israel depends on a vast network of collaborators in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to help its hunt for Palestinian militants waging a 3 1/2-year-old revolt with suicide bombings. Palestinian advocates say collaborators are recruited on the offer of pay or after Israeli authorities withhold favours such as travel permits, an account confirmed by Shin Bet sources.[/i]
[i]But sexual blackmail is almost unheard of. "An informant risks being caught and killed by his countrymen, so he will only be effective if he works of his own free will, feeling it is worth his while," said Menachem Landau, a retired Shin Bet supervisor of Palestinian collaborators. "Someone acting out of fear will be unreliable and could even end up attacking his handler to clear his name," he said.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Arguing with Zionists (#1) |
| 05.15.04 (11:04 am) [edit] |
[b]In the course of my work, I frequently find myself arguing with Zionists via email. As a consequence, I've decided to start posting a few of these arguments here, as it seems a shame to write so much just for the benefit of someone who isn't going to appreciate it anyway. So, from time to time I'm going to begin reproducing some of our exchanges here for public consumption.
To start this, here is a recent discussion I've been having with a devout Zionist in New York. It is so incredibly generic it serves as a good starting point. The names have been removed.[/b]
Hi XXXXX,
I won't accuse you of intentionally splicing together all of this information and arranging it to reflect your own preexisting prejudices as a cynical propaganda ploy as you may very well honestly believe all this rubbish. This is the price one pays for only listening to one side of the issue, and the more radical propagandists of that one side at that.
Anyway, I’ll respond to your points in sequence:
[i]“Israel already has 1.3 million Arab citizens. They can vote, hold jobs and run for public office. The laws are not Koran-based, but Muslims are free to pray and worship as they wish.”[/i]
True. The problem is that you neglect to mention that Israel also rules over another 3.6 million Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs) that they not only deny citizenship to, but deny absolutely all rights to whatsoever. You can prattle on about the PA and other Araberats (Israel’s versions of the old Nazi Judenrats, the ghettos were as “autonomous” as the PA districts under Oslo) all day, but it does not change the simple fact that Israel has maintained absolute control over the OPTs since 1967 (Oslo constructs notwithstanding). These 3.6 million Palestinians are denied any voice whatsoever in the Israeli military administration, the actual government they live under.
[i]“Israel will not let in millions of Palestinians, because they know what would happen next. If you think the killings are bad now, wait till the Arabs don't have to cross a border, or get through a checkpoint to find a Jew to murder. Wait till they live right among the Jews and they can kill a Jew just by walking across the street and shoving a knife in his gut. Does the word "kristallnacht" mean anything to you? Does the Palestinians celebrating massacring a pregnant woman and her small children wake you up.”[/i]
There is some validity in this objection and the inverse is certainly true, which is why the Israelis are killing Palestinians virtually everyday (there was one day last April in which no Palestinians were murdered by Israelis, but that is the exception, not the rule). And yes, such a move would make it easier for the militant criminals seeking murder or expulsion of “the other” to commit their violence. The point is that with both peoples moving in this direction, the support for (and the grossly disproportionate influence held by) the extremists in both camps would collapse very quickly. Undoubtedly the extremists of groups like the Palestinian Islamic Jihad would commit an outrage in hopes of turning all Israelis against one state, likewise the Kahanist settlers in Kiryat Arba can be counted on to do the same, trying to inflame all the Palestinians. Nevertheless, if the majority of both peoples refuse to be baited, such efforts would fail. A prime example of this being the start of Oslo (1993-1996), neither Hamas suicide bombings nor Kahanist massacres (re: Baruch Goldstein in occupied Al Khalil-Hebron) managed to thwart the peace process despite their worst efforts. It took Hamas and Netanyahu/Likud to do this. The precedent exists, the extremists – on both sides – only rule with the consent of their subjects, but when the people have had enough their influence collapses overnight.
[i]“Read these 2 polls. Does this sound like a few.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satell...d=1066799672944" title="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satell...d=1066799672944" target="_blank"http://www.jpost.com/servlet/...;
Poll: 59% of Palestinians support continuation of terror after state is
created
Oct. 22, 2003 | By JANINE ZACHARIA
Fifty-nine percent of Palestinians believe that Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad should continue their armed struggle against Israel even if Israel leaves all of the West Bank and Gaza, including East Jerusalem, and a Palestinian state is created, a new survey shows.
http://www.jnewswire.com/news_archi...030903_poll.asp" title="http://www.jnewswire.com/news_archi...030903_poll.asp" target="_blank"http://www.jnewswire.com/news...;
Poll: Most Palestinians support terror attacks [60%]
Jerusalem Newswire ^ | September 3, 2003
(jnewswire.com) - A public survey conducted by the Office of Palestinian Information last week shows a solid majority of Palestinian Arabs support terrorist attacks against Israeli Jews.”[/i]
There can be no surprise about this under the current circumstances, I’m more surprised that the numbers of supporters are as low as they are. After all Palestinians in the OPTs are living under the IDF jackboots and watching the Israelis kill their people virtually everyday. How can anyone be surprised that most Palestinians applaud it when some Palestinian has the means to inflict some tiny fraction of the suffering ALL their people face ALL the time on the Israelis?
Nevertheless, you are (either intentionally or unintentionally) citing the reaction as the cause here and that is why you are confused. Palestinian support for their resistance is a direct consequence of the situation that the Israelis have imposed upon them. Again, the proof of it can be found in the start of the Oslo process 1993-1996. At that time, when most Palestinians had a sincere belief that Israel was acting with honor and there was sincere hope that the process would lead to a free Palestine, support for the militants completely collapsed. This happened to such an extent that ALL the extremists (even those ideologically opposed to one another like the secular nationalists vs. the Islamists) were forced to consolidate themselves into the “Rejection Front” in Damascus, because none of them had enough support to maintain their operations in Palestine itself.
The point is, those poll numbers reflect the current situation, the current situation that Israel alone has constructed and that Israel alone can change. If you want to reverse those numbers, Israel can do so at anytime by rearranging the situation and creating one that provides the Palestinians with some hope, some peaceful alternative. Again, the past shows what the reaction will be. However, in the current situation there is no hope, no “light at the end of the tunnel”, no reason not to support their militants. Israel can change this whenever it wants to.
[i]“Arafat adopted an official constitution based on Koranic Sharia Law, which means that all people who live under the PA are now subject to Islamic Law.”[/i]
Factually incorrect. While the Palestinian constitution has gone into force – see the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wo... – it is not an Islamist constitution. Article 7 does read:
“The principles of the Islamic Shari`a are a primary source for legislation. The legislative branch shall determine personal status law under the authority of the monotheistic religions according to their denominations, in keeping with the provisions of the constitution and the preservation of unity, stability, and advancement of the Palestinian people.” See: http://www.pcpsr.org/domestic...
However this relates to the “principles” of Sharia law, which is open to a great deal of interpretation and is addressed in an article focused on personal status law. Even Israel employs Sharia law in personal status issues for its Muslim population. On the matter of Sharia law, this is the basis of all Arab and most Muslim jurisprudence, but that spans relatively moderate secular states like Morocco or Tunisia to militantly oppressive semi-feudal states like Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. There is nothing particularly objectionable – even from a liberal Western perspective – about law based on the Sharia except that it has a religious basis, instead it is the way that it is interpreted that really matters. The Palestinians have a very strong secular strain (the product of their Diaspora, whereby they as a collective, have experienced much of the rest of the world and these experiences have affected their outlook) and I doubt Islamism holds much appeal outside of the ongoing conflict. Given a stop to the conflict, I suspect the Islamists would find their support disintegrating. Look again at 1993-1996.
That being said, nevertheless, I am opposed to the existing Palestinian constitution because it is as ethnocentric (fundamentally racist) as Israel’s existing law and I reject the prudence of any and all ethnocentric law. I firmly advocate a secular democratic state & government for all parties involved.
[i]“Essentially, this is what would happen if Israel did what you said. You dont want 2 states.”[/i]
Correct. But more than “not wanting”, I don’t believe it is even a physical possibility today, much less a political one.
[i]“You want Israel to take in millions of Palestinians and have this as one state.”[/i]
Yes.
[i]“You do realize that Arafat would be the leader. Thats who the Palestinians would elect since they would be the majority.”
You realize Arafat would be leader for life.
You realize there will be no criticism of Arafat allowed.”[/i]
Isn’t real democracy a bitch? LOL, I’m joking.
Quiet seriously, Arafat has invested far too much into the two-state solution and will not renounce it. Arafat is a major obstacle to the one-state alternative and I believe it is safe to say that there will be no major advancement of the one-state perspective on the Palestinian side of the equation until Arafat is dead. Arafat is an “old school” Arab nationalist, the ideology that led to the rise of all the old dictatorships in the rest of the Middle East, and I suspect Arafat wants his turn to be a dictator too. Either way, he is an anachronism today, more of a symbol than a viable leader. The massive Palestinian resistance to his administration – and its corruption – during the Oslo period shows that it is doubtful that most of the Palestinian leadership would voluntarily consent to a regime giving him full control. Like it or not, Arafat can win any election because he is the embodiment of the Palestinian struggle, an unfailing leader of the Palestinian cause that has fought without stop for almost half a century for his people. However, his pseudo-administration (under Israeli control) from 1994 to 2000 showed the Palestinian leadership and educated that he left a LOT to be desired in a political leader. He would be more suitable in a more ceremonial role, something like the Katsav and the Israeli presidency as opposed to an actual political leader.
Anyway, this is much ado about nothing. Arafat would never consent to a one-state solution, so in this respect he is very much in the same camp as most Israelis. Further, he is very old man and his death is imminent even without Israeli help. The one-state idea will not move much beyond its current stage (roughly 25% of Palestinians support it) until he is out of the picture.
[i]“In Israel today, opposition is in general viewed as everyone's inallienable right, whereas the PLO is a dictatorship ruled through terror. So your idea would lead to another Arab dictatorship. (Arafat)”[/i]
As noted above, I do not believe Arafat will play a role in the development of the one state, as a matter of fact, I hold him to be one of the main obstacles to it.
[i]"When you talk about the right of return, what your really talking about are two Palestinian states. Not a Jewish state of Israel, but two Palestinian states."[/i]
No, one state between the river and the sea for ALL it’s people.
[i]There were almost 800,000 Jews driven from their homes in Arab countries in 1948 and their assets stolen. Some had live there for a 1000 years. [/i]
And this is an issue that the Israelis need to take up with the relevant states in question. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Palestinians. The Palestinians did not drive the Jews out of their homes in Yemen or Iraq – the Yemenites and Iraqis did this and if Israel wants to address the issue it has to do so those responsible. Either way, the actions of the Yemenites or Iraqis (or others) does not justify or excuse Israel’s driving the 750,000 Palestinians out of their homes and land in 1948. This is an “apples and oranges” argument, trying to maliciously excuse Israeli behavior toward the Palestinians by citing other people’s treatment of the Jews. Absolute rubbish.
[i]“The difference is that Israel assimilated them and did not allow them to live in squalor”[/i]
Nonsense. Israel did not assimilate the Israeli Palestinians and they do – even to this day – leave them in squalor. Admittedly Israel has gotten better in this respect over the last few decades, but the fundamental discrimination against Israeli Palestinians remains an openly admitted fact in Israel. Worse still, the 3.6 million Palestinians in the OPTs that have lived absolutely under Israeli control since 1967 have not even been included in the pretense afforded those with Israeli citizenship.
[i]“Sorry XXXXX, Israel does not want to become the 23rd Arab country.”[/i]
In which case the Zionist movement probably should not have set up its experiment in an Arab country. Israel did have the opportunity for separatism between 1967 and 1996, but even this option is gone now. All of this is the direct consequence of Israel’s own actions, its demands for the land over its ethnic purity as a “Jewish State” and now it has reached a point of no return. The settlers cannot be brought back beyond the use of force (re: Yamit) and we both know no Israeli government could survive such an attempt. Therefore there will no VIABLE Palestinian state. The choice is now down to integration – one state for all it’s people – or separation – deliberate systematic ethnic cleansing Nazi-style.
[i]“Here's my advice to you. Change your tactics. Instead of hoping the Arabs destroy Israel by flooding Israel with millions of Palestinians. Give the Palestinians the courage to stand up to their own leadership. Persuade them to oust Arafat and to retrieve the billions of dollars in aid that he pocketed while his people languished. Tell them to deny the terrorists access to their homes and villages. Help them take back mosques and schools from preachers of hatred and incitement.”[/i]
LOL. As noted above, no matter which way you look at it, Arafat is in his twilight, he isn’t that much of an issue now. As for all the rest of it – all of it mind you – is the direct consequence of Israeli actions and only Israel can change the situation in a way to counter these trends. Even if all of the above were done tomorrow it doesn’t change the fundamental basis of the problem, namely that Israel demands to maintain total control over the OPTs while denying the resident population any voice or influence in this administration. In so many words what you are demanding is that the Palestinians lay down tamely beneath the jackboots of the IDF and happily accept their lot as disenfranchised slaves beneath the Israeli Harrenvolk. I think it is fair to say that this will never happen no matter what though of course I can appreciate why this would be the Zionist dream.
[i]“Most children of the world are not used as human shields for terrorist camps or encouraged to be suicide bombers so their pictures can be put up in grocery stores as "martyrs". Welcome to Palestinian society. Or what is called child abuse in normal countries.”[/i]
What hypocrisy. You cite Palestinian children in their refugee camps as “human shields” without noting the simple fact that they have absolutely no where else to go, that is their home. Whereas earlier you make mention of the Hatuel family massacre, without noting that this family has the option of getting out of harms way and yet choose of their own free will to live in a war zone. Don’t misunderstand, I fully condemn the massacre of the Hatuel family (as did, mind you, many Palestinians & Arabs), nevertheless it cannot be denied that these settlers voluntarily bring their children into an active war zone to make a political point, i.e. they use their children as human shields. Whereas the children in the Palestinian refugee camps have no alternative but to live there despite indiscriminate massacres by the IDF.
Anyway, make no mistake about it. Israel has backed itself into a corner now. It has two options; either it can surrender its ethnocentric racist concept of being strictly a “Jewish State” and learn to live with the native population OR it will have to invade one of its neighbors, occupy it, and forcibly round up and ship out literally millions of Palestinians. Those are the options and I, for one, certainly hope that Zionism hasn’t warped the Jewish population of Israel to such an extent that the majority would ever consent to the latter option.
This is where we are.
|
|
|
| |
| "Palestinians do not exist" = Yet another IDF massacre |
| 05.13.04 (9:02 am) [edit] |
Last Sunday, on Mother's Day, a number of us went out and protested our local "Walk for Israel" fundraiser for settler militias in Occupied Palestine (see http://palestineday.eccmei.ne... ). One of the constant refrains from the Zionist hatemongers screaming their venom at us was "There are no Palestinians!" "Palestine does not exist!" and "There is no such thing as Palestinians!" as well as other slogans along these lines.
On the surface, is so absurd as to seem completely pointless. After all, there are over nine million Palestinians (1.6 million in Israel; 3.8 million in Occupied Palestine; and at least 4 million in the Palestinian Diaspora) who clearly show the absurdity of these claims.
[b]However, on closer inspection one realizes that these claims DO serve a purpose. By denying their existence, denying their humanity, it justifies Israel's indiscriminate slaughter of these "non-people". After all, when Israel lobs a missile into a densely populated refugee camp indiscriminately massacring anyone in range, it would be very difficult to justify this if the victims were human beings - if they existed. Thus, no Palestinians are slaughtered, they do not exist, they are non-people. To slaughter nothing - people that do not exist - is no crime, as Palestinians do not exist they can be slaughtered with complete impunity - after all, no people died. Thus we see why the Zionists are so desperate to dehumanize the Palestinians in every possible respect, even to the point of claiming they do not even exist - Israel has never slaughtered Palestinians because there are no Palestinians. [/b]
This dehumanization and twisted effort to deny the existence of an entire people is what makes Zionist massacres a matter of routine. Thus today we have... remember these photos are of non-people, they do not exist - in the twisted minds of sicko ZioNazi pigs...
[b]IOF Copter Missiles Kill 11 Palestinians; Wound 45 In Rafah...[/b] IPC, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Excerpts:
[i]RAFAH, May 13, 2004 (IPC+WAFA)-- The death toll of those killed in Rafah climbed to eleven as three more citizens were killed and 15 others wounded by an IOF Apaches raid while the fourth pronounced dead later. [/i]
[i]Dr. Abu Mossa identified the killed citizens as Sameh Abu Jazer, 22, [b]Mohmmed Mossa Mwafi , 15,[/b] and Ramzi Ismael Salah, aged 23. Also the citizen [b]Hamed Fayez Abu Hamra, 17,[/b] was critically wounded who succumbed his wounds shortly thereafter, Palestinian medical sources confirmed. [/i]
[b]24 Palestinians Killed, Further 200 Wounded in Two Attacks in Al Zytoun and Rafah [/b]IPC, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Excerpts:
[i]More than 17 were killed as well as 200 others, mostly were innocent children and women. Gross damages inflicted the citizens’ houses, properties, electricity poles, water networks, phone cables, and the clearances of vast areas of arable lands. [/i]
[i]Dr. Baker Abu Safeiya, chief of emergency department of Al Shifa hospital, told IPC’s that the killed people were Amar Al Jerjawe, 30, shot in the head, [b]Fadi Nasar, 15, torn into shreds,[/b] Mohamed Addass, 18, shot in the ear and head, [b]Ahmed Salem Al Swerki, 17,[/b] Yousef Hejazi, 18, [b]Hamdi Mohsen, Rami Ja’far both of them are 15 years of age,[/b] Ahmed Obeid , Fawzi Musbah Al Madhoun, 32, [b]Mohammed Hassen Yassin, 16,[/b] Mohammed Abed Al Ziz Mushtaha, 25, Medhat Rafeq Al bana, 35, Waleed Azam, 23, Ehab Mohammed Malka, 24, Rami Abi Al Aoun, aged 23. [/i]
[i]Concurrently, In Rafah city, south of Gaza Strip, seven citizens were torn into parts today pre-dawn when two missiles were fired at a group of citizens in Yebna refugee camp killing Mohammed Al Boji, Ehab Yousef, Hani Al Mugheir, Hassen Khaddar Awaja, Ramez Abu Ghali, Fouad Khaled Abu Hashem , Wael Abu Al Einin, 23, Ehab Mohmmed Amer, 21, and Mohammed Ashour Dughmush, 23.[/i]
....
|
|
|
| |
| Indian elections - good news for peace & Palestine |
| 05.13.04 (6:12 am) [edit] |
India, the world's largest democracy, has voted out the Hindu-nationalist right-wing BJP in favor of the more centrist Congress Party under Sonia Gandhi. This is a good development for peace, opposition to US imperialism and even for Palestine.
Though India did not play an active role in the US war on Iraq because the population was radically opposed, the rightist BJP did quietly support Washington and played a much more biased role in favor of Israel against the Palestinians. The BJP sympathized with Israeli calls for a "anti-Muslim" axis (Jewish Israel, Hindu India, Christian US) and quietly played along with this scheme. After all, the BJP has an exhaustive record of religious oppression and violence against Muslims, most notably illustrated by the BJP encouraged Hindu pogroms against Muslims in Gujarat in 2002. Of course this wasn't the main issue in the Indian elections (the situation of India's poor was vastly more important), but nevertheless on an international scale this is a positive development.
Sonia Gandhi, whose secular and centrist Congress Party includes many Indian Muslims seems much less inclined to support these BJP policies. This is not to suggest that there will be a radical change in India - like that in Spain - but I do believe US imperialist efforts will receive a considerably cooler reception in New Delhi now and that Ms. Gandhi will be far less inclined to play along with American and Israeli efforts to drag India into an anti-Muslim cabal of hate. It should be noted that most Indian leftists - including both the leading Communist parties - have rallied to the Congress Party as a means of defeating the Hindu-nationalist BJP (and their allies, the Hindu-Fascist RSS).
Here are some excerpts from a speech by Sonia Gandhi at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, Oxford University, Friday, 29 November 2002 http://www.india-seminar.com/...%20sonia%20gandhi.htm :
[i]There are more Muslims in India than in any other country save Indonesia. Similarly, there are more Hindus in India than in any other country. There are also more Christians in India than in many countries recognised as Christian. But India is not a Hindu country or a Muslim country or a Christian country. It belongs to all of them and the millions of followers of other religions as well.[/i]
[i]We are meeting against the background of growing international terrorism and the fallout of what has come to be known as 9/11. What is striking and remarkable is that international terrorist networks do not seem to have a hold on Indian Muslims. That is entirely because our political and social framework accommodates plurality in substantial measure. All over the world an impression has been created that Islam and terrorism are inseparable. The fact that there are any number of terrorist organisations whose members subscribe to other religions is conveniently forgotten.[/i]
[i]India has been a continuous victim of cross-border terrorism. Both Hindus and Muslims have been targeted alike. This is particularly so in our state of Jammu and Kashmir where it is evident that the terrorists are acting in pursuance of the foreign policy of our neighbour to the west. It would be wrong to think that religion is their motive. Nevertheless, I should point out that, by the postures it adopts and the actions it takes, this neighbour provides a ready handle to those who stoke communal antagonisms within India. There are also religious and political leaders on both sides who feed on each other’s passions.[/i]
[i]Terrorism has no religion. In fact, it is the antithesis of religion, for the essence of all religions is compassion. A major effort has to be made to enable people to appreciate this truth. Inter-faith dialogue and communication at various levels and in different forums, has to be sustained to help improve mutual understanding. Religious extremism very often is born out of perceived threats. These threats can be dealt with only through analysis, debate and engagement. This Centre has an important role to play in this regard.[/i]
[b][i]Terror should not be combated with greater terror. Though no end can justify mindless violence, ultimately the roots of terrorism have to be located in political, social and economic factors. Prosperity can breed terrorism as much as poverty can. A globalisation process that is seen to be inequitable and destabilising of cultural moorings can trigger terrorist mindsets. A political system that is closed and does not fulfil the aspirations of the people can create conditions which encourage dangerous ideologies.[/i][/b]
[i]This campaign should be framed and implemented on a clear understanding that terrorism is indivisible, international and is perpetrated not only by non-state actors but also by some governments as an instrument of their state policy. The approach that says, ‘the terrorism I face is of higher priority than the terrorism you face’ is illogical, and has dangerous implications for global stability and security. Equally grave is the cross-border flow of funds through different channels that help support terrorist organizations. This must be dealt with comprehensively and globally.[/i]
[b][i]It has become fashionable to talk of an impending ‘clash of civilisations’. The Indian experience strongly disproves this approach. The concept of a deep fault line across world religions and its resulting inevitably in conflict, lends itself to mischievous distortions and misrepresentations, both internationally and within our own societies. Complex political, social and economic realities cannot be reduced to a simplistic confrontation between religions. All of us need to guard against this.[/i][/b]
[i]Cherishing and upholding tolerance at home, it is but natural that India should champion coexistence amongst the nations of the world as well. Panchsheel – the five principles of peaceful coexistence derived from the Buddha’s teachings and given contemporary relevance by Jawaharlal Nehru – still holds great meaning. Let me recapitulate what these principles are: mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, mutual nonaggression, mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful coexistence.[/i]
[i]The USA is now the world’s preeminent power in every sense of the term. But the paradox of this power is that it cannot afford to act unilaterally. Many in the United States are impatient with multilateralism, but in today’s interdependent world there is simply no alternative to working in concert and collaboration with each other. We fervently hope that the United States recognises the desirability and feasibility of multilateralism. At the same time, other countries have a responsibility to keep the USA involved and committed to international agreements and institutions.[/i]
[i]I want to say a few words on West Asia, a region with which India has long had an intimate cultural and economic relationship[b]. We recognise the rights of the Palestinian people to a viable state of their own as well as the right of Israel to live within secure borders. While we condemn all forms of violence and terrorism, we believe that there can be no lasting peace in West Asia without the legitimate concerns of the Palestinian people being addressed meaningfully.[/b][/i]
[b][i]Growing economic and strategic cooperation between India and Israel does not make us insensitive to this reality. We have watched closely the developments relating to Iraq in recent months. As a founding member of the UN, India is deeply committed to the principles of its charter. It is our view that the question of Iraq cannot be dealt with unilaterally. Concepts like ‘regime change’ are fraught with grave dangers.[/i][/b]
|
|
|
| |
| Israeli propaganda - terrorism vs. legitimate armed resistance |
| 05.12.04 (10:33 am) [edit] |
The Israeli, and radically pro-Israeli American, media have made a great deal of noise about the recent Palestinian operation in Gaza City in which an IDF armored personnel carrier was successfully neutralized killing six invading IDF soldiers. With very few exceptions in the Israeli, and strictly pro-Israel American, media this operation has been characterized as some sort of "terrorist" attack - which is absolute rubbish.
While there is no universally accepted definition of precisely what constitutes "terrorism", there are particular factors that are generally accepted in most definitions as constituent elements of "terrorism". These factors provide us with a simple definition of what is, and is not, "terrorism". To quote the Council on Foreign Relations discussion of terrorism http://cfrterrorism.org/terro... :
[i]In another useful attempt to produce a definition, Paul Pillar, a former deputy chief of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, argues that there are four key elements of terrorism: [/i]
[i]It is premeditated—planned in advance, rather than an impulsive act of rage.
It is political—not criminal, like the violence that groups such as the mafia use to get money, but designed to change the existing political order.
It is aimed at civilians—not at military targets or combat-ready troops.
It is carried out by sub-national groups—not by the army of a country. [/i]
Premediatation is fairly universal in almost all definitions of terrorism; generally speaking there is no such thing as "accidental" terrorism.
Regarding the political element, this is commonly employed largely to differentiate "terrorists" from organized crime, which frequently uses the same tactics though uses a different rationale. Nevertheless there is a degree of overlap, for example citing the "narco-terrorist" concept frequently employed when opponents are discussing the resistance movements in Colombia or the Albanian mafia gangs in Albania and Kosovo. In both these cases, drug traffic and political ideology (Leftist popular in Colombia; ethno-nationalist in Kosovo) tend to blur in that political movements turn to organized crime to finance and maintain their operations. Nevertheless, there are conflicting interpretations in this respect.
As for being aimed at civilians, this is generally accepted though with reservations. For example, the US State department, in its official definition of terrorism - [i]"The term terrorism means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant (1) targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."[/i] http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls... - clearly adds to civilians other "noncombatants" - [i]"(1) For purposes of this definition, the term noncombatant is interpreted to include, in addition to civilians, military personnel who at the time of the incident are unarmed and/or not on duty."[/i]
And finally, the "sub-national" requirement is hotly debated around the world. Generally speaking, states that routinely use tactics that would otherwise be consider "terrorist" - such as the US and Israel - flatly reject the concept that a state is capable of "terrorism", whereas most others, including most international humanitarian bodies, clearly recognize the concept of "state terrorism", that is, terrorism as practiced by an official government. Thus, according to the US definition the Ton Ton Macute of Haiti under the Duvaliers, the Nazi SS and Gestapo, or the ISI of Pakistan - all of whom used outright terrorist tactics to crush domestic opposition - were not "terrorists" because they were official state agencies, though most observers would, in fact, consider these groups and others like them around the world to be terrorist in nature.
So, though there is no universal definition of terrorism, there are generally accept constituent elements that differentiate terrorism from others acts of violence. And these constituent elements generally reflect what MOST people think of when they hear the term, thus it is not a term completely bereft of meaning or substance.
Unlike terrorism which is universally deemed as criminal (no such thing as "justified terrorism"), other forms of political violence are not only acceptable, but are fully legal. This obviously includes military acts of self-defense (i.e. the right to resist an aggressor) as well as UN Security Council sanctioned Chapter VII actions (the war making powers of the UNSC, as employed in South Korea or in Bosnia-Herzgovina). However, among these legal forms of violence there is also the right to use force in the struggle for "liberation from colonial and foreign domination". To quote UNGA Resolution A/RES/33/24 (29 November 1978 - http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL....!OpenDocument )
[i]"2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;"[/i]
This justification for legitimate armed resistance has been SPECIFICALLY applied to the Palestinian struggle repeatedly - UNGA Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX; 29 November 1974), UNGA Resolution A/RES/33/24 (29 November 1978), UNGA Resolution A/RES/34/44 (23 November 1979), UNGA Resolution A/RES/35/35 (14 November 1980), UNGA Resolution A/RES/36/9 (28 October 1981), and many others.
Of course like the other forms of legitimate military action, this right to legitimate armed resistance IS subject to international humanitarian law and completely excludes terrorism. Contrary to some of the arguments promoted by supporters of the suicide bombers, such activity is not legal, nor justified, therefore condemnations - such as those by Amnesty International - of suicide bombs as "crimes against humanity" are fully correct. Nevertheless, these criminal actions in NO WAY negate the Palestinian people's legitimate right to armed resistance (even including suicide bombs IF they are directed at legitimate military targets as opposed to civilian, or perhaps non-combatant, targets. A suicide bomb in Al Quds/Jerusalem is a crime against humanity; a suicide bomb at a military checkpoint is a fully legal act of armed resistance).
However, as a part of Israel's propaganda campaign against the Palestinian people and their legitimate cause, Israel absolutely refuses to differentiate between Palestinian terrorism and Palestinian legitimate armed resistance. This has been graphically illustrated by the reporting on the successful Palestinian attack on the Israeli APC in Gaza City the other day. In this particular instance we had a Palestinian attack on a fully armed military transport in the process of actively invading a Palestinian community manned exclusively by Israeli uniformed soldiers carrying out a military operation. [b]In absolutely no conceivable respect can this be considered any sort of "terrorist" attack, quite the contrary, this is EXACTLY the kind of Palestinian resistance action that is fully legal and fully justified. [/b]
Yet, despite the fact that the Palestinians were acting perfectly within their rights in this incident most Israeli, and American, media have been portraying this as some sort of terrorist action and have been quote the Knesset discussion on the issue, where the term "terrorism" was repeatedly - and completely falsely - applied to this incident. For example see: "Ariel: Sacrifice civilians to get terrorists" 12.05.2004 0:01:01 Jerusalem Post http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
[i]Excerpts[/i] [u]with commentary[/u]:
[i]MK Uri Ariel (National Union) urged the army to hunt down those who killed the six Givati Brigade soldiers in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday, even at the price of harming innocent people. ... Ariel took a more hard-line stance, saying, "I appeal to the prime minister and the defense minister to pursue the murderers, even if it means harming innocent civilians. Let's not repeat the mistakes made in Jenin." His reference was to the battle during Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002, when many IDF casualties resulted from the desire to avoid harming civilians.[/i] - [u]Here we have an instance of an MK condemning legitimate armed resistance and then calling specifically for a terrorist response by Israel.[/u]
[i]Likud MK and coalition chairman Gideon Sa'ar said there was a time when politicians would not exploit the deaths of soldiers. He in turned accused the Left of strengthening the terrorists by calling at this time for a Gaza withdrawal.[/i] - [u]What terrorists?[/u]
[i]MK Arye Eldad (National Union) told reporters he blames Sharon, because the disengagement plan inspired the Palestinians to carry out attacks like this. He called on him to wage an all-out war against the Palestinian Authority by bombing heavily rather than risking soldiers' lives on the ground. [/i]
[i]Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee chairman Dr. Yuval Steinitz (Likud) said that IDF caution in targeting armed Palestinians hiding among unarmed civilians is costing Israeli lives, Army Radio reported. ... "Although I personally support disengagement, with several reservations, withdrawal from Gaza will not stop attacks on Tel Aviv and Ashkelon," he said. "We will still need to continue our battle against terrorist infrastructures, including operations like today's.[/i]
This is the primary reason that Israeli compiled data on the conflict cannot be taken at face value, because they specifically and intentionally misrepresent absolutely all acts of resistance, including both legitimate armed resistance as well as unarmed resistance (stone-throwing) as "terrorist" attacks. In real terms, actual "terrorism" as such has played a much smaller role in the second Intifada than people who only rely on Israeli or American corporate media are led to believe. Israel itself has committed much more - and vastly more deadly - "state terrorism" against Palestinians civilians and noncombatants than ANYTHING the Palestinians have done in return.
|
|
|
| |
| Iran warns Israel regarding possible nuclear site attack |
| 05.11.04 (8:28 pm) [edit] |
Iran Tuesday sent a sterm message to Israel against any military attack on its nuclear sites. In a TV interview, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Hassan Rowhani, said "Israelis have repeated their threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran for a number of years, but I do not think that they will execute this stupid action."
He was replying to a question about US and Israeli press reports speculating on an imminent Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites.
"Israel knows our reaction, and knows that we would answer with a full hand," he said. "They are aware of our abilities and power, Israel knows that we would not tolerate it, and it will get a very decisive reply." (Albawaba.com)
|
|
|
| |
| The IDF's mass slaughter continues... |
| 05.11.04 (9:44 am) [edit] |
Over the last two days, the IDF has seriously escalated its slaughter of Palestinians...
At Abu Dis, Al Quds (Occupied East Jerusalem), one Palestinian - Fadi Bahar, 19 - was murdered while several others were wounded. http://english.wafa.ps/body.a...
In the town of al-Qarara, near Khan Younis (Gaza), Nahed Abu Haddaf, 22, was murdered. http://english.wafa.ps/body.a...
In the same town, the IDF demolished eleven Palestinian homes http://english.wafa.ps/body.a...
During the invasion of al-Zaytoon district of Gaza City (in which Palestinian freedom fighters successfully destroyed an IDF transport killing six invading IDF soldiers), the IDF killed five Palestinians and wounded another eighty - including at least eleven children. The murdered were: Amar Al Jerjawe, 30, shot in the head, Fadi Nasar, 15, torn into shreds and Mohamed Addass, 18, shot in the head, and [b]Ahmed Salem Al Swerki, 17,[/b] and an unidentified boy... http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Over 1,100 Palestinians have been rendered homeless in the newest IDF onslaught. http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
|
|
|
| |
| Israeli racist minister calls for ethnic cleansing... |
| 05.11.04 (9:20 am) [edit] |
Fanatical Israeli racist leader and current Minister of Transportation in Sharon's government, Avigdor Lieberman, has called for the ethnic cleansing of Israel proper (inside the Green Line) in the event that a two-state solution should ever be realized. Of course I firmly belive there is absolutely no chance of a two state solution ever happening, but that doesn't invalidate the calls for purifying Israel of its untermensch by the likes of Lieberman.
[b]An Israeli Minister Calls for ‘Getting Rid’ of Arabs inside Israel[/b]
International Press Centre, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
Lieberman with Ze'evi (the now dead leader of the radical ethnic cleansing Molodet party, assassinated by the PFLP)
Excerpts:
[i]GAZA, MAY 10, 2004 (IPC+Agencies)-- The Israeli Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman said during an interview with the Israeli army radio on Sunday that the "Arabs of Israel" should be expelled in case a Palestinian state was established and Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip were dismantled.[/i]
[i]The hard liner Lieberman and others of the national unity party that included the most extremist proponents of the transfer for the Palestinians, entrenchment of the occupation and Jewish settlement, Lieberman has recently proposed in the course of his anti-disengagement plan activities, a draft resolution to annex all the occupied Palestinian territories to Israel, enforcement of the Israeli law and paid compensations for the Arab residents inside the green line who are willing to leave these areas after being annexed to Israel. [/i]
[i]Lieberman, a former Moldovan immigrant who arrived in Israel in 1978, suggested that the existence of a large non-Jewish minority in Israel threatened the "Jewish identity" and "ethnic purity" of Israel. [/i]
[i]Lieberman's remarks drew angry reactions from some of the leaders of Israel's Arab community. Arab Knesset member Ahmad Tibi called Lieberman a "full fledged fascist". "He is not the only fascist. The entire political atmosphere in Israel provides a most suitable environment for the growth and prosperity of fascism. This is why sickening statements as such go unchallenged." Al Tibi told the Al jazeera.net[/i]
[i]"A few years ago, Europe moved swiftly to silence and isolate Austrian nationalist leader Jorg Haidar for his alleged anti-Jewish remarks. "Here in Israel we have government ministers who routinely make brazenly racist and fascist remarks about the Palestinians ... and the EU is saying nothing and doing nothing," he said.[/i]
[b][i]"Lieberman came from Moldova in 1978 and he is telling the Palestinians who have been living here from ancient tomes that they don't have the right to be here. Can you think of a more brazen obscenity?", Al-San’e wondered. [/i][/b]
|
|
|
| |
| Great news renouncing "Aliyah" by Jews of conscience... |
| 05.11.04 (9:05 am) [edit] |
As many of you are probably already aware, the movement by Jewish people of conscience in the US to openly and publicly renounce their "right" of aliyah (one of the pillars of Israeli Hafrada [Apartheid] whereby any person in the world with a Jewish grandmother can claim Israeli residency [oliot certificate] and quickly receive Israeli citizenship whereas 4.5 actual native Palestinians are refused their legal right of return to their homeland) has been advancing steadily.
Many of us did this years ago, like those of us who formed the "Jewish Friends of Palestine" project - jewishfriendspalestine.org - who renounced aliyah back in 2000. Similarly a number of Jewish notables in Britiain did this back in 2002. However the movement as such really got started when Jews for a Free Palestine - http://www.renouncealiyah.us/... in California launched their Renounce Aliyah campaign with their rally in San Francisco http://www.jewishsf.com/conte... back in October 2003.
Anyway, the campaign has been advancing steadily and there is some discussion of restructuring to give it a better momentum.
As a complimenting factor for this - aside from the fact that Israel is the most dangerous place in the world for a Jew to live as such (a direct consequence of Israeli Hafrada) - today's Ha'aretz also discusses the increased poverty rates in Israel, which makes the West considerably more inviting for Jewish immigrants, which of course we want to encourage, the more Jews that come here are the less Jews there are to shore up Israel's losing "demographic battle" against the native Palestinian population...
[b]1,3m Israelis now live below the poverty line[/b]
11.05.2004 0:01:00 Ha'aretz http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
Excerpts:
[i]After four stable years the number of poor families in Israel last year grew by more than five percent to 18.5 percent of all families in the country. This means another 15,000 families joined the cycle of poverty to bring the total to 340,000. [/i]
[i]The sudden growth in the number of poor families can be attributed to various factors, including the NIS 5.5 billion cut in NII budgets in the past two years which brought their real value down by an average of 7.2 percent.[/i]
[i]Ben-Shalom also believes the current signs of improvement in the economy will not be felt in coming years in the lowest income groups. The survey reveals that most of the burden of the economic recovery in the past two years was borne by the low income groups. [/i]
[i]While the standard of living of the general population dropped by 4.6 percent on average, that of the lowest decile dropped 12 percent and the second lowest decile by 7 percent. As a result, poor families got even poorer - their average pay was 30 percent or more below the poverty line in 2003. [/i]
[b]Hey! Come to America - the real promised land - and let the Palestinians have their country back![/b]
|
|
|
| |
| Israeli soldier gets two-months for murdering child... |
| 05.06.04 (12:01 pm) [edit] |
Frankly, I'm surprised he got convicted at all - that in of itself is pretty rare in view of Israel's official policy of mass murder against Palestinian untermensch...
[b]Israel 'Rewards' a Soldier for Killing a Child in Jenin by 'Public Service'[/b], The International Press Center (IPC), May 6, 2004, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
Excerpts:
[i]The family of Mohammed Zaid, 16, expressed their extreme resentment over the Israeli martial court's decision of two months in actual prison for the Israeli soldier who killed their son Mohammed in a village near Jenin.[/i]
[i]The Israeli soldier Tzvi Kortski, who was convicted of killing Mohammed Zaid in the village of Nazlet Al Sheikh Zaid near Jenin, was demoted from "Captain" to "Lieutenant" and was sentenced by an Israeli martial court to actual prison for two months and four months of "public service", according to media reports.[/i]
[i]The family of Mohammed Zaid warned that such light sentences constituted a flagrant undermining of the Palestinian life, pointing out that such decisions by the court would encourage more Israeli soldiers to kill innocent civilians.[/i] That is just normal policy, the IDF murders Palestinian children almost daily, this guy must have done something wrong by IDF rules (which has no problem with child murder) or just pissed his commander off somehow - CPSC1
[i]"Captain" Kortski was commanding a force that invaded the village of Nazlet Al Sheikh Zaid from the illegitimate Israeli settlement of "Shakid" on October 4, 2003. Kortski stepped out of the military jeep he was in and fired several times from his M-16 automatic rifle at a glass balcony where Mohammed and his cousin were standing in. Mohammed was shot critically in the abdomen, and died of his wounds shortly afterwards.[/i]
[i]Head of Nazlet Al Sheikh Zaid's rural council, Ahmad Zaid, said that punishing the Israeli soldier so lightly was not enough, because he perpetrated his crime without any reasons and in cold blood. "Sentencing the Israeli soldier so lightly is a reward more than a punishment. When it comes to their criminal soldiers they give them such light rulings, but when it's about a Palestinian who was charged with attacks against Israelis, his entire family is punished by demolishing their homes or even assassinating them," Mr. Zaid told IPC correspondent.[/i]
[i]"I told the attorneys that I categorically reject this punishment, explaining that when a Palestinian does a similar act, he or she is sentenced to life in prison, and his or her family's home gets demolished. Nobody on earth accepts such a punishment for such a hideous crime."[/i]
[i]Deliberations over the case continued until the court's verdict was released, 'rewarding' the Israeli soldier of four months in public service and two months of actual prison, which clearly indicates the collaboration of the Israeli judicial system in giving the green light to the Israeli occupying soldiers to commit atrocities against the Palestinian people, without getting the proper punishment international law demands in such cases.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Voter fraud in Israel... |
| 05.06.04 (10:32 am) [edit] |
From: [b]Dead men voting[/b], May 6, 2004, Ha'aretz
http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040506/248414.html" title="http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a/GSN2004/2004_ 05/20040506/248414.html" target="_blank"http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
[i]The state comptroller has found instances of voter fraud by means of using identity cards of deceased and identity cards of people residing abroad, and recommends that the Interior Ministry check the data in the voter registry "in order not to create an opening for election fraud."[/i]
[i]The comptroller found that the voter registry contains the names of 2,298 Israelis aged 110 or over, with some 1,900 having not yet reached 120 years, and 938 between 120 and 179. [/i]
[i]Moreover, 68 are registered as over 135.[/i]
[i]"The above figures raise doubts as to the reliability of the registration of these extremely elderly people in the voter registry," the report said.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Jerusalem Post attack on the US diplomat's letter... |
| 05.06.04 (10:12 am) [edit] |
Following the example set by a group of British diplomats, a similar group of US diplomats have recently composed and presented a letter to the White House condemning our blantant bias against the Palestinian people. The text of the letter can be found at the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wo...
A few quick excerpts:
[i]We also are deeply concerned by your April 14 endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to reject the rights of three million Palestinians, to deny the right of refugees to return to their homeland, and to retain five large illegal settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank. [/i]
[i]Your meeting with Sharon followed a series of intensive negotiating sessions between Israelis and Americans, but which left out Palestinians. In fact, you and Prime Minister Sharon consistently have excluded Palestinians from peace negotiations. [/i]
[i]By closing the door to negotiations with Palestinians and the possibility of a Palestinian state, you have proved that the United States is not an even-handed peace partner. You have placed US diplomats, civilians and military doing their jobs overseas in an untenable and even dangerous position. [/i]
[i]Your unqualified support of Sharon's extra-judicial assassinations, Israel's Berlin Wall-like barrier, its harsh military measures in occupied territories, and now your endorsement of Sharon's unilateral plan are costing our country its credibility, prestige and friends. [/i]
[i]It is not too late to reassert American principles of justice and fairness in our relations with all the peoples of the Middle East. Support negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis, with the United States serving as a truly honest broker. A return to the time-honored American tradition of fairness will reverse the present tide of ill will in Europe and the Middle East - even in Iraq. [/i]
In reaction to this letter, that has the chutzpah to suggest that the US adopt a fair and even-handed role in the conflict (obvious "anti-Semitism" of course - any suggestion that Israel is less than utterly perfect and any suggestion that Palestinians even exist, much less has some right on their side, is now "anti-Semitic"), it can come as no surprise that the Jerusalem Post decided to attack it.
The JP attack is entitled: [b]The Arabist letter[/b] and can found online at http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a... After reading this silliness I just wanted to comment...
[i]Article Text in Italics;[/i] [b]my comments in bold[/b]...
[i]Back when George Shultz was US secretary of state, he made a practice of asking every newly appointed ambassador to locate his country on a globe. When the unsuspecting emissary put his finger on, say, Thailand, Shultz would correct him: "Your country is here," his finger on the United States. [/i]
[i]The story comes to mind on news that some 50 former American diplomats, taking their cue from their British counterparts, have put their names to a letter denouncing President George W. Bush's policies vis-a-vis Israel and the Palestinians. [/i]
[i]"By closing the door to negotiations with Palestinians and the possibility of a Palestinian state, you have proved that the United States is not an even-handed peace partner," say the diplomats. "Your unqualified support of Sharon's extra-judicial assassinations, Israel's Berlin Wall-like barrier, its harsh military measures in the occupied territories, and now your endorsement of Sharon's unilateral plan are costing our country its credibility, prestige, and friends." [/i]
[i]This sounds like a serious critique, by serious people, of administration policy. The letter was published under the auspices of a Washington-based nonprofit, the American Educational Trust, which publishes a magazine called the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. WRMEA claims to promote "Middle East solutions which it judges to be consistent with the charter of the United Nations and traditional American support for human rights, self-determination and fair play." The magazine's publisher, former US ambassador to Qatar Andrew Killgore, is the letter's principal signatory. [/i]
[i]It's worth taking a look at the magazine's Web site, www.wrmea.com. Its April cover story is titled "Gaza: The IDF's shooting range." (The article, by Gideon Levy, is reprinted from Haaretz.) There is an article on the "USS 'Liberty' cover-up." The site prominently features an electronic ticker on "Your tax dollars sent to Israel," which as of this writing are said to exceed $90 billion over the years. (That, however, is considerably less than the $112 billion the US has spent in one year in its war in Iraq, for which WRMEA also has a ticker going.) [/i]
[i]Aside from its editorial content, WRMEA is sponsoring an ad campaign which calls for "the Palestinian refugees' right to return." And there is this appeal for individual donations: "Journals of opinion do not bring in the same advertising revenue as mainstream magazines. Big corporations and the Zionist lobby want to control the editorial content around which their ads will be placed."[/i]
[i]Killgore has received awards from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee in 1992 and the Islamic Association for Palestine in 1994. As it happens, 1994 was the year in which the two groups jointly sponsored a fund-raiser in Annandale, Virginia, in which featured speaker Muhammad Siam, a Hamas leader, appealed for funds for jihad against Israel.[/i] [b][Note that at the time, Hamas was not on the US "terrorist list" so there was nothing illegal - or even questionable about - having a Hamas participant at this event.][/b]
[i]This isn't to suggest that Killgore shares their agenda. But it does give some indication of the circles in which he and his fellow signatories travel,[/i] [b][Notice how they falsely imply that the people who signed the letter are somehow intimately connected to the Washington Report - an obvious attempt at slander by means of false association. That the letter was initiated by the WRMEA does NOT mean that all the signatories, or even most of them, are in anyway affiliated with WRMEA or any of its other projects - it simply means that they agree with this particular letter.][/b] [i]and the views to which they subscribe. [/i][i]It also gives the lie to WRMEA's claim that it offers mainstream views of the Arab-Israeli conflict.[/i] [b][Nonsense. Being a longtime subscriber to the Washington Report, it does in fact represent the mainstream views of MOST of the world community on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as is represented in virtually all media outside of the US.] [/b][i]It is an anti-Israel, pro-Arab organ and ought to be honest enough to present itself as such.[/i] [b][Of course anything that is critical of Israel in any conceivable respect is "anti-Israel, pro-Arab", so the charge lacks any substance at all. For the record, the Washington Report almost always has Israeli writers included and affords a lot of space to the Jewish/Israeli (and even Zionist) peace movements around the world.][/b]
[i]Which brings us back to the Shultz story. [/i]
[i]Suffusing WRMEA's pages is the conceit that they represent truly "American" views, untarnished by the Zionist lobby and independent of the presumably Zionist-controlled media. [/i] [b][The Washington Report does in fact represent American values and American perspectives. The ONLY reason these views aren't "mainstream" in America is because the "mainstream" media is radically biased in favor of Israel and ONLY presents the Israeli side of the conflict or a grossly distorted version of the Palestinian side of it. As for "Zionist controlled media" these are the words of the Jerusalem Post, not the Washington Report. The absolute bias in favor of Israel and against the Palestinians in the US "mainstream" media is patently obvious to any observer with the slightest inkling of what is going on, but this does NOT automatically lead to some conspiracy theory of Zionist (or Jewish) "control" of the media - this is simply the Post's attempt to equate criticism of Israel with a traditional anti-Semitic libel.][/b] [i]Of course this is a crackpot claim, given that in survey after survey Americans overwhelmingly identify with Israel against the Palestinians.[/i] [b][LOL - talk about absurd. Here they are trying to portray the effect as the cause. Of course "survey after survey" shows that the American public identifies with Israel - but this is the effect of the grossly biased "mainstream" media coverage wherein only Israelis are human beings, only Israelis have any right on their side, and only Israelis[/b] [b]are victims of violence. The Palestinians are almost always misrepresented as extremists, fanatics, unreasonable, and solely responsible for all the trouble. Given this constant representation of the Israeli perspective and this constant vilification of the Palestinians, of course most Americans that rely on our "mainstream" media for their news "identify with Israel" - who wouldn't? However, with some exceptions (like many evangelicals), this "identification with Israel" falls by the wayside once the average American learns the truth of what is going on in Occupied Palestine. This is fundamentally no different than the[/b] [b]American "identification" with the Whites of Apartheid South Africa, who were also represented as the only "civilized" people while the Blacks were constantly vilified until the mid-1980's. Once most Americans learned what was actually happening they dropped their support for Apartheid, and the same will happen for Zionism. It took about ten years for this process to run its course against Apartheid and was spearheaded by grassroots activism. I believe it may well take as long in the case of Zionism, but I believe the process has already begun (since the start of the Second Intifada) and is progressing at an expected pace.][/b] [i]On the other hand, Killgore's views are not that far from those of many State Department officials, as attested by the fact that he was awarded the 1997 "Foreign Service Cup," by the Diplomatic and Consular Officers, Retired (DACOR) group, which cited the "courage" of his Mideast advocacy. [/i] [b][Because the American diplomatic corp is one of the groups in American society that has a decent understanding of what is really happening and do not depend exclusively on our grossly biased media for their information about the conflict. As noted above, if MOST Americans had the any idea of what was really going on, they would reject our support of Israel overnight.][/b]
[i]Right now, America desperately needs a diplomatic corps to serve as its instrument in reshaping the Middle East.[/i] [b][In which case they should represent American values - which are diametrically opposed to most of Israel's behavior toward the native Palestinian people.][/b] [i]To judge by the Killgore letter, what Americans are getting instead is an Arab lobby within and alongside its State Department, representing views far outside the US mainstream.[/i] [b][Despite the fact that this ignores that all the signing US diplomats are in fact retired (therefore not in the State Department), it is also an ominus indicator of how MOST Americans would react if they received fair and balanced reporting on the issue. Remember these are professional diplomats that have a professional's understanding of the issues involved. If most Americans received the information they receive Israel knows most Americans would reject its behavior - they too remember how American support for Apartheid eventually collapsed.][/b] [i]This week's letter should serve as a wake-up call to Bush that he needs to ensure that his Mideast ambassadors and foreign service officers are with him, not against him[/i]. [b][There is no record of US diplomats disobeying their orders; what the Jerusalem Post is in fact calling for is an IDEOLOGICAL purge - ridding the State Department of people with disagreeable (to Israel) opinions.][/b] [i]He is, after all, their[/i] [b][temporary and not professional diplomatic][/b] [i]boss.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Israeli terror in Occupied Palestine continues today... |
| 05.05.04 (2:14 pm) [edit] |
-- http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... --
[i]WEST BANK, Palestine, May 5, 2004 (IPC + Agencies)-- Israeli occupying forces (IOF) heightened Wednesday military offensive against different parts of the West Bank, mainly in the cities of Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarem and Ramallah. [/i]
[i]Female university student Fatma Auda, of the Kufer Thuluth Village, near Qalqilia City, was arrested by IOF on Tuesday overnight, IPC's confirmed. [/i]
-- http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... --
[i]GAZA STRIP, Palestine, May 5, 2004 (IPC + Agencies) - - Not only has property been lost during Wednesday's invasion of three Gaza refugee camps by Israeli tanks, but also human losses were a result of such renewed military offensive against densely-populated areas. [/i]
[i]Abduallah Aljammal, 35, of the central Gaza Strip refugee camp of Al-Buraij, was shot and killed, while ten others were wounded in the Deir Elbalah refugee camp after Israeli tanks opened their heavy fire indiscriminately on inhabitants during an invasion of the area in the early hours of Wednesday. [/i]
[i]Security sources reported that the Israeli occupying forces (IOF) including scores of tanks invaded early on Wednesday dawn three refugee camps in the Gaza Strip, demolishing tens of houses and displacing scores of civilians. The sources said late yesterday night that dozens of Israeli tanks rolled into the refugee camps of Rafah, Khan Younis and Deir Elbalah, where citizens' houses were knocked down.[/i]
[i]Local sources reported that tens of Israeli armored vehicles including bulldozers, thrust into the western Khan Younis refugee camp, and started demolishing houses close to the Altufah Israeli military checkpoint. The said demolition came after more than 30 houses were demolished in the past three days during similar Israeli raids on the same area, a matter that have so far turned hundreds of local inhabitants including women, children and elderly homeless.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Prisoner abuse in Iraq - the Pentagon Report |
| 05.05.04 (2:02 pm) [edit] |
Here is a link to the complete pentagon report regarding the abuse of prisoners in Iraq. What is important however, is to remember that ALL of this was documented and reported by Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch literally months before the CBS report & the Pentagon disclosures.
Another thing that is important to note is General Taguba's comments on the earlier Miller Investigation, which seems to suggest that although this behavior was radically wrong for Iraq - the same or similar behavior might be "justified" in Guantanamo Bay...
[i]There is a strong argument that the intelligence value of detainees held at JTF-Guantanamo (GTMO) is different than that of the detainees/internees held at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) and other detention facilities in Iraq. Currently, there are a large number of Iraqi criminals held at Abu Ghraib (BCCF). These are not believed to be international terrorists or members of Al Qaida, Anser Al Islam, Taliban, and other international terrorist organizations.[/i]
Anyway, here is the link to the complete report with selected excerpts:
[b]Complete text of Article 15-6 Investigation of the 800th
Military Police Brigade by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba[/b]
NBC News, Updated: 8:59 p.m. ET May 04, 2004
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/" title="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/" target="_blank"http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4...
[i]The report was prepared by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba on alleged abuse of prisoners by members of the 800th Military Police Brigade at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Baghdad. It was ordered by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of Joint Task Force-7, the senior U.S. military official in Iraq, following persistent allegations of human rights abuses at the prison. Editor’s note: The report includes graphic descriptions of events some readers may find objectionable.[/i]
Selected excerpts:
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (PART ONE)
REGARDING PART ONE OF THE INVESTIGATION, I MAKE THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT:
[b]5.[/b] (S) That between October and December 2003, at the Abu Ghraib Confinement Facility (BCCF), numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted on several detainees. This systemic and illegal abuse of detainees was intentionally perpetrated by several members of the military police guard force (372nd Military Police Company, 320th Military Police Battalion, 800th MP Brigade), in Tier (section) 1-A of the Abu Ghraib Prison (BCCF). The allegations of abuse were substantiated by detailed witness statements (ANNEX 26) and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence. Due to the extremely sensitive nature of these photographs and videos, the ongoing CID investigation, and the potential for the criminal prosecution of several suspects, the photographic evidence is not included in the body of my investigation. The pictures and videos are available from the Criminal Investigative Command and the CTJF-7 prosecution team. In addition to the aforementioned crimes, there were also abuses committed by members of the 325th MI Battalion, 205th MI Brigade, and Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC). Specifically, on 24 November 2003, SPC Luciana Spencer, 205th MI Brigade, sought to degrade a detainee by having him strip and returned to cell naked. (ANNEXES 26 and 53)
[b]6.[/b] (S) I find that the intentional abuse of detainees by military police personnel included the following acts:
[u]a.[/u] (S) Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet;
[u]b. [/u] (S) Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees;
[u]c. [/u] (S) Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing;
[u]d. [/u] (S) Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time;
[u]e.[/u] (S) Forcing naked male detainees to wear women’s underwear;
[u]f. [/u] (S) Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped;
[u]g. [/u] (S) Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;
[u]h. [/u] (S) Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture;
[u]i. [/u] (S) Writing “I am a Rapest” (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked;
[u]j.[/u] (S) Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture;
[u]k. [/u] (S) A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee;
[u]l. [/u] (S) Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee;
[u]m.[/u] (S) Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees. (ANNEXES 25 and 26)
[b]8. [/b] (U) In addition, several detainees also described the following acts of abuse, which under the circumstances, I find credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses (ANNEX 26):
[u]a. [/u] (U) Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees;
[u]b.[/u] (U) Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol;
[u]c. [/u] (U) Pouring cold water on naked detainees;
[u]d. [/u] (U) Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair;
[u]e.[/u] (U) Threatening male detainees with rape;
[u]f. [/u] (U) Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell;
[u]g. [/u] (U) Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.
[u]h.[/u] (U) Using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.
[b]10.[/b] (U) I find that contrary to the provision of AR 190-8, and the findings found in MG Ryder’s Report, Military Intelligence (MI) interrogators and Other US Government Agency’s (OGA) interrogators actively requested that MP guards set physical and mental conditions for favorable interrogation of witnesses. Contrary to the findings of MG Ryder’s Report, I find that personnel assigned to the 372ndMP Company, 800th MP Brigade were directed to change facility procedures to “set the conditions” for MI interrogations. I find no direct evidence that MP personnel actually participated in those MI interrogations. (ANNEXES 19, 21, 25, and 26).
[b]11. [/b] (U) I reach this finding based on the actual proven abuse that I find was inflicted on detainees and by the following witness statements. (ANNEXES 25 and 26):
[u]a. [/u] (U) SPC Sabrina Harman, 372nd MP Company, stated in her sworn statement regarding the incident where a detainee was placed on a box with wires attached to his fingers, toes, and penis, [i]“that her job was to keep detainees awake.” [/i] She stated that MI was talking to CPL Grainer. She stated: [i]“MI wanted to get them to talk. It is Grainer and Frederick’s job to do things for MI and OGA to get these people to talk.” [/i]
[u]b. [/u] (U) SGT Javal S. Davis, 372nd MP Company, stated in his sworn statement as follows: [i]“I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section, wing 1A being made to do various things that I would question morally. In Wing 1A we were told that they had different rules and different SOP for treatment. I never saw a set of rules or SOP for that section just word of mouth. The Soldier in charge of 1A was Corporal Granier. He stated that the Agents and MI Soldiers would ask him to do things, but nothing was ever in writing he would complain (sic).” [/i]When asked why the rules in 1A/1B were different than the rest of the wings, SGT Davis stated: [i]“The rest of the wings are regular prisoners and 1A/B are Military Intelligence (MI) holds.” [/i]When asked why he did not inform his chain of command about this abuse, SGT Davis stated: [i]“ Because I assumed that if they were doing things out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something. Also the wing belongs to MI and it appeared MI personnel approved of the abuse.” [/i]SGT Davis also stated that he had heard MI insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: [i] “Loosen this guy up for us.” Make sure he has a bad night.” “Make sure he gets the treatment.” [/i]He claimed these comments were made to CPL Granier and SSG Frederick. Finally, SGT Davis stated that (sic): [i]“the MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Granier compliments on the way he has been handling the MI holds. Example being statements like, “Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information, Finally, and Keep up the good work . Stuff like that.” [/i]
[u]c. [/u] (U) SPC Jason Kennel, 372nd MP Company, was asked if he were present when any detainees were abused. He stated: [i]“I saw them nude, but MI would tell us to take away their mattresses, sheets, and clothes.” [/i]He could not recall who in MI had instructed him to do this, but commented that, [i]“if they wanted me to do that they needed to give me paperwork.” [/i]He was later informed that [i]“we could not do anything to embarrass the prisoners.” [/i]
[u]d.[/u] (U) Mr. Adel L. Nakhla, a US civilian contract translator was questioned about several detainees accused of rape. He observed (sic): [i]“They (detainees) were all naked, a bunch of people from MI, the MP were there that night and the inmates were ordered by SGT Granier and SGT Frederick ordered the guys while questioning them to admit what they did. They made them do strange exercises by sliding on their stomach, jump up and down, throw water on them and made them some wet, called them all kinds of names such as “gays” do they like to make love to guys, then they handcuffed their hands together and their legs with shackles and started to stack them on top of each other by insuring that the bottom guys penis will touch the guy on tops butt.”[/i]
[u]e. [/u] (U) SPC Neil A Wallin, 109th Area Support Medical Battalion, a medic testified that: [i]“Cell 1A was used to house high priority detainees and cell 1B was used to house the high risk or trouble making detainees. During my tour at the prison I observed that when the male detainees were first brought to the facility, some of them were made to wear female underwear, which I think was to somehow break them down.” [/i]
[b]13.[/b] (U) Another obvious example of the Brigade Leadership not communicating with its Soldiers or ensuring their tactical proficiency concerns the incident of detainee abuse that occurred at Camp Bucca, Iraq, on May 12, 2003. Soldiers from the 223rd MP Company reported to the 800th MP Brigade Command at Camp Bucca, that four Military Police Soldiers from the 320th MP Battalion had abused a number of detainees during in-processing at Camp Bucca. An extensive CID investigation determined that four soldiers from the 320th MP Battalion had kicked and beaten these detainees following a transport mission from Talil Air Base. (ANNEXES 34 and 35)
[b]14. [/b] (U) Formal charges under the UCMJ were preferred against these Soldiers and an Article-32 Investigation conducted by LTC Gentry. He recommended a general court martial for the four accused, which BG Karpinski supported. Despite this documented abuse, there is no evidence that BG Karpinski ever attempted to remind 800th MP Soldiers of the requirements of the Geneva Conventions regarding detainee treatment or took any steps to ensure that such abuse was not repeated. Nor is there any evidence that LTC(P) Phillabaum, the commander of the Soldiers involved in the Camp Bucca abuse incident, took any initiative to ensure his Soldiers were properly trained regarding detainee treatment. (ANNEXES 35 and 62)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (PART TWO)
REGARDING PART TWO OF THE INVESTIGATION,
I MAKE THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT:
[b]33. [/b] (S/NF) The various detention facilities operated by the 800th MP Brigade have routinely held persons brought to them by Other Government Agencies (OGAs) without accounting for them, knowing their identities, or even the reason for their detention. The Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC) at Abu Ghraib called these detainees “ghost detainees.” On at least one occasion, the 320th MP Battalion at Abu Ghraib held a handful of “ghost detainees” (6-8) for OGAs that they moved around within the facility to hide them from a visiting International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) survey team. This maneuver was deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law. (Annex 53)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (PART THREE)
REGARDING PART THREE OF THE INVESTIGATION, I MAKE THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT:
[b]14. [/b](U) During the course of this investigation I conducted a lengthy interview with BG Karpinski that lasted over four hours, and is included verbatim in the investigation Annexes. BG Karpinski was extremely emotional during much of her testimony. What I found particularly disturbing in her testimony was her complete unwillingness to either understand or accept that many of the problems inherent in the 800th MP Brigade were caused or exacerbated by poor leadership and the refusal of her command to both establish and enforce basic standards and principles among its soldiers. (ANNEX 45 and the Personal Observations of the Interview Team)
[b]15.[/b] (U) BG Karpinski alleged that she received no help from the Civil Affairs Command, specifically, no assistance from either BG John Kern or COL Tim Regan. She blames much of the abuse that occurred in Abu Ghraib (BCCF) on MI personnel and stated that MI personnel had given the MPs “ideas” that led to detainee abuse. In addition, she blamed the 372nd Company Platoon Sergeant, SFC Snider, the Company Commander, CPT Reese, and the First Sergeant, MSG Lipinski, for the abuse. She argued that problems in Abu Ghraib were the fault of COL Pappas and LTC Jordan because COL Pappas was in charge of FOB Abu Ghraib. (ANNEX 45)
[b]16.[/b] (U) BG Karpinski also implied during her testimony that the criminal abuses that occurred at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) might have been caused by the ultimate disposition of the detainee abuse cases that originally occurred at Camp Bucca in May 2003. She stated that [b][i]“about the same time those incidents were taking place out of Baghdad Central, the decisions were made to give the guilty people at Bucca plea bargains. So, the system communicated to the soldiers, the worst that’s gonna happen is, you’re gonna go home.” [/i][/b] I think it important to point out that almost every witness testified that the serious criminal abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) occurred in late October and early November 2003. The photographs and statements clearly support that the abuses occurred during this time period. The Bucca cases were set for trial in January 2004 and were not finally disposed of until 29 December 2003. There is entirely no evidence that the decision of numerous MP personnel to intentionally abuse detainees at Abu Ghrabid (BCCF) was influenced in any respect by the Camp Bucca cases. (ANNEXES 25, 26, and 45)
RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO PART THREE OF THE INVESTIGATION:
[b]1. [/b] (U) That BG Janis L. Karpinski, Commander, 800th MP Brigade be Relieved from Command and given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]2. [/b] (U) That COL Thomas M. Pappas, Commander, 205th MI Brigade, be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and Investigated UP Procedure 15, AR 381-10, US Army Intelligence Activities for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]3. [/b] (U) That LTC (P) Jerry L. Phillabaum, Commander, 320th MP Battalion, be Relieved from Command, be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, and be removed from the Colonel/O-6 Promotion List for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]4. [/b] (U) That LTC Steven L. Jordan, Former Director, Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center and Liaison Officer to 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, be relieved from duty and be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]5. [/b] (U) That MAJ David W. DiNenna, Sr., S-3, 320th MP Battalion, be Relieved from his position as the Battalion S-3 and be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]6. [/b] (U) That CPT Donald J. Reese, Commander, 372nd MP Company, be Relieved from Command and be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]7. [/b] (U) That 1LT Lewis C. Raeder, Platoon Leader, 372nd MP Company, be Relieved from his duties as Platoon Leader and be given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]8. [/b] (U) That SGM Marc Emerson, Operations SGM, 320th MP Battalion, be Relieved from his duties and given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]9.[/b] (U) That 1SG Brian G. Lipinski, First Sergeant, 372nd MP Company, be Relieved from his duties as First Sergeant of the 372nd MP Company and given a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]10. [/b](U) That SFC Shannon K. Snider, Platoon Sergeant, 372nd MP Company, be Relieved from his duties, receive a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, and receive action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]11. [/b](U) That Mr. Steven Stephanowicz, Contract US Civilian Interrogator, CACI, 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, be given an Official Reprimand to be placed in his employment file, termination of employment, and generation of a derogatory report to revoke his security clearance for the following acts which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]12.[/b] (U) That Mr. John Israel,Contract US Civilian Interpreter, CACI, 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, be given an Official Reprimand to be placed in his employment file and have his security clearance reviewed by competent authority for the following acts or concerns which have been previously referred to in the aforementioned findings:
[b]13.[/b] (U) I find that there is sufficient credible information to warrant an Inquiry UP Procedure 15, AR 381-10, US Army Intelligence Activities, be conducted to determine the extent of culpability of MI personnel, assigned to the 205th MI Brigade and the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center (JIDC) at Abu Ghraib (BCCF). Specifically, I suspect that COL Thomas M. Pappas, LTC Steve L. Jordan, Mr. Steven Stephanowicz, and Mr. John Israel were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) and strongly recommend immediate disciplinary action as described in the preceding paragraphs as well as the initiation of a Procedure 15 Inquiry to determine the full extent of their culpability. (Annex 36)
OTHER FINDINGS/OBSERVATIONS
[b]4. [/b] (U) The individual Soldiers and Sailors that we observed and believe should be favorably noted include:
[u]a.[/u] (U) Master-at-Arms First Class William J. Kimbro, US Navy Dog Handler, knew his duties and refused to participate in improper interrogations despite significant pressure from the MI personnel at Abu Ghraib.
[u]b.[/u] (U) SPC Joseph M. Darby, 372nd MP Company discovered evidence of abuse and turned it over to military law enforcement.
[u]c. [/u] (U) 1LT David O. Sutton, 229th MP Company, took immediate action and stopped an abuse, then reported the incident to the chain of command.
CONCLUSION
[b]1. [/b] (U) Several US Army Soldiers have committed egregious acts and grave breaches of international law at Abu Ghraib/BCCF and Camp Bucca, Iraq. Furthermore, key senior leaders in both the 800th MP Brigade and the 205th MI Brigade failed to comply with established regulations, policies, and command directives in preventing detainee abuses at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) and at Camp Bucca during the period August 2003 to February 2004.
|
|
|
| |
| Israel still butchering children... |
| 05.04.04 (12:07 pm) [edit] |
As terrible as the murder of the Israeli settler and her four children the other day was, it still has to be kept in context. As pointed out in the earlier blog, Israel murdered fifteen Palestinian children in April, and in May has kept up the pace...
[b]May 4[/b] - [i]According to IPC's, a nine-year-old child was killed and two others were wounded critically after an Israeli suspicious object exploded between three kids in the eastern neighborhood of Deir Elghisoun Village, north of the West Bank city of Tulkarem. [b]Baha’ Abu Zaytoun, 9, [/b]was killed and [b]Mahmoud Badwan, 12,[/b] and [b]Ahmad Abu Zaytoun, 11,[/b] were wounded very critically after the mysterious object went off suddenly while they were checking it, medics and eyewitnesses said. The eyewitnesses said that the three children were collecting copper wires in the area where they were hit with that object, in order to sell them later on to earn their living. [/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
[b]May 4[/b] - [i]In the meantime, four other children were shot and wounded near the Alnada residential project in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Lahya, WAFA news agency confirmed. Local hospital officials in the Gaza City said that [b]Mohammad Rayan, 16, [/b]was hit in his right thigh, [b]Salah Mousa, 14,[/b] was hit in the right leg, Mohammed Abul Eish, 16, in the shoulder and neck and in critical condition, while [b]Mohammad Abu Jaser, 16,[/b] was hit in his right thigh as well, after coming under Israeli live bullet shooting.[/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
[b]May 4[/b] - [i]In a fresh incursion today morning into the refugee camp of khanyounis, two citizens were killed and 22 others wounded besides 30 houses were demolished. Palestinian medical sources of khanyounis announced that [b]Jameel Abu Mustafa, 16,[/b] and Belal Hamdan,25, were shot dead by the shrapnel of a missile hit by the warplane “Apache” towards a group of people , besides, 22 others were wounded, three critically.[/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
[b]May 3[/b] - [i]Medical sources in Gaza City told IPC correspondent that [b]16-year-old Ahmad Al Khawaldi [/b]died today of wounds he sustained on April 23, when the Israeli forces invaded the town of Beit Lahia, north of Gaza Strip.[/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
[b]May 2[/b] - [i]Also, another child was shot dead by the Israeli occupying forces in the city of Khan Younis, south of Gaza Strip, IPC's said. [b]Six-year-old Hussein Abu Akar[/b], from Khan Younis western refugee camp, was shot and seriously wounded by the invading Israeli forces, along with seven other citizens. Medical sources in Khan Younis said that Abu Akar died of bullet wounds in his abdomen few hours later, as injuries flooded to the hospital due to the indiscriminate and heavy gunfire Israeli forces opened at the citizens of the camp.[/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
[b]April Synopsis[/b] - [i]GAZA, Palestine, May 2, 2004 (IPC + Al Quds Al Arabi) - - The Palestinian Health Information Center (PHIC) revealed in its monthly report that 61 citizens were killed by the Israeli occupying forces (IOF) in April of this year alone, including 22 children.[/i]
[i]Also, the PHIC said in its report that the month of April witnessed a targeting of the civilian population, as 22 children under 18 years of age were killed by the Israeli forces, including three girls who did not blow their tenth candle yet. [b]Children represented 36% of the total of killed citizens during April.[/b][/i]
[i]About the wounded, PHIC noted that 505 wounded citizens arrived at the different hospitals, clinics and medical centers of the Ministry of Health, 357 of them from the Gaza Strip. The report revealed that between the period of April 20 to April 23 (during the invasion of Beit Lahia, north of Gaza), 16 citizens were killed and 93 others were wounded.[/i] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
|
|
|
| |
| Israel reaps what is sows... |
| 05.03.04 (11:41 am) [edit] |
Anyone following the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has seen the massive coverage given to the Palestinian murder of the Hatuel family in Occupied Gaza -
in which a mother Tali Hatuel (34), and her four daughters - Hila (11) Hadar (9) Roni (7) and Merav (2) - were brutally murdered when the car they were driving in on their way to an "Anti-disengagement" rally came under Palestinian gunfire. http://www.gsnonweb.com/gsnli... http://www.gsnonweb.com/gsnli...
Needless to say, such an atrocity must be condemned in the most uncompromising of terms. However, what really disgusts me is the way that this atrocity has been almost completely removed from its context by the biased American media. If one were to only follow the US media, one would think that this was just some completely removed crime having no bearing on the overall situation, whereas in reality this is not true at all. They act as though this is not inside the context of an Israeli onslaught, in which at least seventy Palestinians, most of whom were defenseless civilians, have been murdered by the Israelis in the last month.
Of course this doesn't excuse the massacre of the Hatuel family, but it is also patently absurd to pretend as though this action was not a direct reaction to the overall situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Among those killed by Israel in April are [b](children in bold[/b][b])[/b]:
Mohammad Abid, 19, [b]Nasir Hajahjah, 16,[/b] 3 unnamed http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Mohmmed Salama Abu Rweida, 18, Ammar Adnan Al Rjoudi, 18, Mohammed Zeidan Abu Samhdana, 19, Adham Hesham, 30, Jamal Khariosh, 26, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... [b]Mohammed Abu Saris, 16, [/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... [b]Iman Abu Tolba, 12,[/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Mohammed Dereiya, 36, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... 3 unnamed http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Ahmad Abdel Rahman, 56, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... [b]Eman Tulba, 12,[/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... [b]Hussain Awad, 17,[/b] Modeeb Sarsour, 63, Ali Barhoum, 18, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Yasser Abu Hebeis, 21, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Dr. Abdel Aziz Al Rantisi, 57 http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Diya Abdelkarim, 24, 1 unnamed http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Khaldoun Jarad, 21, Mu’tasim Nasseir, 18, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Suhail Al Harsh, 24, Mohammed Al Ajjouri, 18, Mohammed Al Rantisi, 22, Ra'fat Abu Hasira, 28, [b]Mohammed Hamatto, 16, Ziyad Abu Hamada, 16, Yousef Al Da'our, 12,[/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Bilal Abu Amsheh, 32, Ayman Barahmeh, 28, Ghanem Ghanem, 34, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Mohammed Al Ajjouri, 18, Mohammed Al Rantisi, 22, Suhail Al Harsh, 24, Ayyoub Karsou', 18, Omar Ahmad, 19, [b]Mohammed Al Malfouh, 16,[/b] Khaldoun Abu Jarad, 21, Mo'tasem Nseir, 19, [b]Ibrahim Rayyan, 17,[/b] [b]Mohammed Al Tanani, 16.[/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Mohammed Qotqot, 32, Mohammed Nazzal, Abdel Rahman Nazzal, 22, Professor Yasser Abu Laymoun, 32, [b]Mona Abu Tabaq, 11, Asma'a Abu Quleiq, 4, (for these two girls, see my earlier blog)[/b] http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Hussni Mustafa Darhgma, 22, Kamal Al-Tubasi, 30, Mazen Azzouqa, 28, Said Hardan, 25, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... [b]Ibrahim Al Muqayyed, 14, [/b]http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Ashraf Hasan, 25, Amjad Amara, 21, Ismail Abu Mandil, 22, Fadi Al Na'ami, 21, Isla[b]m Zahran, 14, [/b]http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Tareq Hmaid, 24, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Thae’r Abu Srour, 21, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i... Ahmad Kulaib, 22, Subheya Abu Lobbadeh, 50, http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
And on it goes...
|
|
|
| |
| Sharon, Likud, and the "Gaza Plan" |
| 05.03.04 (9:55 am) [edit] |
Well, this Sunday saw Likud vote down Sharon's Gaza "Disengagement Plan" with 60% of the participating Likudniks (less than half the party membership) voting "No".
As mentioned in an earlier commentary, the whole affair is much ado about nothing really, just a slight restructuring of the Occupation. Further, the Likud referendum matters even less as Sharon had already said before the fact he would bring the proposal before the government regardless of the outcome of the referendum.
Most sources seem to believe that the majority of Israeli's in fact support the "disengagement" plan, and Sharon's hope regarding the referendum was that this majority view was also represented in his own Likud party, thus a successful referendum would put considerable pressure of the far-right leadership to "play ball" with Sharon's scheme. However, since less than half of the Likud membership even took part in the referendum, Sharon is now adopting the stance that the referendum was "hijacked" by the settlers and the Likud far-right and does not, in fact, reflect either the majority of Israelis in general or even the majority of Likud in particular. I personally disagree with this assessment, at least in respect to Likud which has shifted radically to the right over the last few years.
So what is the result? First, its pretty obvious now that Sharon's earlier hints at resignation were just a pressure tactic that he hoped would strengthen his position in the referendum. It is, of course, possible that he might resort to early elections, but in view of his dismal failure as Prime Minister (the least successful PM of all time - he has failed in every conceivable respect in ALL of his campaign promises. He can not, in fact, truthfully claim to have accomplished anything at all.) this would be a big risk for him, especially as the more moderate Shinui continues to gain steam. Further, the pro- vs. anti- "disengagement plan" debate has resulted in a considerable division within Likud which could possibly threaten party unity in the event of early elections. I think it is safe to say that Sharon will not make this move.
Sharon could also simply present the plan - either as it stands or slightly modified - to his cabinet & the Knesset for approval. This is what he said he would do regardless of how the referendum went. The problem being, however, that his losing the referendum has now improved the position of the anti-"disengagement" Likudniks, who are likely to be even more outspoken and aggressive in opposing such a move. Due to Israel's system of "lists" in elections, the cabinet - or at least some ministers - might be willing to compromise with Sharon since they do not face any direct electoral threat, however, the same is not true in the Knesset. I suspect that if Sharon tries this, it will fail.
Sharon could also "modify" the existing plan - as he has already started suggesting today. http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a... However, as noted before, the existing "disengagement plan" was really little more than a restructuring of the occupation by removing some 7,000 settlers from the Strip (where they are surrounded by 1.2 million Palestinians), but beyond this they were not giving up anything at all - maintaining 100% over Gaza. So the question is, how can he really modify the existing plan without actually compromising on the only real purpose - to "disengage" a few thousand settlers from their utterly untenable position in Gaza? All said, I think Sharon really gave up as little as absolutely possible from the very start, so I doubt there is much room for modifying the plan.
Another possibility would be to try to take advantage of the conventional wisdom, that suggests that MOST Israelis in fact support his plan. To do this, he would need to call for a national referendum, which, if successful, could radically expand the momentum and appeal of his plan among Israeli voters. Remember that Sharon was told by Bush that he didn't want any actual action taken until after the US elections, so calling for a national referendum - which would take some time to organize - could keep the plan alive without in fact taking any action through most of the year. I would suggest that this would be Sharon's most prudent move, nevertheless, he is notorious for his political unpredictability, so time will tell.
Anyway, as noted before, as a one-state supporter who is completely opposed to any moves toward ethnic separatism, I personally am happy to see that Sharon has lost this referendum and suffered this (admittedly minor) setback. Further, the settlers in Neveh Dekalim (a settlement in Occupied Gaza) began laying the concrete for a major expansion of their settlement (though it is already 1/3 empty - settlement expansion is NOT done because of a lack of room or a need for more land, but as a political act of disenfranchising native Palestinians. Every time a settlement expands, so too does its surrounding "security zone" as well as its official "zone" limits for yet more expansion in the future. The larger a settlement grows, the more neighboring land falls within its zoning sphere of influence for yet further expansion.) Further a gang of "religious" settlers moved in to eastern Al Quds (Occupied Jerusalem) as part of the never ending gradual ethnic cleansing of that city.
Unlike Begin in 1979 when he withdrew from the Sinai and had to forcibly remove a number of settlements (most famous of which was Yamit), Sharon is facing a vastly more powerful settlement movement, numbering close to 500,000 people (if one takes into account Occupied "Greater" Al Quds/Jerusalem) with an enormous support network in not only Israel proper but around the world (esp. in the US). I firmly do not believe that ANY Israeli prime minister even has the OPTION of reversing the settlement movement, even if they had a genuine desire to do so (something I still doubt in Sharon's case).
Real "disengagement" and separation is no longer (and hasn't been since 1996) a realistic possibility. This is precisely why we call for a one-state solution, one that simply involves a change of law and legislation (ending Israel's official status as a ethnocentric racist state / and ending any suggestion for an independent ethnocentric Palestinian state) as opposed to forcing physical changes on the ground in order to perpetuate ethnocentric/racist agendas (forcibly "transfering" the Palestinians, or forcibly "removing" the settlers).
As for the current "Gaza Plan" of Sharon, it doesn't really matter in the least. Even if Sharon were able and willing to withdraw the Gaza settlements (something I very seriously doubt), it would really make no difference for the affected Palestinians, who would simply be confined to a slightly larger Gaza Ghetto completely surrounded by, controlled by, dependent on the surrounding IDF.
|
|
|
| |
| Israel working hard to sow yet more hatred... |
| 04.30.04 (1:54 pm) [edit] |
[image]CPSC1_1151033596.jpg[/image]
With all the news about US troops sexually abusing Iraqi prisoners, hiring Saddam's henchmen to handle Fallujah for us, and efforts to suppress "unapproved" news & media, it would not be surprising if no one noticed what our little protectorate of Israel has been up to.
Well, they've been busy alright - demolishing over twenty Palestinian houses just today - as well as the usual daily killings of Palestinians (remember - Palestinians kill Israelis a few times a month, whereas Israel murders Palestinians virtually everyday). Anyway, the dead hold no grudges, but all these children picking up the ruins of their lives after the IDF demolishes their homes do. Israel is busy building up the next generation of hatred and has found a fool proof way of doing so.
The US is doing a pretty good job of generating hatred in Iraq, but when it comes to that, no one is as effective as Israel.
[image]CPSC1_595783954.jpg[/image]
[b]IOF Kills Two Citizens, Demolishes 20 Homes[/b], Palestine National Authority International Press Centre, April 30, 2004 http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/i...
Excerpts:
[i]SALFIT, Palestine, April 30, 2004 (IPC + WAFA) - - The Israeli occupying forces (IOF) stepped up its military aggression in the occupied Palestinian territories, killing two citizens and wounding a child seriously, while demolishing 20 houses.[/i]
[i]12-year-old Mohammed Zo'rob, a resident of Block "J" area of Rafah, was shot and wounded in the abdomen by an Israeli sniper stationed in a nearby "Zo'rob" military watchtower, doctors said. They added, according to WAFA, that Zo'rob was in critical condition.[/i]
[image]CPSC1_426289703.jpg[/image]
[i]Nearby in the city of Khan Younis, Israeli bulldozers tore down 20 houses in the Khan Younis western refugee camp, bringing back images of dispossession Palestinian refugees suffered back in 1948 and 1967. Security sources mentioned that the Israeli forces invaded the refugee camp today dawn, escorted by a number of heavy military bulldozers. The forces surrounded a block consisting of 20 homes, sheltering 150 citizens, mostly children, and ordered them to leave the houses in five minutes without taking anything with them. The bulldozers then razed the houses and turned them into piles of rubble.[/i]
[image]CPSC1_679715064.jpg[/image]
|
|
|
| |
| US "patriotic" media desperate to ignore US troops... |
| 04.30.04 (10:55 am) [edit] |
I guess the "patriots" are now even censoring "legitimate" (i.e. White Western) media in a desperate bid to be good patriots by ignoring the existence of our troops and spitting in the face of the fallen by pretending it didn't happen...
[b]US TV blackout hits litany of war dead,[/b] The Guardian, April 30, 2004 http://media.guardian.co.uk/s...,14173,1207089,00.html
Excerpts:
[i]Almost a quarter of households in the US will be prevented tonight from seeing an ABC TV network news programme that is to broadcast a list of American servicemen and women killed in action in Iraq. Eight affiliate stations have refused to take the programme, which is due to go out tonight in America. [/i]
[i]The decision to censor ABC's Nightline programme, which is to broadcast the names and pictures of more than 500 dead US service personnel, has been taken by Sinclair Broadcast Group - a regional company that owns ABC-affiliated TV stations across the country.[/i]
[i]Maryland-based Sinclair, which owns 62 stations and covers 24% of US homes, is claiming ABC's decision to broadcast the show - dubbed "The Fallen" - was "motivated by a political agenda".[/i]
[i]The company said the programme, fronted by anchor Ted Koppel, was a political statement "disguised as news content, and asked why ABC had decided to highlight the loss of soldiers in Iraq and not those killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks by al-Qaida".[/i]
[i]ABC insisted it would stick to its plan to broadcast the show, saying it was intended to be "an expression of respect" to US personnel who have died in the conflict.
It had initially intended to broadcast a list of the 523 soldiers killed in action, but will now extend Nightline by 10 minutes in order to broadcast an additional 200 names of those who have died in accidents, from friendly fire or by suicide.[/i]
[i]The US government is highly sensitive to the impact that coverage of war casualties could have on President Bush's re-election campaign and public support for the continuing US presence in Iraq.[/i]
[i]The Pentagon has barred the release of images of coffins of war dead returning to the country, but the ban was temporarily circumvented last week following legal action by thememoryhole.org, a website dedicated to combating government secrecy.[/i]
[i]Maurice Hinchley, a prominent Democrat congressman, has attacked Sinclair's decision, saying it was motivated by its own political agenda. "The decision by Sinclair... to keep this programme off its stations is being made by a corporation with a political agenda without regard to the wants or needs of its viewers. "This move may be providing a chilling look into the future if we allow media ownership to be consolidated into fewer and fewer hands," said Mr Hinchley.[/i]
[i]In an interview with the New York Times this week, Koppel insisted the motivation for the show was not political. "I have always felt, and I said it when I was in Iraq last year, that the most important thing a journalist can do is remind people of the cost of war," he said. "If the motivation to go to war is good, is justifiable," he said, "then the cost, whether it is 500, or 5,000, or 50,000, is something people will accept. Should the motivation not be good, then five is too many". [/i]
|
|
|
| |
| The "US war on freedom of the press" continues... |
| 04.30.04 (10:34 am) [edit] |
From [b]At US urging, Qatar to seek review at al Jazeera[/b] , Reuters, April 30, 2004 http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
[i]Excerpts[/i] & Comments...
[i]WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) - Under U.S. pressure, Qatar's foreign minister said on Thursday he would seek a review of Arabic television station al Jazeera's coverage of Iraq after Washington complained it was inaccurate and anti-American.[/i]
[i]The Bush administration has warned Qatar its relations with the United States were clouded by what it called "inflammatory" coverage of Iraq by Jazeera, whose satellite broadcasts have a wide Arab audience.[/i]
I guess if you can't stop the media from airing "news" that hasn't been approved by the US, you can appeal to the government where the media outlet is based and call on them to suppress these "illegitimate" (i.e. independent) viewpoints.
[i]The Bush administration says its Middle East policies promote freedom.[/i]
LOLOLOLOLOLOL - yeah right! That's the funniest thing I've read today. In an article trying to SUPPRESS freedom of the press we find this statement about the US trying to "promote freedom"...LOL - too funny.
[i]Many Arabs accuse the Bush administration of using double standards, by seeking to muzzle the media and what they see as valid criticism that U.S. troops have used excessive force in Iraq in an occupation opposed by many governments.[/i]
Don't these silly Arabs get it yet? They can have NO opinion aside from what Bush cares to approve for them. Stupid little untermensch, where do they get off having opinions? Only Republicans can have opinions...
[i]A State Department official, who asked not to be identified, said earlier this week the United States sought to persuade Qatar to cut funds to Jazeera, arguing it was not in the nation's interests for anti-American sentiment to intensify in the region. Hamad was noncommittal. "We have a free press in Qatar and this part of the free press," he said.[/i]
LOL - well, you have to admit that it really shows how stupid American "conventional wisdom" about the Middle East is when a small Arab monarchy has to explain to the US what a "free press" is.
[i]The pressure on Jazeera came as the Bush administration fights criticism that it sought to keep images of the coffins of American soldiers out of the U.S. media to sanitize the Iraq war and stem a drop in public support for the occupation.[/i]
[i]Jazeera's coverage of the war in Iraq includes more graphic images than its U.S. counterparts of civilian casualties, especially children. Many Arabs, including Arab-Americans, see the network as more accurate than U.S. television.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Bring the Troops Home! - To war crimes trials! |
| 04.30.04 (10:00 am) [edit] |
There is no need to rehash the torture and sexual abuse practiced by the US soldiers in Saddam's old torture chambers - now our torture chambers - of Abu Ghraib prison. It's all over the news - all the happy smiling troops humiliating, torturing and abusing Iraqis for fun and games.
There is nothing new about this - Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been reporting about this for months now, though of course its only become "news" now that the "legitimate" CBS network has covered the story. There is nothing new about the reports at all, except for the photos.
However, what really galls me are the pathetic excuses being cited by the families of these sicko bastards.
See, for example, [b]Prisoner Abuse-Families[/b], Associated Press, April 30, 2004 http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
[i]Excerpts[/i] with comments...
[i]HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) -- A soldier facing a court-martial for his role in the alleged abuse of Iraqi war prisoners says commanders ignored his requests to set out rules for treating POWs and scolded him for questioning the inmates' harsh treatment.[/i]
Bull! It doesn't take a genius to know that the crap they were doing was wrong, unless you're some absolute sadist, in which case you should be in prison - not in charge of one.
[i]Lawson and Martha Frederick, the sergeant's wife, said Frederick was being made a scapegoat for commanders who gave him no guidance on managing hundreds of POWs with just a handful of ill-trained, poorly equipped troops.[/i]
Absolute rubbish. It does not take "guidance" from a superior to know that raping prison inmates, attaching electrical wires to their privates, or forcing them to simulate sex with one another is wrong.
[i]CBS's "60 Minutes II" broadcast pictures of the alleged abuse and an interview with Frederick on Wednesday. Some of the soldiers were smiling in the photographs obtained by CBS, which showed naked prisoners stacked in a human pyramid and being forced to simulate sex acts.[/i]
"Duh, nobody told me this was wrong..." Bull.
[i]Lawson, of Newburg, W.Va., said his nephew was being portrayed "as a monster."[/i]
Cause his sicko nephew IS a monster and I think this guy trying to defend his nephew's actions is just about as sick.
[i]Daniel Sivits -- whose son, 24-year-old Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits, is also facing court-martial -- said the young man "was just doing what he was told to do."[/i]
Sorry - that particular defense was repudiated in the Nuremberg Trials. "I was just following orders" is not a defense for anyone engaged in activity that is beyond all question wrong. But it is appropriate to see US soldiers resorting to the defense of the Nazis...
[i]Sivits said his son isn't a trained military police officer. "He's a trained wheeled-vehicle mechanic," he said.[/i]
And this is supposed to mean that he has absolutely no concept of acceptable human behavior? Yeah, right.
[i]The newspaper cited unidentified Army officials in naming Sgt. Javal S. Davis, 26. His wife, who also spoke to the newspaper, defended her husband. "We really don't know how those prisoners are behaving," said Zeenithia Davis, who is in the Navy in Mississippi. "There's a line between heinous war crimes and maintaining discipline."[/i]
Did this sicko actually say this with a straight face? "maintaining discipline" by sexually abusing them? Oh, well maybe for subhuman Arabs... Sick bitch.
[i]The alleged abuses of prisoners were "stupid, kid things -- pranks," Terrie England said. "And what the (Iraqis) do to our men and women are just? The rules of the Geneva Convention, does that apply to everybody or just us?"[/i]
Oh and of course there is the usual "relativist" argument.... What exactly are "they" - the prisoners - doing to the Americans? But at least this person was honest enough to openly imply that we are absolutely no better than the worst of Saddam's thugs - She's right about that much.
[i]Frederick's civilian lawyer, Washington-based Gary Myers, said he has urged the commanding general in Iraq to treat the case as an administrative matter, like those of the seven officers. "I can assure you Chip Frederick had no idea how to humiliate an Arab until he met up" with higher-ranking people who told him how, Myers said.[/i]
Now this may be true and its absolutely criminal that the Pentagon is hiding the names of the "CIA, FBI, and military intelligence" officials that reportedly encouraged this behavior. I guess that's the good thing about rank - you're above the law.
[i]In civilian life, Frederick has been a correctional officer for six years at the Buckingham Correctional Center in Dillwyn, Va., his wife and a state agency spokesman said.[/i]
And this is even worse - if this guy really had no idea that his sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners was wrong, just what the hell was he doing in his prison job in the US?
And of course these sick bastards will get a slap on the wrist from the Pentagon and in a few years will be out on the streets again. But maybe at least a couple of them will meet some big guy in prison who will give them a first-hand lesson in how sexual abuse isn't a fun thing...
|
|
|
| |
| Iraqi "Republican Guard" - an example of Orwellian policy change |
| 04.30.04 (8:56 am) [edit] |
Back in march of 2003 the airwaves were full of stories about the fanatical "Republican Guard" - die-hard Saddam loyalists who represented the worst of the evil Ba'athist regime we were out to "liberate" the Iraqi people from.
See, for example: [b]Republican Guard gets last chance against U.S. forces[/b], USA Today, March 27, 2003, http://www.usatoday.com/news/...
Excerpts:
[i]WASHINGTON — The road to victory for U.S.-led forces in Iraq runs through the Republican Guard. A dozen years after Saddam Hussein's best divisions failed to defeat U.S. tanks and infantry in the deserts west of Kuwait, the elite Iraqi units will get one more chance — this time to save the Iraqi leader's life.[/i]
[i]But now the Iraqis are fighting for their homeland within sight of their capital city. They have learned from their defeats in the 1991 war and picked up tricks from the way the Serbs fought back against U.S. airpower in Kosovo. Unlike lower-paid conscripts in the regular Iraqi forces, many of whom have melted away rather than fight, Republican Guard units are expected to give U.S. invaders an intensely violent battle.[/i]
[i]Iraqi leaders have promised that the Republican Guard will fight to the death. "They are ready to sacrifice to the level of martyrdom to defend their leader, their country and their sanctities," the official Iraqi News Agency said March 1.[/i]
[i]What concerns coalition commanders about the Republican Guard is not their armaments but their loyalty. Commanded by Saddam's younger son, Qusay, the Republican Guard troops are drawn mostly from Iraq's minority Sunni population, Saddam's branch of the Muslim faith. After several coup plots in the 1990s turned out to include Republican Guard officers, Saddam conducted a purge and installed cronies from his hometown of Tikrit as senior officers.[/i]
[i]Before U.S. troops can drop surrender messages or bombs on the Republican Guard, they must find them. Guard forces are scattered and dug in, according to U.S. Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar. To avoid systematic destruction by U.S. airpower, many Guard units have positioned themselves in residential areas, where killing Iraqi tanks and fighters could mean killing Iraqi families.[/i]
[i]Within Baghdad itself is a separate and possibly more dangerous force, the Special Republican Guard, an elite force of between 15,000 and 25,000 trained in urban warfare tactics. In addition there are between 9,000 and 12,000 members of Iraq's Military Intelligence Service and Military Security Service in Baghdad, organizations devoted to covert operations and Saddam's personal security.[/i]
And yet now (as in today), it turns out that we are employing Saddam's loyalists to do some of our dirty work for us - like in Fallujah...
See, for example, [b]Former Iraqi officer forms force to calm Falluja[/b], Reuters, April 30, 2004, http://194.90.101.50/gsnlib_a...
Excerpts:
[i]BAGHDAD, April 30 (Reuters) - A former officer of Saddam Hussein's Republican Guard said on Friday he was forming a military unit to restore calm to the bloodied Iraqi town of Falluja in agreement with besieging U.S. forces. Jasim Mohamed Saleh, who a relative said had been chief of staff of a Republican Guard brigade, told Reuters the force would help Iraqi security forces bring order to the town, so U.S. forces would not be needed.[/i]
[i]"We have now begun forming a new emergency military force to help the forces of the Iraqi Civil Defence Corps and the Iraqi police in completing the mission of imposing security and stability in Falluja without the need for the American army, which the people of Falluja reject," Saleh said. Hundreds of people waving Iraqi flags and Iraqi security forces cheered Saleh, wearing his old army uniform, when he entered the town centre and gave a speech on Friday.[/i]
[i]The New York Times reported on Friday that U.S. military commanders had proposed transferring the task of ending the Falluja insurgency to a new force of Iraqi soldiers, led by officers once loyal to Saddam.[/i]
[b]The lesson being - Loyal Ba'athists & Saddam supporters are EVIL, unless they work for us, then they are GOOD. It's all very Orwellian - one day they are the fanatical enemy, the next the best of good fellows - the only thing that changed was the official party line. Orwell would be proud...[/b]
|
|
|
| |
|
|
