will also be the last one unless i am blasted into action again. g
1. My acceptance speech (Samia)
2. In Israel, detachment from reality is now the norm"
3. CBS Under Attack for Exposing Israeli Apartheid
4. 3rd national demonstration for Gaza (Britain)
5. weapons from US to Israel via Greece canceled after protests
6. student sit-ins England to protest Gaza massacre
7. TELL THEM HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THEIR OCCUPATION OF GAZA
8. radical anti-arms trade action in England
9. MORE GOOD NEWS
10. UN Rapporteur: Initiate Criminal Proceedings Against Bush, Rumsfeld
11. [GNAA] Boycott
12. Letter from Gaza
13. Boycotting Israel
14. Dont confuse anti-semitism wth anti-zionism]
15. Hope?
16. Disappeared News - 3 new articles
17. BBC outrage
18. Jan/Feb IndyKids is Out!
19. Israel Up-date Jan. 26, 2009
20. Regarding The Verdict is in: guilty (Holy Land Foundation
[Re]Trial, Texas)
21. A selection of Comments by journalists & academics: Israel has
lost its Soul
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:48:09 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
1. My acceptance speech (Samia)
I think that you find my friend, Samia's speech very
enlightening. She is now back in Jerusalem. Peace, Pat
Dear Friends: I am not sure if many of you knew that I was
travelling to Texas for my citation of merit award from the
alumni association of Southwestern University. It was great
to have my daughter Dina with me otherwise I do not think I
could have coped with this long trip alone, especially on the
way back with the snow storm hitting London. But then that
will need a whole reflection on its own. What is important
that we arrived home yesterday safe and sound. I am
attaching my acceptance speech for your interest. Samia
[ Part 2, Application/MSWORD 39KB. ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:58:05 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
2. In Israel, detachment from reality is now the norm"
Seems that the majority of Israelis and Americans are in
denial - Judy
------
The Independent
PATRICK COCKBURN: IN ISRAEL, DETACHMENT FROM REALITY IS NOW THE NORM
All these years on from Sabra and Chatila, has anything changed?
Thursday, 22 January 2009
http://www.independent.co.uk:80/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-in-israel-
detachment-from-reality-is-now-the-norm-1488583.html
I was watching the superb animated documentary Waltz with Bashir
about the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It culminates in the
massacre of some 1,700 Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatila
refugee camps in south Beirut by Christian militiamen introduced
there by the Israeli army which observed the butchery from close
range.
In the last few minutes the film switches from animation to graphic
news footage showing Palestinian women screaming with grief and
horror as they discover the bullet-riddled bodies of their
families. Then, just behind the women, I saw myself walking with a
small group of journalists who had arrived in the camp soon after
the killings had stopped.
The film is about how the director, Ari Folman, who knew he was at
Sabra and Chatila as an Israeli soldier, tried to discover both why
he had repressed all memory of what happened to him and the degree
of Israeli complicity in the massacre.
Walking out of the cinema, I realised that I had largely repressed
my own memories of that ghastly day. I could not even find a
clipping in old scrapbooks of the article I had written about what
I had seen for the Financial Times for whom I then worked. Even now
my memory is hazy and episodic, though I can clearly recall the
sickly sweet smell of bodies beginning to decompose, the flies
clustering around the eyes of the dead women and children, and the
blood-smeared limbs and heads sticking out of banks of brown earth
heaped up by bulldozers in a half-hearted attempt to bury the
corpses.
Soon after seeing Waltz with Bashir I saw TV pictures of the broken
bodies of the Palestinians killed by Israeli bombs and shells in
Gaza during the 22-day bombardment. At first I thought that little
had changed since Sabra and Chatila. Once again there were the same
tired and offensive excuses that Israel was somehow not to blame.
Hamas was using civilians as human shields, and in any case ^Ö this
argument produced more furtively ^Ö two-thirds of people in Gaza
had voted for Hamas so they deserved whatever happened to them.
But on returning to Jerusalem 10 years after I was stationed here
as The Independent's correspondent between 1995 and 1999 I find
that Israel has changed significantly for the worse. There is far
less dissent than there used to be and such dissent is more often
treated as disloyalty.
Israeli society was always introverted but these days it reminds me
more than ever of the Unionists in Northern Ireland in the late
1960s or the Lebanese Christians in the 1970s. Like Israel, both
were communities with a highly developed siege mentality which led
them always to see themselves as victims even when they were
killing other people. There were no regrets or even knowledge of
what they inflicted on others and therefore any retaliation by the
other side appeared as unprovoked aggression inspired by
unreasoning hate.
At Sabra and Chatila the first journalist to find out about the
massacre was an Israeli and he desperately tried to get it stopped.
This would not happen today because Israeli journalists, along with
all foreign journalists, were banned from entering Gaza before the
Israeli bombardment started. This has made it far easier for the
government to sell the official line about what a great success the
operation has been.
Nobody believes propaganda so much as the propagandist so Israel's
view of the outside world is increasingly detached from reality.
One academic was quoted as saying that Arabs took all their views
about was happening in Israel from what Israelis said about
themselves. So if Israelis said they had won in Gaza, unlike
Lebanon in 2006, Arabs would believe this and Israeli deterrence
would thereby be magically restored.
Intolerance of dissent has grown and may soon get a great deal
worse. Benjamin Netanyahu, who helped bury the Oslo accords with
the Palestinians when he was last prime minister from 1996 to 1999,
is likely to win the Israeli election on 10 February. The only
issue still in doubt is the extent of the gains of the extreme
right.
The views of these were on display this week as Avigdor Lieberman,
the chairman of the Ysrael Beitenu party, which, according to the
polls will do particularly well in the election, was supporting the
disqualification of two Israeli Arab parties from standing in the
election. "For the first time we are examining the boundary between
loyalty and disloyalty," he threatened their representatives.
"We'll deal with you like we dealt with Hamas."
©independent.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Naila
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 1:20 AM
3. CBS Under Attack for Exposing Israeli Apartheid
Hi, Can someone please find the phone number at CBS where we can make our
calls?
This is the easiest way for people to respond to our call for action. Many
cannot figure out how to send feedback online, but all can call. Thanks,
Naila
----
In a message dated 1/30/2009 1:01:57 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info@gazajustice.org writes:
Naila-
Earlier this week we asked you to Thank CBS and Bob Simon for their
excellent TV report exposing Israeli Apartheid tactics. Thousands like
you responded by signing a letter of support. But we just learned from
the folks at J-Street, a pro-peace Jewish group, that CBS IS UNDER ATTACK
by the anti-Peace pro-Israel network for showing America the truth. If
you haven't seen the report you can watch it here.
FIGHT BACK, GET AT LEAST FIVE OF YOUR FRIENDS TO SEND A LETTER OF SUPPORT
TO CBS. ACT NOW, USING THE BELOW LINK. WE HAVE DESIGNED AN EASY TOOL TO
HELP YOU INVITE everyone you know. Simply click on the below link, upload
your email address book OR copy-paste the addresses you want to contact
and click send. Our software will do the rest.[090125-60min-2state.gif]
GO to www.gazajustice.org TO INVITE YOUR FRIENDS TO SEND THEIR SUPPORT
LETTERS
Here is what J-Street said about the groups behind the attack o CBS:
[CAMERA (the Orwellian-named Committee for Accuracy in Middle East
Reporting in America) alerted their activist network - flooding the 60
Minutes' offices and their advertisers with angry phone calls charging
media bias. [1] Jewish community leader Abe Foxman fired off a letter
calling the piece "a hatchet job on Israel." [2]
Journalists - as well as rabbis, professors and elected officials - know
that if they raise questions about what Israel does - they'll often get
attacked as anti-Israel. It's one way the forces of the status quo
constrain debate and discussion on what's really best for Israel and the
United States. We can't let fringe groups like CAMERA define what it
means to be pro-Israel through intimidation and fear tactics.]
SEND A THANK YOU NOTE TO BOB SIMON AND CBS. IF YOU ALREADY SENT A NOTE,
GET 5 OF YOUR FRIENDS TO SEND A NOTE TOO.
Thank you for continuing to advocate for peace and justice.
Farhana
GazaJustice.org
Contact Us: info@gazajustice.org
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jenny James" <atlantiscol@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 3:14 AM
4. 3rd national demonstration for Gaza (Britain)
>
>> STOP THE WAR COALITION NEWSLETTER
>> No. 1073 16 January 2009
>> Email office@stopwar.org.uk
>> Tel: 020 7278 6694
>> Web: http://www.stopwar.org.uk
>>
>> 3RD NATIONAL DEMONSTRATION FOR GAZA
>> SATURDAY 24 JANUARY
>> ISRAEL OUT OF GAZA NOW: LIFT THE BLOCKADE
>> ASSEMBLE BBC BROADCASTING HOUSE
>> PORTLAND PLACE, LONDON, W1A 1AA
>> (Nearest tube Oxford Circus)
>> MARCH TO TRAFALGAR SQUARE
>>
>> With over 1100 killed, 350 of them children, and over 5500
>> injured, the suffering in Gaza is beyond catastrophic. Israel
>> is ignoring the worldwide clamour for it to stop now and is
>> escalating its attacks.
>>
>> A third national demonstration against Israel's barbarity and
>> war crimes has been called for Saturday 24 January in London
>> by Stop the War Coalition, Palestine Solidarity Campaign,
>> British Muslim Association and many other organisations.
>>
>> The demonstration will assemble at BBC Broadcasting House,
>> Portland Place, London, as a response to the BBC's largely
>> one-sided coverage of the Gaza massacre, allowing Israeli
>> spokespeople endless opportunities to propagate lies and
>> deception without challenge.
>>
>> We will march from the BBC to Trafalgar Square. Further
>> details, including timings and route, will be available
>> shortly.
>>
>> Stop the War calls on all its local groups and supporters to
>> start building now for what we need to make an even bigger
>> demonstration than the 100,000 who protested on 10 January.
>> Israel must be made to stop its carnage and we must show our
>> solidarity with the people of Gaza suffering unimaginable
>> atrocities.
>>
>> Stop the War will publicise further details and updates by
>> email and on our website, as we get them.
This list is primarily set up to distribute the 'Green Letters' edited by
Jenny James which give a running account of the activities and experiences
of the Atlantis Community in Colombia since 1995
Archived messages may be seen at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Green-Letters/messages See also http://afan.org.uk/
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Green-Letters/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jenny James
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 7:45 PM
5. weapons from US to Israel via Greece canceled after protests
Greece: Protests planned over US arms to Israel
Associated Press
Left-wing opposition parties said Tuesday they will go ahead with a
protest at a Greek port despite the U.S. decision not to use the facility
for an arms shipment to Israel.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said plans for shipping U.S. arms to
Israel had been changed to avoid Greece.
"I think the Greek government had some issue with the off-loading of some
of that shipment in their country, and so we are finding alternative means
of getting that entire shipment to its proper destination in Israel,"
Morrell said.
He declined to say what kind of arms were included in the shipment.
Greek opposition parties maintained the government objected to the
shipment only after the issue was revealed in the local media, because it
feared public opinion in Greece, which is broadly opposed to ongoing
Israeli military action in Gaza.
Protests at the western Greek port of Astakos are planned for Wednesday
and Thursday.
--------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Yossi B <yoskale@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:56 PM
US arm shipment from Greece to Israel:
canceled!
<http://www.occupiedlondon.org/blog/2009/01/13/40-1439-us-arm-shipment-from-greece-to-israel-canceled/>
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
International mainstream media
report<http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N12348891.htm>this morning
that the planned US shipment of ammunition from Greece to Israel has been
canceled. The reason for this is still a bit unclear: While the
international media claim the decision was made by the Pentagon in light
of the proximity of the Israeli port of Ashdod (the shipment's
destination) to Gaza, Greek mainstream media paint a very different story:
According to this, the shipment has been called off by the Greek
government - here's a translation of an abstract from the news as carried
by news portal
in.gr:<http://www.in.gr/news/article.asp?lngEntityID=975008&lngDtrID=244>
As reported in the newspaper Ta Nea (The News), for hours the phone lines
between Washington and Athens were on fire until it was decided, on
Monday, that at this point the operation publically announced by the
American Navy should not go ahead.
The decision came despite the fact that outside the greek port of Astakos
was a ship of the American Navy that would be used to transport the
shipment in 235 containers.
The greek government and the ministry of foreign affairs have been uneasy
about the publicity received by the issue and so, despite the (political
and legal) commitments in place, the huge political cost of the operation
outweigh them, since the country would have been directly implicated in
the forwarding of ammunition to Israel whilst its attack on the Gaza strip
is ongoing.
On Saturday (10.01), the Popular front for the Liberation of Palestine had
called upon "the Greek movement, the Greek people and all international
progressive forces to halt the planned shipment of U.S. arms to Israel
from the Greek port of Astakos" (read the full callout
here<http://athens.indymedia.org/front.php3?lang=el&article_id=967338>).
During the following two days, tens of groups across the country responded
to the callout, by calling in turn for a demonstration and blockade of the
port of Astakos for Thursday, 15.01.
Only one day later, the shipment has been canceled! A small, but so
significant victory^Å Comradely greetings to our brothers and sisters in
Gaza.
http://www.occupiedlondon.org/blog/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jenny James
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 1:52 AM
6. student sit-ins England to protest Gaza massacre
SCHOOL OF LIFE
Students from Kings College London, LSE, SOAS, Birmingham, Oxford, Essex,
Leeds, Nottingham, Manchester Metropolitan, Sussex and Newcastle have all
occupied University buildings in response to Israel's assault on Gaza this
week, showing their solidarity with Palestine, and demanding that their
universities boycott and divest from Israel.
Since Tuesday a group of around 80 students have occupied the main lecture
theatre at Sussex Uni. With mobile phones presumably on silent they have
insisted that lectures proceed as normal but refuse to leave until their
demands have been met - insisting that the ceasefire is by no means the
end of University complicity in Israeli actions.
Highlighting both the financial links of the University and the moral
implications of its continued silence over the issue, the students have
made six demands: That the university issue a statement condemning Israeli
military aggression and the occupation; withdraw funding from any company
producing arms, supporting the state of Israel or violating human rights;
institute a campus wide boycott of Israeli goods; pay for six full
scholarships of students from Gaza universities - and - that they send
surplus educational material to Gaza with shipping paid by the University.
Oh and that the students themselves face no repercussions for the action.
So far 'The Management' have refused to make a statement on the grounds
that it's 'too political'. They have agreed to pay for some shipping costs
of resources and to er 'market' their foreign scholarships more strongly
in the Middle East (that's what the Gazans need - a fresh and dynamic
marketing campaign). The University also denies that it's aware that it
invests in arms companies in spite of the wealth of student research and
even FOI requests that prove otherwise, and have flat out rejected the
idea of a boycott. As for repercussions - there will be none... as long
as the occupation doesn't go on too long.
The Sussex students have stated that this 'complete failure to even
dignify our demands, combined with an implicit threat is not good enough'
and have signalled their intention to stay firmly put.
* See www.sussexoccupation.blogspot.com or email
sussexoccupation@gmail.com to show support.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jenny James" <atlantiscol@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 1:04 AM
7. TELL THEM HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THEIR OCCUPATION OF GAZA
>
> TELL THEM HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THEIR OCCUPATION OF GAZA AND THE
> SLAUGHTER OF INNOCENT PALESTINIANS!!
>
> Email addresses and mobile phone numbers of senior Israeli
> politicians, and apologists for murder of innocents.
>
> ACTION ALERT: FAX ISRAELBy Haitham Sabbah ^Õ Jan 12th, 2009 at 19:29 ^Õ
> Category: Action Alert, Haitham's Choice, Israel, Newswire, Palestine,
> War, Zionism
>
> *** PLEASE SPREAD WIDELY ***
> After the successful email campaign, it's time to move to the next
> level: calling some of the war criminals.
> Objectives of this campaign are as follows:
> 1. Bombard their phone/mobile/fax lines with anti-war, anti-Zionist
> messages. This can be in the form of calls, faxes or even sms's;
> 2. Waste the time of these war criminals as much as possible. Some of
> them are doing nothing else but jumping on the TV screens to spread
> lies and hatred. They justify killing Palestinian children and
> civilians;
> 3. Directly delivering to them the message that we are disgusted by
> what they are doing and they should stop now;
> 4. Show them the magnitude of support that Palestinians have after the
> world witnessed their war crimes in Gaza.
> Let's start with war criminal, Mark Regev, International Media Adviser
> to the Prime Minister.
> His MOBILE number is: +972-5-0620-3264 and his office number is
> +972-2670-5354
> If you like to follow your call/sms with an email, use this one:
> mark.regev@it.pmo.gov.il
> Second war criminal, Shlomo Dror in the Ministry of Defence.
> His MOBILE number is +972-5-0629-8148, office number is
> +972-3697-5339, fax number is +972-2670-5602
> As before, if you like to follow it up with an email, use this:
> mediasar@mod.gov.il
> Third war criminal is Major Liebovitz from the Israeli Navy
> His MOBILE number is +972-5-781-86248
> (Sorry, I could not find his email. If you have it, please share it to
> update this post.)
> If you know or come across any mobile number* of any Israeli war
> criminal, please send it to (haitham.sabbah@gmail.com) so that I can
> update the list here. Meanwhile, you can bombard the top war criminal,
> Olmert and his office assistance, managers, spokesperson, etc^Å Please
> visit the following page to select the name that you like to play with
> and pick his/her office number and/or fax number.
> http://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/PM+Office/Contacts/
> Note: To call or fax any in the above list, remove the "zero" and add
> +972 (Israel Int'l code) before the number. (Example: Ehud Olmert's
> phone number is 02-670-5555 will become +972-2-670-555, fax number is
> 02-670-5475 will become +972-2-670-5475)
> I suggest that you put your feelings on paper either by drawing or as
> a letter (in any language, in fact using other than English language
> will keep them busier and waste more of their time, which we want) and
> fax it to the maximum fax numbers you find there, but phone calls are
> still very important if you can.
> More? Yes, you can do more. Call or fax the current Knesset members.
> Go to the following link, select any name and you will find their
> phone and fax numbers. Again, to call or fax any, remove the "zero"
> and add +972 before the number. (Example: Benjamin Netanyahu (a.k.a.
> Bibi the butcher!) phone: 02-6408456 will become +972-2-6408456 and
> his fax number is 02-6496659 which becomes +972-2-6496659)
> Knesset members:
> http://www.knesset.gov.il/mk/eng/mkindex_current_eng.asp?view=0
> Also Knesset Directory (add +9722 before the numbers you find here):
> http://www.knesset.gov.il/description/eng/eng_directory.htm
> To: The Israeli Ministry of Defense, Fax: +972-3-697-6717
> To: The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Fax +972-2-5303367
> Last but not least, share a copy of your fax with others. Please post
> your fax on this flickr group:
> http://www.flickr.com/groups/fax-israel/
> PS. Feel free to do the same with any and all pro-Israel war on Gaza.
> You can start with:
> White House (although they are busy backing up there files, but we can
> only hope that Obama will get something to read and learn about on his
> first day in office):
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
> The Congress (which justed gave Israel new green light to kill kids
> and women of Gaza):
> http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
> https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
> Be creative! Search for the contacts of your government official's
> website and contact them. Save Gaza!
> Remember, Silence is Complicity!
> * Israeli mobile numbers start with the following codes:
> 9725 Israel-Mobile
> 9726 Israel-Mobile
> 97251 Israel-Mobile
> 97253 Israel-Mobile
> 97255 Israel-Mobile
> 97256 Israel-Mobile
> 97258 Israel-Mobile
> 97252 Israel-Mobile-Cellcom
> 97257 Israel-Mobile-Mirs
> 97254 Israel-Mobile-Partner
> 97250 Israel-Mobile-Pelephone
> Source: http://www.nstelcom.com/support/codes_il.htm
> ====
> Update: Here is a list of most terrorist Israeli officials. Feel free
> to bombard them with your words of condemnation and pictures of their
> war crimes. [Hat tip: Shadia]
> Shimon Peres (president@president.gov.il); Ehud Olmert - Prime
> Minister (eulmert@knesset.gov.il); Ehud Barak - Deputy Prime Minister
> , Minister of Defense (minister@mod.gov.il); Tzipi Livni - Acting
> Prime Minister , Minister of Foreign Affairs (zlivni@knesset.gov.il);
> Abraham Dicter - Minister of Internal Security
> (adichter@knesset.gov.il); Ariel Atias - Minister of Communications
> (aatias@knesset.gov.il); Binyamin (Fouad) Ben-Eliezer Minister of
> National Infrastructure(binyaminb@knesset.gov.il); Eli Aflalo -
> Minister of Immigrant Absorption (eaflalo@knesset.gov.il); Eliyahu
> Yishai - Deputy Prime Minister , Minister of Industry, Trade, and
> Labor (eyishay@knesset.gov.il); Gideon Ezra - Minister of
> Environmental Protection (gezra@knesset.gov.il); Isaac Herzog -
> Minister of Welfare and Social Services, Minister of the Diaspora,
> Society, and Fight Against Antisemitism (iherzog@knesset.gov.il);
> Jacob Edery - Minister of the Development of the Negev and Gal);
> (yedri@knesset.gov.il); Meir Sheetrit - Minister of Internal Affairs
> (mshitrit@knesset.gov.il); Raleb Majadele - Minister of Science,
> Culture, and Sport (gmagadla@knesset.gov.il); Ruhama Avraham Bal);a -
> Minister of Tourism (ravraham@knesset.gov.il); Shalom Simhon -
> Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development
> (ssimhon@knesset.gov.il); Shaul Mofaz - Deputy Prime Minister ,
> Minister of Transportation and Road Safety(shaulm@knesset.gov.il);
> Ze'ev Boim - Minister of Housing and Construction
> (zaevb@knesset.gov.il); Haim Ramon - Vice Prime Minister
> (ChaimR@knesset.gov.il); Rafi Eitan - Minister of Pensioner Affairs -
> (reitanhantman@knesset.gov.il); Ronnie Bar-On - Minister of Finance
> (rbaron@knesset.gov.il); Yacov Ben Yizri - Minister of Health
> (ybenyizri@knesset.gov.il); Yitzhak Cohen - Minister of Religious
> Services (izchakec@knesset.gov.il); Yuli Tamir - Minister of Education
> (ytamir@knesset.gov.il); Majalli Whbee - Deputy Minister of Foreign
> Affairs (mwahaba@knesset.gov.il); Matan nai - Deputy Minister of
> Defense - (matanv@knesset.gov.il); Meshulam Nahari - Minister Without
> Portfolio (mnahari@knesset.gov.il); Benjamin Netanyahu
> (bnetanyahu@knesset.gov.il); Ehud Olmert - Prime Minister
> (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Raanan Dinur - Director General Of the Prime
> Minister's Office (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Ovad Yehezkel - Government
> Secretary (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Ya'akov Galanti - Head of
> Communications Division and Media Adviser to the Prime Minister
> (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Shalom Tourgeman - Foreign Policy Adviser for
> Prime Minister (MEDINI@IT.PMO.gov.il); Amnon Ben-Ami - Deputy Director
> General (amnon.benami@it.pmo.gov.il); Tzahi Gavrieli - Personal
> Assistant to the Prime Minister (TzahiG@it.pmo.gov.il); Shlomit Barnea
> Farago - Legal Adviser (legal@pmo.gov.il); Joseph Strauss - Accountant
> (J.strauss@it.pmo.gov.il);Marit Danon - Director of the Authority for
> the Advancement of the Status of Women (women@it.pmo.gov.il); Uzi
> Keren - Adviser to the Prime Minister (Settlement Affairs)
> (Uzi.Keren@it.pmo.gov.il); Hagar Biran - Advisor to the Prime Minister
> for Liaison with the Knesset (hagar.biran@it.pmo.gov.il); Ruti
> Avramovitz - Pub);c affairs Adviser to the Prime Minister
> (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Ofer Levy - Adviser to the prime minister for
> official visits and special events (PMO.HEB@it.pmo.gov.il); Yael
> Nachmias - Head of the Division for policy Implementation
> (Yael.Nachmias@it.pmo.gov.il); Gavriel Golan - Adviser to the Prime
> Minister for Planning and Development (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Mark Regev
> - International Media Adviser to the Prime Minister
> (Gali.Cohen@it.pmo.gov.il); Rachael Risby-Raz - Diaspora Affairs
> Adviser (risbyraz@it.pmo.gov.il); Gal Alon - Adviser for Strategic
> Development (gal.alon@it.pmo.gov.il); Julia Braya - Adviser to the
> Prime Minister for the Russian Languge Media (pm_eng@pmo.gov.il); Edna
> Halbani - Director of International Visits - (edna@it.pmo.gov.il);
> Vered Swid - Adviser to the Prime Minister (Social Affairs)
> (Vered.Swid@it.pmo.gov.il); Avi Widerman - Adviser to the Prime
> Minister (aviw@it.pmo.gov.il); David Baker - Senior Foreign Press
> Coordinator (david.baker@it.pmo.gov.il); Yehiel Nizri - Director of
> the Prime Minister's Bureau (Central Region) (yehiel_nizri@walla.co.);
> Avigdor Liberman (aliberman@knesset.gov.il); Ami Ayalon
> (aaylon@knesset.gov.il); Amir Peretz (aperetz@knesset.gov.il); Abraham
> Hirchson(ahirshson@knesset.gov.il); Alex M);ler
> (am);ler@knesset.gov.il); Amira Dotan (adotan@knesset.gov.il); Amnon
> Cohen (amncohen@knesset.gov.il); Arieh Eldad (aeldad@knesset.gov.il);
> Avishay Braverman(abraverman@knesset.gov.il); Avraham
> Michaeli(amichaeli@knesset.gov.il); Avraham
> Ravitz(aravitz@knesset.gov.il); Avshalom V);an(av);an@knesset.gov.il);
> Benyamin Elon(belon@knesset.gov.il); Chaim
> Amsellem(eamsalem@knesset.gov.il); Chaim Oron(horon@knesset.gov.il);
> Colette Avital(avitalk@knesset.gov.il); Dalia
> Itzik(yor@knesset.gov.il); David Azoulay(dazulay@knesset.gov.il);
> David Rotem(drotem@knesset.gov.il); David Tal(davidt@knesset.gov.il);
> Dov Khenin(dhanin@knesset.gov.il); Effie Eitam(efye@knesset.gov.il);
> Eitan Cabel(ecabel@knesset.gov.il); Elhanan
> Glazer(eglazer@knesset.gov.il); Eliahu Gabbay(egabai@knesset.gov.il);
> Esterina Tartman(etertman@knesset.gov.il); Gideon
> Sa'ar(gsaar@knesset.gov.il); ad Erdan(gerdan@knesset.gov.il); Haim
> Katz(hkatz@knesset.gov.il); Isaac Ben-Israel(itzik@knesset.gov.il);
> srael Hasson(ahason@knesset.gov.il); Itshac
> Galantee(ygalanti@knesset.gov.il); Izhak Ziv(yziv@knesset.gov.il); Lia
> Shemtov(lshemtov@knesset.gov.il); Limor
> Livnat(llivnat@knesset.gov.il); Marina
> Solodkin(msolodkin@knesset.gov.il); Mazor
> Bahyna(mazorb@knesset.gov.il); Meir Porush(mporush@knesset.gov.il);
> Menahem Ben-Sasson(mbensason@knesset.gov.il); Michael
> Eitan(meitan@knesset.gov.il); Michael
> Melchior(melchiorm@knesset.gov.il); Moshe
> Kahlon(mcachlon@knesset.gov.il); Moshe Gafni(mgafni@knesset.gov.il);
> Moshe Sharoni(msharoni@knesset.gov.il); Nissan
> Slomiansky(nslomianski@knesset.gov.il); Nissim
> Zeev(nzeev@knesset.gov.il); Ophir Pines-Paz(pinespaz@knesset.gov.il);
> Otniel Schneller(oschneller@knesset.gov.il); Ran
> Cohen(rancohen@knesset.gov.il); Reuven Rivlin(rrivlin@knesset.gov.il);
> Robert );atov(r);atov@knesset.gov.il); Ronit
> Tirosh(rtirosh@knesset.gov.il); Sara Marom
> Shalev(smarom@knesset.gov.il); Shachiv Shnaan(shanans@knesset.gov.il);
> Shai Hermesh (shermesh@knesset.gov.il); Shelly Yacimovich
> (syechimovich@knesset.gov.il); Shlomo (Neguse) Molla
> (smolla@knesset.gov.il); Shmuel Halpert (shmuelh@knesset.gov.il); van
> Shalom (sshalom@knesset.gov.il);Sofa Landver
> (slandver@knesset.gov.il); Stas Misezhnikov
> (smiseznikov@knesset.gov.il); Tzachi Hanegbi
> (zhanegbi@knesset.gov.il); Tzvia Greenfield (tzviag@knesset.gov.il);
> Uri Maklev (umaklev@knesset.gov.il); Uri Yehuda Ariel
> (uria@knesset.gov.il); Yakov Litzman (ylitzman@knesset.gov.il); Yakov
> Margi (ymargi@knesset.gov.il); Yisrael Katz (yiskatz@knesset.gov.il);
> Yitzhak Aharonovitch (iaharon@knesset.gov.il); Yitzhak Levy
> (ithakl@knesset.gov.il); Yitzhak Vaknin (yvaknin@knesset.gov.il); Yoel
> Hasson (yhasson@knesset.gov.il); Yohanan Plesner
> (yohananplesner@knesset.gov.il); Yoram Marciano
> (ymarziano@knesset.gov.il); Yosef Shagal (yshagal@knesset.gov.il);
> Yuli Yoel Edelstein (yedelstein@knesset.gov.il); Yuval Steinitz
> (ysteinitz@knesset.gov.il); Zahava Gal-On (zgalon@knesset.gov.il);
> Zeev Elkin
> (Zelkin@knesset.gov.il); Zevulun Orlev (zorlev@knesset.gov.il);Zvi
> Hendel (zhendel@knesset.gov.il)
>
> --
> Beirigí bua!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jenny James" <atlantiscol@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 1:45 AM
8. radical anti-arms trade action in England
> From Schnews News service
> FOR CORRESPONDENCE USE schnews@brighton.co.uk THANK YOU.
> For this week's SchNEWS in full technicolour:
> www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news663.htm
> IF I HAD A HAMMER...
> SchNEWS, Issue 663, Friday 23rd January 2009
>
> DECOMMISSION ACCOMPLISHED
>
> AS EDO GETS SMASHED.
> REALLY, REALLY SMASHED...
>
> "Great Britain... will do everything we can to prevent arms
> trafficking which is at the root of some of the problems... I believe
> that will help get a solution to this crisis." - Gordon Brown
>
> "I don't feel I'm going to do anything illegal tonight, but I'm going
> to go into an arms factory and smash it up to the best of my ability
> so that it cannot actually work or produce munitions... [which] have
> been provided to the Israeli army so that they can kill children." -
> Elijah Smith, one of the EDO 9.
>
> After five years of campaigning, die-ins, lock-ons, rooftop
> occupations, noise demos and the odd riot, it turns out that the
> Smash EDO campaign had been taking a fairly indirect route. In the
> early hours of last Saturday morning six activists turned up at the
> factory with a ladder and some hammers, and spent a night thoroughly
> 'decommissioning' the arms factory from top to bottom.
>
> Outraged by the ongoing genocide in Gaza and the UK and US's
> involvement in high-tech killing around the world, they explained in
> a pre-recorded video that the time for talking was over. In the
> pre-recorded words of Bob; "The Israeli Defence Forces are guilty of
> war crimes in Gaza. EDO and many other arms manufacturers around the
> UK are aiding and abetting these humanitarian crimes and war crimes.
> The action we've taken is intended to hamper or delay the commission
> of war crimes and prevent this greater crime. The glorification of
> war and the mass production of arms and weapons is a sickness in the
> heart of those involved."
>
> DCI Graham Pratt of Sussex Plod paid them the best compliment they
> could have got: "Windows had been smashed and offices turned over in
> what I would describe as wanton vandalism, but with machinery and
> equipment so targeted that it could have been done with a view to
> bringing business to a standstill. The damage is significant and the
> value substantial."
>
> Coherence and logic aren't taught at cop school, so we'll leave out
> the fact that targeting machinery and equipment in an arms factory by
> anti-arms protesters cannot be 'wanton vandalism', but we'll let that
> one go. More to the point, 'significant and substantial damage' has
> been caused to an arms company that's been busy selling arms to
> Israel and ignoring public disgust at the genocide that's been
> carried out in Gaza.
>
> This isn't your run of the mill symbolic act of solidarity. The six
> decommissioners threw themselves in the path of the US-UK-Israeli
> juggernaut, and in doing so slowed it down by a measurable amount.
> The protesters are being charged with criminal damage to the tune of
> £250,000, but this is almost definitely an understatement. After all
> the Raytheon 9 (See SchNEWS 635) were charged with £350,000 for
> chucking some computers out of an office window.
>
> But if you want to reduce their actions to numbers, consider these: a
> Hellfire missile costs around £25,000, and if you take EDO/police at
> face value that would mean 10 less Hellfires. But in reality the
> figure's likely to be much higher, as the six were in there for over
> an hour. Of course, if EDO can't get their kit back in working order
> quick enough to complete their contracts on time, their losses could
> be hefty indeed. According to local eyewitnesses, the protesters did
> it in some style. They stuck the factory's sound system on and blasted
> out tunes whilst they worked.
>
> Apparently a missile or bomb shaped object was seen flying out of one
> factory window. The jury's out on whether that counts as collateral
> damage.
>
> Eventually 30 police accompanied by a specialist forced entry unit
> broke through the barricades and were able to corner and arrest the
> decommissioners.
>
> Alongside the six that broke in to the factory, another three
> protesters are being held in connection with the action. Initially
> eight of the nine were held on remand, but as of Thursday all but two
> are now out on strict bail conditions.
>
> The six had recorded 'martyr-videos' of themselves explaining why
> they were prepared to decommission the factory. View it at
> www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/01//418836.mpg
>
> * See also www.smashedo.org.uk
>
> * The Raytheon 9 - During the Lebanon War in August 2006 nine
> protesters occupied Raytheon offices in Derry, Northern Ireland and
> smashed their way through an alleged £350,000 worth of computer gear.
> Their defence was that they were attempting to prevent war crimes, and
> in June 2008 were found unanimously not guilty on three counts of
> criminal damage by a jury in a Belfast court. www.raytheon9.org
>
> * PRISONER SUPPORT: Sent letters of support to Robert Altford (aka
> Tintin). Prisoner no. VP7552 and Elijah James Smith. Prisoner no.
> VP7551 - HMP Lewes, Brighton Rd, Lewes, BN7 1EA.
>
> * Mayday Reclaim the Streets Against EDO MBM/ITT, May 4th - Reclaim
> The Streets style demo/carnival on Mayday - against Brightons bomb
> factory. www.smashedo.org.uk
>
> ALSO UP IN ARMS
>
> BAE is another company playing its part in Israel's Gaza massacre, as
> well as many other war crimes. This Thursday (22nd) six protesters
> blocked the entrance to BAE's Newcastle premises for more than an
> hour by staging a 'die-in'.
>
> Meanwhile in Warwick, last week a group of university students
> disrupted a BAE recruitment event by shouting down the speakers and
> distributing an alternative BAE careers guide.
>
> Despite being subsidised by the British government, BAE makes more
> than £1 million per day from it's weapons peddling - so much in fact
> that it can even afford to slip the odd billion to Saudi princes.
>
> * www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/419750.html
>
> * http://weaponsoutofwarwick.wordpress.com
> ======================================================================
From: peace@peaceinspace.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 8:54 PM
Gaza war crimes probe mulled at the Hague - International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/reuters/2009/02/03/europe/OUKWD-UK-ISRAEL-GAZA.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:32:28 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
9. MORE GOOD NEWS
Palestine - Center Of A Gathering Storm
Terrell E. Arnold
1-27-09
In the past few years, both friends and critics have predicted that
Palestine eventually would be Israel's undoing. The first thing that had
to happen, however, was for the world to open its eyes to Israel's
systematic murder, imprisonment, selective assassination, and repression
of the Palestinians as they took the lands they wanted build the Jewish
national home. That process began long before communications with the
world outside the Middle East were adequate to exposing the tactics of
Israeli state building.
The world's blindness persisted through decades as Zionist propaganda
painted Jewish migrants as the victims of an Arab plot to drive the
Israelis into the sea. As the Zionists told it, the displaced survivors of
Holocaust were going to turn the "empty lands" of the Levant (then the
ancestral homes of a million Christian, Muslim and Jewish Palestinians)
into a prosperous Jewish national home, but the Arab neighbors were
opposing Jewish rights to return to the Promised Land. Those were the
earliest of the Zionist falsehoods that have distorted the world's picture
of what goes on in the Middle East.
It took a catastrophe to finish the world's awakening. While the
Palestinians in Gaza had small arms and crude homemade rockets to protest
their persecution, the Israelis had the best and most modern killing
machines the United States could supply. And as they mercilessly had
pounded Lebanon in 2006 with US cluster bombs, they used new and
experimental US weapons without restraint to destroy at least a hundred
thousand homes and business, indiscriminately kill an estimated 1,300
Palestinian men, women and children, and wound over 5,000 others.
Evidence on the ground, especially in hospitals, shows that Israel Defense
Forces experimented with white phosphorus weapons that are internationally
outlawed against civilians-and should be prohibited against anyone. They
also used a Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME) weapon that doctors working
with victims in Gaza believe is the likely cause of many very severe
wounds to women and children. Apparently Israel is the first and so far
only user of this weapon, but it is of US design and development. The
number and severity of the wounds caused by DIME weapons are part of the
world's awakening to Israeli attacks on the Palestinians.
It is worthy that compassion finally has found its way into the hearts of
the world, but that is only the beginning of Israel's troubles. The
crudest awakening is occurring in the United States where for decades the
Zionists have run a successful effort to keep Americans in the dark about
Israeli crimes in Palestine. Perversely, the first book of any consequence
on this subject was _What Price Israel_ published in 1953 by an American
Jew named Alfred Lilienthal. That book, republished in 2003, told it like
it was at the time. Also at that time, in the early 1950s a group of
American Jewish scientists and intellectuals led by Albert Einstein
published an objection to Zionist activities to create the new state in a
letter to the New York Times. However, until the recent appearance of
works by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt (The_ Israel Lobby_), former
President Jimmy Carter (_Peace not Apartheid_) and Israeli historian Ilan
Pappe (_The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine_), Israeli behavior had gained
little American attention.
Now, largely because of the Internet and televised graphic horrors, the
lid is off. Israeli excesses in Gaza in the past few weeks finally ripped
away any remaining scales. An ultimate kind of proof was contained in
January 25 Central Wisconsin Gannett newspapers in which one lead
editorial proposed divesting of Israeli companies as a way to force the
Israelis to reform, while the other laid out in gory detail the range of
Israeli crimes in Gaza. Both articles were written by American Jews.
All eyes turn now toward President Barack Obama. Throughout his election
campaign, Obama did what American presidential candidates uniformly do; he
declared unconditional support for Israel. After his election, which
coincided with the beginning of Israel's effort to destroy Gaza, Obama
insisted on remaining mum respecting comment on the situation in Gaza or
on his future intentions. Even as the situation in Gaza became even more
brutal and bloody, and the illegal uses of American weapons became more
destructive, the President-elect remained silent. In his inaugural
address, he did not mention Palestine, but on his first day on the job, it
appears that the first foreign leader he spoke to was Mahmoud Abbas, an
action not lost on the leadership of Hamas.
In a statement at the State Department following installation of new
envoys (George Mitchell to the Middle East and Richard Holbrooke for
Afghanistan and Pakistan) the Washington Post reported that Obama stuck to
the Bush position. He said that Hamas had to meet three conditions to be
accepted: Recognize Israel's right to exist, stop the rockets and other
resistance activities, and accept all previously worked out agreements
with Israel. The latter is an interesting condition, since the Israelis
have yet to either recognize the Palestinians or to miss an opportunity to
break or ignore existing agreements. Obama did add, however, that Gaza
needed to be reopened.
In short, in no public action so far has the real Obama stood up. However,
pressure is mounting in the rest of the world for him to do so. In a
January 22 editorial in the Financial Times, Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal
(brother to the Foreign Minister and former Ambassador to the United
States) executed a sharp new turn. Pointing to conditions in the Middle
East, the Prince said: "America is not innocent in this calamity."
Specifically on Gaza, the Prince said that "through an arrogant attitude
about the butchery in Gaza" America "contributed to the slaughter of
innocents." Then he delivered a rare ultimatum: "If the United States
wants to continue playing a leadership role in the Middle East and keep
its strategic alliances intact-especially its "special relationship" with
Saudi Arabia-it will have to drastically revise its policies vis a vis
Israel and Palestine."
So there could be no question about where he was headed and, incidentally,
for whom he was speaking, the Prince said that "Obama should strongly
support Saudi King Abdullah's peace initiative." That would require the
Israelis to (a) withdraw from all territories occupied in 1967, (b)
withdraw from East Jerusalem, (c) pull back to the June 4 1967 line (the
UN Green Line), and (d) negotiate a "just solution to the refugee problem
according to General Assembly Resolution 194." In exchange, the Prince
summed it up: "There would be an end to hostilities between Israel and all
the Arab countries, and Israel would get full diplomatic and normal
relations." That is the basic proposal originally put forward by then
Crown Prince Abdullah in Beirut in 2002. This proposal has been accepted
in principle by Hamas, but Hamas leadership, while conceding the existence
of Israel per se, refuses to extend formal recognition to Israel except as
part of an overall Palestinian settlement.
In the fragmented political/religious context of the Middle East, Prince
Turki's article produced a powerful reaction. Iran's Prime Minister
Ahmadi-Nijad is reported to immediately have called Prince Turki and said
that Iran would follow Saudi Arabia's lead in this matter. That concession
produces the previously unlikely appearing situation of placing the
leading Sunni (Saudi Arabia) and Shia (Iran) communities on the same side
of the region's most important political issue, the future of Palestine.
The critical anomaly of the situation is the position of Hamas. As pushed
by Israel and the US, one of the charges against Hamas is that it is a
terrorist group. That is true because Hamas members violently have opposed
Israeli repression, and the notion that anyone who resists Israeli
treatment of the Palestinians is a terrorist is a powerful and highly
successful Zionist propaganda tool. The second charge, which has some
resonance among the Arab country oligarchs, is that as an offshoot of
Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas is an Islamist, that is, religious
political movement; it is therefore a potential threat to oligarchic
regimes. Its basis of support in Palestine, however, rests on two rather
more sturdy pillars: First, it stands for the basic goals of the
Palestinian people and represents them more forcefully than its
Palestinian competitor Fatah. Second, as a political movement it takes
greater interest in and does a great deal more substantial work for the
welfare of its constituents. Hamas is a genuine political success without
being corrupt.
Those qualities make Hamas a serious political threat to the Fatah
following of Mahmoud Abbas. They also make it anathema to the Zionists who
would much prefer to deal with Palestinians who do not insist on a fair
and just Palestinian future.
The upshot of the Palestine situation at the moment is that twice in the
past three years Israel has attempted militarily to destroy movements
favorable to the basic cause of the Palestinians, and the attempts have
failed. As a result of the 2006 Israeli military fiasco in Lebanon,
Hezbollah was transformed into a strong and highly regarded political
player, not only among Shia, but among Muslims in general. A repeat of the
Israeli strategy in Gaza appears to have had similar effect. Hamas was
damaged in the attack, but it is still alive and largely well in Gaza as
well as the West Bank. Its prestige in the region has been enhanced, and
it is reasonably predictable that in any future (free) election- without
substantial US and Israeli financial and operational support -Fatah would
lose its shirt.
It is unlikely that Prince Turki would have taken his frank and decisive
public position without seeing Hamas in the equation. It is also very
doubtful that Iran's leadership would have handed the mantle to the Saudis
on any premise that Hamas would be ignored or suppressed. On any other
premise than a significant political role for Hamas, the region is in for
even more trouble than Prince Turki may have imagined. It would be a
tragic error for Israel and its allies to push the Palestinians back
toward global resistance to repression by refusing to deal with their
leadership. The gathering storm around Palestine could easily double in
intensity. That outcome would be most unfortunate, because as Hamas has
shown, it has more real capacity to grow and respond to the needs of the
times than virtually all other Palestine players.
------
The writer is the author of the recently published work, A World Less
Safe, now available on Amazon, and he is a regular columnist on rense.com.
He is a retired Senior Foreign Service Officer of the US Department of
State whose overseas service included tours in Egypt, India, Sri Lanka,
the Philippines, and Brazil. His immediate pre-retirement positions were
as Chairman of the Department of International Studies of the National War
College and as Deputy Director of the State Office of Counter Terrorism
and Emergency Planning. He will welcome comment at wecanstopit@charter.net
----
FROM: WWW.RENSE.COM
Best regards,
Fred Shepherd
"The world is too dangerous to live in - not because of the people who do
evil, but because of the people who sit and let it happen." Albert
Einstein
Global Information Services
336 Bon Air Center #441, Greenbrae, CA 94904
415-459-8738 email: altencon@aol.com
website: http://www.gisfilms.org/
"Patriotism begins with knowing who the enemy is."
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:29:04 -0800
From: Kathy Roberts <weerkhr@pacbell.net>
10. UN Rapporteur: Initiate Criminal Proceedings Against Bush, Rumsfeld
UN Rapporteur: Initiate criminal proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld
now By Scott Horton 21 Jan 2009 In an interview on Tuesday evening with
the German television program "Frontal 21," on channel ZDF Professor
Manfred Nowak, the United Nations Rapporteur responsible for torture,
stated that with George W. Bush^Òs head of state immunity now terminated,
the new government of Barack Obama was obligated by international law to
commence a criminal investigation into Bush^Òs torture practices. "The
evidence is sitting on the table," he stated. "There is no avoiding the
fact that this was torture." He pointed to the U.S. undertakings under
the Convention Against Torture in which the country committed that it
would criminally prosecute anyone who tortured, or extradite the person
to a state that would prosecute him. "The government of the United States
is required to take all necessary steps to bring George W. Bush and
Donald Rumsfeld before a court," Nowak said.
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/01/hbc-90004250
January 21, 8:21 AM, 2009 ·
UN Rapporteur: Initiate criminal proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld
now
By Scott Horton
In an interview on Tuesday evening with the German television program
^ÓFrontal 21,^Ô on channel ZDF Professor Manfred Nowak, the United
Nations Rapporteur responsible for torture, stated that with George W.
Bush^Òs head of state immunity now terminated, the new government of
Barack Obama was obligated by international law to commence a criminal
investigation into Bush^Òs torture practices.
^ÓThe evidence is sitting on the table,^Ô he stated. ^ÓThere is no
avoiding the fact that this was torture.^Ô He pointed to the U.S.
undertakings under the Convention Against Torture in which the country
committed that it would criminally prosecute anyone who tortured, or
extradite the person to a state that would prosecute him. ^ÓThe
government of the United States is required to take all necessary steps
to bring George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld before a court,^Ô Nowak said.
Manfred Nowak, an internationally renowned law professor at the
University of Vienna, currently serves as an independent expert for the
United Nations looking at allegations of torture affecting member states.
In 2006, he undertook a special investigation of conditions at the U.S.
detention facilities at Guantánamo in which he concluded that practices
approved by the Bush Administration violated human rights norms,
including the prohibition against torture.
The ZDF piece also includes an interview with attorney Wolfgang Kaleck,
who brought charges against Rumsfeld before German prosecutors. He states
that the Obama administration is ^Óoff to a good beginning^Ô with its
explicit renunciation of torture, but it still has not shown how it will
hold Bush, Rumsfeld, and others to account for their crimes, nor has it
demonstrated its legally obligated duty to provide compensation to
torture victims.
Law professor Dietmar Herz clarifies that under U.S. and international
law, George W. Bush bears personal responsibility for the introduction of
torture. From the point of his departure from office, head of state
immunity terminates, and under clear principles of international law, the
United States is obligated to commence a criminal investigation and then
a prosecution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:37:57 -0800
From: Eileen Joyce <ejoyce7@hotmail.com>
11. [GNAA] Boycott
Maybe this is a better approach to a boycott for those who slaughtered the
civilians in Gaza.
Eileen
------
From: migalli@comcast.net
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:02:40 -0500
http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/19390/Group_calls_for_Barcode_Boycott_of_Isr
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:46:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Barbara Lubin <meca@mecaforpeace.org>
12. Letter from Gaza
MECA January 23, 2009
Dear Gabrielle,
I entered the Gaza Strip on Wednesday night with my friend and fellow
activist Sharon Wallace after waiting ten hours at the Egypt/Gaza. The
destruction and trauma is even greater than I expected.
In just two short days I met with families who were given minutes to
evacuate their homes and are now living in overcrowded UN schools; I saw
the ruins of bombed greenhouses; I looked out the window at fields and
roads torn up by the tread of Israeli tanks; and I visited two
universities where MECA supports students with scholarships-severely
damaged by Israeli bombs.
Out of all the devastation I have seen so far, there is one story in
particular that I think the world needs to hear. I met a mother who was
at home with her ten children when Israeli soldiers entered the house.
The soldiers told her she had to choose five of her children to "give as
a gift to Israel." As she screamed in horror they repeated the demand and
told her she could choose or they would choose for her. Then these
soldiers murdered five of her children in front of her. The concept of
"Jewish morality" is truly dead. We can be fascists, terrorists, and
Nazis just like everybody else.
I spent the first morning visiting Rafah then drove north to Nuseirat
Refugee Camp where our partner organization Afaq Jadeeda Association is
buying food a delivering cooked meal to displaced families with funds
MECA provided. Then to Gaza City.
Today I visited Jabaliya Refugee Camp and the Zaytoun neighborhood of
Gaza City, two of the areas hardest hit by Israel's brutal attacks.
Pharmacies, schools, and homes were indiscriminately hit in Jabaliya.
Mohammed, one of our volunteers in Gaza, and his family were forced to
evacuate their home because of intense bombing in their area.
In Zaytoun, I saw families gathering wood from charred trees. The almost
two-year blockade of Gaza has deprived people cooking gas, so these
terrified families build fires to keep warm and cook the little food they
can get.
I talked to people on the street who told stories of wild dogs coming to
eat their dead neighbors, relatives bleeding to death because Israel
would not allow emergency workers into the area, and Israeli soldiers
entering homes to beat and kill.
But despite the immense mourning and devastation, people are starting to
put their lives back together. Sabreen, a young woman from Rafah, told
me, "We are a strong people. No matter how many times Israel bombs us we
are not leaving. We will keep trying to live as normal a life as
possible."
Sincerely,
Barbara Lubin Gaza City, Gaza, Palestine
email: meca@mecaforpeace.org
web: http://www.mecaforpeace.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Boycotting Israel
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:47:04 -1000
From: richardnsalvador@gmail.com
Naomi Klein explains in the following piece why it is now sensible to
force the government of Israel into civilized behavior by applying
economic sanctions. This may not be possible because of the behavior of
our own government, which historically has aided and abetted human rights
violations, but it is worth considering.
--Jack
-----
Israel: Boycott, Divest, Sanction
by Naomi Klein
<http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090126/klein?rel=hp_currently>
It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly
bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of
global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa.
In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups
<http://www.bdsmovement.net/?q=node/52> laid out plans to do just that.
They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad
boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to
those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era." The campaign
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions <http://www.bdsmovement.net/> --BDS for
short--was born.
Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause,
and talk of cease-fires is doing little to slow the momentum. Support is
even emerging among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500
Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter<http://www.freegaza.org/en/home/658-a-call-from-within-signed-by-israeli-citize
ns> to foreign ambassadors stationed in Israel. It calls for "the
adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a
clear parallel with the antiapartheid struggle. "The boycott on South
Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves.... This
international backing must stop."
Yet many still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and
understandable. And they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions
are the most effective tools in the nonviolent arsenal. Surrendering them
verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS
strategy, followed by counterarguments.
1. Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis. The
world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement." It has
failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its
criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against
Lebanon and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal
blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive
measures--quite the opposite. The weapons and $3 billion in annual aid
that the US sends to Israel is only the beginning. Throughout this key
period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic,
cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For
instance, in 2007 Israel became the first non-Latin American country to
sign a free-trade deal with Mercosur. In the first nine months of 2008,
Israeli exports to Canada went up 45 percent. A new trade deal with the
European Union is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And
on December 8, European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel Association
Agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem.
It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war:
confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over
seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship
index actually went up 10.7 percent. When carrots don't work, sticks are
needed.
2. Israel is not South Africa. Of course it isn't. The relevance of the
South African model is that it proves that BDS tactics can be effective
when weaker measures (protests, petitions, back-room lobbying) have
failed. And there are indeed deeply distressing echoes: the color-coded
IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the
settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician,
said that the architecture of segregation that he saw in the West Bank
and Gaza in 2007 was "infinitely worse than apartheid."
3. Why single out Israel when the United States, Britain and other
Western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan? Boycott is
not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the BDS strategy should be tried
against Israel is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent,
it could actually work.
4. Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less. This
one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have
been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I
published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the
advice of BDS activists, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus
<http://www.andalus.co.il/> . Andalus is an activist press, deeply
involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher
devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted
a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and
none to me. In other words, I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not
Israelis.
Coming up with this plan required dozens of phone calls, e-mails and
instant messages, stretching from Tel Aviv to Ramallah to Paris to
Toronto to Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start implementing
a boycott strategy, dialogue increases dramatically. And why wouldn't it?
Building a movement requires endless communicating, as many in the
antiapartheid struggle well recall. The argument that supporting boycotts
will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array
of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in
ways to rant at one another across national boundaries. No boycott can
stop us.
Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major
point-scoring: don't I know that many of those very high-tech toys come
from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but
not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey,
the managing director of a British telecom company, sent an e-mail to the
Israeli tech firm MobileMax. "As a result of the Israeli government
action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to
consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company."
When contacted by The Nation, Ramsey said his decision wasn't political.
"We can't afford to lose any of our clients, so it was purely
commercially defensive."
It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to
pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of
calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long
denied, to Palestine.
Further Reading: Disengagement and the Frontiers of Zionism
<http://www.merip.org/mero/mero021608.html>
© 2009 The Nation
---
Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist and syndicated columnist and
the author of the international and New York Times bestseller The Shock
Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, now out in paperback. Her
earlier books include the international best-seller, No Logo: Taking Aim
at the Brand Bullies; and the collection Fences and Windows: Dispatches
from the Front Lines of the Globalization Debate (2002). To read all her
latest writing visit <http://www.naomiklein.org/>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 08:16:06 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
14. Dont confuse anti-semitism wth anti-zionism]
Dont confuse anti-semitism with anti-zionism.
Zionism is judeo imperialism. Unfotunately zionist
exclusivness and the superior Israeli god mindset still exists in
within christian ideology. Unforturnately the U.S. constitution is
based on racist archaic judeo-christian ideology. Unfortunately the U.S.
western academic system is based upon racist christian dogma.
Unfortunately Hawaii is a colony of racist judeo christian
euro-american capitalism.
Unfortunately the Makena subdivsion is a zionist investment instigated
by Lingle and the begining of the Israeli colonization of Hawaii and
with them comes their depleted unranium cluster bombs. Maui and all of
Hawaii will eventually become another Gaza.
Will the so called chosen people of Israel crucify Jesus once again
when he supposedly returns to mother earth?
Fortunately under Hawaiian Kingdom constitutional law, U.S.
constitutional law and United Nations international law Hawaii is still an
independent nation and Hawaiians still have a connection with their
genealogy their unique documented land tenure system, The Great Mahele,and
their bio-genetic cultural belief system, the Kumulipo.
Free Hawaii Free Palestine!
Brandish the banner of Hawaiian independence!
Eric Po'ohina
po box 744
kailua hi 96734
email goofyfootnumber1@hotmail.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 11:46:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Cecilie Surasky <info@jewishvoiceforpeace.org>
15. Hope?
Hope?
Click here to sign the Open Letter to Obama and download the posters now.
Dear Gabrielle,
Every time I saw one of those Obama posters with "HOPE" on it, I felt it.
Hope, that is. Hope against hope that perhaps this new President would
pursue a just peace with the same fervor that he pursued hope before he
was elected.
And in the short time since the inauguration, we're seeing reasons to
believe our hope was justified. But, here's the big challenge: Israel,
Palestine, Gaza. Turning hope into reality comes down to how President
Obama deals with this ongoing tragedy. This week's announcement of George
Mitchell as Middle East envoy -- the man who helped broker peace in
Northern Ireland-- signals that Obama is serious about even-handed
diplomacy. For so many, our hope is that Mitchell and Obama will now take
serious and meaningful steps towards a just and true peace.
It's a tall order, we know. But the momentum that began on inauguration
day won't last long, and the cease fire in Gaza has only ceased the worst
of the bombs and violence. We have a window and we must take advantage of
it. We must hope - and HOPE BIG. Please join Jewish Voice for Peace and
Just Foreign Policy in asking President Obama to make good on his promise
of hope.
Please read our letter and add your name, and then ask your like-minded
friends to do the same. We're aiming to deliver our letter on February
23. Then download our Hope posters and put them in your windows or on
your wall. Obama has said that he needs people like us to demand action
loudly and visibly. Now is our moment. We must keep the pressure on.
Thank you for doing your part.
Sincerely,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:31:58 -0500
From: FeedBlitz <feedblitz@mail.feedblitz.com>
16. Disappeared News - 3 new articles
"DISAPPEARED NEWS" - 3 NEW ARTICLES
1. Mark your calendar for July 22 eclipse
2. Public Utilities Commission throws out HECO biofuels application with
secret palm oil supplier
3. How to get through to Obama on Israel
4. More Recent Articles
5. Search Disappeared News
Mark your calendar for July 22 eclipse
by Larry Geller Itâ^À^Ùs considered inauspicious to have a solar eclipse
during the Chinese New Year. Weâ^À^Ùre ok in Hawaii, but those who live
in Australia, Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia,
Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Taiwan or Thailand had
better watch out for the negative energy. Hawaii will experience a
partial solar eclipse on July 22. Don't miss it, that....
Public Utilities Commission throws out HECO biofuels application with
secret palm oil supplier
This just in from Henry Curtis at Life of the Land: On December 31,
2008, HECO opened two fast-tracked biofuel dockets at the Hawaii Public
Utilities Commission (PUC). HECO proposed testing a Low Sulfur Fuel Oil
(LSFO)/Palm Oil combination at a Kahe steam generator. HECO proposed that
MECO test palm oil biofuel at a Maalaea diesel generator. HECO stated
that at some point in the future they....
How to get through to Obama on Israel
by Larry Geller While in Hawaii, Barack Obama studiously avoided making
eye contact with pro-Palestinian demonstrators lined up along his
limousine's escape route in Kailua. It was a message he clearly
didnâ^À^Ùt want to be seen considering, yet it was an important one, and
one that increasing numbers of Americans support. Back in Washington, he
involved himself in several key issues, but as to the....
More Recent Articles
* Indonesia starts up a tsunami early warning system-made with German,
not Hawaii assistance
* No response from Governor Lingle on Superferry quarterly reports
* Flash â^À^Ó unverified â^À^Ó Superferry hits whale?
* Advice for America from our postal service
* Beware Circuit City liquidation
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:43:05 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
17. BBC outrage
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/01/25/bbc.gaza.advert/index.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:21:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Indy Kids <indykidsinfo@yahoo.com>
18. Jan/Feb IndyKids is Out!
IndyKids takes a look at who Obama is appointing to his cabinet, and
provides a look back on news and issues from 2008 in a Year in Review. The
issue also spotlights the Israeli attack on Gaza, the protests happening
in response around the world, and features a creative approach to saving
public wilderness, a program where Indigenous kids make movies, and an
interview with radical historian and author Howard Zinn. Plus, news,
features and letters from kids!
Go to www.indykids.net to download the paper and TEACHER^ÒS GUIDE, find
out how to get copies and to subscribe.
IndyKids is a free newspaper and teaching tool for kids in grades 4-8 and
high school English language learners. IndyKids aims to inform children on
current news and world events from a progressive perspective and to
inspire a passion for social justice and learning.
IndyKids
P.O. Box 1417
New York , NY 10276
Phone: 212-592-0116
Email: indykids@indymedia.org
Web: www.indykids.net
_______________________________________________-----------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:00:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Tikkun Magazine and NSP <magazine@tikkun.org>
19. Israel Up-date Jan. 26, 2009
Here are a set of articles from the peace perspective by Israelis, plus
one article from right-wing analysts in Israel (you should know what both
sides are saying).
It seems clear that some of you prefer to read our material on the web.
It's easy to do. You can EITHER click here OR you go to www.tikkun.org to
our home page and then under current thinking you'll find these articles
pasted in. If that doesn't work, try pasting this following into your URL:
http://files.tikkun.org/current/admin/story.php?mode=edit&sid=20090125223923306
On the other hand, some of our readers won't click through and have
indicated a strong preference to have the articles available right here in
the email where they don't have to enter another sector of cyberspace to
read the articles. For them, the articles are pasted in below!
24.1.09
On The Wrong Side by Uri Avneri
OF ALL the beautiful phrases in Barack Obama's inauguration speech, these
are the words that stuck in my mind: "You are on the wrong side of
history."
He was talking about the tyrannical regimes of the world. But we, too,
should ponder these words
In the last few days I have heard a lot of declarations from Ehud Barak,
Tzipi Livni, Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Olmert. And every time, these
eight words came back to haunt me: "You are on the wrong side of
history!"
Obama was speaking as a man of the 21st century. Our leaders speak the
language of the 19th century. They resemble the dinosaurs which once
terrorized their neighborhood and were quite unaware of the fact that
their time had already passed.
DURING THE rousing celebrations, again and again the multicolored
patchwork of the new president's family was mentioned.
All the preceding 43 presidents were white Protestants, except John
Kennedy, who was a white Catholic. 38 of them were the descendants of
immigrants from the British isles. Of the other five, three were of Dutch
ancestry (Theodor and Franklin D. Roosevelt , as well as Martin van
Buren) and two of German descent (Herbert Hoover and Dwight Eisenhower.)
The face of Obama's family is quite different. The extended family
includes whites and the descendents of black slaves, Africans from Kenya,
Indonesians, Chinese from Canada, Christians, Muslims and even one Jew (a
converted African-American). The two first names of the president
himself, Barack Hussein, are Arabic.
This is the face of the new American nation - a mixture of races,
religions, countries of origin and skin-colors, an open and diverse
society, all of whose members are supposed to be equal and to identify
themselves with the "founding fathers". The American Barack Hussein
Obama, whose father was born in a Kenyan village, can speak with pride of
"George Washington, the father of our nation", of the "American
Revolution" (the war of independence against the British), and hold up
the example of "our ancestors", who include both the white pioneers and
the black slaves who "endured the lash of the whip". That is the
perception of a modern nation, multi-cultural and multi-racial: a person
joins it by acquiring citizenship, and from this moment on is the heir to
all its history.
Israel is the product of the narrow nationalism of the 19th century, a
nationalism that was closed and exclusive, based on race and ethnic
origin, blood and earth. Israel is a "Jewish State", and a Jew is a
person born Jewish or converted according to Jewish religious law
(Halakha). Like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, it is a state whose mental
world is to a large extent conditioned by religion, race and ethnic
origin.
When Ehud Barak speaks about the future, he speaks the language of past
centuries, in terms of brute force and brutal threats, with armies
providing the solution to all problems. That was also the language of
George W. Bush who last week slinked out of Washington, a language that
already sounds to the Western ear like an echo from the distant past.
The words of the new president are ringing in the air: "Our power alone
cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please." The key
words were "humility and restraint".
Our leaders are now boasting about their part in the Gaza War, in which
unbridled military force was unleashed intentionally against a civilian
population, men, women and children, with the declared aim of "creating
deterrence". In the era that began last Tuesday, such expressions can
only arouse shudders.
BETWEEN Israel and the United States a gap has opened this week, a narrow
gap, almost invisible - but it may widen into an abyss.
The first signs are small. In his inaugural speech, Obama proclaimed that
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and
nonbelievers." Since when? Since when do the Muslims precede the Jews?
What has happened to the "Judeo-Christian Heritage"? (A completely false
term to start with, since Judaism is much closer to Islam than to
Christianity. For example: neither Judaism nor Islam supports the
separation of religion and state.)
The very next morning, Obama phoned a number of Middle East leaders. He
decided to make a quite unique gesture: placing the first call to Mahmoud
Abbas, and only the next to Olmert. The Israeli media could not stomach
that. Haaretz, for example, consciously falsified the record by writing -
not once but twice in the same issue - that Obama had called "Olmert,
Abbas, Mubarak and King Abdallah" (in that order).
Instead of the group of American Jews who had been in charge of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict during both the Clinton and Bush
administrations, Obama, on his very first day in office, appointed an
Arab-American, George Mitchell, whose mother had come to America from
Lebanon at age 18, and who himself, orphaned from his Irish father, was
brought up in a Maronite Christian Lebanese family.
These are not good tidings for the Israeli leaders. For the last 42
years, they have pursued a policy of expansion, occupation and
settlements in close cooperation with Washington. They have relied on
unlimited American support, from the massive supply of money and arms to
the use of the veto in the Security Council. This support was essential
to their policy. This support may now be reaching its limits.
It will happen, of course, gradually. The pro-Israel lobby in Washington
will continue to put the fear of God into Congress. A huge ship like the
United States can change course only very slowly, in a gentle curve. But
the turn-around started already on the first day of the Obama
administration.
This could not have happened, if America itself had not changed. That is
not a political change alone. It is a change in the world-view, in mental
outlook, in values. A certain American myth, which is very similar to the
Zionist myth, has been replaced by another American myth. Not by accident
did Obama devote to this so large a part of his speech (in which, by the
way, there was not a single word about the extermination of the Native
Americans).
The Gaza War, during which tens of millions of Americans saw the horrible
carnage in the Strip (even if rigorous self-censorship cut out all but a
tiny part), has hastened the process of drifting apart. Israel, the brave
little sister, the loyal ally in Bush's "War on Terror", has turned into
the violent Israel, the mad monster, which has no compassion for women
and children, the wounded and the sick. And when winds like these are
blowing, the Lobby loses height.
The leaders of official Israel do not notice it. They do not feel, as
Obama put it in another context, that "the ground has shifted beneath
them". They think that this is no more than a temporary political problem
that can be set right with the help of the Lobby and the servile members
of Congress.
Our leaders are still intoxicated with war and drunk with violence. They
have re-phrased the famous saying of the Prussian general, Carl von
Clausewitz into: "War is but a continuation of an election campaign by
other means." They compete with each other with vainglorious swagger for
their share of the "credit". Tzipi Livni, who cannot compete with the men
for the crown of warlord, tries to outdo them in toughness, in
bellicosity, in hard-heartedness.
The most brutal is Ehud Barak. Once I called him a "peace criminal",
because he brought about the failure of the 2000 Camp David conference
and shattered the Israeli peace camp. Now I must call him a "war
criminal", as the person who planned the Gaza War knowing that it would
murder masses of civilians.
In his own eyes, and in the eyes of a large section of the public, this
is a military operation which deserves all praise. His advisors also
thought that it would bring him success in the elections. The Labor
party, which had been the largest party in the Knesset for decades, had
shrunk in the polls to 12, even 9 seats out of 120. With the help of the
Gaza atrocity it has now gone up to 16 or so. That's not a landslide, and
there's no guarantee that it will not sink again.
What was Barak's mistake? Very simply: every war helps the Right. War, by
its very nature, arouses in the population the most primitive emotions -
hate and fear, fear and hate. These are the emotions on which the Right
has been riding for centuries. Even when it's the "Left" that starts a
war, it's still the Right that profits from it. In a state of war, the
population prefers an honest-to-goodness Rightist to a phony Leftist.
This is happening to Barak for the second time. When, in 2000, he spread
the mantra "I have turned every stone on the way to peace, / I have made
the Palestinians unprecedented offers, / They have rejected everything, /
There is no one to talk with" - he succeeded not only in blowing the Left
to smithereens, but also in paving the way for the ascent of Ariel Sharon
in the 2001 elections. Now he is paving the way for Binyamin Netanyahu
(hoping, quite openly, to become his minister of defense).
And not only for him. The real victor of the war is a man who had no part
in it at all: Avigdor Liberman. His party, which in any normal country
would be called fascist, is steadily rising in the polls. Why? Liberman
looks and sounds like an Israeli Mussolini, he is an unbridled
Arab-hater, a man of the most brutal force. Compared to him, even
Netanyahu looks like a softie. A large part of the young generation,
nurtured on years of occupation, killing and destruction, after two
atrocious wars, considers him a worthy leader.
WHILE THE US has made a giant jump to the left, Israel is about to jump
even further to the right.
Anyone who saw the millions milling around Washington on inauguration day
knows that Obama was not speaking only for himself. He was expressing the
aspirations of his people, the Zeitgeist.
Between the mental world of Obama and the mental world of Liberman and
Netanyahu there is no bridge. Between Obama and Barak and Livni, too,
there yawns an abyss. Post-election Israel may find itself on a collision
course with post-election America.
Where are the American Jews? The overwhelming majority of them voted for
Obama. They will be between the hammer and the anvil - between their
government and their natural adherence to Israel. It is reasonable to
assume that this will exert pressure from below on the "leaders" of
American Jewry, who have incidentally never been elected by anyone, and
on organizations like AIPAC. The sturdy stick, on which Israeli leaders
are used to lean in times of trouble, may prove to be a broken reed.
Europe, too, is not untouched by the new winds. True, at the end of the
war we saw the leaders of Europe - Sarkozy, Merkel, Browne and Zapatero -
sitting like schoolchildren behind a desk in class, respectfully
listening to the most loathsome arrogant posturing from Ehud Olmert,
reciting his text after him. They seemed to approve the atrocities of the
war, speaking of the Qassams and forgetting about the occupation, the
blockade and the settlements. Probably they will not hang this picture on
their office walls.
But during this war masses of Europeans poured into the streets to
demonstrate against the horrible events. The same masses saluted Obama on
the day of his inauguration.
This is the new world. Perhaps our leaders are now dreaming of the
slogan: "Stop the world, I want to get off!" But there is no other world.
YES, WE ARE NOW on the wrong side of history.
Fortunately, there is also another Israel. It is not in the limelight,
and its voice is heard only by those who listen out for it. This is a
sane, rational Israel, with its face to the future, to progress and
peace. In these coming elections, its voice will barely be heard, because
all the old parties are standing with their two feet squarely in the
world of yesterday.
But what has happened in the United States will have a profound influence
on what happens in Israel. The huge majority of Israelis know that we
cannot exist without close ties with the US. Obama is now the leader of
the world, and we live in this world. When he promises to work
"aggressively" for peace between us and the Palestinians, that is a
marching order for us.
We want to be on the right side of history. That will take months or
years, but I am sure that we shall get there. The time to start is now.
********************************************************************
Gideon Levy / Gaza war ended in utter failure for Israel
By Gideon Levy
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057670.html
On the morrow of the return of the last Israeli soldier from Gaza, we can
determine with certainty that they had all gone out there in vain. This
war ended in utter failure for Israel.
This goes beyond the profound moral failure, which is a grave matter in
itself, but pertains to its inability to reach its stated goals. In other
words, the grief is not complemented by failure. We have gained nothing
in this war save hundreds of graves, some of them very small, thousands
of maimed people, much destruction and the besmirching of Israel's image.
What seemed like a predestined loss to only a handful of people at the
onset of the war will gradually emerge as such to many others, once the
victorious trumpeting subsides.
The initial objective of the war was to put an end to the firing of
Qassam rockets. This did not cease until the war's last day. It was only
achieved after a cease-fire had already been arranged. Defense officials
estimate that Hamas still has 1,000 rockets.
The war's second objective, the prevention of smuggling, was not met
either. The head of the Shin Bet security service has estimated that
smuggling will be renewed within two months.
Most of the smuggling that is going on is meant to provide food for a
population under siege, and not to obtain weapons. But even if we accept
the scare campaign concerning the smuggling with its exaggerations, this
war has served to prove that only poor quality, rudimentary weapons
passed through the smuggling tunnels connecting the Gaza Strip to Egypt.
Israel's ability to achieve its third objective is also dubious.
Deterrence, my foot. The deterrence we supposedly achieved in the Second
Lebanon War has not had the slightest effect on Hamas, and the one
supposedly achieved now isn't working any better: The sporadic firing of
rockets from the Gaza Strip has continued over the past few days.
The fourth objective, which remained undeclared, was not met either. The
IDF has not restored its capability. It couldn't have, not in a quasi-war
against a miserable and poorly-equipped organization relying on makeshift
weapons, whose combatants barely put up a fight.
-------
The spread of Liebermanism
By Haaretz Editorial Friday, January 23 2009
Tags: Israel, arabs, Lieberman, Israel
This week, the Supreme Court accepted a petition by two Arab Knesset
factions - Balad and United Arab List-Ta'al - and overturned the Central
Elections Commission's decision to bar them from running in the upcoming
elections. This ruling, which did not ignore the problematic elements of
both parties' platforms, rescued the political system from the disgrace
it inflicted on itself and the voting public by disqualifying these
slates.
As always, the bid to disqualify the parties came from members of the
extreme right, and they are also the ones who heaped unbridled criticism
on the court's decision. Most prominent among them was Yisrael Beiteinu
chairman Avigdor Lieberman, who shouted at MK Ahmed Tibi, "Some of the
Arab MKs should be dealt with like Hamas."
Lieberman, though he works tirelessly to disenfranchise Arab politicians
- and, in effect, the entire Arab public - is not the most extreme.
Baruch Marzel, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Effi Eitam are even less restrained
when it comes to the rights of Israeli Arabs. But it is Lieberman, whose
vision and platform seem to be rational and well thought out, who is
actually the greater danger to democracy. The Central Elections
Commission's sweeping consensus in favor of disqualifying the Arab
parties - which even included Kadima and the Labor Party - is bitter
proof of this.
Advertisement
Granted, Labor's response team argued vehemently that MK Eitan Cabel's
vote on the commission in favor of disqualification violated the party's
principles and did not reflect the majority's views. But to this day,
party chairman Ehud Barak has yet to make his views on the subject known.
And while Kadima likes to describe itself as a centrist party, its
leaders, including Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, did not hesitate to vote
in favor of disqualification.
Lieberman's dangerous and anti-democratic worldview has thus succeeded in
infecting the centrist stream of Israeli politics, and that is reflected
in the statements of politicians who are considered relatively moderate.
The ridiculous idea of demanding loyalty tests for Arab citizens as a
condition for obtaining basic civil rights is being treated as a
legitimate option in the corridors of the Knesset. So is the desire to
transfer towns in the Triangle region, along with their residents, to the
future state of Palestine as part of a "repartition" of the country.
Ideas that no one would have dared let cross their lips 10 or 20 years
ago, lest they be thought utter fascists, have been bolstered in recent
months by the war in the south. It seems that Israeli Arabs are once
again paying the price of the bloody struggle between Israel and its
neighbors. And populist politicians seeking to ingratiate themselves with
an inflamed public are once again using the Arabs as a punching bag,
along the lines of "stick it to the Arabs and salvage the party in the
polls."
Now that the court has overturned the disqualification decision, the
leading candidates must publicly disavow this spreading Liebermanism and
its racist characteristics. Any other response would constitute an
undemocratic and immoral disqualification of Israel's Arab citizens.
The heroic descriptions and victory poems written abut the "military
triumph" will not serve to change reality. The pilots were flying on
training missions and the ground forces were engaged in exercises that
involved joining up and firing weapons.
The describing of the operation as a "military achievement" by the
various generals and analysts who offered their take on the operation is
plain ridiculous.
We have not weakened Hamas. The vast majority of its combatants were not
harmed and popular support for the organization has in fact increased.
Their war has intensified the ethos of resistance and determined
endurance. A country which has nursed an entire generation on the ethos
of a few versus should know to appreciate that by now. There was no doubt
as to who was David and who was Goliath in this war.
The population in Gaza, which has sustained such a severe blow, will not
become more moderate now. On the contrary, the national sentiment will
now turn more than before against the party which inflicted that blow -
the State of Israel. Just as public opinion leans to the right in Israel
after each attack against us, so it will in Gaza following the
mega-attack that we carried out against them.
If anyone was weakened because of this war, it was Fatah, whose fleeing
from Gaza and its abandonment have now been given special significance.
The succession of failures in this war needs to include, of course, the
failure of the siege policy. For a while, we have already come to realize
that is ineffective. The world boycotted, Israel besieged and Hamas ruled
(and is still ruling).
But this war's balance, as far as Israel is concerned, does not end with
the absence of any achievement. It has placed a heavy toll on us, which
will continue to burden us for some time. When it comes to assessing
Israel's international situation, we must not allow ourselves to be
fooled by the support parade by Europe's leaders, who came in for a
photo-op with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
Israel's actions have dealt a serious blow to public support for the
state. While this does not always translate itself into an immediate
diplomatic situation, the shockwaves will arrive one day. The whole world
saw the images. They shocked every human being who saw them, even if they
left most Israelis cold.
The conclusion is that Israel is a violent and dangerous country, devoid
of all restraints and blatantly ignoring the resolutions of the United
Nations Security Council, while not giving a hoot about international
law. The investigations are on their way.
Graver still is the damage this will visit upon our moral spine. It will
come from difficult questions about what the IDF did in Gaza, which will
occur despite the blurring effect of recruited media.
So what was achieved, after all? As a war waged to satisfy considerations
of internal politics, the operation has succeeded beyond all
expectations. Likud Chair Benjamin Netanyahu is getting stronger in the
polls. And why? Because we could not get enough of the war.
Biographical Note:
Prof. Oren Yiftachel teaches political geography and urban planning at
Ben-Gurion University, Beersheba. Yiftachel has written extensively on
the political geography of ethnic conflict. Among his books: "Ethnocracy:
Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine" (2006, PennPress), and
"Israelis in Conflict" (ed, 2004, Sussex Academic Press)... He is an
occasional contributor to Israel's leading newspapers "Haaretz" and
"Ynet". Yiftachel is an active member in several peace and civil society
organizations, including B'tselem, the Bedouin Council of unrecognized
villages, Adva and a founding member of Faculty for Israel-Palestine
Peace (FFIPP).
------
RETURNING TIME TO GAZANS
Oren Yiftachel[i]
The sights of death and destruction from Gaza are devastating, and the
residents of southern Israel are under on-going bombardment. The
situation is suffocating, saddening and infuriating. In such a time it
may be difficult to look beyond the violence, but this may be necessary
to understand what is transpiring in front of our eyes.
An aboriginal author once said, during the struggle for native rights in
Australia: "wherever national territory advances, our time is killed, but
it also has a strange habit of returning after death."
It may seem far removed, but this insight can help us fathom the war on
Gaza. Beyond the carnage, brutality, and screaming children, we can also
see it as the continuation of the Israeli territorial project which has
adopted a consistent and cruel goal - the erasure of Palestinian time,
that is, the full recent history of this land. This erasure, needless to
say, is aimed at destroying Palestinian space, in what Palestinian
professor Sari Hanafi calls 'spaciocide'. With this destruction comes the
annihilation of political powers, those existing by right, and not as a
result of some Israeli 'generosity'.
Accordingly, one may look at the current invasion to Gaza not only as an
'operation' to stop Hamas' rockets; a pre-election effort to boost
popularity by cynical Israeli leaders; nor an attempt to re-establish
Israel's deterrence following the failure of the second Lebanon War of
2006. This invasion and destruction of Gaza is neither only a colonial
attempt to 'create a new political order' among neighboring nations, or an
imperial (American-Israeli) push to control insurgent Arab societies. The
current attack on Gaza is of course all these, but also - and most
importantly, another step in the long-standing project of silencing,
fragmenting, breaking and annihilating Palestinian history and collective
existence. The erasure project is conducted by nearly everybody in Israel
- politicians, artists, the media, university researchers and
intellectuals.
Against the efforts of collective amnesia, let us remember: the Gaza Strip
is a small region covering only 1.7% of historic Palestine. It was created
as an entity following the 1948 war, known as the Nakbah (Palestinian
disaster), during which some two thirds of Palestinians refugees were
driven out from what is now Israel, with 150,000 of them joining the
60,000 Arabs already residing in the area. The armistice lines were drawn
between Israeli and Egypt, with the refugees trapped on the 'wrong side',
and prevented from returning to their villages. In the meantime, Israel
destroyed nearly all Arab villages from Jaffa to Beersheba, appropriated
all Palestinian land and allocated it to the dozens of Jewish towns and
settlements built around Gaza.
The refugee population in Gaza today amounts to more than a million (over
two thirds of the Strip's population). Its spatial conditions have
worsened dramatically, with overcrowding, poverty, lack of services and a
growing regime of geographic constraints. Israel's conquest in 1967 eased
for a while the sense of siege, but following the first Intifada, and
further since the Oslo Agreement, Gaza was cordoned once more, cut off
from the rest of the Palestinian Territories and the world, and surrounded
in 1994 by a massive 'security fence', ironically as part of the 'peace
process'. Gaza became a large Palestinian Ghetto, or as notable Gaza Eyad
el-Sarraj quipped: "the largest jail in the world.".
This is the background for the rise of Hamas, which offered an alternative
to the failed Oslo accords under which the promise to peace turned into a
Palestinian 'Via Dolorosa'. Hamas refused to believe the promise of 'two
states for two nations', which has become an empty slogan, enabling the
endless continuation of Jewish settlement and Israeli colonial occupation.
Hamas also gave voice and political weight for the refugees by appointing
Ismail Haniya - - resident of the Shati Camp, as its first Prime Minister.
This move was conducted against a corrupt Palestinian political elite,
trapped within the Oslo framework, which prevented it from dealing with
the refugee issue, thereby silencing again the recent history of this
land.
True, the shelling of Israeli towns by Hamas should be condemned as an act
of terror, and as a disastrous political strategy with grave consequences
to the Palestinian people. But beyond this, we should understand it as a
desperate attempt to remind the world, Israel, and even the Arab world,
that the refugee problem is still alive - an open wound awaiting to be
healed by the forces that created it -- first and foremost Israel.
Against this on-going cry, Israel typically decided to escape engaging
with the issue, and is now conducting a campaign of state-sanctioned
terror, against Gazan society. Hence the brutal violence that aims to
divide, cut, kill and injure. But even tons of bombs and piles of 'cast
lead' cannot silence the echo of history. Israel's mighty military power
is weak politically and morally and will not prevent the return of native
time, even after its pronounced death, as predicted by the Aboriginal
author.
The moral is clear: the genuine cessation of violence must pass through
the return of time to our public and political life, that is, the opening
of a genuine debate over the history that created and maintained Gaza and
other Palestinian ghettoes controlled violently by Israel. Without that,
we may realize time and again that our enormous military power buys no
genuine security. During such a debate, the refugee issue will be foremost
on the agenda, but it will also have to engage with the Jews' own history
of dislocation and disaster, and the making of a safe Jewish place in an
Arab Middle East.
The return of Palestinian time, therefore, is necessary for the
recognition of Jewish time, and for the two nations to find a way to
coexist in their common homeland. Hence, we must replace territory with
history as the core of Palestinian-Jewish engagement, and thereby enter,
perhaps, a time of reconciliation.
**************************************************************
The war that wasn't
By Reuven Pedatzur
Tags: israel news, hamas, IDF, gaza
It is very dangerous for the Israel Defense Forces to believe it won the
war when there was no war. The expressions of satisfaction and praise for
the war's outcome voiced by the army's top brass may lead the IDF to draw
the wrong conclusions. Contrary to the image portrayed by reports in the
Israeli media - asserting that the IDF's performance in the war was
near-perfect and that the army adopted the lessons from the Second Lebanon
War - in reality, not a single battle was fought during the 22 days of
fighting.
The Hamas fighters did not even try to stop the IDF soldiers who entered
the Strip, opting to withdraw without a fight. The challenge the soldiers
were faced with in their advance on Gaza City was not - as senior command
had said prior to the operation - hand-to-hand combat with determined
fighters, armed to the teeth and willing to die, but the need to find
booby traps and explosives, and occasionally to neutralize individual
snipers as well. This is not war. It is not even a real battle.
There is nothing in common between the sort of combat adopted by the IDF
during Operation Cast Lead and what happened in the battles of the Second
Lebanon War. Therefore, the argument that the Gaza fighting proves that
the IDF has adopted the lessons of that war lacks foundation. True, the
soldiers were better equipped, the commanders were in the field and not
stuck behind plasma screens, and the intelligence was a lot better than in
2006. But all this does not alter the fact that what happened in the Strip
was essentially a military operation characterized by advancing forces in
hostile territory, densely populated by civilians, without facing a
military force.
At the start of the ground offensive, senior command decided to avoid
endangering the lives of soldiers, even at the price of seriously harming
the civilian population. This is why the IDF made use of massive force
during its advance in the Strip. As a Golani brigade commander explained,
if there is any concern that a house is booby-trapped, even if it is
filled with civilians, it should be targeted and hit, to ensure that it is
not mined - only then should it be approached. Without going into the
moral aspects, such fighting tactics explain why there were no instances
in which there was a need to assault homes where Hamas fighters were holed
up.
Other outcomes of this fighting method were the extensive damage and the
deaths of many civilians. According to IDF statistics, almost two thirds
of Palestinians killed were civilians. Moreover, even though it was one of
the war's aims, hardly any Hamas fighters were taken prisoner, and the
holding center set up to imprison them remained almost empty.
The Israel Air Force, too, received a great deal of praise. The media
asserted that during Cast Lead it proved that it is the world's best air
force. While the IAF's quality is beyond dispute, it would be a serious
mistake to bolster such a claim on the basis of its activity in the Gaza
Strip. The planes operated in an environment free of air defenses,
enjoying complete aerial superiority. A flight over the Strip and a mostly
"accurate" bombing run, which can be dropped from a relatively short
range, is not a complicated mission. The flights over Gaza are like test
flights, which every pilot does dozens of times a year.
The IDF should relate to its performance in Operation Cast Lead with the
necessary humility and proportionality. There was no war there.
Israel to grant legal aid to IDF troops accused of Gaza war crimes By
Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service Tags: Israel, Gaza,
War crimes The government on Sunday ratified a bill granting aid and
support to Israel Defense Forces officers in cases where they face suits
for alleged war crimes committed in Gaza.
"Israel will give full support to everyone who operated for it and on
behalf of it. The commanders and soldiers who were sent to Gaza need to
know that they are safe from various tribunals," Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert announced at the opening of the weekly cabinet meeting.
The bill, titled "strengthening the IDF's hand after Operation Cast Lead",
was put forward by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and coordinated by the
Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Justice and State Prosecutor.
There is growing concern at the Defense Ministry and the Ministry of
Justice that Israeli officers will be singled out in a wave of suits for
alleged human rights violations during the recent 3-week offensive against
Hamas.
"The terrorist organizations and Hamas were mistaken in thinking that
Israel would reconcile itself to [rocket] fire and not respond," Olmert
added.
"Now after the operation, the organizations are trying to settle accounts
with the State of Israel, and one of the central arenas in which they are
doing so is the arena of international law, by means of the moralistic
diplomatic tact that characterizes these groups."
Defense Minister Ehud Barak joined Olmert in pledging support for the
soldiers. Calling the IDF "the most moral army in the world," Barak said
troops would receive governmental backing against accusations from abroad
and "self-flagellation" from within Israel.
Olmert added that terror organizations are trying to turn attacker into
attacked and vice-versa by pinning responsibility on IDF soldiers instead
of blaming terrorism. He said also said Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann
would consult with Israel's top legal experts and find "answers to
possible questions relating to the Israeli military's activities" during
the campaign.
More than 1,250 Palestinians were reportedly killed during Israel's
offensive against Hamas in the coastal territory. Israel has been harshly
criticized for the large number of civilians among the Palestinian dead,
of whom they numbered more than half according to Gaza officials.
****************************************************
No moderates left
By Gideon Levy
The three leading candidates for prime minister are extremists. Tzipi
Livni and Ehud Barak went to war in Gaza and are therefore as radical as
can be. Benjamin Netanyahu is more radical in rhetoric only.
We must not be led astray in this election campaign and consider both
Livni and Barak as moderates, in contrast to the "extremist" Netanyahu.
This is a deception. Kadima and Labor, the center and left-wing parties,
have led Israel to two awful wars within two years. Netanyahu has yet to
go to war once. True, he speaks more radically than the other two, but so
far it has only been words, while the "moderates" have taken radical,
aggressive action.
"Bibi is unreliable and terribly right-wing," Kadima's electoral
broadcast asserts. Is he? Livni and Barak are just the same.
Advertisement
None of the people involved in the Gaza war can speak of peace now. Those
who delivered such a brutal blow to the Palestinians, only to sow more
hatred and fear among them, have no intention of making peace with them.
Those responsible for firing white phosphorous shells into a civilian
population and destroying thousands of homes cannot talk the following
day about two states living peacefully side by side.
In one fell swoop, Ehud Olmert, who issued some of the bravest statements
ever made in these parts about ending the occupation, singlehandedly
turned them into a cynical babble of hollow cliches. Who will now believe
that he wanted peace? And who will believe Barak or Livni?
This war unmasked Livni, the woman who had promised us "different
politics." She, who as foreign minister was supposed to show Israel's
sunny side to the world, chose to present an arrogant, violent and brutal
face. During the war she boasted that Israel was acting "savagely,"
threatened to let Hamas "have it" and announced that the cease-fire would
come into effect "whenever Israel decides."
As far as she was concerned, there was no world, no United States and
Europe, no UN Security Council, and no bleeding and defeated other side -
only Israel will decide. No foreign minister has ever spoken like this
before.
In her pathetic attempts to assume a masculine, militaristic, even macho,
posture of someone who would know what to say if the telephone rang at 3
A.M., Livni was exposed as a failed foreign minister, whose words and
deeds are no different from those espoused by the radical militaristic
men around her. No self-respecting voter who considers himself an
upstanding centrist could vote for her. Whoever votes for Kadima will be
voting for the right, which is eager to embark on any war and risk the
accompanying crimes.
Voting for Labor also means voting for the war and its horrors. This
war's marshal, Ehud Barak, has forever deprived himself of the moral
right to talk of coexistence, political arrangements and diplomacy. If he
really believed in them, he would have given them a chance before going
to war, not afterward. Barak took the army to war and Barak must pay for
it, together with his "left-wing" party, which joined the most radical,
far-right parties in supporting the move to outlaw Israel's Arab parties.
Avigdor Lieberman, Netanyahu, Livni and Barak are one - they all voted in
support of an undemocratic decision. And don't be alarmed by Lieberman -
he, too, only talks. But at least he does so honestly, while Barak fires
off salvos and deceives.
Granted, these impostors still enjoy the support of world leaders, but
for many people around the globe, they have become war-mongers and
suspected war criminals. Their diplomatic immunity will protect them -
but who wants those leaders, with their bloodied hands, to represent us?
No less severe is the fact that there are no ideological differences
between the candidates. Let Barak and Livni step up and explain what the
hell sets them apart. What ideological argument are they conducting,
apart from bickering on who should be credited for the war?
Facing them is Netanyahu - what does he have to offer? "Economic peace."
After this war, which wasn't enough as far as he is concerned, his
doctrine sounds even more ludicrous than ever.
This is how we're going into elections - with three leading parties that
are hardly different from each other.
We always used to say, "There aren't any moderates in the Arab world."
Now we are the ones who don't have any. Vote as you will, but don't fool
yourself. Every ballot cast for Kadima, Labor and Likud is an endorsement
of the last war and a vote for the next one.
Editor's Note: Here's a perspective from the theorists of the Israeli
Right-wing, because it is important to know what the people who shape
Israeli strategic and policy discussions are thinking. After reading this
one, read Rabbi Lerner's analysis, which is the article following this
one.
------
Jerusalem Issue Brief
Institute for Contemporary Affairs
founded jointly with the Wechsler Family Foundation
Vol. 8, No. 19 25 January 2009
The George Mitchell Appointment: The Tactics of
"Symmetrical Negotiations" May Not Work in "Asymmetrical Conflicts"
Lenny Ben-David
The appointment of former Senator George J. Mitchell as Middle East envoy
was warmly received in Washington, Jerusalem, and Ramallah. Yet, the
Middle East that Mitchell will confront today is much changed from the
one he wrestled with eight years ago as chairman of the 2001 Sharm
el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee, which was created to investigate the
outbreak of the Second Intifada.
The 2001 Mitchell Report was seen as an "even-handed" document,
reflecting President Clinton's directive to "strive to steer clear
of...finger-pointing. As a result, the committee attempted - even at the
risk of straining credibility - to split the blame for the crisis. The
Mitchell Committee could not ignore Palestinian terrorism and the
Palestinian use of civilians as human shields. Israel's transgression -
and there had to be one to balance Palestinian sins --was its settlement
activity. The committee recommended a "freeze[of] all settlement
activity, including the 'natural growth' of existing settlements."
Israelis objected that the freeze - never mandated in the interim stages
of the Oslo Accords - would serve to reward the Palestinians' terrorism.
The committee was appointed before the 9/11 al-Qaeda attack. Its report
came prior to the capture of two weapons-laden ships bound for Gaza - the
Santorini in May 2001 and the Karine A in January 2002 - and prior to
President Bush's 2004 recognition of "new realities on the ground [in the
territories], including already existing major Israeli populations
centers." Bush continued: "[I]t is unrealistic to expect that the outcome
of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the
armistice lines of 1949."
The 2001 Mitchell Report was issued years before Hamas' coup in Gaza.
Hamas remains dedicated to Israel's destruction. Its alliance with Iran
and its affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood mark Hamas as an enemy of
moderate Arab regimes. Hamas may yet prove to be a fatal flaw to
Mitchell's axiom that "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be
ended."
President Barak Obama's appointment of former Senator George J. Mitchell
as Middle East envoy was warmly received in Washington, Jerusalem, and
Ramallah. Over the years, Mitchell, a respected judge, legislator and
negotiator, has been tasked by presidents to broker a peace agreement in
Northern Ireland, explore paths to peace in the Middle East, and even
chair a commission to investigate steroid use in Major League Baseball.
"The Conciliator" was the apt moniker given to Mitchell by one British
newspaper.
The Middle East that Mitchell will confront today is much changed from
the one he wrestled with eight years ago. And the parties to the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict bear little resemblance to the antagonists
he dealt with in Northern Ireland.
Mitchell chaired the "Sharm el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee," mandated
by a Sharm el-Sheikh summit in October 2000 to investigate the outbreak
of the "al-Aqsa Intifada" one month earlier and to recommend ways to stop
the violence. His committee, which also included Senator Warren Rudman
and three European statesmen, presented its findings to the new Bush
administration on April 30, 2001. Its recommendations were then
incorporated into the April 2003 "Performance-Based Roadmap to a
Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,"
drafted by the Quartet of the UN, European Union, United States, and
Russia.
In 2003, Mitchell distilled his vision of the Middle East conflict:
"Palestinians will never achieve a state if Israel does not have
security. Israel will never get sustainable security if the Palestinians
don't have a state." Based on his experience in reaching the Northern
Ireland "Good Friday" peace agreement, Mitchell expressed his belief in
2003 and again in December 2008 that "there is no such thing as a
conflict that can't be ended."1
The Mitchell Report was seen as an "even-handed" document, reflecting the
fact that the committee was directed by President Clinton to "strive to
steer clear of any step that will intensify mutual blame and
finger-pointing between the parties..The Committee should not become a
divisive force or a focal point for blame and recrimination but rather
should serve to forestall violence and confrontation and provide lessons
for the future. This should not be a tribunal whose purpose is to
determine the guilt or innocence of individuals or of the parties."2
As a result, the committee attempted - even at the risk of straining
credibility - to split the blame for the crisis. "Some Israelis appear
not to comprehend the humiliation and frustration that Palestinians must
endure every day as a result of living with the continuing effects of
occupation," the report wrote. "Some Palestinians appear not to
comprehend the extent to which terrorism creates fear among the Israeli
people and undermines their belief in the possibility of co-existence."
Humiliation is rarely fatal; terrorism usually is.
While the Mitchell Report did not blame Israeli Prime Minister Sharon for
the outbreak of the Second Intifada,3 nonetheless, it sought to
evenhandedly spread the responsibility for the violence, ignoring the
evidence of Palestinian incitement.In response to Israeli claims that the
violence was planned by Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, the
committee declared, "[We were not] provided with persuasive evidence that
the PA planned the uprising. Accordingly, we have no basis on which to
conclude that there was a deliberate plan by the PA to initiate a
campaign of violence at the first opportunity."
Subsequently, the real causes for the violence were exposed by a
Palestinian minister in Yassir Arafat's government. Palestinian
Communications Minister 'Imad al-Falujiadmitted in the Lebanese daily
al-Safir on March 3, 2001: "Whoever thinks the Intifada broke out because
of the despised Sharon's visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque is wrong....This
Intifada was planned in advance, ever since President Arafat's return
from the Camp David negotiations." Even earlier, al-Faluji had explained
that the Intifada was initiated as the result of a strategic decision
made by the Palestinians.4
The Intifada's premeditation is seen in the training and indoctrination
of 25,000 Palestinian youth in summer camps even while Arafat was engaged
in negotiations at Camp David.5
The Mitchell Report's Recommendations
In its recommendations to the two sides, the Mitchell Committee could not
ignore Palestinian terrorism and the Palestinian use of civilians as
human shields. It issued these recommendations:
The PA should make clear through concrete action to Palestinians and
Israelis alike that terrorism is reprehensible and unacceptable, and that
the PA will make a 100 percent effort to prevent terrorist operations and
to punish perpetrators. This effort should include immediate steps to
apprehend and incarcerate terrorists operating within the PA's
jurisdiction. The PA should prevent gunmen from using Palestinian
populated areas to fire upon Israeli populated areas and IDF positions.
This tactic places civilians on both sides at unnecessary risk.
According to the committee, Israel's transgression - and there had to be
one to balance Palestinian sins - was its settlement activity. "The
Government of Israel," the committee recommended, "should freeze all
settlement activity, including the 'natural growth' of existing
settlements."
Two years later, the Roadmap would cite the Mitchell Report in its call
for a settlement freeze in Phase I of the Roadmap. "Israel also freezes
all settlement activity," the drafters instructed, "consistent with the
Mitchell Report" (emphasis added).
Israelis objected to the draconian call for a freeze. Sharon asked
Secretary of State Colin Powell, "What do you want, for a pregnant woman
to have an abortion just because she is a settler?"6 Moreover, Israelis
objected, the freeze - never mandated in the interim stages of the Oslo
Accords - would serve to reward the Palestinians' terrorism.
A Changed World Since the Mitchell Report
The Mitchell Report was drafted relatively early in the Palestinian
Intifada, when it was believed by some that the Palestinians' violent
outbreak was actually a spontaneous reaction to Prime Minister Sharon's
visit to the Temple Mount in September 2000. As mentioned above, the
world today knows otherwise.
The committee was appointed before the al-Qaeda attack on September 11,
2001, and the revelation of hostile international Islamic terrorism. The
report was issued prior to the capture of two weapons-laden ships bound
for Gaza - the Santorini in May 2001 and the Karine A in January 2002 -
and the surfacing of proof of the grand battle Arafat was planning
against Israel. (The Grad rockets, explosives, mortars and anti-tank
weapons on the ships would find their way into Hamas arsenals in Gaza
five years later through tunnels from the Sinai Peninsula.)
By 2003, George Mitchell was refocusing his attention on the threat of
terrorism. In a commencement address at MIT in June 2003, he stated, "Our
committee's report was very tough on terrorism. We branded it morally
reprehensible and unacceptable. It is also politically counterproductive.
It will not achieve its objective. To the contrary, with each suicide
bomb attack, the prospect of a Palestinian state is delayed. Such tactics
also are destructive of Palestinian civil society and the reputation of
the Palestinian people throughout the world."
Nevertheless, Mitchell repeated at MIT his opposition to Israel's
settlement policies, in keeping with the "long-standing opposition to the
government of Israel's policies and practices regarding settlements. That
U.S. opposition," he continued, "has been consistent through the Carter,
Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush administrations; just as consistent has
been the continued settlement activity by the Israeli government."
The U.S. position toward settlements, of course, underwent a major change
under President Bush in April 2004 when he assured Prime Minister Sharon:
"In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing
major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the
outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return
to the armistice lines of 1949."7 The universal interpretation of Bush's
letter was that settlement blocs would remain under Israeli sovereignty.
Lastly, the 2001 Mitchell Report was issued years before Hamas' coup in
Gaza and its open fealty to Iran. Hamas remains dedicated to Israel's
destruction. Its alliance with Iran and its affiliation with the Muslim
Brotherhood mark Hamas as an enemy of moderate Arab regimes such as Egypt
and Jordan. As such, Hamas cannot be compared to the Irish Republican
Army (IRA), which wanted to throw the British out of Northern Ireland but
had no aspirations to capture London. Moreover, while the IRA had limited
international contacts, it was not a part of a European-wide network and
was not backed by a petrodollar-rich, oil-producing country like Iran,
which was also on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons, and thereby
emboldening its regional surrogates. In short, Mitchell will be
conducting diplomacy under completely different strategic circumstances
than he did in the 1990s. Indeed, Hamas may prove to be a fatal flaw to
Mitchell's axiom that "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be
ended."
* * *
Notes
1. Commencement address at MIT, Cambridge, Mass., June 9, 2003.
2. Mitchell Report, April 30, 2002.
3. Ibid. "The Sharon visit did not cause the 'Al-Aqsa Intifada.' But it
was poorly timed and the provocative effect should have been foreseen;
indeed, it was foreseen by those who urged that the visit be prohibited.
More significant were the events that followed: The decision of the
Israeli police on September 29 to use lethal means against the
Palestinian demonstrators; and the subsequent failure, as noted above, of
either party to exercise restraint."
4. Al-Ayyam, December 6, 2000.
5. New York Times, August 3, 2000.
6. BBC News, May 12, 2003.
7. Letter from President Bush to Prime Minister Sharon, April 14, 2004.
* * *
Lenny Ben-David served as deputy chief of mission in Israel's embassy in
Washington. He blogs at http://www.lennybendavid.com/.
------
This Jerusalem Issue Brief is available online at:
http://www.jcpa.org
Dore Gold, Publisher
*****************
Arab initiative, Israeli choice
By Akiva Eldar
Tags: Palestinians
For the third time since the Arab League unanimously voted in favor of
the peace plan with Israel, the people here are being called upon to vote
for a new Knesset. In a normal country, the various parties' positions on
this important initiative would be on full display. In Israel, for the
third time, the Saudi initiative is being pushed to the margins. It is
far easier to sell fear of the Iranians to the voters and to promise "a
strong Israel." What does a peace plan made in Saudi Arabia have in
common with an Iranian-produced bomb? Plenty, it would appear.
At the height of the Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip, a rare missive
from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was delivered to the royal
palace in Riyadh. The Shi'ite leader displayed reverence toward Saudi
Arabia, his sworn enemy, by bestowing on it the title "the leader of the
Arab and Muslim world." And he called on King Abdullah to take a more
strident stance against "the horror and the killing of your children in
Gaza." Prince Turki al-Faisal, who revealed the existence of the letter
in an article for The Financial Times, cautions that answering the "call
for Saudi Arabia to lead a jihad against Israel would, if pursued, create
unprecedented chaos and bloodshed in the region."
These harsh words were penned by an Arab who in the last year helped to
lead the public relations campaign for a reconciliation between the
Muslim world and Israel and ending the Arab conflict with the Jewish
state. Al-Faisal, who was once chief of Saudi intelligence and served as
the country's ambassador in Washington and London, lectures and writes
unceasingly about the benefits of the Saudi peace initiative. In touting
the plan, the prince is not deterred from publicly meeting with Israelis
(including this author). Common sense tells us he is not doing this on
his own volition.
Advertisement
Saudi Arabia is also pressing U.S. President Barack Obama to adopt the
initiative, rendering the plan a litmus test for the Arab world's
relations with the new administration. In his visit to the State
Department the day after his inauguration, Obama made do with a few
noncommittal words in praise of the Saudi initiative. Why should he get
into trouble with the Jewish lobby in his first week in office? In any
case, the return of the right wing to power in Israel would likely seal
the initiative's fate when the topic is brought up for discussion next
month at the Arab League summit in Qatar.
It is hard to blame Obama when every party jousting for power in Israel
is hiding its position on the Saudi initiative behind vaguely worded
statements. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week boasted that he favors
using the Saudi initiative as a framework for negotiations. In the same
breath, he noted that UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, which
are open to various interpretations, were bases for talks, while the Arab
League declaration explicitly states that the June 4, 1967 lines are the
basis for a settlement.
Olmert claimed that Ehud Barak, on the other hand, is shrouding his
position on the initiative in a cloud of fog. Has Olmert been informed of
a more lucid stance expressed by Tzipi Livni on the initiative beyond a
throwaway comment from the summer of 2007, when she was quoted as saying
that the Saudi plan is "a historic opportunity that must not be missed"?
Like Olmert and Barak, the foreign minister also failed to lift a finger
to advance the "historic opportunity." Israel's acceptance of the plan as
a framework for negotiations would have compelled Hamas to decide whether
it is part of the Arab consensus in favor of the initiative, or whether
it is an Iranian satellite state that opposes it.
You may support the initiative and you are allowed to oppose it. Yet the
Zionist parties who seek the trust of the voters cannot evade the most
positive diplomatic outline ever offered to Israel by the Arabs. Each of
the candidates must clearly state whether the government will accept or
reject the initiative. In other words, what do the candidates prefer -
forming a united front with 22 Arab states against Iran and its agents,
or forming a united front with the settlers against the entire world?_
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:19:35 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
20. Regarding The Verdict is in: guilty (Holy Land Foundation
[Re]Trial, Texas)
(Here's a site any uninitiated may visit:
http://theenemyshallnot.blogspot.com/ , which is the below author Harold
Knight's blog. Links are provided for further delving.)
------
I had contemplated a bitterly sarcastic response to the guilty on all
counts verdict for Shukri, Mufid, Abdul, Mohammad, and Ghassan about an
hour ago. But I will refrain. We Americans have now stooped so low as to
condemn American citizens for seeking to give food to the hungry, to
provide something to drink for the thirsty, to welcome the stranger, to
give clothing to the naked, to provide care for the sick, and to minister
to those in prison. Purely at the behest of the State of Israel, we have
condemned these good men and the tens of thousands of Muslim Americans who
gave their resources to provide for their sisters and brothers in
Palestine. The State of Israel was founded in violence, established in
ethnic cleansing, and in terror and occupation completed its obliteration
of any hope for a homeland for the Palestinian people, and the United
States "justice" system operates as an arm of that regime of terror. Yes,
I might as well go completely over the top and say what I think: mene,
mene, tekel, parsin. America will be "weighed on the scales and found
wanting." And especially the silent, silent, silent Christian church.
Ah, you destroyer,
who yourself have not been destroyed;
you treacherous one,
with whom no one has dealt treacherously!
When you have ceased to destroy,
you will be destroyed;
and when you have stopped dealing treacherously,
you will be dealt with treacherously. . . .
Listen! the valiant cry in the streets;
the envoys of peace weep bitterly. (Isaiah 33)
_______
Dr. Harold Knight
First-Year Writing Faculty
Southern Methodist University, Dallas
Music Director
St. Paul Lutheran Church, Farmers Branch
"We will oppose those who would deny us or denigrate our love for and
pride in our national traditions, who bear our name but do not belong to
our nation, who do not understand our customs, our morality and our
faith.... We go to battle against parasites and mongrels as to a holy war
that God¢s holy will demands. The objective power of race breaks through,
we understand it, and we place ourselves in its light and at its
service..." German LUTHERAN PASTOR Joachim Hossenfelder, 1933
"One of the most important functions of the discourse of ¡Islamic
terrorism¢ is to construct and maintain national identity, primarily
through the articulation of a contrasting, negative ¡other¢ who defines
the Western ¡self ¢ through negation." Richard Jackson, University of
Manchester, 2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:49:37 -0800 (PST)
From: patricia blair <cris6369@yahoo.com>
21. A selection of Comments by journalists & academics: Israel has
lost its Soul
This is worth reading. It proves that many jews have been realizing that
Israel has "lost its soul". The problem with their awakening is that
Zionist Israel never had a soul. The Zionist project on which Israel was
born is based on usurping the land of the legitimate owners of Palestine,
dehumanizing and demonizing them. Israel deliberately and consistently
engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide against the Palestinians since
its birth in 1948. How can such an entity be claimed to have a soul?
Those morally motivated jews are, in all probability, romantic human
beings who were drawn to the Zionist project by the socialist principles
and Kibbutz "ideals", deliberately dangled in front of their naive eyes by
the real managers of the Zionist project. The general view among
Palestinians now seems to be that the 2 state solution is dead. The only
feasible solution is seen to be a "ONE STATE" for all its equal citizens,
Muslims, Christians and Jews. Ramsis
------
Yitzhak Laor
We^Òve been here before. It^Òs a ritual. Every two or three years, our
military mounts another bloody expedition. The enemy is always smaller,
weaker; our military is always larger, technologically more sophisticated,
prepared for full-scale war against a full-scale army. But Iran is too
scary, and even the relatively small Hizbullah gave us a hard time. That
leaves the Palestinians.
Israel is engaged in a long war of annihilation against Palestinian
society. The objective is to destroy the Palestinian nation and drive it
back into pre-modern groupings based on the tribe, the clan and the
enclave. This is the last phase of the Zionist colonial mission,
culminating in inaccessible townships, camps, villages, districts, all of
them to be walled or fenced off, and patrolled by a powerful army which,
in the absence of a proper military objective, is really an over-equipped
police force, with F16s, Apaches, tanks, artillery, commando units and
hi-tech surveillance at its disposal.
The extent of the cruelty, the lack of shame and the refusal of
self-restraint are striking, both in anthropological terms and
historically. The worldwide Jewish support for this vandal offensive makes
one wonder if this isn^Òt the moment Zionism is taking over the Jewish
people.
But the real issue is that since 1991, and even more since the Oslo
agreements in 1993, Israel has played on the idea that it really is
trading land for peace, while the truth is very different. Israel has not
given up the territories, but cantonised and blockaded them. The new
strategy is to confine the Palestinians: they do not belong in our space,
they are to remain out of sight, packed into their townships and camps, or
swelling our prisons. This project now has the support of most of the
Israeli press and academics.
We are the masters. We work and travel. They can make their living by
policing their own people. We drive on the highways. They must live across
the hills. The hills are ours. So are the fences. We control the roads,
and the checkpoints and the borders. We control their electricity, their
water, their milk, their oil, their wheat and their gasoline. If they
protest peacefully we fire tear gas at them. If they throw stones, we fire
bullets. If they launch a rocket, we destroy a house and its inhabitants.
If they launch a missile, we destroy families, neighbourhoods, streets,
towns.
Israel doesn^Òt want a Palestinian state alongside it. It is willing to
prove this with hundreds of dead and thousands of disabled, in a single
^Ñoperation^Ò. The message is always the same: leave or remain in
subjugation, under our military dictatorship. We are a democracy. We have
decided democratically that you will live like dogs.
On 27 December just before the bombs started falling on Gaza, the Zionist
parties, from Meretz to Yisrael Betenu, were unanimously in favour of the
attack. As usual ^Ö it^Òs the ritual again ^Ö differences emerged only
over the dispatch of blankets and medication to Gaza. Our most fervent
pro-war columnist, Ari Shavit, has suggested that Israel should go on with
the assault and build a hospital for the victims. The enemy is wounded,
bleeding, dying, desperate for help. Nobody is coming unless Obama moves
^Ö yes, we are all waiting for Godot. Maybe this time he shows up.
Yitzhak Laor lives in Tel Aviv. He is the editor of Mita^Òam.
------
John Mearsheimer
The Gaza war is not going to change relations between Israel and the
Palestinians in any meaningful way. Instead, the conflict is likely to get
worse in the years ahead. Israel will build more settlements and roads in
the West Bank and the Palestinians will remain locked up in a handful of
impoverished enclaves in Gaza and the West Bank. The two-state solution is
probably dead.
^ÑGreater Israel^Ò will be an apartheid state. Ehud Olmert has sounded a
warning note on this score, but he has done nothing to stop the
settlements and by starting the Gaza war he doomed what little hope there
was for creating a viable Palestinian state.
The Palestinians will continue to resist the occupation, and Hamas will
still be able to strike Israel with rockets and mortars, whose range and
effectiveness are likely to improve. Palestinians will increasingly make
the case that Greater Israel should become a democratic binational state
in which Palestinians and Jews enjoy equal political rights. They know
that they will eventually outnumber the Jews, which would mean the end of
Israel as a Jewish state. This proposal is already gaining ground among
Israel^Òs Palestinian citizens, striking fear into the hearts of many
Israelis, who see them as a dangerous fifth column. This fear accounts in
part for the recent Israeli decision to ban the major Arab political
parties from participating in next month^Òs parliamentary elections.
There is no reason to think that Israel^Òs Jewish citizens would accept a
binational state, and it^Òs safe to assume that Israel^Òs supporters in
the Diaspora would have no interest in it. Apartheid is not a solution
either, because it is repugnant and because the Palestinians will continue
to resist, forcing Israel to escalate the repressive policies that have
already cost it significant blood and treasure, encouraged political
corruption, and badly tarnished its global image.
Israel may try to avoid the apartheid problem by expelling or
^Ñtransferring^Ò the Palestinians. A substantial number of Israeli Jews ^Ö
40 per cent or more ^Ö think that the government should ^Ñencourage^Ò
their fellow Palestinian citizens to leave. Indeed, Tzipi Livni recently
said that if there is a two-state solution, she expects the Palestinians
inside Israel to move to the new Palestinian state.
Why would American and European leaders intervene? The Bush
administration, after all, backed Israel^Òs creation of a major
humanitarian crisis in Gaza, first with a devastating blockade and then
with a brutal war. European leaders reacted to this collective punishment,
which violates international law, not to mention basic decency, by
upgrading Israel^Òs relationship with the European Union.
Many in the West expect Barack Obama to ride into town and fix the
situation. Don^Òt bet on it. As his campaign showed, Obama is no match for
the Israel lobby. His silence during the Gaza war speaks volumes about how
tough he is likely to be with the Israelis. His chief Middle East adviser
is likely to be Dennis Ross, whose deep attachment to Israel helped
squander opportunities for peace during the Clinton administration.
In a recent op-ed about the Gaza war, Benny Morris said that ^Ñit would
not be surprising if more powerful explosions were to follow.^Ò I rarely
agree with Morris these days, but I think he has it right in this case.
Even bigger trouble is in the offing for Israel ^Ö and above all for the
Palestinians.
John Mearsheimer is a professor of political science at the University of
Chicago and co-author of The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.
------
Yonatan Mendel
It^Òs very frustrating to see Israeli society recruited so calmly and
easily to war. Hardly anyone has dared to mention the connection between
the decision to go to war and the fact that we are only a few weeks away
from an election. Kadima (Tzipi Livni^Òs party) and Labour (Ehud Barak^Òs)
were doing very badly in the polls. Now that they have killed more than
1000 Palestinians (250 on the first day ^Ö the highest number in 41 years
of occupation) they are both doing very well. Barak was expected to win
eight seats in the Knesset; now it is around 15. Netanyahu is the one
sweating.
I am terribly sad about all this, and frustrated. On the first day of the
operation I wrote an article for the Walla News website and within four
hours I had received 1600 comments, most calling for my deportation (at
best) or immediate execution (at worst). It showed me again how sensitive
Israeli society is to any opposition to war. It is shocking how easily
this society unites behind yet another military solution, after it has
failed so many times. Hizbullah was created in response to Israel^Òs
occupation of Lebanon in 1982. Hamas was created in 1987 in response to
two decades of military occupation. What do we think we^Òll achieve this
time?
The state called up more than 10,000 reservists, and even people who had
not been called also travelled to military bases and asked to be sent to
Gaza. This shows once again how efficient the Israeli propaganda and
justification machine is, and how naturally people here believe in myths
that have been disproved again and again. If people were saying, ^ÑWe
killed 1000 people, but the army is not perfect, and this is war,^Ò I
would say it was a stupid statement. But Israelis are saying: ^ÑWe killed
1000 people, and our army is the most moral army in the world.^Ò This says
a lot about the psychology of the conflict: people are not being told what
to think or say; they reach these insights ^Ñnaturally^Ò.
Since I was a soldier myself ten years ago, I worry I might be called up
as a reservist. If I were to refuse now, when Israel is at war, I would be
sent to prison. But still, I tell myself, that would be so much easier
than being part of what my country is doing. Apparently, every single
Jewish member of the Knesset, except one from the Jewish-Arab list,
believes that killing more Palestinians, keeping the Gazan population
under siege, destroying their police stations, ministerial offices and
headquarters will weaken Hamas, strengthen Israel, demonstrate to the
Palestinians that next time they should vote for Fatah, and bring
stability to the region. I have no words. Only one Jewish member of the
Knesset, out of 107, went to the demonstration that followed the
deliberate bombing by the Israelis of an UNRWA school being used to house
refugees, resulting in the deaths of 45 civilians. Once again, the Israeli
slogan is ^ÑLet the IDF win^Ò and once again everybody agrees. People have
short memories. By 2008, two years after the Second Lebanon War ended,
Hizbullah had more soldiers than before, three times more weapons, and had
dramatically improved its political position. It now even has a right of
veto in parliament. The same could happen to Hamas, but once again
military magic enchants Israeli society.
I have a friend whose brother is a pilot in the IDF. I asked to speak to
him. I told him what I thought about Israel^Òs behaviour and he seemed to
agree with my general conclusions. He said, however, that a soldier should
not ask himself such questions, which should be kept to the political
sphere. I can^Òt agree. But the second thing he told me was more
important. He told me that for pilots, a day like the first day of the
war, when so many attacks are being made simultaneously, is a day full of
excitement, a day you look forward to. If you take these words into
account, and bear in mind that in Israel every man is a soldier, either in
uniform or in reserve, there is no avoiding the conclusion that there are
great pressures for it to act as a military society. Not acting is
damaging to the IDF^Òs status, budget, masculinity, power and happiness,
and not only to the IDF^Òs. This could explain why in Israel the military
option is almost never considered second best. It is always the first
choice.
Ha^Òaretz too is a source of unhappiness for me, since in wartime the
paper is part of this militaristic discourse, shares its values and lack
of vision. Ha^Òaretz did not criticise Israel when its troops deployed to
Lebanon in 2006. Nor did it have anything to say when the same soldiers
bombed Gaza^Òs police, schools and people. Even when there was a
demonstration against the war, with more than 10,000 people taking part,
both Jews and Palestinian citizens of Israel, the Ha^Òaretz website chose
to publish a picture of a counter-demonstration, in which a few hundred
participated, waving Israeli flags and shouting: ^ÑLet the IDF win.^Ò
I have problems speaking to my closest friends and family these days,
because I can no longer bear to hear the security establishment^Òs
propaganda coming from their mouths. I cannot bear to hear people
justifying the deaths of more than 200 children killed by Israeli
soldiers. There is no justification for that, and it^Òs wrong to try to
find one. Usually I feel part of society in Israel. I feel that I am on
one side of the political map and other people are on the opposite side.
But over the last few days, I feel that I am not part of this society any
more. I do not call friends who support the war, and they do not call me.
The same with my family. It is a hard thing for me to write, but this is
how it is.
Yonatan Mendel was a correspondent for the Israeli news agency Walla. He
is currently at Queens^Ò College, Cambridge working on a PhD that studies
the connection between the Arabic language and security in Israel.
------
Gabriel Piterberg
Israel^Òs onslaught on Gaza may well do permanent damage to one of the
most effective tools in its propaganda kit: the image of the morally
handsome, ^Ñshooting and crying^Ò Israeli soldier.
Three weeks after the 1967 War, Avraham Shapira and Amos Oz, then a rising
young author, were summoned to Labour Party headquarters. They were asked
to make the demobilised soldiers from the kibbutzim break the wall of
silence and discuss their war experience. Soldiers^Ò Talk (Siah Lohamim),
the collection of interviews they edited, was a national and international
success. The book, which forged the image of the handsome, dilemma-ridden,
existentially soul-searching Israeli soldier, was a hymn to that
frightening oxymoron, ^Ñpurity of arms^Ò and the ideal of an exalted
Jewish morality.
It was also a kind of ^Ñcentral casting^Ò from which Oz drew many of his
fictional protagonists. Rabin (when he was ambassador to Washington) and
Elie Wiesel read extracts in the US ^Ñin order to present the Israeli
soldier^Òs profile^Ò; and Golda Meir called it ^Ña sacred book^Ò: ^Ñwe are
fortunate to have been blessed with such sons.^Ò The latest version of
Soldiers^Ò Talk, in terms of register and success, is Ari Folman^Òs Waltz
with Bashir.
Given the might of Israel^Òs warriors and the vulnerability of
their targets, now that the country no longer engages in wars
against other state armies, the image is hard to keep alive. At the
same time it no longer matters in the way it once did: for
political and military elites in Israel, and the War on Terror
constituency in the US, the killing of Arabs and Muslims no longer
requires any weeping or soul-searching. It^Òs just what
freedom-loving people do. The war adulation of the recent
pro-Israel demonstrations in Los Angeles is chastening but you
couldn^Òt call it hypocritical.
Perhaps with the benefit of hindsight, the attack on Gaza will be seen as
the action of a colonial power that is running out of ideas; not unlike
France in the final stage of the Algerian war.
Gabriel Piterberg teaches history at UCLA. The Returns of Zionism was
published last year.
------
Jacqueline Rose
The only abiding law for Israel in this onslaught seems to be the ethics
of self-defence, and yet Israel^Òs defence cannot be secured by such a
path and there are, it would seem, no ethics. How can such unrestrained
and indiscriminate violence ^Ö a hundred, and more, dead for every
Israeli, including hundreds of children ^Ö be justified? ^ÑWe are very
violent,^Ò the commander of the Yahalom unit observed, according to
Ha^Òaretz. ^ÑWe do not balk at any means to protect the lives of our
soldiers.^Ò Another senior IDF officer was reported as commenting on the
offensive so far, ^ÑIt^Òs not the movie, it^Òs only the coming
attractions,^Ò with a knowing smile.
If it sometimes seems as if a new limit has been breached, we need to
trace this language back to the creation of Israel and before, to the
founding belief that Israel would be the redemption for the historic
suffering, and passivity, of the Jews, a belief given new urgency by the
genocide in Europe and which would lay the grounds for the ruthless
dispossession of the Palestinians. At a rally in support of Israel^Òs war
in Gaza in Trafalgar Square, one banner read: ^ÑWe will not be victims
again.^Ò As the rally dispersed, those of us protesting as Jews against
Israel^Òs actions were spat at and met with cries of ^ÑKapos^Ò. The
Holocaust is still the felt justification, in the midst of this new war.
Israel is the fourth most powerful military nation in the world, yet it
lives in a permanent state of fear, always fighting the last war.
So while everyone is asking ^ÑWho is the aggressor?^Ò, another equally
important question is going unasked. Who claims the monopoly of suffering?
Whose suffering is felt to warrant a form of state power that is above the
law? Already we are being told that there will be no legal reckoning.
Faced with war crimes allegations in the past, Israel has blocked all
attempts by the UN to investigate its conduct and it is not a signatory to
the International Criminal Court.
To say this is in no way to diminish the traumatic impact of the Holocaust
but to register it all the more powerfully. The effect of trauma is
precisely to freeze people in time. There is a psychological dimension to
this conflict that seems almost impossibly difficult to shift. In its own
eyes, Israel is never the originator and agent of its own violence, and to
that extent its violence is always justified. The Palestinians do not
count. Even when the worst of what has been done to them is registered
inside Israel, it is still the Israeli who suffers more.
We are all waiting to see what Barack Obama will do. My hope is that he is
ring-fencing his new appointees (Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton and, it
seems, Dennis Ross) so he can intervene more forcefully to change the
US^Òs unconditional support for Israel. But even if he were to do so early
on, a single breach of any agreement by Hamas ^Ö even if, as most likely,
provoked by Israel ^Ö might be enough for him to adopt Israel^Òs language
of state security as the justification of all means. ^ÑAs soon as anyone
mentions security,^Ò Miri Weingarten of Physicians for Human Rights
commented on a visit last year to Britain, ^Ñeveryone stands up straight
and stops thinking.^Ò
Jacqueline Rose is a co-founder of Independent Jewish Voices.
------
Eliot Weinberger
1. Who remembers the original dream of Israel? A place where the observant
could practice their religion in peace and the secular would be invisible
as Jews ^Ö where being Jewish only mattered if you wanted it to matter.
That dream was realised, not in Israel, but in New York City.
2. The second dream of Israel was of a place where socialist collectives
could flourish in a secular nation with democratic freedoms. Who remembers
that now?
3. ^ÑNever again^Ò should international Jews invoke the Holocaust as
justification for Israeli acts of barbarism.
4. As in India-Pakistan, blaming the Brits is true enough, but useless.
5. A few days ago, to illustrate the Gaza invasion, the front page of the
New York Times had a large pastoral photograph of handsome Israeli
soldiers lounging on a hill above verdant fields. Unquestioning faith in
the ^Ñmilk and honey^Ò Utopia of Israel is the bedrock of American
Judaism, and reality does not intrude on faith.
6. Any hope for some sort of peace will not come from the US, even without
Bush. It must come from within an Israel where the same petrified leaders
are elected time and again, where masses of the rational have emigrated to
saner shores and have been replaced by Russians and the American cultists
who become settlers. It is hard to believe that this will be anytime soon.
7. It is hard to believe that two states will ever be possible. So why not
a new dream of Israel? A single nation, a single citizenry with equal
rights, three languages^Ö English as a neutral third^Ö and three
religions, separate from the state. Give it a new name^Ö say, Semitia,
land of the Semites.
Eliot Weinberger^Òs recent books include What Happened Here: Bush
Chronicles.
-------
Michael Wood
A New York Times reporter describes the ^Ñlethal tricks^Ò of Hamas in
Gaza. I don^Òt doubt the existence of the tricks, but the implication is
that the far more lethal directness of the Israeli attack is not only
justified but morally superior to the enemy^Òs underhand modes of action.
This is an adaptation of an old paradigm, in which Israel gets to play the
role of the rational modern state. The straightforward, civilised West
meets the endlessly devious, backward Orient, and takes care of things in
its up-to-date efficient way. What^Òs wrong with that? They are always
^Ñthey^Ò; their deaths don^Òt count as ours do.
When does an invasion become a massacre? How many Palestinians have to die
just because they are Palestinians before we recognise another old
paradigm? Herzl thought the native population of what was to become Israel
would have to be ^Ñspirited^Ò across the border; now the very deaths of
that population are being spirited off into arguments about the right to
self-defence. If self-defence includes the bombing of ambulances and
feeling no qualms at killing such an astonishing number of children, then
we have entered a moral territory from which there may be no return.
Unless of course we have merely returned to the imperial 19th century, a
world of brutal and unapologetic conquest, where force was the only
argument that mattered and our only choice was whether to be hypocritical
about it or not.
Michael Wood teaches at Princeton. His most recent book is Literature and
the Taste of Knowledge.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gabrielle Welford, Ph.D. (support "Noho Hewa: The Wrongful Occupation of
Hawai'i" by going to www.nohohewa.com and clicking on "donate")
blog:
www.greenwom.blogspot.com
books:
_Too Many Deaths: Decolonizing Western Academic Research on Indigenous
Cultures_
http://www.theguildofwriters.com/books/shop.php?action=full&id=317
_Dora_
http://www.theguildofwriters.com/books/shop.php?action=full&id=378
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/705 - Release Date: 2/27/2007
