Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Israel’s Dilemma

The Phony Claim of Self-Defense

By NADIA HIJAB | June 3, 2010

Israel is stuck. For decades, it has used the same strategy to achieve its objectives and to rout all challengers: overwhelming force. When it meets violence with violence — even when it uses disproportionate force as in Beirut in 1982 and 2006 and Gaza in 2008 — Israel claims self-defense and usually manages to spin the facts its way. And, as it has not yet been held to account in any meaningful way, it has seen no reason to change its strategy.

But when it meets non-violence with violence, the strategy backfires. Israel is pitching the self-defense line to try to shield itself from criticism of its attack on the Freedom Flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza convoy — but it’s not working.

You cannot claim self-defense when you have decided to send a thousand or so well-armed forces to board boats in international waters — vessels that were carefully searched before the voyage to make sure there were no arms. Or when you have killed up to 20 civilians and injured 54 others, while suffering no deaths yourself. If the situation were not so tragic, Israel’s spinning would be the stuff of comedy.

The visible crushing of peaceful activists usually has a powerful effect on world public opinion and this time it has pushed governments to take action to hold Israel accountable in a way that armed force has not. This is perhaps the most important contribution that those brave humanitarians have made to the Palestinian quest for justice.

And things will continue to unravel for Israel because it only knows how to use force to try to get its way. Ironically, Israel’s overkill has made the use of force so costly for those who favor armed resistance that the stage has been left clear for those who believe it is more effective to use civil resistance against a vastly superior armed force. It should be noted that Palestinian civil resistance is not new although it has recently been “discovered” by the mainstream media.

The first Palestinian uprising (Intifada) of 1987-1991 was almost completely non-violent and imposed itself on the world consciousness, making a powerful case for Palestinian rights. Unfortunately, the Palestinian leadership did not know how to translate the power it generated into diplomatic gains. And that uprising was just one of a series of major acts of civil resistance stretching back a century.

Today, acts of peaceful resistance are underway throughout Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, and the rest of the world. And another outcome of Israel’s massacre on the Freedom Flotilla is that it will inexorably draw attention to the violent tactics Israel uses to counter these non-violent acts.

For example, many Palestinians and their international supporters have lost their lives and been injured in protests against the illegal Wall Israel has been building in the occupied territory since 2002. The most recent victim was May 31: 21-year-old Emily Henochowicz, a student at New York’s Cooper Union, had her eye knocked out by one of the tear gas canisters Israel’s armed force routinely fire at unarmed demonstrators. She and a group of Palestinians and internationals were demonstrating in the occupied West Bank against Israel’s assault on the Flotilla. An Israeli tear gas canister killed the peaceful anti-Wall activist Bassem Abu Rahme in April 2009 as he demonstrated against his village Bil’in’s loss of 60% of its land to Israel’s Wall and settlements — and critically injured American citizen Tristan Anderson just a few weeks previously.

Israel’s international standing is also further eroded by the violence it is using against its own Palestinian citizens as they pursue their non-violent quest for equality, most recently in its draconian arrest of community leaders Ameer Makhoul and Omar Saeed. Having incarcerated both for weeks without access to legal counsel and subject to such torture as stress positions and sleep deprivation, Israel now claims to have evidence through both men’s “confessions” of collaboration with Israel’s enemies — confessions they have since retracted as obtained under duress.

Israel’s word against Ameer Makhoul’s? When it weighs the word of a known user of indiscriminate force and terror against that of a prominent civil society leader, the world will know whom to believe.

The real dilemma for Israel is that all of the force it brings to bear is aimed at achieving the unachievable: Keeping the territories it occupied in 1967, illegal under international law; privileging Jews over non-Jews within Israel, in violation of the United Nations Charter and international conventions; and denying Palestinian refugees their right of return. There are only two alternatives for Israel: to make its peace with justice and equality, or to experience growing and costly isolation.

Nadia Hijab is a senior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies.

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Leave a comment

Greece, Sweden back Iran declaration

Press TV – June 3, 2010

Seeking to lighten the mood over Iran’s nuclear program, Greece and Sweden have called for the implementation of the recent Tehran declaration on a potential nuclear fuel swap.

Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt called for the implementation of the Tehran nuclear declaration in a telephone conversation with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki late Wednesday, IRNA reported.

Iran, Turkey, and Brazil signed a declaration in the Iranian capital on May 17, committing Tehran to shipment of 1,200 kilograms (2,640 pounds) of its low-enriched uranium in Turkey in exchange for 120 kilograms of 20-percent enriched nuclear fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor that produces radioisotopes for cancer treatment.

In their telephone conversation, the three high ranking officials also discussed the recent Israeli attack on a Gaza-bound aid convoy and denounced the brutal assault against the Palestinian community.

The Israeli military attacked the Freedom Flotilla in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea early on May 31, killing at least 20 people, mostly Turkish nationals, on board and injuring about 50 others.

Israel also arrested nearly 700 activists from 42 different countries on board the Freedom Flotilla that were attempting to break the siege of Gaza in order to deliver humanitarian supplies to the long-suffering people of the coastal territory.

The official condemnations come as the pre-dawn attack by Israeli commandos on the Turkish-flagged Flotilla has sparked a torrent of international criticism against Tel Aviv.

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Lies, damned lies, and Israeli propaganda‎

Lies, damned lies, and Israeli propagandaBy Omar Radwan | Middle East Monitor | 02 June 2010

Following Israel’s murderous attack on the Freedom Flotilla taking humanitarian aid to Gaza, it is hard not to conclude that sections of the media in Britain and other Western countries have been desperate to find ways to justify the crime. On the BBC and Sky News, a frequent argument has been that Israel feels “isolated” by the international community and is in a “war” situation, and therefore feels that it has to take extraordinary measures to defend itself. To shore up this argument, these media outlets have, once again, repeated two tired fabrications; Hamas is committed to Israel’s destruction and Israel’s blockade of Gaza was imposed in response to Hamas rocket attacks.

The reality is, of course, very different. Israel is not isolated by the rest of the world. On the contrary, unlike, say, Iran and Syria (and before 2003, Iraq) in the Middle East, Israel has not been subject to sanctions in any way by the international community. It remains the largest recipient of US financial, political and military aid, despite the much-hyped rift between the Obama administration and the right-wing Netanyahu government and was recently co-opted to the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development with the blessing of the European Union Nations. Nor is Israel in a war situation. None of Israel’s Arab neighbours pose a military threat to its existence and two of them, Egypt and Jordan, have full diplomatic relations with the Jewish state; Egypt cooperates actively with Israel in the siege of Gaza.

Israel’s blockade of Gaza is usually said to have started in June 2007, when Hamas took control of the territory after pre-empting a coup by a faction within political rivals Fatah, but Israel had been limiting the movement of goods and people into Gaza long before that. The rockets fired from Gaza are not a threat to Israel and are not the reason for the blockade. Israel conducts frequent and deadly raids into the Gaza Strip and the rockets are fired in response to these raids. These rockets are very basic and inaccurate, capable of causing limited damage; they are very rarely lethal and are the only “serious” weapon available to a desperate people who have been brutalised by Israel for years. What about the claim that Hamas is committed to Israel’s destruction? Hamas has offered Israel an open-ended ceasefire if it withdraws from the West Bank and lifts the blockade of Gaza; Israel has refused. The very fact that this “hudna” has been offered is de facto recognition of the state of Israel.

It is still not known exactly how many fatalities there were during Israel’s assault on the flotilla. Most news reports claim that nine or ten of the passengers were killed by the Israeli commandos, but other sources suggest that the figure could be as high as nineteen. Israel has imposed an information blackout designed to make sure that only its version of events comes out. As part of this “hasbara” campaign, the Israeli military issued a grainy black and white video, labelled helpfully, showing some of its soldiers being attacked with iron bars and chairs, with one being thrown from one deck to another, as they stormed it from their helicopters. This film has been played without comment on Sky News, the BBC and other channels. In addition, Israeli claims that the activists were carrying knives and stun grenades on their ship have been taken at face value and reported without comment all too frequently. The Israelis would have us believe that helpless commandos were attacked by unarmed “terrorists” masquerading as activists and the main news channels in Britain and other countries have been more than willing to repeat this message.

In this way, the murder of at least nine unarmed people by soldiers armed to the teeth is made to look natural and justifiable. The Israeli video is so surreal and unbelievable that it is barely worth commenting on. Apart from the fact that there is another, better quality video of an announcement made by an activist to his fellow passengers telling them not to resist because there is nothing they can do against the Israelis’ live ammunition, suffice to say that Israel has used this tactic before. During the war on Gaza, in order to justify its attacks on civilians, the Israeli army posted videos of rockets being loaded or fired, which later turned out to be faked. Even if we suppose that the latest “attack” video is authentic, isn’t it natural for people under attack to defend themselves? And yet the activists are being portrayed as thugs, hooligans and terrorists for doing so.

Israel has called the Freedom Flotilla an “Armada of Hate” and said that the activists on board are linked with Hamas, al-Qaeda, and “global jihad”; again, these absurd claims have been taken at face value by sections of the media. The Turkish humanitarian organisation, IHH, which has played a leading role in the flotilla, has been smeared in the Daily Telegraph as a front organisation for al-Qaeda, without any evidence being proffered. This charitable society operates legally around the world apart from Israel where it is banned, as are many other legitimate charities which support Palestinians in the midst of a desperate humanitarian catastrophe; no credible evidence is ever provided for these bans. They are seen by many as just another tool used by Israel to deny Palestinians much-needed aid.

The same DailyTelegraph story mentions that the flotilla has been endorsed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the British Green Party MP Caroline Lucas. On board the flotilla were the Swedish bestselling author Henrig Mankell, the former United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, Dennis Halliday and the founder of Northern Ireland’s “Peace People”, Mairead Corrigan Maguire. Did the Telegraph bother to ask why all these people endorsed and took part in a project organised by IHH if it was indeed an al-Qaeda front organisation?

One very important aspect has been played down amidst all this hostile media coverage – the dire need of the people of Gaza for the items on board the ships of the flotilla. Among other things the flotilla carried cement, building materials, school supplies and medical equipment. The admittedly limited quantity of aid on the convoy would still have been of immense value to the people of Gaza. The homes and buildings that Israel destroyed in its December 2008 assault on the territory are still in ruins because Israel has since blocked the import of building materials. In fact, there is a long and arbitrary list of items that cannot be imported: pencils, computers and other educational items, for example, are banned, as are many food items, such as canned fruit. The volume and category of goods permitted to be imported into Gaza are kept at a level low enough to create poverty, malnourishment and suffering but not too low to create a humanitarian catastrophe that will make Israel look bad in front of the cameras. Despite this, the statement by Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that there is “no humanitarian crisis in Gaza” and that Israel is allowing thousands of tons of food and equipment in has been reported without comment. The organisers of the Freedom Flotilla have also been criticised by some for not accepting Israel’s offer to unload their ships in Ashdod so that the Israelis can deliver their cargo “through the usual channels”. They were, of course, supposed to believe that the same “channels” which have made the people of Gaza suffer for so many years would suddenly and willingly help to alleviate that suffering.

Media complicity in Israel’s crimes has long been accepted by analysts, and Israel has spent a great deal of money on promoting its side of the long-running conflict narrative through a sophisticated propaganda machine. This latest episode, however, has exposed the double-standards and lack of genuine objectivity by the compliant sections of the media. On BBC Radio 5’s “Up all Night” programme on 2 June, Bruce Shapiro, the executive Director of the Dart Centre for Journalism and Trauma at the Columbia University in New York City, said that in most cases, the “facts” which emerge within the first 24-48 hours of incidents like Israel’s hijacking of the flotilla are usually shown to be false with the passage of time. Should this happen in this case (and it has already been admitted by an Israeli military spokesperson that none of the passengers had any weapons on them prior to the assault), a lot of media outlets will be left with egg on their faces because they have allowed the Israeli side of the story to be pushed almost unchallenged. How long will it be before members of the public grasp the fact that they are being duped, say enough is enough, and demand a balanced media approach to this conflict?

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

Inside the flotilla attack

Farooq Burney, the Canadian director of Al Fakhoora, a Qatar-based charity for fostering education in Gaza, was among the passengers on board the Mavi Marmara, the Turkish boat boarded by Israeli commandos early Monday morning.

Mr. Burney, 37, was reached in Istanbul by The Globe and Mail’s Middle East correspondent, Patrick Martin, just before boarding a flight to Qatar.

Mr. Burney, where were you when the Israelis arrived, and what did you see?

I was on the main deck when the assault began.

Basically, we had just finished the morning prayer, when we saw two Israeli boats approach the ship. It was almost as if they had waited until we finished the prayer.

We knew something was going to happen because the Israelis had radioed our ship’s captain about four hours before to ask where we were going and so on.

We were expecting something to happen as a result of that, and certain people stayed up, while others went to sleep.

Did you stay up?

No, I went to sleep, but got up at 3:30. The attack began happening at about 4:10.

The first thing that happened was that someone on the Israeli boats threw gas bombs or something from the boats onto our deck. There was a very loud bang, a huge bang, and a lot of smoke. Some of the women started screaming when they heard the bang.

At that point, some people began spraying the Israelis with water, from fire hoses.

Had they gotten them ready before the attack?

Yes, they got them ready before.

As this was going on, a helicopter approached, and people knew they were going to try to take over the ship. Lots of people then tried to stand around the captain [on the bridge] to stand in their way.

I was not directly under the helicopter, but I could see things quite clearly: First one commando, then another descended.

People rushed the first commando and they overpowered him.

How? Did they use wooden clubs or metal rods or anything?

No, it was just basically hand-to-hand combat. You have to realize there were about 25 or 30 people fighting with this guy, and they overpowered him and disarmed him. Then they threw him onto the deck below.

And they didn’t use any weapons at all when they were doing this?

No, none at all.

What happened to the second commando?

They overpowered him too; also just with hand-hand fighting.

Did they throw him off the deck as well?

No, they locked him up in a room.

Then, at that point, a second helicopter came and tried to lower commandos onto the deck. But there were too many people on the deck by this time and they [the commandos] couldn’t do it. So it left.

Then, a third helicopter came…

How long after the second helicopter?

About two or three minutes later.

And that’s when they opened fire.

Who opened fire?

The Israelis.

And then bullets were flying everywhere. There were these sounds crack – crack – crack.

Multiple or single shots?

Multiple shots.

At this point, more commandos came on board.

Where from?

From helicopters…

More to come

June 3, 2010 Posted by | War Crimes | Leave a comment

IHH: Israel shoots Gaza activists dead

Press TV – June 3, 2010

Turkish organizers of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla attacked by Israeli naval commandos accuse Israel of shooting activists dead at a close range.

Bulent Yildirm, who heads the Foundation of Humanitarian Relief (IHH), told reporters at Istanbul airport how a journalist called Cevdet was killed by Israeli soldiers for no good reason.

“He was just taking pictures. He was shot at from no more than a meter and his brain exploded … one of our friends was shot even after he had surrendered,” AFP quoted Yildrim as saying.

He accused Israeli naval forces of killing “whoever they laid hands on” and even throwing some activists into the sea.

“We were given the bodies of nine martyrs, but we have a longer list. There are missing people. Our doctors handed over 38 injured, on our return they (the Israelis) said there were only 21 injured.”

The UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on Wednesday, saying it would set up an independent international probe into Israel’s “outrageous attack” on the six-ship aid convoy.

The Tel Aviv regime, which has backed its military’s use of lethal force as an act of “self defense,” dismissed the decision, saying the council lacked “moral authority.”

Israeli officials say nine people were killed in the Monday’s deadly attack, but reports by Palestinian sources put the fatalities at around 20.

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Everyone Is NOT Released

By Free Gaza Team

(Cyprus, June 3, 2010) Yesterday, the The UN Security Council called for impartial, credible investigation of the Israeli attack on our boats. In addition, the council requested the immediate release of the ships as well as the civilians held by Israel. The media is reporting that all are being released which is simply untrue.

At least four Palestinian/Israelis, Free Gaza Movement board director, Lubna Masarwa, Sheik Raed Salah, leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Mohammed Zeidan, Chairperson of the High Fellowship Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel and Hamed abu Dabis are facing multiple serious criminal charges for their participation in a peaceful voyage to break Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

After a full day in court represented by excellent attorneys from Adalah, they were remanded until June 8, evidence of how seriously the situation is for these four human rights workers.

This illegal incarceration is just another example of Israel’s draconian policies. First, they boarded our ships, traveling in international waters and loaded with supplies to Gaza. They murdered at least nine of our passengers, wounded dozens more, then hijacked our boats and forced them into the port of Ashdod. They threw  600 passengers into detention. None of these passengers had any intention of going to Israel but were dragged to the country under force and then deported.

Now they have thrown four well-known human rights, religious and political leaders into prison for expressing support for their beleaguered brothers and sisters in Gaza.

Please contact: Audrey Bomse, Lawyer 00 357 96 48 98 05

Greta Berlin, 00 357 99 18 72 75

###

See also:

Israel sends home last of flotilla activists

The Independent – June 2, 2010

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Deception | Leave a comment

Blinded in Gaza: The “Liberal” Media’s Seeing Eye Dogma

Marsha B. Cohen| May 31st, 2010

The barks of pro-Israel media “watchdog” groups like CAMERA (Committee for  Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America), The Israel Project , and the meretriciously monikered website HonestReporting have  echoed the Israeli government’s talking points about the Israeli navy’s attack on half a dozen civilian ships bringing aid to Gaza,  in defiance of an Israeli blockade.

But if you’ve been looking to the so-called “liberal” media for more balanced coverage of the events as they’ve unfolded in the international waters off the Gaza coast, you’ve probably gotten the yip-yap of a pro-Israel poodle.

As usual, the “fool’s gold” standard, at the core of most news  coverage in the “no sooner done than said” era, begins (and too often ends) with the Associated Press.  AP entrusted it initial Gaza  report to Amy Teibel and Tia Goldenberg.  Teibel , who provides a a good deal of  AP’s Israel coverage, is  not on CAMERA’s list of journalists who arouse  its ire.    That’s not to say that Teibel is immune from scrutiny or censure by the “guardians of Israel,” some of it bordering on the bizarre.  Neverthless, her articles earn her an occasional whimper,  while some of her  AP colleagues  get a nasty snarl.

Teibel’s co-author, Tia Goldenberg, also isn’t on CAMERA’s journalistic hit list. Goldenberg  is a Canadian-born Israeli  and a former  intern  for the Canadian Jewish Congress.   More to the point, either unnoticed or deliberately ignored by most newspapers, is that Goldenberg  was reporting on the Gaza flotilla’s destruction from the Israeli warship INS Kidon.   Not much chance of Goldenberg screwing the pooch, at least not from an Israeli perspective.

Reuters coverage of the confrontation between Israeli forces and the Gaza convoy has been authored or co-authored by Jeffrey Heller,  currently the editor-in-charge  of Reuters’ Jerusalem bureau. It’s instructive to contrast the development throughout the day in Heller’s online Feed with the one released later in the day.

In his first Feed entry today, Heller had written:

Israeli commandos stormed a convoy of Gaza-bound aid ships on Monday and more than 10 of the mostly international activists aboard were killed, provoking a diplomatic crisis and Palestinian charges of a “massacre.”

The violent end to a Turkish-backed attempt to break Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip by six ships carrying some 600 people and 10,000 tonnes of supplies raised an outcry across the Middle East and far beyond.

As the navy escorted the vessels into Israel’s port of Ashdod, accounts remained sketchy of the pre-dawn interception out in the Mediterranean, in which marines stormed aboard from dinghies and rappelled down from helicopters. Israel said “more than 10″ activists died. Israeli media spoke of up to 19 dead…

But the most recent Reuters version as of this writing (1:06 am IST June 1), co-authored with Alastair Macdonald,  reads:

Israeli marines stormed a Turkish aid ship bound for Gaza on Monday and at least nine pro-Palestinian activists were killed, triggering a diplomatic crisis and an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council.

European nations, as well as the United Nations and Turkey, voiced shock and outrage at the bloody end to the international campaigners’ bid to break Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Boarding from dinghies and rappelling from helicopters, naval commandos stopped six ships, 700 people and 10,000 tons of supplies from reaching the Islamist-run Palestinian enclave — but bloody miscalculation left Israel isolated and condemned…

The “commandos” have become “marines.”   The ten “international activists” on board are now “pro-Palestinian activists.”  The Gaza-bound aid ships are downsized to “a Turkish aid ship bound for Gaza.”  The consequences are muzzled too:  a diplomatic crisis and the accusation that a massacre has taken place” is parlayed into “a profound diplomatic crisis.”  And poor Israel is standing alone, “isolated and condemned,” on account of a mere “miscalculation.”

Heller isn’t on the list of journalists CAMERA disapproves of either.

CNN’s coverage of the fate of the Gaza convoy  has had no bark and no bite.  Its latest  offering (as of this writing) begins with the  pretense of “he said/she said” balance but slips easily into Israeli talking points:

Israel insisted Monday that its soldiers were defending themselves when they fatally shot nine activists aboard a ship in international waters that was laden with humanitarian goods for Gaza.

Israel’s assertion was denied by one of the groups that sponsored the boat. The competing claims could not be independently verified.

“They deliberately attacked soldiers,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters at a photo op in Ottawa, Canada, with his Canadian counterpart…

Not surprising that CAMERA was pleased by most of the coverage by the mainstream media, noting with satisfaction that:

AP,  Reuters, CNN and the New York Times ran balanced stories, noting the participants are “pro-Palestinian activists,” that Israel is already assuring regular convoys of humanitarian supplies into Gaza and that Israel has additionally offered to transfer materials from the flotilla by land to Gaza. Some reported in detail the preparations in the Israeli city of Ashdod to house any possible detainees before returning them to their home countries.

This is not to say that media coverage of the recent  events in Gaza has been ideal from CAMERA’s point of view.  Hardly!  It has fallen short of  CAMERA standards of “objectivity” in several respects:

Missing from all coverage thus far is any indication of the radical nature of the organizations sponsoring the flotilla. To characterize them as “pro-Palestinian,” while accurate, hardly conveys adequately who they are and what they promote. The organizations include far-left individuals, such as members of the Communist Party in Sweden and members of the extremist International Solidarity Movement which advocates “armed struggle” against Israel as well as Islamist groups fronting for Hamas and with ties to the global jihad and Al Quaeda.

Furthermore, CAMERA insists, the flotilla’s sponsors are nothing but a bunch of lying “European and American radicals and pro-Hamas Muslims.”  Gaza doesn’t even need any aid:

Contrary to allegations of Free Gaza, there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Convoys of trucks continuously bring food, clothing, medicine and other essentials to the population.

Unfortunately, the harsh and narrow standards of hardline “pro-Israel” media watchdogs like CAMERA, while they may not fully succeed in  imposing all aspects of their agenda, have a stultifying effect not only on  journalists’ choice of terminology but how they view–and depict–the context of the various conflicts in the Middle East.

At this point, the progressive reader may be thinking that the way to avoid “indoctrination” is to entrust one’s news leash to one or more of the larger progressive media sites.

How about Alternet?  As of this morning, the only news coverage was  a  home page link to an early French Press Agency (Agence France-Presse–AFP) reproduced in full on  Raw Story, which was based exclusively on a not-particularly-informative Israeli  television report.

According to Israel’s private channel 10 television, Israeli marine commandos had opened fire after being attacked with axes and knives by a number of the passengers on board the aid ships, the television said, without giving the source of its information.

The station did not say whether the dead and injured were passengers or members of the Israeli navy.

Israel’s army radio said between 10 and 14 people had been killed in clashes which broke out after the passengers allegedly tried to grab weapons off the naval commandos who tried to storm one of the boats.

It was not clear whether the clashes were taking place on just one of the six boats making up the aid convoy, and the Israeli army had no immediate comment on the incident.

Shortly afterwards, the Israeli military censor ordered a block on all information regarding those injured or killed during the storming of the ship.

Raw Story also provides video footage courtesy of the Israel Defense Forces.

The main story featured on the Huffington Post home page for most of the day has been AP’s report, no byline for Teibel and Goldenberg.  To its credit, HP did interject a link to video footage  by Al Jazeera reporter Jamal Elshayyal, recorded while he was on board the aid ship Mavi Marmara. This afternoon an AP Analysis by Karin Laub and Matthew Lee, headlined High Seas Raid Deepens Israel’s Isolation, became Huffington Post’s lead story.  CAMERA, which has a litany of grievances against Laub,  isn’t going to like its first sentence, which Huffington Post included in in its own  headline for the piece, making it a  bit more juicy:

Israel’s bloody, bungled takeover of a Gaza-bound Turkish aid vessel is complicating U.S.-led Mideast peace efforts, deepening Israel’s international isolation and threatening to destroy the Jewish state’s ties with key regional ally Turkey.

The Daily Beast’s Cheat Sheet of “must reads”  is a teaser that provides a link to CNN’s coverage, complemented by IDF video footage.  More insightfully, Reza Aslan posted a new entry in his Daily Beast blog this afternoon headlined “An Israel Raid’s Deadly Toll.”

The well-known English proverb “every dog has his day” is rendered Kul kalb bi’gi yomo in Arabic, Kol kelev ba yomo in Hebrew.   Yizhar Be’er, writing on the Ir Amim website, points out that  “unlike the phrase’s English cousin, which rosily promises that even the lowest among us will have a day of good fortune,”  the  Semitic form of the proverb is more along the lines of (quoting the author of the Forward’s On Language column) “Every scoundrel will receive his comeuppance.”  In other words, karma will eventually run over  dogma.

When it does, don’t expect to find it out much from the coverage from the “liberal” media.

June 3, 2010 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

Irish aid boat holds course towards Gaza despite Israel warning

June 2, 2010

The final boat in the Gaza aid flotilla was sailing at full speed towards the territory’s coast tonight despite warnings that it would be intercepted by Israeli forces.

The MV Rachel Corrie, a 40-year-old cargo ship bought by the Irish arm of the Free Gaza Movement, was delayed and avoided capture during Monday night’s assault. Tonight it was still in international waters about two days from Gaza, carrying a consignment of aid and 19 activists and crew, among them five Irish nationals, the organisation said.

The Irish taoiseach, Brian Cowen, warned Israel tonight that he expected no violence against those on the Rachel Corrie.

“If any harm comes to any of our citizens it will have the most serious consequences,” he said, calling on Israel to guarantee the vessel safe passage through the military blockade of Gaza.

The ship, named after the 23-year-old American killed in Gaza in 2003 while trying to prevent an Israeli bulldozer demolishing a Palestinian home, had halted in the Mediterranean following the assault while those on board – among them the Nobel peace laureate Máiread Maguire and Denis Halliday, a retired senior UN diplomat – discussed whether they should continue.

It was now carrying as a “second wave” of the flotilla, said Niamh Moloughney, who organised the sailing in Ireland.

“I’d say the mood on board is resilient and steadfast. When people signed up to this they knew what might happen,” said Moloughney. “We expected we would be confronted and there would be a stand-off, but no one expected this. But there’s never really been a question of the boat turning back.”

As well as the Irish nationals, the 1,200-tonne boat is carrying six Malaysians and eight crew of varying nationalities.

All those on board had received training in non-violent resistance before the sailing and had pledged not to fight back if the boat was boarded, Moloughney added.

Speaking on the boat’s satellite phone, Maguire said she was determined the boat should continue on its course.

“We’re not frightened, no, we hope the Israeli government will allow us to go freely in and we know the international community are calling for our safe passage,” she said.

Halliday said he had spoken to Ireland’s foreign minister, Micheál Martin. “He was very reassuring that the government was behind us and he gave us a complete green light to do what we’re doing and he’ll protect us as much as he can,” Halliday said.

Martin himself told parliament: “We will be watching this situation very closely – as indeed will the world – and it is imperative that Israel avoid any action which leads to further bloodshed.”

It appeared clear, however, that Israel planned to stop the ship.

The country’s military was carrying out “professional investigations” into what happened in Monday’s raid, an Israeli marine lieutenant, who was not identified, told Israel’s Army Radio. He added: “And we will also be ready for the Rachel Corrie.”The boat, which was bought at auction by the Free Gaza Movement after being impounded a year before in Dundalk, is carrying a consignment including medical equipment, wheelchairs, school supplies and cement, according to the organisation.

June 2, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Israeli Murders, NATO and Afghanistan

By Craig Murray on 02.06.2010

I was in the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office for over 20 years and a member of its senior management structure for six years, I served in five countries and took part in 13 formal international negotiations, including the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and a whole series of maritime boundary treaties. I headed the FCO section of a multidepartmental organisation monitoring the arms embargo on Iraq.

I am an instinctively friendly, open but unassuming person who always found it easy to get on with people, I think because I make fun of myself a lot. I have in consequence a great many friends among ex-colleagues in both British and foreign diplomatic services, security services and militaries.

I lost very few friends when I left the FCO over torture and rendition. In fact I seemed to gain several degrees of warmth with a great many acquaintances still on the inside. And I have become known as a reliable outlet for grumbles, who as an ex-insider knows how to handle a discreet and unintercepted conversation.

What I was being told last night was very interesting indeed. NATO HQ in Brussels is today a very unhappy place. There is a strong understanding among the various national militaries that an attack by Israel on a NATO member flagged ship in international waters is an event to which NATO is obliged – legally obliged, as a matter of treaty – to react.

I must be plain – nobody wants or expects military action against Israel. But there is an uneasy recognition that in theory that ought to be on the table, and that NATO is obliged to do something robust to defend Turkey.

Mutual military support of each other is the entire raison d’etre of NATO. You must also remember that to the NATO military the freedom of the high seas guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is a vital alliance interest which officers have been conditioned to uphold their whole career.

That is why Turkey was extremely shrewd in reacting immediately to the Israeli attack by calling an emergency NATO meeting. It is why, after the appalling US reaction to the attack with its refusal to name Israel, President Obama has now made a point of phoning President Erdogan to condole.

But the unhappiness in NATO HQ runs much deeper than that, I spoke separately to two friends there, from two different nations. One of them said NATO HQ was “a very unhappy place”. The other described the situation as “Tense – much more strained than at the invasion of Iraq”.

Why? There is a tendency of outsiders to regard the senior workings of governments and international organisations as monolithic. In fact there are plenty of highly intelligent – and competitive – people and diverse interests involved.

There are already deep misgivings, especially amongst the military, over the Afghan mission. There is no sign of a diminution in Afghan resistance attacks and no evidence of a clear game-plan. The military are not stupid and they can see that the Karzai government is deeply corrupt and the Afghan “national” army comprised almost exclusively of tribal enemies of the Pashtuns.

You might be surprised by just how high in NATO scepticism runs at the line that in some way occupying Afghanistan helps protect the west, as opposed to stoking dangerous Islamic anger worldwide.

So this is what is causing frost and stress inside NATO. The organisation is tied up in a massive, expensive and ill-defined mission in Afghanistan that many whisper is counter-productive in terms of the alliance aim of mutual defence. Every European military is facing financial problems as a public deficit financing crisis sweeps the continent. The only glue holding the Afghan mission together is loyalty to and support for the United States.

But what kind of mutual support organisation is NATO when members must make decades long commitments, at huge expense and some loss of life, to support the Unted States, but cannot make even a gesture to support Turkey when Turkey is attacked by a non-member?

Even the Eastern Europeans have not been backing the US line on the Israeli attack. The atmosphere in NATO on the issue has been very much the US against the rest, with the US attitude inside NATO described to me by a senior NATO officer as “amazingly arrogant – they don’t seem to think it matters what anybody else thinks”.

Therefore what is troubling the hearts and souls of non-Americans in NATO HQ is this fundamental question. Is NATO genuinely a mutual defence organisation, or is it just an instrument to carry out US foreign policy? With its unthinking defence of Israel and military occupation of Afghanistan, is US foreign policy really defending Europe, or is it making the World less safe by causing Islamic militancy?

I leave the last word to one of the senior NATO officers – who incidentally is not British:
“Nobody but the Americans doubts the US position on the Gaza attack is wrong and insensitve. But everyone already quietly thought the same about wider American policy. This incident has allowed people to start saying that now privately to each other.”

June 2, 2010 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Wars for Israel | Leave a comment

Organizers: Freedom Flotilla 2 in a few weeks

Ma’an – 02/06/2010

Gaza – The Brussels-based European campaign against the siege on Gaza announced Wednesday that they had secured funds to support three new aid ships to be sailed to Gaza.

The fleet will be called the Freedom 2, which head of the campaign Arafat Madhi said would be “much bigger than the first,” which included nationals from some 40 nations and 10,000 tons of aid, currently held by Israel following the takeover of six ships in international waters on Monday morning.

“Following the massacre committed by Israeli forces against solidarity activists on board the Freedom Flotilla in international waters, there have been increasing calls by Arab, Islamic, and European countries to launch a new aid fleet much bigger than the first one. This is a clear challenge by the free people of the world in the face of Israel’s arrogance,” Madhi said.

The officials aid the ships would sail in a few weeks’ time from ports in Turkey, whose Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan confirmed his country’s support, including aid contributions, for the flotilla.

During a televised speech Tuesday, Erdogan said future flotillas bound for Gaza territorial waters under Israeli threat would be accompanied by a military escort to ensure their safety.

June 2, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Defending Israel: A How-To Guide

By Eli Clifton | Lobe Log | June 1st, 2010

Today’s op-ed by the Wall Street Journal editorial board offers a fairly comprehensive list of the talking points which are de rigueur in defending Israel’s attack on civilian ships in international water.

1.) Mention the Gaza war in 2008 as an example of what happens when weapons get into Gaza.

Example from the WSJ:

Since [Hamas seized power in 2007], both Israel and Egypt have imposed a partial blockade on the Strip, mainly to prevent Hamas from arming itself with the kinds of weapons it used to spark a war with Israel in December 2008.

It’s interesting that Israel should bring up the Gaza war as an example of Hamas viciousness.  This was a war where between 1,166 and 1,417 Palestinians were killed and 13 Israelis died.  It’s hard to argue that Israel’s response to Hamas’s “spark” was proportional but we’ll talk about proportionality later.

2.) Emphasize that food, water and other necessary supplies enter Gaza on a daily basis through Israeli checkpoints.

Example from the WSJ:

Food, medicine and electricity continue to flow to Gaza.

World Health Organization reports have found that Israel is blocking vital medical supplies from entering Gaza and that building a well-functioning health care system is impossible without the regular delivery of supplies. Furthermore, mortality rates are 30-percent higher in Gaza than in Palestinian populations in the West Bank and chronic malnutrition is now over 10-percent. As to electricity, the UN’s Office of Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported on May 9th that:

“(A)lmost all of the 1.4 million Palestinians residing in the Gaza Strip, with the exception of those who live in the Rafah area, must cope with scheduled electricity cuts of 8-12 hours daily, compared to 6-8 hours prior to January 2010.

These power cuts exacerbate the already difficult living conditions in Gaza and disrupt almost all aspects of daily life, including household chores, health services, education and water and sanitation services.”

3.) Claim that the international community is biased against Israel, denies Israel its sovereign right to defend itself and constantly complains about Israel’s “disproportional” use of force.  If possible, belittle the concept of proportionality.

Example from the WSJ:

The Gaza war also elicited international protests against Israel, which time and again is told what it can do in its own self-defense, with its critics deeming nearly every effective military action “disproportionate”.

It is true that Israel is frequently accused of using disproportionate force.  From the wildly disproportionate death toll in the Gaza war to the killing of nine human rights activists this weekend, there is no shortage of Israeli disproportionality.

But none of that matters if you argue that disproportionality works and that discussions about “proportionality” are a waste of time.

Editorial writers and bloggers have been busy dusting off the argument that a disproportionate response is the only way to deal with terrorists that threaten our western values.

(I blogged earlier today about Michael Rubin’s defense of Israel’s disproportional use of force.)

4.) Insist that the IDF was just defending itself against an armed, bloodthirsty mob.

Example from the WSJ:

It was only after the humanitarians aboard the ship assaulted the commandos with clubs and knives that the Israelis used live fire. If the Internet videos of the commandos being viciously attacked as they descended from a helicopter are accurate, they were acting to defend themselves.

This characterization of events totally ignores the context in which the raid and the shooting of nine flotilla members occurred.

The IDF commandos had to fly seventy miles offshore, into international waters, before rappelling onto a Turkish- flagged passenger ship.  Then, when not greeted with open arms, they shot nine people dead.  An ambush would suggest that the Israelis were tricked into boarding the ships. No account of the events from either flotilla members or the IDF suggests that this was the case.  Israel attacked a ship sailing in international waters. At what point did those aboard the vessel forfeit their own right of self-defense?

Craig Murray, a human rights activist and former British ambassador to Uzbekistan writes:

A word on the legal position, which is very plain. To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare.

Because the incident took place on the high seas does not mean however that international law is the only applicable law. The Law of the Sea is quite plain that, when an incident takes place on a ship on the high seas (outside anybody’s territorial waters) the applicable law is that of the flag state of the ship on which the incident occurred. In legal terms, the Turkish ship was Turkish territory.

There are therefore two clear legal possibilities.

Possibility one is that the Israeli commandos were acting on behalf of the government of Israel in killing the activists on the ships. In that case Israel is in a position of war with Turkey, and the act falls under international jurisdiction as a war crime.

Possibility two is that, if the killings were not authorized Israeli military action, they were acts of murder under Turkish jurisdiction. If Israel does not consider itself in a position of war with Turkey, then it must hand over the commandos involved for trial in Turkey under Turkish law.

In brief, if Israel and Turkey are not at war, then it is Turkish law which is applicable to what happened on the ship. It is for Turkey, not Israel, to carry out any inquiry or investigation into events and to initiate any prosecutions. Israel is obliged to hand over indicted personnel for prosecution.

5.) Set the stage for future conflicts which will derail the peace process.

Example from the WSJ:

We suppose Israel could have allowed the flotilla to pass to avoid the political fallout it is now enduring.  Had it done so, however, it would have merely created a channel through which Hamas could be supplied with ever-more advanced weaponry (much of it courtesy of Iran) thus setting the stage for an even bloodier war in Gaza.

Israel knows exactly what risk it runs when it commits provocative acts such as the recent raid on the flotilla.  Editorial writers and sympathetic journalists dutifully repeat the message that the Palestinian response to Israel “defending itself” could lead to a “new Intifada”.  What better way to derail peace talks than to provoke violence before the parties have even gotten to the table?

The pressure is on Netanyahu to cease settlement expansion and make a meaningful attempt to negotiate borders and security arrangements with Hamas.  Pressure from the White House might be difficult to completely ignore, but, with a loyal group of sympathetic journalists and bloggers, Netanyahu can try to drown out the voices of his international critics.  That’s as long as his friends in the media stick to their talking points.

June 2, 2010 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »