Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

UNHRC forms international committee to probe Israel’s attack on Flotilla convoy

Palestine Information Center – 22/06/2010

GENEVA: The UN human rights council (UNHRC) approved with a comfortable majority a draft resolution to form an international inquiry commission to investigate Israel’s deadly attack on the Freedom Flotilla on May 31, which took place in international waters.

The European campaign to end the siege said in a press release that the UNHRC announced Monday the names of the commission’s members, which include prominent international human rights experts and jurists.

The campaign noted that the draft resolution was introduced by Pakistan (on behalf of the Arab group) at the request of Turkey in the aftermath of the Israeli massacre that claimed the lives of nine Turkish nationals aboard one of the flotilla’s ships.

The resolution stressed the need for submitting a comprehensive report on Israel’s violations in the upcoming meeting of the UNHRC next September.

According the resolution, if Israel refused to cooperate with the commission, the latter would have to go ahead with the investigation.

In a related context, the Dutch foreign ministry informed the coordinator of the European campaign to end the siege Amin Abu Rashed and Dutch citizen Anna Da Yong, who participated in the Freedom Flotilla, that it will take care of all expenses of the lawsuit filed by them against Israel.

Abu Rashed, who is also a Dutch citizen, said in a press release that he and Da Yong last Thursday filed a lawsuit against the Israeli government on a charge of kidnapping them at sea and detaining them without the presence of a lawyer and claimed compensation for all material and moral damage done to them during and after the attack.

June 22, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Lebanon Gives Flotilla Ships Green Light to Set Sail; Organizers to Sail Soon

Al-Manar TV – 21/06/2010

Lebanese Transportation Minister Ghazi Aridi confirmed that the ministry allowed organizers of a Gaza-bound aid flotilla to sail from the northern port city of Tripoli to Cyprus before heading to the Strip, Lebanese newspaper an-Nahar reported Monday morning.

The vessels will pass through Cyprus so as not to violate UN Security Council Resolution 1701.

The minister added that one of the vessels would undergo a technical checkup before it sails from Tripoli and that the Lebanese government was responsible for the decision.

Diplomatic sources in the United Nations said over the weekend that the UNIFIL headquarters in New York had warned Lebanon that UN naval forces would not allow any violation of Resolution 1701 and would prevent any such violation.

On Friday, Israel warned the UN that the security situation in the Middle East may be undermined as result of the Lebanese flotilla planning to head to the Gaza Strip.

In a letter relayed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Gabriela Shalev said the “provocative” sail may affect security in the entire region.

Two ships are expected to leave from Lebanon to Gaza: Naji al-Ali – which will be carrying 25 European activists, including parliament members, and some 5 journalists – and Maryam – which is said to carry female activists with chemotherapeutic medications for women and children and humanitarian aid. It is unclear when the vessels will set sail.

Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Sunday that Lebanese sources involved in organizing the flotilla said that their preparations were not yet complete but that activists were on their way to the country to take part in the latest attempt to break Israel’s maritime blockade on the Strip.

The participants, including several nuns, have yet to arrive in Lebanon from various European countries, but will be coming “very soon”, the sources said.

The London-based Al-Hayat reported on Sunday that two ships were in advanced stages of preparation for sailing to Gaza. Lebanese sources told the paper they had received the authorities’ approval for both the passenger list and the cargo.

June 22, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Flashback: Oakland Police Settle Lawsuits for Bloody Monday

4 April 2006

Almost three years after the bloody police riot at the Port of Oakland, California, that left nine longshore workers and dozens of anti-war demonstrators injured and scores of protesters and one union business agent arrested, the City of Oakland finally settled the lawsuits against the police.

The settlement included not only monetary damages for the injuries and constitutional rights trampled, but new, more restrictive policies on the Oakland Police Department’s use of force during protests.

But the waterfront employers in the Pacific Maritime Association who colluded with the police in those actions have yet to pay for their crimes.

Shortly after the US invaded Iraq, peace activists organised a protest at the port to highlight war profiteering by some ship companies. Stevedoring Services of America received a no-bid contract to operate the Iraqi port of Um Qasr for the occupying forces and American President Lines had a contract with the US Government to ship munitions and other war materiel to Iraq.

Before the first shift on Monday, April 7, 2003, protesters set up picket lines outside the terminal gates. They had organised their action publicly, advertising it through flyers and web postings.

The employers and the police were aware of it and plotted their response in secret. Documents obtained through the lawsuits’ discovery process revealed that representatives of management and the Port of Oakland met with police several days before the demonstration. Oakland Police Department Lieutenant Edward Poulson, in charge of the police response, was granted his request that company and port representatives be present at the police command centre during the protest, and actually “deputised” an employer representative as part of the police “command and support team” to assist in arresting people.

The Tribune quoted the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center spokesman Mike Van Winkle justifying his agency’s tactics: “If you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that’s being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that [protest],” Van Winkle said. “You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act.”

With that kind of information and arguments the OPD greeted the demonstrators in full riot gear and armed with so-called “less-than-lethal” munitions, including wooden and rubber bullets, concussion grenades and lead-shot filled bean bags.

Longshore workers arriving for their morning shift at the terminals saw hundreds of people picketing the gates and a line of trucks backed up down the road. They stood by a good distance away as local officers had instructed, awaiting the arbitration. But the police did not.

One police officer, using a barely audible bull horn, declared the demonstration an illegal gathering and ordered everyone to disperse. Then the police moved in formation toward the demonstrators with rifles drawn and aimed head high. Suddenly shots rang out and concussion grenades arced overhead and boomed. Protesters and longshore workers alike fell to the fire. Others were run into by cops on motorcycles, beaten and arrested. Local 10 Business Agent Jack Heyman, rushing to help his members get out of harm’s way, was pulled out of his obviously marked ILWU Business Agent car, thrown to the ground, handcuffed and arrested.

Many of the injuries were severe enough to require hospitalisation and surgery. Video and photos showed the police aiming at people’s heads, in direct violation of the munitions manufacturers’ warnings that such practice could result in death. Injuries to heads and shoulders confirmed the violations were common. The multitude of wounds in the back showed police were shooting at retreating people.

The next day’s New York Times quoted Police Chief Richard Word saying the police dispersed the crowd at the behest of management. Outraged that ILWU members would be shot on orders from the employers, as if this were 1934 and Bloody Thursday once again, the Coast Committee fired off a letter to the Oakland mayor demanding an independent investigation.

While Local 10 and injured and arrested protesters prepared their lawsuits against the city and its police department, Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff moved preemptively. He charged 24 protesters with failure to disperse and interfering with a business, and charged BA Heyman with obstructing justice and failure to comply with a police officer’s order. Those charges were all eventually dropped.

From the day of the event the Mayor and City Council President defended the police action, claiming they were responding to demonstrators throwing rocks and bottles. But the police department’s own video showed no violence on the part of the demonstrators. Rather than go to trial without supporting evidence, the city offered an out-of-court settlement.

In total the police use of excessive force on peaceful citizens exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech, assembly and dissent cost Oakland taxpayers $1.25 million to settle 59 lawsuits, not including attorney and court fees.

“City politicians spent all this money to suppress civil liberties and trade union rights when it could have gone to Oakland schools and paid teachers decent wages and benefits,” said Jack Heyman.

Closing the deal, the Oakland City Council voted unanimously in February to pay up and get out of this embarrassing mess, all the while claiming they were not admitting guilt.

Local 10 declared victory and voted to accept the settlement. Only the employers have yet to answer for their role in putting ILWU members and protesters lives at risk that day-so far.

“The documents we got from the police in this case show without a doubt how today’s employers still turn to the police to enforce their power over workers just as they did in 1934,” Heyman said. “We won’t forget that.”

MUA Solidarity

To Jack, all our brothers and sisters in the ILWU and all progressive men and women who stand in defence of workers’ rights and the rights of people to peacefully protest against corporate war mongering, government corruption and police brutality, the members of the Maritime Union of Australia send you this message of support.

If the profits of war go unquestioned there will be no peace and if police brutality and government deception goes unchallenged, there will be no freedom.

The bloody attack on Monday April 7, 2003 against you, other anti-war demonstrators and longshore workers at terminal gates in the port of Oakland was a gross act of repression, condemned by the UN Rights Commission, progressive Americans and working people worldwide.

That the Oakland government turned its guns on its own people accusing you of terrorism for speaking out against war profiteers, giant corporations American President Lines and Stevedore Services of America is a gross violation of civil rights.

Blood flowed, but you refused to cower.

We congratulate all those involved for taking a stand against your persecutors and for your victory. In so doing you not only defend your rights, but our rights and the rights of all.

Paddy Crumlin

Maritime Union of Australia National Secretary

June 20, 2010 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Police Violence Shocks Activists, Others at Port of Oakland Protest

By Dana Hull |San Jose Mercury News | April 7, 2003


A protestor, who refused to give her name, bears the wounds after she says was hit by Oakland police weapon during a anti-war protest in Oakland, Calif., Monday, April 7, 2003 outside the port area. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)


Berkeley resident Clay Hinson (R), who was shot once in the chest and twice in the back during an anti-war protest, shows his wounds to an Oakland Police sergeant (L) who takes his statement at the West Oakland train station, April 7, 2003. Oakland police fired rubber bullets and wooden pellets on Monday to disperse hundreds of anti-war protesters in what was believed to be their first such use against U.S. protesters since the American-led war on Iraq began. REUTERS/Tim Wimborne

An anti-war demonstration at the Port of Oakland turned violent this morning when Oakland Police opened fire with wooden dowels, “sting balls,” concussion grenades, tear gas and other non-lethal weapons when protesters at the gates of two shipping lines refused an order to disperse.

Scores of protesters ran from a line of police or tried to hide behind nearby big rigs. At least a dozen demonstrators and nine longshoremen who were standing nearby were injured.

“Our guys were standing in one area waiting to go to work, and then the police started firing on the longshoremen,” said Henry Graham, the president of ILWU Local 10. “Some were hit in the chest with rubber bullets, and seven of our guys went to the hospital. I don’t want to imply that the police deliberately did this, but it doesn’t make sense.”

There have been so many anti-war demonstrations in the Bay Area in recent months that they have almost become routine, and most have been peaceful. Monday’s events mark the first time that local police have used projectiles to disperse crowds, and many demonstrators said they were stunned that the projectiles were fired at such close range.

“I was just marching in a big circle and the police lowered their guns at us,” said Scott Fleming, 29, who took off his shirt to reveal four large red and swollen welts on his back. “I turned to run and I started getting hit with wooden bullets. They just kept shooting at us, and I kept running. I’m a lawyer, and I’m seriously considering filing charges.”

The early morning mayhem came as a shock to veteran activists and Oakland leaders alike. Oakland was one of the first cities in the region to pass a resolution condeming the U.S.-led war with Iraq, and the City Council has a progressive reputation. Some well known public officials even turned out to participate in the early morning protest.

“I got hit a few times with rubber bullets,” said Dan Siegel, an attorney and member of the Oakland School Board. Siegel pulled a sting ball out of the pocket of his business suit and said he was outraged that the police fired on a peaceful protest. “The police totally overreacted. It’s over the top. They were reckless, and I also saw an officer on a motorcycle run over a woman’s foot.”

The port protest was one of several anti-war demonstrations held Monday in the Bay Area. Several people were arrested at the Concord Naval Weapons Station, and seven were arrested after they temporarily blocked an off-ramp from Interstate 280 in San Francisco. Other demonstrators walked in a circle in front of the federal building in San Francisco, drumming wooden spoons together as federal employees arrived for work.

The action at the Port was the largest. Hundreds of demonstrators met near dawn Monday at the terminals of Neptune Orient Lines Ltd.’s APL unit and Stevedoring Services of America, shipping companies that activists say are profiting from the war.

In late March, Stevedoring Services of America won a $4.8 million contract from the U.S. government to manage the Iraqi port Umm Qasr and ensure that urgent food assistance and materials flow smoothly through the seaport. Critics are screaming foul over the process, which excluded any foreign companies from bidding on the lucrative contracts.

The demonstrations at the port were planned with the quiet support of the ILWU, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union.

Many rank-and-file members of ILWU Local 10 oppose the war with Iraq, and the local has its own Anti-War Action Committee.

Police fired into the crowd after some protesters failed to clear the street in front of the terminals.

“At that point, we fired non-lethal munitions,” said Danielle Ashford, an officer with the Oakland Police Department. “There were a few agitators in the crowd. The majority of them were peaceful.”

But others said they never saw any evidence of “agitators” and urged any witnesses to come to Tuesday’s City Council meeting.

“I was there from 5 a.m. on, and the only violence that I saw was from the police,” said Joel Tena, the constituent liason for Vice Mayor Nancy Nadel. “What happened today was very surprising. It seemed the police were operating under the assumption that they were not going to let any kind of protest happen.”


An Oakland Police officer fires a shotgun towards a group of anti-war protesters near the Port of Oakland, April 7, 2003. Oakland police fired rubber bullets and wooden pellets on Monday to disperse hundreds of anti-war protesters in what was believed to be the first such use against U.S. protesters since the American-led war on Iraq began. REUTERS/Tim Wimborne

Copyright 2003 San Jose Mercury News

June 20, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, Subjugation - Torture | Leave a comment

Gaza convoy activists claim Israeli soldiers using debit cards stolen in raid

By Haroon Siddique | The Guardian | June 18, 2010

Israeli troops have been accused of stealing from activists arrested in the assault on the Gaza flotilla after confiscated debit cards belonging to activists were subsequently used.

In their raid of 31 May, the Israeli army stormed the boats on the flotilla and, as well as money and goods destined for the Palestinian relief effort in Gaza, the bulk of which have yet to be returned, took away most of the personal possessions of the activists when taking them into custody.

Individual soldiers appear to have used confiscated debit cards to buy items such as iPod accessories, while mobile phones seized from activists have also been used for calls.

Ebrahim Musaji, 23, of Gloucester, has a bank statement showing his debit card was used in an Israeli vending machine for a purchase costing him 82p on 9 June.

It was then used on a Dutch website, http://www.thisipod.com, twice on 10 June: once for amounts equivalent to £42.42 and then for £37.83. And a Californian activist, Kathy Sheetz, has alleged that she has been charged more than $1,000 in transactions from vending machines in Israel since 6 June.

Musaji and Sheetz were on board two separate boats – one the Mavi Marmara, on which nine Turkish activists were killed, the other on the Challenger 1. Both activists only entered Israel when arrested, and were in custody for their entire time on Israeli soil.

“They’ve obviously taken my card and used it,” Musaji told the Guardian.

“When they take things like people’s videos and debit cards and use them, and their mobile phones, it becomes a bit of a joke.

“We were held hostage, we were attacked, and now there’s been theft. If the police confiscate your goods in the UK, they’re not going to use your goods and think they can get away with it.”

Musaji cancelled his card on 7 June, the day after he returned to Britain, where he is a support worker for adults with learning difficulties. His bank has agreed to treat the transactions as fraudulent and he will not be charged for them. His mobile phone was also used for two short calls in Israel after it had been confiscated.

Another American activist, David Schermerhorn, 80, from Washington state, claims his iPhone was used, while Manolo Luppichini, an Italian journalist, said his card was debited with the equivalent of €54 after it was confiscated.

Activists say Israel still has possession of at least £1m of goods and cash, comprising aid and personal possessions, including laptops and cameras.

Some passports, three of them belonging to British citizens, have still not been returned. On Thursday, delegations in 12 countries, including the UK, held meetings with their respective governments to exert pressure on Israeli to return the seized property.

A spokeswoman for the Israeli embassy in London advised Musaji to register a formal complaint.

“We regard any misconduct as described in Mr Musaji’s allegations to be utterly unacceptable and intolerable, and suggest waiting until this subject matter is clarified,” she said. “As had happened previously, an Israeli soldier was found guilty of illegal use of a credit card for which he was indicted and sentenced to seven months’ imprisonment.”

June 18, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Turkey Freezes Defense Deals with Israel in Wake of Gaza Flotilla Raid

Al-Manar TV – 17/06/2010

Turkey has frozen billions of dollars worth of defense deals with Israel in the wake of the Israeli Navy’s deadly raid on a humanitarian bound flotilla to the Gaza Strip, according to Turkish media.

Some of the 16 scrapped projects include a $5 billion deal in which Ankara was to receive 1,000 Merkava Mark III tanks from Israel, a $50 million plan to upgrade Turkish M-60 tanks, and a $800 million agreement to buy two Israeli patrol aircrafts and an Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft.

Turkey has also abandoned a $632.5 million deal for 54 F-4 Phantom, and a $75 million program for 48 F-5 fighter bombers.

Bilateral corporate deals in the private sector would continue as usual unless so decided by the companies, according to Today’s Zaman.

The decision regarding the defense sector was made due to Israel’s refusal to apologize or offer concessions for the deaths of the nine Turkish citizens it killed aboard the Mavi Marmara on May 31, said Zaman.

Turkey said it does not know if or when it would decide to send its ambassador back to the Zionist entity, according to the newspaper, though such a move would depend on Israel’s agreement to send a representative to a United Nations investigatory commission into the raid.

Turkey will refuse to recognize Israel’s internal inquiry into the incident at all levels, according to Zaman. “An apology is Israel’s exit if it really wants to normalize relations with Turkey, and we are firm in our demand for an apology,” Zaman quoted a diplomat as saying.

“Destroying such ties is easier than establishing them. But we are ready to face the negative impact of cutting these ties in an eventual absence of an apology from the Israeli side,” said the diplomat.

Turkey is considering downgrading its ties with Israel to a “charge d’affairs” level, as they were in the 1980s, according to Zaman.

June 18, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Irish Singer’s Concert In Israel Canceled

By Malak Behrouznami – Palestine News Network – June 17, 2010

Legendary songwriter, performer and peace activist, Tommy Sands’s scheduled performance at the “Festival Bloomsday Concert ” Sunday June 20 has been canceled.

The appearance was canceled after Sands refused to be censored during his performance. Sands was asked by the organizers of the events, the Israeli- Ireland Friendship League, in association with the Municipality of Ramat Hasharon, to not perform “Peace on the Shores of Gaza,” the song he had written as the anthem for the MV Rachel Corrie that set sail from Ireland to Gaza.

This comes shortly after Ireland’s recent decision to expel an Israeli diplomat after an investigation over the assassination of Hamas official Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai earlier this year. The investigation proved that the eight Irish passports used by suspects in the assassination, an operation supposedly under Israeli intelligence, had been forged.

Despite the recent increase of artists boycotting Israel by canceling their performances, Sands has taken an alternative approach to the boycott, by performing in Israel, Palestine and Gaza during his tour. Sands recalls friends and colleagues in Ireland urging him not to come after the Flotilla crisis, fearing for his safety as a peace activist.

However, Sands thought it was important to come, “I realized that even though Ireland was seeing Israel in a dehumanizing way, I realized that there are many activists here who may need solidarity from the outside.”

During his performance last week at the Yellow Submarine in Jerusalem, Tommy received an invitation to play at the weekly Sheikh Jerrah demonstration in East Jerusalem this Friday. Sands accepted the invitation despite the fact that it was not a planned venue for the tour.

Sands is known for his involvement by actively speaking out about the conflict between Northern and Southern Ireland through his music. When asked about his role as a peace activist musician he responded, “Trust me, it would be a lot easier to stay home and make records, but we have a duty to contribute to the betterment of society.”

June 18, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Canada: Israel’s new defender

Muted support for Palestine, funding cuts for Arab groups, now a ban on the phrase ‘Israeli apartheid’: what’s going on in Canada?

By Jesse Rosenfeld | guardian.co.uk | 17 June 2010

At a time when many countries are becoming more critical of Israel’s policies, Canada seems to be moving in the opposite direction. A general reluctance to engage in open debate about the Palestinian issue is exacerbated by pro-Israel groups’ efforts to shut down discussion and the federal government’s unprecedented penchant for defending Israeli actions.

Since the beginning of 2010, the federal government has systematically cut funding to Arab-Canadian organisations and to UN relief works in Gaza. In March, the Ontario provincial legislature issued a unanimous condemnation of Israeli Apartheid Week, while the federal government considered introducing a similar motion.

However, self-censorship reached new heights last month when Toronto’s Pride Committee – which organises one of the world’s largest gay pride celebrations – announced it would be banning use of the term “Israeli apartheid” at the festivities.

Pride week in Toronto is a loud and highly visible public event, with a long tradition of activists linking their own campaigns for sexual rights to other struggles for liberation and social justice; however, this year the organisers caved in to pressure from pro-Israel groups and Toronto city council.

The main effect of the decision is to bar one group in particular – Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) – who have marched in the parade since 2008.

The reason given is that the phrase “Israeli apartheid” violates Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy. But when asked, neither Pride Toronto nor Giorgio Mammoliti – the Toronto city councillor mainly involved – could explain in detail what was discriminatory about describing Israel’s privileging of its Jewish citizens over others as a form or racism and apartheid.

“It’s absolutely bizarre the way they are trying to use the language around diversity and inclusiveness to exclude people,” QuAIA activist Tim McCaskell told me. “It was so 1984.”

Accompanying the onset of a Canadian McCarthyism dressed up as anti-discrimination, the mainstream left in Canada has been unwilling to take a clear political and moral stance on Palestine. Instead it has sought the approach of least resistance, trying to appease rather than take a stand against the silencing of Palestinian voices in Canada and Israel.

Writing in NOW Magazine, a progressive Toronto weekly newspaper, news editor Ellie Kirzner contended that Palestinians and their supporters should simply drop the term “apartheid”. “It’s a vulnerability the movement doesn’t need,” she wrote.

McCaskell, on the other hand, says QuAIA is bringing the fight against Israeli apartheid to pride because that is what Palestinian LGBT organisations have requested, and because Israel tries to present itself as queer-tolerant in an attempt to distract from its ill-treatment of Palestinians.

The two Palestinian LGBT groups, Aswat and al-Qaws (both based in Israel), issued a joint statement saying: “Pride parades started as political marches, and we firmly believe that solidarity should be with human rights first and foremost.” They continued:

We believe that as queers, one of the most disadvantaged and oppressed minorities in human societies, we should protest against all forms of oppression and struggle together to promote the rights of minorities and oppressed groups. As Palestinian queers, our struggle relates to social injustices caused by the discrimination that is deeply rooted in Israel’s policies and practices against the Palestinian people, straight and gay alike …
Over the past decades, Pride parades around the world have been a platform for queers, not only to increase public awareness for [LGBT] rights, but also a platform to promote and defend causes like the feminist struggle, and the fight to end apartheid in South Africa.

Trying to smother this debate in relation to Israel at Toronto pride could easily backfire, according to Ayala Shani, a queer activist with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign. She points out that banning a term will only multiply its use and adds: “We are expecting to see ‘Israeli apartheid’ written and spoken all over pride parades around the world, including a parade in Tel Aviv.”

However, with the Canadian mainstream left dodging defence of Palestinians and the country at large continuing its polite silence on the Middle East, Toronto’s establishment may be taking more pride in silencing discussion of Israeli apartheid than even Tel Aviv.

June 17, 2010 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

My question for J.J. Goldberg

By Alex Kane on June 17, 2010

During Tuesday night’s “Jewish perspectives on the BDS campaign” debate in New York, the audience had the opportunity to make comments or ask questions.  Esther Kaplan, the moderator of the debate and co-host of WBAI’s Beyond the Pale, called on me, and I had a question for the opponents of BDS.

Throughout the discussion, J.J. Goldberg, the columnist for the Forward, and Kathleen Peratis, a J Street board member, emphasized the need for solutions that would “work” to end the occupation. Goldberg made reference to the “peace process” and the 2003 Geneva Accord, seemingly saying that the way to settle the conflict was through dialogue and negotiations.

My question went something like this: The so-called “peace process” that you reference roughly started in 1991, with the Madrid Conference, and we’re now in the year 2010. That’s about 20 years. It appears that the “peace process” has failed and that negotiations have led to nowhere, and that was due to the Israeli refusal to accept a viable two-state solution. I said that both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority are willing to accept a Palestinian state in only 22% of historic Palestine. Israel, it seems, wants it all.

So, if negotiations have failed, why do you oppose BDS as a tool to end the occupation? BDS is, in fact, slowly working; it hasn’t had a huge impact economically, but that’s not the whole point, as Hannah Mermelstein, a panelist in favor of BDS, pointed out. Mermelstein said that an important part of BDS was that it was an educational tool as well, and that it’s opening up the discourse on Israel/Palestine. The Israeli government is deeply worried about this growing movement, as evidenced by the hysterical reports coming out of the Reut Institute and the latest draconian bill in the Knesset that would criminalize BDS.

Goldberg responded to me by saying something like this (I don’t remember it word for word): The peace process really only went on for less than a decade, during the Oslo years. The negotiations didn’t fail because of the Israelis; no, it was the Second Intifada and the suicide bombings directed at Israeli civilians that killed the peace process. The intifada put the nail in the coffin of the Israeli Left, and now the Israeli public believes that there is no one to negotiate with.

I didn’t get a chance to respond directly, but if I did, I would have said something like this: Mr. Goldberg, it seems that you are omitting some very crucial facts about the Oslo years. During the 1990s, Israel relentlessly continued to colonize the West Bank and Gaza. The occupation, and all of its mechanisms of oppression, didn’t end; Israel just outsourced the responsibilities it wanted to throw off its shoulders to the Palestinian Authority, which, under the boot of Israel, was never a fully functioning government. The Oslo years were more about “normalizing” the occupation rather than ending it.

Yes, the Second Intifada was bloody, but let’s not forget that the Second Intifada began as a nonviolent popular uprising. It only turned violent after Israel brutally suppressed the uprising, firing 1.3 million bullets into the West Bank and Gaza Strip after Israeli security forces were directed to “fan the flames”, as Haaretz’s Akiva Eldar reported in 2004.

As John Dugard wrote in a 2008 U.N. report, the violence perpetrated against Israelis during the Second Intifada “must be understood as being a painful but inevitable consequence of colonialism, apartheid or occupation. History is replete with examples of military occupation that have been resisted by violence – acts of terror.”

I think the boat that Goldberg is on has sailed, and that the two-state solution is dead. Soon, Zionism and the idea of an ethnically exclusivist state that denies the rights of its indigenous inhabitants will run out of gas. The BDS movement is being fueled by the fire of history, and will end with justice for Palestinians.

June 17, 2010 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

War is no game, so why is it marketed to children as one?

In the post-conscription era, parents have subtler enemies to fight

AVRIL MOORE | Sydney Morning Herald | June 15, 2010

IT’S been nearly 40 years since five Melbourne women – Jean McLean, Joan Coxsedge, Irene Miller, Chris Cathie and Jo McLaine Ross – were sent to Fairlea prison for 14 days for their activities in the Save Our Sons (SOS) movement.

In the 1960s and early ’70s, SOS successfully campaigned against conscription and Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War. Times are different now; we no longer have such barbaric laws, our boys simply ”volunteer”.

Last week, the front pages of most Australian newspapers displayed heartbreaking images of two young men – Jacob Moerland, 21, and Darren Smith, 25 – who died in Afghanistan from an exploding roadside bomb.

I wonder how I would react in the event that either of my two sons, the same ages as the two dead soldiers, decided to ”join up”?

So it is that mothers today must try to save their sons from themselves.

David Simon and Ed Burns are all too aware of young men and their often-misguided call to adventure. In their award-winning TV series Generation Kill, based on Evan Wright’s embedded reporting for Rolling Stone, the series documents the first three weeks of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

In it a new generation of young marines or ”warriors”, who have been raised on hip-hop, heavy metal and video games, request the evacuation of a young Iraqi boy badly wounded by one of their more trigger-happy colleagues.

Lieutenant-Colonel Stephen ”Godfather” Ferrando acknowledges the situation is worse than ”shitty” but refuses their request. He reminds them that ”nobody put a f—ing gun to our heads and forced us to come here. We’re all volunteers.”

But surely this is disingenuous. Every year, the Pentagon spends $US6 billion using the latest digital gaming technology for training for the armed forces. This in turn has given rise to an effective recruitment tool called ”militainment”.

According to Peter W. Singer, director of the 21st Century Defence Initiative at the Brookings Institution, ”America’s Army” is one of the top 10 downloaded games on the internet.

Singer describes it as a ”first-person shooter”, where the player is a soldier who goes out on various missions. However, to access the game online you must sign up and give your personal information, which helps recruiters find you.

Although Singer acknowledges that a large number of the players engage for the fun of playing the game, it has turned out to be, according to one study, ”more effective than any other form of recruiting that the US Army has”.

Furthermore, in another survey of Americans between the ages of 16 and 24, 30 per cent reported they had a more positive view of the US military after playing the game.

We know from studies carried out on young men that the brain is only fully formed at about 24 years and that the last part of the brain to develop is responsible for impulse control and risk assessment.

So what possible influence do parents of Generation Y have when the modern theatre of war is aggressively marketed to their children (who, given this evidence, really do only have half a brain) via the excitement of computer games?

The irony is not lost on Simon and Burns, whose characters, barely 18 years of age, continually parody the idea that they are killing people due to all the ”Nintendo” they played as kids.

However, no amount of Simpson-esque or South Park-style wisecracking saves them from the horror of Iraq.

I live near Irene Miller and whenever I see her at the local shopping strip I am struck by how her tiny stature did not inhibit her maternal instinct to defy authority and protect her offspring.

In John Irving’s semi-autobiographical novel, A Prayer for Owen Meany, set during the Vietnam War, Owen, in an act of love, removes the right index or ”trigger” finger of his best friend John who has been conscripted, thus ensuring he fails his physical.

Would I deliberately injure one of my children to stop them from joining up? Possibly. How many years do you get for grievous bodily harm?

Given that 30 per cent of men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan have a mental health disorder, are nine times more likely to commit suicide than veterans from previous wars and that horrific physical injuries are so prevalent that accurate statistics are unattainable, surely half a finger is a minor disability.

There is a scene in Generation Kill where armed marines who have surrounded a small Iraqi village watch as a fearless but clearly angry woman runs towards them.

“Women are the fiercest,” one of them observes. “You always gotta look out for the women. Doesn’t matter if it’s a black bitch from South Central or some rich white bitch from Beverley Hills. Don’t matter if you got a gun or whatever. They’ll come after you screaming.” Ooh-rah! to that.

Avril Moore is a Melbourne writer who lectures in visual culture at the Photography Studies College, Southbank.

Copyright © 2010 Fairfax Media

June 17, 2010 Posted by | Militarism, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

Israeli Raid Coverage

American Media Failure Again

By LINN WASHINGTON, Jr. | June 15, 2010

An American art student loses an eye when struck in the face by a tear gas canister fired by Israeli Defense Force (IDF) personnel breaking up a demonstration in the occupied West Bank which itself is a protest against the deadly commando raid on the Free Gaza flotilla.

No, you didn’t miss U.S. news media coverage of this IDF attack on 21-year-old Emily Henchowicz, a student at Cooper Union in New York City who was standing with a group of foreigners during that demonstration near a checkpoint between Ramallah and Jerusalem.

You didn’t miss it because the mainstream media in the U.S. ignored it. Apparently news of Henchowicz’s maiming was not news deemed worthy enough for print in the New York Times or Washington Post or meriting broadcast network/cable news attention.

It’s no surprise that the avowedly right-wing FOX ignored this incident, but the liberal-leaning MSNBC ignored this story also.

The blackout of this partial blinding of an American citizen darkens the already black eye the mainstream American news media has given itself by its crimped coverage of the deadly Israeli raid on that flotilla attempting to bring humanitarian supplies to the Israeli-besieged Gaza and of the international fallout in the wake of that illegal raid.

The same major U.S. newspapers that found space during the two weeks after that May 31st assault in international waters for over 1,200 articles about the Tea Party or that “movement’s” darling du jour Rand Paul, carried only 58 references to the American-born teen killed during that raid, according to a review of articles in the LexisNexis database of U.S. newspapers and wires.

So, what would explain why the fatal shooting of Troy, NY-born Furkan Dogan merits only one-ninth of the 500+ article coverage devoted to prattle from Sarah Palin, all of which was published during that same two week post-raid period?

Maybe it’s the fact that the 19-year-old Dogan, who had dual US/Turkish citizenship, lived the last 17-years of his short life in Turkey. Did his “Turkishness” trump the news that autopsy results showed the young Dogan had died from multiple gun shots including four shots to the head, one of them from the back?

Or maybe this minimalist coverage of Dogan’s death, as documented by a Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) anylisis, results from the fact that much of the “U.S. press coverage takes Israeli government claims at face value…”

If FAIR’s criticism that the media exhibited a lack of “skepticism” toward Israeli government spin is on target, maybe media managers simply embraced Israeli government claims that their crack commandos only boarded the Mavi Marmara armed with paint-ball guns and small caliber pistols, and then concluded that perhaps Dogan must have died either from gunfire from his fellow peace activists, or that he had shot himself four times in the head?

FAIR cited a Washington Post editorial as an “appalling” example of the U.S. news media’s penchant for reporting on the Israeli assault exclusively through Israel’s eyes.

That Post editorial characterized participants in the flotilla as a “motley collection,” deserving no sympathy due to their ulterior motive on “provoking a confrontation.”

Acknowledging that the Israeli raid was “misguided and badly executed,” this editorial in one of the nation’s major newspapers (a paper that did not report on the blinding of Emily Henchowicz) took a pro-Israeli perspective, inferring that calls for an international investigation into the flotilla raid could potentially become part of a campaign to “de-legitimize the Jewish State.” Such language is a talking-point lifted straight from the Israeli government and its American lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Irrespective of the sympathy many Americans have for Israel, the Ethics Code of America’s Society of Professional Journalists states that journalists should: support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.

Any fair-and-balanced report on the flotilla raid would have to include the perspective of flotilla participant and Israel Parliament member Hanin Zoabi, an Israeli-Arab, which ran in an AP article, and which was thus available to virtually every news editor in the country. In that AP story, which ran on June 10, she said, “The Israeli military is like a rapist that gets scratched and then blames the victim…Israel acts like a bull.”

According to a LexisNexis review condcted three days later, Zoabi’s words had still not been published in any major American newspaper.

Many American journalists – like many Americans – may feel Israel is justified in taking military actions in its professed self-defense, even as other Americans might consider those actions to be war crimes. Yet the point remains that support for the Israeli position does not justify suppression by the media of information integral to the story that conflicts with that position. At that point, the “news” becomes simply propaganda.

As George Curry, columnist for the BlackPressUSA site, noted in a recent article about the FAIR analysis, “For years, Palestinians have been unable to get their side fairly reported in the U.S. media and the latest international incident is yet another example.”

The critiques of Curry, FAIR and many others about the pro-Israeli/anti-Palestinian slant in America’s news media echoes a decades-old finding about news media failing to adequately cover race-related matters in the United States. America’s news media have “not communicated to the majority of their audience – which is white – a sense of the degradation, misery, and hopelessness of living in the ghetto,” stated the March 1968 report of the Kerner Commission, which examined the causes of urban riots during the 1960s.

The Kerner Commission’s examination of news media practices criticized exclusionary coverage that consistently failed to provide context critical for a full understanding of race-related issues.

“If what the white American reads in the newspapers or sees on television conditions his expectations of what is ordinary and normal in the larger society, he will neither understand nor accept the black American,” the Kerner Report noted, concluding that slanted news coverage had “contributed to the black-white schism in this country.”

Slanted coverage on Palestinian issues similarly deprives Americans of the context needed to understand the complicated controversy that keeps the Middle East volatile and keeps America as a primary target of terrorists.

While accounts of that blinding injury to Emily Henchowicz are available in the blogosphere, the Inter Press Service is the only major U.S. news organization listed in the LexisNexis database to carry a story specifically reporting on the incident.

A June 1, 2010 IPS report from Ramallah stated that Henchowicz “…appeared to be deliberately targeted when a teargas canister was fired at her head, causing her to lose an eye.”

That same IPS article included context about Israeli personnel regularly violating regulations barring firing those powerful gas canisters directly at protesters…violations that have produced in a number of deaths and serious injuries.

That Society of Professional Journalists Ethics Code urges journalists to “Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it’s unpopular to do so.”

The failure of many American media organizations to adhere to SPJ Code provisions produces the dynamic of: text without context is pretext.

LINN WASHINGTON is a founding member of the new independent collectively-owned, journalist-run online newspaper ThisCantBeHappening.net. His work, and that of colleagues John Grant, Dave Lindorff and Charles Young, can be found at www.thiscantbehappening.net

June 15, 2010 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Solidarity and Activism | Leave a comment

ICRC: Gaza closure must be lifted

The hardship faced by Gaza’s 1.5 million people cannot be addressed by providing humanitarian aid. The only sustainable solution is to lift the closure.

ICRC News Release | June 14, 2010

The serious incidents that took place on 31 May between Israeli forces and activists on a flotilla heading for Gaza once again put the spotlight on the acute hardship faced by the population in the Gaza Strip.

As the ICRC has stressed repeatedly, the dire situation in Gaza cannot be resolved by providing humanitarian aid. The closure imposed on the Gaza Strip is about to enter its fourth year, choking off any real possibility of economic development. Gazans continue to suffer from unemployment, poverty and warfare, while the quality of Gaza’s health care system has reached an all-time low.

The whole of Gaza’s civilian population is being punished for acts for which they bear no responsibility. The closure therefore constitutes a collective punishment imposed in clear violation of Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law.

“The closure is having a devastating impact on the 1.5 million people living in Gaza”, said Béatrice Mégevand-Roggo, the ICRC’s head of operations for the Middle East. “That is why we are urging Israel to put an end to this closure and call upon all those who have an influence on the situation, including Hamas, to do their utmost to help Gaza’s civilian population. Israel’s right to deal with its legitimate security concerns must be balanced against the Palestinians’ right to live normal, dignified lives.”

The international community has to do its part to ensure that repeated appeals by States and international organizations to lift the closure are finally heeded.

Under international humanitarian law, Israel must ensure that the basic needs of Gazans, including adequate health care, are met. The Palestinian authorities, for their part, must do everything within their power to provide proper health care, supply electricity and maintain infrastructure for Gaza’s people.

Furthermore, all States have an obligation to allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel.

Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit is about to enter his fifth year in captivity. Hamas has continued to rebuff the ICRC’s requests to let it visit Gilad Shalit. In violation of international humanitarian law, it has also refused to allow him to get in touch with his family. The ICRC again urges those detaining Gilad Shalit to grant him the regular contact with his family to which he is entitled. It also reiterates that those detaining him have an obligation to ensure that he is well treated and that his living conditions are humane and dignified. *

Ruined livelihoods

Although about 80 types of goods are now allowed into Gaza – twice as many as a year ago –over 4,000 items could be brought in prior to the closure. Generally, the price of goods has increased while their quality has dropped – this is one consequence of the largely unregulated trade conducted through the tunnels that have been dug under the Gaza-Egypt border to circumvent the closure.

Fertile farmland located close to the border fence has been turned into a wasteland by ongoing hostilities, affecting people’s livelihoods in many rural communities. The buffer zone imposed by Israel extends in practice over one kilometre into the Gaza Strip, covering a total area of about 50 square kilometres that is host to nearly a third of Gaza’s farmland and a large share of its livestock. Agricultural activities in the area are hampered by security conditions. Israel’s enforcement of the buffer zone and frequent hostilities have resulted not only in civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian property but also in the impoverishment and displacement of numerous families.

Gaza’s fishermen have been greatly affected by successive reductions imposed by Israel on the size of the fishing grounds they are allowed to exploit. The latest restriction to three nautical miles has cut down both the quantity and quality of the catch. As a result, nearly 90% of Gaza’s 4000 fishermen are now considered either poor (with a monthly income of between 100 and 190 US dollars) or very poor (earning less than 100 dollars a month), up from 50% in 2008. In their struggle to survive, the fishermen have little choice but to sail into no-go zones, at the risk of being shot by the Israeli navy.

“I have already been arrested and my boat has been confiscated several times,” said Nezar Ayyash, who heads Gaza’s fishermen’s union. “But this is our life here. We know that fishing can cost us our lives, but we have no other choice but to go out with our boats: we need to feed our families.”

No cure in sight for ailing health-care system

Gaza is suffering from an acute electricity crisis. The power supply in Gaza is interrupted for seven hours a day on average. The consequences for public services, especially the primary health-care system, are devastating. Hospitals rely on generators to cope with the daily blackouts.

The power cuts pose a serious risk to the treatment of patients – and to their very lives. It takes two to three minutes for a generator to begin operating, and during that time electronic devices do not function. As a result, artificial respirators must be reactivated manually, dialysis treatment is disrupted and surgery is suspended as operating theatres are plunged into darkness.

To make matters worse, fuel reserves for hospital generators keep drying up. Three times this year, fuel shortages have forced hospitals to cancel all elective surgery and accept emergency cases only. Gaza’s paediatric hospital had to transfer all its patients to another facility because it could no longer function. Laundry services have repeatedly shut down. With the prospect of increased electricity consumption during the hot summer months when air conditioning is required, the situation is likely to deteriorate further if hospitals do not receive ample fuel.

Fluctuations in the power supply can also damage essential medical equipment. Repairs are difficult owing to the closure, under which the transfer into Gaza of spare parts for medical equipment is subject to excessive delays of up to several months.

The transfer of disposable electrodes, which are used to monitor the heart rhythm of cardiac patients, has been delayed since August 2009. Without this equipment, patient lives are at risk, as heart problems may not be detected in time. Because of the restrictions in place, most heart monitors in Gaza will be unusable by the end of this month. The run-down state of equipment is one of the reasons for the high numbers of patients seeking treatment outside the Strip.

Stocks of essential medical supplies have reached an all-time low because of a standstill in cooperation between Palestinian authorities in Ramallah and Gaza. At the end of May 2010, 110 of 470 medicines considered essential, such as chemotherapy and haemophilia drugs, were unavailable in Gaza. When chemotherapy is interrupted, the chances of success drop dramatically, even if another painful round of treatment is initiated. Haemophilia patients face life-threatening haemorrhages when compounds such as Factor VIII and IX are not available.

More than 110 of the 700 disposable items that should be available are also out of stock. The only way to cope is to re-use such items as ventilator tubes or colostomy bags, even though doing so can lead to infections that endanger patients’ lives.

“The state of the health-care system in Gaza has never been worse,” said Eileen Daly, the ICRC’s health coordinator in the territory. “Health is being politicized: that is the main reason the system is failing. Unless something changes, things are only going to get even worse. Thousands of patients could go without treatment and the long-term outlook will be increasingly worrisome.”

The health-care system is further weakened by severe restrictions imposed on the movement of people into and out of Gaza. The restrictions prevent medical staff from leaving the Strip to get the training they need to update their skills, and technicians from entering to repair medical equipment.

Lack of sanitation hazardous for health and the environment

The lack of proper sanitation and certain agricultural practices are polluting Gaza’s aquifer. Only about 60% of the territory’s 1.4 million inhabitants are connected to a sewage collection system. Raw sewage discharged into the river Wadi Gaza, which snakes through urban areas, jeopardizes the health of the communities living on its banks.

Because the aquifer is over-exploited, drinking water in most of Gaza contains high levels of nitrate, chloride and salt. The water is unfit for consumption, and the risk of contracting an infectious disease is high.

Assembling enough suitable materials to carry out sanitation projects is a slow and haphazard process. Materials obtained through the tunnel trade can be of questionable quality, while some items, such as certain electro-mechanical pumps, cannot be found at all, which hobbles construction efforts.

“The current situation is critical and may lead to an irreversible trend in the degradation of underground fresh water,” said Javier Cordoba, who oversees the ICRC’s water and sanitation activities in Gaza. “Large-scale projects, such as the construction of a desalination plant, must be undertaken to meet water-supply needs without further exposing the aquifer. The closure must be lifted so that the 4.5 billion US dollars pledged by donor countries over a year ago can be put to use.”

* Over 800 Gazan detainees in Israeli prisons have been prevented from meeting face-to-face with their loved ones since June 2007, when Israel suspended the ICRC’s family visit programme. To mitigate the effects of this measure, the ICRC has doubled its own visits to Gazan detainees and stepped up its efforts to maintain family links by delivering written and oral messages between detainees and their families.

June 14, 2010 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »