Wheat harvest met with live ammunition in Gaza “buffer zone”
International Solidarity Movement | 13 June 2010
Israeli forces attacked women farmworkers and international human rights activists with heavy gunfire during three days’ wheat harvest in the southern Gaza Strip. The Israel-imposed “buffer zone” illegally claims over 30% of Gaza’s arable farmland. In Khoza’a village, east of Khan Yunis, substantial wheat remains unharvested despite severe poverty and food shortages, as a result of the attacks.
Tuesday, the first day of harvest, did not take place inside the 300m “buffer zone”. However, snipers approached the harvest in Israeli military Jeeps on two occasions, shooting live ammunition around five women who were crouching to hand-collect the wheat with four International Solidarity Movement (ISM) activists. The women laid down in the wheat during the attack but did not leave, and harvest continued after the Jeeps had left. Activists communicated the non-threatening nature of the work to soldiers with a megaphone.
A more severe attack was levied Wednesday, as the harvest continued within 300 meters of the fence. 5 ISM activists and 2 journalists were present as Israeli military Jeeps approached at 7 a.m. and fired several rounds, similar to the previous day. At 8:30, the Jeeps parked on a small hill near the fence. Snipers stood atop the Jeep closest to the workers, with a clear view of the obviously non-threatening hand-harvest. Israeli snipers then rained over 50 rounds on the women, activists and journalists, causing the women to crawl along the ground and shriek with fear. Rounds of live bullets hit within a meter of
people’s heads, meaning any deviation would almost certainly hit someone. The harvest finished at 10 a.m.
Thursday, the final day of harvest, was cut short by two gunfire attacks at 8:00 and 8:30 a.m. Roughly 20 rounds were fired very close to the farmers and 3 ISM activists present. The women were evidently more fearful of attack, and those present agreed that a third attack was imminent and would target them. This proved a correct assumption as, soon after finishing at 8:45, 4 jeeps arrived and remained at the fence. The wheat will likely remain unharvested.
“We were shot at repeatedly with live ammunition; the deafening fizz and crack of the bullets flying past our ears”, states ISM activist Adie Mormech. “The women courageously returned after each attack. On the last day, after snipers had already come twice and fired many rounds quite close, it was clear that someone would be intentionally hit if we stayed. Consequently, the wheat will not be harvested. It is infuriating that this violence continues against what is clearly a peaceful endeavor to farm the third of Gaza’s arable land which is patrolled by the Israeli military.”
While unemployment levels hover near 42% in Gaza and 60% of its 1.5 million residents lack food security,¹ Israel’s illegal buffer zone greatly exacerbates the humanitarian crisis. 30% of Gaza’s arable farmland, and some of its most fertile, lies within the buffer zone.² Farmers who attempt to work in the zone face live fire and crop destruction. The number of crops grown in the zone has consequently been reduced from a diverse range to wheat and other less labor-intensive harvests, which further negatively impacts the nutrition and economic condition of Gazans. An additional 17% of farmland was destroyed in Israel’s war of aggression,³ making 47% (nearly half) of Gaza’s farmland now marginally usable.
The buffer zone has also reduced Gaza’s fishing zones to 1-3 miles offshore. In the first four months of 2010, 19 naval attacks led to two shootings and three arrests, as well as numerous confiscations of fishing equipment. The narrow fishing zone, in which over 3,600 fishermen work daily, is gravely over-fished.²
Israel’s decision to instate a 300-meter buffer zone is in violation of Oslo Accords, and people are routinely shot as far as two kilometers from the border. Israeli attacks in the buffer zone injured 50 persons and killed 14 between January and April 2010. In the past twelve months, at least 220 Israeli attacks have been carried out, with 116 coming since the beginning of 2010 (as of April 30th).²
¹ PCHR Fact Sheet: The Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip
² PCHR Fact Sheet: The Buffer Zone in the Gaza Strip
³ Oxfam: Failing Gaza: No rebuilding, no recovery, no more excuses
Egypt rejects Algerian aid into Gaza
Press TV – June 12, 2010
Egyptian authorities have refused to allow an Algerian humanitarian aid convoy to enter into the Gaza Strip which has been under a crippling three-year Israeli blockade. The ship, carrying seven tons of medicine and two tons of powder milk, docked in Egypt’s Al-Arish sea port on Friday.
Fifteen people onboard the ship including Algerian lawmakers, businessmen and peace activists were seeking to break the Gaza siege by organizing the convoy.
Algerian daily Al-Khabar said that the convoy was prevented from entering Gaza despite a prior agreement signed between the Algerian Foreign Ministry and Egypt in this regard. The daily added that the Egyptian officials only allowed three Algerian lawmakers to visit Gaza though the Rafah border crossing for a few hours.
The move came two weeks after the Israeli military attacked the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, killing at least 20 peace activists including nine Turkish citizens on board the M.V. Mavi Marmara and injuring about 50 other people who were part of the team on the six-ship convoy.
Israel imposed the blockade on Gaza after the Palestinian resistance movement, Hamas, won parliamentary elections in June 2007.
Some 1.5 million people in the coastal strip are being denied their basic rights, including freedom of movement, and their rights to appropriate living conditions, work, health and education. Poverty and unemployment rates stand at approximately 80 percent and 60 percent respectively in the Gaza Strip.
Egypt has joined Israel in imposing a three-year-long blockade on Gaza, sealing its borders with the strip and effectively cutting off all links to the coastal sliver.
Egypt-US concede failure of steel barrier along Gaza borders
Palestine Information Center – 11/06/2010
NAZARETH — Hebrew media sources have revealed that an atmosphere of pessimism prevailed in the meeting of US Vice-president Joe Biden with Egyptian president Husni Mubarak in Sharm e-Sheikh due to the failure of the steel barrier strategy in tightening the grip on the besieged Gaza Strip.
Military and security consultants from both countries were profoundly disappointed after “Hamas engineers” in the Gaza Strip succeeded in penetrating the barrier, the sources added.
The sources also disclosed that reports received by Biden alleged that “Hamas engineers” succeeded in excavating 18 meters under the ground and in planting burning materials in the way of the steel slabs that melted the foundations of the barrier and made them of no effect.
Furthermore, the sources said that that the USA decided to abandon the project and stopped financing it, and started to pull out all American military engineers participating in and supervising the project.
The US-Egypt plan was meant to destroy all tunnels along the Gaza Strip borders with Egypt in a bid to complete the Israeli siege and suffocate the 1.6 million Palestinians living in the Strip.
A growing part of the Obama legacy
By Glenn Greenwald | June 9, 2010
Physicians for Human Rights yesterday released a report documenting (while relying on heavily redacted material) that “medical professionals who were involved in the Central Intelligence Agency’s interrogations of terrorism suspects engaged in forms of human research and experimentation in violation of medical ethics and domestic and international law.” To those paying close attention, the evidence suggesting that this occurred has long been clear. Today, The New York Times Editorial Page said this:
The report from the physicians’ group does not prove its case beyond doubt — how could it when so much is still hidden? — but it rightly calls on the White House and Congress to investigate the potentially illegal human experimentation and whether those who authorized or conducted it should be punished. Those are just two of the many unresolved issues from the Bush administration that President Obama and Congressional leaders have swept under the carpet.
When the history of the Bush era is written, the obvious question will be: what was done about the systematic war crimes, torture regime, chronic lawbreaking, and even human experimentation which that administration perpetrated on the world? And the answer is now just as obvious: nothing, because the subsequent President — Barack Obama — decreed that We Must Look Forward, Not Backward, and then engaged in extreme measures to carry out that imperial, Orwellian dictate by shielding those crimes from investigation, review, adjudication and accountability.
All of that would be bad enough if his generous immunity were being applied across the board. But it isn’t. Numerous incidents now demonstrate that as high-level Bush lawbreakers are vested with presidential immunity, low-level whistle blowers who exposed serious wrongdoing and allowed citizens some minimal glimpse into what our government does are being persecuted by the Obama administration with a vengeance. Yesterday it was revealed by Wired that the Army intelligence officer analyst who reportedly leaked the Apache helicopter attack video to Wikileaks — and thus enabled Americans to see what we are really doing in Iraq and other countries which we occupy and attack — has been arrested (Wikileaks denies the part of that report claiming that the whistle blower also leaked to it “hundreds of thousands of classified State Department records”). This latest episode led Der Spiegel today to decry Obama’s “war on whistle blowers” as more severe than the one waged by the Bush administration (English translation here).
At least in these areas, that’s the Obama administration in a nutshell: protecting Bush extremism and war crimes from any form of accountability while significantly escalating the punishment for those who tried to bring about some minimal degree of transparency (thereby also escalating the intimidation toward those who might want to do so in the future). As the very pro-Obama NYT Editorial Page puts it today: the human experimentation accusation and the question of whether crimes were committed are just “two of the many unresolved issues from the Bush administration that President Obama and Congressional leaders have swept under the carpet.” If you really think about it, that’s a rather damning statement.
The Outrage at Helen Thomas
While Israel Kills and Maims …
By ALISON WEIR | June 9, 2010
Whenever Israel commits yet another atrocity, its defenders are quick to redirect public attention away from the grisly crime scene.
Currently, there are headlines about allegedly anti-Semitic comments made by senior White House correspondent Helen Thomas. Pundits across the land evince outrage at her off-the-cuff 25-second statement made to a man who appears to be holding a camera right in her face.
Thomas issued a public apology for her words, but this was insufficient to assuage the wounded feelings of powerful antagonists, and she has now retired from a long and distinguished career.
Before we examine her comments and evaluate their possible validity, let’s look at other recent events having to do with Israel.
On May 31st Israeli commandos killed at least nine unarmed volunteers attempting to take humanitarian supplies to Gaza.
According to eyewitness reports and forensic evidence, many of these aid volunteers were shot at close range, including a 19-year-old American citizen killed by four bullets to the head and one to the chest fired from 18 inches away.
Israel immediately imprisoned eyewitnesses and hundreds of other aid participants, confiscated their cameras, laptops, and other possessions, and prevented them from speaking to the press for days. Among the incarcerated were decorated U.S. veterans and an 80-year-old former ambassador who had been deputy director of Reagan’s Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism.
When they finally emerged and were able to tell their stories, many described horrific scenes of Israeli commandos shooting people in the head, of those tending the injured being shot in the stomach, of people bleeding to death while flotilla participants waved white flags and pled for help.
They also described being beaten brutally by Israeli forces, again and again – including those on ships that, in the U.S. media’s judgment, experienced “no violence.” A 64-year-old piano tuner from California, Paul Larudee, described hundreds of Israeli commandos boarding his ship. When he refused to cooperate with them, soldiers then beat him numerous times both on board the ship and after he was imprisoned on land.
Eventually he was taken by ambulance to an Israeli hospital. He wasn’t treated, however, and Larudee believes he was taken there because Israel didn’t want media to see his black eye, pronated joints, bruised jaw and body contusions.
Marine veteran Ken O’Keefe described similar beatings while in Israeli custody. In his case, the public was able to see his bloodied, battered face in video clips and still images – but only on the Internet, since American mainstream media failed to report on his press conference or to publish the many still photos of his injuries.
Other gruesome photos available to the American public only on the Internet are of Emily Henochowicz, a 21-year-old American student whose eye and eye socket were recently shattered by Israeli forces. She has since had her eyeball removed, three metal plates inserted in her face, and her jaw wired shut.
Henochowicz was not on the flotilla; she was taking part in a nonviolent demonstration against the Israeli assault when an Israeli soldier shot a high-velocity teargas canister into her face.
A Swedish citizen standing with Henochowicz said, “They clearly saw us. They clearly saw that we were internationals and it really looked as though they were trying to hit us. They fired many canisters at us in rapid succession. One landed on either side of Emily, then the third one hit her in the face.”
Henochowicz is not the first to have been shot by such a canister.
Thirty-year-old Basem Ibrahim Abu Rahmeh died when an Israeli soldier shot one at him at close range while Abu Rahmeh participated in a demonstration against Israeli confiscation of Palestinian farmland. A video of this is also available on You Tube; U.S. networks have also chosen not to broadcast this.
Californian Tristan Anderson was shot in the head by a similar canister while he was taking photographs following another demonstration. Part of Anderson’s brain was removed and he was in a “minimally responsive state” for 6-7 months.
He is now in a wheelchair, has almost no movement in his left arm and leg, is blind in one eye, and his mental functioning is significantly reduced. Photos of the shooting are also available on the Internet.
Since at least 2006 Israeli forces have closed off Gaza to the outside world, essentially imprisoning 1.5 million men, women, and children, and denying them foodstuffs, medicines, and building materials, as documented by such agencies as Amnesty International, Oxfam, and Christian Aid, which said that Israel was using food and medicine as weapons.
One of the multitudinous victims of this illegal siege is five-year-old Taysir Al Burai, who suffers from an acute neurological disorder and requires round-the-clock care. According to the UK Guardian, he could be cured if Israel would allow him to leave Gaza, but to date his parents’ repeated requests have been denied.
Another victim is 7-month-old Mohammad Khader, whose swelling in the brain required specialized treatment unavailable in Gazan hospitals depleted by the Israeli siege. His distraught parents’ applications asking Israel to allow them to travel abroad were similarly denied. Their tiny son died a few days ago.
Such stories go on and on.
Thomas’ “outrageous” statement
Yet, the rage we see in the U.S. media is directed against none of this. People shot in the head, eyes and brain parts destroyed, the elderly beaten, small children and infants caused to suffer and die, parents to grieve – none of this has caused a hint of anger. In fact, most of it has been considered of too little importance even to report.
Instead, media reports are filled with outrage at “anti-Israel” words spoken by 89-year-old Helen Thomas.
In Thomas’s lifetime Israel has ethnically cleansed over a million people, replaced them with colonists from around the world, committed dozens of massacres, tortured thousands of people, killed and maimed untold numbers of children, mangled limbs, and committed outrages on women, old people, the weak and the infirm.
It has assassinated people throughout the world, invaded numerous countries, spied on the U.S., killed and injured 200 American servicemen (the anniversary is this week), and tortured and imprisoned Americans. All while receiving more American money than any other country on earth.
For years, long before her recent words, Thomas has been the target of Israel’s vicious American volunteers, the Zionist blogosphere abounding with nasty slurs on her looks and her Lebanese ancestry, this latter also consistently emphasized by the media, despite her Kentucky birth and upbringing.
One of the reasons for the ferocious animosity toward her is the fact that Thomas is one of the very few mainstream reporters to challenge the neocon engendered lies that led the U.S. into wars that have caused massive death, destruction and tragedy and to continue to expose ongoing policies of violence and cruelty.
As the same groups and individuals who pushed the US into attacking Iraq have in recent years been escalating their efforts to push the U.S. to now similarly decimate Iranians under the pretext that Iran might be developing nuclear weapons, Thomas’s questioning attempted to elicit from Obama the fact that Israel already possesses nuclear weapons. While the rest of the press corps has conspired in the cover-up of this fact and others, Thomas worked to expose them.
Not surprisingly, the many people complicit in these manipulations, such as former Bush spokesperson Ari Fleischer, have led the charge against her.
It is useful to examine the video and context of Thomas’s allegedly “anti-Semitic” comment.
A man, apparently holding a camera right in her face, asks for her comments about Israel. She says, “Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine. Remember, these people are occupied. And it’s their land…” He interrupts her and asks where they should go. She responds, “They should go home. To Germany, Poland, America, and everywhere else.”
While Thomas has since apologized for her hasty words and many Israelis have the right to continue living where they are, the reality is that Israeli settlers did, indeed, come from elsewhere; they are, in fact, illegally occupying Palestinian land (a fact acknowledged even by the U.S. State Department); and international law does require that they leave.
Many commentators evince particular anger at Thomas’s inclusion of Germany and Poland as places to which Israeli colonists should return, suggesting that Hitler is still in control and waiting to pounce.
The happy fact is, however, that World War II and the Nazi holocaust ended well over half a century ago. In Poland today there is a vibrant Jewish revival with a 10-foot tall Menorah being lit in the center of Warsaw during Hanukah, and Germany has become, according to the New York Times, “a country where Jews want to live.” In fact, in recent years more Jews have chosen to immigrate to Germany than to Israel.
Thomas’s call for colonists to return to America (this destination was left out of many articles) is far from outrageous given that a great many West Bank settlers are from the U.S.
Overall, reporting on the incident has largely departed from the standard journalistic practice of quoting people from both sides of an issue. Quotes from Thomas supporters are missing, even though the You Tube page featuring the infamous video contains a large number of comments supporting her. In contrast, quotes from Thomas’s detractors, almost all of them Zionists, are ubiquitous, but generally fail to divulge the speakers’ frequent conflicts of interest.
For example, the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz quotes Jeffrey Goldberg without mentioning that Goldberg is an Israeli citizen who served as a prison guard at an Israeli prison that held hundreds of Palestinians without charge, some killed in cold blood by the prison commander.
Mainstream media organizations do not seem to have investigated reports that the man who videotaped Thomas, Rabbi David Nesenoff, also made an offensive video featuring himself and another man impersonating a buffoonish Catholic priest and Mexican immigrant.
Similarly, news reports that a high school had disinvited Thomas as a graduation speaker almost never inform readers that many of the school’s parents and students wished Thomas to remain, even though this unreferenced group may represent a majority of the school. Members of this group have created a Facebook page, “Helen Thomas should have been our graduation speaker,” that states:
“The purpose of this group is to quietly but firmly protest the ability of a small minority to impose its will on the larger group through engaging or threatening to engage in disruptive discourse. This group affirms a belief in reasonable discussion and feel that in this scenario, a clear minority was able to override a larger majority by distorting the issues and discussion.”
It is not known who will take over Thomas’s front-row seat at White House briefings. Given the record of the current press corps, it is likely that Israel partisans are breathing a sign of relief.
Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew. Photos and videos referenced in the article can be viewed on the website (http://ifamericansknew.org) She can be reached at contact@ifamericansknew.org
The crimes I saw on the Mavi Marmara
Lubna Masarwa writing from Kfor Qara, Live from Palestine, 8 June 2010
During the Israeli attack on the Mavi Marmara, deep in international waters, I was inside the body of the ship. We were unarmed civilians ranging in age from a one-year-old child to an 88-year-old priest. We were going to Gaza to break the siege that Israel has imposed on a million-and-a-half people for the last four years. We were carrying a cargo of humanitarian and construction aid as well as letters from Turkish children to the children of Gaza. We were full of hope. When the attack began at 4am on 31 May 2010, our ship was transformed into a military target. On the deck, at first there was heavy firing, and then the Israeli occupation’s commandos took control of the ship.
Minutes after the attack began, wounded and corpses were being brought inside from the deck. We were then held for several hours with four bodies and dozens of wounded, some in critical condition. Blood was pouring from the bodies of the dead and the injured. We wanted to help them, but we had no medical equipment to treat them. There was nothing we could do. One Turkish woman was crying and saying goodbye to the body of her dead husband, petting his face and reading the Quran over him. Another man had a bullet wound in his head and was dying.
From 5am on, we were begging the Israeli navy to provide medical assistance to the wounded and dying but received no response. We made the request in English and Hebrew through the loudspeaker and also wrote a sign in Hebrew reading, “SOS … people dying in need of immediate medical attention” and put it on the window in front of them. They ordered the people with the sign to get lost.
At around 7am they ordered us to come to the exit door one by one. I requested in Hebrew that medics be allowed to stay with the wounded; a solider told me to shut my mouth. Later he called me, “You, tell the wounded that if they want to stay alive, they should come out one by one.” We tried to bring the injured out individually, but they could not walk and were falling down.
We were transferred to the upper deck. We were searched; our hands were tied, and we were forced to sit or kneel on the deck as a military helicopter hovered within meters above our heads. Heavily-armed soldiers with guns and knives strapped to their arms and legs stood guard over us with dogs. They were standing around us with the blood of their victims on their boots, joking and making lewd sexual suggestions to each other about the female prisoners. Then Israeli personell came and strutted around the ship. We were held this way for hours. I was held here until 1:40am on 1 June 2010.
As soon as the Israeli occupation forces learned that I was a Palestinian Israeli citizen, I was treated more harshly and isolated from the rest of the other imprisoned passengers. I was taken to a prison in Ashkelon where I was held in isolation and subjected to humiliations such as strip searches four times a day. The next day we were brought to court, and I was held in a small metal box inside the police car for eight hours with my hands and legs shackled. We were subjected to various accusations, from attacking soldiers to carrying weapons. The judge gave the police permission to extend our detention for another eight days. After international pressure forced the Israeli authorities to release all the foreign prisoners, all the Palestinian citizens of Israel were taken to court again. This time, the judge ruled that we would be subject house arrest and would be forbidden to leave the country for 45 days.
As an occupier and a colonizer, Israel depends on the principle of “divide and conquer” in order to maintain its control. It is especially threatened by people like the Palestinian delegation from 1948 (what is now referred to as Israel) who sailed to Gaza on the Mavi Marmara, because we defy Israel’s attempt to divide us as Palestinians. By struggling with our sisters and brothers under the siege, we also send the message that we are one people and our struggle is one struggle. Israel is threatened by solidarity.
That Israel should murder civilians in international waters is not strange. It is a direct continuation of its policy of targeting civilians with lethal force and deadly policies such as the siege of Gaza, and Israeli policies of occupation and apartheid.
Israel feels entitled to besiege, to kill and to attack civilians in international water. This results from the silence of the world that makes Israel believe it has the right to do so.
This is the time to break the silence and to take action. To say “enough is enough” for Israel. Israel’s impunity must end. Israeli war criminals, such as the ones who committed piracy and murder on the Mavi Marmara and their superiors, must be held accountable for their crimes in international courts.
Lubna Masarwa was a Free Gaza Movement representative aboard the Mavi Marmara and wrote this essay from her house arrest in Kfor Qara, Palestine. She can be reached at Lubnna A T gmail D O T com.
Turkish journalist recounts flotilla attack
By Belén Fernández | Pulse Media | June 8, 2010
Ayşe Sarıoğlu
Following is my (rough) translation of excerpts from the first part of Taraf newspaper’s two-part interview with Ayşe Sarıoğlu, a 27-year-old graduate student at Istanbul University, who was on board the Mavi Marmara. Sarıoğlu begins the interview by explaining that although she is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, she participated in the expedition to Gaza as a journalist.
Readers will note Sarıoğlu’s description of fellow journalist Cevdet Kılıçlar, who was fatally shot during the raid and whose funeral Jasmin Ramsey and I attended this past Friday at Beyazıt Mosque in Istanbul. The fact that Kılıçlar is said to be holding a camera at the start of the attack provides yet more evidence of Israel’s all-inclusive application of the term “weapon.”
Excerpts from the second part of the Taraf interview, in which Sarıoğlu recounts her experience in Israeli custody, will be translated and posted shortly.
[The interviewer’s questions are in bold; Sarıoğlu’s responses follow]
» Was there much solidarity among the journalists on the ship? Did you know the murdered journalist Cevdet Kılıçlar?
Yes, Mr. Kılıçlar never left the press room on the ship. He was always working. I would even say to him: “We’re in such a nice place, we’re on a cruise ship. You should go outside a bit and get some sun.” But he hardly set foot on deck. He told me: “This isn’t a sightseeing trip, this is a work trip… We’ll do sightseeing another time.”…
» I will get to the raid [in a minute], but first I’m curious as to what you all on the ship were expecting [from the Israelis] and whether you realized you were in danger.
At the most we were expecting something along the lines of Taksim [square in Istanbul where protests are often held]… with tear gas, clubs, and commotion, nothing more. Actually we were even thinking [the Israelis] might use rubber bullets, and I thought to myself: “God protect us, a rubber bullet in the eye can blind you.”
…
» There were no weapons [on the Mavi Marmara]?
There were definitely no weapons. There were 30 gas masks which were distributed to journalists doing live broadcasts.
» As I understand it, the convoy’s goal was not only to bring aid materials [to Gaza] but also to break the siege, is that right?
The goal was to bring aid. We even had packaged toys and accompanying letters from Turkish children to the children of Gaza, addressed: “Dear brother.” It was very symbolic and meaningful and, looking back on it, it was so innocent…
…
» The ship’s Turkish flag was taken down during the raid, right?
Yes, but there were also the flags of Palestine, Syria, Kuwait, and all of the other countries. The Israeli soldiers tore down the flags first thing and threw them in the sea, starting with the Palestinian flag…
…
» Did the [soldiers] descend from helicopters?
Everything happened so fast. At the same time, they boarded us from boats and descended from helicopters by rope. And as they were descending they starting firing.
» As they were descending? [So they were firing] haphazardly?
Yes, haphazardly. Mr. Kılıçlar was at the front [of our group] with his camera in hand. And I remember him saying: “If they get to where the captain is our ship is gone. Friends, we must form a barricade.” But he wasn’t inciting anyone to fight, he was just trying to get them to form a wall with their bodies…
…
» Did the Israeli soldiers initially use rubber bullets?
That’s what we thought, but we were wrong. No rubber bullets were found anywhere. I actually hid some used bullets in my pocket that I found on the ground, but of course the soldiers took them from me afterwards… When I realized that people were being shot outside I immediately went inside, where an emergency center had been set up. Our doctors and nurses were there. The wounded started to be brought in…
» What did you do at that moment?
At that moment I thought, ‘There is a frightened, wounded person here who is losing blood and I am taking pictures of him. What should I do? Be a journalist? No, I can’t do this. I need to do something else, because there aren’t enough people here.’ And I decided to help. I don’t understand the first thing about first aid but I did whatever the nurses told me to do… There were so many wounded…
…
» Did [the people resisting the Israeli attack] take weapons from [a certain “captured” attacker]?
They took his weapon… and brought it downstairs but then someone said: “If Israel catches us with weapons it will be terrible”, and they immediately threw the weapon in the sea…
» Was the soldier beaten?
I’m not talking about a systematic beating but of course they hit him.
» What sort of shape was he in?
He was in shock… and shaking. His eyes filled with tears; I saw him crying.
» Were any other soldiers taken captive?
A total of 3 Israeli soldiers were captured, and the weapons belonging to all 3 were thrown in the sea. Nobody kept them.
» So at the same time that you were attending to the wounded, you were also watching what was happening with the soldiers…
Yes, because both the soldiers and the wounded had to come in through the same entrance…
…
» What sort of injuries were sustained [by those resisting the Israeli attack]? What did you see?
Should I really describe it?… On the ground there were pieces of people’s brains. I saw a skull bone, I saw brain pieces…
…
» [Following the attack], were the handcuffs [used on you] plastic?
Yes, they were plastic but they were very tight and [my hands were] behind my back… I said [to a soldier]: “I’m a member of the press.” He asked where my press card was. I said it was with all of my other possessions, in the press room. He said: “At this point it doesn’t matter anyway if you’re a journalist or not.”… It seemed as though the entire [Israeli] army was on top of us, and I asked myself how this many soldiers could be necessary for 600 people.
…
» Were there women among the [Israeli] soldiers?
Yes, I could tell from their voices and their hands. It was impossible to tell otherwise because their faces were masked.
…
» While waiting on deck what else… did you talk to the soldiers about?
I needed to go to the bathroom. I had waited for several hours. I got up and told a soldier, without asking permission, that I was going to the bathroom. He told me I couldn’t go. I asked why not. “You don’t want to see what is in there right now,” he said. “We are cleaning up inside. There are corpses. You can go after we clean.” I said: “I was already inside and I saw everything.” He told me to sit: “Shut up and sit down.”… As a woman I had the advantage of being able to speak to the soldiers more easily. Their behavior toward the men was much harsher.
» How long did you have to wait [on deck]?
From 7.30 in the morning until 1.20 in the afternoon. I kept looking at my watch. We were sitting under the sun. The [Israeli] helicopters kept pouring water on us, so everyone was going from wet to dry, freezing to burning…
…
» When you arrived to Ashdod Port what did you think [the Israelis] were going to do with you?
I thought they would probably put us on the first plane home.
» You never thought they were going to put you in jail?
No. We didn’t think they could do that, because we hadn’t done anything. It was the Israeli soldiers who had killed people… While we were waiting, I was watching Kağan [a Turkish baby on board the Mavi Marmara] with admiration. He never cried or got cranky; I can’t begin to tell you how calm he was…
… part 2
Egypt Prevents Nine Parliamentarians from Entering Gaza
By Saed Bannoura – IMEMC & Agencies – June 08, 2010
The Egyptian Authorities stopped nine Egyptian Legislators at the Rafah Terminal who were trying to deliver construction supplies to Gaza.
In Sinai, Egyptian Authorities confiscated four trucks filled with cement and construction materials heading to Gaza.
Hazim Farouq, head of the Egyptian delegation, said that the authorities seized the trucks that were filled with cement and construction materials, and revoked the license cards of the drivers after threatening to arrest them when they were 20 kilometers away from the Gaza Strip.
The Egyptian Authorities then said that the trucks will not be allowed into Gaza although the Egyptian President ordered the opening of the Rafah Border Terminal until further notice.
The parliamentarian Change and Reform Bloc of the Hamas Movement, slammed the Egyptian authorities from preventing the Egyptian parliamentarians from entering Gaza, and called for allowing the entry of construction materials and other basic supplies.
Several Egyptian Islamist legislators, members of the convoy, started an open-ended protest in front of the Egyptian side of the Rafah Terminal, demanding that Egypt release the detained relief trucks.
Egyptian Legislator, Mohammad al-Biltaji, told the Ikhwan Online news Website, that the legislators will remain at the terminal and will not end their protest until the authorities release the confiscated aid trucks, and allow them to cross into Gaza.
Deputy head of the Palestinian Legislative Council, Dr. Ahmad Bahar, called on Egypt to allow the legislators into Gaza.
It is worth mentioning that Russia also called for lifting the siege on Gaza in order to provide humanitarian and economic relief to the residents.
Independent autopsy: Dog mauled imam
Oralandar Brand-Williams / The Detroit News / June 2, 2010
Southfield –A Muslim advocacy group released a report today claiming an imam was mauled by an FBI dog during a raid and may have fired at it to stop the attack.
The finding comes from an independent autopsy retained by the Council of American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders discussed the report during a news conference this afternoon at their Southfield offices.
The autopsy from forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht, who is based in Pennsylvania, follows months of controversy over the shooting death of Luqman Abdullah. He was shot by FBI agents in October during a raid in a Dearborn warehouse over a stolen-goods operation.
The agents say they returned fire from Abdullah after he opened fire. A federal indictment labeled him a violent extremist but others have questioned the characterization and called for an independent investigation.
Wecht’s report — which was based on an earlier autopsy and didn’t involve exhuming the body — concluded an FBI dog killed in the raid was responsible for wounds on the imam’s face, hands and arms. The report also concluded that the imam’s jaw was broken as a result of the attack and not from an impact of falling to the ground as previously believed.
Also, Wecht’s report claimed Abdullah, who was shot 21 times, was shot twice in the back and not once as concluded by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s Office.
The county report also indicates the imam was shot twice in the chest, four times in the abdomen, twice in the groin, four times in the left hip and side, seven times in the left thigh and once in the scrotum.
CAIR executive director Dawud Walid said the dog bites on Abullah’s body may indicate the imam was trying to protect himself against the attack by the animal.
Walid renewed his call for the FBI, Dearborn Police and the Michigan State police to [provide] videotapes and other information on the case. He also called again for an independent investigation by the Justice Department into Abdullah’s shooting.
“They are the only ones who can do a thorough and robust investigation,” Walid said.
bwilliams@detnews.com (313) 222-2027
© Copyright 2010 The Detroit News
Blinding the witnesses
By Naomi Klein on June 4, 2010
There is something way too literal about Israel shooting out the eye of a witness to its crimes.
This photograph of Emily Henochowicz’s bandaged face needs to be seen by the world.
Like many of us around the world, Henochowicz, a 21-year-old Cooper Union art student, joined protests on Monday against Israel’s outrageous attack on the humanitarian flotilla. But unfortunately, the protest Emily attended was in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, and like so many protests in the West Bank, it was violently attacked by the IDF. According to a report from the International Solidarity Movement, Emily was “hit in the face with a tear gas projectile fired directly at her by an Israeli soldier during the demonstration at Qalandiya checkpoint today.” Sören Johanssen, a Swedish activist standing beside Henochowicz, reported that, “They fired many canisters at us in rapid succession. One landed on either side of Emily, then the third one hit her in the face.”
This courageous young woman is now the wrenching embodiment of a policy that systematically targets witnesses and human rights advocates — from Stop the Wall’s Mohammad Othman, arrested on his way back from a European speaking tour, to the vicious smear campaign waged against Justice Richard Goldstone.
When Did Resistance Become a Dirty Word?
By Robin Yassin-Kassab | Pulse Media | June 6, 2010
What the Western political class and its media demand of the Arabs and Muslims is acceptance of the unacceptable status quo in Israel-Palestine. To resist the status quo is to be troublesome, destabilising and irrationally violent. Resistance arises from the inadequacies of a culture and religion given to antisemitism and hysteria. In order to develop, these backward folk must give resistance up.
For the Lebanese, this means that they must forget the brutal 22-year occupation of their country and the 1982 siege of Beirut as well as the 2006 assault on the country’s civilian infrastructure. They must forget the endless chain of massacres perpetrated by Zionists and their allies on Lebanese territory. They must smile when Israel violates their air space on a daily basis and threatens to send them “back to the stone age” on a weekly basis. They must disarm and label as terrorist Hizbullah, the principled defender of their country.
Syria must smile at the illegal occupation and annexation of the Golan Heights and the theft of its essential water supplies. It must repress the refugees from the Golan and the half million Palestinian refugees and their political organisations. It must not buy or build weaponry that might give it minimum protection from Zionist terrorism. It must grin stupidly when Israel chooses to bomb its territory.
The Palestinians must be modern and democratic. They must do this by fighting the winner of democratic elections and by supporting an unelected and corrupt bunch of collaborators.
As for Western sympathisers with the Palestinian cause, they must preface their criticisms of Israel with such statements as “Of course, Israel has a right to exist in security,” or “Of course we don’t support Hamas,” or, in the case of the passengers on the Rachel Corrie (whose courage and commitment I salute), “We will not resist.”
Learning Not to Resist
It’s time we stopped playing this game. To recognise Israel’s ‘right’ to exist in security is to deny Palestine’s right to exist in security. No state which occupies other states’ territories has a right to security. Did Hitler’s Germany have a right to security once it had invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland? And apartheid states don’t have a right to exist at all. There’s nothing anti-Semitic about this, just as there was nothing anti-white or anti-Afrikaaner in arguing that apartheid South Africa didn’t have a right to exist. A state established by massive ethnic cleansing and perpetuated by occupation and repeated massacres is not a normal state like any other. Israel will earn its right to exist when it allows the refugees to return home and when Jews, Muslims and Christians enjoy equal rights.
What are the arguments used to demonise (rather than critically engage with) Hamas?
Firstly, Hamas doesn’t recognise Israel. True, Hamas believes that Arafat made a major strategic blunder by officially recognising Israel before Israel allowed the Palestinians minimal rights. In this Hamas is only being logical. Hamas certainly knows that Israel exists, and even if Hamas drank enough whisky to forget Israel’s existence (which isn’t likely) Israel would still be there, with its Merkava tanks, its checkpoints and its nuclear bombs. Hamas has repeatedly said that it will stop fighting if Israel leaves the territories in 1967. It still won’t recognise Israel as a Jewish state on 78% of Palestine, because this would be to recognise the ‘justice’ of the theft of Palestine in order to build an ethno-state. In any case, Israel doesn’t recognise Palestine. Its failure to recognise Palestine has immediate and practical ramifications, like the occupation and the ethnic cleansing.
Secondly, Hamas doesn’t recognise the two-state solution. But again, neither does Israel, whatever its propagandists say. If Israel supported two states, it wouldn’t have spent the last decades, under Labour and Likud, building settlements on the West Bank and in Jerusalem. And Israel is the occupier.
Thirdly, Hamas has attacked civilians. This is surely the most hypocritical of reasons for isolating the movement. Since September 2000, Palestinians have killed 1072 Israelis. In the same period, Israelis have killed 6348 Palestinians (not including those who died as an indirect result of the occupation, for instance critically ill people who died in ambulances held up for hours at checkpoints). So Israel is far more guilty of killing civilians. And I would say that the violence of the occupied struggling to liberate themselves is more justifiable than the oppressive violence of the occupier. The people who cry over the fate of Sderot should consider not only the far, far worse fate of Gaza and the West Bank, but also the fact that the inhabitants of the bombed and starved refugee camps in Gaza come from the destroyed villages on which Sderot is built. If your home is stolen and neither the law nor the conscience of the thieves will give you restitution, you are entitled to fight the thieves. Hamas also holds one prisoner of war – not a civilian but a stormtrooper of the occupation. It is grotesque that the world knows the name of this captured terrorist but not the existence of at least 10,000 Palestinian prisoners in the Zionist gulag, many of them children.
Even if we could establish that the Palestinian side has been more violent than the Israeli side – which we can’t – Hamas, unlike Israel, has shown itself capable of sustaining ceasefires. And anyway, many of the Israeli victims have been killed by the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, which is linked to Fatah.
A Good Arab – Not Resisting
Fourthly, Hamas aims to establish an Islamic state. True, in theory. But it knows that it was elected for its resistance agenda and its freedom from corruption, not for Islamic reasons. There are signs that Hamas has recently tried to impose some of its moral code on the people of Gaza – and I oppose this – but given the circumstances, it’s been a gentle Islamism. It is in fact a bulwark against the more offensive Salafi nihilist groups which are now appearing among Palestinians in their desperation. And of course Israel is not a state for its citizens, still less for the people under its control, but a Jewish state. The fact that some of its people define Jewishness ethnically rather than religiously does not change this fact.
My main quibble with Hamas is its constitution’s reference to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an antisemitic Russian text discredited by anti-Zionists such as Abdelwahhab el-Messiri. (I’m not as outraged as I am by European anti-Semitism – if anyone can be excused for generalising about Jews, it’s the victims of the self-proclaimed Jewish state). Hamas leaders frequently say they do not oppose Jews for being Jews, but Zionists for being Zionists. If this is the case, I wish they’d remove the Protocols reference. So Hamas is not perfect, but neither was the Communist Party, which dominated resistance to Nazi occupation in Europe. Had I been around, I would have supported the anti-Nazi resistance as I support Hamas – critically but unconditionally.
As for the brave passengers on the MV Rachel Corrie, I wish they had not said, “we will not resist.” I wish they had said, “We are unarmed and we have no desire to come to blows with Israeli soldiers. However, if we are hijacked by armed men in international waters or near the shore of Gaza – over which we do not recognise Israeli jurisdiction – we will resist as best we are able.” Unwittingly, the activists handed Israel ammunition for its propaganda – ‘when civilised, peaceful activists arrive we deal with them peacefully. When mad Islamist Turks attack us with sticks when we board their ship, we have no choice but to shoot them many times at close range in the back of the head.’
The passengers on the Mavi Marmara should be congratulated for resisting piracy and the illegal, barbaric siege. We should never be ashamed of resistance – in occupied Europe, in South Africa, in Iraq, in Vietnam, in Palestine, in Lebanon, or on the Mediterranean sea. Resistance is beautiful. Resistance proves the existence of the human spirit amid a vast sea of inhumanity.
