Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

AP again skews the story, this time about Israeli attacks on Palestinian farmers

By Alison Weir | October 15, 2012

It’s interesting to examine how the Associated Press reported on a recent statement by the UN envoy to Israel-Palestine demanding that Israel protect Palestinian farmers from daily attacks by Israeli settlers.

The situation is dire for Palestinian farmers. In the first weeks of the olive harvest, a critical period for sustaining their families, Palestinian farmers have suffered daily attacks by Israelis (often armed) living in nearby settlements.

Settlements are illegal colonies on confiscated Palestinian land that not only bar the Palestinians from whom the land has been confiscated, they also bar citizens of Israel who are Christian and Muslim from living in them.

In its lead paragraph AP reported, “The U.N. Middle East envoy says he’s alarmed by attacks blamed on Israeli settlers against Palestinian farmers and their olive trees.”

The AP headline said: “UN envoy alarmed by attacks on Palestinian trees.”

Somehow the word “farmers” didn’t make the cut, implying that the UN envoy was alarmed about what could seem a minimal concern and playing into Israeli claims that the UN is unduly picking on Israel.

While the headline might sound like the UN envoy is quibbling over Palestinian trees while people (Israelis) are suffering, the true situation is lost entirely: that these trees are the livelihood for entire village communities whose subsistence is at stake.

Also, AP’s paraphrase of the envoy’s statement is far milder than his actual words: “I am alarmed at recent reports that Israeli settlers in the West Bank have repeatedly attacked Palestinian farmers and destroyed hundreds of their olive trees at the height of the harvest season.”

The envoy, Robert Serry, also said:

“These acts are reprehensible and I call on the Government of Israel to bring those responsible to justice.”

AP left that out.

Serry also said:

“Israel must live up to its commitments under international law to protect Palestinians and their property in the occupied territory so that the olive harvest – a crucial component of Palestinian livelihoods and the Palestinian economy – can proceed unhindered and in peace.”

AP also left that out.

Two Israeli human rights groups had released reports on the Israeli attacks a few days earlier.

One, B’Tselem, said that it had documented five such settler attacks on Palestinian farmers in the previous four days, and called on the Israeli army and police “to investigate each incident,” as well as complaints that Israeli soldiers, who are legally required to protect the civilian population under their control, “did not intervene to prevent attacks.”

AP also left that out.

The report by the other Israeli human rights group, Yesh Din, stated that of 162 attacks on Palestinian trees since 2005, only one case had led to charges.

AP also left that out.

The Yesh Din report also stated that the Israeli failure to investigate the attacks is “only one aspect of its continuous and broad failure to enforce the law against ideological crimes by Israeli citizens against Palestinians in the occupied territories.”

AP also left that out.

A recent story in Ma’an News reports that over 7,500 Palestinian olive trees were destroyed by Israelis throughout 2011, according to The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs.

AP also left that out.

Below is the AP story found on US newspaper websites in its entirety. Below that is the AP story in an Israeli newspaper.

Note that there are two significant paragraphs in the middle of the Israeli story that are not in the US version. I am placing them in boldface.

AP sends different versions of its articles to its different wires and in my experience generally sends milder articles on this topic to its US wire than to other wires.

Whether AP omitted those significant paragraphs from its US version of the story or the Israeli editors added them, we know that AP had easy access to that important context – and chose not to include it in its report to American audiences.

AP story for US news media:

UN envoy alarmed by attacks on Palestinian trees

The U.N. Middle East envoy says he’s alarmed by attacks blamed on Israeli settlers against Palestinian farmers and their olive trees.

Robert Serry says Israel must do more to protect Palestinians and their property in the West Bank, in a statement sent to reporters Sunday. Israel’s military had no immediate comment. The West Bank, claimed by the Palestinians for a state, is under Israeli military rule.

An Israeli rights organization, B’Tselem, counts 450 Palestinian-owned trees either damaged or uprooted since the harvest season began on October 10.

Every year a small number of extremist Jewish settlers carry out attacks during harvest season. Most attacks occur close to Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Olive groves provide crucial income for Palestinian farmers.

AP story in Israeli newspaper:

UN envoy alarmed by attacks on Palestinian trees

The UN’s Middle East envoy said on Sunday that he’s alarmed by attacks blamed on Israeli settlers against Palestinian farmers and their olive trees.

Robert Serry, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, said that Israel must do more to protect Palestinians and their property in the West Bank in a statement sent to reporters.

Israel’s military had no immediate comment. The West Bank, claimed by the Palestinians for a state, is under Israeli military rule.

“I am alarmed at recent reports that Israeli settlers in the West Bank have repeatedly attacked Palestinian farmers and destroyed hundreds of their olive trees at the height of the harvest season,” Serry wrote. “These acts are reprehensible and I call on the Government of Israel to bring those responsible to justice.”

He continued: “Israel must live up to its commitments under international law to protect Palestinians and their property in the occupied territory so that the olive harvest – a crucial component of Palestinian livelihoods and the Palestinian economy – can proceed unhindered and in peace.”

An Israeli rights organization, B’Tselem, counts 450 Palestinian-owned trees either damaged or uprooted since the harvest season began on October 10.

Every year a small number of extremist Jewish settlers carry out attacks during harvest season. Most attacks occur close to Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Olive groves provide crucial income for Palestinian farmers.

A 2006 study of AP’s coverage of Israel-Palestine found that AP covered Israeli children’s deaths at a rate over seven times greater than it reported on Palestinian children’s deaths.

* * *

B’Tselem report

Yesh Din report

October 15, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Alone – Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system

October 15, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

Arson Attack on Olive Trees in Qaryut

October 14, 2012 | International Solidarity Movement, West Bank
Latif Ali with one of her trees that were destroyed

Last night in the West Bank village of Qaryut, 12 Palestinian owned olive trees were irreparably destroyed in a late night arson attack by Israelis from the illegal West Bank settlement of Eli.

The attack follows an incident last week, on the night of October 8th, in which settlers cut the branches from 130 trees with chainsaws. The branches will take some ten years to regrow, during which time the eight farmers who owned the trees will be without this crucial source of income.

The attacks seem to have been carried out so as to maximize economic impact. Many Palestinian olive farmers are financially dependent on the olive harvest, which begun earlier this week. In last night’s attack, the settlers seem to have targeted the oldest and most fruitful trees. They set fire to hollows in their trunks, which kills the tree. Growing a new one to their size takes hundreds of years.

The timing, too, maximized the impact of the attack. For the last two years, the Israeli government has run a permissions system for Palestinians harvesting olives in areas near to West Bank settlements: although the farmers own both the land and the trees, they have to apply for Israeli permission to access the land. Permission is usually granted for impossibly short periods of time: in this case, the Qaryut farmers were able to harvest for either two or three days (traditionally harvest lasts between four and six weeks). The first attack came the night before the first permissions began in the area, thereby devastating the harvest the night before it started.

Such incidents are not uncommon. During the last two harvests, a reported 300 trees were destroyed in Quryat alone. In 2009, the village suffered violent attacks by settlers from Eli and another nearby illegal settlement Shilo (more here and here). Such attacks are commonplace across the West Bank during olive harvest, when the symbolic and economic importance of the crop make their farmers frequent targets for settler violence.

October 14, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The EU accelerates trade with Israel, despite human rights abuses

By Amelia Smith | MEMO | October 13, 2012

The EU accelerates trade with Israel, despite human rights abusesThe EU’s 500 million citizens account for about 60% of Israel’s total trade. Europe is Israel’s largest source of imports and its second biggest export market, second only to the United States.

That’s a lot of bargaining potential when it comes to addressing Israel’s bullish behaviour in the Middle East. A boycott of Israeli goods for example, could finally push Israel to stop its breaches of international law.

But instead of exercising this negotiating clout, the EU is actually planning to boost trade between them through the Agreement on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (ACAA). They would rather maintain, or make worse, the status quo than address human rights violations.

If it is permitted, the agreement will reduce practical barriers, which currently stand in the way of trade, and make the flow of goods between Israel and the EU easier. Whether the deal in question will materialise depends on an imminent European Parliamentary vote, and could be approved by the end of the month.

ACAA’s supporters argue that it is simply a “technical” measure. That the benefits of such a system could offer greater health related goods, considering the agreement is limited to pharmaceutical produce.

But does anyone actually believe that it will continue to apply only to medicine? It won’t stop here. It will be a stepping-stone, and could pave the way for many other types of merchandise.

Whilst the agreement will improve Israel’s economic integration into the EU’s single market and enhance co-operation between the countries, it will do so at the expense of Palestinians’ well-being.

Reverence for human rights is the EU’s motto, it is supposed to run through the core of everything it does, especially foreign policy. Take Turkey for example, whose human rights record has long prevented its entry into the EU.

It is strange then that Israel should be treated so differently. Which part of the separation wall and the torrent of human rights abuses that occur from its presence, have those who are poised to sign the agreement missed about Israel? Their expansion policies in the West Bank and the demolition of Palestinian homes are not civil liberties. Sadly, it seems Israel will continue to be a member of the elite club regardless.

If the economic interest of big powers wins over local interests it will be nothing new; think Germany and its contract to sell nuclear-tipped submarines to Israel. Angela Merkel may have asked Benjamin Netanyahu to halt settlement activity and build a sewage treatment plant in the Gaza Strip in exchange, but none of these conditions have been met.

Ironically, today the European Union won the Nobel Peace Prize for encouraging peace in Europe. As he pronounced the award, committee president Thorbjoern Jagland commended the EU for encouraging “peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights.”

But the prize’s recipients are often steeped in controversy; Obama once balanced the trophy in one hand and two wars in the other.

Follow Amelia on Twitter: @amyinthedesert

October 13, 2012 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Hugo Chavez’s Re-Election Matters to the Arab World

By Jody McIntyre | Al Akhbar | October 10, 2012

Caracas – As crowds occupied the streets of Caracas, Venezuela on the evening of Sunday, October 7, to celebrate the successful re-election of President Hugo Chavez, a Lebanese flag was held aloft. As they poured into the grounds of Miraflores to hear him speak from the balcony of the Presidential palace, later that night, a Palestinian flag was also visible as it was waved above our heads. These symbols were not without meaning; the re-election of Chavez with 55 percent of ballots cast – eleven points ahead of his opponent, Henrique Radonski – will have repercussions not only across the continent of South America, but also in the Arab world.

On Tuesday, just two days after his electoral victory, Chavez reiterated his support for the Syrian government, about which he has been characteristically vocal over the last year. It is a far cry from the pre-election promises of Capriles, who was seen by many in Venezuela as the candidate of the United States and had pledged to develop “closer relations with Israel,” as well as re-thinking several areas of foreign policy. Chavez, on the other hand, took the step of expelling the Israeli ambassador in January 2009, during the bombing campaign of Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. It was not the first time he had taken such action, having ordered the US ambassador to leave in September 2008.

From the evidence of his first press conference since being re-elected, and particularly in regard to the Arab world, it is clear that re-thinking foreign policy is the last thing on Chavez’s mind. He described Assad’s as the “only legitimate government” of Syria, before continuing:

“[He] has made a huge effort to make concessions, constitutional changes, [and has] called for elections, but none of that is true for those who want to overthrow [the regime].”

Whilst speaking from the “People’s Balcony” of Miraflores at just before midnight on Sunday, Chavez called for reconciliation with the opposition at home. But he knows that his victory, although down from the 26 percent margin he won by in 2006, would be considered a landslide in many other countries and gives him a strong democratic mandate for the next six years of government. Foreign policy has often been a talking point during the last fourteen years of Chavez’s government, and his popularity, so pervasive amongst the poorest sections of Venezuelan society, has also spread as far as occupied Palestine, the south of Lebanon, and many parts of the Arab world.

Chavez vehemently denounced the NATO bombing of Libya earlier this year, which he described at the time as “imperial cynicism,” a “massacre” and a “madness” that had “destroyed” the country. On Tuesday, Chavez took the opportunity to mention former Libyan President Colonel Gaddafi, saying that “the way he died was a barbarity.”

Some western commentators have criticised Chavez’s support for what they see as dictatorial governments in Libya and now Syria, whilst recognising the democratic credentials of Venezuela itself. However, Chavez is particularly aware of what demonization of political leaders who challenge or question the dominant narrative – once referred to as the “Washington Consensus” but now struggling to retain one hand, let alone a “consensus” in Latin America – can lead to. The April 2002 coup d’etat against his government, which resulted in huge demonstrations and the re-instatement of Chavez after just forty-eight hours, was preceded by much hysterical commentary in both the US and in the privately-owned Venezuelan media, which routinely referred to Chavez as an “autocrat,” a “monkey” or even “Venezuela’s Hitler.”

Chavez is of the view that, whilst undoubtedly embroiled in turmoil, there are more forces at work in Syria than usually portrayed in the mainstream media. On Tuesday, he repeated his opinion in regards to Syria that “the US government is largely responsible for this disaster.”

There is no doubt that Chavez’s presence will be continue to be felt in the Arab world over the next six years. With a wave of pro-poor, anti-imperialist governments continuing to enjoy widespread popularity in Latin America – Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Evo Morales in Bolivia and Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner in Argentina – the question remains as to how Arab people will respond to this example of resisting subservience to foreign interests. Indeed, in a speech following his decision to expel the Israeli ambassador, Hugo Chavez made a proposal of his own:

“Every day, Latin America will be more united and more free. I hope that one day, Arabs will be the same way; united. United or dominated, you decide!”

Jody McIntyre is a journalist and political activist. Follow him on Twitter @jodymcintyre.

October 10, 2012 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

CNN seems to consider damaged motorcycle more important than injured Palestinian children

By Allison Weir | October 8, 2012

CNN’s choice of a photo for its latest online news story on Israel-Palestine is revealing.

In its report on the recent Israeli attacks on Gaza, “Palestinians: Israeli strikes in Gaza kill 1, wound 15,” CNN features one photo. It is a picture of a charred motorcycle.

CNN reports: “Palestinian militants say they have fired 20 mortar rounds from Gaza into Israel in retaliation for airstrikes that killed one person and wounded 15 others.”

Later in the story CNN mentions that some of the “others” were children but gives no additional details. According to reports from other sources, at least five of the injured were children, including one infant.

There are a number of photographs of these children.

Yet, CNN didn’t publish any of them, and instead used a photo of a motorcycle.

Below are some of the photos CNN missed. (Click on each photo to see the source.)

In the last paragraph of its story, CNN reports: “On the Israeli side, there were no injuries and only minor property damage…”

October 8, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NY Times headline reverses chronology, story leaves out important information

Does the New York Times consider Israeli goats more important than Palestinian children?

By Allison Weir | October 8, 2012

Today’s New York Times features a headline that reverses the sequence of events described in the story it is allegedly representing. It also omits significant information.

The headline reads: “Israel Launches Airstrikes After Attacks From Gaza” in a story bylined by Isabel Kershner. In other words, in its usual fashion, the New York Times headline tells readers that Israeli violence is defensive and came after Palestinians initiated the violence.

In reality, it was the opposite, as the lead paragraph states: “Palestinian militants from Gaza fired a barrage of rockets and mortar shells into Israeli territory on Monday, causing no casualties but some property damage, AFTER an Israeli airstrike wounded at least 10 Palestinians in southern Gaza on Sunday [emphasis added].”

Farther down, the story reports, “The latest flare-up began with the [Israeli] missile strike on Sunday against two men who Israel said were members of jihadist groups…. at least eight passers-by were also injured.”

In addition to reversing the party responsible for the initiation of violence, the Times story also omits information about the 8 people who were “also injured.” Were they old men? Women? Children? What is the nature of their injuries? Will any be permanent?

The Times doesn’t tell us. Yet, while reporter Isabel Kershner didn’t bother to obtain or convey this information, she does tell us, “Several goats were killed in a petting zoo in an Israeli communal farm…”

Other news media provide some of the missing information. According to the Middle East Media Center (IMEMC), an infant and four other children were among the injured. Three of the injured are in serious condition. IMEMC reports that the missiles were fired into a crowded area that included school students heading home from evening school.

The New York Times story also doesn’t disclose the fact that the reporter, Isabel Kershner, is an Israeli citizen. (The Times refuses to answer questions about whether she has served in the Israeli military, or whether she has family members currently serving in the Israeli military or that served in it in the past.)

The previous New York Times bureau chief for the region, Ethan Bronner, had a son serving in the Israeli army, and many of the journalists in the area have similar personal connections to the Israeli military. The New York Times has a history of appointing bureau chiefs with ties to Israel.

A 2005 study found that the Times had reported on Israeli children’s deaths at a rate seven times greater than it reported on Palestinian children’s deaths.

While the New York Times and other US media frequently report that Palestinian violence has interrupted what the media call “a period of calm,” a 2009 study by an MIT professor revealed, “[I]t is overwhelmingly Israel that kills first after a pause in the conflict.”

The study found, “79% of all conflict pauses were interrupted when Israel killed a Palestinian, while only 8% were interrupted by Palestinian attacks (the remaining 13% were interrupted by both sides on the same day).

In addition, the researchers stated, “…of the 25 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than a week, Israel unilaterally interrupted 24, or 96%, and it unilaterally interrupted 100% of the 14 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than 9 days.”

An alternative headline, and story, could have been something like: “Israeli airstrikes injure infant and 4 other children.” This might be the kind of reporting we would get if the Times would ever stop assigning partisans to cover the conflict.

October 8, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli police smash boy’s head to the ground in Aqsa incursion

Al Akhbar | October 6, 2012

A video has surfaced showing Israeli police smashing a teenage boy’s head to the ground during an incursion into the revered Aqsa compound in Jerusalem Friday. Police had fired tear gas and stun grenades at a group of worshipers Friday protesting the entry of illegal Jewish settlers into Islam’s third holiest site earlier this week.

The video exposes further the brutality of Friday’s attack where witnesses reported several arrests and some injuries. It shows a boy being dragged across the ground, and pinned down as he screams “Khalas”, or enough. Police then punch his head against the stone floor in a swift and forceful swing of the arm.

Many youth and injured sought refuge in the Haram el-Sharif mosque, or Dome of the Rock, as police clad in black stood stationed around it during the incursion.

Reuters reported that protesters hurled stones at police during their protest, and Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld claims that one of the demonstrators tried to stab a police officer and that only one Palestinian was arrested.

Israelis have made repeated threats to demolish the Aqsa mosque, considered the third holiest site in Islam, in order to build a Jewish temple in its stead. The move would accelerate redemption, according to some Jewish religious authorities.

Some thirty illegal Jewish settlers toured the compound this week under heavy police protection, a move that has been interpreted by Palestinians as an attempt to assert Israeli claims to the site, named Temple Mount in Jewish tradition.

October 6, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli army turns Palestinian homes in Hebron into military barracks

MEMO | October 4, 2012

The Israeli occupation forces have turned the roofs of Palestinian homes in the ancient city of Hebron, south of the West Bank, into military barracks and control points under the pretext of providing security for Jewish settlers during the Hebrew celebrations of the Sukkot Feast.

Human rights sources in the Hebron Rehabilitation Committee reported that a large number of Israeli forces took over the roofs of several Palestinian homes along the lanes of the old town. These houses, including the family home of the Islam Al-Fakhouri in Al-Sahla area, have been turned into military barracks and control towers while the families have been forced to leave.

Israeli soldiers also commandeered the roofs of the Abdulmutallab Abu Sunaina, Imran Abu Rumaila, Daoud Jaber, Nader Salaymeh and AliAl-Rajabi households turning them into control points.

Sources also point out that the regions extending between the settlement of Kiryat Arba, the Cave of the Patriarchs, Tel Rumeida, Al-Shuhada, Al-Ras, and Wadi El-H’aseen streets; and the areas of Al-Masharqa Al-Fawqa and Tahta, are subjected to a blanket Israeli police and army presence.

October 5, 2012 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Illegal Occupation, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Occupied Lives: They terrorize us in our homes

PCHR | October 3, 2012
Haniya, in her home in al Nussairat.

On Monday, 10 September, 2012, Israeli warplanes launched 2 missiles at a vast tract of land in the west of al-Nussairat refugee camp in the Middle Area of the Gaza Strip. As a result, 2 rooms and a container on the land were destroyed. 10 olive trees and 23 houses were also damaged. Additionally, 7 Palestinian civilians, including 4 children and 2 women, were wounded. This attack targeted civilian objects which is a violation of international law.

Haniya Abdul Hadi Kabaja (60) is one of the women who sustained minor injuries on the night of the attack. She recounts that: “At around 2.00am in the night, we woke up to the sound of shelling. We were all very scared but we went back to sleep. 15 or so minutes later, we heard more shelling and shrapnel hitting surfaces outside. Something hit my face and, when I touched it, I felt myself bleeding. My son, Anas, saw this and he started screaming for his brothers to come and help me. After they offered me first aid, we heard my ten-year-old granddaughter, Reema, crying, and that is when we noticed that she had also been wounded, in her leg.”

An ambulance arrived after a while, and Haniya and her granddaughter were taken to Al Aqsa Martyrs hospital. Their wounds were moderate and they were discharged soon after.

Until now, Haniya and her family have unanswered questions with regard to the attack. They do not know what the exact target was: “All of us were terrified, because the missiles were launched about 100m from where we live. Other people in the neighborhood also got injured by the shrapnel from the missiles. Some windows were smashed and there is clear damage to some of the asbestos roofs. In this area, there have been no incidents since Cast Lead. Nobody really knows why they launched missiles on an empty piece of land, and so close to where people live.”

Since the attack, Haniya’s family has been living in constant fear of further attack. This has had a particularly negative impact on the children: “The attack has really frightened the children. They used to go out after dark to play or to visit relatives who live in neighboring houses. Now, they do not even step outside after darkness falls because they are too scared. They are not the only ones who are scared. Even we, the adults, feel the same way. At the same time, we know that there is nothing we can say against the Israeli occupation. We cannot do anything about it either.”

Haniya’s son, Mohammed (32), hopes to see an end to the attacks on unarmed civilians and calls for the respect of everyone’s rights. “I just want to see the situation change and an end to the Israeli occupation. We are unarmed civilians, yet they follow us and continue to attack and terrorize us in our homes. They hurt my mother and my daughter, yet they had not even done anything. We have not caused problems for anyone and the only thing we demand is our rights, our land and our freedom. We are peaceful people and we want it to remain that way. After all these years of being attacked, we will not stop demanding our rights. Even if they kill all of us and only 10 people remain, we will still demand for those rights.”

The direct targeting of a civilian object constitutes a war crime, as codified in Article 8(2) (b) (ii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Similarly, under Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the destruction of private property is prohibited unless rendered absolutely necessary by military operations. Intentionally launching an indiscriminate attack constitutes a war crime as defined in Article 8 (2) (b) of the Rome Statute of the ICC.  Furthermore, according to the principle of proportionality, which is codified in Article 51 (5) (b) of Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions, an attack that may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects or a combination thereof is considered excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

October 4, 2012 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Interfaith dialogue is no answer to Israel’s racist bullying

 By Stuart Littlewood | My Catbird Seat | October 3, 2012

So the Albuquerque Episcopalians got jumpy and ‘disinvited’ the Friends of Sabeel who had booked their cathedral for a conference.

Sabeel is an international peace movement which calls itself the Voice of Palestinian Christians.

Why would one Christian group snub another? The excuse for turning away the conference was concocted by the Dean of the Cathedral, the Very Rev. J. Mark Goodman. “We said our prayers and deliberated thoughtfully and purposefully,” he explained.

It seems he and his Episcopalian colleagues didn’t like the way the conference would be dealing with “a political issue that has polarized people in ways that we felt were unhelpful. We did not want to introduce a polarized issue into the life of the Cathedral that would have the potential to divide rather than unite. Our decision was not based upon anti-Palestinian positions. In fact, many on the Vestry [i.e. the church directors] are very sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinian people, yet they were concerned about the rhetoric of the literature from Sabeel.”

He denied they were put under pressure from Zionists. Nevertheless they had invited a local rabbi to come and speak to the Vestry, a rather odd thing to do when, presumably, they were all acquainted with the endless crimes committed by the Jewish State against the Christian communities in the Holy Land. Do they usually turn to rabbis for advice?

Goodman also said Vestry members had attended his recent Forum classes, after which they had misgivings about serving as conference hosts.

“This summer at General Convention, I served on a committee that dealt in a focused way with resolutions about the conflict between Israel and Palestinians,” he went on. “It was my personal prayer that we would craft resolutions that were balanced and offered a way forward with positive engagement with each side, seeking a way forward that would bring security, dignity and peace to a region that has known strife for too long. I believe we succeeded.”

Note the reliance on “positive engagement”. What exactly does that mean – more interfaith dialogue? “We succeeded”, he says. But how does he measure success? And why is he not pressing for the enforcement of international and humanitarian law and the implementation of UN resolutions, the only route to justice? The Episcopalian approach implies that some sort of equivalence, or level playing field, already exists between the powerful aggressor and the weak victim, the robber and the robbed, the armed occupier and his unarmed dispossessed prisoner.

How did these churchmen, far removed from the rotten reality, become experts on “security, dignity and peace” in the Palestinians’ struggle for freedom? Have they been there, rolled up their sleeves and immersed themselves in the snake pit that the Holy Land has been allowed to become? What makes him and his mates think they’ve found a way forward while Palestine remains under brutal occupation?

The mission statement provided by Goodman’s church says: “The Cathedral continues to honor its responsibility to be a good steward and shepherd in the community and the world.” A huge and worthy commitment indeed. However, the cathedral’s own relatively peaceful community and inconsequential little world have been rudely rocked by scandal following claims that it was headed for bankruptcy and members were deserting. The cathedral accountant blew the whistle and allegations were made about the misuse of collection money, liberal imbibing of expensive wine and Vestry members “trashing the cathedral’s endowment by $2 million through complacency, and of not disciplining the dean”.

The regional bishop moved quickly to hush it up in an operation that local church workers said was “like a quiet version of the Spanish Inquisition”. There’s more about it here.

If only this sort of tomfoolery were all that Christian churches in the Holy Land had to worry about. Unfortunately the Episcopalians seem pretty confused, or downright ignorant, about the depths of evil to which the Israeli occupation has sunk. This is from their official report Israel-Palestine: Convention supports positive investment – Bishops agree to postpone indefinitely debate on corporate engagement ….

Bishop John Tarrant of South Dakota urged opposition to Resolution C060 [which calls on the church to engage “in corporate social responsibility by more vigorous and public corporate engagement with companies in the church’s investment portfolio that contribute to the infrastructure of the Occupation”]. He spoke about the town of Rawabi, currently under construction north of Ramallah in the West Bank, that will provide opportunities for affordable home ownership, employment and education. Tarrant said that the project, envisioned by a group of Palestinian businessmen, would inject about $80 million into the Israeli economy.

“It gave me the sense that there are Palestinians that understand the importance of mutuality if the two states are going to exist side by side,” he said.

He reminded the house of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori’s charge for Episcopalians ‘to go as emissaries…to go into the world of God’s dream’. “I believe there are Palestinians and Israelis now that are going into the world with God’s dream.”

Has Bishop Schori been to the world of God’s dream and seen what’s there?

And why would Bishop Tarrant want to inject all those $millions into the Israeli economy when Israel has been strangling the Palestinian economy to death, seizing its land and water and withholding Palestine’s tax revenues?

Bishop Charles Bennison of Pennsylvania said the movement to support boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel was unwise. “We need more, not fewer, economic ties to Israel. The more isolated Israel becomes the more dangerous the situation becomes.”

It turns out that Episcopalians are against boycott and divestment. Instead the bishops have supported a resolution on positive investment in the Palestinian Territories, as if that will do the slightest good while the illegal occupation and blockade continue. Meanwhile they agreed to postpone indefinitely the conversation on corporate engagement.

To them, it seems, going as emissaries into God’s dream involves kicking the can down the road like the rest of wretched Christendom (with a few honourable exceptions). Was anybody at the Convention truly concerned with right versus wrong, good versus evil, the rule of international law versus the rule of the gun-butt, the F-16, the helicopter gun-ship, the tank shell, illegal detention and the hard-to-get permit to go anywhere.

Their own Bishop is a victim of Israel’s apartheid policies

The Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem himself is a classic victim of the machinations of the cruel occupation. Suheil Dawani is Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Jerusalem, which is a part of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and The Middle East. This covers Israel, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. He was installed in April 2007, but in March 2011 Israel cancelled his residency permit making it well nigh impossible for him to carry out his duties. As a non-Israeli he needs a temporary residence permit. The Israelis played fast and loose, granting a permit initially then turning him down.

Here’s the explanation. “The bishop is a native of the Holy Land and has spent most of his life and ministry there, but cannot obtain either citizenship or legal residence in Israel, since he was born in Nablus, in the West Bank, which has been under Israeli occupation since 1967, but has not been annexed to Israel. East Jerusalem, on the other hand, where the Anglican Cathedral and Diocesan offices are situated, was also occupied at the same time, but Israel annexed it and considers it part of its national territory (although no other country in the world recognizes this annexation). Therefore, Bishop Dawani is considered by Israel to be a foreigner who can only visit – let alone live in – East Jerusalem with a special permit, which the Israeli authorities can either grant or deny at their sole discretion.”

Get it?

There’s a religious war going on in the Holy Land and Dawani was wide open to this sort of dirty trick. After six months of aggravation and international pressure, during which Israel’s Interior Ministry accused him of “improper” land dealings on behalf of the church and the Palestinian Authority, the illegal occupiers granted residency permits to the bishop and his family.

But here’s the catch… those permits will have to be renewed when they expire, whenever that may be or whenever the Israelis choose.

So the Israelis have the bishop’s balls in a vice. Keep quiet Dawani and all you Anglicans/Episcopalians while we carry on with our ethnic cleansing. Keep quiet while we trash the Palestinian economy, confiscate their lands and water resources, continue the blockade, erase their culture and humiliate their families, drive out the Christians and Muslims and disrupt the religious life of those who stubbornly remain.

Keep quiet or we’ll revoke your permit again.

The Catholics similarly walk on eggshells and are mercilessly bullied in their homeland. Their priests are harassed and obstructed and often prevented from going about their pastoral duties. Many are ‘imprisoned’ in their parish – if they leave it to visit relatives or holiday in another part of the Occupied Territories or in neighbouring countries like Jordan and Lebanon, the Israelis may not let them back in.

So imagine what it’s like for the Muslims.

The simple truth is that the Jewish State is the world leader in rampant lawlessness and interfaith bullying, while the wet and wimpish Anglicans respond with their clapped-out formula of interfaith dialogue and other verbal diarrhoea. For 64 years it has got us and our Palestinian brothers and sisters precisely nowhere.

The good folks of Sabeel must now be wondering what they’ve done to deserve same-faith friends like the Albuquerque Episcopalians.

Stuart Littlewood’s book Radio Free Palestine, with Foreword by Jeff Halper, can now be read on the internet by visiting www.radiofreepalestine.org.uk.

October 3, 2012 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘West wants end of Syria as a functioning independent state’

RT | September 30, 2012

The Syrian insurgency will never win its war because its means are unsupported even among the opposition, political analyst Dan Glazebrook told RT. But thanks to a flood of weapons from the West, they will continue to destabilize the country.

­Syria, Glazebrook says, is the only link keeping Western powers from dominating the region, which is why the anti-Assad coalition is sending weapons and funding the “proxy war” through Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Western governments, he says, support the rebels because once Syria falls, they hope to “roll out the program of a final solution” for the Palestinians, Southern Lebanon and Iran.

RT: Russia has reiterated calls for what it calls a balanced solution to the Syrian conflict – why aren’t more countries supporting Moscow’s proposals?

Dan Glazebrook: Well, it is a good question. In fact it is not only Moscow that is making these proposals. A week ago in Damascus, the National Coordination Committee, which is the main organization behind the initial outbreak of peaceful protests in Syria, actually had their own conference where they also called for a cease fire on both sides. They’ve criticized the militarization of the conflict. They’ve criticized the countries that have been arming the rebels.

We see how the Western-trained and sponsored militia on the ground in Syria has responded. They’ve responded with a wave of bomb attacks over two days in Damascus. The crucial point is that the West does not want to see a peaceful resolution to this conflict. It wants to destabilize, that is the name of the game. They do not want a peaceful resolution.

They don’t want any compromise, because what are their main strategic aims? Remember, their main strategic aim is to destroy Syria as a functioning independent state, because at the moment Syria is part of the alliance with Iran and Hezbollah. Now, Hezbollah’s independent existence, which was shown by Hezbollah’s defeat of Israel in 2006, that is the one thing protecting the Palestinians from Israel just unilaterally imposing some kind of once-and-for-all ‘peace deals’ on the Palestinians that would condemn them forever to living in little cantons in a sea of Israeli settlements – the one thing preventing Israel from doing that is the existence of Hezbollah, the arming of Hezbollah by Iran and Syria. Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah himself, said that Syria was crucial in the 2006 victory by Hezbollah against Israel.

So the West is determined to keep this war going, to destabilize Syria, to make sure that they cannot any longer play the role that it has been playing in supporting the Palestinians and preventing a successful Israeli attack on the Palestinians, on Lebanon and on Iran. Once Syria falls, the hope is for the West and for the Zionists that they will then have a free hand to go and implement, to go ahead and roll out, that program of a final solution for the Palestinians, destruction of Southern Lebanon, destruction of Iran. Syria is a kind of link that so far is preventing that. They do not want a peaceful solution.

RT: With Washington now pledging $45 million worth of extra support to the rebels, how much longer can the opposition keep up the fight without direct foreign intervention?

DZ: We have to get over the idea that there is no foreign direct intervention. There is a foreign direct intervention already now – and there has been for many, many months. There were groups on the ground calling themselves part of the Free Syrian Army, but there are entire units made up of Libyans, of Lebanese, of people from Jordan, of people from Saudi Arabia. They have been armed and also equipped and trained by the SAS and by the CIA, at camps in Turkey.

In fact if the situation in Libya – the war in Libya last year – is anything to go on, from what we know happened there, they were probably under the direct command of British and US Army officers. So I do not think it’s true to say that the current situation is one without direct foreign intervention.

The other thing to bear in mind, the $45 million of aid from the US is just the tip of the iceberg. Most of the weapons and the funding for the West’s proxy war against Syria is being channeled through Saudi Arabia and through Qatar. Now, just Britain alone for example, last year provided £1.75 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia, and much of it is now ending up in the hands of these proxy militias. So that $45 million figure is actually just the tip of the iceberg.

And it is very tricky that the US and Britain, and Britain in particular, often says it is just providing non-lethal equipment: communications equipment, night vision goggles, this kind of thing. But it is providing weapons, but it’s just doing it through third parties.

The question of how long this war can go on is a good question. It is not clear. They can’t really win these rebel groups, because they don’t have the support of even most of the anti-Assad forces. As I have mentioned, the main peaceful opposition group does not really support the strategy of the Free Syrian Army, does not support the Syrian National Council and in the key cities of Aleppo and Damascus, which is where more than half of the Syrian population live. Most of the population is behind the government, supports the government. A couple of weeks ago, a Free Syrian Army Officer admitted it himself, saying that ‘the problem for us here in Aleppo is that 70 per cent of the population supports Assad,’ and it has always been that way. So they can’t win with that lack of popular support.

Unfortunately, because they’re getting this huge flood of weapons from the outside, they can continue to destabilize. That is, unfortunately, they may be able to keep the war going for some time. It does not mean that they’re actually going to be able to win.

September 30, 2012 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment