Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
La France humiliée par Tsahal
Si Nicolas Sarkozy fait beaucoup d’efforts pour se rapprocher de l’Etat hébreu, on ne peut pas dire que la réciproque soit vraie. A preuve la multiplication des «bavures» commises par les forces de sécurité israéliennes à l’encontre de ressortissants français en mission et soigneusement étouffées par le Quai d’Orsay. Lundi, la directrice du centre culturel français de Naplouse (Cisjordanie) a été sortie de son véhicule, jetée à terre et rouée de coups par des militaires israéliens près de Jérusalem. «Je peux te tuer», a lancé en anglais l’un des soldats. Sa voiture portait pourtant des plaques diplomatiques. Depuis, on lui a déconseillé de porter plainte pour ne pas «gêner» la visite de Nétanyahou. Mardi, c’est le directeur du centre culturel de Jérusalem-Ouest, Olivier Debray, qui, à bord d’un véhicule pourvu de plaques consulaires, a été insulté par des policiers.
Miette. D’une façon générale, le corps consulaire français se plaint de la violation régulière par les policiers et les soldats israéliens des usages consulaires. Le 11 juin 2008, Catherine Hyver, consule adjointe à Jérusalem, avait été retenue dix-sept heures sans une goutte d’eau ni une miette de pain par la sécurité israélienne à un point de passage de la bande de Gaza.
Excréments. Mais l’incident le plus choquant est l’occupation du domicile de l’agent consulaire français, Majdi Chakkoura, à Gaza pendant l’attaque israélienne de janvier. En son absence, les soldats israéliens ont complètement ravagé les lieux - pourtant signalés à l’armée israélienne -, volé une grosse somme d’argent, les bijoux de son épouse, son ordinateur et détruit la thèse sur laquelle il travaillait. Et ils ont souillé d’excréments le drapeau français. Le Quai d’Orsay n’a là encore élevé aucune protestation. Une occupation semblable s’est produite au domicile d’une professeure palestinienne du centre culturel français. Avec ce tag écrit en français sur la bibliothèque dévastée : «Sale arabe, ont va revenir te tuer». C’est, dit-on à Gaza, la faute de français - le «t» en trop - qui a choqué l’enseignante.
Revolution / ya wlad al wes5a. Cairo Protest. Khaled Said
“Helen Thomas and “archetypal” democracy! ”
“Helen Thomas and “archetypal” democracy!!”
On June 14, the state-controlled Al-Watan (Syria) daily carried the following opinion
piece by Khaled Bdeir:
“American democracy is so odd, because in form it is with
“extra sugar” [Arabic expression meaning perfect] while in fact, it is void of
any content. It is the democracy of cultural, moral and ethical vandalism in
which American citizens can wear, eat, sing and listen to whatever they want.
But this is only form. In reality, they are consuming what the American media
outlets are offering them in terms of goods and products, in which case, they
are subjected to those paying the most to the most renowned outlets and this is
where it does not have “extra sugar.” There is no real democracy in the area of
opinion, especially on urgent matters. There is also no democracy in tackling
sensitive issues, as the disputes between Hillary Clinton and her husband or the
way President Obama treats his dog do not fall in the latter context and the
Americans can address them as much as they please. This is the democracy of that
country.
“However, those like intellectual Noam Chomsky who is calling for the lifting of
Washington’s hegemony over the people of this Earth and for positive
intervention in favor of human rights, are besieged. In this context, the story
of journalist Helen Thomas, the 89-year old dean of White House correspondents
who has been covering the activities of the White House since the days of
American President John Kennedy, testifies to this “archetypical” American
democracy. In response to a question by a Rabbi named David Nesenoff regarding
the Zionist entity, Helen Thomas stated: “Tell them – the Jews - to get the hell
out of Palestine,” adding: “Remember, these people are occupied and it's their
land. It's not Germany, it's not Poland!” Asked “where should the Jews go?” she
replied: “Poland, Germany and America and everywhere else…”
“Naturally, this solution did not and will not ever please decision-makers in
the United States who perceive the Zionist entity as their advanced barrack, the
guardian of their interests and part of their “civilization, morals and values.”
Therefore, the old journalist faced a flow of condemnation, starting with the
White House spokesman who said that her statements were “offensive and
reprehensible” and ending with the Jewish lobby. Organizations such as the
“Anti-Defamation League” said: “Her remarks were outrageous, offensive and
inappropriate. Her suggestion that Israelis should go back to Poland and Germany
is bigoted and shows a profound ignorance of history.”
“As for Ari Fleischer, the former White House spokesman during the term of
George Bush, he believes that “She is advocating religious cleansing… It is as
bad as saying that all the blacks should leave America and return to Africa."
What Fleischer is forgetting however, is that the arrival of the blacks to
America was not an invasion or an occupation, but due to White America’s need
for someone to serve in their country … Still, he added: “Hearst should do the
right thing and fire her,” to which the Hearst administration did not take long
to respond, announcing her resignation. The United States’ alleged democracy did
not fit the opinions of journalist Helen Thomas… This is American democracy!
Without “extra sugar?!”” (Al-Watan Syria, Syria)
Source : http://alwatan.sy/dindex.php?idn=81020
Gaza's children suffering from malnutrition
... and this video was 2 years ago.
--
Malnutrition increasing in Gaza
International sanctions are to blame for half of the Palestinian population being dependent on food aid, a United Nations report has said.
Al Jazeera has gained access to the findings of a study prepared by the World Food Programme (WFP) and the Food Aid Organisation on Palestinians' food security.
The study blames Israel's siege of Gaza and closure of the West Bank, for increasing food prices and poverty levels.
It also notes the devastating effects of suspending salaries of public sector employees and the international sanctions imposed on the Palestinian Authority for the past year.
Arnold Vercken, WFP country director, said: "Nearly half of the Palestinian population is thought to be food insecure. It is at an alarming level."
Currently, 1.1 million of Gaza's 1.4 million residents depend on outside food assistance, placing the Palestinian territory on the list of WFP's hunger global hotspots.
The WFP is a principal food aid provider to Palestinians, serving 640,000 primarily non-refugee Palestinians, over a third of them in Gaza.
Although al Jazeera could visit food distribution centres, speaking to the recipients proved difficult.
Some shied away and even those who initially agreed to be interviewed eventually couldn't bear the perceived shame of having their extreme poverty exposed.
Um Mahmoud Al-Hilu is a mother of eight and three months pregnant.
She said she can't remember the last time she cooked meat for her children.
Malnutrition indicators include patients being underweight, wasting, and stunting.
These are all slowly rising despite the increase of food aid from organisations such as the WFP, which raised its assistance by more than 20 per cent in the past year.
Source: Al Jazeera
UPDATED ON:
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2007
17:01 MECCA TIME, 14:01 GMT
UN says nearly half of the Palestinian population is 'food insecure' [EPA]
The UN has found that even farmers and fishermen are less unable to feed their families [Reuters]
Wheat harvest met with live ammunition in Gaza “buffer zone”
"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 …" Continue reading
Haaretz : les USA informés d'avance de l'assaut d'Israël contre la flottille
The Pyrrhic Victory of Jam and Halva
On Monday, Israel permitted jam, halva, and shaving razors to enter Gaza, and it has said that it is willing to allow additional foods such as coriander, cardamom, and cookies into Gaza, after banning them for three years.
Gisha is pleased to learn that coriander no longer presents a threat to Israeli security.
However, Israel continues to prevent the transfer of purely civilian goods, such as fabrics, fishing rods, and food wrappers, as part of what it calls "economic warfare" aimed at crippling Gaza's economy. In doing so, it denies 1.5 million human beings the right to engage in productive, dignified work.
It is not enough to permit Gaza residents to purchase Israeli-made cookies. Israel should stop banning raw materials such as industrial margarine and glucose, so that Gaza residents can produce their own cookies and restart the economy that has been paralyzed for three years.
International law requires Israel to allow the free passage of goods and people into and out of the Gaza Strip, subject only to individual security checks.
Additional details about the Israeli restrictions on goods coming into Gaza are available in a position paper by Gisha, titled: Restrictions on the transfer of goods to Gaza: Obstruction and obfuscation and in Gisha's Frequently Asked Questions on the closure.
A list of permitted and forbidden goods is available on Gisha's website.
Le Ministère des affaires étrangères israélien annonce qu’Ehud BARAK renonce à sa visite en France, ce lundi 14 juin 2010. Le motif invoqué est la crainte d’être arrêté en raison de sa responsabilité, publiquement revendiquée, dans l’attaque sanglante de la flottille internationale à vocation humanitaire FREE GAZA, dans les eaux internationales entre Chypre et la bande de Gaza, dans la nuit du 31 mai 2010.
Special thanks: Bertrand Delanoë & Rachida Dati
"Si j'étais un leader Arabe, je ne signerais jamais un accord avec Israël. C'est normal ; nous avons pris leur pays. Il est vrai que Dieu nous l'a promise, mais comment cela pourrait-il les concerner ? Notre dieu n'est pas le leur.
Il y a eu l'antisémitisme, les Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, mais était ce leur faute ? Ils ne voient qu'une seule chose : nous sommes venus et nous avons volé leurs terres. Pourquoi devraient t-ils accepter cela ?
David Ben-Gourion (le 1er Premier Ministre israélien) : Cité par Nahum Goldmann dans "le Paradoxe Juif", page 121
"Ne nous cachons pas la vérité…. Politiquement nous sommes les agresseurs et ils se défendent. Ce pays est le leur, parce qu’ils y habitent, alors que nous venons nous y installer et de leur point de vue nous voulons les chasser de leur propre pays. Derrière le terrorisme (des Arabes) il y a un mouvement qui bien que primitif n'est pas dénué d'idéalisme et d'auto-sacrifice."
David Ben-Gourion : Cité page 91 du Triangle Fatidique de Chomsky qui est paru le livre de Simha Flapan "Le Sionisme et les Palestiniens" – page 141-2, citant un discours de 1938.
"Nous devons tout faire pour nous assurer qu'ils (les Palestiniens" ne reviendront jamais."
David Ben-Gourion, dans son journal, 18 Juillet 1948, cité dans le livre de Michael Bar Zohar : "Ben-Gourion : le Prophète Armé", Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
"Nous devrions nous préparer à lancer l’offensive. Notre but est d’écraser le Liban, la Transjordanie (Jordanie) et la Syrie. Le point faible c’est le Liban, car le régime musulman y est artificiel et il nous sera facile de le miner.
Nous y établirons un Etat chrétien, puis nous écraserons la Légion Arabe, nous éliminerons la Transjordanie (Jordanie); la Syrie tombera entre nos mains. Nous bombardons alors et avancerons pour prendre Port-Saïd, Alexandrie et le Sinaï." (50)
David Ben-Gourion, mai 1948, au Chef d'Etat-Major. De Ben-Gourion, une Biographie, par Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"Si je savais qu'il était possible de sauver tous les enfants d'Allemagne en les emmenant en Angleterre, et seulement la moitié en les transférant sur la terre d'Israel, je choisirais la dernière solution parce que, devant nous, il n'y a pas que le nombre de ces enfants mais la calcul historique du peuple d'Israel."
Ben-Gourion (Cité pages 855-56 du Shabtai Teveth de Ben-Gurion dans une version légèrement différente).
David Ben-Gourion, le créateur de l'Etat d'Israel en 1948, fut l'un des leaders les plus importants du mouvement Sioniste du siècle dernier. Il a établi la capacité militaire juive (Haganah), et en 1948, il a créé l'Etat d'Israel et a lu sa déclaration.
De 1948 à 1963 (sauf pendant une courte période), il fut Premier Ministre et Ministre de la Défense.
J'ai rassemblé ci-dessous quelques citations de Ben-Gourion en espérant que cela nous aidera à comprendre ce qu'il pensait et ce qu'il croyait.
"Si j'étais un leader Arabe, je ne signerais jamais un accord avec Israël. C'est normal ; nous avons pris leur pays. Il est vrai que Dieu nous l'a promise, mais comment cela pourrait-il les concerner ? Notre dieu n'est pas le leur.
Il y a eu l'antisémitisme, les Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, mais était ce leur faute ? Ils ne voient qu'une seule chose : nous sommes venus et nous avons volé leurs terres. Pourquoi devraient t-ils accepter cela ?
David Ben-Gourion (le 1er Premier Ministre israélien) : Cité par Nahum Goldmann dans "le Paradoxe Juif", page 121
"Ne nous cachons pas la vérité…. Politiquement nous sommes les agresseurs et ils se défendent. Ce pays est le leur, parce qu’ils y habitent, alors que nous venons nous y installer et de leur point de vue nous voulons les chasser de leur propre pays. Derrière le terrorisme (des Arabes) il y a un mouvement qui bien que primitif n'est pas dénué d'idéalisme et d'auto-sacrifice."
David Ben-Gourion : Cité page 91 du Triangle Fatidique de Chomsky qui est paru le livre de Simha Flapan "Le Sionisme et les Palestiniens" – page 141-2, citant un discours de 1938.
"Nous devons tout faire pour nous assurer qu'ils (les Palestiniens" ne reviendront jamais."
David Ben-Gourion, dans son journal, 18 Juillet 1948, cité dans le livre de Michael Bar Zohar : "Ben-Gourion : le Prophète Armé", Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
Ben Gourion prévenait également en 1948 : En assurant à ses copains Sionistes que les palestiniens ne reviendraient jamais dans leurs maisons : "Les vieux mourront et les jeunes oublieront."
"Nous devrions nous préparer à lancer l’offensive. Notre but est d’écraser le Liban, la Transjordanie (Jordanie) et la Syrie. Le point faible c’est le Liban, car le régime musulman y est artificiel et il nous sera facile de le miner.
Nous y établirons un Etat chrétien, puis nous écraserons la Légion Arabe, nous éliminerons la Transjordanie (Jordanie); la Syrie tombera entre nos mains. Nous bombardons alors et avancerons pour prendre Port-Saïd, Alexandrie et le Sinaï." (50)
David Ben-Gourion, mai 1948, au Chef d'Etat-Major. De Ben-Gourion, une Biographie, par Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"Si je savais qu'il était possible de sauver tous les enfants d'Allemagne en les emmenant en Angleterre, et seulement la moitié en les transférant sur la terre d'Israel, je choisirais la dernière solution parce que, devant nous, il n'y a pas que le nombre de ces enfants mais la calcul historique du peuple d'Israel."
Ben-Gourion (Cité pages 855-56 du Shabtai Teveth de Ben-Gurion dans une version légèrement différente).
"Il ne s'agit pas de maintenir un statu-quo. Nous devons créer un Etat dynamique, orienté vers l'expansion." - Ben Gourion
"Chaque écolier sait qu'il n'y a pas de chose de ce genre dans l'histoire en tant qu'arrangement final : pas en ce qui concerne le régime, pas en ce qui concerne des frontières, et pas en ce qui concerne des accords internationaux."
Ben Gourion, Journal de guerre, 12/03/1947 suite à l'acceptation par Israel du Plan de partition des Nations-Unies du 29 novembre 1947 (Simha Flapan, "Naissance d'Israel," p.13)
"Nous marchions dehors, Ben-Gourion nous accompagnait. Allon a répété sa question : "Que doit-on faire avec la population palestinienne ?" ‘Ben-Gourion a agité la main dans un geste qui disait : "Conduisez-les dehors!"
Yitzhak Rabin, version censurée des Mémoires de Rabin, publiée dans le New York Times, 23 octobre 1979.
Partition : "Après la formation d'une grande armée à la suite de l'établissement de l'Etat, nous abolirons la partition et nous nous étendrons sur l'ensemble de la Palestine"
Ben Gourion, p.22 "La Naissance d'Israel, 1987" Simha Flapan.
"L'acceptation de la partition ne nous engage pas à renoncer à la Cisjordanie. On ne demande pas à quelqu'un de renoncer à sa vision. Nous accepterons un état dans les frontières fixées aujourd'hui -- mais les frontières des aspirations Sionistes sont les affaires des Juifs et aucun facteur externe ne pourra les limiter."
p.53, " La Naissance d'Israel, 1987" Simha Flapan
En octobre 1936, au cours de la réunion de l'exécutif de l'Agence Juive, plaidant pour une politique du transfert, Ben-Gourion a dit : "Nous ne sommes pas un Etat et la Grande-Bretagne ne le fera pas pour nous..." bien que "il n'y ait rien de mal dans l'idée."
Il a continué : "s'il était permis de déplacer un Arabe de Galilée vers la Judée, pourquoi est-il impossible de déplacer un Arabe d'Hebron vers la TransJordanie (Jordanie), qui est bien plus proche ? Il y a de vastes étendues de terres là-bas et nous sommes surpeuplés....Même la Haute Commission est d'accord sur un transfert vers la Transjordanie (Jordanie) si nous dotons les paysans de terre et d'argent. Si la Commission Peel et le gouvernement de Londres acceptent, nous enlèverons de l'agenda le problème de la terre."
Les Arabes, affirmait Ben-Gourion, ne deviendront pas sans terre en raison de l'acquisition Sioniste de la terre; ils seront transférés en Transjordanie (Jordanie).
Le 29 octobre 1936, les 21 membres de l'exécutif de l'Agence Juive ont approuvé la proposition d'un transfert des fermiers Arabes déplacés vers laTransjordanie (Jordanie). Seuls deux des quatre membres Non-Sionistes ont choisi la dissidence.
Flapan, "Le Sionisme et les Palestiniens", citant les protocoles de la reunion de l'Exécutif, p. 261
Le 12 juillet 1937, Ben-Gourion écrit dans son journal :
"Le transfert forcé des Arabes des vallées de l'Etat Juif proposé pourrait nous donner quelque chose que nous n'avons jamais eue, même lorsque nous y étions nous-mêmes à l'époque du Premier et du Second Temple"
une Galilée affranchie de sa population Arabe
Ben-Gourion est allé jusqu'à écrire : “Nous devons nous préparer à le faire” le transfert (emphase dans l'original)
Le 27 Juillet 1937, Ben-Gourion écrivait dans une lettre à son fils, Amos, âgé de 16 ans :
"Nous avons n'avons jamais voulu déposséder les Arabes [ mais ] parce que la Grande-Bretagne leur donne une partie du pays qui nous a été promis, il est juste que les Arabes de notre Etat soient transférés vers la partie Arabe"
Le 5 octobre 1937, Ben-Gourion écrivait dans une lettre à son fils, Amos, âgé de 16 ans :
"Nous devons expulser les Arabes et prendre leur place.... Et, si nous devons utiliser la force -non pas pour déposséder les Arabes du Negev et de la Transjordanie, mais pour garantir notre propre droit à nous installer dans ces lieux - puis nous avons la force à notre disposition."
"il est très possible que les Arabes des pays voisins viendront les aider contre nous. Mais notre force sera supérieure à la leur. Non seulement parce que nous serons mieux organisés et mieux équipés, mais parce que derrière nous, il y a une plus grande force encore, supérieure en quantité et en qualité... l'ensemble de la génération plus jeune des Juifs d'Europe et d'Amérique."
Ben-Gourion, Zichronot [Mémoires], Vol. 4, p.297-299, p. 330-331.
Voir également : Teveth, Ben-Gourion et les Palestiniens Arabes, p. 182-189
Ben-Gourion dans un discours au Comité Central de la Histadrut le 30 décembre 1947 :
Dans le secteur assigné à l'Etat Juif, il n'y a pas plus de 520.000 juifs et environ 350.000 Non-Juifs, en grande partie des Arabes. Avec les Juifs de Jérusalem, la population totale de l'Etat Juif à l'époque de son établissement sera d'environ un million, incluant presque 40% de Non-Juifs.
Une telle composition (de la population) ne fournit pas une base stable pour un Etat Juif. Ce fait (démographique) doit être vu dans toute sa clarté et avec finesse. Avec une telle composition de (population), il ne peut même pas y avoir de certitude absolue que le contrôle restera entre les mains de la majorité juive.... Il ne peut y avoir aucun Etat Juif stable et fort sans majorité juive d'au moins 60%.
Le 6 février 1948, pendant un Conseil du parti du Mapai, Ben-Gourion a répondu à une remarque d'un membre de l'assistance que : "Nous n'y avons aucune terre" (dans les collines et les montagnes à l'ouest de Jérusalem) en disant :
"La guerre nous donnera la terre. Les concepts de "nôtre" et de "pas à nous" sont des concepts de paix, seulement, et en temps de guerre, ils perdent leur signification entière "
(Ben-Gourion, Journal intime De Guerre, Vol. 1, date d'entrée le 6 février 1948. p.211)
En s'adressant le jour suivant au Conseil du Mapai, Ben-Gourion a déclaré :
"Depuis votre entrée dans Jérusalem, par Lifta, Romema... il n'y a aucun Arabe. 100% de Juifs. Depuis que Jérusalem a été détruit par les Romains, elle n'a jamais été aussi si Juive. Dans beaucoup de quartiers Arabes de l'ouest, on ne voit pas un seul Arabe. Je ne suppose pas que cela changera... Ce qui s'est passé à Jérusalem... est susceptible de se produire dans beaucoup de régions du pays... dans les six, huit ou dix mois de la campagne, il y aura certainement de grands changements dans la composition de la population du pays."
(Ben-Gourion, Journal intime De Guerre, Vol. 1, date d'entrée le 7 Février 1948. p. 210-211)
Et deux mois plus tard, alors que Ben-Gourion parlait au Comité d'Actions Sionistes, le 6 avril, Ben-Gourion a déclaré :
"Nous ne pourrons pas gagner la guerre si, pendant la guerre, nous ne peuplons pas le pays de bas en haut, l'est et l'ouest de la Galilee, le Neguev et le secteur de Jérusalem....Je crois que la guerre apportera également dans son sillage un grand changement dans la répartition de la population Arabe."
[Ben-Gourion, Behilahem Yisrael, Tel Aviv, Mapai Press, 1952, pp. 86-87]
Ben-Gourion a écrit dans son journal intime le 12 juillet 1937 :
"Le transfert forcé des Arabes des vallées de l'Etat Juif prévu.... Nous devons coller à cette conclusion de la même manière que nous avons saisi la Déclaration de Balfour, encore plus que ça, de la même manière que nous avons saisi le Sionisme lui-même."
(Ben-Gourion, Zichronot [Mémoires], Vol. 4, p. 299)
Traduction : MG pour ISM
Arna's Children, Les enfants d'Arna
Produced by: Osnat Trabelsi & Pieter van Huystee
Written & Directed by: Juliano Mer Khamis & Danniel Danniel
"The child under military occupation is affected psychologically, emotionally and academically. So if one wants to support and strengthen these children, one has to consider them from all these aspects. The socialisation of the child is the most basic thing in its life; if you see children only as individuals, in fact you can be indirectly deepening their problems... Our principle is to serve the child: to turn the pyramid [of education and authority] upside down."
Arna Mer-Khamis
Helen Thomas and the moral failure of US liberals
The ostracism of Helen Thomas, the doyenne of the White House press corps, over her comment that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Poland, Germany, America and elsewhere is revealing in several ways. In spite of an apology, the 89-year-old has been summarily retired by the Hearst newspaper group, dropped by her agent, spurned by the White House, and denounced by long-time friends and colleagues.
Thomas earned a reputation as a combative journalist, at least by American standards, with a succession of administrations over their Middle East policies, culminating in Bush officials boycotting her for her relentless criticisms of the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. But the reaction to her latest remarks suggest that, if there is one topic in American public life on which the boundaries of what can and cannot be said are still tightly policed, it is Israel.
Undoubtedly, Thomas' opinions, as she expressed them in an unguarded moment, were inappropriate and required an apology. It is true, as she says, that Palestine was occupied and the land taken from the Palestinians by Jewish immigrants with no right to it barring a Biblical title deed. But 62 years on from Israel's creation, most Jewish citizens have no home to go to in Poland and Germany -- or in Iraq and Yemen, for that matter. There is also an uncomfortable echo in her words of the chauvinism underpinning demands from some Jews -- and many Israelis -- that Palestinians should "go home to the 22 Arab states."
But Thomas did apologize and, after that, a line ought to have been drawn under the affair -- as it surely would have been had she made any other kind of faux pas. Instead, she has been denounced as an anti-Semite, even by her former friends.
The reasoning of one, Lanny Davis, counsel to the White House in the Clinton administration, was typical. Davis, who said he previously considered himself "a close friend," asked whether anyone would be "protective of Helen's privileges and honors if she had been asking Blacks to return to Africa, or Native Americans to Asia and South America, from which they came 8,000 or more years ago?"
It is that widely-accepted analogy, appropriating the black and Native American experience in a wholly misguided way, that reveals in stark fashion the moral failure of American liberals. In their blindness to the current relations of power in the US, most critics of Thomas contribute to the very intolerance they claim to be challenging.
Thomas is an Arab-American, of Lebanese descent, whose remarks were publicized in the immediate wake of Israel's lethal commando attack on a flotilla of aid ships trying to break the siege of Gaza. Unlike most Americans, who were half-wakened from their six-decade Middle East slumber by the killing of at least nine Turkish activists, Thomas has been troubled by the Palestinians' plight for much of her long lifetime.
She was in her late twenties when Israel ethnically cleansed three-quarters of a million Palestinians from most of Palestine, a move endorsed by the fledgling United Nations. She was in her mid-forties when Israel took over the rest of Palestine and parts of Egypt and Syria in a war that dealt a crushing blow to Arab identity and pride and made Israel a favored ally of the US. In her later years she has witnessed Israel's repeated destruction of Lebanon, her parents' homeland, and the slow confinement and erasure of the neighboring Palestinian people. Both have occurred under a duplicitous American "peace process" while Washington has poured hundreds of billions of dollars into Israel's coffers.
It is therefore entirely understandable if, despite her own personal success, she feels a simmering anger not only at what has taken place throughout her lifetime in the Middle East but also at the silencing of all debate about it in the US by the Washington elites she counted as friends and colleagues.
While she has many long-standing Jewish friends in Washington -- making the anti-Semite charge implausible -- she has also seen them and others promote injustice in the Middle East. Doubtless she, like many of us, has been exasperated at the toothless performance of the press corps she belongs to in holding the White House to account in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon and Israel-Palestine.
It is with this context in mind that we can draw a more fitting analogy. We should ask instead: how harshly should Thomas be judged were she a black professional who, seeing yet another injustice like the video of Rodney King being beaten to within an inch of his life by white policemen, had said white Americans ought to "go home to Europe?"
This analogy accords more closely with the reality of power relations in the US between Arabs and Jews. Thomas is not a representative of the oppressor white man disrespecting the oppressed black man, as Davis suggests; she is the oppressed black man hitting back at the oppressor. Her comments shocked not least because they denied an image that continues to dominate in modern America of the vulnerable Jew, a myth that persists even as Jews have become the most successful minority in the country.
Thomas let her guard down and her anger and resentment show. She generalized unfairly. She sounded bitter. She needed to -- and has -- apologized. But she does not deserve to be pilloried and blacklisted.
Jonathan Cook, The Electronic Intifada, 10 June 2010
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.
We Are Watching You - Shayfeen.com / Brave Egyptian women
A BBC documentary about women who decided to act and denounce fraud during the Parliamentary Elections in Egypt
Les enfants-soldats du gouvernement somalien, allié des Etats-Unis
REUTERS/CANDACE FEIT
Seuls deux pays n'ont pas ratifié la Convention internationale des droits de l'enfant, qui fixe à 15 ans l'âge minimum d'enrôlement volontaire et à 18 ans l'âge de participation directe aux hostilités, il s'agit des Etats-Unis et de la Somalie.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Finkielcrotte is back
LEMONDE.FR | 13.06.10 |
Le philosophe français Alain Finkielkraut a dénoncé dimanche le danger que représente à ses yeux "un mouvement islamo-gauchiste qui est ostensiblement indifférent à la mémoire de la Shoah". Invité à la 7e conférence sur l'enseignement de la Shoah, organisé par le mémorial de Yad Vashem à Jérusalem, M. Finkielkraut a déploré que l'enseignement de la Shoah, notamment dans les écoles, "soit si difficile en France". Selon lui, "la situation au Proche-Orient risque d'amplifier ce mouvement de rage contre la mémoire de la Shoah qui existe" dans le pays.
Dans une interview à l'AFP, le philosophe a désigné ce mouvement comme "l'union de gens issus de l'immigration et d'intellectuels progressistes, une sorte d'arc islamo-gauchiste qui m'inquiète". "Je crois que le moment où Auschwitz sera boycotté comme un produit israélien peut arriver", a-t-il ajouté, en faisant allusion au mouvement international pro-palestinien qui appelle au boycottage économique et culturel d'Israël.
De son côté, François Zimeray, ambassadeur pour les droits de l'homme au ministère français des Affaires étrangères, également invité, a regretté que "la perception déformée de la Shoah par une partie du public en France amène à une négation d'Auschwitz". "Quand j'entends en France des gens comparer Gaza à un camp de concentration, c'est du révisionnisme contre lequel nous devons lutter", a-t-il estimé.
Nommé l'an dernier par Bernard Kouchner comme responsable de la mémoire de la Shoah, M. Zimeray a participé cette année à la conférence de Yad Vashem en tant que délégué de la France à la "Task Force Internationale" (ITF) sur l'enseignement de la Shoah. Cet organisme, créé en 2000, compte 27 pays membres et a pour vocation de développer l'éducation sur la Shoah, la commémoration, la recherche et la lutte contre l'antisémitisme.
Israel Defense Forces-hired driver: 'Why did they kill so few?'
Pity the Nation
Ultra-Orthodox Jewish men write on artillery shells and dance with Israeli soldiers as a mobile artillery unit fires into Lebanon, July 24, 2006. (REUTERS/Gil Cohen Magen) 
Pity the nation that is full of beliefs and empty of religion.
Pity the nation that wears a cloth it does not weave, eats a bread it does not harvest, and drinks a wine that flows not from its own wine-press.
Pity the nation that acclaims the bull as hero, and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful.
Pity the nation that despises a passion in its dream, yet submits in its awakening.
Pity the nation that raises not its voice when it walks in a funeral, boasts not except among its ruins, and will rebel not save when its neck is laid between the sword and the block.
Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox, whose philosopher is a juggler, and whose art is the art of patching and mimicking.
Pity the nation that welcomes its new ruler with trumpetings and farewells him with hootings, only to welcome another with trumpetings again.
Pity the nation whose sages are dumb with years and whose strong men are yet in the cradle.
Pity the nation divided into fragments, each fragment deeming itself a nation.
Khalil Gibran
The garden of the Prophet (1934)
Noam Chomsky Palestine Israel occupation 101
For more info or to purchase the DVD please visit: www.occupation101.com.
VIDEO : İsraeli soldiers murdering Peace Activist on The Freedom Flotilla
The murder of Furkan Dogan (Turkish-American), 19 year old teenage boy by Israeli soldiers.
Abbas to Obama: I'm against lifting the Gaza naval blockade
Charte du Mouvement de la Résistance Islamique - Palestine
A short primer on Israeli propaganda for media dummies* By Stuart Littlewood
Stuart Littlewood deconstructs the Israeli propaganda that has been flooding the airwaves following Israel’s murder of humanitarian activists aboard the Gaza-bound international aid flotilla, most notably from the orifice of the Israeli prime minister’s spokesman, Australian-born Mark Regev, and debunks the propaganda manual used by Israeli officials and stooges to hoodwink Westerners.
What were Israel’s excuses for hijacking the Free Gaza ships in international waters and imprisoning their passengers after gunning down nine of them and wounding several more?
- There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and
- Israel already allows sufficient humanitarian aid into Gaza so the flotilla was “an armada of hate and violence", said Israel’s deputy foreign minister.
But according to John Ging, United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) director of operations in Gaza, “It’s a struggle to survive [with] the infrastructure and water and sanitation in a state of collapse and all that goes with that... People are at their wits’ end to understand when all of this will come to an end.”
- If the Free Gaza ships delivered the humanitarian cargo to the Israeli port of Ashdod, Israel would ensure it was delivered to Gaza after checking it for arms.
That’s very unlikely. The report “Failing Gaza: No rebuilding, no recovery, no more excuses” by a group of 16 European non-governmental organizations, published in December 2009, showed that the Israelis allow only a feeble trickle and what is permitted changes from day to day.
- Israel could not allow the ships into Gaza without searching them for arms that might be of use to Hamas.
There are peaceful alternatives for checking cargoes. Besides, it’s time Israel implemented The Agreement on Movement and Access it signed in November 2005, under which it promised to allow its crossings into Gaza to “operate continuously” so that people and goods could move freely.
The agreement also provides for
- the reduction of obstacles to movement within the West Bank
- bus and truck convoys between the West Bank and Gaza
- the building of a new seaport in Gaza
- reopening of the airport in Gaza
There would then be no need for ships bringing humanitarian aid.
The European Council on 8 December 2009 stated: “The EU again reiterates its calls for an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza. In this context, the council calls for the full implementation of The Agreement on Movement and Access.”
Israel has ignored countless verbal appeals. The EU is in position to twist its arm because it has granted Israel privileged access to European markets under the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the plug can be pulled. These trading advantages are conditional on Israel showing respect for human rights and democratic principles. Compliance is an essential element, not an option.
- Israel’s interference with the mercy ships was an act of self-defence against the threat posed by Hamas firing rockets and mortars out of Gaza.
This isn’t about rockets. A ceasefire, brokered by Egypt, was negotiated with Hamas in June 2008. Hamas honoured the agreement, firing no rockets and restraining other resistance groups. Israel broke the ceasefire on 4 November by suddenly making a military incursion into Gaza and killing seven members of Hamas. Operation Cast Lead followed, supposedly to stop the rockets. The deaths of over 1,400 people and the maiming of thousands more were unnecessary. All Israel needed to do was observe the ceasefire. It chose not to.
And whatever Israel may say, the blockade inflicts “collective punishment” on the people of Gaza, which is a violation of international law and Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
- Hamas wants to destroy Israel.
Not true. Hamas has said it will accept Israel within its internationally-recognized 1967 borders, which is the same position the United Nations has adopted.
- Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu now says "dozens of thugs" from what he called "an extremist, terrorism-supporting" organization were on-board the flotilla.
No evidence has been produced so far.
- Israel is a vibrant democracy.
Actually, Israel is a racist ethnocracy, which discriminates in countless vile ways against its Arab minority.
As usual, Israel's chief propagandist, Mark Regev, was on hand to give the tragedy the benefit of his spin.
- "We did everything we could to avoid violence... They [the aid workers] chose the path of confrontation… Our boarding party was attacked with live fire…”
No such weapons were found.
- "Violence was initiated by these activists..."
No, violence was initiated by armed troops storming the peace ships in the dead of night.
- "We didn't attack them, they attacked us... We tried to do, in accordance with international law, a peaceful intervention as they were entering a blockaded area..."
International law does not permit armed intervention in international waters, and the blockaded area has no legal basis.
- "There are no shortages in Gaza..."
That is not what the UN and countless NGOs and charities say.
Meanwhile, in London, Israel’s ambassador, Ron Prosor, was saying:
- “The people on board the ships behaved appallingly… they really did everything in order to provoke and confront…”
What is confrontational about sailing lawfully and peacefully on a humanitarian mission?
- “We disengaged completely out of Gaza…”
No, Israel remains in occupation of Gaza's airspace and coastal waters and in control of all entrances and exits except on the Egyptian border. It has Gaza bottled up.
As always, newspaper and television editors, reporters and presenters were happy to retell the Israeli version of events, the distortion and the plain lies, along with the exaggerated language such as “extremists” and “militants” to describe aid workers, without bothering to examine or question the material in any way.
More pearls of wisdom from Regev
Mark Regev, the Israeli prime minister’s spokesman, is a rich source of propaganda nonsense, for example…
- "It’s not just Israel who refuses to speak to Hamas. It’s the whole international community… Most of the democratic world refuses to have a relationship with Hamas because Hamas has refused to meet the most minimal benchmarks of international behaviour."
Isn’t that a little cheeky, Mr Regev, coming from a regime widely condemned for war crimes, piracy and mega-lawlessness?
- "It was the former UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, that put four benchmarks on the table. And he said, speaking for the international community…That if Hamas reforms itself… If Hamas recognizes my country’s right to live in freedom… If Hamas renounces terrorism against innocent civilians… If Hamas supports international agreements that are being signed and agreed to concerning the peace process… then the door is open. But unfortunately – tragically – Hamas has failed to meet even one of those four benchmarks. And that’s why today Hamas is isolated internationally. Even the United Nations refuses to speak to Hamas.
Which of those benchmarks has Israel met, Mr Regev?
If you’re getting the impression that Israel is going all-out to demonize Hamas you’d be right, as we’ll see later.
- "Iran’spPresident openly talks about wiping Israel off the map. The Iranian nuclear programme is a threat, not just to my country, but to the entire region. And it’s incumbent upon us all to do what needs to be done to keep from proliferating.”
Why is Israel the only state in the region not to have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Mr Regev? Are we all supposed to believe that Israel's 200 (or is it 400?) nuclear warheads pose no threat to the region? Would you also tell us why Israel hasn’t signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, and hasn’t ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty or the Chemical Weapons Convention? What proof do you have of Iran's nuclear weapons plans?
And why do you deliberately misquote Mr Ahmadinejad? For the record, the Iranian president said, quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Israel’s Crapaganda Handbook
The Israeli administration’s scriptwriters use a propaganda training manual that teaches the art of lying and how to sugar-coat their poison so that gullible audiences will easily swallow it. Everything Israel dislikes, and everything that thwarts their lust for domination, is now labeled “Iranian-backed”… They would have us believe that everyone in the West – and that includes you and me and the dog – is in mortal danger from Iran and must therefore huddle together in a collective act of aggression orchestrated by Tel Aviv and Washington.
Situations are defined in language that suits only Israel’s case and ensures that Israel’s narrative, which has little or nothing to do with truth, is the one that is carried by the media.
Take, for example, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the UN in 2009. Referring to the critical Goldstone report on Israel’s blitzkrieg against Gaza, he said:
Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?
The false choice is a propaganda favourite. Why would anyone wish to stand alongside either? The fact is, Israel reneged on a ceasefire agreement just before it launched its murderous onslaught, which it had been planning for months.
In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza… We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base 50 miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent.
Israel, camped on the Gazans’ doorstep and still occupying Gaza’s airspace and coastal waters, lobs high explosives into the tiny enclave’s 1.5 million starving and defenceless civilians, and there’s no escape because all exits are sealed.
…If Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.
What exactly are these “risks for peace” Israel has so bravely taken? In 62 years what peace dividends has Israel delivered?
The 116-page manual is designed to help the worldwide Zionist movement win the propaganda war, keep their ill-gotten territorial gains and persuade international audiences to accept that their crimes are necessary and in line with “shared values” between Israel and the West.
It was written by The Israel Project, which describes itself as “devoted to educating the press and the public about Israel while promoting security, freedom and peace”. The organization claims to provide journalists, leaders and opinion-formers with “accurate information about Israel”.
What it really does is undermine with clever words and discredited techniques the inalienable rights pledged by the UN to all peoples, including the Palestinians.
The manual teaches the sort of propaganda bollox that Israel’s scribblers and drivellers use to try to justify the slaughter, the ethnic cleansing, the land-grabbing, the cruelty and their blatant disregard for international law and UN resolutions, and make it all smell sweet with a liberal sprinkling of persuasive words. It is designed to hoodwink hard-bitten media types into believing that we actually share values with the racist regime in Israel and that its abominable behaviour is therefore deserving of support.
Priority: isolate Hamas
How does it do that?The manual’s strategy from the start is to demonize the democratically-elected Hamas and rob the resistance movement and the Palestinian population of their human rights. It is packed with advice such as this:
- “Clearly differentiate between the Palestinian people and Hamas… Hamas is a terrorist organization – Americans get that already. But if it sounds like you are attacking the Palestinian people (even though they elected Hamas) rather than their leadership, you will lose public support.”
- "The big picture approach is this: You must isolate Hamas as:
- A critical cause of the delay in achieving a two-state solution
- The biggest source of harm to the Palestinian people, and
- The reason why Israel must defend its people from living in terror.
- Read from the Hamas Charter. Now, here’s how to attack Hamas: indict them with their own indoctrination materials. Yes, people know Hamas is a terrorist organization – but they don’t know just how terrifying Hamas can be. The absolute best way to heighten their awareness is to read from the Hamas Charter itself. Don’t just “quote” from it. Read it. Out loud. Again and again. Hand it out to everyone."
That’s a very good point. Hamas is mad not to have rewritten its charter. Israel’s barbarous behaviour makes Hamas look good, but all that will count for nothing if the charter remains unchanged.
- "Israel’s right to defensible borders: The big picture is that they [specifically the Americans, but equally the British and other Europeans] believe that Hamas’s leadership of Gaza has made Israel and the region less safe… they are willing to grant Israel more leeway in resisting calls to give more land for more peace."
Here we see the motive for demonizing Hamas: Israel wants more leeway to continue its land-grabs and colonization. The idea that they are “giving land for peace” is utterly absurd – they are required to return land they have seized at gunpoint.
- “If… If… If…Then. Put the burden on Hamas to make the first move for peace by using If’s. If Hamas reforms… If Hamas recognize our right to exist… If Hamas renounces terrorism… If Hamas supports international peace agreements… then we are willing to make peace today.”
Just substitute Israel for Hamas. It reads much better.
- “Peace can only be made with adversaries who want to make peace with you. Terrorist organizations like Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are, by definition, opposed to peaceful coexistence, and determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how do you negotiate with those who want you dead?”
Hamas and Hezbollah are only regarded as terrorists by the White House and Tel Aviv, and by US-Israeli stooges elsewhere.
The definition Bush used to blacklist those it suited him to accuse of committing, threatening to commit or supporting terrorism goes as follows…
“The term “terrorism” means an activity that –
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended –
(a) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(b) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(c) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.
This of course fits the US and Israel perfectly.
- "There is never, ever, any justification for the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children. Never ... civilized people do not target innocent women and children for death.”
So where does that leave Israel, which recently killed 320 children in Gaza and 773 civilians including 109 women? From 2000 up to the start of Operation Cast Lead in December 2008 Israel had slaughtered 4,790 Palestinians in their homeland, including 952 children, according to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem. In the same period Palestinians killed 490 Israelis in Israel including 84 children. So Israel’s kill-rate is nearly 10 to 1, and rising since the blitzkrieg on Gaza.
Israelis are also expert at making families homeless. Since 1967, according to the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), Israel has demolished in total 24,145 homes in the occupied territories, including 4,247 (a UN figure) destroyed during Operation Cast Lead.
Israel talks a lot about its right to defend itself. Here is the rationale:
- “Americans fundamentally believe that a democracy has a right to protect its people and its borders… There is one and only one argument that will work for Israel:
(1) As a democracy, Israel has the right and the responsibility to defend its borders and protect its people.
(2) Terrorist groups, including Iran-backed Hezbollah and Hamas, continue to pose a direct threat to Israeli security and have repeatedly taken innocent Israeli lives.
(3) Israel is America’s one and only true ally in the region. In these particularly unstable and dangerous times, Israel should not be forced to go it alone.
(4) With America’s financial assistance, Israel can defend its borders, protect its people, and provide invaluable assistance to the American effort against the war against terrorism.”
But it seems that Americans don’t believe in democracy enough to allow Palestinian democracy to flourish.
- “When the terror ends, Israel will no longer need to have challenging checkpoints to inspect goods and people. When the terror ends we will no longer need a security fence.”
No rockets are coming out of the West Bank, so why is the wall still there – and still being built? Why are the occupation troops still there? Why are hundreds of checkpoints still there? Why is Israel still stealing land, demolishing Palestinian homes and building settlements there?
- "Remind people – again and again – that Israel wants peace. Reason One: If Americans see no hope for peace… they will not want their government to spend tax dollars or their president’s clout on helping Israel. Reason Two: The speaker that is perceived as being most for peace will win the debate... peace should be at the core of whatever message you wish to convey."
Israelis do NOT want peace and never have. They failed to honour previous peace accords. Every action is directed at provoking security crises and keeping the conflict boiling until they have stolen enough land and established enough '”acts on the ground” – Jews-only settlements, highways, disconnected Palestinian bantustans – to enable them to re-draw the map to suit their expansionist agenda and make the occupation permanent.
- "Draw direct parallels between Israel and America – including the need to defend against terrorism... The more you focus on the similarities between Israel and America, the more likely you are to win the support of those who are neutral. Indeed, Israel … faces many of the same challenges as America in protecting their citizens."
Israel’s strategy is dependent on the false idea that they are victims of terror and Western nations need to rally round Israel for mutual protection.
- "The language of Israel is the language of America: 'democracy’, 'freedom’, 'security' and 'peace'. These four words are at the core of the American political, economic, social and cultural systems, and they should be repeated as often as possible because they resonate with virtually every American… Remind your audience that Israel wants peace and then repeat the messages of democracy, freedom and peace over and over again.... we need to repeat the message, on average, ten times to be effective… But don’t confuse messages with facts.... "
Right, never let facts get in the way of a good message! The only word that matters to Israel is security (at everyone else’s expense, of course). How can democracy be a shared value when Israel is a nasty ethnocracy? How can freedom be a shared value when the world is still waiting for Israel to end the occupation and allow the Palestinians their freedom.
- “How can the current Palestinian leadership honestly say it will pursue peace when previous leaders rejected an offer to create a Palestinian state just a few short years ago and now refuse to live up to their responsibilities as outlined in the Road Map?”
This refers to Ehud Barak's so-called "generous offer”, a favourite myth. It wasn't enough that the Palestinians, at the time of the Oslo Agreements in 1993, were willing to concede 78 per cent of the land that was originally theirs, accept the remaining 22 per cent and recognize Israel within “Green Line” borders (i.e. the 1949 Armistice Line), Barak wanted to include 69 Israeli settlements within the Palestinians’ 22 per cent. He also demanded that the Palestinian territories be placed under "temporary Israeli control", meaning Israeli military and administrative control indefinitely. The “generous offer also gave Israel control over all the border crossings of the new Palestinian state. What nation in the world would accept that?
- “Why is the world so silent about the written, vocal, stated aims of Hamas?”
Why is the world silent about the written, stated aims of the racist regime and its political parties? Read their manifestos.
- “The situation in the Middle East may be complicated, but all parties should adopt a simple approach: peace first, political boundaries second.”
Why should Palestinians renounce resistance while Israel’s jackboot is still on their throat? The international community should first insist on Israel’s compliance with international law and the many UN resolutions it has defied. The boundaries are already defined by these. Whatever issues then remain to be decided, Palestinians should not have to negotiate with a gun to their heads.
- "Bottom line: What will happen if we fail to get the world to care about the fact that Israeli parents in southern Israel need to literally dodge rockets when they drive their children to kindergarten in the morning?”
Only one in 500 makeshift Qassam rockets causes a fatality. The devastation and carnage resulting from the barrage of Israel’s state-of-the-art rocketry targeted on Gaza is a very different story.
- “Humanize Rockets: Paint a vivid picture of what life is like in Israeli communities that are vulnerable to attack. Yes, cite the number of rocket attacks that have occurred. But immediately follow that up with what it is like to make the nightly trek to the bomb shelter.”
Israel claims 12,000 rockets were fired from Gaza in the eight years up to the start of Operation Cast Lead. Would they care to tell the world how many bombs, rockets and shells (including the illegal and prohibited variety) Israel’s F-16s, tanks, armed drones and navy gunboats poured into the densely-packed humanity that is Gaza in the same period? Probably not.
And Israelis are careful not to mention that the township of Sderot, targeted by Gaza’s rockets and a major propaganda asset for Regev and company, is built on the ruins of an ethnically cleansed Palestinian village whose inhabitants were forced to flee by Jewish terrorists.
- “Living together, side by side. This is the best way to describe the ultimate vision of a two-state solution without using the phrase.”
Sounds cute and fluffy, but who would want to live alongside bigots and extremists who have made your life hell for 62 years?
- "When talking about a Palestinian partner, it is essential to distinguish between Hamas and everyone else. Only the most anti-Israel, pro- Palestinian American expects Israel to negotiate with Hamas, so you have to be clear that you are seeking a 'moderate Palestinian partner'."
What gives anyone, American or Israeli, the right to ignore a nation’s democratically elected representatives? And where are the moderate Israeli partners?
- "The fight is over ideology, not land; terror, not territory. Thus, you must avoid using Israel’s religious claims to land as a reason why Israel should not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look extremist to people who are not religious Christians or Jews.”
If the fight isn’t about land, why has Israel been stealing it? And why won’t they give it back when told to by the UN?
- "Think pro-Palestinian…I particularly want to reach out to Palestinian mothers who have lost their children. No parent should have to bury their child.”
Reach for the sick-bag. Israel won’t even allow cement into Gaza to build the graves.
- "And so I say to my Palestinian colleagues … you can stop the bloodshed. You can stop the suicide bombings and rocket attacks. If you really want to, you can put an end to this cycle of violence. If you won’t do it for our children, do it for your children.”
This is recommended as “an effective sound bite” for pro-Israel activists.
- "I want to see a future where the Palestinians govern themselves. Israel does not want to govern a single Palestinian. Not one. We want them to govern themselves. We want them to have complete self-determination."
Pure tosh! That’s not what Israel’s political parties are pledging. For decades Israel has dismissed the Palestinians’ right to self-determination. It is desperate to snuff out Palestine's fledgling democracy and destroy its chosen government.
What’s to become of the Holy City?
- "The toughest issue to communicate will be the final resolution of Jerusalem. Americans overwhelmingly want Israel to be in charge of the religious holy sites and are frankly afraid of the consequences should Israel turn over control to the Palestinians.”
Israel is in control right now and prevents Muslims and Christians from outside the city from visiting the holy places. Israel has proved it can’t be trusted. In any case, the UN's partition plan decreed that Jerusalem should become a “corpus separatum" – an international city – under international management.
And here’s a final example of the twisted mentality of those who wrote the manual:
- “The force undermining peace is Iran and their proxies Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. You must not call Hamas just Hamas. Call them what they are: Iran-backed Hamas. Indeed, when they [the West] know that Iran is behind Hamas and Hezbollah, they are much more supportive of Israel.”
By the same token should we call the racist regime what it is – US-backed Israel or US proxy Israel? Take your pick.
In addition to their expertise in disinformation the Israelis are adept at concealing or destroying the evidence of their crimes. We saw it again with the confiscation of the flotilla passengers’ cameras, phones, laptops and other personal effects. If they ever get them back they’ll be corrupted. Israel also makes it difficult for even VIPs to enter Gaza – they don’t want outsiders inspecting their major crime scene. Anything to obstruct justice and make it difficult to bring their thugs to book.
Israel’s dirty tricks will be to no avail in the end. They are beginning to lose the propaganda war. That was inevitable. In the long run you cannot succeed with a communications programme based on lies and deception. Even the best public relations is only as good as the “product” or brand, and “Brand Israel’s” reputation was never great. It has now fallen off a cliff. The truth is spreading despite big efforts by mainstream media to block or disguise it.
The thing we must cling to is the obligation that binds all decent people to respect and promote human rights. The following words, written nearly 62 years ago, explain why good will eventually triumph over the selfish and evil outpourings of the Israeli crapaganda machine.
Now, Therefore the General Assembly proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. For further information please visit www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk.
Thanks to Dr David Morrison for sending me the Sadaka Briefing Papers that inspired this article. See: http://www.sadaka.ie/Files/Israels_bogus_excuses_for_piracy.pdf and http://www.sadaka.ie/Files/The_blockade_of_Gaza_must_be_lifted_completely.pdf
http://www.redress.cc/palestine/slittlewood20100609
"J’ai été enlevé par Israël. J’ai été abandonné par mon pays."
Tout d’abord, je dois m’excuser d’avoir pris si longtemps pour mettre à jour mon blog. Les événements des derniers jours ont été fiévreux, pour ne pas dire plus, et je suis encore en train d’essayer de tirer au clair ce qui s’est produit.
Voilà une semaine à cette même heure que je me trouvais sur le pont supérieur du Mavi Marmara, et que j’ai d’abord aperçu au loin des navires de guerre israéliens, tandis qu’ils s’approchaient de la flotille humanitaire. Je n’imaginais guère combien ce qui allait bientôt se produire serait meurtrier et sanglant.
Ce que je vais écrire ici est factuel, jusqu’au dernier mot. Rien n’est de l’ordre de l’opinion ni de l’analyse, et c’est à vous, lecteur, que j’en laisse le soin.
Après avoir repéré les navires de guerre à distance (aux environs de onze heures du soir), les organisateurs ont enjoint aux passagers d’enfiler leurs gilets de sauvetage et de rester à l’intérieur tandis qu’ils géraient la situation. Les navires de guerre et les hélicoptères qui les accompagnaient sont restés au loin durant plusieurs heures.
A deux heures du matin, heure locale, les organisateurs m’ont appris qu’ils avaient modifié le trajet du bateau, le plus loin possible d’Israël, le plus profondément possible dans les eaux internationales. Ils ne souhaitaient pas de confrontation avec l’armée israélienne, du moins pas de nuit. Juste après quatre heures du matin, les Israéliens ont attaqué le bateau, dans les eaux internationales et hors de toute provocation. Ils ont utilisé des gaz lacrymogènes, lancé des grenades assourdissantes, et des balles d’acier gainées de caoutchouc ont été tirées de presque toutes les directions.
Des douzaines de canots rapides transportant en moyenne quinze à vingt soldats israéliens, armés jusqu’aux dents, ont cerné le Mavi Marmara qui transportait quelque six cents civils non armés. A un moment, deux hélicoptères rôdaient au-dessus du bateau. Des commandos à bord des canots à moteur se sont joints à la fusillade, utilisant des balles explosives avant qu’aucun des soldats n’ait pris pied sur le bateau.
Deux civils non armés ont été tués à quelques mètres de moi. Des douzaines de civils non armés ont été blessés sous mes yeux mêmes.
L’un des soldats israéliens, armé d’un lourd fusil automatique et d’un pistolet, a été maîtrisé par plusieurs passagers, qui l’ont désarmé. Ils n’ont pas fait usage de ses armes mais les ont jetées à la mer par-dessus bord.
Après ce qui a paru durer une trentaine de minutes, des passagers du bateau ont levé un drapeau blanc. L’armée israélienne a continué à tirer des balles explosives. Les organisateurs du bateau ont annoncé par haut-parleur la reddition du bateau. L’armée israélienne a continué à tirer des balles explosives.
J’ai été le dernier à quitter le pont supérieur. En bas, dans les dortoirs, tous les passagers s’étaient regroupés. Etat de choc, colère, peur, humiliation, chaos. Des médecins couraient dans toutes les directions en tentant de soigner les blessés, il y avait du sang sur le sol, des larmes coulaient sur les visages des gens, des cris de douleur et de deuil s’entendaient partout. La mort était dans l’air. Trois civils grièvement blessés étaient soignés à même le sol de l’espace de réception du bateau, leurs vêtements trempés de sang. Des passagers se tenaient à côté, en état de choc ; quelques-uns récitaient des versets du Coran pour les apaiser, les médecins tentaient désespérément de sauver les blessés.
Plusieurs annonces ont été faites par haut-parleur en hébreu, en arabe et en anglais. « Ceci est un message à l’armée israélienne, nous nous sommes rendus. Nous ne sommes pas armés. Nous avons des blessés graves. S’il vous plaît, venez les chercher. Nous n’attaquerons pas ». Il n’y a pas eu de réponse.
Un des passagers, membre du parlement israélien, a écrit en hébreu une pancarte avec exactement le même message ; elle le portait en même temps qu’un drapeau blanc et s’est approchée des fenêtres à l’extérieur desquelles les soldats israéliens se tenaient debout. Ils ont pointé vers sa tête leurs fusils à guidage laser et l’ont obligée à s’écarter.
Un citoyen britannique a fait la même tentative avec une pancarte en anglais mais en portant un drapeau britannique et en se dirigeant vers d’autres soldats postés à d’autres fenêtres. Ils ont répondu de la même manière.
Trois heures plus tard, la mort des trois blessés était avérée. Les soldats israéliens qui leur avaient refusé les soins avaient réussi là où leurs collègues avaient échoué en prenant ces hommes pour cibles de leurs balles.
Vers huit heures du matin, l’armée israélienne a pénétré dans la zone des dortoirs. Ils ont menotté les passagers. J’ai été jeté au sol, les mains liées derrière le dos, dans l’impossibilité de bouger d’un pouce. J’ai été emmené au pont supérieur, où se trouvaient les autres passagers, forcé à rester accroupi sous le soleil brûlant.
L’un des passagers avait les mains si étroitement liées que ses poignets prenaient toutes sortes de couleurs. Quand il a demandé qu’on desserre les menottes, un soldat israélien les a serrées encore davantage. Le cri qu’il a poussé m’a glacé jusqu’aux moelles.
J’ai demandé à aller aux toilettes. J’en ai été empêché, et le soldat israélien m’a dit d’uriner là où j’étais, dans mes vêtements. Je n’ai été autorisé à bouger que trois ou quatre heures plus tard.
J’ai alors été, avec les autres passagers, reconduit vers les dortoirs. L’endroit était dévasté, ressemblant à la suite d’un tremblement de terre. Je suis resté sur le bateau, assis, sans aucune nourriture ni boisson, si ce n’est trois gorgées d’eau, pendant plus de vingt-quatre heures. Durant tout ce temps, des soldats israéliens maintenaient leurs fusils pointés vers nous, le doigt sur la gâchette. Durant plus de vingt-quatre heures.
J’ai ensuite été emmené du bateau vers Ashod où il m’a été demandé de signer un ordre d’expulsion, lequel disait que j’étais entré illégalement en Israël et que j’acceptais mon expulsion. J’ai dit à l’officier que, en fait, je n’étais pas entré en Israël mais que l’armée israélienne m’avait kidnappé dans les eaux internationales et conduit en Israël contre ma volonté ; par conséquent, je ne pouvais pas signer le document.
Mon passeport m’a été enlevé. On m’a dit que j’allais être emprisonné. C’est seulement à ce moment –là que mes mains ont été détachées. J’ai passé plus de 24 heures avec les mains liées derrière le dos, sans rien à manger et en ayant à peine quelque chose à boire.
A l’arrivée à la prison, j’ai été placé dans une cellule avec trois autres passagers. La cellule mesurait à peu près trois mètres sur trois mètres et demi. J’ai passé plus de vingt-quatre heures en prison, sans l’autorisation de passer un seul coup de téléphone.
Le consulat britannique n’est pas venu me voir. Je n’ai pas vu d’avocat.
Il n’y avait pas d’eau chaude pour une douche. L’unique repas était du pain surgelé et des pommes de terre.
La seule raison pour laquelle je pense avoir été libéré est que les prisonniers turcs sont refusé de partir sans que soient aussi libérés les ressortissants d’autres nationalités (ceux dont les consulats n’étaient pas venus pour leur élargissement).
On m’a conduit à l’aéroport Ben Gourion. Quand j’ai réclamé mon passeport, le fonctionnaire israélien m’a présenté un morceau de papier en me disant : « Félicitations, voici votre nouveau passeport ». J’ai répondu : « Vous plaisantez, vous avez mon passeport ». A quoi le fonctionnaire israélien a répondu : « Portez donc plainte contre moi ! ». Puis on m’a de nouveau demandé de signer un ordre d’expulsion, ce que j’ai de nouveau refusé.
On m’a placé dans un avion à destination d’Istanbul.
Des soldats israéliens masqués et des commandos m’ont kidnappé dans les eaux internationales.
Des fonctionnaires israéliens en uniforme m’ont détenu derrière des barreaux.
Le gouvernement britannique n’a pas levé le petit doigt pour m’aider. A ce jour, je n’ai rien vu ni entendu d’un fonctionnaire britannique.
Le gouvernement israélien a volé mon passeport. Le gouvernement israélien a volé mon ordinateur portable, deux appareils-photo, trois téléphones, 1500 dollars et tout ce que j’avais sur moi.
Mon gouvernement, le gouvernement britannique, n’a même pas reconnu mon existence.
J’ai été enlevé par Israël. J’ai été abandonné par mon pays.
Source : http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2010/06/06/kidnapped-israel-forsaken-britain
(Traduit de l’anglais par Anne-Marie PERRIN pour CAPJPO-EuroPalestine)
Al Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal has been released by Israeli authorities following Monday's deadly raid on the Mavi Marmara aid ship that was destined for Gaza. Our producer, who reported from the ship as Israel launched the raid, was on the top deck when the ship was attacked.
Here, he tells his account of what happened.