Twelfth Night here but Christmas Eve in Gaza

********************************************
Yesterday, one day before Christian Orthodox Christmas Eve in Palestine, Zionist missiles crashed into two United Nations schools, murdering 30 people in one of the schools and three more in the other attack. A number of children were among those who were killed. At least 55 more were injured when Zionist artillery shells landed outside a U.N. school in Gaza, according to official U.N. sources. 14,000 people had sought refuge in U.N. schools throughout the Gaza strip.

In the past 11 days, at least 640 Palestinians have been killed and 2,850 have been wounded by Zionist attacks on a fundamentally civilian population. This is a population, moreover that has suffered from decades of oppression by the Zionist entity.

Christ was a champion of the oppressed and disenfranchised and yet few in the West are willing to raise their voices against the unconscionable invasion that is occurring at this moment in Palestine and is part and parcel of an ongoing policy of genocide against the Palestinian people. I would like to be able to be inspired wholly by visions of beauty and magic, but a part of me cannot be oblivious to the carnage in Gaza. Any one in ANY land who celebrates the magic of Christmas and Twelfth Night must speak out unequivocally against the murders and destruction being committed in the name of the spurious 'war against terror'. The entire concept of 'terror' when applied to a sophisticated, highly militarised Occupation is absurd. It is tantamount to a claim that an armed bully is defending himself against 'terror' in the form of his victim. The nuclear option is in the hands of the Israelis, not the Palestinians. The wildly inaccurate rockets fired by Hamas are nothing more than a desperate attempt to make a statement to the effect that the Palestinian people refuse to be swept under the carpet, and refuse to accept the ever-expanding theft of their land. Irrespective of the pros and cons of Hamas' strategies, it is innocent people who are being killed by Israeli missile strikes and the Israeli invasion of Gaza cannot be condoned.

In this holiday season, how many of us will have the courage to speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves? Every one moans about the recession and 'hard times', but what people experience in the States is nothing compared to the horror that is occurring in Gaza.

I try very hard not to post here about political issues, but this situation transcends politics and cuts to the very core of our humanity. I may love fantasy, but we all have to live in the real world.
For those who are entirely ignorant of the situation in Gaza, a recent article by Jeremy Hammond provides some salient facts:

Top 5 Lies about Israel's Assault on Gaza

By Jeremy R. Hammond

Lie #1: Israel is only targeting legitimate military sites and is seeking to protect innocent lives. Israel never targets civilians.

The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated pieces of property in the world. The presence of militants within a civilian population does not, under international law, deprive that population of their protected status, and hence any assault upon that population under the guise of targeting militants is, in fact, a war crime.

Moreover, the people Israel claims are legitimate targets are members of Hamas, which Israel says is a terrorist organization. Hamas has been responsible for firing rockets into Israel. These rockets are extremely inaccurate and thus, even if Hamas intended to hit military targets within Israel, are indiscriminate by nature. When rockets from Gaza kill Israeli civilians, it is a war crime.

Hamas has a military wing. However, it is not entirely a military organization, but a political one. Members of Hamas are the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. Dozens of these elected leaders have been kidnapped and held in Israeli prisons without charge. Others have been targeted for assassination, such as Nizar Rayan, a top Hamas official. To kill Rayan, Israel targeted a residential apartment building. The strike not only killed Rayan but two of his wives and four of his children, along with six others. There is no justification for such an attack under international law. This was a war crime.

Other of Israel’s bombardment with protected status under international law have included a mosque, a prison, police stations, and a university, in addition to residential buildings.

Moreover, Israel has long held Gaza under siege, allowing only the most minimal amounts of humanitarian supplies to enter. Israel is bombing and killing Palestinian civilians. Countless more have been wounded, and cannot receive medical attention. Hospitals running on generators have little or no fuel. Doctors have no proper equipment or medical supplies to treat the injured. These people, too, are the victims of Israeli policies targeted not at Hamas or legitimate military targets, but directly designed to punish the civilian population.

Lie #2) Hamas violated the cease-fire. The Israeli bombardment is a response to Palestinian rocket fire and is designed to end such rocket attacks.

Israel never observed the cease-fire to begin with. From the beginning, it announced a “special security zone” within the Gaza Strip and announced that Palestinians who enter this zone will be fired upon. In other words, Israel announced its intention that Israeli soldiers would shoot at farmers and other individuals attempting to reach their own land in direct violation of not only the cease-fire but international law.

Despite shooting incidents, including ones resulting in Palestinians getting injured, Hamas still held to the cease-fire from the time it went into effect on June 19 until Israel effectively ended the truce on November 4 by launching an airstrike into Gaza that killed five and injured several others.

Israel’s violation of the cease-fire predictably resulted in retaliation from militants in Gaza who fired rockets into Israel in response. The increased barrage of rocket fire at the end of December is being used as justification for the continued Israeli bombardment, but is a direct response to the Israeli attacks.

Israel's actions, including its violation of the cease-fire, predictably resulted in an escalation of rocket attacks against its own population.

Lie #3) Hamas is using human shields, a war crime.

There has been no evidence that Hamas has used human shields. The fact is, as previously noted, Gaza is a small piece of property that is densely populated. Israel engages in indiscriminate warfare such as the assassination of Nizar Rayan, in which members of his family were also murdered. It is victims like his dead children that Israel defines as “human shields” in its propaganda. There is no legitimacy for this interpretation under international law. In circumstances such as these, Hamas is not using human shields, Israel is committing war crimes in violation of the Geneva Conventions and other applicable international law.

Lie #4) Arab nations have not condemned Israel’s actions because they understand Israel’s justification for its assault.

The populations of those Arab countries are outraged at Israel’s actions and at their own governments for not condemning Israel’s assault and acting to end the violence. Simply stated, the Arab governments do not represent their respective Arab populations. The populations of the Arab nations have staged mass protests in opposition to not only Israel's actions but also the inaction of their own governments and what they view as either complacency or complicity in Israel's crimes.

Moreover, the refusal of Arab nations to take action to come to the aid of the Palestinians is not because they agree with Israel’s actions, but because they are submissive to the will of the US, which fully supports Israel. Egypt, for instance, which refused to open the border to allow Palestinians wounded in the attacks to get medical treatment in Egyptian hospitals, is heavily dependent upon US aid, and is being widely criticized within the population of the Arab countries for what is viewed as an absolute betrayal of the Gaza Palestinians.

Even Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has been regarded as a traitor to his own people for blaming Hamas for the suffering of the people of Gaza. Palestinians are also well aware of Abbas' past perceived betrayals in conniving with Israel and the US to sideline the democratically elected Hamas government, culminating in a counter-coup by Hamas in which it expelled Fatah (the military wing of Abbas' Palestine Authority) from the Gaza Strip. While his apparent goal was to weaken Hamas and strengthen his own position, the Palestinians and other Arabs in the Middle East are so outraged at Abbas that it is unlikely he will be able to govern effectively.

Lie #5) Israel is not responsible for civilian deaths because it warned the Palestinians of Gaza to flee areas that might be targeted.

Israel claims it sent radio and telephone text messages to residents of Gaza warning them to flee from the coming bombardment. But the people of Gaza have nowhere to flee to. They are trapped within the Gaza Strip. It is by Israeli design that they cannot escape across the border. It is by Israeli design that they have no food, water, or fuel by which to survive. It is by Israeli design that hospitals in Gaza have no electricity and few medical supplies with which to treat the injured and save lives. And Israel has bombed vast areas of Gaza, targeting civilian infrastructure and other sites with protected status under international law. No place is safe within the Gaza Strip.

-Jeremy R. Hammond is the editor of Foreign Policy Journal (www.foreignpolicyjournal.com), a website dedicated to providing news, critical analysis, and opinion commentary on U.S. foreign policy from outside of the standard framework offered by government officials and the mainstream corporate media, particularly with regard to the "war on terrorism" and events in the Middle East. He has also written for numerous other online publications. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Contact him at: jeremy@foreignpolicyjournal.com.


Sunday, 4 January 2009

Palestine Chronicle

Illegal U.S. Mandate to Police the World

As the Presidential election looms large on the horizon, it appears to dwarf actual current events worldwide, including a new illegal U.S. invasion of another sovereign nation. In this instance, it is an invasion of Syria that the U.S. has executed on the blatantly provocative grounds that 'We are taking matters into our own hands'. By what legal mandate does the U.S. swoop down into the territory of yet another sovereign nation to kill civilians or any one else for that matter? There is absolutely no legal justification for such actions. In fact, it is an act of state-sponsored terrorism, plainly illicit and moreover, one that may have unpleasant results in terms of furthering international hostility towards the U.S.

The 'American people' appear to be oblivious of the extent to which the U.S. military, purportedly acting 'in their name', is committing acts of terrorism throughout the globe or if not oblivious, certainly are not responding to the threat to the rule of law that these actions represent.

What other war crimes will Bush commit before he leaves the White House? His determination to fabricate evidence in order to drum up public support for his outrageous invasion of Iraq is public knowledge now but the dangers represented by his attitudes have not be addressed properly. His own definition of nations including Iran and Syria as part of an imaginary 'axis of Evil' should have acted as a warning to the American people to curtail a dangerous megalomaniac willing to wage war against the entire world in pursuit of his own agenda. Yet, without ever declaring war, Bush now has escalated his international dubious 'war on terror' by invading Syria.

This sort of arrogance and lack of concern for the rule of law will not go unchallenged by the world even if the American public chooses to sweep it under the carpet. While the American public puzzles over a Presidential election consisting of two candidates who, au fond, represent similar platforms where international policy is concerned, they allow the current Executive to commit acts of state-sponsored terrorism without expressing the outrage these attacks merit. Democrat and Republican alike both in the past and in terms of their vision of the future have embraced a foreign policy that spells ultimate ruin in terms of justice and which only will encourage more hostility and retaliation against Americans.

In the context of illicit actions undertaken in the name of the 'American people', I would recommend the recent film, 'Rendition'. The title of the film refers to a common U.S. practice known as 'extraordinary rendition' whereby individuals, including American citizens are kidnapped by the C.I.A. or other government agents and sent abroad to be tortured. The practice began under Clinton's presidency but achieved greater popularity after the 11 September 'attacks'.

One such actual case is that of Maher Arar, a software engineer with dual Canadian/Syrian citizenship, who was 'detained' in September 2002 during a layover at John F. Kennedy International Airport. He was held in detention on American soil for two weeks without any access to a lawyer, then deported, not to Canada, but to Syria, ironically the subject of the latest illicit American military 'strike'. Under U.S. recommendation and pressure, he was tortured in Syria as a suspected 'terrorist'.

Ultimately, Arar was held in Syria for almost a year before the Canadian government secured his release. Exonerated by the Canadian government and awarded $10.5 million in damages, the U.S. government nonetheless has removed neither him nor any of his family members from its international 'terrorist watch list'.

Another case is that of Khalid el-Masri, a German national with the same name as wan al-Qaeda operative involved with the Hamburg cell. Seized at a border chequepoint in Macedonia while on vacation, he was handed over to CIA operatives who drugged him and flew him to Afghanistan. There he was tortured and abused for months before finally convincing his captors that they had the wrong man. Without apologies or restitution, el-Masri was flown back to Europe and dumped on a lonely road in Albania. He eventually made his way back to Germany, where he continues to pursue legal action.

Countless others detained by the CIA simply have been taken to Guantanamo, where only a few have been released. Mamdouh Habib, an Australian citizen of Egyptian birth was kidnapped in Pakistan in October 2001 and sent to Egypt under the 'rendition' programme, where he endured electrocution, cigarette burns, and beatings for six months before being sent to Guantanamo. There he languished until 2005, when he finally was released without ever being charged.

In 2005, the media actually published information to the effect that the U.S. was maintaining a network of secret prisons throughout the world where the CIA kept and interrogated thousands of individuals never charged with any crime. Some of these facilities were alleged to be on European soil. Among other sites, a former Soviet air base in Eastern Europe was used as a detention centre where 'enhanced interrogation' techniques, otherwise known as torture, were applied. When exposed, the U.S. government quickly moved the detainees to North African facilities, safely out of reach of further investigation.

The film 'Rendition' delineates the chilling reality of these practices, and shows how even the innocent can be 'persuaded' to admit guilt when broken by tortures now known to be commonplace at U.S. facilities like Guantanamo as well.

One wonders how either of the Presidential candidates, should they be successful in gaining the vote, will address fundamental human rights issues such as 'rendition'... McCain makes much of his own detention in the past but one doubts that he would make any changes where 'rendition' or the spurious 'war on terror' are concerned. Unfortunately, one can expect no better from Obama, a man who clearly embraces the 'special relationship' with the occupiers of Palestine, stating that: 'My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction.' Where Iran was concerned, he declared that 'The world must work to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons' and avowed that 'we should take no option, including military action, off the table'.

So here we have Frick and Frack, who may march beneath different party affiliations but who both have no intention of changing U.S. foreign policy in any substantial way. As long as the 'two-party system' retains its stranglehold in American politics, there is no hope of justice in terms of international affairs.

King Charles I and President Saddam Hussein

Tonight, PBS aired a programme about the trial of Saddam Hussein. There appeared to be some surprise as to the strategy of the defence, which was to deny consistently the legitimacy and jurisdiction of the tribunal. Why should this be a surprise to any one with any knowledge of history? It is the same argument used by King Charles I against Cromwell's henchmen. He simply consistently denied the jurisdiction of the court to judge him. Both Charles I and Saddam Hussein were executed. Both would have been executed whatever arguments they had put forward in courts determined to make their deaths a reality. In point of fact, both Charles I and Saddam Hussein demonstrated dignity and courage when faced with death and a staunch determination not to lend their enemies one iota of false legitimacy. Neither were fools. Neither were blinded by the desperate need that a coward has to save his skin at any price.

New names for old Conditions

I noticed an Associated Press article about a 'new' medical condition in Iraq christened TBI or 'Traumatic Brain Injury'. With a host of new therapies and medical specialisation relating to the 'disorder', much is being made of its unusual and unprecedented nature. Doesn't any one read history? Doesn't any one read literature?

Greek and Roman writers discussed this condition and in the wake of the First World War, writers like H.G. Wells wrote a number of books that featured soldiers who suffered from a similar condition, known then as 'shell shock'.

I had a personal friend in the British paratroopers who told me about life in the 'elite' branch of the military. The training for military exercises is inimical to ordinary life.

One medical specialist noted that poor sleeping habits were the result of training that forced them to be 'alert all the time.'

Another remarked that: 'Their nervous system becomes acclimated to being constantly on alert - fight or flight.'

Drugs including strong amphetamines are given to soldiers on a regular basis when the situation merits it. It is well-known that 'uppers' can cause mental disorders, including anxiety and paranoia attacks. My friend thought he was going mad until I showed him literature dealing with the side-effects of drugs like 'speed'. He recognised the drugs that he and his companions had been given but had been unaware of the fact that they were what was known on the street as 'speed'.

Soldiers are trained to become 'killing machines'. Ordinary human life does not allow individuals to be 'killing machines'. Is it any wonder that these soldiers return to civilian life unequipped to deal with normal situations?

What is amazing to me, however, is the way people focus on THEIR own society, their time period and their situation as if it were something unique and new. Lessons seldom are learned from the past even when the past is acknowledged.

The article dealing with TBI only discussed American soldiers, making no mention of the traumatic stress and TBI suffered by the Iraqi people. There was no mention of the depleted uranium in Iraq either, the presence of which is poisoning the land and its people.

The United States has been using vast quantities of depleted uranium in munitions in Iraq. Uranium dust spread by the air after the explosion of any projectile containing DU causes birth defects and cancer, apart from the other immediate health hazards it poses to those who inhale it.

By illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but the whole world.

It is not only Iraq itself that may be affected by use of depleted uranium. Dr. Chris Busby, a British radiation expert, declared: 'I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes get red dust from the Sahara on your car.'

There are those who may consider, like the infamous Madeleine Albright that the six million Iraqi infant deaths caused by the economic sanctions were 'well worth the price', and that Iraqi deaths from depleted uranium therefore would be of no consquence. I say to them: 'Look to your own children! Who knows the ultimate affects of the U.S. military adventure in Iraq to ALL of us on this planet?'

Depleted uranium is one of the real 'weapons of mass destruction' whose use should be considered a war crime. I believe it is far more significant than the ordinary effects of military service on U.S. soldiers, including 'shell shock' or 'TBI'. How could any one imagine that killing as a chosen profession could not have untoward effects on the human psyche...

Comparing World 'Leaders'

Whatever one may think about the ideologies of various international 'leaders', it is a fact that George Bush Jr. would be bested in any comparison with Usama bin Laden, whether based on personal intelligence, courage or the ability to make a memorable declaration.

Usama bin Laden has another advantage in the services of a highly talented American writer named Adam Gadahn, although the assumption by an American 'senior intelligence official' that bin Laden's latest video 'has Adam Gadahn written all over it' is a little arrogant. After all, bin Laden always was extremely articulate and lyrical both in past interviews and speeches. It did not require the services of an 'American' to give his declarations power.

In a new video released by al Qaeda, Usama bin Laden aptly declares that Bush is 'like the one who plows and sows the sea: He harvests nothing but failure.'
In all fairness, this is not an original comparison. It is derived from an old proverb. Nonetheless, it is both accurate and eloquent. Arabic is a language that lends itself to poetry and verbal elegance, and Arab and Muslim leaders never have been afraid of making lyrical statements in political and social contexts.

Unfortunately, perhaps, Western cultures have rebelled against the old Victorian flowery verbiage that made poets like Swinburne immortal. Nonetheless, in any contest, Bush's response that 'it's important that we show resolve and determination to protect ourselves, deny al-Qaeda safe haven and support young democracies' demonstrates his failure to learn anything of consequence, despite his many years in high office. He is the proverbial 'broken record', repeating the same bits of nonsense again and again.

In fact, the best weapon that Bush could muster on the public relations front recently was a confession that he is a man who weeps often and copiously! If that were intended to soften the hearts of a world grown weary of his endless deceits, bare-faced lies and shameless glory-mongering, it is simply another example of the pathetic nature of the man.

Although bin Laden's assurance that the best solution to the conflict in Iraq would be universal acceptance of Islam is simplistic and poses far more questions than it answers, there is no doubt that George Bush's 'vison' of democracy led by the American military industry and multi-national corporations cannot be considered desirable in any world.

'My name is Baghdad'

The illusions under which the obscene invasion of Iraq began are in tatters. Those who supported the war with enthusiasm in their arrogance, believing that the wealth and power of the West could force its brand of 'democracy' upon the world now are becoming weary of the lives lost on THEIR side. If they only had listened from the start and had bothered to study the situation, they would not have supported the invasion of Iraq in the first place. It reminds me of Mrs. Beare in 'Mother and Son' who lamented, 'Why do our boys have to die? What can't it be only their boys?' (* see note)

In any case, here is a beautiful lament for Baghdad sung by Tina Arena with a powerful visual statement about the war, a nation now in ruins because of the arrogance and greed of corrupt Western leaders and their gullible 'subjects' who were willing to follow them blindly into this endless 'engagement' of dishonour and shame.

Here is 'Je m'appelle Baghdad':



One final point: The archaeological and cultural wonders destroyed by the Western invasion of Iraq had far more intrinsic value to the entire world and civilisation in general than the World Trade Centre ever could have possessed. Yet the hype about the events of 11 September never ends... Unfortunately, it is that sort of tunnel vision that set those events in motion. What is called 'terrorism' often is the only weapon available to the dispossessed and disenfrancised.

*Maggie Beare's lament is paraphrased. I need to watch that episode again.

Politics and Idealism

Throughout my childhood, tales of heroes very often centred on commitment to a political or social cause. A hero must be willing to fight and even die for the cause to which he/she is sworn. Freedom, justice and self-determination are wonderful concepts. 'Peace' is an ideal that is utopian in nature, but I quickly determined that peace without justice could be defined as nothing more than a type of slavery or an excuse for cowardice.

People are divided over fundamentals often. The philosophy of the individual often is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of the community. 'Am I my brother's keeper?' is a question that must be answered one way or the other by any political or social manifesto.

There are those who believe that each individual is responsible for his/her own welfare and that self-determination combined with survival of the fittest actually creates the healthiest and most ethical course of action. Others believe in the duty of society to protect the weak against the strong, and to take care of those who are incapable of caring for themselves.

The contemporary doctrine of 'tough love' actually denies the virtue of helping the weak with its claim that true love requires non-intervention, allowing an individual to drown if need be rather than casting a life support system in his/her direction.

I personally cannot agree with that philosophy. Although I do understand the concept of 'enablers' and have experienced manipulation at the hands of some individuals I tried to help in the past, I continue to maintain that there is a duty on the part of the strong to protect the weak. All human beings are NOT created equal. Furthermore, the vicissitudes of life often can diminish an individual's own potential to survive.

At the same time, I support the inalienable right of any individual or nation to self-determination. That right cannot be abrogated by any perception that another person may 'know better'. The right to self-destruct as well as the right to attain the ultimate positive state of being deserve the same protection. In like fashion, people do have the right to live as slaves if they choose to do so. Who are we to insist upon the freedom of others? The truth of the matter is that few individuals who truly could be defined as 'free' and 'independent' walk this earth. Almost every one carries chains and in many cases, those chains have been forged and tempered by the individual himself/herself. People for the most part are terrified of freedom. They prefer the security of a prison to the insecurity of freedom. They prefer the security of a bad relationship to the freedom of loneliness. Who is to tell them they must cast aside all the elements in their lives that allow them to function? Not I. Although I feel I would rather die than make the choices some others have made, it is not for me to judge.

Where politics is concerned, most of the time our ideals are high but the manifestation of those causes is as flawed as human nature. Even in revolutions, leaders ultimately display the very elements they promised to combat! The man who fights against tyranny later becomes a tyrant himself. People are impure by nature, and the motivations that drive individuals towards public office, fame or leadership often are not as noble as they would like to think. Ego is very much a part of it.

That having been said, I do firmly believe that it is vital for every individual to embrace a social or political cause that will not benefit him or her personally. To support or fight for a cause simply because it is just is something that ennobles the human spirit and allows us never to forget that we are connected as a commmunity to all humanity. Despite the personal failures of groups and leaders to maintain the highest standards, it is important never to lose faith in our ideals. Nobility cannot exist in vacuo. It is expressed through our actions and our commitment to justice, whether in the private or public sphere.