The Lying Game and Revisionism of Bush Legacy continues General Petraeus continues with Bush Spin & insists US military was not involved in systematic torture The Torture Myth exposed once again Torture of Abu Zubaida by Bush Regime provided no worthwhile Intelligence Will the pro-torture lobby accept this fact or just ignore it
Once again we get another revelation that a supposedly important key member of Al Qaeda held at Guantanamo wasn't so important after all. The Washington Post writes that Abu Zubaida who was held at Gunatanamo " within weeks of his capture, US officials had gained evidence that made clear they had misjudged Abu Zubaida. President Bush had publicly described him as "Al Qaeda's chief of operations," and other top officials called him a "trusted associate" of Osama bin Laden and a major figure in the planning of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. None of that was accurate, the new evidence showed.
and in fact :
Abu Zubaida was not even an official member of Al Qaeda, according to a portrait of the man that emerges from court documents and interviews with current and former intelligence, law enforcement, and military sources. Rather, he was a "fixer" for radical Muslim ideologues, and he ended up working directly with Al Qaeda only after Sept. 11 - and that was because the United States stood ready to invade Afghanistan. "
It was in part because of the questionable intel he gave while being tortured which many in the Bush Regime pointed to as evidence that torture was effective and an important tool in the fight against Terrorists but as it turns out "... In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida's tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida - chiefly names of Al Qaeda members and associates - was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said."
When CIA officials subjected their first high-value captive, Abu Zubaida, to waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods, they were convinced that they had in their custody an Al Qaeda leader who knew details of operations yet to be unleashed, and they were facing increasing pressure from the White House to get those secrets out of him.
The methods succeeded in breaking him, and the stories he told of Al Qaeda terrorism plots sent CIA officers around the globe chasing leads.
In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida's tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida - chiefly names of Al Qaeda members and associates - was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said.
Moreover, within weeks of his capture, US officials had gained evidence that made clear they had misjudged Abu Zubaida. President Bush had publicly described him as "Al Qaeda's chief of operations," and other top officials called him a "trusted associate" of Osama bin Laden and a major figure in the planning of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. None of that was accurate, the new evidence showed.
Abu Zubaida was not even an official member of Al Qaeda, according to a portrait of the man that emerges from court documents and interviews with current and former intelligence, law enforcement, and military sources. Rather, he was a "fixer" for radical Muslim ideologues, and he ended up working directly with Al Qaeda only after Sept. 11 - and that was because the United States stood ready to invade Afghanistan.
Abu Zubaida's case presents the Obama administration with one of its most difficult decisions as it reviews the files of the 241 detainees still held in the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Abu Zubaida - a nom de guerre for the man born Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein - was never charged in a military commission in Guantanamo Bay, but some US officials are pushing to have him charged now with conspiracy.
While General Petraeus denies use of torture the Spanish government is launching investigations into the use of torture by members of the Bush Regime.
— In what may turn out to be a landmark case, a Spanish court has started a criminal investigation into allegations that six former officials in the Bush administration violated international law by creating the legal justification for torture in Guantanamo Bay.
The officials named in the 98-page complaint include former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who once famously described the Geneva Conventions as "quaint" and "obsolete."
Others include John Yoo, a former Justice Department lawyer who wrote the so-called "torture memo" that justified waterboarding and other extreme interrogation methods for terror suspects.
Also named are: former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; former General Counsel for the Department of Defense William Haynes II; Jay S. Bybee, formerly of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel; and David S. Addington, former chief of staff and legal advisor to former Vice President Dick Cheney.
The six targets named include former Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, who cold face "immediate arrest" upon entering Spain.
This weekend found General David Petraeus on CNN denying that the U.S. military engaged in systematic torture. The military "learned hard lessons from Abu Ghraib," Petraeus told CNN's John King on Sunday, "and we believe we took corrective measures in the wake of that."
But along with a growing number of Americans, people the world over disagree. Now, a Spanish court has launched a criminal probe into six Bush administration attorneys who created the legal architecture for the of torture at Guantanamo Bay.
As Scott Horton reported last week, the targets of the probe are "University of California law professor John Yoo, former Department of Defense general counsel William J. Haynes II (now a lawyer working for Chevron), former vice presidential chief-of-staff David Addington, former attorney general and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, now a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and former Undersecretary of Defense Doug Feith."
The criminal investigation is not symbolic. According to Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, "If you're any of those six at this point, you don't want to go to the twenty-five countries that make up the European Union, because you may be subject to immediate arrest."
" What will happen next is this investigation will most likely continue in a very vigorous form. It will look at those six, and it also has the possibility of going up the chain of command, not just to Rumsfeld, but all the way up to Cheney and Bush. So it's a serious investigation. It's one that the Obama administration has to take very seriously. And it means, for them, that the pressure is increasing really in this country to open its own criminal investigation."
As Democracy Now!reported this morning ,"Spain's law allows it to claim jurisdiction in the case because five Spanish citizens or residents who were prisoners at Guantanamo Bay say they were tortured there. The case was sent to the Spanish prosecutor's office for review by Baltasar Garzon, the Spanish judge who ordered the arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1998."
-------- Obama' s Nominee Dawn Johnsen to the justice Department is seen by Republicans and Conservative Democrats as a threat since she may rule against Torture and warrantless wire tapping and might begin exposing some of the legal chicanery of the Bush Regime. The over ruling of such actions instituted by the Bush regime would be a repudiation of the Bush Regime's policies and therefore a slap in the face of all those who still defend those policies as being legal and morally defensible. By shinning a light on these issues this may lead to even more public support for going ahead with taking legal actions against members of the former Bush administration.
The GOP is threatening an ugly fight over an Obama Justice Department appointee who wants to disclose more Bush-era torture memos.
Until recently, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, often considered the “brains” of the department, has been known mostly to legal experts. But for the past eight years, it was the epicenter of allegations of political manipulation and, worse, the source of infamous memoranda on torture. In tapping Eric Holder as attorney general, President Obama has promised to restore standards of professionalism to the department. For Republicans, this is tantamount to a declaration of partisan war.
On March 19, the nomination of Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen to head the OLC was endorsed by the Judiciary Committee with every Republican voting against her and Sen. Arlen Spector (R-PA) abstaining. The nomination was to have been brought to the Senate floor for a vote on Monday and then again on Wednesday, but it has been held back. Republican leaders, it appears, are playing with the notion of making Johnsen the target of their first filibuster.
...The real reason for their vehement opposition is that Johnsen is committed to overturning the Bush administration’s policies on torture and warrantless surveillance, which would clip the wings of the imperial presidency. Even more menacingly (from their perspective), she is committed to shining a light on some of the darkest skeletons of the Bush years. Already, publication of OLC memoranda authorizing torture, approving warrantless surveillance, and pronouncing the First and Fourth Amendments a dead letter in connection with domestic military operations has rocked the public. More memos, potentially even more disturbing, I have learned, are about to be made public soon. Yet these are difficult issues on which to attack Johnsen, other than through vague suggestions that she is “weak on national security.” Hence the steady stream of accusations linked to her largely irrelevant views about abortion rights.
Will the Republicans attempt to filibuster the Johnsen nomination? The threat is sufficiently serious to have provoked the editors of the New York Times to editorialize in support of Johnsen on Thursday. Calling the operation of OLC in the Bush era “lawless,” the editors wrote, “Ms. Johnsen is superbly qualified and has fought for just the sort of change the office needs.”
Let's begin with a bit on race and its function as a political tool. There is only one race the Human Race.
Wonderful sentiment on the issue of race at the United Nations -March 18, 2009
Edward James Olmos, on his authority as Admiral of the Battlestar Galactica, tells the assembled crowd at the United Nations there is no race but the human race (so say we all).
For instance this may help to explain the Indifference on the part of America's leaders and the Main Stream Media and the American people to the deaths of over one million (1,000,000) Iraqi citizens since they are considered to be part of a different "Race" as Arabs or Kurds they are of little consequence since they are of an inferior breed . Even Obama and the members of his administration tend to downplay the number of dead and severely wounded Iraqis since the only lives that really matter are American lives. In the same way Americans have little interest in the abuse and torture of Iraqis or Afghans .
For instance the massive bombings of densely populated cities such as Bagdad or Fallujah were in fact celebrated by the Americans and their allies . They of course did not have to hear the screams of those innocent civilians being blown to pieces instead it was Party Time for those at CNN and Fox News etc. They forget that the images on their TV Screens were not a Hollywood Movie or the latest video game but that Shock and Awe caused the deaths of thousands and led to the destruction of most of Iraq's infrastructure which has still not been repaired six years later. Nor do they accept that these targets were not according to International Law legitimate military targets but it was "Great Eye-Candy " for the Folks at home who felt they were getting their revenge for the attacks on 9/11 (which had nothing to do with Iraq or Saddam). Besides it was great for CNN's ratings as was the First Gulf War which merely highlights the depraved state of Western Civilization as it were. The war was a disaster for the Iraqi people but it was a boon for KBR and Haliburton and Blackwater to name a few. As for the US soldiers these poor bastards were just cannon fodder to Bush and Cheney and the Neocons .
Bush Regime commits War Crimes and the West Applauds Them - Darfur Regime of Omar al-Basheer Commits War Crimes & is indicted by International Criminal Court-
Is it because Bush is an American or because he is a Christian Evangelical or because he believes in Capitalism and so for one or all of these reasons that he can not be even accused of committing criminal acts ???
Colonialism and Capitalism Greed and Avarice - True Western Values Capitalism and Rugged Individualism versus morality and ethics
Instead those who accuse Bush and his gang are characterized as UnAmerican, UnCanadian or anti-Western, anti-Democracy, anti-Christian or as pro-Terrorist , or in what is seen as an insult to be called Pro-Islamic, Pro-Arab , Pro-Pashtun, Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Gaza- Heaven forbid we insist on fair treatment for all and justice for all or that the same standards of justice be applied to everyone whether they are Arab or Muslim or Christian or Jew or American or Israeli or Iraqi or Afghan Meanwhile we each day more is revealed about the crimes and machinations of the Bush Regime & its allies who claim moral superiority over everyone else- The Bush Regime being a clever bunch reshaped the laws of America to allow them to do whatever they wanted to under the guise of legality- Just because an action is considered legal does not make it right or moral-
Remember the Western Powers esp. the US defended ruthless , brutal, sadistic dictators for decades including General Pinochet of Chile, The Shah of Iran, Saddam of Iraq, or various dictators of Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Argentina, Venezuela the Philippines, Indonesia , Vietnam, South Africa, etc, etc, etc,- and yet the Western Powers claim to be in favor of Democracy and Freedom well except when it gets in the way of Profits- The West main value is that of Greed and avarice while crushing any populist movement which threatens Western Hegemony in any way shape or form. For instance the British Empire was far from being the benevolent power which the revisionists now claim that it was. When the people of India rose up against the British in the nineteenth century the British had no qualms about killing a couple of Million citizens of India so they would in the future be reluctant to rise up against their "Task Masters " or Oppressors or enslavers.
But even to mention such things these days is also considered a form of Heresy. In the same way no one is permitted to question the superior morality of the American Empire or enterprise from the early years of the colonies in the sixteenth century down to the present time. The European/American mass murder of the Native Americans or First Nations was necessary because the Indians of North America were just a bunch of savages who prayed to Pagan Gods and were of an inferior race who deserved to be wiped out. There are in fact millions of Americans and Canadians who truly believe such propaganda - besides it eases their conscience that is if they have such a thing- for when Greed , Avarice and the lust for land is upon human beings it seems their very souls are extinguished and they develop religious beliefs and a theology to defend the indefensible.
We in the West cannot indict one of our own is that the case- well Hitler was one of our own- Mussolini & Franco were both ruthless dictators who operated in the West. All three claimed to be good Christians who supported the Eternal values of Western Civilization - ie Christian and European values.
Of course these days the history of Western Civilization is being rewritten by conservative Christian revisionists who claim the West was never really anti-Semitic before the rise of Hitler & the Nazis. In fact many now equate anti-Semitism with the Arabs and Islam. Yet historically the Jewish people were treated far better in Islamic countries than they were in Christian countries. In European Christian countries they were locked in Ghettos , prevented from holding certain jobs or becoming professionals or from pursuing higher education and at times were expelled en mass from various European countries or just killed off or given the choice to convert or die. Hitler and the NAZIS for the most part played upon ancient anti-Semitism of Christianity which was embedded in Christian beliefs from the its very beginnings. But of course even to point to such facts these days is considered " heresy ".
For the accepted newly revised view of many Westerners now is that the Jews were never treated that badly by Christians as part of an ongoing policy of anti-Semitism but rather anti-Semitism only occurred if it did in the bad old days of the darkest period of the Dark Ages or Middle Ages.
Whereas the belief that now is pushed as part of a Christian Propaganda War against Islam is that it is the Muslims who were always more hostile to Judaism and the Jews. But the Prophet Muhammad said that the Jews should not be mistreated & should be shown respect by all Muslims because they, he said were "The People Of The Book " and were the children of Abraham & Moses etc. But such facts are not permitted to get in the way of the Hysteria being fomented against all Muslims by Western Christians who now demonize all Muslims as being potential terrorists who follow a religion of Warfare and violence. Too bad some of these Westerners wouldn't spend sometime studying the bloody and brutal history of Christianity or the History of the Israelites of ancient Judea.
What is appalling is that the Bush Deadenders Defenders still continue to claim Bush & Co. did not lie and it appears millions of Americans still believe that the Bush Regime was telling the truth. Just watch Sean Hannity , Bill O'Reilly, FOX NEWS etc. Odd that Americans like those on FOX NEWS Red Eye dare to belittle Canadians and for someone who is supposedly well informed like Tucker Carlson would call Canadians retarded yet he and many supposedly intelligent Americans still believe Bush , Cheney , Rumsfeld etc. never lied to the American People or to the World about Saddam 's WMDS , connections to Al Qaeda & Osama Bin Laden and to the 9/11 attack. So who's bloody retarded. But then again the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his gang of Neoconservatives and Fundamentalists Christians still believe Bush was one of America's greatest Presidents and the Ronald Reagan was either the Messiah or Elijah . Harper too believes that whatever we do is by definition sanctified by God or the Gods of Capitalism . Harper like Bush & Co. still doesn't see anything wrong with invading sovereign nations in order to subdue them and to eventually rob them of all their resources . Harper has said that he would have taken Canada into Iraq with the US since he either believed everything Bush , Rumsfeld & Cheney said or he knew and agreed with their secret agenda- oil , or war for the profiteers such as Halibuton or just a matter of revenge to teach the Arab and Muslims who really controls the Middle East.
Jonathan Turley argues that Obama shouldn't refer to Cheney's admissions of torture as merely a difference in policies. Rather Turley argues Obama should call Cheney out and allow a serious investigation by the DOJ of Cheney & others who allegedly committed War Crimes. Instead of Obama taking action against Cheney, Bush , John Yoo, Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice etc. he has been preventing such investigations from taking place. Obama's excuse is that he wishes to move forward and not look back. But after what the Bush Regime has done why should anyone trust any US administration since it appears they are always as Cheney put it working in the shadows. US administrations prior to Bush and Cheney often worked in the shadows hoping not to get caught. The difference is that Bush and Cheney were in fact more upfront about what they were doing . They in effect went public with their criminal actions and expected and usually received the OK from the Mainstream Media and a significant proportion of the American public.
Obama criticizes Cheney - Maddow
Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Powell- the lies uncovered Mar 21-09
Lawrence Wilkerson on the Mosaic Philosophy of Dick Cheney- keeping people in Guantanamo who are innocent just because they may know something. Former Bush Official Snitches on Dick Cheney- The Young Turks March 20, 2009 Cenk Uygur
Over-the-top FOX News Teaser "Asks" If Obama Could Destroy Us What FOX NEWS continues to do on a daily basis attacking Obama
Even with mounting evidence that the Bush Regime was prepared to move even further towards dictatorial powers the Republicans still have the audacity to claim that Obama worse than Bush. They claim Bush did what he had to after the attacks on 9/11 which they keep reminding us of and then go on to explain why it was necessary to round up people based upon flimsy intelligence and to then abuse and torture these persons to get more intelligence. That so called intelligence led to the rounding up of more people that is thousands in Afghanistan and some 100,000 or more in Iraq.Meanwhile anyone who spoke out against the Iraq War or the indefinite internment of people without due process etc. were branded as disloyal and were secretly investigated, their phones tapped , their E_Mails monitored , they were harassed all in the name of National Security.
In order to carry out their criminal or unethical activities the Bush Regime spent a great deal of time manufacturing a legal veneer believing this was enough to protect them. To a great extent they were right since even President Obama seems to accept this legal veneer as somehow legitimate. We also see this in the case of the Robber Barons and shysters on Wall Street who claim their abuses of the system were legal in some sense and therefore acceptable . But where was their sense of common decency or their sense of loyalty to their country and to their Fellow Americans. It seems the very notion of a good or responsible corporate citizen is an Oxymoron and this doesn't in the least bother those who are such defenders ( IE Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians, Fox News Rush Limbaugh etc. ) of Capitalism and the Wall Street speculators. They see nothing inherently wrong with making a buck in any way that one can.So knowingly selling stocks at over-inflated prices that have little to do with their actual value is OK. Telling people to invest in a mismanaged failing corporation is OK they say. "You pays your money you take your chances" they say but change their tune when it is their company which is in need of a bail out. Then they go crying to the government for help while belittling the average citizen who loses their job or their home through no fault of their own. It's like Bush's attitude and many Americans after Hurricane Katrina you know let them drown, let them die of hunger or from lack of clean water because America stands for rugged selfish self-serving Individualism and does not stand for any socialist notions like community or having the haves help out the have-nots unless they feel like it.So next time there's fires raging in California tell those people to put them out themselves and don't expect help from the State or Federal Government since that's not its role.
If you can't pay your mortgage because suddenly the payment has sky-rocked then that's too bad you lose your house even Evangelicals like John Hagee believe this to be God's plan & if you lose your job and are starving don't expect Pastor Hagee to help you cause he says that's part of God's plan.
Legal expert Michael Ratner calls the legal arguments made in the infamous Yoo memos, "Fuhrer's law."
-- from one of the nation's top constitutional scholars (and most steadfast patriots), Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been at the forefront of defending the detainees and our own liberties...
Michael Ratner: What they mean is that your book looks moderate in respect to those issues now. This -- what is in the memos -- is law by fiat.
I call it "Fuhrer's law." What those memos lay out means the end of the system of checks and balances in this country. It means the end of the system in which the courts, legislature and executive each had a function and they could check each other.
What the memos set out is a system in which the president's word is law, and Yoo is very clear about that: the president's word is not only law according to these memos, but no law or constitutional right or treaty can restrict the president's authority.
What Yoo says is that the president's authority as commander in chief in the so-called war on terror is not bound by any law passed by Congress, any treaty, or the protections of free speech, due process and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The First, Fourth and Fifth amendments -- gone.
The military can disregard the Posse Comitatus law, which restricts the military from acting as police in the the United States. And the president can, in the name of wartime restrictions, limit free speech. There it is in black and white: we are looking at one-person rule without any checks and balances -- a lawless state. Law by fiat.
Who has suspended the law this way in the past? It is like a Caesar's law in Rome; a Mussolini's law in Italy; a Fuhrer's law in Germany; a Stalin's law in the Soviet Union. It is right down the line. It is enforcing the will of the dictator through the military.
Part of this plan was actually implemented: for instance, they tried to keep people like Padilla from getting to a magistrate. They engaged in the wiretapping, because according to these memos there was no Fourth Amendment.
They had to be planning some kind of a takeover of the United States to be saying they could simply abolish the First Amendment if the president believed it was necessary in the name of national security. It lays the groundwork for what could have been a massive military takeover of the United States.
As a condition for his release, the U.S. government told Binyam Mohamed to plead guilty, deny torture, and not to talk to media.
NEW YORK, Mar 24 (IPS) -- A British court ruled Monday that U.S. authorities had asked a Guantanamo Bay detainee to drop allegations of torture in exchange for his freedom.
A ruling by two British High Court judges said the U.S. offered Binyam Mohamed a plea bargain deal in October. Mohamed refused the deal and the U.S. dropped all charges against him later last year.
Mohamed is an Ethiopian who moved to Britain when he was a teenager. He was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and claims he was tortured both there and in Morocco. He was transferred to Guantanamo in 2004. He was finally returned to Britain in late February 2009, with no charges against him.
He is suing the British government, charging that its intelligence services were complicit with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in facilitating his "extraordinary rendition" and torture while in custody.
The court said the plea bargain also asked Mohamed to plead guilty to two charges and agree not to speak publicly about his ordeal.
Zachary Katznelson, legal director of Reprieve, a legal action charity that has represented Mohamed for four years, told IPS, "In Binyam Mohamed’s case, the United States clearly prized secrecy over justice. It simply did not want the truth to get out."
He added, "That has nothing to do with national security, but everything to do with the potential for national embarrassment. If we are to truly combat terrorism, we must use the tools of democracy -- openness, fairness, justice -- not abandon them, then desperately try to cover up our wrongs."
In their ruling Monday, the British judges revealed how the U.S. government tried to get Mohamed to sign an agreement stating that he had never been tortured, to promise not to speak with the media upon his release, and to plead guilty as a condition of his release back to Britain -- all without his lawyers being allowed access to evidence that would help prove his innocence.
Israel with US Cooperation attacked a convoy in Sudan More on Israeli War Crimes from The Guardian ,UK Israeli forces in Gaza targeted hospitals and Medics Canadian ban on Galloway unjustified while War Criminal Bush was welcomed in Calgary last week- When Hamas tortures it is evil when the US and Britain torture it is OK ???
'Closed Zone' Shows Gaza's Grimness by Gishaorg March 11, 2009
The new animated film created by Yoni Goodman, Director of Animation for the Academy Award-nominated film "Waltz with Bashir", together with the human rights group Gisha. "Closed Zone" shows the closure of the Gaza Strip and its effects on the ability of 1.5 million human beings living there to fulfill their daily needs, as well as their dreams and aspirations. More details and videos at www.closedzone.com
Israel Warplanes Attacked Sudan Convoy- March 26, 2009
The United States government signed an agreement with Israel prior to Obama's inauguration which provides for US assistance to Israel to stop any weapons from being shipped to any organization or group which is perceived as a threat to Israel ie Hamas, Hezbullah .The agreement was signed in the last days of the Bush Regime by Condoleeza Rice and it appears that Obama is going to honor that agreement . So Israel has been further emboldened by the Bush Regime and now Obama's administration so that Israel can attack any country it wants to is it perceives any sort of threat to its National Security. So Israel and the US are going to expand the war on Israel's behalf one country at a time.
-- Oh what a slippery slope Obama is now on. This Sudanese attack has US cooperation and Intelligence assistance written all over it IMHO. It would appear that Israel is now going to be attacking and invading any country where it deems anything suspicious, and with the approval (or assistance) of the US government.
On January 19th 2009 an MOU (memorandum of understanding) was signed between the US government and Israel to “work together” in keeping anyone from replenishing arms to Hamas. (Like every time Israel invades, Hamas doesn’t have the right to defend itself, its people and it’s country from an invader? Only Israel gets to defend itself as we have seen and continue to see) But, there you go. At any rate, the Israeli fighter jets would have had to fly a great distance and possibly through other countries air space, additionally needing a mid air re-fuelling to complete the mission.
It seems like Obama is going to not only keep, but honour, the agreements Bush made with Israel, so much for “change” and “hope” This means the US will support Israeli attacks into other countries, and possibly assist in those attacks. As if the US does not have enough problems already. Israel is pushing America towards war with Iran and has been for 3 years now. The slippery slope begins.
Gaza war crimes investigation: attacks on medics- The Guardian March 24, 2009
The Israelis targeted 59 hospitals in Gaza Clancy Chassay asks why 16 medical workers were killed and more than half of Gaza's hospitals hit during Israel's invasion of Gaza
Mark Regev responds to IDF Soldiers Confessions of War Crimes in Gaza- March 26, 2009
"Do any of your Investigations EVER lead to a PROSECUTION" Regev is asked. Mark Regev the AUSSIE guy who now speaks for the Israeli Government, is BUSTED yet again as he has to defend the indefensible, all the time insisting their will be "another " investigation.
This Video includes the report concerning the accusations from the Testimony of IDF Soldiers who KNOW what they did was wrong and are now speaking out about their experiences AND Human Rights Watch
The exclusion order of the Canadian government which has prevented MP Galloway from entering Canada is being applied and interpreted in a rather wide or open ended manner. It would seem that the Canadian Government under Prime Minister claims that anyone giving humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza could be considered a threat to Canada's national security. The logic is rather dubious and twisted. Would this make the United Nations or Red Cross also guilty of aiding terrorists by providing humanitarian aid , medical supplies , clothing food etc. to Gaza.Because people want to help out the the people of Gaza who have undergone a 20 month Siege by Israel plus the Invasion by Israel in December and January does not mean they support the tactics and methods of fighting used by Hamas. But it should be noted Hamas was democratically elected to form the government of Gaza.
The exclusion order, claimed the Conservative minister, "has nothing to do with freedom of speech and everything to do with maintaining the integrity of our immigration act, which says individuals that provide materials and financial support to an illegal terrorist organization are inadmissible for entry into Canada."
The letter sent to Galloway by the Canadian High Commission in London last Friday says the British MP is "inadmissible" to Canada "on security grounds" under clauses C and F of Section 34 of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. These clauses say that foreign nationals can be barred from Canada for "engaging in terrorism" or for "being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage" in terrorism or in subverting "or instigating the subversion by force of any government."
"Specifically," says the Canadian government letter, "we have information that indicates you organized a convoy worth over one million British pounds in aid and vehicles, and personally donated vehicles and financing to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya."
The government's claim that organizing relief for the impoverished and besieged people of Gaza, as Israel continues a punishing economic blockade, constitutes support for terrorism is both preposterous and chilling. It underscores the sweeping and arbitrary powers Canada's government, with the support of all parties in Canada's parliament, has arrogated to itself in the name of combating terrorism.
In a cogently argued letter to the High Commission official who authored last Friday's letter to Galloway, his Canadian lawyers expose the "perverse" character of the government's attempt to tar him as a terrorist and correctly label it a politically-motivated "abuse of power."
An abuse of power because the "national security" provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Act were not meant to provide the government with the means to censor and silence those whose political views it dislikes; because excluding Galloway from Canada robs Canadians of their constitutional right to hear his views and because, through Galloway's exclusion, the state is trying to impose novel and far-reaching reinterpretations of what constitutes a national security threat, support for and engagement in terrorism.
It is worth quoting the letter authored by lawyers Barbara Jackman and Hadayt Nazami extensively:
"We are surprised (and frankly shocked)," they write, "that it is the view of the Government of Canada that Mr. Galloway is considered to be a member of a terrorist organization and to have engaged in terrorism. While Canadian courts have applied a broad definition to the concept of ‘member' to include ‘fellow travelers' and other associates, the provision has never, to [our] knowledge, been so broadly interpreted as to include an elected member of Parliament, from a democratic country, because he engaged in symbolic support for a severely oppressed people, the Palestinians of Gaza. Nor has engagement in terrorism been so broadly interpreted. These interpretations are novel and far reaching in their effect.
Using his interpretation of Old Testament texts to arrive at his "legal" opinion, former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Mordecai Eliyahu ruled that there is no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians in Gaza. The judgment, which many Israelis consider the truth, was sent in the form of a letter to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2007, was then published in "Olam Katan" and widely distributed the same week to congregations in synagogues throughout Israel.
"According to Jewish war ethics, wrote Eliyahu, an entire city holds collective responsibility for the immoral behavior of individuals. In Gaza, the entire populace is responsible because they do nothing to stop the firing of Kassam rockets. "
Eliayahu's son, Shmuel Eliayhu, himself chief rabbi of Safad, amplified his father's comments, stating:"If they don't stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand," said Shmuel Eliyahu. "And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don't stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop."
" Under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted in the wake of the Nazi holocaust, "Direct and public incitement to commit genocide" is a punishable act. One wonders whether the UN Security Council, which created an international tribunal to investigate the killing of one man in Lebanon, will pay any attention to the indiscriminate state- and theocratically-sanctioned massacres of Palestinians by Israel.
Will Hillary Clinton, who continues to defame Palestinian schoolchildren with the lie that they are taught "hatred" in their schoolbooks, or any of our other pandering candidates, take a moment out from praising Israel to condemn Eliayahu's statement? What about Oprah Winfrey, who at the invitation of Elie Wiesel is to undertake a "solidarity" visit to Israel? "
Israeli Forces Used Civilians as Human Shields in Gaza Invasion The Real News Network March 26, 2009
Israeli officials say Western Nations Ie. The US & UK use White Phosphorus in Iraq and Afghanistan - so what 's the Big Deal. And it is true that the US & UK forces also show little or no concern for the killing of civilians - since all Iraqis and Afghans are the enemy. Children and the unborn grow up to be terrorists.
Human Rights Watch on Israel's attack in Gaza (26/3/09 news)
Rabbis in the Israeli Army Told Troops They Were Fighting "Religious War Against Gentiles"- IDF's Profound Contempt for the Palestinians- SKY NEWS March 20, 2009
Israeli soldiers claim attacks on Gaza civilians were permitted- Israeli Logic is Nonsense- Kill Civilians so that the Palestinians in Gaza will put pressure on Hamas to stop rocket attacks. If civilians don't approve of Hamas they should leave- where should they go- besides the Israel's have imprisoned the Gazans in Ghetto.
The US is complicit in Israeli War Crimes by supplying WMDS such as White Phosphorus to Israel. If the US had any conscience it would stop supplying any arms to Israel. But even the US government under President Obama seems to defend Israel no matter what and Obama's administration has no interest in the well being of the citizens of Gaza, the West Bank or the Arabs in East Jerusalem.Besides there money to be made in the arms industry. The arms industry is of course does not desire less conflict but more. The US has shown over the decades that it is more interested in a robust arms industry than in peace.
White Phosphorus used by Israel in Gaza was Manufactured in the USA- Americans are unapologetic - Unconcerned -Jobs and Profits are what matter- It is against US law & International Law to supply weapons which may be used in War Crimes.But then again it was the US who supplied Saddam and other dictators with WMDS to use on their own citizens. Though the American Main Stream Media tends to gloss over these facts.
Of course the Americans and Brits also used White Phosphorus on the civilian population in Iraq most notably in the US Massacre of Fallujah.
Small town's controversial role in War on Gaza - 26 Mar 09
Al Jazeera has tracked down the origin of the white phosphorus used by Israel in the war on Gaza.
It comes from an army arsenal in a small US town called Pine Bluff, Arkansas, home to 50,000 people.
Mike Kirsch traveled to Pine Bluff to discover what its residents and leaders thought of their town's role in the war on Gaza.
Human Rights Watch report claims Israel committed war crimes in its use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells
Israel's military fired white phosphorus over crowded areas of Gaza repeatedly and indiscriminately in its three-week war, killing and injuring civilians and committing war crimes, Human Rights Watch said today.
In a 71-page report, the rights group said the repeated use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells in populated areas of Gaza was not incidental or accidental, but revealed "a pattern or policy of conduct".
It said the Israeli military used white phosphorus in a "deliberate or reckless" way. The report says:
• Israel was aware of the dangers of white phosphorus.
• It chose not to use alternative and less dangerous smoke shells.
• In one case, Israel even ignored repeated warnings from UN staff before hitting the main UN compound in Gaza with white phosphorus shells on 15 January.
"In Gaza, the Israeli military didn't just use white phosphorus in open areas as a screen for its troops," said Fred Abrahams, a senior Human Rights Watch researcher. "It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren't in the area and safe smoke shells were available. As a result, civilians needlessly suffered and died." He said senior commanders should be held to account.
Human Rights Watch called on the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, to launch an international commission of inquiry to investigate allegations of violations of international law in the Gaza war by the Israeli military and Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that controls Gaza.
-------------- After the invasion of Gaza and allegations of War Crimes world opinion of Israel falls creating at the least a Public Relations problem.
...Battered by fresh accusations of war crimes during the recent Gaza conflict, Israel’s standing in the world is plunging to fresh lows. Two months after the guns fell silent, international condemnation of its treatment of Palestinian civilians during the military offensive shows no sign of abating. Outside the country, the latest revelations — most strikingly, a claim that soldiers committed “cold-blooded murder” during the operation — have once again spurred calls for a UN war crimes tribunal.
In Israel itself, however, the response to allegations of war crimes has been both muted and defensive. While Israeli officials have promised to investigate the claims, ministers insist there was nothing wrong with the army’s conduct during the three-week offensive.
On Monday, a report by a UN human rights panel made fresh allegations, including the claim that Israeli soldiers used Palestinian civilians as human shields during the fighting. “Violations were committed on a daily basis, too numerous to list,” said one of the report’s authors. Some leftwing Israeli commentators have joined the critics. Writing in Haaretz, the Israeli daily, Gideon Levy argued this week that “the IDF has long ceased to be an army of ‘values’, not on the ground, not in the battalion, not in the senior command”.
...One view that is gaining ground in Israel is that this represents above all a public relations failure... Israel’s reputation is being undermined by bias in the foreign press, the inability of the Israeli government to explain its actions and the influence of what some Israelis call the “Palestinian PR machine”.
3000 new housing units for Settlers in West Bank how does this fit into a peace plan - Palestinian State to remain a collection of bantustan lands with little or no autonomy with Israel still controlling many aspects of Palestinian lives including movement and no control over their air-space while illegal Settlement multiply and are expanded.
Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has struck a secret deal with Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman for highly contentious construction on West Bank land known as E1, Army Radio reported Wednesday.
A source close to the negotiations between the pair told Army Radio that the plan had been agreed upon even though it did not appear in the official document detailing the coalition deal between Yisrael Beiteinu and Netanyahu's Likud.
The plan is for the West Bank settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim to build 3000 new housing units on the territory, which stretches between it and Jerusalem, the source was quoted as saying.
So some are outraged that Hamas has torture prisoners but according to the US & UK & Canadian government torture is not that bad; if it was considered wrong by these countries the Bush, Rumsfeld , Cheney, John Yoo and Condoleeza Rice & Tony Blair and Possibly PM Stephen Harper would be indicted . Or at the least Obama & other leaders and Fox News & CNN etc. would offer an apology to all those POWS mistreated, abused or tortured by US personnel whether those prisoners were in Gitmo, or Abu Ghraib in Iraq, or Bagram in Afghanistan and a hundred other US run Medieval style prisons .These abuses were not just minor errors on the part of Americans or the result of a few bad apples but rather were and are an ongoing US Military policy which therefore constitute War Crimes. But its not going to happen because it would mean these countries would have to admit to permitting War Crimes. And as we know its only enemies of the West & Christendom who can be accused of War Crimes.
The Hamas-run police force in the Gaza Strip said on Wednesday it was investigating the death of a prisoner after a Palestinian human rights group said the inmate was tortured and beaten to death during interrogation.
The Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) said one of its researchers had seen marks on the hands and legs of the inmate, Jamil Assaf, indicating he had been tortured in jail.
Assaf was detained by police on March 9 and died in Gaza's main hospital on Tuesday. The ICHR said he was suffering from kidney failure after a beating.
Americans make fun of Canada FOX NEWS calls Canada a ridiculous country American Police ride in cars Canadian Police ride horses US#4 in world for STATE EXECUTIONS US #1 For Incarceration Rates - 2 million in Jail
So first a little song and dance with Robin Williams singing South Park's "Blame Canada "
Anyway its ironic that the Harper government of Canada would be upset over comments made by American pundits on Fox News network. The people at Fox News are for the most part Stepehn Harper's kind of people. Fox News is one of the most conservative networks in the US. They were among the greatest cheerleaders and defenders of the Bush administration. They defended the policies of George Bush dealing with the War on Terror including the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They also over and over again defended the abuse and torture of so called detainees. And further they attacked anyone who dared question the policies of the Bush administration. And from the moment Barack Obama announced he was running to be the leader of the Democratic party the folks at Fox were on his case making fun of his name , claiming he had little or no experience , that it was possible he was a secret Muslim and claimed that Obama was not born in America .
Will those Canadians who are so in love with the Americans realize there are many Americans who are proud about their ignorance. about Canada and the rest of the world . To many Americans only their country is of any real importance . They believe all other countries are jealous of the American people , their system of government and their policies Those canadians who talk about our close relationship with the Americans and our mutual respect for one another maybe now they'll realize that the relationship is unbalanced and that Americans in general have little or no interest in Canadian policies. And when push comes to shove the majority of American politicians will do what they believe is in America's best interest with little regard to Canada's .
The other thing to note is that Prime Minister Harper and other past Prime Ministers believed that our policies should be kept in line with those of the United States . Harper and other conservative and even liberal Canadians believe we should never criticie the US.
Fox News Downplays its Apology to Canada Military-March 23, 2009
Fox Forced To Apologize-March 23, 2009
Fox News Douchebag Apologizes to Canada
Fox News Douchebag: The reaction in Canada...March 23, 2009-CBC
Host of FOX's Red Eye insults Canadians and their contribution to Afghanistan FOX Canada
Here's a couple of things Americans are proud of -State Executions and Incarceration Rates:
Amnesty International finds that while the world as a whole is moving away from the death penalty, executions went up last year.
A new report by Amnesty International released Tuesday reveals good news and bad news on the death penalty.
The good news: the world is moving away from capital punishment. "The majority of countries now refrain from using the death penalty," Amnesty reports.
"Europe and Central Asia is now virtually a death penalty free zone following the abolition of the death penalty in Uzbekistan for all crimes. There is just one country left -- Belarus -- that still carries out executions."
The bad news? From 2007 to 2008, the number of executions carried out by death penalty countries doubled.
Worldwide in 2007, 1,252 people were executed. Last year, "at least 2,390 people were known to have been executed in 25 countries," according to the study, and "at least 8,864 people were sentenced to death in 52 countries around the world."
As usual, the United States received the dubious distinction of being the only county left in the Americas that "regularly executes." Last year, the U.S. carried out 37 executions, with Texas responsible for 18. This number -- the lowest since 1994 -- would have almost certainly been dramatically higher were it not for a halt on executions stemming from controversy over lethal injection -- a moratorium that lasted from September 2007 until May of 2008.
For the first time in the nation’s history, more than one in 100 American adults are behind bars, according to a new report.
Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million, after three decades of growth that has seen the prison population nearly triple. Another 723,000 people are in local jails.
The number of American adults is about 230 million, meaning that one in every 99.1 adults is behind bars.
...The United States imprisons more people than any other nation in the world. China is second, with 1.5 million people behind bars. The gap is even wider in percentage terms.
Germany imprisons 93 out of every 100,000 people, according to the International Center for Prison Studies at King’s College in London. The comparable number for the United States is roughly eight times that, or 750 out of 100,000.
Trendy "T" Shirts for the Israeli Defence Forces(IDF) which show contempt for Palestinians : that is that all Palestinians men, women and children including toddlers and infants are all viewed as being legitimate military targets. What critics of IDF argue is that over the past several years and especially during the Gaza invasion a harsh, uncompromising , racist mentality among the IDF has been tolerated if not encouraged by the commanders in the field and by some members of the Israeli government.
The unfortunate thing about such an attitude is that it is shared by the extremist on both sides. So is Israel in its defense willing to abandon any rule of law or common decency in order to defend themselves. To thereby gain the world as it were but to lose one's soul- what sort of victory is that. From what US veterans of the Iraq War have testified that this attitude was prevalent among a significant proportion of American soldiers including their commanders in Iraq.
See article below.
Israeli T-shirts mock Gaza killings - 23 March 2009
Gaza war crimes investigation: Israeli drones- The Guardian Investigations- March 24, 2009 Clancy Chassay asks why Israeli drones with optics capable of seeing the colour of a target's clothes killed so many Palestinian civilians during the recent Gaza invasion
Israeli troops admit abuses in Gaza/ US Israeli Relations/ the Israeli lobby March 23, 2009 Real News network
Siege of Gaza Continues:
"Richard Falk, the UN's special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, said Israel had confined Palestinian civilians to the combat zone in Gaza, a unique move which should be outlawed." March 24, 2009
In other conflicts such as Iraq average citizens were not usually prevented from leaving an area of intensive fighting. Some four million Iraqis left their areas of residence fleeing to quieter areas within the country or chose to leave the country itself. What the Israelis did was to prevent Gaza citizens from leaving the Gaza itself or moving to areas which might have been safer . In fact as many humanitarian and human rights groups observed the Israelis encourage or pushed the citizens of Gaza into highly populated areas and then proceeded to bomb these areas. So it appears to have been a deliberate policy to ensure the most damage and casualities.
Spokespersons for the Obama administration claim that Robert Falk along with the United Nations and groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Red Cross , B'Teselem and others are biased and are anti-Israel and basically anti-Semitic and hate America so much that they also hate America's allies including Israel . Obama, Biden and Hillary Clinton have made it clear that criticisms of Israel will not be tolerated. Israel they claim is permitted to do whatever it takes to defend itself including the 20 month blockade of Gaza and possibly in the near future an attack on Iran, Syria and Lebanon. It saddens many who thought Obama might bring a fresh perspective on the Middle East issues but instead his first response is to defend Israel and to ignore the suffering of the ordinary people of Gaza who are non-combatants.
A senior UN official has suggested that Israel should be held accountable for a "new crime against humanity" during its January assault on the Gaza strip.
Richard Falk, the UN's special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, said Israel had confined Palestinian civilians to the combat zone in Gaza, a unique move which should be outlawed.
"Such a war policy should be treated as a distinct and new crime against humanity, and should be formally recognised as such, and explicitly prohibited," Falk said in a report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on Monday.
Palestinian civilians were prevented from leaving the Gaza Strip during the three-week bombardment by the Israeli authorities.
Falk also called for an investigation into Israel's attack on Gaza, in which more than 1,300 Palestinians were killed and homes destroyed.
Israel said it carried out the assault to stop Palestinian rocket attacks on southern Israel.
Cairo, an accomplice in the imposition of a 20-month blockade on Gaza, has stopped a flock of sheep from entering the Palestinian ghetto.
Egyptian police said that on Sunday night they discovered and seized a flock of 560 sheep set to be transported into Gaza through underground tunnels -- the main artery for food entry into the strip.
Israeli warplanes return to the skies of the Gaza Strip and evoke memories of the three-week onslaught on the blockaded territory.
At least two sonic booms hit Gaza City and northern areas of the strip earlier on Sunday, Xinhua cited witnesses as saying.
Tel Aviv has previously resorted to sonic boom attacks on the Gazans for weeks on end, causing psychological disorders for thousands of Gazans -- mainly children.
"Around 50 percent of the children in Gaza are in need of mental health interventions," Gaza-based psychologist El Sarraj told Fars News Agency in a previous interview.
(and once again Israeli forces are firing on Palestinian fishing boats - these Gazan fishermen have the audacity to go out trying to get fish to sell or to eat . Surely a Goliath like Israel would be undermined if these fishermen were to be gainfully employed or caught enough fish to feed their families)
Israeli gunboats also opened fire on Palestinian fishing boats near the coast of Rafah city south of the territory. A number of the boats were reportedly damaged.
Similar attacks happen on Palestinian boats on a regular basis with a 20-month blockade being in place on the coastal sliver.
Dead babies, mothers weeping on their children's graves, a gun aimed at a child and bombed-out mosques - these are a few examples of the images Israel Defense Forces soldiers design these days to print on shirts they order to mark the end of training, or of field duty. The slogans accompanying the drawings are not exactly anemic either: A T-shirt for infantry snipers bears the inscription "Better use Durex," next to a picture of a dead Palestinian baby, with his weeping mother and a teddy bear beside him. A sharpshooter's T-shirt from the Givati Brigade's Shaked battalion shows a pregnant Palestinian woman with a bull's-eye superimposed on her belly, with the slogan, in English, "1 shot, 2 kills." A "graduation" shirt for those who have completed another snipers course depicts a Palestinian baby, who grows into a combative boy and then an armed adult, with the inscription, "No matter how it begins, we'll put an end to it."
There are also plenty of shirts with blatant sexual messages. For example, the Lavi battalion produced a shirt featuring a drawing of a soldier next to a young woman with bruises, and the slogan, "Bet you got raped!" A few of the images underscore actions whose existence the army officially denies - such as "confirming the kill" (shooting a bullet into an enemy victim's head from close range, to ensure he is dead), or harming religious sites, or female or child non-combatants.
In many cases, the content is submitted for approval to one of the unit's commanders. The latter, however, do not always have control over what gets printed, because the artwork is a private initiative of soldiers that they never hear about. Drawings or slogans previously banned in certain units have been approved for distribution elsewhere. For example, shirts declaring, "We won't chill 'til we confirm the kill" were banned in the past (the IDF claims that the practice doesn't exist), yet the Haruv battalion printed some last year.
...Evyatar Ben-Tzedef, a research associate at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism and former editor of the IDF publication Maarachot...
"These days the content on shirts is sometimes deplorable," Ben-Tzedef explained. "It stems from the fact that profanity is very acceptable and normative in Israel, and that there is a lack of respect for human beings and their environment, which includes racism aimed in every direction."
...Sociologist Dr. Orna Sasson-Levy, of Bar-Ilan University, author of "Identities in Uniform: Masculinities and Femininities in the Israeli Military," said that the phenomenon is "part of a radicalization process the entire country is undergoing, and the soldiers are at its forefront. I think that ever since the second intifada there has been a continual shift to the right. The pullout from Gaza and its outcome - the calm that never arrived - led to a further shift rightward.
"This tendency is most strikingly evident among soldiers who encounter various situations in the territories on a daily basis. There is less meticulousness than in the past, and increasing callousness. There is a perception that the Palestinian is not a person, a human being entitled to basic rights, and therefore anything may be done to him."
Could the printing of clothing be viewed also as a means of venting aggression?
Sasson-Levy: "No. I think it strengthens and stimulates aggression and legitimizes it. What disturbs me is that a shirt is something that has permanence. The soldiers later wear it in civilian life; their girlfriends wear it afterward. It is not a statement, but rather something physical that remains, that is out there in the world. Beyond that, I think the link made between sexist views and nationalist views, as in the 'Screw Haniyeh' shirt, is interesting. National chauvinism and gender chauvinism combine and strengthen one another. It establishes a masculinity shaped by violent aggression toward women and Arabs; a masculinity that considers it legitimate to speak in a crude and violent manner toward women and Arabs."
In this next article we are told that there is in fact no difference between criticizing Israel and anti-Semitism. Somehow the author Judea Pearl claims that Judaism, Jews and Israel are one in the same. What's odd about this is that it sounds like the sort of argument made by fanatical anti-Semites but the author here is defending Judaism, Jews and Israel & Zionism. He claims that these strands can not reasonably be disentangled. Israel is the natural home of the Jews given to them by God and the return to Israel is the right of all Jews as part of the destiny of the Jews or Israelites. So the Zionist movement which was born in the 19th century is a culmination of Jewish destiny. If one attacks Israel than one is attacking the very foundation not just of Zionism but also of Judaism. He claims the Jews are a people , a religion and a race tied spiritually to the very real state of Israel. Those who insists on redrawing the map of Israel in such a way that it does not conform to the ideal boundaries of Israel as found in the Torah are in fact enemies of Israel, Zionism and the Israelites or Jews.
One of the things to note is that he bases part of his argument on the Biblical traditions or legends that God promised to Moses and the Israelites after leaving Egypt that all of Palestine would be theirs and that those who lived there were to be driven out or slaughtered. The he claims that even secular or atheists Jews are themselves part of God's Covenant with the Jewish People.
But it seems that Christains could make similar claims about ancient Judea where the Nazarene known as the Christ was born , raised , lived, was crucified and ressurrected. Muslims have also made similar claims about Jerusalem and Palestine . So as our hero in the film The Kingdom Of Heaven when Jerusalem was surrounded by the Great Saladin's ( more properly, Salah al-Din Yusuf Ibn Ayyub (meaning Righteousness of Faith, Joseph, Son of Job)*, army proclaimed ( paraphrasing) All have claim or none have claim. He leaves the city believing it was an illusion that one should claim that only in Jerusalem or in Palestine one could find or be close to God and the Kingdom of Heaven. Anyway just a little side-bar as it were.
on the discriminatory, immoral and more dangerous character of anti-Zionism.
Anti-Zionism rejects the very notion that Jews are a nation -- a collective bonded by a common history -- and, accordingly, denies Jews the right to self-determination in their historical birthplace. It seeks the dismantling of the Jewish nation-state: Israel.
Anti-Zionism earns its discriminatory character by denying the Jewish people what it grants to other historically bonded collectives (e.g. French, Spanish, Palestinians), namely, the right to nationhood, self-determination and legitimate coexistence with other indigenous claimants.
Anti-Semitism rejects Jews as equal members of the human race; anti-Zionism rejects Israel as an equal member in the family of nations.
Are Jews a nation? Some philosophers would argue Jews are a nation first and religion second. Indeed, the narrative of Exodus and the vision of the impending journey to the land of Canaan were etched in the minds of the Jewish people before they received the Torah at Mt. Sinai. But, philosophy aside, the unshaken conviction in their eventual repatriation to the birthplace of their history has been the engine behind Jewish endurance and hopes throughout their turbulent journey that started with the Roman expulsion in AD 70.
More important, shared history, not religion, is today the primary uniting force behind the secular, multiethnic society of Israel. The majority of its members do not practice religious laws and do not believe in divine supervision or the afterlife. The same applies to American Jewry, which is likewise largely secular. Identification with a common historical ethos, culminating in the reestablishment of the state of Israel, is the central bond of Jewish collectivity in America.
First, anti-Zionism targets the most vulnerable part of the Jewish people, namely, the Jewish population of Israel, whose physical safety and personal dignity depend crucially on maintaining Israel's sovereignty. Put bluntly, the anti-Zionist plan to do away with Israel condemns 5 1/2 million human beings, mostly refugees or children of refugees, to eternal defenselessness in a region where genocidal designs are not uncommon.
Secondly, modern society has developed antibodies against anti-Semitism but not against anti-Zionism. Today, anti-Semitic stereotypes evoke revulsion in most people of conscience, while anti-Zionist rhetoric has become a mark of academic sophistication and social acceptance in certain extreme yet vocal circles of U.S. academia and media elite. Anti-Zionism disguises itself in the cloak of political debate, exempt from sensitivities and rules of civility that govern inter-religious discourse, to attack the most cherished symbol of Jewish identity.
Finally, anti-Zionist rhetoric is a stab in the back to the Israeli peace camp, which overwhelmingly stands for a two-state solution. It also gives credence to enemies of coexistence who claim that the eventual elimination of Israel is the hidden agenda of every Palestinian.
It is anti-Zionism, then, not anti-Semitism that poses a more dangerous threat to lives, historical justice and the prospects of peace in the Middle East.
Judea Pearl is a professor at UCLA and the president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation.
-------------------------------------- Here's another neocon condemning Galloway while making excuses for Israel he also sees anti-Zionism all around him esp. Universities which we assume the author believes is part of the Great Liberal conspiracy ( or Secular Humanists) as defined by Right Wing Pundits such as Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh- what he wants is for universities to teach that the Palestinians are evil and the Israelis are good. Academia is supposed to be dedicated at least in part to the search for truth. Academia also deals in shades of grey which Ideologues right or left don't like. Sometimes an issue isn't clearly defined as Good v Evil.
Whereas for instance one may not agree with a group like Hamas whether their public statements or their tactics which may seem brutal and barbaric but does that mean that every man , woman and child in Gaza is the Enemy and therefore can be legitimately seen as justifiable military targets of the IDF. Is every Iraqi responsible for the actions of Saddam or of the insurgents and terrorists in Iraq. There are many who believe that is in part because of this attitude on the part of the US and British forces which helped to fuel the insurgency.
Galloway was as vehement a critic of George Bush as anyone in the world -- and still the Americans have admitted him to speak in their country several times. They have banned the same terror organizations we have. Indeed, we largely copied their list (and the Brits'), and Galloway was to come to Canada this month at the end of a speaking tour in the U.S.
One of the reasons, supposedly, that the Canada Border Services Agency has issued its ban is Galloway's support for the Taliban's cause; the Taliban being the very insurgents currently blowing up Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.
His Canadian appearances were to be sponsored by the Canadian Peace Alliance, the same group who, during Israel's recent raids on Gaza, organized a rally in Toronto during which several demonstrators shouted for the death of Jews around the world.
Galloway is a nasty piece of work and has plenty of rotten friends, but if we are to begin banning everyone who sympathizes with the Palestinians' grievances, or argues against the war on terrorism in Iraq and Afghan- istan, or shows interest in Islamists' motivations, then we need to begin roundups on every university campus in the country, in every faculty and teachers' lounge, in newsrooms, mainline churches and political conventions.
( But what's the writers point in this statement - that Galloway is a dangerous buffoon and those who support him are mean spirited anti-Israel and anti-Semitic- he goes from this sort of character assassination to claim that anyone who questions the policies on the War On Terror is sympathetic to the terrorists or anyone who has any sympathy for the citizens of Gaza or the West Bank or Iraq or Afghanistan is also pro-terrorists - he paints a black and white picture which is an echo of Bush's claim after 9/11 " that you are either with us or against us" so if someone objects to indiscriminate killing and detentions and the abuse and torture of so-called detainees then that person is soft on terrorism - in other words we can't discuss strategy and tactics but must support the US government or the British government no matter what. To criticize the Bush Regime or Tony Blair etc. is to be on the side of the terrorists. For instance there are those who believe we would be better served by engaging in talks with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah or groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan . It may be that such talks turn out to be futile but many believe that such a dialogue should at least be tried and not ruled out .
The other thing to note is that the author believes that there is a sort of conspiracy at work on University Campuses by those who he claims are anti-Israel. Again any criticism of the IDF during its recent invasion of Gaza is by definition anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic.
Now comes a strange statement about the Anti-Islamic Dutch MP Geert Wilders. Gert Wilders does not argue that there some Muslims living in Europe who are extremists who should be dealt with by the authorities but rather he believes that all Muslims are evil and anti-Western and anti-Christian and so should be expelled from European countries in the same way that in earlier time Christian countries in Europe expelled the Jews and the Muslims ie from England , Spain etc.
So part of his argument is that if Galloway is kept out of Canada then those in authority could also keep out someone like Geert Wilders whom he seems to suggest has analyzed the issue correctly that is that all Muslims are out to destroy Christendom and Western Civilization.)
Five weeks ago, the British government banned Dutch MP Geert Wilders, as vocal an opponent of radical Islam as Galloway is a supporter. That move was wrong, too.
Wilders has produced a controversial 17-minute movie on what he sees as Islam's threat to Western values. He has advocated a ban on public readings of the Qur'an, on Islamic attire, on Islamic schools in his homeland, the Netherlands, and has proclaimed that "moderate Islam does not exist."
Those who would cheer the prohibition against Galloway from entering Canada should realize that the same powers used by government to bar him could just as easily be used to keep Wilders out, too.
...Only days after they were groaning with fury at the Israeli lobby's success in hounding the outspoken Charles Freeman away from his proposed intelligence job for President Obama, the Arabs now have to contend with an Israeli Foreign Minister whose – let us speak frankly – racist comments about Palestinian loyalty tests have brought into the new Netanyahu cabinet one of the most unpleasant politicians in the Middle East.
The Iraqis produced the hateful Saddam, the Iranians created the crackpot Ahmadinejad – for reasons of sanity, I leave out the weird ruler of Libya – and now the Israelis have exalted a man, Avigdor Lieberman, who out-Sharons even Ariel Sharon.
A few Palestinians expressed their cruel delight that at last the West will see the "true face" of Israel. I've heard that one before – when Sharon became prime minister – and the usual nonsense will be trotted out that only a "hard-line extremist" can make the compromises necessary for a deal with the Palestinians.
This kind of self-delusion is a Middle East disease. The fact is that the Israeli Prime Minister-to-be has made it perfectly clear there will be no two-state solution; and he has planted a tree on Golan to show the Syrians they will not get it back. And now he's brought into the cabinet a man who sees even the Arabs of Israel as second-class citizens.
Lieberman's first visit to Washington will be a gem. AIPAC – posing as an Israeli lobby when in fact it works for the Likudists – will fight for him and Lady Hillary will have to greet him warmly at the State Department. Who knows, he might even suggest to her that she imposes a loyalty test for American minorities as well – which would mean demanding an oath of faithfulness from Barack himself. The horizon goes on forever.
Robert Fisk concludes the situation is becoming catastrophic:
The New York Times when it attempted last week to explain why Lady Hillary was frightened of offending the Israelis during the formation of the Netanyahu government when she described the destruction of 1,000 Palestinian homes as "unhelpful".
Her caution in the Middle East, it explained, was "a reflection of the treacherous landscape in the Middle East, where a misplaced phrase can ruffle feathers among constituencies back home". You bet it can – and when Mr Lieberman comes to town, we'll see who those feathers belong to.
Their owners would do well, however, to dwell on the incendiary language of Avigdor Lieberman. He speaks like a Russian nationalist rather than the secular Israeli he claims to be.
I covered the bloodbath of Bosnia in the early Nineties and I can identify Lieberman's language – of executions, of drownings, of hell and loyalty oaths – with the language of Messrs Mladic and Karadzic and Milosevic.
Lady Hillary and her boss should pull out a few books on the war in ex-Yugoslavia if they want to understand who they are now dealing with. "Unhelpful" will not be the appropriate response.
RAMALLAH - The critical wounding of a U.S. activist has highlighted the excessive use of force by Israeli forces.
The activist, Tristan Anderson, 38, was shot in the head by Israeli soldiers during a protest against Israel's separation barrier in the Palestinian West Bank last week. He remains in intensive care in Tel Hashomer Hospital in Tel Aviv.
Anderson was one of approximately 400 international, Palestinian and Israeli protestors taking part in a demonstration in the village of Ni'ilin, near the central West Bank city Ramallah, when he was hit by a teargas canister.
Since Israel's devastating three-week war on Gaza, human rights organisations and activists have accused the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) of using indiscriminate violence and testing new weapons on unarmed protestors.
The teargas canister which hit Anderson is a new variety being used by the IDF, and is particularly lethal if fired directly at protestors.
The gas canister can travel over 400 metres. It does not make a noise when fired, or emit a smoke tail, and has a propeller for mid-air acceleration. A combination of velocity and silence increases the danger it poses.
Witnesses gave testimonies to the media and to human rights organisations that they saw Israeli soldiers aiming at Anderson before they shot the canister from a distance of about 60 metres. It hit him directly on the forehead. The impact of the canister caused severe damage to the right eye, and Anderson has had to undergo critical brain surgery.
Israeli soldiers continued to fire teargas canisters towards the wounded man and the people surrounding him as he lay critically injured on the ground and Palestinian medics tried to give him first aid.
Later, a Palestinian ambulance trying to rush Anderson to hospital was blocked at least five minutes by Israeli soldiers. Only after other foreigners engaged the soldiers in heated debate did they allow the ambulance to pass.
Anderson was then delayed another 15 minutes while an Israel ambulance was called, because Palestinian ambulances are not allowed to cross into Israeli territory without special permit.
One is the story of Canada and the Canadian military being insulted by blow-hard Americans on the FOX NEWS NETWORK where there are more clowns and buffoons than one could imagine. So first a little rant about how Americans know so little about Canada and are dismissive of our country , our history etc. and make jokes about Canadian soldiers dying in Afghanistan. To me this is just another reason we shouldn't be involved in Afghanistan since it began and is still seen as an American Mission to end terrorism and yet Bin Laden has still not been caught so why are we in Afghanistan. If there is failure there it will be blamed on Canada and the other NATO countries while if there is success the Americans will take full credit for it as they still seem to take credit for winning single handed the Second World War. Those millions of Ally troops fighting beside the Americans in Europe in North Africa , in Russia , in the Pacific according even to Ken Burns film about WWII never existed- there were only American troops so they keep telling themselves. Unfortunately many Canadians and Brits have bought into the American Myth-Making and Propaganda.
The second story is the continuing story of George Galloway and the Canadian governments refusal to allow him into our country. Connected with this is the developing story on Israeli War Crimes committed during its action against Gaza.
Anyway there's bit of a flap over some negative comments made about Canada and especially our military by the dim witted dumbed down folks at Fox News USA. The ignorance of most Americans concerning Canada is often amazing sometimes funny ie Rick Mercer interviewing Americans and other times down right insulting. But it shouldn't surprise Canadians since to Americans their country is the only real country of importance. They believe that they have been chosen by Destiny or God or as a result of Natural Selection to be superior to all other nations. They see themselves as never doing anything wrong. They also believe all other countries are envious of them. But we are not.
Because Americans don't really study history but rather the Myths about America- They arrived on an empty continent - well not that empty - everyone was treated justly and fairly except if you were female or Black or Red or not a Christian and so on and so forth.
America - Democratic, Equality , Fairness, Justice - I don't think so. From the mass murder of Native Americans approximately 20-40 million Millions enslaved Jim Crow & the KKK Denial of Women's Rights Gay Rights still not recognized Invading Sovereign Nations to Grab land- Mexico , The Philippines , Central America, Middle East- some might even think of Israel as an extension of the US or a colony or puppet state
Remember the Americans have built up this imaginary Mythological History which helps them forget all of the mistakes they have made and that they were not really much a democratic state until after the Civil Rights Legislation of late 1960s.But America to its shame did not pass the Equal Rights Amendment to give equal rights to women since many Americans especially the Far Right and the Religious Right believe that would be going too far. Of course many of these people like Rush Limbaugh and other Conservatives and their supporters believe that the country started to go down after the Supreme court decision of Brown v. The Board of Education. So it is also not surprising that many Americans like John McCain and others supported South African Apartheid up to the bitter end. Many Americans still consider Nelson Mandela a terrorists along with Martin Luther King Jr. But then again these patriotic Americans are also against equal rights for Gays and Lesbians . The Americans in their bigotry & ignorance are still tossing Gays out of the military when they are uncovered. They believe that if someone is born into a poor family that is somehow your own fault and if you were to die of starvation they don't care its all part of God 's plan as Pastor Hagee has said.
So Americans are not in favor of a Universal Health Care system paid for by the government because to them what would then be the difference between the rich and the poor so they have one of the worst Health Care systems of any Western Industrialized Nation and their Education system is less than adequate. But they believe that only those who are well to do have a right to good health Care or Education. They do beat out all other nations in having the largest prison population which is over two million. They would rather spend money on Nukes than on education.
The Americans still treat those who lose their jobs as if they were criminals or just free-loaders- maybe this will change after a few million more lose their jobs. But unfortunately the most outspoken defenders of the Free-Market, Deregulation and Laissez Faire Capitalism will not be hurt by this economic meltdown as they can always sell a couple of their houses or move to the island where they have been hiding their money in an off-shore account.
American ignorance about Canadians is typical unfortunately. As for FOX NEWS it is referred to by many American commentators as Faux News since during and since the Bush administration they were the most outspoken cheer leaders of Bush's Policies especially foreign policy. But you can find lots of these ignorant and absurd comments on American Networks being made about Canada all the time. See Ann Coulter , Tucker Carlson etc.
Canada: A Ridiculous Country Could you even imagine a more annoying and ignorant group of people? These ignoramuses sit around and disrespect Canada and its fallen soldiers while spewing a stream of stupid comments and failing to be even remotely amusing.
Unspeakably Stupid and Annoying Buffoons on Faux News Disrespect Canada, Soldiers.
Tucker Carlson Calls Canadians Retarded-Oct. 2006
Tucker Carlson has a talk with The Hour host George Stroumboulopoulos about comments he made; namely, calling Canadians "like your retarded cousin."
Ann Coulter/Tucker Carlson talk about Canada-Nov. 06, 2006 They are lucky we allow them to exist on our continent
Ann Coulter and Tucker Carlson clips debating why the US should just bomb Canada, this goes in the comedy section
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- George Galloway and Israeli War Crimes If America and the British can get away with War Crimes why shouldn't Israel !!! On the other hand if the International Community can get Israel to answer for its War Crime maybe the world Court can go after the United States and Britain next- or vice versa as it were.
In the clip below a discussion panel was held at Al Jazeera dealing with Israel's alleged War Crimes.
Major General (RES) Yaakov Amidror FMR Commander, Israeli Army College who appears in this panel discussion on the issue of allegations that the IDF committed War Crimes just keeps reiterating various "Talking Points" that First and foremost Israel has a right to protect itself from terrorists attacks. Secondly Yaakov Amidror argues that these eye-witness accounts are really just " hearsay " and refuses to acknowledge that these eyewitnesses are members of the IDF. Thirdly He claims that Israel will conduct its own investigations into these allegations if there is any merit to them. Fourthly he claims that any international group could not be trusted to investigate the Israeli Military's actions in Gaza because all such organizations and governments are anti-Israeli and are out to destroy Israel .
It should also be noted that the Major General doesn't even bother to respond to the evidence that Israel during the Gaza invasion used White Phosphorus and other banned ordinance and that they bombed non-military targets deliberately. He also returns to the Talking Point that Hamas was using human shields during the fighting with Israel. He also claims that Michael Sfard the other Israeli in this discussion panel is not a patriotic Israeli and is really anti-Israel. But at the outset of the discussion the Major General claimed that he was out-numbered 3 to 1 that is that the other 3 members of the panel were in fact anti-Israel and should not be listened to or trusted.
He reminds one of the members of the Bush Administration who also in such discussions merely reiterated certain "Whitehouse Talking Points ". For instance they would claim that the facts were not that clear cut or claiming that certain facts were indisputable when they were not. Further the Bush defenders even now tend to characterize any American who questions the policies of the Bush Regime as being UNAmerican or not a "Real American". What the Bush administration and its supporters have argued over the last eight years is that all citizens must support the Government, the Military and all of their policies. So to criticize the way the US military has operated in Iraq or Afghanistan is to be characterized as being a traitor .
And further the Bush Regime also claimed that any International Organization, Human Rights Organization or other NGOs or foreign governments that questioned the military actions were or are really just anti-American.
This is why the Bush Regime used the propaganda ploy using the slogan " Support The Troops " in order to silence as best they could any criticism of the Bush Regime's Foreign Policy. So if someone criticized the military for certain tactics such as abusing and torturing detainees then the critic was labeled UnAmerican or a supporter of the "Terrorists " . Those who dared question the Bush policy of invading Iraq they were seen as traitors giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
In Canada we have been told by the Stephen Harper Neocon Regime that we must support unconditionally Canada's troops which are deployed with the troops of other NATO countries in Afghanistan . So to criticize this foreign policy decision is to be labeled as Unpatriotic as not supporting Canada's troops and therefore not acknowledging the sacrifices being made by our troops in Afghanistan. But the issue is not Support for the Troops but whether or not this is good foreign policy. That is should Canadian soldiers or NATO itself be involved in this conflict . The question is what is our role and are we making things better or worse by being in Afghanistan. The point is that Canadian citizens should be permitted to have different points of view on this issue without their loyalty to their country being questioned.
Note he does make one good point which is that other countries accused of War Crimes have not been held accountable by the International Court or permitted International Investigations of these allegations.He then claims that why should Israel pay any attention to such allegations when the US and Britain and NATO have also been accused of committing War Crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan and they were not held accountable. But he only makes this point to claim that Israel in his view is once again being singled out and targeted by anti-Israeli organizations and individuals. He is right to some extent but there are many in the International Community who believe that the US and Britain and Canada and NATO forces should cooperate with an International Investigations of alleged War Crimes.
Michael Sfard legal Counselor of Yesh Din argues that the IDF has a poor record when it comes to investigating itself concerning allegations of wrong doing or of committing War Crimes.
Jeremy Corbyn, labour MP, UK- He points out that the allegations are not just hearsay but have come from personnel of Humanitarian Organizations including the United Nations. The allegations are that the Israeli forces were bombing non-military targets in Gaza including the UN main compound and schools and hospitals and industrial plants and the residences of of Gazan civilians. He also points out that there is a great deal of evidence which shows that Israel uses White Phosphorus on non-military targets.
Inside Story - Israeli war crimes in Gaza - 22 Mar - Part 1
Breaking The Silence which is a group of former Israeli soldiers who say they have new evidence of potential war crimes committed by the Israeli army during the war on Gaza. These are not the first allegations of war crimes levelled at the Israeli military and the claims have sparked a bitter debate within Israel's defence forces and wider society over the "morality" of the IDF and its behaviour in Gaza.
Inside Story - Israeli war crimes in Gaza - 22 Mar - Part 2
George Galloway "The West has DOUBLE STANDARDS when it comes to Israel"-Jan.16, 2009
George Galloway's powerful speech in the House of Commons debate on Gaza, Jan. 15, 2009 , highlighting the hypocrisy and brazen double-standards of Western foreign policy towards Israel policies, including assassinations and other war crimes.
The Guardian has compiled detailed evidence of alleged war crimes committed by Israel during the 23-day offensive against Gaza earlier this year, involving the use of Palestinian children as human shields, the targeting of medics and hospitals, and drone aircraft firing on civilians...
...Some of the most dramatic testimony gathered by the Guardian came from three teenage brothers in the al-Attar family. The trio describe how they were taken from their home at gunpoint, made to kneel in front of tanks to deter Hamas fighters from firing at them and sent by Israeli soldiers into Palestinian houses to clear them.
"They would make us go first so if any fighters shot at them the bullets would hit us not them," 14-year-old Al'a al-Attar said.
Medics and ambulance drivers said they were targeted when they tried to tend to the wounded. Sixteen of them were killed. According to the World Health Organisation, more than half of Gaza's 27 hospitals and 44 clinics were damaged by Israeli bombs. Two clinics were destroyed. In one incident, paramedics were fired on by a tank using a shell filled with 8,000 lethal metal darts as they were carrying a wounded man to an ambulance.
In a report released today, doctors for Human Rights Israel said there was "certainty" that Israel violated international humanitarian law during the three-week war in January, with attacks on medics, damage to medical buildings, indiscriminate attacks on civilians and delays in medical treatment for the injured.
"We have noticed a stark decline in IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] morals concerning the Palestinian population of Gaza, which in reality amounts to a contempt for Palestinian lives," said Dani Filc, chairman of Physicians for Human Rights Israel.
The Guardian gathered testimony of missile attacks by Israeli drones on clearly distinguishable civilian targets. In one case a family of six was killed when a missile hit the courtyard of their house. Israel has not admitted to the use of drones but military experts say their optical equipment is good enough to clearly identify individual items of clothing worn by targets...
