Tuesday, August 1, 2006
Sadly, the Plural of "Fiasco" Requires No "E"
By Ray McGovern
"But the world desperately needs an "E" for EXIT from the march of folly toward a wider Middle East war that is increasingly likely to result from plural US foreign policy fiascos - in Iraq, Israel and Lebanon, for starters; in Syria and Iran for the next stage. Fortunately, Webster's does allow the insertion of an "E" and that's precisely what we must now do. We need to make a prompt exit from the endless string of fiascoes that have the Middle East marching to calamity.
If we do not take a sober look beyond the carnage of the last few weeks and weigh the reaction of still others in and outside the region, I fear there will be no exit. Perhaps it would be wise to start with a brief review: Who led our march into this modern-day Valley of Death?
There is a certain poetic justice in the fact that Rice, now secretary of state, is reaping the whirlwind. She has been trapped in the extremely awkward position of having to say "No" to a cease-fire to stop the burgeoning violence, and then being mocked by the Israelis who openly violated the cease-fire they had promised her.
Still an innocent abroad, Rice has loyally played piano accompaniment for the neo-con hit song, "Reshaping the Entire Region." She has, for example, described the violence in Lebanon and Israel as "the birth pangs of a new Middle East." On Friday, President Bush declared, "This is a moment of intense conflict ... yet our aim is to turn it into a moment of opportunity and a chance for broader change in the region."
Bush's remark elicited uncharacteristically acerbic ridicule from Richard Haass, who served under Bush as head of policy planning at the State Department. (Yes, this is the same Haass who in July 2002 begged Rice for an appointment with the president, whom he wanted to warn of the folly of invading Iraq. Rice reportedly told him, "The decision's been made; don't waste your breath.") Referring to Bush's remarks on Friday, Haass, now head of the Council on Foreign Relations, laughed at the president's optimism, according to a report by Peter Baker in yesterday's Washington Post. "That's the funniest thing I've heard in a long time," said Haass. "If this is an opportunity, what's Iraq? A once-in-a-lifetime chance?"
It is far from funny. Rather, it is amateur-hour again at the White House, with Rice acting as the president's personal secretary under instruction to do what Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the neo-cons tell her to do. The results have been entirely predictable. Seldom before has Washington been so widely seen to be joined at the hip to an Israel on the rampage. Seldom has US stock in the region sunk to such depths as it did last week, with civilian casualties in Lebanon piling up (literally) and with Rice joining Israel in rejecting appeals for an immediate cease-fire on grounds that it must be "sustainable." Policy and performance alike have been myopic in the extreme, and have resulted in an embarrassing US setback from which it will take decades to recover. The ramifications are region-wide."
"But the world desperately needs an "E" for EXIT from the march of folly toward a wider Middle East war that is increasingly likely to result from plural US foreign policy fiascos - in Iraq, Israel and Lebanon, for starters; in Syria and Iran for the next stage. Fortunately, Webster's does allow the insertion of an "E" and that's precisely what we must now do. We need to make a prompt exit from the endless string of fiascoes that have the Middle East marching to calamity.
If we do not take a sober look beyond the carnage of the last few weeks and weigh the reaction of still others in and outside the region, I fear there will be no exit. Perhaps it would be wise to start with a brief review: Who led our march into this modern-day Valley of Death?
There is a certain poetic justice in the fact that Rice, now secretary of state, is reaping the whirlwind. She has been trapped in the extremely awkward position of having to say "No" to a cease-fire to stop the burgeoning violence, and then being mocked by the Israelis who openly violated the cease-fire they had promised her.
Still an innocent abroad, Rice has loyally played piano accompaniment for the neo-con hit song, "Reshaping the Entire Region." She has, for example, described the violence in Lebanon and Israel as "the birth pangs of a new Middle East." On Friday, President Bush declared, "This is a moment of intense conflict ... yet our aim is to turn it into a moment of opportunity and a chance for broader change in the region."
Bush's remark elicited uncharacteristically acerbic ridicule from Richard Haass, who served under Bush as head of policy planning at the State Department. (Yes, this is the same Haass who in July 2002 begged Rice for an appointment with the president, whom he wanted to warn of the folly of invading Iraq. Rice reportedly told him, "The decision's been made; don't waste your breath.") Referring to Bush's remarks on Friday, Haass, now head of the Council on Foreign Relations, laughed at the president's optimism, according to a report by Peter Baker in yesterday's Washington Post. "That's the funniest thing I've heard in a long time," said Haass. "If this is an opportunity, what's Iraq? A once-in-a-lifetime chance?"
It is far from funny. Rather, it is amateur-hour again at the White House, with Rice acting as the president's personal secretary under instruction to do what Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the neo-cons tell her to do. The results have been entirely predictable. Seldom before has Washington been so widely seen to be joined at the hip to an Israel on the rampage. Seldom has US stock in the region sunk to such depths as it did last week, with civilian casualties in Lebanon piling up (literally) and with Rice joining Israel in rejecting appeals for an immediate cease-fire on grounds that it must be "sustainable." Policy and performance alike have been myopic in the extreme, and have resulted in an embarrassing US setback from which it will take decades to recover. The ramifications are region-wide."
Beyond Lebanon by Brent Scowcroft
Before you read this article there are a number of things that Mr. Scowcroft left out. I emphasized a couple of things in bold because of the utter importance of the statement.
Scowcroft was partially right when he said "Hezbollah is not the source of the problem; it is a derivative of the cause, which is the tragic conflict over Palestine that began in 1948." The problem goes a little bit further back to the promises of T.E. Lawrence and what Arnold Toynbee overheard British Prime Minister David Lloyd George say to himself at the Paris Peace Conference:
"Mesopotamia...yes...oil...irrigation...we must have Mesopotamia; Palestine...yes...the Holy Land...Zionism...we must have Palestine; Syria...h'm...what's there in Syria? Let the French have that."
What Toynbee overheard was precisely what this problem is about: giving other people's land to foreigners.
Other things that Scowcroft fails to mention is that his "opportunity" is extremely similar to the numerous offers that Israel has rejected over the past few decades. Most recently has been the Saudi Peace Plan (1981 and 2002) and the Geneva Accords. The latter can be viewed via the sidebar on this website. Both offers were rejected by Israel. Also, the "opportunity" mostly resembles the Fatah-Hamas agreement from late June 2006 than anything the Israeli or American government have endorsed.
If you bother to read the links you will notice that the offer in 2002 was rejected because Israel was not willing to give up land that it is legally obligated to give up since they took it illegally.
The offer can easily be found online here. Notice that the offer stated: "the Arab countries affirm the following: "I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region. II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace."
As for the Geneva Accords, simply read the last paragraph of the article to get the attitude of the Israeli government.
Keep in mind that these Arab offers that have existed for decades offer peace with Israel if they will simply adhere to international law; withdraw back to the 1967 borders, dismantle illegal settlements, allow a Palestinian state and the issues of Jerusalem and right of refugees to return varies depending on the offer, but all make considerable concessions or ask Israel to adhere to international law (the latter would mean Jerusalem goes to Palestine and the refugees are allowed to return). Again, these are basic requirments of international law.
Scowcroft also mentions "President Bill Clinton's efforts [that] collapsed in 2000."
According to Robert Malley, a Special Assistant to President Clinton for Arab-Israeli Affairs, was also a member of the US peace team and participated in the Camp David summit:
"The final and largely unnoticed consequence of Barak's approach is that, strictly speaking, there never was an Israeli offer. Determined to preserve Israel's position in the event of failure, and resolved not to let the Palestinians take advantage of one-sided compromises, the Israelis always stopped one, if not several, steps short of a proposal. The ideas put forward at Camp David were never stated in writing, but orally conveyed. They generally were presented as US concepts, not Israeli ones; indeed, despite having demanded the opportunity to negotiate face to face with Arafat, Barak refused to hold any substantive meeting with him at Camp David out of fear that the Palestinian leader would seek to put Israeli concessions on the record. Nor were the proposals detailed. If written down, the American ideas at Camp David would have covered no more than a few pages."
In the article Scowcroft says: "The current crisis in Lebanon provides a historic opportunity to achieve what has seemed impossible."
Why does he think the "opportunity.. seemed impossible" when the Arabs were offering it?
Scowcroft ignores alot in this piece.
It ignores what the US has been vetoing and what the Israelis have been rejecting.
----------------
Beyond Lebanon
This Is the Time for a U.S.-Led Comprehensive Settlement
By Brent Scowcroft
Sunday, July 30, 2006; Page B07
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has stated that a simple cease-fire in Lebanon is not the solution to the current violence. She says it is necessary to deal with the roots of the problem. She is right on both counts. But Hezbollah is not the source of the problem; it is a derivative of the cause, which is the tragic conflict over Palestine that began in 1948.
The eastern shore of the Mediterranean is in turmoil from end to end, a repetition of continuing conflicts in one part or another since the abortive attempts of the United Nations to create separate Israeli and Palestinian states in 1948. The current conflagration has energized the world. Now, perhaps more than ever, we have an opportunity to harness that concern and energy to achieve a comprehensive resolution of the entire 58-year-old tragedy. Only the United States can lead the effort required to seize this opportunity.
The outlines of a comprehensive settlement have been apparent since President Bill Clinton's efforts collapsed in 2000. The major elements would include:
· A Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with minor rectifications agreed upon between Palestine and Israel.
· Palestinians giving up the right of return and Israel reciprocating by removing its settlements in the West Bank, again with rectifications as mutually agreed. Those displaced on both sides would receive compensation from the international community.
· King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia unambiguously reconfirming his 2002 pledge that the Arab world is prepared to enter into full normal relations with Israel upon its withdrawal from the lands occupied in 1967.
· Egypt and Saudi Arabia working with the Palestinian Authority to put together a government along the lines of the 18-point agreement reached between Hamas and Fatah prisoners in Israeli jails in June. This government would negotiate for the Authority.
· Deployment, as part of a cease-fire, of a robust international force in southern Lebanon.
· Deployment of another international force to facilitate and supervise traffic to and from Gaza and the West Bank.
· Designation of Jerusalem as the shared capital of Israel and Palestine, with appropriate international guarantees of freedom of movement and civic life in the city.
These elements are well-known to people who live in the region and to those outside who have labored over the decades seeking to shape a lasting peace. What seems breathtakingly complicated, however, is how one mobilizes the necessary political will, in the region and beyond, to transform these principles into an agreement on a lasting accord.
The current crisis in Lebanon provides a historic opportunity to achieve what has seemed impossible. That said, it is too much to expect those most directly implicated -- Israeli and Palestinian leaders -- to lead the way. That responsibility falls to others, principally the United States, which alone can mobilize the international community and Israel and the Arab states for the task that has defeated so many previous efforts.
Scowcroft was partially right when he said "Hezbollah is not the source of the problem; it is a derivative of the cause, which is the tragic conflict over Palestine that began in 1948." The problem goes a little bit further back to the promises of T.E. Lawrence and what Arnold Toynbee overheard British Prime Minister David Lloyd George say to himself at the Paris Peace Conference:
"Mesopotamia...yes...oil...irrigation...we must have Mesopotamia; Palestine...yes...the Holy Land...Zionism...we must have Palestine; Syria...h'm...what's there in Syria? Let the French have that."
What Toynbee overheard was precisely what this problem is about: giving other people's land to foreigners.
Other things that Scowcroft fails to mention is that his "opportunity" is extremely similar to the numerous offers that Israel has rejected over the past few decades. Most recently has been the Saudi Peace Plan (1981 and 2002) and the Geneva Accords. The latter can be viewed via the sidebar on this website. Both offers were rejected by Israel. Also, the "opportunity" mostly resembles the Fatah-Hamas agreement from late June 2006 than anything the Israeli or American government have endorsed.
If you bother to read the links you will notice that the offer in 2002 was rejected because Israel was not willing to give up land that it is legally obligated to give up since they took it illegally.
The offer can easily be found online here. Notice that the offer stated: "the Arab countries affirm the following: "I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region. II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace."
As for the Geneva Accords, simply read the last paragraph of the article to get the attitude of the Israeli government.
Keep in mind that these Arab offers that have existed for decades offer peace with Israel if they will simply adhere to international law; withdraw back to the 1967 borders, dismantle illegal settlements, allow a Palestinian state and the issues of Jerusalem and right of refugees to return varies depending on the offer, but all make considerable concessions or ask Israel to adhere to international law (the latter would mean Jerusalem goes to Palestine and the refugees are allowed to return). Again, these are basic requirments of international law.
Scowcroft also mentions "President Bill Clinton's efforts [that] collapsed in 2000."
According to Robert Malley, a Special Assistant to President Clinton for Arab-Israeli Affairs, was also a member of the US peace team and participated in the Camp David summit:
"The final and largely unnoticed consequence of Barak's approach is that, strictly speaking, there never was an Israeli offer. Determined to preserve Israel's position in the event of failure, and resolved not to let the Palestinians take advantage of one-sided compromises, the Israelis always stopped one, if not several, steps short of a proposal. The ideas put forward at Camp David were never stated in writing, but orally conveyed. They generally were presented as US concepts, not Israeli ones; indeed, despite having demanded the opportunity to negotiate face to face with Arafat, Barak refused to hold any substantive meeting with him at Camp David out of fear that the Palestinian leader would seek to put Israeli concessions on the record. Nor were the proposals detailed. If written down, the American ideas at Camp David would have covered no more than a few pages."
In the article Scowcroft says: "The current crisis in Lebanon provides a historic opportunity to achieve what has seemed impossible."
Why does he think the "opportunity.. seemed impossible" when the Arabs were offering it?
Scowcroft ignores alot in this piece.
It ignores what the US has been vetoing and what the Israelis have been rejecting.
----------------
Beyond Lebanon
This Is the Time for a U.S.-Led Comprehensive Settlement
By Brent Scowcroft
Sunday, July 30, 2006; Page B07
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has stated that a simple cease-fire in Lebanon is not the solution to the current violence. She says it is necessary to deal with the roots of the problem. She is right on both counts. But Hezbollah is not the source of the problem; it is a derivative of the cause, which is the tragic conflict over Palestine that began in 1948.
The eastern shore of the Mediterranean is in turmoil from end to end, a repetition of continuing conflicts in one part or another since the abortive attempts of the United Nations to create separate Israeli and Palestinian states in 1948. The current conflagration has energized the world. Now, perhaps more than ever, we have an opportunity to harness that concern and energy to achieve a comprehensive resolution of the entire 58-year-old tragedy. Only the United States can lead the effort required to seize this opportunity.
The outlines of a comprehensive settlement have been apparent since President Bill Clinton's efforts collapsed in 2000. The major elements would include:
· A Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with minor rectifications agreed upon between Palestine and Israel.
· Palestinians giving up the right of return and Israel reciprocating by removing its settlements in the West Bank, again with rectifications as mutually agreed. Those displaced on both sides would receive compensation from the international community.
· King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia unambiguously reconfirming his 2002 pledge that the Arab world is prepared to enter into full normal relations with Israel upon its withdrawal from the lands occupied in 1967.
· Egypt and Saudi Arabia working with the Palestinian Authority to put together a government along the lines of the 18-point agreement reached between Hamas and Fatah prisoners in Israeli jails in June. This government would negotiate for the Authority.
· Deployment, as part of a cease-fire, of a robust international force in southern Lebanon.
· Deployment of another international force to facilitate and supervise traffic to and from Gaza and the West Bank.
· Designation of Jerusalem as the shared capital of Israel and Palestine, with appropriate international guarantees of freedom of movement and civic life in the city.
These elements are well-known to people who live in the region and to those outside who have labored over the decades seeking to shape a lasting peace. What seems breathtakingly complicated, however, is how one mobilizes the necessary political will, in the region and beyond, to transform these principles into an agreement on a lasting accord.
The current crisis in Lebanon provides a historic opportunity to achieve what has seemed impossible. That said, it is too much to expect those most directly implicated -- Israeli and Palestinian leaders -- to lead the way. That responsibility falls to others, principally the United States, which alone can mobilize the international community and Israel and the Arab states for the task that has defeated so many previous efforts.
المقاومة الإسلامية تكبد جيش العدو الذي يقهر خسائر فادحة جداً في ملحمة عيتا الشعب
مع بدء اليوم الثاني والعشرين للعدوان الإسرائيلي الغاشم على لبنان، كثفت قوات العدو محاولات التقدم البرية على أكثر من محور في بنت جبيل ومرجعيون، في محاولة مستميتة لتعويض خسائرها السابقة فمنيت بالمزيد منها، وخصوصا في بلدة عيتا الشعب التي سطر فيها المقاومون على مدى الساعات الماضية، فصلا جديدا من فصول ملحمة البطولة والرجولة التي بدأت في 12 تموز الماضي في عيتا الشعب نفسها، وسطعت على تلال مارون الراس ومثلث التحرير في بنت جبيل، ثم تكررت في مشروع الطيبة وعلى محور كفركلا - العديسة - الطيبة، لتعود اليوم وتبزغ مجددا في مكان اشراقها الأول. .."الجيش الذي لا يقهر"، قهر خلال الليلة الماضية واليوم، أكثر من مرة على مرتفع العويضة، ومحور كفركلا - العديسة، وخسر من نخبة قواته حوالى 35 قتيلا وجريحا في بلدة عيتا الشعب وحدها، وحتى الساعة الثالثة بعد ظهر اليوم فقط، اضافة الى تدمير العديد من الدبابات والجرافات. فقوات النخبة في هذا الجيش الذي ثبت انه يقهر، والمكونة من المشاة والمظليين المدعومين بالدبابات والجرافات والغطاء الناري، حاولت خلال الليلة الماضية التقدم الى بلدة عيتا الشعب في قضاء بنت جبيل، فتصدى لها رجال المقاومة وخاضوا معها اشتباكات عنيفة دارت في بعض الأحيان من منزل الى منزل. وتجددت قبل ظهر اليوم محاولات التقدم، فجوبهت بمقاومة ضارية أدت الى ايقاع خسائر كبيرة في صفوف الأعداء، حيث نقل تلفزيون "المنار" عن المقاومة الاسلامية أن رجالها دمروا دبابة وجرافة وأوقعوا عشرين عسكريا اسرائيليا بين قتيل وجريح. وأكدت وكالة الصحافة الفرنسية مقتل ثلاثة جنود اسرائيليين في هذه المواجهات. وبعد الظهر، حاولت قوة معادية التقدم الى مدرسة عيتا الشعب، فوقعت في كمين للمقاومة التي أكدت تكبيد المهاجمين 15 اصابة جديدة بين قتيل وجريح. كذلك تصدى المقاومون خلال الليلة الماضية وصباح اليوم، لمحاولتي تقدم اسرائيليتين الى محور كفركلا - العديسة، وصدوا محاولات تقدم عدة على مرتفع العويضة المطل على بلدات: كفركلا، الطيبة والعديسة. وحول كمين بعد الظهر في عيتا الشعب، صدر عن المقاومة الاسلامية، البيان الآتي: "ها هي عيتا الشعب تقدم نموذجا آخر للملاحم والبطولات، التي كان رجال الله قد سطروها في مارون الراس وبنت جبيل وعيترون والطيبة وكفركلا، حيث لا تزال الاشتباكات الضارية مستمرة بين المجاهدين وما يسمى بقوات النخبة الاسرائيلية في اطراف البلدة، وبعد تدمير دبابة وجرافة لها صباحا، عاودت هذه القوات الدخول الى البلدة، وعند وصولها الى مدرستها وقعت في كمين محكم لأبناء المقاومة، فأمطرها المجاهدون بنيرانهم المسددة من الله سبحانه وتعالى، ما أدى الى وقوع خمسة عشر اصابة للعدو في أرض المعركة بين قتيل وجريح، ومازالت الاشتباكات الضارية مستمرة، ويحاول العدو اجلاء خسائره من الميدان."
EXCELLENT SOURCE OF MAPS OF LEBANON
In both Arabic and English. Click on any square for a very detailed map of that area.
Peaceful Israeli Rabbis
Yesha Rabbinical Council: During time of war, enemy has no innocents: All of the discussions on Christian morality are weakening the spirit of the army and the nation and are costing us in the blood of our soldiers and civilians," the statement said.
Watch robotic Israelis defend murder
4 Minute Video: Apologists For Murder: A valid effort by CNN anchor to expose Israeli propaganda
Hezbollah Supporters
By Dahr Jamail
Monday 31 July 2006
Today, Sunday, I write this from Beirut, which is being circled by Israeli unmanned military surveillance drones, the same kind I saw so often in Fallujah. I suppose they were spying on the raging demonstrators who clogged the streets in Beirut and assaulted the UN building in a rage of vengeance after the fresh massacre of civilians by Israeli warplanes in the small town of Qana in the south.
Hundreds of the protesters ran through the building's corridors smashing offices, walls and glass while rescue teams extracted the bodies of at least 34 children and scores of other civilians from the bowels of the refugee shelter they were hiding in.
"Fuck the UN! Fuck those bastards for not stopping this Israeli slaughtering of the innocents," screamed a young protestor waving a Lebanese flag outside the UN building, which by now had smoke billowing out of portions of it. "What good are they if they cannot do what they were designed to do - to stop the killing of innocents?"
This man, 22 years old, was but a baby when the first Israeli military massacre at Qana took place. Yet the parallels of this sordid history repeating itself were not missed by most in the seething crowd.
On April 11, 1996, Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, under pressure to respond to a wave of suicide bombings in Israel, launched Operation Grapes of Wrath. One week later, on April 18, while 800 civilians sought shelter from the fighting at a UN peacekeeping base in Qana, the base was shelled heavily - killing 102 and wounding 120.
After the first Qana massacre, the Israeli military rejected responsibility for the deaths, instead blaming Hezbollah because they thought fighters had entered the UN base. A similar Israeli justification, albeit the very definition of collective punishment, was given today - that they suspected Hezbollah militants had fired rockets from Qana. After the 1996 massacre, a UN investigation found no evidence to support the claim made by the Israeli military, and I suspect a similar investigation will find a similar verdict this time - that the Israeli military had no reason to bomb innocent civilians.
Astounding as this level of blood thirst is, it really cannot come as much of a surprise. Why not? Because just last Thursday, Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon announced on Israeli army radio, "All those in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah."
Using rhetoric that set the stage for justifying the collective punishment of the Lebanese people in southern Lebanon, Ramon added, "In order to prevent casualties among Israeli soldiers battling Hezbollah militants in southern Lebanon, villages should be flattened by the Israeli air force before ground troops move in."
He rationalized his statements by saying that Israel had given the civilians of southern Lebanon ample time to leave the area; thus, anyone who remained could be considered a supporter of Hezbollah.
So of course by his definition, everyone in southern Lebanon supports Hezbollah.
I met some of these "supporters of Hezbollah" yesterday in the hospitals of Sidon.
I met five-year-old Hussein Jawad as his stiff little body lay prone on a hospital bed, one of his tiny legs in a cast. His eight-year-old sister Zayneb, also a "supporter of Hezbollah," lay next to him in the same bed. See, there were so many Hezbollah supporters in the southern hospitals that the small ones had to share beds.
They, along with their mother Yusah in a nearby bed, covered in the kind of shrapnel wounds received from cluster bombs, had stayed in their tiny village near the border during the first three days of the bombing because they were too scared to leave. The bombing got so close; they took their chances and managed to move to another village, where they stayed for another eight days.
They ran out of food, so Yusah and the two little "supporters of Hezbollah," compelled by fear and hunger, along with another car containing Yusah's two sisters, followed an ambulance to Kafra village. When they arrived there, the car carrying the two sisters was bombed by an American-made F-16.
Then there was Khuder Gazali, an ambulance driver, whose left arm was blown off by a rocket fired by an American-made Apache war helicopter while he was rescuing civilians whose home had been bombed. The ambulance then sent to rescue the rescuer was bombed, everyone in it killed. Miraculously, the third ambulance was able to retrieve him, only because the Apache had left.
16-year-old Ibrahim Al-Hama was surely supporting Hezbollah as he played in a river with a dozen of his friends before they were bombed by a warplane. He lay in the hospital bed, his lacerated chest oozing blood, his left ankle shattered and held together by gauze and medical tape. Two of his friends are dead, along with a woman who was near the bomb's impact zone. Perhaps she too was plotting a rocket attack against Israel?
It's wonderful to see the thoroughness of the Israeli military, their effectiveness at eradicating "supporters of Hezbollah." Like 51-year-old Sumi Marden Ruwiri. On July 14th his home in Bint Jbail was bombed while most of his family members were inside, killing his mother and sister while they surely were strategizing the next rocket launches for Hezbollah. When he and several others began to sift through the rubble for their loved ones, the warplanes returned to bomb the rescuers. He lay in bed, his back shredded by shrapnel, countless patches of gauze stuck to his wounds. His sheets were stained red by blood and yellow by pus that oozed from the wounds.
Alia Abbas, a 52-year-old, fled her village with five other family members after Israeli warplanes dropped leaflets instructing them to leave their village. She lay in bed shredded by shrapnel wounds, one of her eyes missing. 10 days ago when they tried to flee, hanging white flags out the windows of their car, they were bombed by warplanes. She's the only survivor. "Why did they bomb as after we did what they told us to do," she asked me. All I could do was clench my jaw to stave off the tears.
Apparently Alia didn't know she was a "supporter of Hezbollah," since her family was wiped out after Haim Ramon's preposterous remarks about half a million inhabitants of southern Lebanon.
I met dozens of other Hezbollah supporters, most of them women, children and elderly - the kind most ill-equipped to flee their homes on a moment's notice. They lay in their beds, many of them moaning, some crying, and others comatose and kept alive only by machines. The man comatose in this picture was fleeing his village on a motorcycle after receiving the leaflets of instruction to do so, according to his mother - the only one left alive from their family of 10.
Then I met Durish Zhair, a 43-year-old man whose home near the southern border was bombed by warplanes. Half of his face was burned his back horribly burned, and the rest of his body pocked by shrapnel. He sat with a stern look on his face, distraught and confused by what happened. I asked him where his 11 family members were and he told me, "They are all wounded, scattered in hospitals in the south, or in Beirut."
I thanked him for his time, and we walked out of his room. The nurse who accompanied me softly closed the door. She then said to me quietly, "All of his family is dead. We cannot tell him yet because he is so injured. He thinks they are still alive."
Surely, they too, along with his wife and young children were "supporters of Hezbollah."
My head spun. My head still spins and I feel sick inside. I wonder how much is enough? How many more will die? Over 600 Lebanese, mostly civilians, are dead. At least 51 Israelis, the majority civilians, are dead from this.
If we look back a few years, we find the answer. Speaking before the Conference on America's Challenges in a Changed World at the US Institute of Peace (yes, "Institute of Peace") in Washington DC on September 5, 2002, the Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had the following exchange during a Q&A session:
Q: In this war on terrorism, a group that isn't mentioned very often is one that you're very familiar with, Hezbollah. It has killed more Americans than any other terrorist group before September 11th. I just would like to hear whether they are on the agenda sometime in the future.
Mr. Armitage: Well, let me, for those who don't know you, Buck, "Buck" Revell, formerly of the FBI, was one of the leading voices for anti-terrorism activities during the second Reagan administration and was absolutely key in some of the takedowns we had at the time. And I appreciate the question.
Hezbollah may be the "A team" of terrorists, and maybe al Qaeda is actually the "B team." And they're on the list and their time will come, there is no question about it. They have a blood debt to us, which you spoke to, and we're not going to forget it. And it's all in good time. And we're going to go after these problems just like a high school wrestler goes after a match. We're going to take 'em down one at a time.
And taking 'em down one at a time, or in the case of Qana today, scores at a time, is what they are doing in southern Lebanon. While Israel and their stalwart US backers continue to refuse pleas for a cease-fire, bombs and rockets rain down on women, children and other innocents as they huddle in their homes, in refugee shelters, or while they flee in their cars while holding white surrender flags.
Meanwhile, Israeli defense sources told Israel's Haaretz newspaper Sunday that the Israeli army's general staff had received orders to accelerate its offensive on Hezbollah before the declaration of any cease-fire.
Yet as War Criminal Rice and her cronies back in DC drag their feet, postponing any real cease-fire, Israel's military needn't hasten itself too much as they go about their daily slaughtering of the "supporters of Hezbollah."
Monday 31 July 2006
Today, Sunday, I write this from Beirut, which is being circled by Israeli unmanned military surveillance drones, the same kind I saw so often in Fallujah. I suppose they were spying on the raging demonstrators who clogged the streets in Beirut and assaulted the UN building in a rage of vengeance after the fresh massacre of civilians by Israeli warplanes in the small town of Qana in the south.
Hundreds of the protesters ran through the building's corridors smashing offices, walls and glass while rescue teams extracted the bodies of at least 34 children and scores of other civilians from the bowels of the refugee shelter they were hiding in.
"Fuck the UN! Fuck those bastards for not stopping this Israeli slaughtering of the innocents," screamed a young protestor waving a Lebanese flag outside the UN building, which by now had smoke billowing out of portions of it. "What good are they if they cannot do what they were designed to do - to stop the killing of innocents?"
This man, 22 years old, was but a baby when the first Israeli military massacre at Qana took place. Yet the parallels of this sordid history repeating itself were not missed by most in the seething crowd.
On April 11, 1996, Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, under pressure to respond to a wave of suicide bombings in Israel, launched Operation Grapes of Wrath. One week later, on April 18, while 800 civilians sought shelter from the fighting at a UN peacekeeping base in Qana, the base was shelled heavily - killing 102 and wounding 120.
After the first Qana massacre, the Israeli military rejected responsibility for the deaths, instead blaming Hezbollah because they thought fighters had entered the UN base. A similar Israeli justification, albeit the very definition of collective punishment, was given today - that they suspected Hezbollah militants had fired rockets from Qana. After the 1996 massacre, a UN investigation found no evidence to support the claim made by the Israeli military, and I suspect a similar investigation will find a similar verdict this time - that the Israeli military had no reason to bomb innocent civilians.
Astounding as this level of blood thirst is, it really cannot come as much of a surprise. Why not? Because just last Thursday, Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon announced on Israeli army radio, "All those in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah."
Using rhetoric that set the stage for justifying the collective punishment of the Lebanese people in southern Lebanon, Ramon added, "In order to prevent casualties among Israeli soldiers battling Hezbollah militants in southern Lebanon, villages should be flattened by the Israeli air force before ground troops move in."
He rationalized his statements by saying that Israel had given the civilians of southern Lebanon ample time to leave the area; thus, anyone who remained could be considered a supporter of Hezbollah.
So of course by his definition, everyone in southern Lebanon supports Hezbollah.
I met some of these "supporters of Hezbollah" yesterday in the hospitals of Sidon.
I met five-year-old Hussein Jawad as his stiff little body lay prone on a hospital bed, one of his tiny legs in a cast. His eight-year-old sister Zayneb, also a "supporter of Hezbollah," lay next to him in the same bed. See, there were so many Hezbollah supporters in the southern hospitals that the small ones had to share beds.
They, along with their mother Yusah in a nearby bed, covered in the kind of shrapnel wounds received from cluster bombs, had stayed in their tiny village near the border during the first three days of the bombing because they were too scared to leave. The bombing got so close; they took their chances and managed to move to another village, where they stayed for another eight days.
They ran out of food, so Yusah and the two little "supporters of Hezbollah," compelled by fear and hunger, along with another car containing Yusah's two sisters, followed an ambulance to Kafra village. When they arrived there, the car carrying the two sisters was bombed by an American-made F-16.
Then there was Khuder Gazali, an ambulance driver, whose left arm was blown off by a rocket fired by an American-made Apache war helicopter while he was rescuing civilians whose home had been bombed. The ambulance then sent to rescue the rescuer was bombed, everyone in it killed. Miraculously, the third ambulance was able to retrieve him, only because the Apache had left.
16-year-old Ibrahim Al-Hama was surely supporting Hezbollah as he played in a river with a dozen of his friends before they were bombed by a warplane. He lay in the hospital bed, his lacerated chest oozing blood, his left ankle shattered and held together by gauze and medical tape. Two of his friends are dead, along with a woman who was near the bomb's impact zone. Perhaps she too was plotting a rocket attack against Israel?
It's wonderful to see the thoroughness of the Israeli military, their effectiveness at eradicating "supporters of Hezbollah." Like 51-year-old Sumi Marden Ruwiri. On July 14th his home in Bint Jbail was bombed while most of his family members were inside, killing his mother and sister while they surely were strategizing the next rocket launches for Hezbollah. When he and several others began to sift through the rubble for their loved ones, the warplanes returned to bomb the rescuers. He lay in bed, his back shredded by shrapnel, countless patches of gauze stuck to his wounds. His sheets were stained red by blood and yellow by pus that oozed from the wounds.
Alia Abbas, a 52-year-old, fled her village with five other family members after Israeli warplanes dropped leaflets instructing them to leave their village. She lay in bed shredded by shrapnel wounds, one of her eyes missing. 10 days ago when they tried to flee, hanging white flags out the windows of their car, they were bombed by warplanes. She's the only survivor. "Why did they bomb as after we did what they told us to do," she asked me. All I could do was clench my jaw to stave off the tears.
Apparently Alia didn't know she was a "supporter of Hezbollah," since her family was wiped out after Haim Ramon's preposterous remarks about half a million inhabitants of southern Lebanon.
I met dozens of other Hezbollah supporters, most of them women, children and elderly - the kind most ill-equipped to flee their homes on a moment's notice. They lay in their beds, many of them moaning, some crying, and others comatose and kept alive only by machines. The man comatose in this picture was fleeing his village on a motorcycle after receiving the leaflets of instruction to do so, according to his mother - the only one left alive from their family of 10.
Then I met Durish Zhair, a 43-year-old man whose home near the southern border was bombed by warplanes. Half of his face was burned his back horribly burned, and the rest of his body pocked by shrapnel. He sat with a stern look on his face, distraught and confused by what happened. I asked him where his 11 family members were and he told me, "They are all wounded, scattered in hospitals in the south, or in Beirut."
I thanked him for his time, and we walked out of his room. The nurse who accompanied me softly closed the door. She then said to me quietly, "All of his family is dead. We cannot tell him yet because he is so injured. He thinks they are still alive."
Surely, they too, along with his wife and young children were "supporters of Hezbollah."
My head spun. My head still spins and I feel sick inside. I wonder how much is enough? How many more will die? Over 600 Lebanese, mostly civilians, are dead. At least 51 Israelis, the majority civilians, are dead from this.
If we look back a few years, we find the answer. Speaking before the Conference on America's Challenges in a Changed World at the US Institute of Peace (yes, "Institute of Peace") in Washington DC on September 5, 2002, the Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had the following exchange during a Q&A session:
Q: In this war on terrorism, a group that isn't mentioned very often is one that you're very familiar with, Hezbollah. It has killed more Americans than any other terrorist group before September 11th. I just would like to hear whether they are on the agenda sometime in the future.
Mr. Armitage: Well, let me, for those who don't know you, Buck, "Buck" Revell, formerly of the FBI, was one of the leading voices for anti-terrorism activities during the second Reagan administration and was absolutely key in some of the takedowns we had at the time. And I appreciate the question.
Hezbollah may be the "A team" of terrorists, and maybe al Qaeda is actually the "B team." And they're on the list and their time will come, there is no question about it. They have a blood debt to us, which you spoke to, and we're not going to forget it. And it's all in good time. And we're going to go after these problems just like a high school wrestler goes after a match. We're going to take 'em down one at a time.
And taking 'em down one at a time, or in the case of Qana today, scores at a time, is what they are doing in southern Lebanon. While Israel and their stalwart US backers continue to refuse pleas for a cease-fire, bombs and rockets rain down on women, children and other innocents as they huddle in their homes, in refugee shelters, or while they flee in their cars while holding white surrender flags.
Meanwhile, Israeli defense sources told Israel's Haaretz newspaper Sunday that the Israeli army's general staff had received orders to accelerate its offensive on Hezbollah before the declaration of any cease-fire.
Yet as War Criminal Rice and her cronies back in DC drag their feet, postponing any real cease-fire, Israel's military needn't hasten itself too much as they go about their daily slaughtering of the "supporters of Hezbollah."
Hungry, thirsty and confused, they emerge from their ruined shelters
Only the elderly and the infirm are left in Bint Jbail. Rescue services helped them from their basement shelters yesterday and lorries, vans and tractors took many to the relative safety of Tyre ALI HASHISO / REUTERS
A War Crimes Tribunal May be the Only Deterrent to a Global War
Prosecuting Israel
By FRANCIS A. BOYLE
The United Nations General Assembly must immediately establish an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel (ICTI) as a "subsidiary organ" under U.N. Charter Article 22. The ICTI would be organized along the lines of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY), which was established by the Security Council.
The purpose of the ICTI would be to investigate and prosecute Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against the Peoples of Lebanon and Palestine--just as the ICTY did for the victims of international crimes committed by Serbia and the Milosevic Regime throughout the Balkans.
The establishment of ICTI would provide some small degree of justice to the victims of Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against the Peoples of Lebanon and Palestine--just as the ICTY has done in the Balkans. Furthermore, the establishment of ICTI by the U.N. General Assembly would serve as a deterrent effect upon Israeli leaders such as Prime Minister Olmert, Defense Minister Peretz, Chief of Staff Halutz and Israel's other top generals that they will be prosecuted for their further infliction of international crimes upon the Lebanese and the Palestinians.
Without such a deterrent, Israel might be emboldened to attack Syria with the full support of the Likhudnik Bush Jr. Neoconservatives, who have always viewed Syria as "low-hanging fruit" ready to be taken out by means of their joint aggression.
The Israeli press has just reported that the Bush Jr administration is encouraging Israel to attack Syria. If Israel attacks Syria as it did when it invaded Lebanon in 1982, Iran has vowed to come to Syria's defense.
And of course Israel and the Bush Jr administration very much want a pretext to attack Iran. This scenario could readily degenerate into World War III.
For the U.N. General Assembly to establish ICTI could stop the further development of this momentum towards a regional if not global catastrophe.
By FRANCIS A. BOYLE
The United Nations General Assembly must immediately establish an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel (ICTI) as a "subsidiary organ" under U.N. Charter Article 22. The ICTI would be organized along the lines of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY), which was established by the Security Council.
The purpose of the ICTI would be to investigate and prosecute Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against the Peoples of Lebanon and Palestine--just as the ICTY did for the victims of international crimes committed by Serbia and the Milosevic Regime throughout the Balkans.
The establishment of ICTI would provide some small degree of justice to the victims of Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against the Peoples of Lebanon and Palestine--just as the ICTY has done in the Balkans. Furthermore, the establishment of ICTI by the U.N. General Assembly would serve as a deterrent effect upon Israeli leaders such as Prime Minister Olmert, Defense Minister Peretz, Chief of Staff Halutz and Israel's other top generals that they will be prosecuted for their further infliction of international crimes upon the Lebanese and the Palestinians.
Without such a deterrent, Israel might be emboldened to attack Syria with the full support of the Likhudnik Bush Jr. Neoconservatives, who have always viewed Syria as "low-hanging fruit" ready to be taken out by means of their joint aggression.
The Israeli press has just reported that the Bush Jr administration is encouraging Israel to attack Syria. If Israel attacks Syria as it did when it invaded Lebanon in 1982, Iran has vowed to come to Syria's defense.
And of course Israel and the Bush Jr administration very much want a pretext to attack Iran. This scenario could readily degenerate into World War III.
For the U.N. General Assembly to establish ICTI could stop the further development of this momentum towards a regional if not global catastrophe.
Into the Meat Grinder A NATO Force Would Benefit Israel, Not Lebanon
By ROBERT FISK
"Indeed, how come the people of southern Lebanon have not been consulted about the army which is supposed to live in their lands? Because, of course, it is not coming for them. It will come because the Israelis and the Americans want it there to help reshape the Middle East. This no doubt makes sense in Washington, where self-delusion rules diplomacy almost as much as it does in Israel. But America's dreams usually become the Middle East's nightmares.
And this time, we will watch a NATO-led army's disintegration at close quarters. South-west Afghanistan and Iraq are now so dangerous that no reporters can witness the carnage being perpetrated as a result of our hopeless projects. But, in Lebanon, it's going to be live-time coverage of a disaster that can only be avoided by the one diplomatic step Messrs Bush and Blair refuse to take: by talking to Damascus.
So when this latest foreign army arrives, count the days, or hours, to the first attack upon it. Then we'll hear all over again that we are fighting evil, that "they"--Hizbollah or Palestinian guerrillas, or anyone else planning to destroy "our" army--hate our values; and then, of course, we'll be told that this is all part of the "War on Terror"--the nonsense which Israel has been peddling. And then perhaps we'll remember what George Bush senior said after Hizbollah's allies suicide-bombed the Marines in 1982, that American policy would not be swayed by a bunch of "insidious terrorist cowards".
And we all know what happened then. Or have we forgotten?"
"Indeed, how come the people of southern Lebanon have not been consulted about the army which is supposed to live in their lands? Because, of course, it is not coming for them. It will come because the Israelis and the Americans want it there to help reshape the Middle East. This no doubt makes sense in Washington, where self-delusion rules diplomacy almost as much as it does in Israel. But America's dreams usually become the Middle East's nightmares.
And this time, we will watch a NATO-led army's disintegration at close quarters. South-west Afghanistan and Iraq are now so dangerous that no reporters can witness the carnage being perpetrated as a result of our hopeless projects. But, in Lebanon, it's going to be live-time coverage of a disaster that can only be avoided by the one diplomatic step Messrs Bush and Blair refuse to take: by talking to Damascus.
So when this latest foreign army arrives, count the days, or hours, to the first attack upon it. Then we'll hear all over again that we are fighting evil, that "they"--Hizbollah or Palestinian guerrillas, or anyone else planning to destroy "our" army--hate our values; and then, of course, we'll be told that this is all part of the "War on Terror"--the nonsense which Israel has been peddling. And then perhaps we'll remember what George Bush senior said after Hizbollah's allies suicide-bombed the Marines in 1982, that American policy would not be swayed by a bunch of "insidious terrorist cowards".
And we all know what happened then. Or have we forgotten?"
Tehran teeters on the path to war
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Asia Times
"Whereas a stalemate or even quagmire may benefit Iran's position with respect to the nuclear crisis, the obverse possibility of Hezbollah's substantial weakening, not to mention the squeeze on Damascus, will translate into a more vulnerable Iran confronted with the distinct possibility that Phase 1 of a multi-stage conflict with the US and Israel has already started in Lebanon and Gaza. On a related note, historian Immanuel Wallerstein has predicted that Israel's military gambit in Lebanon will prove to be a "catastrophic blunder" paralleling the United States' predicament in Iraq. This is a distinct possibility, if the net of Israel's ground invasion expands, as it has almost on a daily basis, one that Iran is banking on to happen. But the chances are reasonably high that Israel, learning from the past, will ultimately frustrate Tehran's hopes by making it a limited war followed by an international buffer that would tie the hands of whatever fighting was left in Hezbollah."
Asia Times
"Whereas a stalemate or even quagmire may benefit Iran's position with respect to the nuclear crisis, the obverse possibility of Hezbollah's substantial weakening, not to mention the squeeze on Damascus, will translate into a more vulnerable Iran confronted with the distinct possibility that Phase 1 of a multi-stage conflict with the US and Israel has already started in Lebanon and Gaza. On a related note, historian Immanuel Wallerstein has predicted that Israel's military gambit in Lebanon will prove to be a "catastrophic blunder" paralleling the United States' predicament in Iraq. This is a distinct possibility, if the net of Israel's ground invasion expands, as it has almost on a daily basis, one that Iran is banking on to happen. But the chances are reasonably high that Israel, learning from the past, will ultimately frustrate Tehran's hopes by making it a limited war followed by an international buffer that would tie the hands of whatever fighting was left in Hezbollah."
Turning Point At Qana
By Rami G. Khouri
"As attention shifts to the United Nations deliberations in New York, a striking new aspect of this novel political landscape is the isolation and perhaps even the temporary impotence of the United States. Washington is feeling the pain of its own self-inflicted diplomatic castration, as a consequence of siding so strongly with Israel. It refuses to talk to key players like Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran and the Syrian government, is now cold-shouldered by the Lebanese government, and speaks only to Arab governments with increasingly less credibility and impact."
"As attention shifts to the United Nations deliberations in New York, a striking new aspect of this novel political landscape is the isolation and perhaps even the temporary impotence of the United States. Washington is feeling the pain of its own self-inflicted diplomatic castration, as a consequence of siding so strongly with Israel. It refuses to talk to key players like Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran and the Syrian government, is now cold-shouldered by the Lebanese government, and speaks only to Arab governments with increasingly less credibility and impact."
Day of Mourning for Lebanon after Latest Attack on Qana by Aaron Glantz
SAN FRANCISCO - Lebanon marked a national day of mourning Monday, a day after Israeli warplanes bombed the village of Qana killing at least 57 people, most of them children.
According to reporters at the scene, an Israeli missile hit a three-story building where relatives from two extended families were seeking refuge. There were only eight survivors. The youngest of the dead was 10 months old. The oldest was 95. One person was in a wheelchair. No weapons were found in the building that was hit.
The attack brought the number of Lebanese deaths to over 750, most of them civilians, since Israel began its strikes in mid-July in response to the kidnapping of two soldiers. A total of 51 Israelis, 18 of them civilians, have been killed.
[click title to continue reading article.]
According to reporters at the scene, an Israeli missile hit a three-story building where relatives from two extended families were seeking refuge. There were only eight survivors. The youngest of the dead was 10 months old. The oldest was 95. One person was in a wheelchair. No weapons were found in the building that was hit.
The attack brought the number of Lebanese deaths to over 750, most of them civilians, since Israel began its strikes in mid-July in response to the kidnapping of two soldiers. A total of 51 Israelis, 18 of them civilians, have been killed.
[click title to continue reading article.]
'No Hezbollah Rockets Fired from Qana' by Dahr Jamail
QANA - Red Cross workers and residents of Qana, where Israeli bombing killed at least 60 civilians, have told IPS that no Hezbollah rockets were launched from the city before the Israeli air strike.
The Israeli military has said it bombed the building in which several people had taken shelter, more than half of them children, because the Army had faced rocket fire from Qana. The Israeli military has said that Hezbollah was therefore responsible for the deaths.
"There were no Hezbollah rockets fired from here," 32-year-old Ali Abdel told IPS. "Anyone in this village will tell you this, because it is the truth."
Abdel had taken shelter in a nearby house when the shelter was bombed at 1 am. When the bombings finally let up in the morning, he went back to the bombed shelter to search for relatives.
He found his 70-year-old father and 64-year-old mother both dead inside.
"They bombed it, and afterwards I heard the screams of women, children, and a few men -- they were crying for help. But then one minute after the first bomb, another bomb struck, and after this there was nothing but silence, and the sound of more bombs around the village."
Masen Hashen, a 30-year-old construction worker from Qana who lost several family members in the air strike on the shelter, said there were no Hezbollah rockets fired from his village. "Because if they had done that now, or in the past, all of us would have left. Because we know we would be bombed."
Qana had been a shelter because no rockets were being fired from there, survivors said. "When Hezbollah fires their rockets, everyone runs away because they know an Israeli bombardment will come soon," Abdel said. "That is why everyone stayed in the shelter and nearby homes, because we all thought we'd be all right since there were no Hezbollah fighters in Qana."
[click on title of post to continue reading article.]
The Israeli military has said it bombed the building in which several people had taken shelter, more than half of them children, because the Army had faced rocket fire from Qana. The Israeli military has said that Hezbollah was therefore responsible for the deaths.
"There were no Hezbollah rockets fired from here," 32-year-old Ali Abdel told IPS. "Anyone in this village will tell you this, because it is the truth."
Abdel had taken shelter in a nearby house when the shelter was bombed at 1 am. When the bombings finally let up in the morning, he went back to the bombed shelter to search for relatives.
He found his 70-year-old father and 64-year-old mother both dead inside.
"They bombed it, and afterwards I heard the screams of women, children, and a few men -- they were crying for help. But then one minute after the first bomb, another bomb struck, and after this there was nothing but silence, and the sound of more bombs around the village."
Masen Hashen, a 30-year-old construction worker from Qana who lost several family members in the air strike on the shelter, said there were no Hezbollah rockets fired from his village. "Because if they had done that now, or in the past, all of us would have left. Because we know we would be bombed."
Qana had been a shelter because no rockets were being fired from there, survivors said. "When Hezbollah fires their rockets, everyone runs away because they know an Israeli bombardment will come soon," Abdel said. "That is why everyone stayed in the shelter and nearby homes, because we all thought we'd be all right since there were no Hezbollah fighters in Qana."
[click on title of post to continue reading article.]
Israelis Test U.S. Weapons on Lebanese Civilians
A Medic inspects burned bodies of Lebanese civilians who were attacked as they passed by a bridge that was targeted in north Saida (Tyre), southern Lebanon. (17 July, 2006).
Lebanese firefighters try to extinguish the fire while the dismembered and burnt corpses of two civilians killed in an Israeli air raid lie on the ground at the port in Beirut.A member of the Lebanese Red Cross walks past a badly burnt body in Beirut's port.
Lebanese civil defence member carries the corpse of a young girl from the southern village of Marwahin.
The State of Israel Classified War Document, Discovered
By Gilad Atzmon
"*Unlike, the Hamas and the Hizbullah, we never kill indiscriminately. We always kill very discriminately. We kill Arabs whether they are Arab women, Arab elders, Arab children, Arab refugees, Arab disabled hiding in a Red Cross shelter in Kafar Quana. We are after Arabs and to speak about us as if we are bombing and killing indiscriminately is an utter anti-Semitic lie.
*We the Israelis are at the forefront of the fight for democracy and humanism. You European and Westerners should support us. We are engaged in a dirty war you fail to fight. Is it a coincidence that Tony, George and Condy gave us a green light to bring Lebanon back to the Stone Age? Is it a coincidence that the Andrea’le Merkel sent us 3 Submarines as soon as she settled in office? Let’s face it, you all love us, and you better admit it, you love us strong and murderous. You all give us the green light to paint the region in red. And let me tell you, we love painting in red, moreover, we are really good at it.
*And don’t you ever forget, we are the only democracy in the Middle East, when we engage in one war crime or another, when we breach the Geneva Convention, when we violate any possible humanist call, we always express our people’s democratic choice. We always do it in the name of our people. Don’t you forget, this war was launched by an Israeli national unity centrist coalition. This war is the call of the moderate peace-seeking Jewish voice. Unlike the Hizbullah, a tiny group of a paramilitary militias, our terror is nothing but state terrorism in its making. Our state terrorism is our democratic choice and it is supported by the world’s leading democrats: Bush and Blair.
*Although we clearly punish the Arabs for the crimes committed against us by the Nazis, we are humanists, we never behave like the Nazis, we never schlep innocent Arabs in trains, we never ship them to death camps, we never gas them, instead, with the support of our American Brother, we bring the death directly to them, we kill them in their homes, in their beds sometime just before dawn when they are still in pajamas. "
"*Unlike, the Hamas and the Hizbullah, we never kill indiscriminately. We always kill very discriminately. We kill Arabs whether they are Arab women, Arab elders, Arab children, Arab refugees, Arab disabled hiding in a Red Cross shelter in Kafar Quana. We are after Arabs and to speak about us as if we are bombing and killing indiscriminately is an utter anti-Semitic lie.
*We the Israelis are at the forefront of the fight for democracy and humanism. You European and Westerners should support us. We are engaged in a dirty war you fail to fight. Is it a coincidence that Tony, George and Condy gave us a green light to bring Lebanon back to the Stone Age? Is it a coincidence that the Andrea’le Merkel sent us 3 Submarines as soon as she settled in office? Let’s face it, you all love us, and you better admit it, you love us strong and murderous. You all give us the green light to paint the region in red. And let me tell you, we love painting in red, moreover, we are really good at it.
*And don’t you ever forget, we are the only democracy in the Middle East, when we engage in one war crime or another, when we breach the Geneva Convention, when we violate any possible humanist call, we always express our people’s democratic choice. We always do it in the name of our people. Don’t you forget, this war was launched by an Israeli national unity centrist coalition. This war is the call of the moderate peace-seeking Jewish voice. Unlike the Hizbullah, a tiny group of a paramilitary militias, our terror is nothing but state terrorism in its making. Our state terrorism is our democratic choice and it is supported by the world’s leading democrats: Bush and Blair.
*Although we clearly punish the Arabs for the crimes committed against us by the Nazis, we are humanists, we never behave like the Nazis, we never schlep innocent Arabs in trains, we never ship them to death camps, we never gas them, instead, with the support of our American Brother, we bring the death directly to them, we kill them in their homes, in their beds sometime just before dawn when they are still in pajamas. "
Monday, July 31, 2006
ANOTHER ISRAELI WARSHIP DESTROYED
BREAKING NEWS!
Al-Jazeera is reporting that Hizbullah has just announced the destruction of an Israeli warship, Sa'er class, off the Tyre coast in southern Lebanon.
More details as they become available.
MORE BREAKING NEWS!
Israeli T.V. is reporting that an Israeli patrol on the occupied Golan Heights was attacked. Most likely this is a lie to drag Syria into the fight. Fasten your seatbelts!
Al-Jazeera is reporting that Hizbullah has just announced the destruction of an Israeli warship, Sa'er class, off the Tyre coast in southern Lebanon.
More details as they become available.
MORE BREAKING NEWS!
Israeli T.V. is reporting that an Israeli patrol on the occupied Golan Heights was attacked. Most likely this is a lie to drag Syria into the fight. Fasten your seatbelts!
Condi’s New Middle East
By Mike Whitney
"The attack on Qana was motivated by revenge. After the IDF was rebuffed by Hezbollah guerillas at Bint Jubail last week, Olmert and his cast of blundering military advisors decided to "exact their pound of flesh" by recreating the massacre they staged 10 years ago at the same location. Just like today, the attack was purposely directed at people who sought refuge at a "clearly marked" United Nations shelter. In the April 18, 1996 attack 106 Lebanese civilians were killed. As Global Reaserch.ca reports, "The July 2006 attack on the Qana UN shelter replicates with meticulous accuracy the April 1996 IAF operation, entitled 'The Grapes of Wrath’".
In the wake of the massacre, Condoleezza Rice has been told by Lebanon’s Prime Minister Fouad Siniora that she should cancel her trip to Beirut. The State Dept is "spinning" Rice’s humiliation as simply "postponing" her trip, but its obvious to those who have followed recent developments, that Rice has been slapped in the face and that America’s threadbare diplomatic strategy is in now in a state of complete collapse.
We are now, perhaps, just one crisis away from the whole, rickety scaffolding of American imperialism crashing to the ground in a heap. Imagine if riots were to spontaneously break out in Riyadh or Cairo tomorrow? The puppet regimes in the Gulf States would fall like dominos leaving the American oil giants with the dismal prospect of buying their oil on the open market rather than extracting it at gunpoint.
In just one week the mystique of Israeli invincibility has been dashed and, now, the entire Muslim world is galvanized by Israeli war crimes at Qana. Things could not be better for Hassan Nasrallah and his tough-minded band of fighters. It’ll take more than the 40,000 IOF reserves that Olmert just called up to put the genie of "Arab resistance" back in the bottle. He'd be better off suing for peace."
"The attack on Qana was motivated by revenge. After the IDF was rebuffed by Hezbollah guerillas at Bint Jubail last week, Olmert and his cast of blundering military advisors decided to "exact their pound of flesh" by recreating the massacre they staged 10 years ago at the same location. Just like today, the attack was purposely directed at people who sought refuge at a "clearly marked" United Nations shelter. In the April 18, 1996 attack 106 Lebanese civilians were killed. As Global Reaserch.ca reports, "The July 2006 attack on the Qana UN shelter replicates with meticulous accuracy the April 1996 IAF operation, entitled 'The Grapes of Wrath’".
In the wake of the massacre, Condoleezza Rice has been told by Lebanon’s Prime Minister Fouad Siniora that she should cancel her trip to Beirut. The State Dept is "spinning" Rice’s humiliation as simply "postponing" her trip, but its obvious to those who have followed recent developments, that Rice has been slapped in the face and that America’s threadbare diplomatic strategy is in now in a state of complete collapse.
We are now, perhaps, just one crisis away from the whole, rickety scaffolding of American imperialism crashing to the ground in a heap. Imagine if riots were to spontaneously break out in Riyadh or Cairo tomorrow? The puppet regimes in the Gulf States would fall like dominos leaving the American oil giants with the dismal prospect of buying their oil on the open market rather than extracting it at gunpoint.
In just one week the mystique of Israeli invincibility has been dashed and, now, the entire Muslim world is galvanized by Israeli war crimes at Qana. Things could not be better for Hassan Nasrallah and his tough-minded band of fighters. It’ll take more than the 40,000 IOF reserves that Olmert just called up to put the genie of "Arab resistance" back in the bottle. He'd be better off suing for peace."
Arab states must repudiate ties with Israel now
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 31 July 2006
"Israel's continued and deepening occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese territory, violations of their sovereignty, blatant interference in the internal affairs of Palestinians and Lebanese, and its mounting atrocities which have claimed Jordanian and Egpytian as well as thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian lives are not only crimes against humanity but violations of Israel's treaty commitments. Jordan and Egypt have a right and obligation to respond.Arab governments have a slim chance to play a genuine leadership role and prove that their earlier positions were simply being misinterpreted and exploited. Breaking off relations may seem like a small step in the current circumstances, but it is the minimum they must do and it will set an example for other international actors such as the EU and the UN who have also failed in their international responsibilities, siding with the aggressor against the victim and thereby enabling Israel's unspeakable crimes.After Qana, Jordan's foreign minister Abul-Ilah al-Khatib urged the international community "take a firm stand against the aggression." Amman and Cairo should lead the way with more than words."
"Israel's continued and deepening occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese territory, violations of their sovereignty, blatant interference in the internal affairs of Palestinians and Lebanese, and its mounting atrocities which have claimed Jordanian and Egpytian as well as thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian lives are not only crimes against humanity but violations of Israel's treaty commitments. Jordan and Egypt have a right and obligation to respond.Arab governments have a slim chance to play a genuine leadership role and prove that their earlier positions were simply being misinterpreted and exploited. Breaking off relations may seem like a small step in the current circumstances, but it is the minimum they must do and it will set an example for other international actors such as the EU and the UN who have also failed in their international responsibilities, siding with the aggressor against the victim and thereby enabling Israel's unspeakable crimes.After Qana, Jordan's foreign minister Abul-Ilah al-Khatib urged the international community "take a firm stand against the aggression." Amman and Cairo should lead the way with more than words."
Confrontation with Hamas and Hezbollah by Noam Chomsky
[The following excerpt is from the Epilogue to Perilous Power: The Middle East and U.S. Foreign Policy, by Noam Chomsky & Gilbert Achcar, edited with a Preface by Stephen R. Shalom, to be published by Paradigm Publishers September 15, 2006, Hardcover $22.95. To order the book at a 15% individual customer discount please click here.]
Q: How would you assess the Israeli and U.S. responses to the election of Hamas, and to the ensuing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon?
Noam Chomsky: The U.S. response reveals, once again, that the United States supports democracy if and only if it conforms to U.S. strategic and economic objectives.
Perhaps it would be useful to review some highlights since Hamas was elected in late January 2006.
On February 12, the statements of Osama bin Laden were reviewed in the New York Times by NYU law professor Noah Feldman. He described bin Laden's descent into utter barbarism, reaching the depths when he advanced "the perverse claim that since the United States is a democracy, all citizens bear responsibility for its government's actions, and civilians are therefore fair targets." Utter depravity, no doubt. Two days later, the lead story in the Times casually reported that the United States and Israel are joining bin Laden in the lower depths of depravity. Palestinians offended the masters by voting the wrong way in a free election. The population must therefore be punished for this crime. The "intention," the correspondent observed, "is to starve the Palestinian Authority of money and international connections" so that President Mahmoud Abbas will be "compelled to call a new election. The hope is that Palestinians will be so unhappy with life under Hamas that they will return to office a reformed and chastened Fatah movement." Mechanisms of punishment of the population are outlined. The article also reports that Condoleezza Rice will visit the oil producers to ensure that they do not relieve the torture of the Palestinians. In short, bin Laden's "perverse claim"; but when the United States advances the claim, it is not ultimate evil but rather righteous dedication to "democracy promotion."1
These paired articles elicited no comment that I could discover. Also overlooked was the fact that bin Laden's "perverse claim" is standard operating procedure. Familiar examples are "making the economy scream" when Chileans had the effrontery to elect Salvador Allende -- the "soft track"; the "hard track" brought Pinochet. Another pertinent illustration is the U.S.-UK sanctions regime that murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, devastated the country, and probably saved Saddam Hussein from the fate of other monsters like him (often supported by the United States and Britain to the very end). Not quite bin Laden's doctrine; rather, much more perverse, not only in terms of scale but also because Iraqis could not by any stretch of the imagination be held responsible for Saddam Hussein.
The most venerable illustration is Washington's forty-seven-year campaign of terror and economic strangulation against Cuba. From the internal record, we learn that the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations determined that "[t]he Cuban people are responsible for the regime," so they must be punished with the expectation that "[r]ising discomfort among hungry Cubans" will cause them to throw Castro out (JFK). The State Department advised that "[e]very possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba [in order to] bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of the government."2 The doctrine remains in force.
Without continuing, we find ample evidence that it is no departure from the norm to adopt bin Laden's most perverse claim in order to punish Palestinians for their democratic misdeeds.
The United States and Israel then proceeded to implement their "intention," with scrupulous care. Thus, for example, an EU proposal to provide some desperately needed aid for health care was stalled when U.S. "officials expressed concerns that some of this money might end up paying nurses, doctors, teachers and others previously on the government payroll, thereby helping to finance Hamas." Another achievement of the "war on terror." With U.S. backing, Israel also continued its terrorist atrocities and other crimes in Gaza and the West Bank -- in some cases, perhaps, in an attempt to induce Hamas to violate its embarrassing cease-fire, so that Israel could respond in "self-defense," another familiar pattern.3
In May 2006, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert announced his plan to formalize Sharon's West Bank expansion programs, which were announced along with the "Gaza disengagement." Olmert chose the term "convergence" ("hitkansut") as a euphemism for annexation of valuable land and resources (including water) of the West Bank, programs designed to break the continually shrinking Palestinian areas into separated cantons, virtually isolated from one another and from whatever corner of Jerusalem will be left to Palestinians, all imprisoned as Israel takes over the Jordan valley and controls air space and any external access. In a stunning public relations triumph, Olmert won praise for his courage in "withdrawing" from the West Bank as he put the finishing touches on the project of destroying any hope for recognition of Palestinian national rights. We were enjoined to lament the "anguish" of the residents of scattered settlements that would be abandoned as they "converge" into the territories illegally annexed behind the cruel and illegal "Separation Wall." All of this proceeds, as usual, with a kindly nod from Washington, which is expected to fork up the billions of dollars needed to carry out the plans, though there are occasional admonitions that the destruction of Palestine should not be "unilateral": It would be preferable for President Mahmoud Abbas to sign a surrender declaration, in which case everything would be just fine.
The people of Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to observe all of this submissively, rotting in their virtual prisons. Otherwise they are sadistic terrorists.
The latest phase began on June 24, when the Israeli army kidnapped two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from their home in Gaza. They were "detained" according to brief notes in the British press. The U.S. media mostly preferred silence.4 They will presumably join the 9,000 other Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, 1,000 reportedly in prison without charges, hence kidnapped -- as were many of the rest, in that they were sentenced by Israeli courts, which are a disgrace, harshly condemned by legal commentators in Israel. Among them are hundreds of women and children, their numbers and fate of little interest. Also of little interest are Israel's secret prisons. The Israeli press reported that these have been "the entry gate to Israel for Lebanese, especially those who were suspected of membership in Hezbollah, who were transferred to the southern side of the border," some captured in battle in Lebanon, others "abducted at Israel's initiative" and sometimes held as hostages, with torture under interrogation. The secret Camp 1391, possibly one of several, was discovered accidentally in 2003, since forgotten.5
The next day, June 25, Palestinians kidnapped an Israeli soldier just across the border from Gaza. That did happen, very definitely. Every literate reader also knows the name of corporal Gilad Shalit, and wants him released. The nameless kidnapped Gaza civilians are ignored; international law, while rightly insisting that captured soldiers be treated humanely, absolutely prohibits the extrajudicial seizure of civilians. Israel responded by "bombing and shelling, darkening and destroying, imposing a siege and kidnapping like the worst of terrorists and nobody breaks the silence to ask, what the hell for, and according to what right?" as the fine Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote, adding that "[a] state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization." Israel also kidnapped a large part of the Palestinian government, destroyed most of the Gaza electrical and water systems, and committed numerous other crimes. These acts of collective punishment, condemned by Amnesty International as "war crimes," compounded the punishment of Palestinians for having voted the wrong way. Within a few days, UN agencies working in Gaza warned of a "public health disaster" as a result of developments "which have seen innocent civilians, including children, killed, brought increased misery to hundreds of thousands of people and which will wreak far-reaching harm on Palestinian society. An already alarming situation in Gaza, with poverty rates at nearly eighty per cent and unemployment at nearly forty per cent, is likely to deteriorate rapidly, unless immediate and urgent action is taken."6
The pretext for punishing Palestinians is that Hamas refuses to accept three demands: to recognize Israel, cease all acts of violence, and accept earlier agreements. The editors of the New York Times instruct Hamas leaders that they must accept the "ground rules that have already been accepted by Egypt and Jordan and by the Arab League as a whole in its 2002 Beirut peace initiative" and, furthermore, that they must do so "not as some kind of ideological concession" but "as an admission ticket to the real world, a necessary rite of passage in the progression from a lawless opposition to a lawful government" -- like us.7
Unmentioned is that Israel and the United States flatly reject all of these conditions. They do not recognize Palestine; they refused to end their violence even when Hamas observed a unilateral truce for a year and a half and called for a long-term truce while negotiations proceed for a two-state settlement; and they dismissed with utter contempt the 2002 Arab League call for normalization of relations, along with all other proposals for a meaningful diplomatic settlement. Even when it accepted the "Road Map" that is supposed to define U.S. policy, Israel added fourteen "reservations" that rendered it entirely meaningless, eliciting the usual tacit approval in Washington and silence in commentary.8
The Hamas electoral victory was eagerly exploited by the United States and Israel. Previously, they had to pretend that there was "no partner" for negotiations, so they had no choice but to continue their project of taking over the West Bank, as they had been doing systematically since the Oslo Accords were signed (extending earlier actions). The pace of settlement peaked in 2000, the last year of Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, then escalated under Bush-Sharon. With Hamas in office, Olmert and his cohorts can lament that there is "no partner." Therefore, they must proceed with annexation and destruction of Palestine, counting on articulate Western opinion to applaud politely, perhaps with mild reservations about unilateral "convergence," and to suppress the fact that while Hamas's programs are in many respects entirely unacceptable, their own are comparable or much worse, and are not just rhetoric: They are systematically implementing their denial of any meaningful Palestinian rights, a crucial difference.
The next act in this hideous drama opened on July 12, when Hezbollah launched a raid in which it captured two Israeli soldiers and killed several others, leading to an all-out Israeli attack, killing hundreds and destroying much of what Lebanon has painfully reconstructed from the wreckage of its civil wars and the Israeli invasions. Whatever its motives, Hezbollah took a frightful gamble, for which Lebanon would surely pay dearly. Here we see the danger of processes that have led to the rise of "parallel or alternative leaderships that can protect [civilian populations] and deliver essential services" with their own military wings, as veteran Middle East correspondent Rami Khouri has noted.9
On the motives, analysts differ. "Hezbollah's official line," the Financial Times reports, "was that the capture was aimed at winning the release of the few remaining Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails. But the timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on the Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously." Many agree, recalling Hezbollah's reaction to the outbreak of the al-Aqsa Intifada in September 2000 -- when it seized soldiers in a cross-border raid that led to a prisoner exchange -- as well as its response to Israel's devastating attacks in the West Bank in 2002 (Amos Harel).10 Others highlight the prisoner motive, which is also suggested by the exchange in 2000, by the fact that Hezbollah had attempted capture of soldiers before the recent crisis, and by the matter of Israel's secret prisons, mentioned earlier. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese academic specialist on Hezbollah, regards the Gaza connection as primary, but argues that one should not ignore "the domestic significance of these hostages."11
Still others regard Iran and/or Syria as the main actors. Many experts and Iranian dissidents disagree, though few doubt that Iran and Syria authorized Hezbollah's actions. Most Arab rulers place the blame on Iran. At an emergency Arab League summit, they were willing "to openly defy Arab public opinion" because of their concerns about Iranian influence. One Dubai military specialist commented that the Iranians, by means of Hezbollah, "are embarrassing the hell out of the Arab governments," who are doing nothing while "[t]he peace process has collapsed, the Palestinians are being killed. . . . And here comes Hezbollah, which is actually scoring hits against Israel." The criticism of Hezbollah was opposed by Syria, Yemen, Algeria, and Lebanon; the Iraqi parliament, "in a rare show of unity," condemned the Israeli attack as "criminal aggression," and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose designation Washington applauded, "call[ed] on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression." The fact that most Arab leaders, however, are willing to "defy public opinion" may have large-scale regional implications, strengthening radical Islamist groups. It is noteworthy that the "Supreme Guide" of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, sharply condemned the Arab states. "The Brotherhood would win a comfortable majority" in a free election in Egypt, according to Middle East scholar Fawwaz Gerges, and has broad influence elsewhere, including with Hamas, one of its offshoots.12
A broader analysis is suggested by retired colonel Pat Lang, former head of the Middle East and terrorism desk at the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency: "This is basically tribal warfare. If you have someone who's hostile to you and you're unwilling to accept a temporary truce, as Hamas offered, then you have to destroy them. The Israeli response is so disproportionate to the abduction of the three men it appears it's a rather clever excuse designed to appeal both to their public and to the U.S."13
Speculation about motives and conflicting factors should not blind us to the tragedy that is unfolding. Lebanon is being destroyed, Israel's Gaza prison is suffering still more savage blows, and on the West Bank, mostly out of sight, the United States and Israel are consummating their project of the murder of a nation, a grim and rare event in history.
These actions, and the Western response, illustrate all too clearly the amalgam of savage cruelty, self-righteousness, and injured innocence that is so deeply rooted in the imperial mentality as to be beyond awareness. One can easily understand why Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization, is alleged to have said that he thought it might be a good idea.
-- July 20, 2006
Notes
1. Noah Feldman, "Becoming bin Laden" (review of Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden), New York Times Book Review, February 12, 2006, p. 12; Steven Erlanger, "U.S. and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster," New York Times, February 14, 2006, p. A1.
2. Louis Pérez, "Fear and Loathing of Fidel Castro: Sources of U.S. Policy Toward Cuba," Journal of Latin American Studies 34, no. 2 (May 2002), pp. 227–254.
3. Steven R. Weisman, "Europe Plan to Aid Palestinians Stalls Over U.S. Salary Sanctions," New York Times, June 15, 2006, p. A10. See also Tanya Reinhart, "A Week of Israeli Restraint," Yediot Ahronot, June 21, 2006. A striking illustration of this pattern is the intense (and failed) effort to elicit Palestinian violence to justify the planned 1982 invasion. Palestinian violence does continue, however, notably in the form of Qassam rocket attacks from Gaza by groups that refused to accept the Hamas truce -- actions both criminal and foolish.
4. Jonathan Cook, "The British Media and the Invasion of Gaza," Medialens (UK), June 30, 2006; Josh Brannon, "IDF Commandos Enter Gaza, Capture Two Hamas Terrorists," Jerusalem Post, June 25, 2006; Ken Ellingwood, "2 Palestinians Held in Israel's First Arrest Raid in Gaza Since Pullout," Los Angeles Times, June 25, 2006, p. A20. Apart from the Los Angeles Times, there were only a few marginal words in the Baltimore Sun (June 25) and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (June 25). Moreover, no mainstream media source chose to refer to this event when discussing Shalit's capture. The only serious coverage I know of in the English-language press appeared in the Turkish Daily News (June 25). (Database search by David Peterson.)
5. Aviv Lavie, "Inside Israel's Secret Prison," Ha'aretz, August 22, 2003; Jonathan Cook, "Facility 1391: Israel's Guantanamo," Le Monde Diplomatique, November 2003; Chris McGreal, "Facility 1391: Israel's Secret Prison," Guardian, November 14, 2003, p. 2.
6. Gideon Levy, "A Black Flag," Ha'aretz, July 2, 2006; Christopher Gunness, "Statements by the United Nations Agencies Working in the Occupied Palestinian Territory," July 8, 2006; Amnesty International press release, "Israel/Occupied Territories: Deliberate Attacks a War Crime," AI Index: MDE 15/061/2006 (Public), News Service No. 169, June 30, 2006.
7. Editorial, "A Problem That Can't Be Ignored," New York Times, June 17, 2006, p. A12.
8. Israeli Cabinet Statement on Road Map and 14 Reservations by State of Israel, July 9, 2004, originally released on May 25, 2003.
9. Rami G. Khouri, "The Mideast Death Dance," Salon, July 15, 2006.
10. Roula Khalaf, "Hizbollah's Bold Attack Raises Stakes in Middle East," Financial Times, July 13, 2006, p. 5; David Hirst, "Overnight Lebanon Has Been Plunged into a Role It Endured for 25 Years -- That of a Hapless Arena for Other People's Wars," Guardian, July 14, 2006, p. 29; Megan K. Stack and Rania Abouzeid, "The Nation of Hezbollah," Los Angeles Times, July 13, 2006, p. A1; Neil MacFarquhar and Hassan Fattah, "In Hezbollah Mix of Politics and Arms, Arms Win Out," New York Times, July 16, 2006, pp. I:1; Amos Harel, "Israel Faces a Wide Military Escalation," Ha'aretz, July 12, 2006; Uri Avnery, "The Real Aim," July 15, 2006, Gush Shalom Web site.
11. Mouin Rabbani, Democracy Now!, July 14, 2006, transcript available online; Saad-Ghorayeb, quoted in Halpern and Blanford, "A Second Front Opens for Israel," p. 1. [The number of prisoners is unknown, apart from the one or two officially admitted. In what may be the first mainstream reference, Ha'aretz commentator Nehemia Shtrasler writes that in the course of the six years since Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, "no one found it correct to neutralize the central demand of Hezbollah: freeing the Lebanese prisoners. The head of the Lebanese government, Fuad Siniora, stated two days ago that freeing these prisoners is a central condition for any agreement. In addition to Samir Quntar, Israel holds about 15 Lebanese prisoners, who have been held here for many years. It was possible to free them long before -- to the hands of the moderate Siniora." See Shtrasler, "A Path to Strengthen the Extremists," Ha'aretz, July 21, 2006 (in Hebrew). (Information added July 22, 2006.)]
12. Hassan Fattah, "Militia Rebuked by Some Arab Countries," New York Times, July 17, 2006, p. A1; Dan Murphy and Sameh NaGuib, "Hizbullah Winning over Arab Street," Christian Science Monitor, July 18, 2006, p. 1; Edward Wong and Michael Slackman, "Iraqi Prime Minister Denounces Israel's Actions," New York Times, October 20, 2006, p. A1; Fawwaz Gerges, Journey of the Jihadist: Inside Muslim Militancy (Orlando, FL: Harcourt Inc., 2006), p. 26.
13. Lang, quoted in Dan Murphy, "Escalation Ripples Through Middle East," Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2006, p. 1.
Q: How would you assess the Israeli and U.S. responses to the election of Hamas, and to the ensuing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon?
Noam Chomsky: The U.S. response reveals, once again, that the United States supports democracy if and only if it conforms to U.S. strategic and economic objectives.
Perhaps it would be useful to review some highlights since Hamas was elected in late January 2006.
On February 12, the statements of Osama bin Laden were reviewed in the New York Times by NYU law professor Noah Feldman. He described bin Laden's descent into utter barbarism, reaching the depths when he advanced "the perverse claim that since the United States is a democracy, all citizens bear responsibility for its government's actions, and civilians are therefore fair targets." Utter depravity, no doubt. Two days later, the lead story in the Times casually reported that the United States and Israel are joining bin Laden in the lower depths of depravity. Palestinians offended the masters by voting the wrong way in a free election. The population must therefore be punished for this crime. The "intention," the correspondent observed, "is to starve the Palestinian Authority of money and international connections" so that President Mahmoud Abbas will be "compelled to call a new election. The hope is that Palestinians will be so unhappy with life under Hamas that they will return to office a reformed and chastened Fatah movement." Mechanisms of punishment of the population are outlined. The article also reports that Condoleezza Rice will visit the oil producers to ensure that they do not relieve the torture of the Palestinians. In short, bin Laden's "perverse claim"; but when the United States advances the claim, it is not ultimate evil but rather righteous dedication to "democracy promotion."1
These paired articles elicited no comment that I could discover. Also overlooked was the fact that bin Laden's "perverse claim" is standard operating procedure. Familiar examples are "making the economy scream" when Chileans had the effrontery to elect Salvador Allende -- the "soft track"; the "hard track" brought Pinochet. Another pertinent illustration is the U.S.-UK sanctions regime that murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, devastated the country, and probably saved Saddam Hussein from the fate of other monsters like him (often supported by the United States and Britain to the very end). Not quite bin Laden's doctrine; rather, much more perverse, not only in terms of scale but also because Iraqis could not by any stretch of the imagination be held responsible for Saddam Hussein.
The most venerable illustration is Washington's forty-seven-year campaign of terror and economic strangulation against Cuba. From the internal record, we learn that the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations determined that "[t]he Cuban people are responsible for the regime," so they must be punished with the expectation that "[r]ising discomfort among hungry Cubans" will cause them to throw Castro out (JFK). The State Department advised that "[e]very possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba [in order to] bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of the government."2 The doctrine remains in force.
Without continuing, we find ample evidence that it is no departure from the norm to adopt bin Laden's most perverse claim in order to punish Palestinians for their democratic misdeeds.
The United States and Israel then proceeded to implement their "intention," with scrupulous care. Thus, for example, an EU proposal to provide some desperately needed aid for health care was stalled when U.S. "officials expressed concerns that some of this money might end up paying nurses, doctors, teachers and others previously on the government payroll, thereby helping to finance Hamas." Another achievement of the "war on terror." With U.S. backing, Israel also continued its terrorist atrocities and other crimes in Gaza and the West Bank -- in some cases, perhaps, in an attempt to induce Hamas to violate its embarrassing cease-fire, so that Israel could respond in "self-defense," another familiar pattern.3
In May 2006, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert announced his plan to formalize Sharon's West Bank expansion programs, which were announced along with the "Gaza disengagement." Olmert chose the term "convergence" ("hitkansut") as a euphemism for annexation of valuable land and resources (including water) of the West Bank, programs designed to break the continually shrinking Palestinian areas into separated cantons, virtually isolated from one another and from whatever corner of Jerusalem will be left to Palestinians, all imprisoned as Israel takes over the Jordan valley and controls air space and any external access. In a stunning public relations triumph, Olmert won praise for his courage in "withdrawing" from the West Bank as he put the finishing touches on the project of destroying any hope for recognition of Palestinian national rights. We were enjoined to lament the "anguish" of the residents of scattered settlements that would be abandoned as they "converge" into the territories illegally annexed behind the cruel and illegal "Separation Wall." All of this proceeds, as usual, with a kindly nod from Washington, which is expected to fork up the billions of dollars needed to carry out the plans, though there are occasional admonitions that the destruction of Palestine should not be "unilateral": It would be preferable for President Mahmoud Abbas to sign a surrender declaration, in which case everything would be just fine.
The people of Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to observe all of this submissively, rotting in their virtual prisons. Otherwise they are sadistic terrorists.
The latest phase began on June 24, when the Israeli army kidnapped two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from their home in Gaza. They were "detained" according to brief notes in the British press. The U.S. media mostly preferred silence.4 They will presumably join the 9,000 other Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, 1,000 reportedly in prison without charges, hence kidnapped -- as were many of the rest, in that they were sentenced by Israeli courts, which are a disgrace, harshly condemned by legal commentators in Israel. Among them are hundreds of women and children, their numbers and fate of little interest. Also of little interest are Israel's secret prisons. The Israeli press reported that these have been "the entry gate to Israel for Lebanese, especially those who were suspected of membership in Hezbollah, who were transferred to the southern side of the border," some captured in battle in Lebanon, others "abducted at Israel's initiative" and sometimes held as hostages, with torture under interrogation. The secret Camp 1391, possibly one of several, was discovered accidentally in 2003, since forgotten.5
The next day, June 25, Palestinians kidnapped an Israeli soldier just across the border from Gaza. That did happen, very definitely. Every literate reader also knows the name of corporal Gilad Shalit, and wants him released. The nameless kidnapped Gaza civilians are ignored; international law, while rightly insisting that captured soldiers be treated humanely, absolutely prohibits the extrajudicial seizure of civilians. Israel responded by "bombing and shelling, darkening and destroying, imposing a siege and kidnapping like the worst of terrorists and nobody breaks the silence to ask, what the hell for, and according to what right?" as the fine Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote, adding that "[a] state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization." Israel also kidnapped a large part of the Palestinian government, destroyed most of the Gaza electrical and water systems, and committed numerous other crimes. These acts of collective punishment, condemned by Amnesty International as "war crimes," compounded the punishment of Palestinians for having voted the wrong way. Within a few days, UN agencies working in Gaza warned of a "public health disaster" as a result of developments "which have seen innocent civilians, including children, killed, brought increased misery to hundreds of thousands of people and which will wreak far-reaching harm on Palestinian society. An already alarming situation in Gaza, with poverty rates at nearly eighty per cent and unemployment at nearly forty per cent, is likely to deteriorate rapidly, unless immediate and urgent action is taken."6
The pretext for punishing Palestinians is that Hamas refuses to accept three demands: to recognize Israel, cease all acts of violence, and accept earlier agreements. The editors of the New York Times instruct Hamas leaders that they must accept the "ground rules that have already been accepted by Egypt and Jordan and by the Arab League as a whole in its 2002 Beirut peace initiative" and, furthermore, that they must do so "not as some kind of ideological concession" but "as an admission ticket to the real world, a necessary rite of passage in the progression from a lawless opposition to a lawful government" -- like us.7
Unmentioned is that Israel and the United States flatly reject all of these conditions. They do not recognize Palestine; they refused to end their violence even when Hamas observed a unilateral truce for a year and a half and called for a long-term truce while negotiations proceed for a two-state settlement; and they dismissed with utter contempt the 2002 Arab League call for normalization of relations, along with all other proposals for a meaningful diplomatic settlement. Even when it accepted the "Road Map" that is supposed to define U.S. policy, Israel added fourteen "reservations" that rendered it entirely meaningless, eliciting the usual tacit approval in Washington and silence in commentary.8
The Hamas electoral victory was eagerly exploited by the United States and Israel. Previously, they had to pretend that there was "no partner" for negotiations, so they had no choice but to continue their project of taking over the West Bank, as they had been doing systematically since the Oslo Accords were signed (extending earlier actions). The pace of settlement peaked in 2000, the last year of Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, then escalated under Bush-Sharon. With Hamas in office, Olmert and his cohorts can lament that there is "no partner." Therefore, they must proceed with annexation and destruction of Palestine, counting on articulate Western opinion to applaud politely, perhaps with mild reservations about unilateral "convergence," and to suppress the fact that while Hamas's programs are in many respects entirely unacceptable, their own are comparable or much worse, and are not just rhetoric: They are systematically implementing their denial of any meaningful Palestinian rights, a crucial difference.
The next act in this hideous drama opened on July 12, when Hezbollah launched a raid in which it captured two Israeli soldiers and killed several others, leading to an all-out Israeli attack, killing hundreds and destroying much of what Lebanon has painfully reconstructed from the wreckage of its civil wars and the Israeli invasions. Whatever its motives, Hezbollah took a frightful gamble, for which Lebanon would surely pay dearly. Here we see the danger of processes that have led to the rise of "parallel or alternative leaderships that can protect [civilian populations] and deliver essential services" with their own military wings, as veteran Middle East correspondent Rami Khouri has noted.9
On the motives, analysts differ. "Hezbollah's official line," the Financial Times reports, "was that the capture was aimed at winning the release of the few remaining Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails. But the timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on the Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously." Many agree, recalling Hezbollah's reaction to the outbreak of the al-Aqsa Intifada in September 2000 -- when it seized soldiers in a cross-border raid that led to a prisoner exchange -- as well as its response to Israel's devastating attacks in the West Bank in 2002 (Amos Harel).10 Others highlight the prisoner motive, which is also suggested by the exchange in 2000, by the fact that Hezbollah had attempted capture of soldiers before the recent crisis, and by the matter of Israel's secret prisons, mentioned earlier. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese academic specialist on Hezbollah, regards the Gaza connection as primary, but argues that one should not ignore "the domestic significance of these hostages."11
Still others regard Iran and/or Syria as the main actors. Many experts and Iranian dissidents disagree, though few doubt that Iran and Syria authorized Hezbollah's actions. Most Arab rulers place the blame on Iran. At an emergency Arab League summit, they were willing "to openly defy Arab public opinion" because of their concerns about Iranian influence. One Dubai military specialist commented that the Iranians, by means of Hezbollah, "are embarrassing the hell out of the Arab governments," who are doing nothing while "[t]he peace process has collapsed, the Palestinians are being killed. . . . And here comes Hezbollah, which is actually scoring hits against Israel." The criticism of Hezbollah was opposed by Syria, Yemen, Algeria, and Lebanon; the Iraqi parliament, "in a rare show of unity," condemned the Israeli attack as "criminal aggression," and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose designation Washington applauded, "call[ed] on the world to take quick stands to stop the Israeli aggression." The fact that most Arab leaders, however, are willing to "defy public opinion" may have large-scale regional implications, strengthening radical Islamist groups. It is noteworthy that the "Supreme Guide" of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, sharply condemned the Arab states. "The Brotherhood would win a comfortable majority" in a free election in Egypt, according to Middle East scholar Fawwaz Gerges, and has broad influence elsewhere, including with Hamas, one of its offshoots.12
A broader analysis is suggested by retired colonel Pat Lang, former head of the Middle East and terrorism desk at the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency: "This is basically tribal warfare. If you have someone who's hostile to you and you're unwilling to accept a temporary truce, as Hamas offered, then you have to destroy them. The Israeli response is so disproportionate to the abduction of the three men it appears it's a rather clever excuse designed to appeal both to their public and to the U.S."13
Speculation about motives and conflicting factors should not blind us to the tragedy that is unfolding. Lebanon is being destroyed, Israel's Gaza prison is suffering still more savage blows, and on the West Bank, mostly out of sight, the United States and Israel are consummating their project of the murder of a nation, a grim and rare event in history.
These actions, and the Western response, illustrate all too clearly the amalgam of savage cruelty, self-righteousness, and injured innocence that is so deeply rooted in the imperial mentality as to be beyond awareness. One can easily understand why Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization, is alleged to have said that he thought it might be a good idea.
-- July 20, 2006
Notes
1. Noah Feldman, "Becoming bin Laden" (review of Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden), New York Times Book Review, February 12, 2006, p. 12; Steven Erlanger, "U.S. and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster," New York Times, February 14, 2006, p. A1.
2. Louis Pérez, "Fear and Loathing of Fidel Castro: Sources of U.S. Policy Toward Cuba," Journal of Latin American Studies 34, no. 2 (May 2002), pp. 227–254.
3. Steven R. Weisman, "Europe Plan to Aid Palestinians Stalls Over U.S. Salary Sanctions," New York Times, June 15, 2006, p. A10. See also Tanya Reinhart, "A Week of Israeli Restraint," Yediot Ahronot, June 21, 2006. A striking illustration of this pattern is the intense (and failed) effort to elicit Palestinian violence to justify the planned 1982 invasion. Palestinian violence does continue, however, notably in the form of Qassam rocket attacks from Gaza by groups that refused to accept the Hamas truce -- actions both criminal and foolish.
4. Jonathan Cook, "The British Media and the Invasion of Gaza," Medialens (UK), June 30, 2006; Josh Brannon, "IDF Commandos Enter Gaza, Capture Two Hamas Terrorists," Jerusalem Post, June 25, 2006; Ken Ellingwood, "2 Palestinians Held in Israel's First Arrest Raid in Gaza Since Pullout," Los Angeles Times, June 25, 2006, p. A20. Apart from the Los Angeles Times, there were only a few marginal words in the Baltimore Sun (June 25) and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (June 25). Moreover, no mainstream media source chose to refer to this event when discussing Shalit's capture. The only serious coverage I know of in the English-language press appeared in the Turkish Daily News (June 25). (Database search by David Peterson.)
5. Aviv Lavie, "Inside Israel's Secret Prison," Ha'aretz, August 22, 2003; Jonathan Cook, "Facility 1391: Israel's Guantanamo," Le Monde Diplomatique, November 2003; Chris McGreal, "Facility 1391: Israel's Secret Prison," Guardian, November 14, 2003, p. 2.
6. Gideon Levy, "A Black Flag," Ha'aretz, July 2, 2006; Christopher Gunness, "Statements by the United Nations Agencies Working in the Occupied Palestinian Territory," July 8, 2006; Amnesty International press release, "Israel/Occupied Territories: Deliberate Attacks a War Crime," AI Index: MDE 15/061/2006 (Public), News Service No. 169, June 30, 2006.
7. Editorial, "A Problem That Can't Be Ignored," New York Times, June 17, 2006, p. A12.
8. Israeli Cabinet Statement on Road Map and 14 Reservations by State of Israel, July 9, 2004, originally released on May 25, 2003.
9. Rami G. Khouri, "The Mideast Death Dance," Salon, July 15, 2006.
10. Roula Khalaf, "Hizbollah's Bold Attack Raises Stakes in Middle East," Financial Times, July 13, 2006, p. 5; David Hirst, "Overnight Lebanon Has Been Plunged into a Role It Endured for 25 Years -- That of a Hapless Arena for Other People's Wars," Guardian, July 14, 2006, p. 29; Megan K. Stack and Rania Abouzeid, "The Nation of Hezbollah," Los Angeles Times, July 13, 2006, p. A1; Neil MacFarquhar and Hassan Fattah, "In Hezbollah Mix of Politics and Arms, Arms Win Out," New York Times, July 16, 2006, pp. I:1; Amos Harel, "Israel Faces a Wide Military Escalation," Ha'aretz, July 12, 2006; Uri Avnery, "The Real Aim," July 15, 2006, Gush Shalom Web site.
11. Mouin Rabbani, Democracy Now!, July 14, 2006, transcript available online; Saad-Ghorayeb, quoted in Halpern and Blanford, "A Second Front Opens for Israel," p. 1. [The number of prisoners is unknown, apart from the one or two officially admitted. In what may be the first mainstream reference, Ha'aretz commentator Nehemia Shtrasler writes that in the course of the six years since Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, "no one found it correct to neutralize the central demand of Hezbollah: freeing the Lebanese prisoners. The head of the Lebanese government, Fuad Siniora, stated two days ago that freeing these prisoners is a central condition for any agreement. In addition to Samir Quntar, Israel holds about 15 Lebanese prisoners, who have been held here for many years. It was possible to free them long before -- to the hands of the moderate Siniora." See Shtrasler, "A Path to Strengthen the Extremists," Ha'aretz, July 21, 2006 (in Hebrew). (Information added July 22, 2006.)]
12. Hassan Fattah, "Militia Rebuked by Some Arab Countries," New York Times, July 17, 2006, p. A1; Dan Murphy and Sameh NaGuib, "Hizbullah Winning over Arab Street," Christian Science Monitor, July 18, 2006, p. 1; Edward Wong and Michael Slackman, "Iraqi Prime Minister Denounces Israel's Actions," New York Times, October 20, 2006, p. A1; Fawwaz Gerges, Journey of the Jihadist: Inside Muslim Militancy (Orlando, FL: Harcourt Inc., 2006), p. 26.
13. Lang, quoted in Dan Murphy, "Escalation Ripples Through Middle East," Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2006, p. 1.
ISRAEL UBER ALLES
Lebanese Civilians Bear the Brunt of Israel's Destruction
by Dahr Jamail
"Large numbers fled the south after the Israeli military dropped leaflets warning of attacks. Others have been unable to leave, often because they have not found the means. The Israelis have taken that to mean that they are therefore Hezbollah.
Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon announced on Israeli army radio Thursday that "all those in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah."
Justifying the collective punishment of people in southern Lebanon, Ramon added, "In order to prevent casualties among Israeli soldiers battling Hezbollah militants in southern Lebanon, villages should be flattened by the Israeli air force before ground troops move in."
This policy explains the large number of wounded in the hospitals of Sidon in the south.
Wounded people from southern Lebanon narrate countless instances of indiscriminate attacks by the Israeli military. "
by Dahr Jamail
"Large numbers fled the south after the Israeli military dropped leaflets warning of attacks. Others have been unable to leave, often because they have not found the means. The Israelis have taken that to mean that they are therefore Hezbollah.
Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon announced on Israeli army radio Thursday that "all those in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah."
Justifying the collective punishment of people in southern Lebanon, Ramon added, "In order to prevent casualties among Israeli soldiers battling Hezbollah militants in southern Lebanon, villages should be flattened by the Israeli air force before ground troops move in."
This policy explains the large number of wounded in the hospitals of Sidon in the south.
Wounded people from southern Lebanon narrate countless instances of indiscriminate attacks by the Israeli military. "
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Eighty percent of Christians polled supported Hizbullah along with 80 percent of Druze and 89 percent of Sunnis.
The stakes are high for Hizbullah, but it seems it can count on an unprecedented swell of public support that cuts across sectarian lines.According to a poll released by the Beirut Center for Research and Information, 87 percent of Lebanese support Hizbullah's fight with Israel, a rise of 29 percent on a similar poll conducted in February. More striking, however, is the level of support for Hizbullah's resistance from non-Shiite communities. Eighty percent of Christians polled supported Hizbullah along with 80 percent of Druze and 89 percent of Sunnis.
Lebanese no longer blame Hizbullah for sparking the war by kidnapping the Israeli soldiers, but Israel and the US instead.
Lebanese no longer blame Hizbullah for sparking the war by kidnapping the Israeli soldiers, but Israel and the US instead.
الانتقام قادم وموجع
عبد الباري عطوان
هذه الحرب في لبنان هي اهم الحروب في المنطقة واخطرها، لانها ستكون نقطة تحول فارقة ترسم شكل المنطقة وخريطتها لسنوات ان لم يكن لعقود قادمة.فهيبة الجيش الاسرائيلي انهارت في مارون الراس وبنت جبيل، وعقدة ذنب العالم تجاه اليهود تآكلت، وربمـــا تبخــرت، مع توارد صور مجزرة قانا.القوات الاسرائيلية تقيم محرقتها في لبنان، وتعيد امجاد النازية علي حساب الاطفال اللبنانيين العزل، امام بصر العالم وسمعه، بالصوت والصورة، وصور قانا لا تكذب.لعل الخير يأتي من باطن الشر، ولعلها مأساة تعيد الوعي الي العرب والمسلمين، وتقضي علي الفتنة التي بذرها الاحتلال الامريكي في العراق، وتعيد توحيد الأمة، ومذاهبها جميعا، في مواجهة مصدر البلاء الاساسي وهو الدولة العبرية وجرائمها، والدعم الامريكي غير المحدود لها.محور الشر الامريكي ـ الاسرائيلي يعيش هذه الايام اسوأ ايامه في لبنان، ومعه النظام العربي الرسمي المرتعش المتخاذل المتواطئ، بعد ان وجد من يتعامل معه بالطريقة التي يفهمها، ولم يجربها في السابق.
هذه الحرب في لبنان هي اهم الحروب في المنطقة واخطرها، لانها ستكون نقطة تحول فارقة ترسم شكل المنطقة وخريطتها لسنوات ان لم يكن لعقود قادمة.فهيبة الجيش الاسرائيلي انهارت في مارون الراس وبنت جبيل، وعقدة ذنب العالم تجاه اليهود تآكلت، وربمـــا تبخــرت، مع توارد صور مجزرة قانا.القوات الاسرائيلية تقيم محرقتها في لبنان، وتعيد امجاد النازية علي حساب الاطفال اللبنانيين العزل، امام بصر العالم وسمعه، بالصوت والصورة، وصور قانا لا تكذب.لعل الخير يأتي من باطن الشر، ولعلها مأساة تعيد الوعي الي العرب والمسلمين، وتقضي علي الفتنة التي بذرها الاحتلال الامريكي في العراق، وتعيد توحيد الأمة، ومذاهبها جميعا، في مواجهة مصدر البلاء الاساسي وهو الدولة العبرية وجرائمها، والدعم الامريكي غير المحدود لها.محور الشر الامريكي ـ الاسرائيلي يعيش هذه الايام اسوأ ايامه في لبنان، ومعه النظام العربي الرسمي المرتعش المتخاذل المتواطئ، بعد ان وجد من يتعامل معه بالطريقة التي يفهمها، ولم يجربها في السابق.
Israel's Latest Invasions and Neocon Plans for the Middle East
Cowboys Still in the Saddle
By GARY LEUPP
"But no! The Israelis through their heroic actions will force the president's hand. They will provoke actions that will serve as pretexts for the planned regime changes. A New Middle East---no, New Greater Middle East, a contiguous string of Israel-friendly U.S. client-states from the Mediterranean to Central Asia---will be George W. Bush's legacy. This surely must be the expectation in the Vice President's office, and in that curious office set up last March called the "Office of Iranian Affairs." Laura Rozen of the Los Angeles Times points out that this is a reincarnation of the Office of Special Plans under Douglas Feith that stove-piped the cherry-picked intelligence rejected by the CIA to the Oval Office as well as the press."
By GARY LEUPP
"But no! The Israelis through their heroic actions will force the president's hand. They will provoke actions that will serve as pretexts for the planned regime changes. A New Middle East---no, New Greater Middle East, a contiguous string of Israel-friendly U.S. client-states from the Mediterranean to Central Asia---will be George W. Bush's legacy. This surely must be the expectation in the Vice President's office, and in that curious office set up last March called the "Office of Iranian Affairs." Laura Rozen of the Los Angeles Times points out that this is a reincarnation of the Office of Special Plans under Douglas Feith that stove-piped the cherry-picked intelligence rejected by the CIA to the Oval Office as well as the press."
Shredded by Cluster Bombs
Bush and Blair: "Keep It Up!"
By Robert Fisk
"Of course not. But Israel has special privileges afforded to no other nation. It can do exactly what Blair would never have done--and still receive the British Government's approbation. It can trash the Geneva Conventions--because the Americans have done that in Iraq--and it can commit war crimes and murder UN soldiers like the four unarmed observers who refused to leave their post under fire.
The idea that Nasrallah is going to kneel before a Nato general and hand over his sword--that this disciplined, ruthless, frightening guerrilla army is going to surrender to Nato--is a folly beyond self-delusion.
But Blair and Bush want to send a combat force into southern Lebanon. Well, I shall be there, I suppose, to watch its swift destruction in an orgy of car and suicide bombings by the same organization that yesterday fired another new longer-than-ever range missile that landed near Afula in Israel."
By Robert Fisk
"Of course not. But Israel has special privileges afforded to no other nation. It can do exactly what Blair would never have done--and still receive the British Government's approbation. It can trash the Geneva Conventions--because the Americans have done that in Iraq--and it can commit war crimes and murder UN soldiers like the four unarmed observers who refused to leave their post under fire.
The idea that Nasrallah is going to kneel before a Nato general and hand over his sword--that this disciplined, ruthless, frightening guerrilla army is going to surrender to Nato--is a folly beyond self-delusion.
But Blair and Bush want to send a combat force into southern Lebanon. Well, I shall be there, I suppose, to watch its swift destruction in an orgy of car and suicide bombings by the same organization that yesterday fired another new longer-than-ever range missile that landed near Afula in Israel."
Bush and Blair Risk Repeating the 1982 Fiasco
By PATRICK COCKBURN
"The arrival of the multinational force in Lebanon in 1982 brought with it a train of disasters. I still recall that great concrete sandwich near the airport that was all that remained of the US barracks in which 241 Marines died after it was hit by a suicide bomber on 23 October 1983. Elsewhere in Beirut, 58 French paratroopers were entombed when the building in which they were living was rammed by a second vehicle packed with explosives.
A multinational force sent to Lebanon will be seen much as the US and British in Iraq. They will be fought as a new detachment of crusaders. The US is probably more unpopular than it has ever been across the Middle East. Even if there are no American troops in the new multinational force they will be seen as opening another front in the West's perceived war on Islam. They will be joining a war, not ending it."
"The arrival of the multinational force in Lebanon in 1982 brought with it a train of disasters. I still recall that great concrete sandwich near the airport that was all that remained of the US barracks in which 241 Marines died after it was hit by a suicide bomber on 23 October 1983. Elsewhere in Beirut, 58 French paratroopers were entombed when the building in which they were living was rammed by a second vehicle packed with explosives.
A multinational force sent to Lebanon will be seen much as the US and British in Iraq. They will be fought as a new detachment of crusaders. The US is probably more unpopular than it has ever been across the Middle East. Even if there are no American troops in the new multinational force they will be seen as opening another front in the West's perceived war on Islam. They will be joining a war, not ending it."
CFL ALERT: Israeli war crimes in Qana and Gaza
TO SEND OUR PREWRITTEN LETTER TO YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS CLICK HERE
7/30/06-CFL ALERT: STOP ISRAELI WAR CRIMES IN LEBANON AND GAZA.
*In the past few days Israel has killed hundreds of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians—most recently overnight in Qana where they attacked a four story building where women and children were seeking refuge from Israeli bombs. Israel is commiting war crimesi n clear violation of international law. I am dismayed that, despite the indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, the U.S. has stifled any attempts to bring the matter to the United Nations in hopes of reaching a resolution. I demand that my representatives speak out against the war crimes taking place in the Middle East right now.
* Tell your representatives that you support an end to aid to apartheid Israel until it learns to live in peace with its neighbors. The events taking place now did not occur in a vacuum. Israel occupied Lebanon in the early 1980’s and imprisoned thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian nationals. This is merely a continuation of that conflict.
*There are 9,000 political prisoners, including women and children as young as 9 years old, who have never been charged with a crime and have in some cases been sitting in Israeli prisons for decades.
EMAIL AND OR CALL THE WHITE HOUSE
WHITE HOUSE COMMENTS LINE: 202-456-1111
WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414
WHITE HOUSE FAX: 202-456-2461
==============================
Citizens for Fair Legislation
http://www.cflweb.org/
7/30/06-CFL ALERT: STOP ISRAELI WAR CRIMES IN LEBANON AND GAZA.
*In the past few days Israel has killed hundreds of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians—most recently overnight in Qana where they attacked a four story building where women and children were seeking refuge from Israeli bombs. Israel is commiting war crimesi n clear violation of international law. I am dismayed that, despite the indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, the U.S. has stifled any attempts to bring the matter to the United Nations in hopes of reaching a resolution. I demand that my representatives speak out against the war crimes taking place in the Middle East right now.
* Tell your representatives that you support an end to aid to apartheid Israel until it learns to live in peace with its neighbors. The events taking place now did not occur in a vacuum. Israel occupied Lebanon in the early 1980’s and imprisoned thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian nationals. This is merely a continuation of that conflict.
*There are 9,000 political prisoners, including women and children as young as 9 years old, who have never been charged with a crime and have in some cases been sitting in Israeli prisons for decades.
EMAIL AND OR CALL THE WHITE HOUSE
WHITE HOUSE COMMENTS LINE: 202-456-1111
WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414
WHITE HOUSE FAX: 202-456-2461
==============================
Citizens for Fair Legislation
http://www.cflweb.org/
The “Honest Broker's” Plan for occupying Southern Lebanon
By Mike Whitney
"The Bush administration has played an integral part in the war on Lebanon. They blocked the “peace initiative” proposed by the 15-member coalition at the Rome Conference and they supplied “precision-guided weapons” during the hostilities so Israel could continue to pulverize Beirut and the cities in the south. They have been as engaged in the fighting as any combatant in the field and should not be regarded an “impartial arbiter”.
The United States participation in the conflict precludes it from participating in any settlement of the dispute. The administration cannot be trusted as an “honest broker”.
The real motive behind the initiative is to “militarize” the area south of the Litani River and “ethnically cleanse” the predominantly Muslim population. This is how Bush intends to stealthily annex more Lebanese land and create a new de-facto northern border for Israel.
Let the multinational force protect the Palestinians first; then, we’ll see.
The only “silver lining” to Israel’s lethal rampage is that it signals the death-knell for the enfeebled United Nations. The Bush administration has torpedoed every effort to reach a peace agreement and blocked all resolutions criticizing Israeli aggression. This, of course, is why Israeli-loyalist, John Bolton, was installed as US Ambassador in the first place; to oversee the destruction of the UN and pave the way for a wider regional war. So far, he has succeeded admirably. Working in tandem with Condi Rice, Bolton has delivered a ferocious “one-two” punch that has KO’d the diplomatic work of EU, the Arab League and the bumbling foreign ministers from around the globe. Now, whenever Condi or Bolton speaks, it looks like the entire world stands behind them lending international credibility to Israel’s ongoing depredations in Lebanon. "
"The Bush administration has played an integral part in the war on Lebanon. They blocked the “peace initiative” proposed by the 15-member coalition at the Rome Conference and they supplied “precision-guided weapons” during the hostilities so Israel could continue to pulverize Beirut and the cities in the south. They have been as engaged in the fighting as any combatant in the field and should not be regarded an “impartial arbiter”.
The United States participation in the conflict precludes it from participating in any settlement of the dispute. The administration cannot be trusted as an “honest broker”.
The real motive behind the initiative is to “militarize” the area south of the Litani River and “ethnically cleanse” the predominantly Muslim population. This is how Bush intends to stealthily annex more Lebanese land and create a new de-facto northern border for Israel.
Let the multinational force protect the Palestinians first; then, we’ll see.
The only “silver lining” to Israel’s lethal rampage is that it signals the death-knell for the enfeebled United Nations. The Bush administration has torpedoed every effort to reach a peace agreement and blocked all resolutions criticizing Israeli aggression. This, of course, is why Israeli-loyalist, John Bolton, was installed as US Ambassador in the first place; to oversee the destruction of the UN and pave the way for a wider regional war. So far, he has succeeded admirably. Working in tandem with Condi Rice, Bolton has delivered a ferocious “one-two” punch that has KO’d the diplomatic work of EU, the Arab League and the bumbling foreign ministers from around the globe. Now, whenever Condi or Bolton speaks, it looks like the entire world stands behind them lending international credibility to Israel’s ongoing depredations in Lebanon. "
In the Gunsight: Syria! or A Nice Little War
By Uri Avnery
"IT IS the old story about the losing gambler: he cannot stop. He continues to play, in order to win his losses back. He continues to lose and continues to gamble, until he has lost everything: his ranch, his wife, his shirt.
That is what happened this week, following the battle of Bint-Jbeil, which the Arabs have already started to call proudly Nasrallahgrad. All over Israel the cry goes up: Get into it! Quicker! Further! Deeper!
A day after the bloody battle, the cabinet decided on a massive mobilization of the reserves. What for? The ministers do not know. But it does not depend on them anymore, nor on the generals. The political and military leadership is tossed about on the waves of war like a boat without a rudder.
When it becomes clear that nothing is helping, that Hizbullah goes on fighting and the rockets continue to fly, the political and military leadership will face bankruptcy. They will need to pin the blame on somebody. On who? Well, on Assad, of course.
How is it possible that a small "terror organization", with a few thousand fighters altogether, goes on fighting? Where do they get the arms from? The finger will point towards Syria.
Even now, the army commanders assert that new rockets are flowing all the time from Syria to Hizbullah. True, the roads have been bombed, the bridges destroyed, but the arms somehow continue to arrive. The Israeli government demands that an international force be stationed not only along the Israeli-Lebanese border, but on the Lebanese-Syrian border, too. The queue of volunteers will not be long.
Then the generals will demand the bombing of roads and bridges inside Syria. For that, the Syrian Air Force will have to be neutralized. In short, a real war, with implications for the whole Middle East."
"IT IS the old story about the losing gambler: he cannot stop. He continues to play, in order to win his losses back. He continues to lose and continues to gamble, until he has lost everything: his ranch, his wife, his shirt.
That is what happened this week, following the battle of Bint-Jbeil, which the Arabs have already started to call proudly Nasrallahgrad. All over Israel the cry goes up: Get into it! Quicker! Further! Deeper!
A day after the bloody battle, the cabinet decided on a massive mobilization of the reserves. What for? The ministers do not know. But it does not depend on them anymore, nor on the generals. The political and military leadership is tossed about on the waves of war like a boat without a rudder.
When it becomes clear that nothing is helping, that Hizbullah goes on fighting and the rockets continue to fly, the political and military leadership will face bankruptcy. They will need to pin the blame on somebody. On who? Well, on Assad, of course.
How is it possible that a small "terror organization", with a few thousand fighters altogether, goes on fighting? Where do they get the arms from? The finger will point towards Syria.
Even now, the army commanders assert that new rockets are flowing all the time from Syria to Hizbullah. True, the roads have been bombed, the bridges destroyed, but the arms somehow continue to arrive. The Israeli government demands that an international force be stationed not only along the Israeli-Lebanese border, but on the Lebanese-Syrian border, too. The queue of volunteers will not be long.
Then the generals will demand the bombing of roads and bridges inside Syria. For that, the Syrian Air Force will have to be neutralized. In short, a real war, with implications for the whole Middle East."
Cabinet in open revolt over Blair's Israel policy
Tony Blair was facing a full-scale cabinet rebellion last night over the Middle East crisis after his former Foreign Secretary warned that Israel's actions risked destabilising all of Lebanon.
Jack Straw, now Leader of the Commons, said in a statement released after meeting Muslim residents of his Blackburn constituency that while he grieved for the innocent Israelis killed, he also mourned the '10 times as many innocent Lebanese men, women and children killed by Israeli fire'.
Continued
Jack Straw, now Leader of the Commons, said in a statement released after meeting Muslim residents of his Blackburn constituency that while he grieved for the innocent Israelis killed, he also mourned the '10 times as many innocent Lebanese men, women and children killed by Israeli fire'.
Continued
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)