Skip navigation.

I've Heard That Song Before

Posts tagged with "Palestine"

Jimmy Carter: Peace Not Apartheid

,


Jimmy Carter appeared on PBS's Newshour. In his interview with Judy Woodruff, I was surprised to hear the kinds of arguments I never hear on American media outlets. Carter actually expressed the views of Palestinians. The former president, unlike most Americans, actually listened to what the Palestinians had to say -- and checked it out himself.

Kabobfest - 11/29/60
by Will

Carter on Palestinian Prisoners

This exchange on the question of the captured Israeli soldier was impressive:

Judy Woodruff:

President Carter, people would listen to what you're saying here, and they would read your book, and they would say, "He's putting the onus here on the Israelis." And many would return that by saying, "But wait a minute. It's the Palestinians who continue to fire rockets into Israeli land. It's the Palestinians who have kidnapped Israeli soldiers. It's the Palestinians that continue to perpetuate terrorist acts against the Israelis."

Jimmy Carter:

Sure, that's what you say, and that's the general consensus in the United States. The fact is that, when the Palestinians dug under the Israeli wall from Gaza and captured the Israeli soldier, one soldier, at that time, Israel was holding 9,200 Palestinians prisoner, including 300 children, almost 300, 293 children, some of them 12 years old, and holding almost 100 women prisoner.

And immediately, the Palestinians who took that soldier said, "We want to swap this soldier for some of our women and children." And the Israelis rejected that proposal and refused to swap at all with the Palestinians in the West Bank. That was the key to the issue.

So it's right that the Palestinians took a soldier, which they should release. But for Israel to keep 9,000 Palestinians and not release any of them is something that you don't mention in the question, and it's generally not even known in this country.



Wow. At some point media heads will have to start asking tough questions to Israeli talking heads.

Website: kabobfest.blogspot.com

Gazan Voices

,

Aljazeera - 11/24/06
by Motasem A Dalloul in Gaza

Al Jazeera spoke to Palestinians in Gaza about their views on the situation, asking how they are surviving the economic embargo and how they feel that the Palestinian factions should overcome their differences.

Hassan abdul-Aal, 50, shopkeeper

"The current situation in the country is so bad, no money, no food and no security. People can't pay us for the goods they buy.

"Though, I don't see a great change took place after Hamas took office. The unemployment rate has been high for six years.

"The only backward step is the delay of the salaries of the Palestinian authority workers which paralysed the economic situation completely beside the original high rate of unemployment.

"I tell the government to do whatever it sees suitable without having to return to the people again after they have elected them."



Waleed al-Ghorra, 43, former building entrepreneur

"The current situation is bad in general. I myself was a builder, but I have been without work for two years.

"I see that the bad economic situation, which has resulted in the security chaos, is a result of the international siege practised against the current government.

"The new government isn't responsible for the terrible current situation in the life of the Palestinians, it is Israel and the international community which practises a siege against it.

"However, I don't agree with those who call for the recognition of Israel to solve the problem. This is just a dream since the previous government recognised Israel and got no benefits."



Tamara abu-Dalfeh, 22, university student

"What makes the current situation distinctive is the unstable security and fear of every side in our life.

"It is clear that the main cause is the loss of salaries and economical decline.

"However, the Hamas government isn't the reason.

"My advice for the government is to work hard for a national unity government and to persuade as many of the Palestinian parties as possible to share in it in order to unite the Palestinians and make their stance more steadfast against the oppressive international demands.

"I also advise the Palestinians to be more patient as I am sure that the government does its best for the sake of them. I call for the current government not to recognise Israel whatsoever. I highly respect the Hamas movement because of its wonderful stubbornness on this principle."



Rahma Sarsour, 60, whose husband, son and son-in-law have been killed by Israeli forces

"I think that the change of ruling power is good for the Palestinians, but the plight that came with this change isn't the fault of the new government.

"It is the fault of the Arab leaders.

"I call for the government to carry on in its Islamic policy and not to give up hope of prosperity. We will continue with it till we die or achieve victory.

"I am against the recognition of Israel as a solution to our problems, but support a unity government which may lead to a united Palestinian nation."



Noreez Sobhi, 31, mother

"We live a life that is unenviable. Severe hunger, security chaos from the inside and savage Israeli invasion from the outside. The world has abandoned us.

"The Hamas government took office at the beginning of this year through a democratic election, but the so-called democratic world ignored the result of the elections.

"I don't believe in a national unity government nor a technocratic one. People have elected Hamas according to its programme, so it must take the opportunity to implement it. If the elected party doesn’t do that, it will betray the people who elected it."



Abdul-Hameed Faris, 47, butcher

"Palestinians have been suffering for many years and this increased after the coming of the Hamas government.

"However, the new government isn't to blame for the increase in our misery.

"I am against the recognition of Israel at all.

"I think that the unity government may be a successful solution for our cause as it can bring together all the Palestinian parties."



Ghada al-Bardaweel, 23, journalist

"The current social, economic and psychological situation is bad in our country nowadays.

"But I am sure that the reason is the international siege imposed on the government as well as Israeli military action. Palestinians want a change, so they have chosen a new party to rule them.

"I advise the government not to be defeated in the face of international and Israeli pressure since dignity with hunger is better than humiliation with food.

"If the government recognised Israel, our achievements over the last 50 years ago will be in vain. I am against a technocratic government and support the national unity one as it can bring together all the Palestinian parties at the same table."



Website: aljazeera.net

Palestine: I Pray for Peaceful People . . .

, ,


Palestine: Time for a Hudna

New York Times - 11/01/06
by Ahmed Yousef

Pause for peace

Here in Gaza, few dream of peace. For now, most dare only to dream of a lack of war. It is for this reason that Hamas proposes a long-term truce during which the Israeli and Palestinian peoples can try to negotiate a lasting peace.

A truce is referred to in Arabic as a "hudna." Typically covering 10 years, a hudna is recognized in Islamic jurisprudence as a legitimate and binding contract. A hudna extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.

The Koran finds great merit in such efforts at promoting understanding among different people. Whereas war dehumanizes the enemy and makes it easier to kill, a hudna affords the opportunity to humanize one's opponents and understand their position with the goal of resolving the intertribal or international dispute.

Such a concept - a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict - is foreign to the West and has been greeted with much suspicion. Many Westerners I speak to wonder how one can stop the violence without ending the conflict.
We Palestinians are prepared to enter into a hudna to bring about an immediate end to the occupation and to initiate a period of peaceful coexistence during which both sides would refrain from any form of military aggression or provocation.

During this period of calm and negotiation we can address the important issues like the right of return and the release of prisoners. If the negotiations fail to achieve a durable settlement, the next generation of Palestinians and Israelis will have to decide whether or not to renew the hudna and the search for a negotiated peace.

There can be no comprehensive solution of the conflict today, this week, this month, or even this year. A conflict that has festered for so long may, however, be resolved through a decade of peaceful coexistence and negotiations. This is the only sensible alternative to the current situation. A hudna will lead to an end to the occupation and create the space and the calm necessary to resolve all outstanding issues.

Few in Gaza dream. For most of the past six months it's been difficult to even sleep. Yet hope is not dead. And when we dare to hope, this is what we see: a 10-year hudna during which, inshallah (God willing), we will learn again to dream of peace.

Ahmed Yousef is a senior adviser to the Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniya.

Read Article

Palestine: Like Attacking Dogs

,


Palestine: Confiscated Lands

, ,


Vengeance Has Nothing To Do With It

, ,

Electronic Intifada
by Jonathan Cook - 09/29/06

Bad faith and the destruction of Palestine

A mistake too often made by those examining Israel’s behaviour in the occupied territories -- or when analysing its treatment of Arabs in general, or interpreting its view of Iran -- is to assume that Israel is acting in good faith. Even its most trenchant critics can fall into this trap.

Such a reluctance to attribute bad faith was demonstrated this week by Israel’s foremost human rights group, B’Tselem, when it published a report into the bombing by the Israeli air force of Gaza’s power plant in late June. The horrifying consequences of this act of collective punishment -- a war crime, as B’Tselem rightly notes -- are clearly laid out in the report.

The group warns that electricity is available to most of Gaza’s 1.4 million inhabitants for a few hours a day, and running water for a similar period. The sewerage system has all but collapsed, with the resulting risk of the spread of dangerous infectious disease.

In their daily lives, Gazans can no longer rely on the basic features of modern existence. Their fridges are as good as useless, threatening outbreaks of food poisoning. The elderly and infirm living in apartments can no longer leave their homes because elevators don’t work, or are unpredictable.

Hospitals and doctors’ clinics struggle to offer essential medical services. Small businesses, most of which rely on the power and water supplies, from food shops and laundry services to factories and workshops, are being forced to close.

Rapidly approaching, says B’Tselem, is the moment when Gaza’s economy -- already under an internationally backed siege to penalise the Palestinians for democratically electing a Hamas government -- will simply expire under the strain.

Unfortunately, however, B’Tselem loses the plot when it comes to explaining why Israel would choose to inflict such terrible punishment on the people of Gaza. Apparently, it was out of a thirst for revenge: the group’s report is even entitled “Act of Vengeance”. Israel, it seems, wanted revenge for the capture a few days earlier of an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, from a border tank position used to fire artillery into Gaza.

The problem with the “revenge” theory is that, however much a rebuke it is, it presupposes a degree of good faith on the part of the vengeance-seeker. You steal my toy in the playground, and I lash out and hit you. I have acted badly -- even disproportionately, to use a vogue word B’Tselem also adopts -- but no one would deny that my emotions were honest. There was no subterfuge or deception in my anger. I incur blame only because I failed to control my impulses. There is even the implication that, though my action was unwarranted, my fury was justified.

But why should we think Israel is acting in good faith, even if in bad temper, in destroying Gaza’s power station? Why should we assume it was a hot-headed over-reaction rather than a coldly calculated deed?

In other words, why believe Israel is simply lashing out when it commits a war crime rather than committing it after careful advance planning? Is it not possible that such war crimes, rather than being spontaneous and random, are actually all pushing in the same direction?

More especially, why should we give Israel the benefit of the doubt when its war crimes contribute, as the bombing of the power station in Gaza surely does, to easily deciphered objectives? Why not think of the bombing instead as one instalment in a long-running and slowly unfolding plan?

The occupation of Gaza did not begin this year, after Hamas was elected, nor did it end with the disengagement a year ago. The occupation is four decades old and still going strong in both the West Bank and Gaza.

In that time Israel has followed a consistent policy of subjugating the Palestinian population, imprisoning it inside ever-shrinking ghettos, sealing it off from contact with the outside world, and destroying its chances of ever developing an independent economy.


Since the outbreak six years ago of the second intifada -- the Palestinians’ uprising against the occupation -- Israel has tightened its system of controls. It has sought to do so through two parallel, reinforcing approaches.

First, it has imposed forms of collective punishment to weaken Palestinian resolve to resist the occupation, and encourage factionalism and civil war. Second, it has “domesticated” suffering inside the ghettos, ensuring each Palestinian finds himself isolated from his neighbours, his concerns reduced to the domestic level: how to receive a house permit, or get past the wall to school or university, or visit a relative illegally imprisoned in Israel, or stop yet more family land being stolen, or reach his olive groves.

The goals of both sets of policies, however, are the same: the erosion of Palestinian society’s cohesiveness, the disruption of efforts at solidarity and resistance, and ultimately the slow drift of Palestinians away from vulnerable rural areas into the relative safety of urban centres -- and eventually, as the pressure continues to mount, on into neighbouring Arab states, such as Jordan and Egypt.

Seen in this light, the bombing of the Gaza power station fits neatly into Israel’s long-standing plans for the Palestinians. Vengeance has nothing to do with it.

More

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His book,
Blood and Religion: the Unmasking of the Jewish and Democratic State,
is published by Pluto Press. His website is www.jkcook.net

Palestine: Carried By Friends

,



In Service to Israel: Mahmoud Abbas

, ,


The Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, is being challenged by the Palestinian government of acting as a mouthpiece for the United States government, and misrepresenting the Palestinian demands during his visit to the United States over the last two days.
IMEMC - 09/22/06

Stalemate on unity government talks after Abbas returns from U.S. with new 'orders'

Abbas told the General Assembly in New York Thursday that the Palestinian government would recognize the state of Israel, despite the fact that national unity government talks between his party and the rival ruling party, Hamas,
have yet to be completed.

Abbas' statement came just one day after a meeting with George Bush and Condoleeza Rice, leading many to speculate that he was pressured by Bush
to make such a statement.

The Palestinian government . . . has long stated its commitment to a comprehensive peace with Israel, and has largely adhered to a 17-month ceasefire agreed to in February 2005 with Israel -- despite the fact that large-scale invasions, air strikes, kidnappings, extra-judicial assassinations and occupation by Israeli forces have continued during the entire 17-month period in direct violation of the ceasefire agreement.

Former US president Jimmy Carter places the blame on Israel, for refusing to negotiate with any Palestinian government, let alone the Hamas-led one. Carter said:
One clear reason for the surprising Hamas victory for legislative seats was that the voters were in despair about prospects for peace. With American acquiescence, the Israelis have avoided any substantive peace talks for more than five years, regardless of who had been chosen to represent the Palestinian side as interlocutor.

With all their faults, Hamas leaders have continued to honor a temporary cease-fire, or hudna, during the past 17 months, and their spokesman told me that this 'can be extended for two, 10 or even 50 years if the Israelis will reciprocate.
Although Hamas leaders have refused to recognize the state of Israel while their territory is being occupied, Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh has expressed approval for peace talks between Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert . . . If these negotiations result in an agreement acceptable to Palestinians, then the Hamas position regarding the recognition of Israel would change.

The national unity government currently in formation would likely accept the Arab Peace Initiative
of 2002, which calls for “the Jewish state to return to its pre-1967 borders in return for ‘normal relations’ with Arab nations", an agreement that if accepted would have Hamas “cease all military activities".

The Hamas movement, even prior to being elected into the Palestinian government, had shown its commitment to the peace process by adhering to a ceasefire with Israel, even though Israel decidedly refused to reciprocate.

The Arab Peace Initiative would provide acceptance of Israel by all Arab states, including Hamas,
as long as Israel returns to its pre-1967 borders.

This would require Israel to return land acquired by war in 1967, in adherence with international law, and to remove from this illegally-occupied land both its troops and the 500,000 civilians that have been transferred into colonies on the illegally-occupied land since 1967.

The efforts by the Hamas government to negotiate, even while under a severe military occupation coupled by an economic siege, have been recognized by the European Union and the United Nations who have stated that they will be willing to accept a Palestinian national unity government that "reflects the demands" of the Quartet for Mid-East Peace, made up of the United Nations, European Union, United States, and Russia.

Only the United States and Israel remain steadfast in their absolute refusal to negotiate.

The Palestinian leadership has seen the U.S. pressure tactics, using Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as their mouthpiece, as a form of manipulation and blackmail, and a denial
of the Palestinian people's universally-recognized right to sovereignty and self-determination.

"The U.S. administration does not want the Palestinians to be unified", said Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh last week. "It wants to blackmail the Palestinian people and the Palestinian government."

Read Article
Related Posts -- 06/15/06 -- 07/30/06

Ahmadi-Nejad: On Palestine

, ,

Excerpt from UN Address - 09/21/06
by Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad


The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War.

Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that War, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the War survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world, who had not been even affected by the Second World War; and a government was established in the territory of others with a population collected from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land into a diaspora and homelessness.

This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history.

Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee camps, and many have died still hoping to one day return to their land. Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?

The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to merely speak about them, as they are concerned that shedding light on the facts would undermine the raison d'etre of this regime, as it has.

The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the territory of others.

Regrettably, from its inception, that regime has been a constant source of threat and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the region.

Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.

Worst yet, is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime. Just watch what is happening in the Palestinian land. People are being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?

At the same time, a Government is formed democratically and through the free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of democracy, its Ministers and Members of Parliament are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.

Which council or international organization stands up to protect this brutally besieged Government? And why can't the Security Council take any steps?




The Right of Return

, ,


Palestinian refugees are the largest and longest suffering refugee population. Of the almost 10 million Palestinians in the world today, more than 7 million of them are "living" in refugee camps -- refugee camps.



Signs of the Times
September 14, 2006

The Right To Return, a Basic Right Still Denied

In 1948 the Zionist state of Israel was created. Yes, it was created. But it wasn't a magical or supernatural creation -- it wasn't created from nothing. No, it was created using other people's land -- the land of the Palestinians, upon which their ancestors resided for more than a thousand years -- a land called Palestine.

During the creation of this Zionist state in 1948, approximately three quarters of a million Palestinians were forced to become refugees. They were literally driven from their land -- a land they called home. Many of those who refused to leave were killed. They were killed by a particularly evil people. They were killed by the Jews who promoted Zionism.

This is what happened in 1948, a year that lives in infamy --
a tragic saga for the Palestinian people, a despicable legacy for the Zionist Jews.
- - -
Approximately 32,000 Palestinians became internally displaced in 1948. Today, these refugees number approximately 355,000 persons. Despite the fact that they were issued Israeli citizenship, the
Zionist state continues to deny these refugees their right to return to their homes or villages.

When the West Bank and Gaza Strip were occupied in 1967, about 200,000 Palestinians fled their homes. These 1967 refugees and their descendants today number more than 800,000 persons.

As a result of home demolitions, revocation of residency rights and construction of illegal settlements on stolen Palestinian owned-land, more than 50,000 Palestinians have become displaced in the occupied West Bank. This includes 15,000 persons who have become displaced by the construction of Israel's Annexation/Apartheid Wall.

The Right to Return has a solid legal basis

-- The Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms:

"Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and return to his country."

-- The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination states:

"State parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination on all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, color, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of ... the right to leave any country, including one's own, and to return to one's country."

-- The International Convention on Civil and Political Rights states:

"No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country."

Moreover, the Principle of Self Determination guarantees, inter alia, the right of ownership and domicile in one's own country. The UN adopted this principle in 1947. In 1969 and thereafter,
it was explicitly applied to the Palestinian people, including "the legality of peoples' struggle for
self-determination and liberation".

International law demands that neither occupation nor sovereignty diminish the rights of ownership. When the Ottomans surrendered in 1920, Palestinian ownership of the land was maintained. The land and property of the refugees remains their own and they are entitled to return to it.
In 1948, some people felt a sense of responsibility
for the mass dispossession, ethnic cleansing and the Zionist transfer policy that began in Palestine. UN mediator count Folke Bernadotte, stated:
It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes, while Jewish immigrants flow into Palestine.
The count's indictment against the Zionist state is as valid today as it was in 1948. Today, any Jew, regardless of national origin, can gain automatic citizenship in this state created from stolen land. Palestinians, on the other hand, forced to flee their homes at the point of a gun, continue to be denied their right to return to their own homeland.

By the way, on September 17, 1948 shortly after 5:00 pm, good count Bernadotte was assassinated by Zionist terrorists on a Jerusalem street. Zionist terrorism is as prevalent today as it was in 1948, perhaps more so.

The UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 194 on December 11, 1948. Paragraph 11 states:
refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible.
Resolution 194 has been affirmed by the UN over 130 times since its introduction in 1948 with universal consensus except for -- Israel\United States. This resolution was further clarified by Resolution 3236 which reaffirms "the inalienable right of Palestinians to return to their homes
and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return".
- - -
The inalienable rights of refugees are not negotiable. International law considers agreements between an occupier and the occupied to be null and void if they deprive civilians of recognized human rights including the rights to repatriation and restitution.

Read Article

Gaza Incursion Kills Israeli Officer

, ,

Aljazeera - 09/12/06

Israeli soldier killed in Gaza

Aljazeera says an Israeli soldier has been killed after coming under fire in Kissufim on the border with the Gaza Strip.

The death took place during clashes between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters on Tuesday near the Kissufim crossing with Israel, east of Khan Yunus, in the Gaza Strip.

Witnesses said the fighters had exchanged fire with Israeli soldiers in an area of central Gaza after troops backed by tanks had moved across the border just after dawn.

Afterwards, Aljazeera's correspondent said the channel's Gaza bureau received a joint statement issued by Hamas's Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades and the National Resistance Committees, claiming responsibility for the killing of "an Israeli officer participating in the incursion in southern al-Maghazi and northern Kissufim, south of Gaza Strip".

Two Palestinian fighters belonging to the two factions, ambushed Israeli soldiers in a spot 500 metres away from the border separating Gaza Strip from Israeli territories, the statement said.

Clashes then erupted with Israeli forces, resulting in the death of the officer and injuries to others, the statement added.
Hamas member

Earlier, an Israeli air strike destroyed the two-storey central Gaza home of a senior security official in the interior ministry [of the government], witnesses said. No one was wounded in the operation.

An Israeli army spokesman said the house was hit because it was being used to store weapons.
[ Baba Kamma 113a ? ]

In addition to serving in the interior ministry, the official is a member of Hamas, Palestinian officials said.

Tuesday's clash came one day after Palestinian factions agreed to form a unity government to try to end Western sanctions imposed on the Hamas-led administration for refusing to recognise Israel and renounce violence.

Israel has responded sceptically to the unity government while the Hamas Islamist movement has said it would never recognise Israel.

Israel has frequently hit Palestinian fighters' homes as part of a broader Gaza offensive launched after an Israeli soldier was seized and two others killed in a cross-border raid on June 25.

The Israeli offensive has killed more than 210 Palestinians, about half of them civilians.

Read Article

Apartheid: Alive and Well in Israel

, ,

EI - 07/23/06
by Ali Abunimah

Israel wants us to believe that its wholesale destruction of Lebanon and killing to date of nearly 400 civilians is about the capture of two of its soldiers by Hizbullah.

This focus on the "latest incident" is designed to obscure what truly lies at the heart of this ongoing conflict: Israel's violent takeover of Palestine.

Palestinians, expelled from their country in 1948, had continued their struggle against Israel from Lebanon. In 1982, Israel invaded that country in an attempt to destroy the Palestine Liberation Organisation, killing tens of thousands of civilians. On that occasion, Israel's official pretext was a failed assassination attempt against its London ambassador.

Rather than ending resistance, Israel laid the seeds for what we see today.

The mostly Shia villagers in southern Lebanon who bore the brunt of Israel's 1982 invasion are the core constituency of Hizbullah, founded in 1983 to resist Israel's occupation.

The fighting in Lebanon, and to the south in Gaza, are directly related to Israel's origins, and the regional violence will only spiral until there is a just solution to the Palestine question.
Israel was established in 1948 as an explicitly ''Jewish state'' in a country whose overwhelming majority population at the time was not Jewish and had no desire to live under such a government. Such a project could only generate enormous resistance.

Because of this, Israel has never gained legitimacy among the people who paid the price for its creation.

Lacking such legitimacy, Israel exists only by the constant exercise of brute force - first to expel the majority of Palestinians, to prevent the return of refugees and, after 1967, to settle as many of its Jewish citizens as it could in east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Zionist leaders hoped that the transformation of Palestine from a multicultural, multireligious society into one ruled exclusively by and for Jews would have been completed by now, with the Palestinians merely a distant memory. Instead, Israel created a catastrophe.
Today because of their determination not to be driven from what remains of their land, and due to their higher birth rate, Palestinians are once again becoming the majority population. Their struggle draws support across the Arab world, including from groups like Hizbullah.

For the first time since the 1948 expulsions accompanying Israel's foundation, Jews no longer form the absolute majority in the territory they control.

Israeli and Palestinian official statistics count 5.3 million Jews living in Israel-Palestine and 5.6 million non-Jews (this does not include millions more Palestinian refugees outside the country).

Israeli leaders understand what this means.

Prime minister Ehud Olmert said in 2003: "We are approaching the point where more and more Palestinians will say 'There is no place for two states between the [River] Jordan and the [Mediterranean] sea. All we want is the right to vote'. The day they get it, we [Israeli Jews] will lose everything."

Olmert added: "I shudder to think that liberal Jewish organisations that shouldered the burden of struggle against apartheid in South Africa will lead the struggle against us."
The internationally-endorsed solution for the dilemma is a complete Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967 so that Palestinians can establish a state in these areas, which amount to just 22 per cent of their original homeland.

Unfortunately, Israel used the years of the peace process, not to begin to end its occupation, but to entrench it - doubling the number of settlers in the West Bank. While it pulled 8,000 settlers out of Gaza last year, former Israeli prime minister Shimon Peres explained on the BBC in August:' 'We are disengaging from Gaza because of demography."

Israel hoped that, distracted by the pulling out of a few settlers, the world would not notice its continued military control of Gaza, as well as its annexation wall and the massive expansion of Jews-only colonies throughout the West Bank.
Israel's full-scale assault on Lebanon and its round-the-clock bombardment of Gaza have nothing to do with the recent attacks on its army.

The indiscriminate killing of civilians can only be understood as an attempt to put fear back into the Arabs, in a desperate effort to maintain Israel as a Jewish-dominated garrison state surrounded by concrete walls.

But groups like Hizbullah and Hamas, which emerged as a direct response to the brutality of decades of Israeli occupation, and an absence of principled international intervention, represent a generation no longer cowed by Israel's US-supplied missiles and jets.

FW de Klerk, the last president of apartheid-era South Africa, calculated when he took office that the white government could retain power for many years, but only at the cost of inflicting enormous casualties.

Both he and Nelson Mandela concluded that nothing could be gained from further bloodshed and that the time had come to negotiate the peaceful end of apartheid.

Looking back on the apartheid regime's long history of violence, de Klerk wrote in his memoirs: "There is no evidence that the assassination of opponents had the slightest effect on the final outcome of the struggle, other than causing further personal suffering and bitterness."

It is only by ending their claims of superior rights and power that Israeli Jews, like white South Africans, will gain the legitimacy and acceptance from people in Lebanon, Palestine and across the Middle East that cannot be won with violence.


Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada , and author of the forthcoming
book: One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.

Read Article

Zionism: A Despicable Reality

, ,

EI News 06/30/06
by Jonathan Cook
Until the advent of Zionism at the turn of the twentieth century, Jews for whom their Jewishness mattered believed either that their identity was of a strictly religious nature or, if they were secular, that it was a meaningful marker of their ethnicity. In other words, Jews who wanted to identify themselves as Jews were either Jews in that they practised a religion called Judaism or they were Jews in that they believed they belonged to a distinct ethnic group.

But Zionism added a third possible category of Jewish identity. A Jew no longer had to regard the choice simply in terms of either-or: the Jew either as a believer in a Jewish God or as a member of a group that shared a biological inheritance.

Instead a Jew could identify himself as belonging to a “nation”, whose rights derived from but could never be entirely satisfied at either the biological or metaphysical level. For the Zionist (or at least almost all those who identify themselves today as such), Jewishness as a national identity needed also to be realised at the territorial level. At the minimum the Jews required a state where their sovereignty could be exercised.

The new kind of Jewish identity was a strange hybrid from the outset. Zionists believed a Jewish state must exist for the Jews to be able to identify themselves as a nation but at the same time the only criteria by which to judge membership of this state were religious or ethnic, or both. In fusing the religious and ethnic identities, the Jewish nation became greater than the sum of its two parts.

So for a Jew to claim citizenship of the Jewish state -- to become an Israeli -- he needs to prove either that he is a practising Jew or that he has inherited Jewish genes. This is the legal basis, the 1950 Law of Return, for determining who is admitted to the Jewish state.

No one should deny Jews the right to reinvent their identity and strive in so far as it is legal and moral to realise such an identity. Identity, by its nature, is fluid. For each of us it changes over time at the personal, political, social and cultural levels. But at the same time, for the sake of consistency and justice, Jews should not deny others the same rights they claim for themselves.

As far as Israeli Jews are concerned, a Palestinian citizen of Israel who demands that his Palestinian identity be recognised automatically raises doubts about where his loyalties lie, the assumption being that he cannot be at once a Palestinian and loyal to Israel. Of course, no Jew would accept such an attribution of double loyalties in his own case. An American Jew, however Zionist, would denounce as anti-Semitic any suggestion that he is not always a loyal American citizen.

Why are the Zionists so determined to refuse the Palestinians a right they demand for themselves?

Because the territorial homeland to which Palestinians lay claim has been under Israeli dominion for only a few decades. The Palestinians, like many other national groups in the colonial era, may not have had sovereignty in their homeland after centuries of occupation (in their case, by the Ottomans, Britain, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel) but it was nonetheless their homeland. After all, they could not have been occupied had they not been living there for generations.

By contrast, the Jews’ claim to nationhood in Palestine (rather than somewhere else) cannot be derived from either national or ethnic claims. Until the dispossession of the Palestinians began a century ago, the number of Jews living in Palestine had been minuscule for nearly 2,000 years. Their numbers were far higher almost everywhere else: in America, Europe and the rest of the Middle East.

Instead, Zionists seek legitimacy for their claim to Palestine from a religious claim: that the Jews were promised the land by God. This mostly unspoken assumption among Zionists has two problematic consequences.

It raises to the point of irrational dogma the belief that Israelis should never make concessions either on sovereignty or on the territory they now possess. It means that there can be no discussion of a right of return for dispossessed Palestinians, of power sharing, of a binational state, of democratising Israel (changing it from a Jewish state into a state of all its citizens).

It also continues to obstruct the emergence of a separate Palestinian state, and certainly a viable one. Because, according to the Bible, God did not promise Tel Aviv or Haifa, he promised the West Bank cities of Nablus, Hebron, Bethlehem and Jerusalem -- parts of the Holy Land which under international law still belong to the Palestinians.

Given this context, the international debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict applies a terrible double standard. While the West accepts the conflict as one between two rival nationalisms fighting for the same territority, it places the onus on the Palestinians (a dispersed non-people) to recognise Israel (a nation state), to such a degree that the international community is currently starving the Palestinians and their Hamas leadership into submission through sanctions.

But in truth, the conflict endures because Israel and its Zionist supporters refuse to recognise the Palestinians, and because they continue to act in bad faith in peace negotiations. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s convergence plan, like the Oslo process before it, is a way of dressing up an illusory territorial separation that ensures continuing recognition of a Jewish national identity in Israel while denying a meaningful Palestinian national identity in Palestine.


Jonathan Cook, based in Nazareth, is the author of Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish and Democratic State published by Pluto Press. His website is www.jkcook.net

Read Article

Palestinians: Where Is Our Land?

,


Holocaust Should Be Investigated

, , , ...

The Jerusalem Post
June 16, 2006

"I think we have sufficiently talked about this matter and these Holocaust events need to be further investigated by independent and impartial parties," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at a news conference on Friday following a meeting with China's president.
An event that has influenced so many diplomatic and political equations of the world needs to investigated and researched by impartial and independent groups.
Speaking in Shanghai, China, he added that Jews, Christians and Muslims all had the "right to be respected."

Ahmadinejad has come in for sharp criticism in Europe for repeatedly casting doubt on the Holocaust and calling for Israel to be destroyed or shifted to Europe.

On Monday, German Jews and politicians protested Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated denial [casting doubt] of the Holocaust while his country kicked off its World Cup campaign on Sunday, declaring that he would be unwelcome at the tournament.

About 1,200 people [German Jews], according to police estimates, gathered in a downtown Nuremberg square, many waving Israeli flags.

In the end of May, during a Spiegel interview, Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying that he doubted the magazine would write 'the truth' about the Nazi genocide against Europe's Jews.
We want to know whether this crime really happened or not. If so, then those responsible should be punished and not the Palestinians ... If it didn't happen, then the Jews have to go back where they came from.
He also played up the credentials of Western Holocaust deniers such as the British historian David Irving and echoed some of their views.

Read Article

Bloodthirsty Devils Kill Again!

,


Zionist devils' thirst for blood is insatiable. -- More Palestinians killed today in occupied Gaza.
Aljazeera 06/13/06
At least 11 Palestinians, including two children, have been killed in two Israeli air strikes in central Gaza City. Dr Jumaa al-Saqqa, a spokesman for al-Shifa hospital, told Aljazeera that a number of Palestinians were also wounded in the strike in Salah al-Din Street, the main road through the coastal strip.

Hospital officials and witnesses are reported as saying that two school children and two ambulance drivers are among the dead. The number of the dead is expected to rise, as hospital sources say some of the wounded are in critical condition.

The first missile strike hit a car carrying members of al-Quds Brigades, the military wing of Islamic Jihad. The second missile strike came two minutes later, after a crowd had begun to gather around the scene of the attack, witnesses said.

Khalid al-Batsh, an Islamic Jihad spokesman, confirmed that al-Quds Brigades activists were killed in the attack.
The activists were killed defending our nation, religion and Palestine, and continuing our resistance and jihad in the face of the Israeli occupation.

The Israeli aggression will continue as long as the international voice is silent and Arabs feel embarrassed to condemn the Israeli massacres.
The Israeli Occupation Army has [initially] confirmed that it fired the missiles.

On Sunday, an Israeli air strike killed two Hamas members in the northern Gaza Strip and wounded three others.

Attacks escalating

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights based in Gaza City, has expressed its concern at the escalation of Israeli attacks in the occupied territories.

The rights organisation recorded the killing of 14 Palestinians and the injury of 36 others in Israeli attacks in 24 hours, in a report issued on June 11.

Israeli planes resumed causing sonic booms in the sky over the Gaza Strip on June 10. The PCHRC says:
These attacks cause widespread fear among civilians, especially children, and cause material damage to property.

The PCHRC "calls upon the international community to act immediately to stop these crimes, renewing the call to the High Contracting Parties of the Fourth Geneva Convention to fulfill their obligation to protect Palestinian civilians in the occupied Palestinian territories".
Read Article

Israel Demolishes Old Woman's Home

,

Palestine News Agency
June 12, 2006

Israeli bulldozers demolished Monday morning a house in the West Bank (WB) city of Jenin.

Head of Toura al-Gharbia Rural Council, Tareq Qabha told WAFA [Palestine News Agency] that Israeli bulldozers, backed by twelve military vehicles, stormed the village at yhe south west, demolishing the house of Naji Qabha under a pretext of security reasons.

Naji's old mother went in a comma as she was witnessing her house become debris. She was taken to a hospital in the city.

Read Article

Death On The Beach

,

The Times 06/10/06
by Stephen Farrell

Children were among the casualties after an Israeli artillery shell landed on Soudania beach.




Israeli artillery fire killed a Palestinian family who were picnicking on the beach in Gaza yesterday, as the shoreline was packed with people on a Muslim holiday.


Body parts, bloodstained baby carriages and shredded holiday tents were left strewn on the sand near Beit Lahiya, in northern Gaza, after the late afternoon strike that killed ten people, including the parents and children of one family.


As usual, the Israeli military "expressed regret" for the civilian deaths.

The armed wing of the Islamist group Hamas responded by announcing an end to the truce it declared last year.
The earthquake in the Zionist towns will start again and the aggressors will have no choice but to prepare their coffins or their luggage
In harrowing scenes one distraught Palestinian girl was filmed among the bloodstained debris, screaming: “Father, father.”

One man wept as he held the limp body of what appeared to be a girl or young woman, shouting: “Muslims, look at this.”


Palestinian television carried reports showing children with wounds to their heads, necks and torsos as body parts lay scattered around the beach.

Visiting the hospital where the injured were taken from Soudania beach, Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian Prime Minister and senior Hamas leader denounced the incident as a war crime.











Palestinian medical officials said that the dead included three children, aged 1, 2 and 4, two teenagers, aged 15 and 17, and an adult man and woman, all members of the same family.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian President, reacted angrily, calling the killings in-excusable and declaring three days of mourning.
Men, women, children and elderly people are being massacred in front of the world’s eyes. We call upon the world to intervene immediately to stop all these aggressions.
Read Article

A Brutal Occupation

, ,


How much longer should the U.S. underwrite the Israeli occupation of Palestinian Territories?


"Rather than rushing to pass the Anti-Palestinian Terrorism Act of 2006, it is the time for the United States to re-evaluate the relationship with Israel. Israel, a country the size of New Jersey, has been receiving 25% to 30% of U.S. foreign aid for decades. This tiny country has been receiving as much foreign assistance as sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Carribean combined. This funding has made the United States taxpayer the underwriter of the occupation of the Palestinian Territories.

And, this occupation is not just illegal – it is brutal. The killing of civilians, the assassination of political leaders, the destruction of fruit orchards, the plowing of homes, routine mass searches of the population, the separation of Palestinians from water supplies, the separation of farmers from their fields and the division of towns with the security wall – all combine to make this 39 year occupation among the harshest in the world. It is so ugly that hard line pro-Israel forces work hard to prevent the U.S. taxpayer from knowing what they are funding, e.g. the recent closing of a play about the death of Rachel Corrie – a U.S. citizen murdered by Israel while trying to block the destruction of Palestinian homes.

Sadly, this occupation is not only 'starving and humiliating' an entire people it is making Israel weaker and less secure. The Israeli economy was the major political issue in the most recent election with poverty on the rise in Israel. Israel is more politically isolated in the world community, anti-Semitism is on the rise throughout the world and Israelis are less secure. If the occupation was successful there would not be a need to build the so-called 'security wall' that is currently under construction. If Israel were secure it would not be advocating for a dangerous military strike against Iran."

Read Article