For more than two years, all border crossings to the Gaza Strip have been closed by the Israeli army. Since then, the 1.5 million inhabitants live in a state of siege, even more so since June, when the siege was tightened. As reasons for the siege Israel refers to Qassam rocket fire from the area and the alleged intention of the Hamas government to destroy Israel. At the same time, Israeli government officials emphasize that the occupation of the Gaza Strip has ended with the withdrawal of the Israeli settlements and army in September 2005 and that the Gaza Strip would now be considered foreign territory. But facts on the ground speak a different language.
The siege has a disastrous effect on the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip as it violates the human, economic and social rights of the population. More than 200 civilians have died because of the restrictions. In addition, the siege has severely impacted the flow of food, medical supplies and other necessities such as fuel, construction materials and raw materials for various economic sectors. Factories have been forced to close. The unemployment rate is the highest in the world, according to a recent UN report. About 60% of the Gazan households rely on donations, says UNWRA, and urges Israel to reopen the borders. The current bloody rivalries between Hamas and Fatah add to the overall problem.
Recently, the European Commission agreed on a direct aid of $ 6.3 million for the poorest, to be distributed until the end of the year. At the same time, Europe supports the suffocation of the civilian population and the boycott of the democratically elected government, causing damage far beyond $ 6.3 million. To relieve the distress, a few weeks ago, a Palestinian-Scottish couple took a truck from Scotland to deliver one and a half tons of medical supplies to the Gaza Strip. At the current moment, Khalil Al Niss and Linda Willis have been waiting for days on the Egyptian side of the partition wall in Rafah and they have not yet gotten a permission to cross the border. The Egyptians deny this.
So, is Gaza under occupation or not? What does the so-called withdrawal of the Israeli army really mean? To clarify this matter two boats are leaving Cyprus for Gaza on or about August 7. Forty members of the "Free Gaza Movement" are on their way now to meet in Cyprus and prepare the vessels. They are invited to Gaza by The Palestinian Medical Relief Society, The Gaza Community Mental Health Programme, The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, The Palestinian Ministry of Youth and Sport, the local popular committee to break the Gaza siege, and diverse individuals in Gaza. Legally, Israel has nothing to do with this enterprise, because the ships will not enter Israeli waters or ports. They will sail directly from international waters into Gazan waters.
Some expect Israeli forces to stop the vessels in order to make a clear statement that the Gaza population are prisoners without any legal or human rights except the ones granted by Israel, and that Israel can thus newly demonstrate to the world how its legal conceptions rank higher than international and human rights laws. In the morning of July 20, for instance, Israeli war vessels opened fire on Palestinian fishing boats north and west of Gaza City, according to the news agency Maan. The usual justification for such action is the Israeli claim (or "fear", respectively) that arms are possibly smuggled into the area. Even the cease-fire, which Hamas and twelve other groups have been keeping since June 19, does not seem to make any difference to Israel - except for the fact that Israeli incursions are momentarily concentrated on Nablus and the West Bank. Legally, there are no grounds for any of these military measures.
Many international organizations and individuals support the Free Gaza project and acknowledge the importance of the mission, among them Noam Chomsky and Luisa Morgantini, Vice President of the European Parliament. Archbishop emeritus Desmond Tutu wrote: "Peace and security, we discovered in South Africa, do not come through the barrel of a gun ... I support the boat convoy in its attempt." Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire adds: "You carry with you the hopes and wishes of many people around the world." The list of endorsers on www.freegaza.org is updated daily now, as the date gets nearer and the world public turns its attention to the Free Gaza event.
The Free Gaza Movement is a humanitarian and a grass roots democratic project and not affiliated to any political party or agenda. Some public voices have tried to associate it with pro- or anti- group interests which the group vehemently rejects. In an email of one of the participants, Monir Deeb, the spirit of the unforgotten Count Folke Bernadotte is showing: "The Free Gaza group are investing their time, money, and safety to speak out against injustice. They are the same people who stood by the Jewish population of the world in the hard times of Nazi persecution." His Gazan father, says Deeb, actually met the Swedish diplomat and UN mediator Bernadotte during negotiations in the Sinai in 1948.
Post Note : Why do people in my country (A) not know about the dire situation in Gaza and (B) Dont Care !!! What is that all about ????
Tuesday, 29 July 2008
Bomb Eye-ran!
Although this is satire, it is also very sad, because this IS in fact how a lot of people think of Iran, which the Western media hypes constantly.
----------------------
Attempting to disarm Iran's nuclear enrichment program diplomatically has proven futile. Even with the noose tightening around its neck through sanctions, and joint American-Israeli military exercises combined with covert CIA operations being conducted close to its border, Iran still has the sheer audacity to tell America that it will defend itself in the case of an invasion. How dare this 3000-year-old civilization threaten the world's declining 60-year hegemonic superpower? How dare this country stand up for itself after watching America slaughter thousands in neighboring Iraq? It is time to bomb these people into oblivion so the West can once again overthrow its regime and replace it with one that will conform, abide by, and slave to its master. It's time these people got with the times. It is upon America and the rest of the "civilized world" to prevent another 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
The inherently evil Ahmadinejad brought it upon himself by demanding oil compensation in euros. Oil has always been bought and sold in American currency. So what if the dollar is at rock-bottom due to America's colonial misadventures? So what if the Iranians want full compensation for a resource that they own? So what if the Iranians want to circumvent American restrictions on banks that engage in business with Iran? These greedy Iranians have to understand that only America can act in its best interest and everybody else has to act in the best interests of America. As long as Iran exists, so does the potential for another 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
What are these Iranians thinking by enriching uranium? Everyone knows that only the U.S. and Israel can have weapons of mass destruction, because they have the God-given right to do so. Any other state that even attempts to acquire such technology, even for peaceful purposes, is doing so because it wants to destroy western civilization. Sure, Iran is constantly threatened by Israel, shares a border with nuclear Pakistan and is surrounded by two American client regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, but that does not matter. If Iran cooperated, did not nationalize its oil industry in 1953, and did not overthrow a brutal US-installed dictator in 1979, then it would not be where it is today. Iran does not have a right to meddle in its own affairs, only Britain, America, and Israel do. If this magnanimous, righteous, and noble trio does not take matters into their own hands, these evil-doers will unleash another attack like 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
Ahmadinejad stated that he wanted to wipe Israel off the map so the only logical course of action is that the U.S. and Israel destroy Iran first. In reality he may have said he wanted to "wipe Zionism from the page of history," but those devious Iranians just like to mask their threats in colorful language. Iran's constant meddling in Iraq, support of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, and combative rhetoric of self-defense is highly disconcerting. If Iran acquired nuclear weapons, they will invade neighboring states and try to spread their Shiite revolution across the Muslim world and into Europe. Maybe present-day Iran has not invaded a foreign state since the Greco-Persian wars before the birth of Christ, and perhaps the US and Israel have a more profound history of invasion and occupation. However, that is all irrelevant because the U.S. and Israel are believers in democracy and freedom. Those who committed the heinous acts of 9/11 despised democracy and freedom.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
America and Israel can easily target Iran's nuclear reactors that are spread throughout the country. Iran will not see this as an act of aggression because the strikes will be "strategic" and this will minimize any "collateral damage" just like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their threat to target American interests and to further destabilize the Middle East is hogwash. Their threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which 30 per cent of the world's oil passes, is baseless and tantamount to political suicide. If Iran does become that desperate, oil may rise to $500 dollars a barrel and the people may suffer, but it will definitely make the American oligarchy much happier. In the end that is all that matters.
And most important of all, nobody will have the gall to execute another 9/11, because the concept of "blowback" does not really exist.
I say Bomb Eye-ran and let freedom ring.
--------------------------------
Thanks to Aurangzeb Qureshi from Antiwar.com for this piece
----------------------
Attempting to disarm Iran's nuclear enrichment program diplomatically has proven futile. Even with the noose tightening around its neck through sanctions, and joint American-Israeli military exercises combined with covert CIA operations being conducted close to its border, Iran still has the sheer audacity to tell America that it will defend itself in the case of an invasion. How dare this 3000-year-old civilization threaten the world's declining 60-year hegemonic superpower? How dare this country stand up for itself after watching America slaughter thousands in neighboring Iraq? It is time to bomb these people into oblivion so the West can once again overthrow its regime and replace it with one that will conform, abide by, and slave to its master. It's time these people got with the times. It is upon America and the rest of the "civilized world" to prevent another 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
The inherently evil Ahmadinejad brought it upon himself by demanding oil compensation in euros. Oil has always been bought and sold in American currency. So what if the dollar is at rock-bottom due to America's colonial misadventures? So what if the Iranians want full compensation for a resource that they own? So what if the Iranians want to circumvent American restrictions on banks that engage in business with Iran? These greedy Iranians have to understand that only America can act in its best interest and everybody else has to act in the best interests of America. As long as Iran exists, so does the potential for another 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
What are these Iranians thinking by enriching uranium? Everyone knows that only the U.S. and Israel can have weapons of mass destruction, because they have the God-given right to do so. Any other state that even attempts to acquire such technology, even for peaceful purposes, is doing so because it wants to destroy western civilization. Sure, Iran is constantly threatened by Israel, shares a border with nuclear Pakistan and is surrounded by two American client regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, but that does not matter. If Iran cooperated, did not nationalize its oil industry in 1953, and did not overthrow a brutal US-installed dictator in 1979, then it would not be where it is today. Iran does not have a right to meddle in its own affairs, only Britain, America, and Israel do. If this magnanimous, righteous, and noble trio does not take matters into their own hands, these evil-doers will unleash another attack like 9/11.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
Ahmadinejad stated that he wanted to wipe Israel off the map so the only logical course of action is that the U.S. and Israel destroy Iran first. In reality he may have said he wanted to "wipe Zionism from the page of history," but those devious Iranians just like to mask their threats in colorful language. Iran's constant meddling in Iraq, support of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, and combative rhetoric of self-defense is highly disconcerting. If Iran acquired nuclear weapons, they will invade neighboring states and try to spread their Shiite revolution across the Muslim world and into Europe. Maybe present-day Iran has not invaded a foreign state since the Greco-Persian wars before the birth of Christ, and perhaps the US and Israel have a more profound history of invasion and occupation. However, that is all irrelevant because the U.S. and Israel are believers in democracy and freedom. Those who committed the heinous acts of 9/11 despised democracy and freedom.
I say Bomb Eye-ran!
America and Israel can easily target Iran's nuclear reactors that are spread throughout the country. Iran will not see this as an act of aggression because the strikes will be "strategic" and this will minimize any "collateral damage" just like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their threat to target American interests and to further destabilize the Middle East is hogwash. Their threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which 30 per cent of the world's oil passes, is baseless and tantamount to political suicide. If Iran does become that desperate, oil may rise to $500 dollars a barrel and the people may suffer, but it will definitely make the American oligarchy much happier. In the end that is all that matters.
And most important of all, nobody will have the gall to execute another 9/11, because the concept of "blowback" does not really exist.
I say Bomb Eye-ran and let freedom ring.
--------------------------------
Thanks to Aurangzeb Qureshi from Antiwar.com for this piece
Monday, 14 July 2008
War Crimes and the President of Sudan
The question is who should be charged for Crimes against humanity. Personally i think Sudan should suggest that their president should only be tried after worse war criminals have been charged and sentenced. As this would never happen, it is safe to suggest such a thing.
This has been nicely summerised by a comment on the Gulf News website today. (see below).
The Arab League is being called to rescue one of its leaders, President of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir. Reports say he is being considered by the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a suspect in the ongoing conflict and massacres in Darfur. Al Bashir, being the president, holds a moral responsibility for the bloody conflict in the unfortunate region. He, nevertheless, tried to resolve the crisis long before the West got hold of the issue and made it an election banner in more than one country. But the real question is, why is he being singled out? There are many presidents and international figures, amongst us, who could also be tried for crimes against humanity.
Yes, we are thinking of Ariel Sharon (AKA: the Butcher of Lebanon) who should have been prosecuted years before Slobodan Milosevic was arrested, and George W. Bush, whose catastrophic foreign policies have resulted directly in the killings of thousands of innocent people in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Lest we forget, neither Israel nor the US even recognise the ICC's authority to try their citizens. Also, any of the major powers has the right to veto the prosecution of its own citizens. So depending on which country we're talking about, the concept of "justice" will vary.
International organisations were right when they sounded the alarm over what was taking place in Darfur. It was a real war, in which thousands of innocent women, men and children paid the price. But it was a war between two groups and it could have been addressed long time ago. But going after the Sudanese president and humiliating him will only complicate the conflict and undermine any progress made on Darfur in the past few months.
This is nothing more than an attempt to put together a political show trial and perhaps justify future "international action" in Sudan. Unfortunately with the ICC, which pursues cases selectively, it was seldom about justice or humanitarian considerations and more so about political motivations.
This has been nicely summerised by a comment on the Gulf News website today. (see below).
The Arab League is being called to rescue one of its leaders, President of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir. Reports say he is being considered by the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a suspect in the ongoing conflict and massacres in Darfur. Al Bashir, being the president, holds a moral responsibility for the bloody conflict in the unfortunate region. He, nevertheless, tried to resolve the crisis long before the West got hold of the issue and made it an election banner in more than one country. But the real question is, why is he being singled out? There are many presidents and international figures, amongst us, who could also be tried for crimes against humanity.
Yes, we are thinking of Ariel Sharon (AKA: the Butcher of Lebanon) who should have been prosecuted years before Slobodan Milosevic was arrested, and George W. Bush, whose catastrophic foreign policies have resulted directly in the killings of thousands of innocent people in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Lest we forget, neither Israel nor the US even recognise the ICC's authority to try their citizens. Also, any of the major powers has the right to veto the prosecution of its own citizens. So depending on which country we're talking about, the concept of "justice" will vary.
International organisations were right when they sounded the alarm over what was taking place in Darfur. It was a real war, in which thousands of innocent women, men and children paid the price. But it was a war between two groups and it could have been addressed long time ago. But going after the Sudanese president and humiliating him will only complicate the conflict and undermine any progress made on Darfur in the past few months.
This is nothing more than an attempt to put together a political show trial and perhaps justify future "international action" in Sudan. Unfortunately with the ICC, which pursues cases selectively, it was seldom about justice or humanitarian considerations and more so about political motivations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)