Maine Owl

"Shministim means 'twelfth-graders' in Hebrew. Military service is mandatory after high school for young Jewish Israelis. The Shministim are Israeli youth who refuse to serve in the army because it enforces Israel's 40-year occupation of the Palestinians."


Grit TV segment from Oct. 2:

Sometimes revolution ignites when individuals ask themselves one simple question: "Why?" These two Israeli teens, Maya Wind and Netta Mishly, asked themselves "Why terrorism?" "Why hostility?" "Why crisis?". When they discovered the answers, they decided not to perform their mandatory military service. These adloescents are known as the Shministim and are currently on a U.S. tour with the group Jewish Voices for Peace and CodePink and here today, sharing with us why they chose the bold path of defiance through nonviolent activism for justice and peace in Israel and Palestine. For more info, go to: whywerefuse.org.

This is an amazing segment, a great contribution. My appreciation for these young people is enormous. The coercion used to compel compliance in ostensibly democratic yet aggressively militarized states of Israel and the U.S. requires much more exploration.

So glad to hear NPR Talk of the Nation's Neal Conan have on yesterday WaPo resident numbnut Jackson Diehl (whose job it is to make sure all Post opeds are as supercilious as possible with respect to critique of US and Israeli policy) to tell us about Israel's Gaza Vindication.

The upshot--The Israelis can burn as many people as they want with white phosphorus because they can get away with it:

Mr. DIEHL: That's right. But from the Israeli point of view, that condemnation [ref to Goldstone Report] has really been not a major setback. They're used to being condemned by the United Nations. The United Nations Human Rights Council, which was what appointed this commission, has spent most of its time condemning Israel over the last two or three years. And the fact is that these reports and condemnations end up having very little impact because the commission itself has been discredited. The Bush - the Obama administration already has dismissed this Goldstone report.

A new article is out and Hersh has been making the rounds:

Seymour Hersh (Democracy Now 3/31): Cheney was deeply involved with the Israelis in the planning for Gaza, resupplying them with weapons and also providing intelligence through our—the offices we have in Egypt, our intelligence offices there. So we were deeply involved in helping the Israelis do the attack on Gaza, with intelligence, etc., and weaponry.

Goddamn, Cheney is a jackass. No foolin'.

Patrick Cockburn:

Israeli society was always introverted but these days it reminds me more than ever of the Unionists in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s or the Lebanese Christians in the 1970s. Like Israel, both were communities with a highly developed siege mentality which led them always to see themselves as victims even when they were killing other people. There were no regrets or even knowledge of what they inflicted on others and therefore any retaliation by the other side appeared as unprovoked aggression inspired by unreasoning hate.

This mentality seizes U.S. politics and media as well.

I wrote a letter to Representative Michaud about the Gaza atrocities. His reply is below. Everybody should know that I very much like and support Mike Michaud. I will probably see him and speak with him personally at several events during the course of the year.

The one thing I'll ask him about his response is the incongruity. If this is a war with actual sides and the loss of life is unacceptable, why is it that what Israel does falls within its "right to defend its citizens" while it "minimizes" civilian casualties while Hamas simply is "targeting civilians"? Seems like what Israel did represents a whole lot of failure to "minimize." Will Mike demand from Israel an accounting for this?

Here's the letter:

Dear Mike,

I just want to register my strong disagreement with your January 9 vote to support "H. Res. 34 to recognize Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, to reaffirm the United States' strong support for Israel, and to support the Israeli-Palestinian peace process."

The text of the resolution contains many one-sidedly pro-Israel statements. Your approach should be much more even-handed.

What I wish you would do is re-evaluate your support for arming Israel in light of the Crimes Against Humanity it committed in Gaza. Just today on Democracy Now!, for example, we heard a direct account from a Palestinian US College Grad who lost "two Brothers in Israeli shooting" while the "father watched son bleed to death after Israeli troops blocked ambulances."

This story is so horrific in it's cruelty that I can hardly contain my sorrow and anger while writing about it. You should be able to recognize the war crime in denial of medical care for non-combatants.

That is just one example. The list of war crimes committed by Israel during its "self-defense" is voluminous: use of U.S.-made weapons to level civilian neighborhoods, dropping of phosphorus bombs into hospitals and U.N. aid depots, and on and on. The numbers of dead are staggering.

Will you please re-evaluate your support for limitless provision of Israel with weapons and unflinching approval of its horrific attack in light of these crimes? The process of stopping diplomatically the threats faced by Israelis and Palestinians alike can begin with a mere word of disapproval from the United States.

Thank you.
Eric

Mike's reply:

Survivors say medical attention was denied for hours or days

Does the similarity in these stories "refute" Israeli denial?

Israel accused of executing parents in front of children in Gaza
Israel has refuted allegations of war atrocities in Gaza after Palestinian children described how their parents had been "executed" by Israeli troops.
By Murray Wardrop - Last Updated: 9:50PM GMT 21 Jan 2009

One nine-year-old boy said his father had been shot dead in front of him despite surrendering to Israeli soldiers with his hands in the air.

Another youngster described witnessing the deaths of his mother, three brothers and uncle after the house they were in was shelled.

He said his mother and one of his siblings had been killed instantly, while the others bled to death over a period of days.

Palestinian US College Grad Loses 2 Brothers in Israeli Shooting; Father Watched Son Bleed to Death After Israeli Troops Blocked Ambulances
Democracy Now! - January 22, 2009

AMY GOODMAN: Amer, Ibrahim—tell us what was happening with him through the day, your eighteen-year-old brother, who your father was with. Where was he shot?

AMER SHURRAB: He was shot in his leg just under the knee. And while he was getting out of the car, upon the orders of the soldiers, he got shot, and he screamed, “I have been injured!” And he tried to call the ambulance, but the soldiers ordered him to drop the phone, or they would shoot him.

But they would allow my father to use a cell phone. My father tried to call the emergency number several times. And Ibrahim would tell him, every five minutes, “I’m hurt. I’m injured. I’m in pain. Call an ambulance.” And he was bleeding all the time. And after sunset, he started shivering and trembling, telling my dad he was cold.

And after my dad found out that Kassab was dead, Ibrahim asked my dad, “Were you pleased with him, Daddy?” And he said, “Yes, I’m pleased with him.” And then Ibrahim, around 9:00, Ibrahim told my dad he was still shivering from cold, and he told my dad, “I’m so cold.” So my dad told him, “OK, stand up, and I will help you to get in the car. Maybe it will be warmer there.”

So, as they stood up, the soldier said, “Don’t move, or we will shoot you.”

What followed was horrific in its cruelty. The injured man was forced to remain with his father in the car, bleeding without medical care until he died twenty hours later.

Why is it so hard for American politicians to stand up against this kind of inhuman behavior? There hardly has been a peep from the U.S. Congress, President Obama, or the U.S. media. I just have to think that if Israel did not feel it had such impunity conferred to it from its American benefactors, these crimes could not happen.

Israel throughout its pummeling of Gaza claimed it was not targeting civilians, in fact caring for them.

False.

I think what obviously is true instead is THIS:

Israel wanted a humanitarian crisis
Targeting civilians was a deliberate part of this bid to humiliate Hamas and the Palestinians, and pulverise Gaza into chaos
Ben White (Guardian - UK - Tuesday 20 January 2009)

The scale of Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip, and the almost daily reports of war crimes over the last three weeks, has drawn criticism from even longstanding friends and sympathisers. Despite the Israeli government's long-planned and comprehensive PR campaign, hundreds of dead children is a hard sell. As a former Israeli government press adviser put it, in a wonderful bit of unintentional irony, "When you have a Palestinian kid facing an Israeli tank, how do you explain that the tank is actually David and the kid is Goliath?" ...

... Estimates for the proportion of civilian deaths among the 1,360 Palestinians killed range from more than half to two-thirds. Politicians, diplomats and journalists are by and large shying away from the obvious, namely that Israel has been deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians and the very infrastructure of normal life, in order to – in the best colonial style – teach the natives a lesson.

It's probably too much to ask the U.S. Congress, President Obama, or the U.S. media to consider these obvious facts about the slaughter we just saw.

Potential war crimes: Hospitals bombed, 1000 dead, white phosphorus chemical incendiary agent used

These are real reports from on the ground in Gaza: see HERE and HERE.

DR. MOUSSA EL-HADDAD (Democracy Now! 1-15-09): I could see cluster bombs being fired this morning, and the phosphorus bombs now are used freely on the civilians.

CHRISTOPHER GUNNESS (Democracy Now! 1-15-09): Well, this morning, there were three rounds of white phosphorus which landed in our compound in Gaza. That set ablaze the main warehouse and the big workshop we have there for vehicles. At the time, there were 700, also, people displaced from the fighting. There were full fuel tankers there. The Israeli army have been given all the coordinates of all our facilities, including this one. They also knew that there were fuel tankers laden with fuel in the compound, and they would have known that there were hundreds of people who had taken refuge.

JENNY LINNEL (KPFA Flashpoints 1-15-09): [In a neighborhood of Rafa] We've had air missile strikes every single day, .... Many homes were destroyed ... literally thousands of homes were flattened. ... [Near Han Yunes] There was an attack with some very unusual weaponry, the white phosphor. ... Can you imagine this civilian neighborhood being attacked, not just with missiles, but with white phosphor missiles that burn anything that comes in contact. ...

DR. MOUSSA EL-HADDAD (Democracy Now! 1-15-09): But let me just add a comment to what Mr. Ehud Olmert said, that he apologized, that it was a mistake. If that was one mistake—and I tell you right now on the air—that they have committed hundreds of mistakes during the last three weeks. You know, what about all these apartment buildings that only civilians occupy? Children and families are trapped in elevators and under the stairs. Children and women bleeding in the streets, and the Israeli Army tanks are not allowing Red Cross or humanitarian aid to go and help them. The ambulances are not allowed to go in. They bleed for hours. And we can hear them on the radio asking for help and somebody to come and help them and take them. Dead bodies are in the streets down in our area in the southwest of Gaza. It’s—I’ll tell you, this is a disaster on humans. This is a human disaster in the twenty-first century. And everybody is looking.

Don't look for these reports on the Nightly News or expect most Congress people to be aware of them. Mike Michaud, Chellie Pingree--Is this what you meant by "Israel's right to defend itself" when you voted for H. Res. 34?

Both Maine U.S. House members, Mike Michaud and Chellie Pingree, vote yea on one-sided, pro-Israel H. Res. 34

On Friday January 9, the U.S. House of Representatives "agreed to suspend the rules" and passed the following measure:

H. Res. 34 to recognize Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, to reaffirm the United States' strong support for Israel, and to support the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

The vote of 390 yeas to 5 nays with 22 voting ``present,'' Roll No. 10, included both Chellie Pingree and Mike Michaud in the yeas.

Read the full text of H. Res. 34 by going HERE and retrieving H95 for 2009.

The U.S. Senate then passed the Resolution on a voice vote.

Is it really so clear as it is to the U.S. Congress and our representatives that what Israel is doing fully is justified by proper notions of self-defense?

Not in my opinion. H. Res. 34 is loaded with misconceptions bound into nakedly pro-Israel talking points. I have included below a commentary about today's quite excellent Democracy Now! among other things. A version of this commentary is cross-posted at Turn Maine Blue.

This letter was published in The Times of London on January 11, 2009. It is reproduced here and its sentiments are endorsed by Maine Owl. h/t Informed Comment

Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is not self-defence – it’s a war crime

ISRAEL has sought to justify its military attacks on Gaza by stating that it amounts to an act of “self-defence” as recognised by Article 51, United Nations Charter. We categorically reject this contention.

The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence. Under international law self-defence is an act of last resort and is subject to the customary rules of proportionality and necessity.

The killing of almost 800 Palestinians, mostly civilians, and more than 3,000 injuries, accompanied by the destruction of schools, mosques, houses, UN compounds and government buildings, which Israel has a responsibility to protect under the Fourth Geneva Convention, is not commensurate to the deaths caused by Hamas rocket fire.

For 18 months Israel had imposed an unlawful blockade on the coastal strip that brought Gazan society to the brink of collapse. In the three years after Israel’s redeployment from Gaza, 11 Israelis were killed by rocket fire. And yet in 2005-8, according to the UN, the Israeli army killed about 1,250 Palestinians in Gaza, including 222 children. Throughout this time the Gaza Strip remained occupied territory under international law because Israel maintained effective control over it.

Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence, not least because its assault on Gaza was unnecessary. Israel could have agreed to renew the truce with Hamas. Instead it killed 225 Palestinians on the first day of its attack. As things stand, its invasion and bombardment of Gaza amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5m inhabitants contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. In addition, the blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel, are prima facie war crimes.

We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes. Israel has a right to take reasonable and proportionate means to protect its civilian population from such attacks. However, the manner and scale of its operations in Gaza amount to an act of aggression and is contrary to international law, notwithstanding the rocket attacks by Hamas.

[see below for signatories]

They could learn from Flashpoints

Update to previous item: On the day (two days ago) when Israel blew up a UN school and killed dozens of innocent people, I suppose NPR deserves a bit of credit for running this 4-1/2-minute interview with one of their own stringers:

Gaza Resident Describes Situation

Mr. AHMED ABU HAMDA (Palestinian News Producer): The people now - because now they have been under attack for a long time, they're out of food, out of supplies. Plus, I saw, for the last two, three days - and I am myself one of them - a lot of people evacuating from their houses, going other relative's houses, especially the people who are living on the hot spots or hot lines where there are clashes and so on. So, everyone is really panicking from that and trying to stay in a safe place. ...

Mr. HAMDA: I'll tell you something, my dear. Now in my flat, I'm not safe, OK? If I go out, I'm not safe. I will choose the less threat. For example, I had to go to the Shifa Hospital while I knew it might be risky. But why I went there? I am a Palestinian citizen who live in Gaza Strip. In such a crisis, I need money to bring food for my family. I have to risk my life to provide this food for my wife, for my family. This is how we are living here.

NPR anchor Melissa Block mainly was interested in poking and prodding about the Israeli propaganda line, "Hamas uses the population within Gaza basically as human shields" and "You did not see Hamas militants. How do you know when a young man is or is not a Hamas militant?"

Here's what I think. The Palestinians elected Hamas in a free and fair election three years ago. Yes, I suppose they are the Palestinian equivalent of the War Party. They were elected for reasons not unlike those for which electorates both in Israel and in the United States choose our own War Parties (basically all Parties in both countries). That is, we're bathed in false notions that violence will be some sort of solution to our problems.

Listening to NPR (especially the hourly news updates), what we hear mostly is a picture of some sort of symmetric war where evil Hamas fighters are surgically targeted by Israeli heroes. When a report leaks through like the one above, the NPR hosts have to make damn sure the piece does not stray too far from the normal drumbeat.

Would it be so hard for them to devote a significant percentage of their coverage speaking with besieged people actually on the ground in the Gaza shooting gallery? No. KPFA's Flashpoints does it every day. The last couple shows reveal truly grisly crimes (phosphorus attacks) and reporters like Sameh Habeeb noticeably more shaken and fearful for his family. Mr. Habeeb received ten seconds on CBS a couple of days ago. He gets ten to twelve minutes per day on Flashpoints.

Predictably, awful.

See also, HERE.

The low point may have been Sunday when George Stephanopoulos on ABC's This Week allowed without challenge Israeli President Shimon Peres to make outrageous statements suggesting all is fine for Gaza's population:

PERES: ... there is no shortage of basic needs in Gaza. We take care that medical equipment and food and fuel will arrive to Gaza, even today.

Cracks in this storyline appeared Monday when Katie Couric's show took a remarkable departure in an excellent report from Gaza on the CBS Evening News by correspondent Richard Roth:


"There aren't enough ambulances to carry the casualties, who arrive in cars - and taxis, too. The beds are all busy at Al-Shifa Hospital; the courtyard's a crowded waiting room; the morgue is full"; "They have no spare parts, they have no monitors. They have not enough blood pressure machines, they don't have enough trolleys. They lack everything. And on top of this you have this huge disaster."

Check out some of the other very good CBS reporting in other stories as well. In particular, "U.S. Shoots Down U.N. Call For Ceasefire,"

The Security Council was scolded by U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D'Escoto, a former Nicaraguan Sandinista, who called the lack of action by the Security Council an illustration of the Security Council's disfunctionality. He called the failure of action a "monstrosity."

"There are some members of the Security Council that are trying to protect their own political interests," d'Escoto said. "This is a real shame … people are dying."

Finally, MSNBC Countdown carried a strong interview with National Security Council analyst Hillary Mann Leverett highly critical of President-elect Obama for remaining silent on the siege. Leverett raised alarming doubts about the orientation and the team coming with State designee Hillary Rodham Clinton in terms not unlike those used in this blog.

Leverett: There's considerable fear [in Arab states] about the advisers she's going to bring with her--people like Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, Ken Pollack. People that I would call neoconservative fellow travelers. People who brought the failed peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians at the end of the Clinton term in 2000, people who cheered and championed the invasion of Iraq under this administration. There's a lot of fear and consternation that the advisers Hillary Clinton is going to bring with her are going to make us long for the Bush days.

Olbermann: Hmmm, goodness. ...

I respect Leverett and her husband, Flynt Leverett, as realist figures at various times in the NSC and State Department for strong stands opposed to use of force in Iran, favoring instead diplomatic engagement. Good job, Ms. Leverett. It takes quite a lot to knock Olbermann back on his heels like that.

HERE.

This is by Jeremy R. Hammond at The Palestine Chronicle.

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

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

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

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

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

There is a succinct explanation about why these are lies following each point. That last one (#5) is quite interesting as it seems easily to convince credulous Americans of benign Israeli intention. Even moderator Matthew Miller of the "balanced" Left, Right, and Center radio talk show from KCRW in California was taken in (Jan. 2 edition).

Hammond points out that "the people of Gaza have nowhere to flee to. They are trapped within the Gaza Strip. It is by Israeli design that they cannot escape across the border. It is by Israeli design that they have no food, water, or fuel by which to survive."

U.S. Secretary of State doesn't want a ceasefire she (Israel) doesn't like


Would just saying "stop the killing" make her head explode?

Here is what U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said today in Washington:

Secretary Rice: We are working towards a ceasefire that would not allow a re-establishment of the status quo ante where Hamas can continue to launch rockets out of Gaza. It is obvious that that ceasefire should take place as soon as possible, but we need a cease-fire that is durable and sustainable.

In other words, the attack won't stop and civilians will continue to be slaughtered until Israel gets what it wants from the bombardment.

Of course coy rejection of ceasefire prior to Israeli attack objectives being met is not new for Secretary Rice. She made similar statements regarding the serious Israeli bombing of Gaza last winter, and of course we must not forget her "birth pangs" remarks during Israeli's summer 2006 bombardment of Lebanon.