في أرض الله تسرق الهوية
وفي نفس الارض تكبل الايدي وتكمم الأفواه
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
حمى
ألم الحمى يعصف برأسي كصوت خلخال راقصة مجنونة
.قال: لديك من الحظ الكثير فلقد رأيت وجه الله
أهذا وجه الله؟
قال: نعم.
ماذا سيقول إن أخبرته أن الله قرر اليوم أن يحتجب عني ما تبقى من العمر
ألم الحمى يعصف برأسي كصوت خلخال راقصة مجنونة
.قال: لديك من الحظ الكثير فلقد رأيت وجه الله
أهذا وجه الله؟
قال: نعم.
ماذا سيقول إن أخبرته أن الله قرر اليوم أن يحتجب عني ما تبقى من العمر
Friday, February 25, 2011
وأخون وطني
ويدق قلبي لذكر المدينة
فأخون وطني
وتأخذني نشوة أخرى فيدق قلبي لمدينة أخرى
وأخون وطني مرتين
اليوم أدخل مدينة
ويجرجر ثوبي ندى في محرابها
بالأمس كان لي فيها عمود
واليوم لي فيها دقات ساعة أو ساعتين
وساعات الى الدقة الأخرى
فأعود وأخون وطني
مرة أخرى
ومرة أخرى
وأخون وطني مرتين
فالقلب لا يدق إلا لمدينتين
Thursday, February 03, 2011
Is Egyptian Red crescent working properly?
Finally some could access Al Tahrir square with aid, though it is not enough, Is there any one capable of reaching out Egyptian Red Crescent Society? Calling them to make sure that the aid WE\ YOU send to help Egyptians injured arrives and is used properly?
A call for any one who lives in Nasr city who can reach the Egyptian Red Crescent Society (Located in Nasr City\ Cairo) or can call to make sure that they are helping out any injured and delivering the aids the world is sending to Egyptians right now.
Everything we do might help the change take Place in Egypt.
In Solidarity
A call for Help: Egyptians are dying, We need Red Cross to step in
A trustworthy friend from Cairo sent me this message "Listen, do your best, send out calls for help, try to draw the Red Cross attention all over the world, any international committee, the government is trying to enforce the curfew, they are trying to bane more protesters from reaching Al Tahrir squarer, Qasr Al Eini hopsital rejects admitting a number of the cases transfered from the field hospital in Tahrir and other locations. Qasr Al Eini Hospital reported that they have received orders from a high ranked official Not to Receive any of the protesters. There is enough doctors to take cases but there's no supplies, drugs or drugs left.
"Talk to your friends, inform everyone, anyone, The more calls you send out the better possibility for Red Cross to step in and help. We can do nothing at the moment, we are banned from reaching the clashes locations, even if we could make it, they strip us from any tool or drug that might help, shops and pharmacies are already emptied"
11:14am, Feb 3, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
More from cairo
I spoke to another friend finally, her mobile network is finally working, she tells me local messages are not working, hard to communicate. She told me what she witnessed and taped in Cairo- Doqqi, Algala street, in front of the Yakht club.
"Friday was horrible, Police were very aggressive and brutal, they attacked ppl, live ammunition and tear gas. Protesters were very brave they attacked back, Police were not ordered to withdraw, but escaped after some of them were beaten, protesters gave them aid, they left everything behind them, officers were the first ones to escape. They fled to the neighboring buildings, some of them came to our building in Doqqi, they knocked on our door and asked to use the phone to call their families and make sure they are ok. We broke the news of the curfew to them. Protesters broke the curfew and remained in the streets, when protesters set fire in one of the police cars, police escaped fearing the explosion, Al Gala bridge was then for people to march not fearing the explosion that might take place. Firemen reached and put out the fire, one of the firemen was suffocating, aided by the protesters who transfered him to the ambulance.
Tear gas were numberless and randomly fired on people, a lot of people in the streets and houses were suffocated, I saw two of them burning two houses, one of the families could put out the fire while the second house was completely burnt.
They accused protesters of stealing and roping, LIERS, I've seen them and taped when they broke into stored, took water, tissues, food and other stuff.
I have it all tapped and recorded."
That was on Friday, the anger and sadness i hear in their voices is incredible.
Updates from Egypt: Cairo, 6th of October city and Alexandria
I have spoken to friends in Cairo, 6th of October city and Alexandria, another one was in Tahrir square in Cairo. They all said the same, PPl are in the street either demonstrating or protecting houses and families, army is at least protecting demonstrators in Tahrir square in Cairo, Last night was the worst since #Jan25, People marched yesterday from Naser city to Ramsees square they were attacked by casualties, suffocated by tear gas, beaten, a lot of shooting from ambiguous places\ ppl. Houses are running out of food, ppl can't withdrew money to buy food and essentials, ATm machines were broken and roped, Banks are closed, It is the end of the month and ppl need money. Some shops dared to open and give ppl food. systematic police and ministry of interior interfere between ppl shooting on protesters, a lot of attacking and looting. national committees formed by the civilians of Egypt are doing great job, protecting ppl, arresting thugs and turning them to Police.
ppl are dividing themselves: with families staying home, go to squares and protests and in committees.
Wael Abbas tells me that what ppl are now aware that this is systematic and it aims to scare people and kill the revolution.
A message from my friend in Alexandria "It is not secure at all, we are in the streets, protecting our families and properties, we have no weapons but knives, sticks and stones. a call to anyone in this country to protect us from thugs and thieves, food and money doesn't matter today but security"
11:30 Jan 30, 2011
Thursday, February 18, 2010
A Magnetic Card
I took a day off from my new work, woke up early, Ra2ed offers me a ride to Beit Eil, super. Fairouz was as usual the voice of morning, i don't remember the song on the way to Beit Eil, it was good as all songs of Fairouz.
It was a warm and sunny day, i had my book and music with me because i know it's gonna be a long day standing in a long line waiting for my turn to be approved.
The line unusually short my number was 10, i stood there for an hour approximately before my turn to have my record checked and announced a harmless citizen. i went through the" regular" security check then sat in the waiting hall, few minutes later the soldier who will check my application called me, i passed him the application, stamped a number on it and let me in to the second stage of security check, the room inside was nice, comfy chairs, warm room, Abdel Haleem hafez singing on the background of the instructions screen.
the nine before me entered a small room one by one according to the number sticked on their application, my turn; i walked in, the room is small, has two cameras one for us to be photographed and the second one for the soldiers behind the glass wall to watch us, one of the soldiers behind the glass receives my application, pull out my record from the data base they have, exchange few words with other soldiers next to him then asking me to put my hand on a small sensors plate right under the photographing camera, "put your hand" remove your hand" five times for each hand. next: i was asked to put my fingers on another plate also under the camera to scan my finger prints, again five times of putting and removing, last step was pausing for the camera.
The soldier asked me to wait outside, i waited for 10 minutes and entered another small room after being called to get in, another photo taken, few seconds later and i walked out with the magnetic card which states that i am not a potential security threat to the great state of Israel! I thought i would be happy walking out with it, but i found myself hiding it from eyes of those who were still waiting outside, and trying to walk out faster than usual, i felt sick when i realized that i compromised my principles and went all the way to get an Israeli security approval, a big black ball was growing inside my belly and makes breathing harder by every step i take holding the magnetic card in my hand.
A phone call
I don't remember exactly where i was heading, but i remember that i was walking in Rukab street, opposite direction to Al-Manara (Lions' Square) heading back home, i crossed the street, usually i don't watch people around me, most the times i am watching people inside me, listening to conversations i make up.
A rifle hanged around a Palestinian militant chest swings loose with its front pointed in my direction, the militant was speaking on the phone, i am pretty sure he didn't notice that civilians where walking around him and and any mistaken move of him would be interpreted as a pullet settling in one of the bodies around him, I visualized this passing by him. I saw the bullet settling in my stomach and him going on with his phone conversation.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Testimonies of Israeli Soldiers
"Breaking the Silence:" Testimonies of Israeli Soldiers
"Breaking the Silence:" Testimonies of Israeli Soldiers - by Stephen Lendman
"Breaking the Silence is an organization of veteran Israeli soldiers that collects anonymous testimonies of soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories during the Second Intifada." They recount experiences that deeply affected them, including abusing Palestinians, looting, destroying property, and other practices "excused as military necessities, or explained as extreme and unique cases."
They believe otherwise in describing "the depth of corruption which is spreading in the Israeli military" to which Israeli society and most Western observers turn a blind eye. "Breaking the Silence" was established to force an uncomfortable reality into the open to "demand accountability regarding Israel's military actions in the Occupied Territories perpetrated by us in our name."
Its new booklet features 54 damning testimonies from 30 Israeli soldiers on their experiences in Operation Cast Lead. They recount what official media and government sources suppressed with comments like:
"You feel like an infantile little kid with a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them."
Another referred to "not much said about the issue of innocent civilians." Anyone and anything were fair game, and laws of war went out the window.
They explained wanton destruction, crops uprooted, human slaughter, women and children killed in cold blood, illegal weapons used, free-fire orders to shoot to kill anywhere at anything that moved, and using civilians as human shields.
Israeli commanders refuted their accounts as groundless, but B'Tselem reported that the military "refused to open serious, impartial investigations," even when provided with detailed information, including victims' names, exact dates, and precise locations of incidents.
On its own, B'Tselem collected testimonies from Gaza residents in which 70 Palestinian civilians were killed, over half of them children. Israeli military sources were unresponsive, except to acknowledge receipt of some information, nothing more or that a serious investigation would be conducted. It never was.
Anonymous Testimonies to Protect Soldiers from Recriminations - First From Earlier Operations
A Nachal unit first sergeant recounted Israeli tanks entering a West Bank village and crushing a car beneath the treads. "Yes, I saw it from the APC we were in. I peeped out. Suddenly we heard a car being crushed....I can't understand why a tank should run over a car when the road's open." It wasn't an isolated incident. It happens often, wanton destruction for its own sake.
He also said that "When we got back from that operation, we had loot so to speak. There were IDs confiscated, uniforms, Kalachnikovs. For army intelligence."
A Nachal elite unit first sergeant said missions were explicitly intended to harass people. Homes were entered, arrests made. "At various points while closing in on a house there are varying open-fire instructions. When the whole house is surrounded, crews placed all around it, the guy who runs out of the house is considered an 'escaper' and must be stopped. If he exits running in a suspect manner (he) must be shot (and) kill(ed). Shot to be stopped: in other words, shoot to kill."
When entering villages, armed Palestinian policemen "at certain points in time....were considered enemy troops (so) we had to shoot to kill if we saw any." Orders were to shoot when in doubt. In describing the atmosphere and command orders, they were "Kill, kill, kill, kill. We want to see bodies."
He explained his anti-terrorism training saying: "Terrorist in sight, that's what it's called, when you run into them. It's some sort of code. It used to be 'hostages.' So you reach the terrorist, you confirm the kill. You don't confirm the kill, you confirm the guy has been 'neutralized,' no chance of his getting back to you because he's been shot in the head. That's confirming he's neutralized."
A 401 Armor unit staff sergeant described the freedom he had to fire a lot - "automatic fire, directed at the whole city, at houses and at doors, was something that everybody did, not just me. I do not know why I did it. I (had) a gun. I did not think. In the army I never thought. I did what I was told to do. And besides, everybody did it. That was the custom - officers and such, everybody knew."
A Battalion 55 Artillery corp first sergeant said when his unit "return(ed) from operations we would throw stun and smoke grenades into the bakeries that opened between 4:00 and 5:00 am because people in the village threw stones....Once I fired over 1500 rounds from a machine gun at the houses in the city." Nobody cared, it was just at Palestinians.
An Armoured Corps first sergeant recounted earlier Gaza and West Bank operations for the "main purpose (of) either demolish(ing) terrorists' houses or places where they manufacture mortars, and other such stuff, or...You would come in and ruin everything you see." At times, "open-fire orders (were to kill) every person you see on the street....kill him....shoot to kill. Don't mind whether he has or has no gun on him."
Operation Cast Lead Testimonies
One soldier said:
"....In training you learn that white phosphorus is not used, and you're taught that it's not humane. You watch films and see what it does to people who are hit, and you say, 'There, we're doing it too.' That's not what I expected to see. Until that moment I had thought that I belonged to the most humane army in the world."
Other testimonies describe white phosphorous used in densely populated neighborhoods, wanton killing and destruction "unrelated to any direct threat to Israeli forces, and permissive rules of engagement that led to the killing of innocents."
More comments reflected the "moral deterioration" of the army and Israeli society, even affecting the rabbinate that blessed mass slaughter and destruction prior to engagements.
Soldier testimonies bear witness to disturbing Israeli values "on a systemic level." Operation Cast Lead's rein of terror was "a direct result of IDF policy, and especially (its) rules of engagement (that sanction) shoot (first) and (don't) ask questions."
Breaking the Silence participants offered their testimonies as "an urgent call to Israeli society and its leaders to sober up and investigate anew the results of our actions....(a disturbing) slide together down the moral slippery slope" that affects them and all Jews globally.
Testimony 1 - Human Shield
People are called "Johnnie. They're Palestinian civilians" in Gaza neighborhoods. In checking out houses, "we send the neighbor in, the 'Johnnie,' and if there are armed men inside, we (use) 'pressure cooker' procedures....to get them out alive....to catch the armed men." When necessary, combat helicopters are called in to fire anti-tank missiles at civilian homes. Then send a "Johnnie" in to check for dead and wounded.
In one home, two were dead and another alive, so supersized Caterpillar D-9 bulldozers start "demolishing the house over him until the neighbor went in" and got him out.
Human shields were also used to check for booby-traps and perform other services. "Sometimes the force would enter while placing rifle barrels on a civilian's shoulder, advancing into the house and using him as a human shield. Commanders said these were the instructions and we had to do it."
Testimony 2 - House Demolitions
Residential buildings at strategic points were taken over by force. Neighborhoods were described with "lots of destroyed houses....ruins....more and more ruins, and even the houses still standing, most of them kept getting shelled...." Other houses were blasted....blown "up in the air" with explosives.
"Operational necessity" sometimes meant a whole neighborhood was destroyed so as "not to jeopardize Israeli soldiers (and with) the day after" in mind, meaning to disrupt Gaza life to the maximum and leave it that way after forces pulled out.
Testimony 3 - Rules of Engagement
Descriptions included "enter(ing) a yard and out of sheer fear the family was waiting in an exposed spot - a father, grandfather, young mother and babies. As we were coming in, the commander was firing a volley, and mistakenly killed an innocent. We got to the house....he goes in with live fire....the family was hiding from the bombings....he happened to kill an elderly guy....it really seems insane....if I look at it from the (other) side, there are people who deserve to go to jail."
Testimony 4 - Rules of Engagement & Home Occupation
Tactics taught are "dry" and "wet" entries. In Gaza, there was "no such thing as a dry entry. All entries were wet," meaning free-firing with missiles, tank shells, machine guns, grenades, everything. On the ground, wet entry orders were to "shoot as we enter a (house or) room (so) no one there could fire at us."
Testimony 5 - Atmosphere
What "bothered me? Many things....all that destruction. All that fire at innocents. This shock of realizing with whom I'm in this together....the hatred, and the joy of killing....I killed a terrorist....blew his head off....There's nothing to hold you back." They're just Arabs.
Testimony 6 - Bombardment
The new 120mm Mortar was used in Gaza with "95 - 100%" accuracy. When it hits, it scatters shrapnel all around. It was used against neighborhoods. Innocents were hit, and "our artillery fire there was insane...."
"Most of the time firing was for softening resistance I think....We simply received orders. If we hit terrorists, then I guess that was the purpose."
Testimony 7 - Rules of Engagement
The commander stressed using "fire power" from the air and on the ground. "You see something and you're not quite sure? You shoot....Fire power was insane. We went in and the booms were just mad. The minute we got to our starting line, we simply began to fire at suspect places....a house, a window....In urban warfare, anyone is your enemy. No innocents." Houses were taken over with soldiers positioned inside "according to plan."
Testimony 8 - Rules of Engagement & Use of White Phosphorous
Some of the younger soldiers "think it's cool to wield such power with no one wanting to rein them in. They (were given) permission to open fire" even at most people who "definitely (are) not terrorists." Free fire used all weapons against "everything (including) houses," whether or not they looked suspect. "I know (that some) crews....even fired white phosphorous. Our battalion mortars (and tanks) were also using phosphorous."
Sometimes an order was given: "Permitted, phosphorous in the air." At times, it was used "because it's fun. Cool. I don't understand what it's used for."
Testimony 9 - Rules of Engagement & House Demolitions
"From the onset....the brigade commander and other officers made it very clear to us that any movement must entail gunfire" with or without being shot at. Alerts were given about a suicide bomber or sniper in the area, but "none of (these) materialized as far as our company was concerned."
"Houses were demolished everywhere." They were fired at "with tremendous power. We didn't see a single house that remained intact....The entire infrastructure, tracks, fields, roads (were) in total ruin." D-9 bulldozers demolished everything "in our designated area. It looked awful, like in those World War II films where nothing remained. A totally destroyed city."
Testimony 10 - Briefings
Formal briefings covered "going off to war (and in war) no consideration of civilians was to be taken. Shoot anyone you see....this pretty much disgusted me. There was a clear feeling, and this was repeated whenever others spoke to us, that no humanitarian consideration played any role in the army at present."
Language used in one briefing was something like: "Don't let morality become an issue. That will come up later. Leave the nightmares and horrors that will come up for later, now just shoot."
Testimony 11 - Use of White Phosphorous & Rules of Engagement
"We walked (with another battalion) and saw all the white phosphorous bombs....we saw glazing on the sand (resulting) from white phosphorous (use), and it was upsetting." Houses were targeted and many around them were destroyed with people inside them.
Testimony 12 - Rules of Engagement
Moving into an area, orders were to "hold the junction, control it." Vehicle movement wasn't allowed and those advancing were fired on. Whole areas were abandoned. In entering houses, strict procedure is followed, including "setting red lines. It means that whoever crosses this line is shot, no questions asked." Orders always were shoot to kill, including women and children.
Testimonies 13 and 14 - Rules of Engagement
Houses were entered with gunfire and taken over. Some civilians were killed. Anyone out at night was called a terrorist even if it was clear he had no weapons.
Testimonies 15 and 16 - Rabbinate Unit
Promoting "Jewish Awareness," rabbis talked with soldiers and gave out materials, the Book of Psalms and some brochures. War got a religious tone against "four enemies:" Hamas, Iran, the Palestinian Authority even though it doesn't control Gaza, and Arab citizens of Israel. Rabbinate briefings said "they (all) undermine us."
Also that Israel was fighting a "war of choice, (a) holy war (with) differing rules." The message "aimed at inspiring the men with courage, cruelty, aggressiveness (and feeling) no pity, God protects you, everything you do is sanctified....Palestinians are the enemy....everyone."
Soldiers were told to be "crusaders," to have a "proper fighting spirit," and show no mercy. Distributed pamphlets said: "Palestinians are like the Philistines of old, newcomers who do not belong in the land, aliens planted on our soil which should clearly return to us."
One man introduced as Rabbi Chen presented his talk in points, also covered in pamphlets. First was "the sanctity of the People of Israel. He put it this way: he said while going in there, we should know there is no accounting for sins in this case." In other words, "whatever we do is fine."
Another point referred to the "sons of light" waging war against the "sons of darkness" to turn the IDF into a messianic force in a battle of good versus evil.
Testimony 17 - House Demolitions & Rules of Engagement
"Pressure cooker" tactics were used. D-9 bulldozers "worked nonstop to raze orchards and take down houses suspected of containing tunnels" or stopping sniper fire. "The feeling is it's all sand dunes, all the streets were destroyed and there were shell pits from the bombings before the ground offensive." After a week, "our officer decided he'd hold a grenade-launching practice....So we went into a house next door, took an inner room, and each person came along and threw a grenade inside. The house was totally devastated."
Testimony 18 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
Before the operation began, the battalion commander "said we were going to exercise insane fire power with artillery and air force....There were no clear red lines. In urban areas it's very much at the commanders' own discretion....we were told to enter every house (using) live fire....a grenade or two, shooting, and only then we enter."
Testimony 19 - Bombardment
It was designed "to gain control of the area....The whole cover thing starts, massive fire, auxiliary fire, and then my company goes it....In the first phase, we open fire in every zone." Every house in a designated area is entered....At the end of the day the platoons are set up in the houses. Each house becomes a small army outpost with positions...." Then other houses are occupied and searched. Families inside were assembled in one room, then told to leave and walk into the city. In some houses, the men were gathered together and shackled.
Testimony 20 - Rules of Engagement
"Our objective was to split the Gaza Strip, fragment it," take total control.
Testimony 21 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
The commander said don't "feel bad about destruction because it is all done for the safety of our own soldiers." If someone is suspect, "we should not give him the benefit of the doubt. Eventually this could be an enemy, even if it's some old woman approaching the house. It could be an old woman carrying an explosive charge."
We had constant reports about suspect women or pairs, stuff like that, but never ran into any.
"There are two phases: there's the primary phase of taking objectives....whatever is suspect is targeted for fire." Youngsters in the ranks "are out for action and most of them have pretty racist views....some of them say (they) don't want wars, but what can (they) do, this is how things are and we'll never have peace with the Arabs." Those with more moderate views are in the minority. For most soldiers, "there are two possibilities: either you're terribly scared or terribly gung-ho. Better gung-ho than frightened, for this way you can do a better job of it."
Testimony 22 - Bombardment
One home "was known as a Hamas activist's house. This automatically gets acted upon...the house was bombed while these guys were inside. A woman came out, holding a child, and escaped southward." Reports were that people inside were unarmed. "But that's not the point. The point is that four men standing outside the house conferring look suspect."
Testimony 23 - Rules of Engagement & Home Searches
"In routine work there are outposts, windows, observation posts and stairs....you go out, take the house, spend (enough time) inside, then go back to the same house or to another one....You're also told to wreck floor tiles to check for tunnels. Television sets, closets (everything). Many explosive charges were found, they also blew up, no one was hurt."
Before going in you shoot....we didn't really need to shoot after the tank had wrecked the house....Physically the houses were ruined." In some, drawings were made on walls, even with lipstick, and "the closets were all trashed. It sounded retarded....you go into a house and turn it all inside out."
Testimony 24 - Briefings & House Demolitions
Initial briefings by commanders never mentioned "the lives of civilians (or) showing consideration to civilians." Here it wasn't mentioned. "Just the brutality, go in there brutally....In case of any doubt, take down houses. You don't need confirmation for anything...."
D-9 operators "cannot show consideration. If he's ordered to demolish a house, he" does it...."houses and agricultural areas as well, orchards and hothouses." At the end of the operation, the commander said "We demolished 900 houses....a really huge number. We demolished a lot."
Testimony 25 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
"The battalion commander said there would be lots and lots of terrorists and we should really watch out but don't worry, everyone will have taken plenty of people down (because) insane fire power (gives us an) advantage over them."
Testimony 26 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
Before going in, "the battalion commander....defined the operation goals: 2000 dead terrorists, not just stopping the missiles launched at (Israeli) communities around the Gaza Strip. He claimed this would bring Hamas down to its knees....No one said 'kill innocents.' " But orders were for the army to kill everyone thought to be suspect.
"The issue of civilians became irrelevant as soon as you'd enter combat - the rules change. You shoot. It's war. In war no questions are asked."
Testimony 27 - House Demolitions
Suspect houses were targeted with white phosphorous shells "to serve as an igniter, simply make it all go up in flames," and in the process destroy weapons and tunnels.
Testimony 28 - Rules of Engagement
Neighborhoods were cleaned out, areas "where infantry had not yet entered." After going in, "terrorists" were identified and killed. "We kept working with snipers, infantry 'straw widows,' where they identify targets for you and you fire shells....You shoot even if (targets not) identified."
Testimony 29 - House Demolitions & Bombardment
In controlled areas, orders were "to raze as much as possible....Such razing is a euphemism for intentional, systematic destruction, enabling total visibility....so no one could hide anything from us" and operational objectives could be accomplished - destroying suspected booby-trapped houses and tunnels. Also leaving behind minimal infrastructure after the operation was concluded.
The destruction in Gaza "was on a totally different scale (than anything) I had previously known....the ground was....constantly shaking. I mean, there were blasts all the time. Explosions were heard all day long, the night was filled with flashes, an intensity we had never experienced before. Several D-9 bulldozers were operating around the clock, constantly busy....What is a suspect spot? It means you decided it was suspect and could take out all your rage at it."
Testimony 30 - House Demolitions & Bombardment
Most "mosques were demolished. (Our) brigade commander (said) we should not hesitate to target mosques. Nothing is immune, nothing and no area. He explicitly mentioned mosques....If you see sand bags, you shoot without the shadow of a doubt....You run into a curve in the road and know there's an angle from which you cannot monitor a certain area, first you shoot, see if anything happens, then you proceed....If you don't know what's in a building, you fire at it. Such were the general instructions...."
Testimony 31 - Rules of Engagement
"We weren't told outright to shoot anything we saw moving but that was the implication. I asked, 'What if I see a girl outside?' She has no business being outside. 'So what do I do?' Check if she's armed - then shoot her." For anyone engaged at short range, it's "understood from (our) briefing that it's better to shoot first and ask questions later."
Testimony 32 - Briefings
"There was less talk of values, more of professionalism, not a moral issue." The atmosphere placed little value on Palestinian lives. Jewish ones were another matter.
Testimony 33 - Rules of Engagement
"We fired rounds at houses in front of us (in) which we didn't see movement....But these were houses that we identified as looking out over us. We fired into windows, before the ceasefire....everyone started shooting. I heard this happened in other areas as well."
Testimony 34 - Rules of Engagement
Even though Israeli forces faced no resistance on entering Gaza, orders were that everyone is suspect. "There is no such thing as suspect arrest procedure. If I detect a (possible threatening) suspect - I shoot (to kill)."
Commander briefings stressed "aggressive action," protecting soldier lives, and having no regard for civilians. They're all suspects.
Testimony 35 - Vandalism
Soldiers "took out notebooks and text books and ripped them. One guy smashed cupboards for kicks, out of boredom....The deputy company commander's staff wrote 'Death to Arabs' on their walls." Lip service only was paid to looting. Don't ask, don't tell was how it was.
Testimony 36 - Rabbinate Unit
They gave pep talks and handed out booklets about "the importance of serving the People of Israel who have been persecuted all these years and (are) now back in (their) homeland and need to fight for it." The usual hot button issues were mentioned - the Holocaust, defending God, and the rights of Israeli Jews. Arab ones don't matter.
Testimony 37 - House Demolitions & Vandalism
Houses were entered with live gunfire, grenades, and other destructive force. Extensive damage was done. Soldiers inside did much more. They had no regard for "even the simplest most basic sanitary stuff like going to the toilet, basic hygiene. I mean you could see they had defecated anywhere and left the stuff lying around." No one cared.
Testimony 38 - Rules of Engagement & House Demolitions
"The amount of destruction was incredible....Not one stone left standing over another. You see plenty of fields, hothouses, orchards, everything devastated. Totally ruined. It's terrible. It's surreal....in my own company there were plenty of people who fired just for the hell of it, at houses, water tanks. They love targeting water tanks." D-9 operators also...."love to demolish, and when the commander sends them off, 'Go take down that house,' they're happy."
Testimony 39 - Vandalism
Doors inside houses were blasted open. Contents were smashed, television and computer screens. Things of value were looted. "The guys would simply break stuff. Some were out to destroy and trash the whole time. They drew a disgusting drawing on the wall. They threw out sofas. They took down (pictures) just to shatter (them)." They did what they wanted. Who'd stop them? The assumption was "everyone is a terrorist (so) it's legitimate to do just anything we please."
Testimony 40 - Bombardment
Targeted houses were bombed, destroying others nearby. Indiscriminate bombing was commonplace.
Testimony 41 - Bombardment
Helicopters and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) were directed against suspect houses. "I'm not certain what is considered suspect and what proper rules of engagement are. We responded to anything that seemed suspect to us." In one area, all houses were fired on. "There was massive fire."
Testimony 42 - Home Demolitions & Use of White Phosphorous
Shells were fired at a house suspected of being booby-trapped. "Then some order arrived to ignite it. The way to do that was to actually fire phosphorous shells from above. (It) ignites the whole house."
Testimony 43 - Rules of Engagement
"One guy said he just couldn't finish this operation without killing someone. So he killed someone...." It was war.
Testimony 44 - Vandalism
Houses were cleared with live fire and people inside taken away. There was no control. Soldiers did what they wanted. At times, they "went crazy." They did "unnecessary damage to property, smashing stuff, looting. Commanders didn't care.
Testimony 45 - House Demolitions & Vandalism
More demolitions. Another neighborhood ruined. "Some of the houses had been demolished because they sheltered armed combatants, other(s) suspected of having tunnels underneath, yet others blocked our line of vision....they were taken down, whole orchards were razed."
Testimony 46 - Vandalism
"In primary searches for weapons, we go in and then suddenly a guy opens a cupboard, sees china and begins to throw it all on the floor (to) show it to the Arabs." Stuff was thrown out windows and walls written on also.
Testimony 47 - House Demolitions
"It was amazing." So many were destroyed that "At first you go in and see lots of houses. A week later, after the razing, you see the horizon further away, almost to the sea. They simply took down all the houses around so the terrorists would have nowhere else to hide." All around you see rubble.
Testimony 48 - Briefings
Briefing stressed "going in there and getting things back in order," that, of course, meant terrorizing Gazans into submission. "An army that does these things, that takes apart houses because there was sporadic shooting nearby, is an unprofessional army."
Testimony 49 - Bombardment
Soldiers were forbidden to go up on rooftops because helicopters, planes, and UAVs fired on persons detected there. "Whoever climbed to the roof was doomed."
Testimony 50 - Rules of Engagement
All Palestinians were suspects, so even ones waving white flags were shot. "The soldiers were made to understand that their lives (mattered), and that there was no way (they'd risk being killed) for the sake of leaving civilians the benefit of the doubt. We were allowed to fire in order to spare our lives." Orders were to shoot at everyone, "even an old woman - take them down."
Testimony 51 - Human Shields
Some soldiers were worried about moral issues like using people as human shields. "Personally I'm unhappy about it....I certainly don't intend to serve in the Occupied Territories any longer....I'm not feeling good....having been there and taken part in (operations making him) very uneasy....You always have another option."
Testimony 52 - House Demolitions
"....most of the destruction that went on....was not necessary....the battalion commander said that as far as we were concerned this was war."
Testimony 53 - Rules of Engagement
...."at a certain time soldiers (use) a machine gun, rifle and grenade launcher (to) take a house....and target it for a blast of deterrent fire. The idea is to sow confusion, keep shifting the direction of warfare."
Testimony 54 - Atmosphere
"Going in, the atmosphere was 'gung-ho' and the whole country was behind us. While inside, all of that disappeared....Listen, coming out of there I did not feel any heroic elation or sacrifice, just that it was sickening and unglamorous and boring and stupid. People suffered....human beings become nothing....It is impossible to conceive of such an extent of suffering as that which we inflicted on Gaza....that is what I take with me in particular, how people can be indifferent to suffering or see it as trivial."
Final Comments
Defense minister Ehud Barak claims Israel has "the most moral army in the world." The above testimonies say otherwise. They show:
-- deep moral degradation;
-- insensitivity to human lives and suffering;
-- clear evidence of indiscriminate slaughter and destruction for its own sake;
-- civilians targeted like combatants;
-- women and children treated no differently than men;
-- the elderly, the very young, it didn't matter;
-- being Palestinian makes them terrorists;
-- rules of engagement were "shoot first and ask questions later" if at all.
For over six decades, Israel defiled international law by committing the most egregious crimes of war and against humanity against Palestinian civilians and neighboring Arab states. The world community hardly blinks.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on Republic Broadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14334
"Breaking the Silence is an organization of veteran Israeli soldiers that collects anonymous testimonies of soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories during the Second Intifada." They recount experiences that deeply affected them, including abusing Palestinians, looting, destroying property, and other practices "excused as military necessities, or explained as extreme and unique cases."
They believe otherwise in describing "the depth of corruption which is spreading in the Israeli military" to which Israeli society and most Western observers turn a blind eye. "Breaking the Silence" was established to force an uncomfortable reality into the open to "demand accountability regarding Israel's military actions in the Occupied Territories perpetrated by us in our name."
Its new booklet features 54 damning testimonies from 30 Israeli soldiers on their experiences in Operation Cast Lead. They recount what official media and government sources suppressed with comments like:
"You feel like an infantile little kid with a magnifying glass looking at ants, burning them."
Another referred to "not much said about the issue of innocent civilians." Anyone and anything were fair game, and laws of war went out the window.
They explained wanton destruction, crops uprooted, human slaughter, women and children killed in cold blood, illegal weapons used, free-fire orders to shoot to kill anywhere at anything that moved, and using civilians as human shields.
Israeli commanders refuted their accounts as groundless, but B'Tselem reported that the military "refused to open serious, impartial investigations," even when provided with detailed information, including victims' names, exact dates, and precise locations of incidents.
On its own, B'Tselem collected testimonies from Gaza residents in which 70 Palestinian civilians were killed, over half of them children. Israeli military sources were unresponsive, except to acknowledge receipt of some information, nothing more or that a serious investigation would be conducted. It never was.
Anonymous Testimonies to Protect Soldiers from Recriminations - First From Earlier Operations
A Nachal unit first sergeant recounted Israeli tanks entering a West Bank village and crushing a car beneath the treads. "Yes, I saw it from the APC we were in. I peeped out. Suddenly we heard a car being crushed....I can't understand why a tank should run over a car when the road's open." It wasn't an isolated incident. It happens often, wanton destruction for its own sake.
He also said that "When we got back from that operation, we had loot so to speak. There were IDs confiscated, uniforms, Kalachnikovs. For army intelligence."
A Nachal elite unit first sergeant said missions were explicitly intended to harass people. Homes were entered, arrests made. "At various points while closing in on a house there are varying open-fire instructions. When the whole house is surrounded, crews placed all around it, the guy who runs out of the house is considered an 'escaper' and must be stopped. If he exits running in a suspect manner (he) must be shot (and) kill(ed). Shot to be stopped: in other words, shoot to kill."
When entering villages, armed Palestinian policemen "at certain points in time....were considered enemy troops (so) we had to shoot to kill if we saw any." Orders were to shoot when in doubt. In describing the atmosphere and command orders, they were "Kill, kill, kill, kill. We want to see bodies."
He explained his anti-terrorism training saying: "Terrorist in sight, that's what it's called, when you run into them. It's some sort of code. It used to be 'hostages.' So you reach the terrorist, you confirm the kill. You don't confirm the kill, you confirm the guy has been 'neutralized,' no chance of his getting back to you because he's been shot in the head. That's confirming he's neutralized."
A 401 Armor unit staff sergeant described the freedom he had to fire a lot - "automatic fire, directed at the whole city, at houses and at doors, was something that everybody did, not just me. I do not know why I did it. I (had) a gun. I did not think. In the army I never thought. I did what I was told to do. And besides, everybody did it. That was the custom - officers and such, everybody knew."
A Battalion 55 Artillery corp first sergeant said when his unit "return(ed) from operations we would throw stun and smoke grenades into the bakeries that opened between 4:00 and 5:00 am because people in the village threw stones....Once I fired over 1500 rounds from a machine gun at the houses in the city." Nobody cared, it was just at Palestinians.
An Armoured Corps first sergeant recounted earlier Gaza and West Bank operations for the "main purpose (of) either demolish(ing) terrorists' houses or places where they manufacture mortars, and other such stuff, or...You would come in and ruin everything you see." At times, "open-fire orders (were to kill) every person you see on the street....kill him....shoot to kill. Don't mind whether he has or has no gun on him."
Operation Cast Lead Testimonies
One soldier said:
"....In training you learn that white phosphorus is not used, and you're taught that it's not humane. You watch films and see what it does to people who are hit, and you say, 'There, we're doing it too.' That's not what I expected to see. Until that moment I had thought that I belonged to the most humane army in the world."
Other testimonies describe white phosphorous used in densely populated neighborhoods, wanton killing and destruction "unrelated to any direct threat to Israeli forces, and permissive rules of engagement that led to the killing of innocents."
More comments reflected the "moral deterioration" of the army and Israeli society, even affecting the rabbinate that blessed mass slaughter and destruction prior to engagements.
Soldier testimonies bear witness to disturbing Israeli values "on a systemic level." Operation Cast Lead's rein of terror was "a direct result of IDF policy, and especially (its) rules of engagement (that sanction) shoot (first) and (don't) ask questions."
Breaking the Silence participants offered their testimonies as "an urgent call to Israeli society and its leaders to sober up and investigate anew the results of our actions....(a disturbing) slide together down the moral slippery slope" that affects them and all Jews globally.
Testimony 1 - Human Shield
People are called "Johnnie. They're Palestinian civilians" in Gaza neighborhoods. In checking out houses, "we send the neighbor in, the 'Johnnie,' and if there are armed men inside, we (use) 'pressure cooker' procedures....to get them out alive....to catch the armed men." When necessary, combat helicopters are called in to fire anti-tank missiles at civilian homes. Then send a "Johnnie" in to check for dead and wounded.
In one home, two were dead and another alive, so supersized Caterpillar D-9 bulldozers start "demolishing the house over him until the neighbor went in" and got him out.
Human shields were also used to check for booby-traps and perform other services. "Sometimes the force would enter while placing rifle barrels on a civilian's shoulder, advancing into the house and using him as a human shield. Commanders said these were the instructions and we had to do it."
Testimony 2 - House Demolitions
Residential buildings at strategic points were taken over by force. Neighborhoods were described with "lots of destroyed houses....ruins....more and more ruins, and even the houses still standing, most of them kept getting shelled...." Other houses were blasted....blown "up in the air" with explosives.
"Operational necessity" sometimes meant a whole neighborhood was destroyed so as "not to jeopardize Israeli soldiers (and with) the day after" in mind, meaning to disrupt Gaza life to the maximum and leave it that way after forces pulled out.
Testimony 3 - Rules of Engagement
Descriptions included "enter(ing) a yard and out of sheer fear the family was waiting in an exposed spot - a father, grandfather, young mother and babies. As we were coming in, the commander was firing a volley, and mistakenly killed an innocent. We got to the house....he goes in with live fire....the family was hiding from the bombings....he happened to kill an elderly guy....it really seems insane....if I look at it from the (other) side, there are people who deserve to go to jail."
Testimony 4 - Rules of Engagement & Home Occupation
Tactics taught are "dry" and "wet" entries. In Gaza, there was "no such thing as a dry entry. All entries were wet," meaning free-firing with missiles, tank shells, machine guns, grenades, everything. On the ground, wet entry orders were to "shoot as we enter a (house or) room (so) no one there could fire at us."
Testimony 5 - Atmosphere
What "bothered me? Many things....all that destruction. All that fire at innocents. This shock of realizing with whom I'm in this together....the hatred, and the joy of killing....I killed a terrorist....blew his head off....There's nothing to hold you back." They're just Arabs.
Testimony 6 - Bombardment
The new 120mm Mortar was used in Gaza with "95 - 100%" accuracy. When it hits, it scatters shrapnel all around. It was used against neighborhoods. Innocents were hit, and "our artillery fire there was insane...."
"Most of the time firing was for softening resistance I think....We simply received orders. If we hit terrorists, then I guess that was the purpose."
Testimony 7 - Rules of Engagement
The commander stressed using "fire power" from the air and on the ground. "You see something and you're not quite sure? You shoot....Fire power was insane. We went in and the booms were just mad. The minute we got to our starting line, we simply began to fire at suspect places....a house, a window....In urban warfare, anyone is your enemy. No innocents." Houses were taken over with soldiers positioned inside "according to plan."
Testimony 8 - Rules of Engagement & Use of White Phosphorous
Some of the younger soldiers "think it's cool to wield such power with no one wanting to rein them in. They (were given) permission to open fire" even at most people who "definitely (are) not terrorists." Free fire used all weapons against "everything (including) houses," whether or not they looked suspect. "I know (that some) crews....even fired white phosphorous. Our battalion mortars (and tanks) were also using phosphorous."
Sometimes an order was given: "Permitted, phosphorous in the air." At times, it was used "because it's fun. Cool. I don't understand what it's used for."
Testimony 9 - Rules of Engagement & House Demolitions
"From the onset....the brigade commander and other officers made it very clear to us that any movement must entail gunfire" with or without being shot at. Alerts were given about a suicide bomber or sniper in the area, but "none of (these) materialized as far as our company was concerned."
"Houses were demolished everywhere." They were fired at "with tremendous power. We didn't see a single house that remained intact....The entire infrastructure, tracks, fields, roads (were) in total ruin." D-9 bulldozers demolished everything "in our designated area. It looked awful, like in those World War II films where nothing remained. A totally destroyed city."
Testimony 10 - Briefings
Formal briefings covered "going off to war (and in war) no consideration of civilians was to be taken. Shoot anyone you see....this pretty much disgusted me. There was a clear feeling, and this was repeated whenever others spoke to us, that no humanitarian consideration played any role in the army at present."
Language used in one briefing was something like: "Don't let morality become an issue. That will come up later. Leave the nightmares and horrors that will come up for later, now just shoot."
Testimony 11 - Use of White Phosphorous & Rules of Engagement
"We walked (with another battalion) and saw all the white phosphorous bombs....we saw glazing on the sand (resulting) from white phosphorous (use), and it was upsetting." Houses were targeted and many around them were destroyed with people inside them.
Testimony 12 - Rules of Engagement
Moving into an area, orders were to "hold the junction, control it." Vehicle movement wasn't allowed and those advancing were fired on. Whole areas were abandoned. In entering houses, strict procedure is followed, including "setting red lines. It means that whoever crosses this line is shot, no questions asked." Orders always were shoot to kill, including women and children.
Testimonies 13 and 14 - Rules of Engagement
Houses were entered with gunfire and taken over. Some civilians were killed. Anyone out at night was called a terrorist even if it was clear he had no weapons.
Testimonies 15 and 16 - Rabbinate Unit
Promoting "Jewish Awareness," rabbis talked with soldiers and gave out materials, the Book of Psalms and some brochures. War got a religious tone against "four enemies:" Hamas, Iran, the Palestinian Authority even though it doesn't control Gaza, and Arab citizens of Israel. Rabbinate briefings said "they (all) undermine us."
Also that Israel was fighting a "war of choice, (a) holy war (with) differing rules." The message "aimed at inspiring the men with courage, cruelty, aggressiveness (and feeling) no pity, God protects you, everything you do is sanctified....Palestinians are the enemy....everyone."
Soldiers were told to be "crusaders," to have a "proper fighting spirit," and show no mercy. Distributed pamphlets said: "Palestinians are like the Philistines of old, newcomers who do not belong in the land, aliens planted on our soil which should clearly return to us."
One man introduced as Rabbi Chen presented his talk in points, also covered in pamphlets. First was "the sanctity of the People of Israel. He put it this way: he said while going in there, we should know there is no accounting for sins in this case." In other words, "whatever we do is fine."
Another point referred to the "sons of light" waging war against the "sons of darkness" to turn the IDF into a messianic force in a battle of good versus evil.
Testimony 17 - House Demolitions & Rules of Engagement
"Pressure cooker" tactics were used. D-9 bulldozers "worked nonstop to raze orchards and take down houses suspected of containing tunnels" or stopping sniper fire. "The feeling is it's all sand dunes, all the streets were destroyed and there were shell pits from the bombings before the ground offensive." After a week, "our officer decided he'd hold a grenade-launching practice....So we went into a house next door, took an inner room, and each person came along and threw a grenade inside. The house was totally devastated."
Testimony 18 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
Before the operation began, the battalion commander "said we were going to exercise insane fire power with artillery and air force....There were no clear red lines. In urban areas it's very much at the commanders' own discretion....we were told to enter every house (using) live fire....a grenade or two, shooting, and only then we enter."
Testimony 19 - Bombardment
It was designed "to gain control of the area....The whole cover thing starts, massive fire, auxiliary fire, and then my company goes it....In the first phase, we open fire in every zone." Every house in a designated area is entered....At the end of the day the platoons are set up in the houses. Each house becomes a small army outpost with positions...." Then other houses are occupied and searched. Families inside were assembled in one room, then told to leave and walk into the city. In some houses, the men were gathered together and shackled.
Testimony 20 - Rules of Engagement
"Our objective was to split the Gaza Strip, fragment it," take total control.
Testimony 21 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
The commander said don't "feel bad about destruction because it is all done for the safety of our own soldiers." If someone is suspect, "we should not give him the benefit of the doubt. Eventually this could be an enemy, even if it's some old woman approaching the house. It could be an old woman carrying an explosive charge."
We had constant reports about suspect women or pairs, stuff like that, but never ran into any.
"There are two phases: there's the primary phase of taking objectives....whatever is suspect is targeted for fire." Youngsters in the ranks "are out for action and most of them have pretty racist views....some of them say (they) don't want wars, but what can (they) do, this is how things are and we'll never have peace with the Arabs." Those with more moderate views are in the minority. For most soldiers, "there are two possibilities: either you're terribly scared or terribly gung-ho. Better gung-ho than frightened, for this way you can do a better job of it."
Testimony 22 - Bombardment
One home "was known as a Hamas activist's house. This automatically gets acted upon...the house was bombed while these guys were inside. A woman came out, holding a child, and escaped southward." Reports were that people inside were unarmed. "But that's not the point. The point is that four men standing outside the house conferring look suspect."
Testimony 23 - Rules of Engagement & Home Searches
"In routine work there are outposts, windows, observation posts and stairs....you go out, take the house, spend (enough time) inside, then go back to the same house or to another one....You're also told to wreck floor tiles to check for tunnels. Television sets, closets (everything). Many explosive charges were found, they also blew up, no one was hurt."
Before going in you shoot....we didn't really need to shoot after the tank had wrecked the house....Physically the houses were ruined." In some, drawings were made on walls, even with lipstick, and "the closets were all trashed. It sounded retarded....you go into a house and turn it all inside out."
Testimony 24 - Briefings & House Demolitions
Initial briefings by commanders never mentioned "the lives of civilians (or) showing consideration to civilians." Here it wasn't mentioned. "Just the brutality, go in there brutally....In case of any doubt, take down houses. You don't need confirmation for anything...."
D-9 operators "cannot show consideration. If he's ordered to demolish a house, he" does it...."houses and agricultural areas as well, orchards and hothouses." At the end of the operation, the commander said "We demolished 900 houses....a really huge number. We demolished a lot."
Testimony 25 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
"The battalion commander said there would be lots and lots of terrorists and we should really watch out but don't worry, everyone will have taken plenty of people down (because) insane fire power (gives us an) advantage over them."
Testimony 26 - Briefings & Rules of Engagement
Before going in, "the battalion commander....defined the operation goals: 2000 dead terrorists, not just stopping the missiles launched at (Israeli) communities around the Gaza Strip. He claimed this would bring Hamas down to its knees....No one said 'kill innocents.' " But orders were for the army to kill everyone thought to be suspect.
"The issue of civilians became irrelevant as soon as you'd enter combat - the rules change. You shoot. It's war. In war no questions are asked."
Testimony 27 - House Demolitions
Suspect houses were targeted with white phosphorous shells "to serve as an igniter, simply make it all go up in flames," and in the process destroy weapons and tunnels.
Testimony 28 - Rules of Engagement
Neighborhoods were cleaned out, areas "where infantry had not yet entered." After going in, "terrorists" were identified and killed. "We kept working with snipers, infantry 'straw widows,' where they identify targets for you and you fire shells....You shoot even if (targets not) identified."
Testimony 29 - House Demolitions & Bombardment
In controlled areas, orders were "to raze as much as possible....Such razing is a euphemism for intentional, systematic destruction, enabling total visibility....so no one could hide anything from us" and operational objectives could be accomplished - destroying suspected booby-trapped houses and tunnels. Also leaving behind minimal infrastructure after the operation was concluded.
The destruction in Gaza "was on a totally different scale (than anything) I had previously known....the ground was....constantly shaking. I mean, there were blasts all the time. Explosions were heard all day long, the night was filled with flashes, an intensity we had never experienced before. Several D-9 bulldozers were operating around the clock, constantly busy....What is a suspect spot? It means you decided it was suspect and could take out all your rage at it."
Testimony 30 - House Demolitions & Bombardment
Most "mosques were demolished. (Our) brigade commander (said) we should not hesitate to target mosques. Nothing is immune, nothing and no area. He explicitly mentioned mosques....If you see sand bags, you shoot without the shadow of a doubt....You run into a curve in the road and know there's an angle from which you cannot monitor a certain area, first you shoot, see if anything happens, then you proceed....If you don't know what's in a building, you fire at it. Such were the general instructions...."
Testimony 31 - Rules of Engagement
"We weren't told outright to shoot anything we saw moving but that was the implication. I asked, 'What if I see a girl outside?' She has no business being outside. 'So what do I do?' Check if she's armed - then shoot her." For anyone engaged at short range, it's "understood from (our) briefing that it's better to shoot first and ask questions later."
Testimony 32 - Briefings
"There was less talk of values, more of professionalism, not a moral issue." The atmosphere placed little value on Palestinian lives. Jewish ones were another matter.
Testimony 33 - Rules of Engagement
"We fired rounds at houses in front of us (in) which we didn't see movement....But these were houses that we identified as looking out over us. We fired into windows, before the ceasefire....everyone started shooting. I heard this happened in other areas as well."
Testimony 34 - Rules of Engagement
Even though Israeli forces faced no resistance on entering Gaza, orders were that everyone is suspect. "There is no such thing as suspect arrest procedure. If I detect a (possible threatening) suspect - I shoot (to kill)."
Commander briefings stressed "aggressive action," protecting soldier lives, and having no regard for civilians. They're all suspects.
Testimony 35 - Vandalism
Soldiers "took out notebooks and text books and ripped them. One guy smashed cupboards for kicks, out of boredom....The deputy company commander's staff wrote 'Death to Arabs' on their walls." Lip service only was paid to looting. Don't ask, don't tell was how it was.
Testimony 36 - Rabbinate Unit
They gave pep talks and handed out booklets about "the importance of serving the People of Israel who have been persecuted all these years and (are) now back in (their) homeland and need to fight for it." The usual hot button issues were mentioned - the Holocaust, defending God, and the rights of Israeli Jews. Arab ones don't matter.
Testimony 37 - House Demolitions & Vandalism
Houses were entered with live gunfire, grenades, and other destructive force. Extensive damage was done. Soldiers inside did much more. They had no regard for "even the simplest most basic sanitary stuff like going to the toilet, basic hygiene. I mean you could see they had defecated anywhere and left the stuff lying around." No one cared.
Testimony 38 - Rules of Engagement & House Demolitions
"The amount of destruction was incredible....Not one stone left standing over another. You see plenty of fields, hothouses, orchards, everything devastated. Totally ruined. It's terrible. It's surreal....in my own company there were plenty of people who fired just for the hell of it, at houses, water tanks. They love targeting water tanks." D-9 operators also...."love to demolish, and when the commander sends them off, 'Go take down that house,' they're happy."
Testimony 39 - Vandalism
Doors inside houses were blasted open. Contents were smashed, television and computer screens. Things of value were looted. "The guys would simply break stuff. Some were out to destroy and trash the whole time. They drew a disgusting drawing on the wall. They threw out sofas. They took down (pictures) just to shatter (them)." They did what they wanted. Who'd stop them? The assumption was "everyone is a terrorist (so) it's legitimate to do just anything we please."
Testimony 40 - Bombardment
Targeted houses were bombed, destroying others nearby. Indiscriminate bombing was commonplace.
Testimony 41 - Bombardment
Helicopters and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) were directed against suspect houses. "I'm not certain what is considered suspect and what proper rules of engagement are. We responded to anything that seemed suspect to us." In one area, all houses were fired on. "There was massive fire."
Testimony 42 - Home Demolitions & Use of White Phosphorous
Shells were fired at a house suspected of being booby-trapped. "Then some order arrived to ignite it. The way to do that was to actually fire phosphorous shells from above. (It) ignites the whole house."
Testimony 43 - Rules of Engagement
"One guy said he just couldn't finish this operation without killing someone. So he killed someone...." It was war.
Testimony 44 - Vandalism
Houses were cleared with live fire and people inside taken away. There was no control. Soldiers did what they wanted. At times, they "went crazy." They did "unnecessary damage to property, smashing stuff, looting. Commanders didn't care.
Testimony 45 - House Demolitions & Vandalism
More demolitions. Another neighborhood ruined. "Some of the houses had been demolished because they sheltered armed combatants, other(s) suspected of having tunnels underneath, yet others blocked our line of vision....they were taken down, whole orchards were razed."
Testimony 46 - Vandalism
"In primary searches for weapons, we go in and then suddenly a guy opens a cupboard, sees china and begins to throw it all on the floor (to) show it to the Arabs." Stuff was thrown out windows and walls written on also.
Testimony 47 - House Demolitions
"It was amazing." So many were destroyed that "At first you go in and see lots of houses. A week later, after the razing, you see the horizon further away, almost to the sea. They simply took down all the houses around so the terrorists would have nowhere else to hide." All around you see rubble.
Testimony 48 - Briefings
Briefing stressed "going in there and getting things back in order," that, of course, meant terrorizing Gazans into submission. "An army that does these things, that takes apart houses because there was sporadic shooting nearby, is an unprofessional army."
Testimony 49 - Bombardment
Soldiers were forbidden to go up on rooftops because helicopters, planes, and UAVs fired on persons detected there. "Whoever climbed to the roof was doomed."
Testimony 50 - Rules of Engagement
All Palestinians were suspects, so even ones waving white flags were shot. "The soldiers were made to understand that their lives (mattered), and that there was no way (they'd risk being killed) for the sake of leaving civilians the benefit of the doubt. We were allowed to fire in order to spare our lives." Orders were to shoot at everyone, "even an old woman - take them down."
Testimony 51 - Human Shields
Some soldiers were worried about moral issues like using people as human shields. "Personally I'm unhappy about it....I certainly don't intend to serve in the Occupied Territories any longer....I'm not feeling good....having been there and taken part in (operations making him) very uneasy....You always have another option."
Testimony 52 - House Demolitions
"....most of the destruction that went on....was not necessary....the battalion commander said that as far as we were concerned this was war."
Testimony 53 - Rules of Engagement
...."at a certain time soldiers (use) a machine gun, rifle and grenade launcher (to) take a house....and target it for a blast of deterrent fire. The idea is to sow confusion, keep shifting the direction of warfare."
Testimony 54 - Atmosphere
"Going in, the atmosphere was 'gung-ho' and the whole country was behind us. While inside, all of that disappeared....Listen, coming out of there I did not feel any heroic elation or sacrifice, just that it was sickening and unglamorous and boring and stupid. People suffered....human beings become nothing....It is impossible to conceive of such an extent of suffering as that which we inflicted on Gaza....that is what I take with me in particular, how people can be indifferent to suffering or see it as trivial."
Final Comments
Defense minister Ehud Barak claims Israel has "the most moral army in the world." The above testimonies say otherwise. They show:
-- deep moral degradation;
-- insensitivity to human lives and suffering;
-- clear evidence of indiscriminate slaughter and destruction for its own sake;
-- civilians targeted like combatants;
-- women and children treated no differently than men;
-- the elderly, the very young, it didn't matter;
-- being Palestinian makes them terrorists;
-- rules of engagement were "shoot first and ask questions later" if at all.
For over six decades, Israel defiled international law by committing the most egregious crimes of war and against humanity against Palestinian civilians and neighboring Arab states. The world community hardly blinks.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on Republic Broadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14334
source: http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Fun
There's always space for fun, i've been looping in this circle of work since May 25, and i would say i am enjoying everything we are doing all teh small details, starting from meeting new ppl to try to stay awake when a mono tone person speaks at least for an hour.
the dancing party we had in Greslahamn and Stockholm was just what we all needed, just let it go
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Endurance... enduring what?
i just likethe word ENDURE, it sounds good, rythmatic and above all describes exactly a lot of the phases i've been through and i am going through!Hardship
taking pain
regard with acceptence.
Enduring
I am in Sweden right now for whatsoever reason and still enduring, the eagre, the change, teh coming, the past.
many phrases, words and terms are being circulated in the program i am participating in:
Should, shouldn't
Must, must not
I hate, I dislike
I love, I like
It should be that way, it shouldn't be that way
you can't say that, could you please say this instead of that
shut the fuck off, don't use fuck in your speech.
I am enduring the shower of instructions which we the participants are putting,, we all come from areas of laws and rules! it could be a vacation from being ruled and ordered!
it seems that we are raised like thiss, fed with it, can't stand without someone orderin\ putting laws and us oposing!
I am enduring, and loving it as much as loving teh word ENDURE
Saturday, May 16, 2009
The Nakba and Envisioning a better future
Life is returning back to the "normal" beat of occupation/colonization after the Pope's visit. The reporters filed stories and the ones allowed to print went through while others were self-censored. Thus few stories appeared about the strangulation of Bethlehem and the colonial theft of our land and natural resources that has been going on for 61 years. But I believe the Internet and personal communications have accelerated a process of change that will inevitably lead to freedom and reversal of colonialism (the main risk now is the Palestinain leadership divisions and pettiness). The best evidence of this shift is that even mainstream media can no longer ignore reality and perhaps more importantly the evidence of desperation among the ruling regimes. The arrest of Amira Hass (an Israeli reporter was arrested by the Israeli regime for going to Gaza and re[porting on real life) and of Israeli peace activists. The attempst to silence by force those who speak out whether in 1948 Palestine, in the West Bank or in Gaza. The scripted Israel lobby conference in Washington that tried in vain to push for stronger pressure on Iran. The kidnapping of 2300 Palestinians by the apartheid forces since the beginning of this year. That desperation among those trying to preserve the status quo is a good sign. I remain optimsitic (see my interview below).
61 years ago today, the state of Israel unilaterally declared its independence after its ground forces have alraedy been engaged in nearly 6 months of ethnic cleansing of the native population. The ethnic cleansing continued after the founding of the state (for a total of 530 villages and towns completely erased). We Palestinains refer to this as the Nakba (the Catasrophe of ethnic cleansing that preceded, accompanied and followed the founding of the Jewish state by force on Palestinian soil). After the last cease fire of 1949, Israel continued demolishing homes and destroying villages and towns. This received a spike after 1967 and the occupation of the remainder of Palestine. We are seeing today more of this process everywhere from the Galilee to Jerusalem to Bethlehem (where the foreign born "foreign minister of Israel" lives on Palestinian land) to the Negev where over 30 "unrecognized" villages are being targeted.
Nakba commemorations in Palestine this year were a bit more subdued because of the political schisms created in Palestinian society (thanks to Oslo accords). But they were traditionally filled with memories of refugees and with hopes and energy and aspiration of refugee children. Even the demonstrations against the wall today carried large keys symbolizing teh right to return (e.g. in Bil'in). Here is a slide whow of 10 minutes to help you put the Nakba in perspective and think about what we need to do collectively:
http://www.palestineremembered.com/GeoPoints/Nakba__Refugees__and_R_O_R__5366/Article_2836.html
Action to Remember the Nakba: Act now to stop home demolitions
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?list=type&type=278
And we must intensify the boycotts, divestments, and sanctions. They are growing. I was happy to see that even Israeli organizations have called for Norwegian divestment from Israeli companies and corporations. In an unprecedented way, a wide array of Israeli civil society and grassroots organizations has sent a letter to the Norwegian Pension Fund, addressed to its Council on Ethics, urging it to support their efforts for a just peace and equality in Israel/Palestine by divesting from all companies involved in the Israeli occupation. These Israeli organizations include feminist organizations and community centers, peace and human rights organizations, organizations concerned with civil rights and equality within the state of Israel and organizations dedicated to ending the occupation of Palestinian territories, to the benefit of all people living in Israel/ Palestine. More here:
http://coalitionofwomen.org/home/english/articles/norway-fund
Envisioning a better future: Activist Mazin Qumsiyeh interviewed
Ida Audeh, The Electronic Intifada, 11 May 2009
Mazin Qumsiyeh
Mazin Qumsiyeh is a tireless activist for Palestinian human rights who returned to his hometown of Beit Sahour in the Israeli-occupied West Bank last year and now teaches at Bethlehem and Birzeit Universities. The author of Sharing the Land of Canaan: Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Struggle (2004), Qumsiyeh is both a human rights activist and a scientist who has a lengthy list of publications on genetics to his credit. The Electronic Intifada contributor Ida Audeh met with him in April and discussed advocating the Palestinian cause in the United States and his impressions about the current direction of the Palestinian struggle.
During the 29 years he lived in the United States, Qumsiyeh earned masters and doctoral degrees; taught at several prestigious universities, including Duke and Yale; co-founded activist organizations (Al-Awda, the Palestinian Right to Return Coalition and the Wheels of Justice Tour -- a traveling tour bus that stops at different communities to educate them about Palestine and Iraq); and was a board member for numerous organizations. Since the mid-1990s, he has maintained email lists that focus on human rights and international law. His weekly postings now reach approximately 50,000 individuals and include reports of events and comments that are informed by a deep understanding of common struggles in other parts of the world. An optimist who advocates "having joyful participation in the sorrows of this world," he includes in every e-mail at least one action that the reader can take to make a difference.
Ida Audeh: How would you describe the evolution of perceptions of the Palestinian question and advocacy efforts over the 29 years in which you lived in the United States?
Mazin Qumsiyeh: When I went to the US in August 1979, my impression was that the Zionist narrative was dominant in the churches, the synagogues, the media, community centers, everywhere. There were only a few heroic voices of opposition -- people like Edward Said, Naseer Aruri and Elaine Hagopian -- who influenced me a lot in those early years. They really envisioned changing perceptions by speaking about human rights and international law and actual facts on the ground. Things have changed significantly over the years as more people became informed and educated. Nonprofit organizations have been set up and people are doing good work, including meeting with their congressional representatives.
IA: There has been undeniable progress, but are we doing what needs to be done?
MQ: The question I would ask is, are we doing enough? Of course not. Are we doing well? I think we are doing fairly well. We are moving in the right direction, I'd say that that's probably more relevant than anything else. It is not easy. We are faced with an enemy that is very well organized, well financed, and well entrenched into the system of Western government, as we saw most recently in the Durban Review Conference in Geneva, where the representatives of the US, Canada, Australia and white European countries walked out of the conference hall when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke. Those are the countries where the work needs to be done. The question for me is what can I do, and where do I fit as an individual. I don't want to change the world, I just want to push in the direction of justice and human rights.
IA: Dealing with Zionist opposition is straightforward in some ways, because one knows what to expect. But liberals argue the "need" to establish good faith by engaging in dialogue with those whose political values in many instances are hostile to our own.
MQ: Within the so-called liberal peace-oriented movement, there are lots of Zionists with a tribalistic form of nationalism that they hide very well. They claim that they are for peace and for justice and a two-state solution, but when you scratch the surface a little bit, you find that they are racist. One simple test to ask is about the right of return for Palestinian refugees. That immediately exposes what they really think.
That's one aspect. The other aspect is best described by Martin Luther King Jr. in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," in which he chides white liberals for always counseling patience. Their kind of liberalism is paternalistic and colonialist. It says, "If you just listen to us, if you denounce terrorism and do this or that, then maybe some time in the future, we will have it in our heart to make pressure to ... achieve some justice for the Palestinians." As Martin Luther King Jr. said, I am getting impatient and don't want to waste too much time with that.
IA: In the US, much of the focus of Palestine advocates is on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (referred to by Palestinians as the 1967 occupation). Should we instead emphasize the nature of Israel itself and the racist laws that Palestinian citizens of Israel are subjected to?
MQ: I argue in Sharing the Land of Canaan that the focus on the 1967 occupation is really the wrong focus, because it goes down that slippery slope of justifying what happened before. We should be talking not about occupation but about colonization, which started much earlier than 1967. There is really no difference between what happened before 1967 and after 1967.
IA: I was reading Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine, and she describes the Israeli economy as being pretty healthy despite the global recession, in large part because of the number of Israeli companies with a "security" focus.
MQ: Israel is now the biggest exporter of conflicts in the world, in my opinion, surpassing even the United States. For example, the Sri Lankan government uses Israeli weapons and expertise against the Tamils, committing massacres even as we speak. And Israel profits financially. The Israeli economy is booming because it is based on the export of weapons and conflict. In addition, the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip nets Israel billions of dollars each year. Approximately 40 to 45 percent of all humanitarian aid into the Occupied Palestinian Territory ends up in Israeli hands. This is documented by a series of publications and research on the economy of the occupation by Israeli researcher Sher Hever of the Alternative Information Center. The occupation is big business.
IA: Since 2003 I've visited Palestinian towns and villages in the path of the wall, and someone once told me that each village has its own personal tragedy. How would you describe Bethlehem's tragedy?
MQ: The West Bank has Israeli-imposed colonial settlement infrastructure like roads, sewage systems and electric grids. This is built on top of an existing Palestine, an existing group of villages and towns in the West Bank that have been receding into the background over the past 42 years of occupation. The wall makes this literal and concrete, physically removing shrinking Palestinian areas from the landscape and making those that remain into ghettoes and prisons. In the case of Bethlehem, each cluster of villages gets turned into a ghetto with one exit and entrance only to this village or cluster of villages. There are more than 30 such cantons now in the West Bank. In the Bethlehem area, for example, the villages of Nahalin Bettir, Wadi Fukin and other places that are close to the green line [the 1949 armistice line marking the boundary between Israel and the West Bank] are isolated and surrounded by settlements. The Bethlehem district, which includes Beit Sahour and Beit Jala, is surrounded by walls and settlements from the north, the west and the south. There is an area to the east, called Ush Ghrab, that the settlers would like to take over. If they succeed, there will be settlements on all four sides. Right now the Bethlehem district has only one entrance and exit going to the north of the West Bank and another going south to Hebron. So if those access points are shut off, people won't be able to move anywhere.
IA: Many argue that the Palestinian Authority (PA) functions as a subcontractor for the Israeli occupation. Do you see any positive role that the PA can play? Should we be taking to the streets and demanding its resignation?
MQ: [The late Palestinian thinker] Edward Said described the Oslo process [of the mid-1990s] as the worst thing that happened to the Palestinians since the beginning of the Nakba. The Oslo process put in place this slippery slope of endless negotiations while Israel creates facts on the ground and legitimizes Israel's racist structure, institutions, mechanisms and racist demands for its own security at the expense of Palestinians' basic human rights. Even Amnesty International attributed the failure of Oslo to the fact that it ignored human rights. In any case, Oslo is finished. It was supposed to last for five years, from 1993 to 1999. It expired 10 years ago. We need to reevaluate what happened.
Whether we really need a PA or not is another issue. I for one would prefer no PA, because you cannot have one under occupation. It's a misnomer. What we have is more like prisoners being allowed to elect their prison representatives in negotiations with the jailers. One accommodating side is like the village leagues [of the 1970s] in some sense. Other prisoners elect tougher reps to the authorities. In my opinion, dismantle the Palestinian Authority and say to the international community, we are done with this process that started in Oslo. What you need to do is implement international law and take responsibility for boycotting, divesting from and sanctioning Israel until it complies with international law and basic human rights. After Israel complies, we can create our own institutions, which can then negotiate with Israel.
IA: After the dispossession of historic Palestine in 1948, many Palestinians were dependent on handouts from UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, and today tens of thousands are dependent on foreign aid through PA salaries. How do we overcome this situation, which puts us at the mercy of foreign donors and their agendas?
MQ: It is inevitable that people will experience pain if they want their freedom. Although tens of thousands of families depend on salaries from the PA, they still remain a minority of the Palestinian population. The majority of the population are not receiving any salaries, and those people should rise up, and even those who do receive salaries will tell you that they are willing to sacrifice if others do.
[As for the matter of us turning against each other to secure the flow of aid,] that's where leadership is important. If we had decent leadership, they could go to Arab and other countries that want to support us and say that we want to establish mechanisms whereby our people are independent of this. I am sure they could have done it. But it requires leadership instead of these spineless negotiations that end up perpetuating a cycle of colonization and impoverishment and dependency, which reinforces the occupation and colonization.
IA: Do you see any role for the Palestinian political factions?
MQ: We don't have much choice. Fateh and Hamas have large popular backing, and we have to work with all existing factions. We need to educate them, we need to encourage them to adopt changes.
IA: Can you comment on the one-state solution versus two-state solution debate?
MQ: People have to understand the implications and ramifications of support for two states and for one state. We should start with the premise that human rights are inalienable, that there is no compromise on human rights. This means that supporting a two-state solution does not entitle you to oppose the right of return. To do so would be an unacceptable selling out of human rights based on political considerations. If you support two states and also support the right of return, then that's fine by me. Studies by Salman Abu Sitta and others show that most of the villages from which Palestinians were expelled are still empty; people could return to them.
On every level, ranging from the environment, to population growth, to natural resources like water, to theology and ideology -- on every issue that you look at, the possibility and the probability and the desirability of the one-state option far surpasses that of the two-state solution. People frequently cite the two-state option as more achievable, when in fact the likelihood of a truly sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza is infinitesimally smaller than the possibility of a one-state solution. When you talk about two states, are you talking about two sovereign states, with equal rights and responsibilities? Or is it a Bantustan called Palestine and a Jewish state that is nuclear, armed to the teeth, and controls natural resources, air space and so on? If it is the latter, which is what most Israelis seem to support, then that is not a viable solution. If it is the former, most Israelis do not support it and will never support it. If I were in their shoes, I am not sure I would support it; I would support one state because it would enhance my security and be better in every way.
IA: Official discourse on the two-state option makes reference to a territorial swap, which means Israel relinquishing the Palestinian-populated Galilee area in exchange for the settlement blocs in the West Bank. What would that entail?
MQ: This is part of the reason why a two-state option cannot be successful. The Palestinian vision of two states consists of sovereign Israeli and Palestinian states. But for Israeli supporters of a two-state option, there would be something called a Jewish state, which is based on Jewish supremacist ideology and a Jewish majority running state affairs and a minority that (if it is allowed to remain) would be subservient and would be discriminated against. The Palestinian state would also be subservient as a state to the Jewish state and would have no control over its borders or its air space or its natural resources. From a Palestinian and human rights perspective, this is not acceptable.
IA: Is Palestinian society sufficiently mobilized to prevent a sellout of our rights from happening?
MQ: History offers no guarantees. Our situation could turn out like that of the Native Americans, where the probability of them reclaiming their ancestral lands is minimal to zero. Or there is Algeria, where fourth- or fifth-generation French settlers had to pack up and go back to Europe after one million Algerians lost their lives in the struggle for freedom and liberation from the French. In South Africa, the whites were integrated into society, and one person, one vote became a one-state solution. ... I prefer the South African model because it opens the possibility for coexistence and a more durable peace. It is not based on total subjugation of the natives or on total removal of the colonial settlers. The South African model is not ideal, there is still economic apartheid, but at least it eliminated political apartheid and it opens the possibility for a struggle for economic justice and the opportunity to achieve economic justice without violence. ... Although I cannot predict the future, I am optimistic, I think we are moving in the right direction despite the obstacles and despite the physical and metaphysical walls.
IA: Why are you optimistic?
MQ: The Zionist project started out in the middle of the 19th century with support from Britain, and the first Zionist colony in Palestine was established in [1878]. The original Zionist plan included establishing a Jewish empire in the Middle East from the Nile to the Euphrates. That was the goal of most Zionists who advocated a political Zionist project in Palestine. And now, almost 130 years later, that project has failed to achieve a fraction of that goal. From the River Jordan to the Mediterranean, there are 5 million Palestinians. When the Zionist project started in 1880, there were maybe less than 500,000 or 600,000 Palestinians living here. So there is natural increase. And then there are another 5 million Palestinians outside Palestine, and they are doing great work. [Israel's first prime minister, David] Ben Gurion's statement that the old would die and the young would forget has been proven at least half wrong. The old do die, but the young never forget. That's why I believe that there is cause for optimism.
Every day in Palestine, I witness hundreds of instances of brilliant actions. [Besides] the usual forms of resistance, even breathing the air here, having a married life or going to school are all forms of resistance, because we are not wanted in our own land. I find that ingenuity in resistance, the ability to persevere -- what we call sumud -- to be tremendously inspiring. Our people are able to continue their lives despite the incredible odds arrayed against them and not only to persist but also to find some measure of success. As the graffiti on the wall says, to exist is to resist.
Ida Audeh is a Palestinian from the West Bank who lives in Boulder, Colorado. Her op-eds and articles have been published by the The Rocky Mountain News, The Daily Camera, The Electronic Intifada, Countercurrents, and Counterpunch.
61 years ago today, the state of Israel unilaterally declared its independence after its ground forces have alraedy been engaged in nearly 6 months of ethnic cleansing of the native population. The ethnic cleansing continued after the founding of the state (for a total of 530 villages and towns completely erased). We Palestinains refer to this as the Nakba (the Catasrophe of ethnic cleansing that preceded, accompanied and followed the founding of the Jewish state by force on Palestinian soil). After the last cease fire of 1949, Israel continued demolishing homes and destroying villages and towns. This received a spike after 1967 and the occupation of the remainder of Palestine. We are seeing today more of this process everywhere from the Galilee to Jerusalem to Bethlehem (where the foreign born "foreign minister of Israel" lives on Palestinian land) to the Negev where over 30 "unrecognized" villages are being targeted.
Nakba commemorations in Palestine this year were a bit more subdued because of the political schisms created in Palestinian society (thanks to Oslo accords). But they were traditionally filled with memories of refugees and with hopes and energy and aspiration of refugee children. Even the demonstrations against the wall today carried large keys symbolizing teh right to return (e.g. in Bil'in). Here is a slide whow of 10 minutes to help you put the Nakba in perspective and think about what we need to do collectively:
http://www.
Action to Remember the Nakba: Act now to stop home demolitions
http://www.endtheoccupation.
And we must intensify the boycotts, divestments, and sanctions. They are growing. I was happy to see that even Israeli organizations have called for Norwegian divestment from Israeli companies and corporations. In an unprecedented way, a wide array of Israeli civil society and grassroots organizations has sent a letter to the Norwegian Pension Fund, addressed to its Council on Ethics, urging it to support their efforts for a just peace and equality in Israel/Palestine by divesting from all companies involved in the Israeli occupation. These Israeli organizations include feminist organizations and community centers, peace and human rights organizations, organizations concerned with civil rights and equality within the state of Israel and organizations dedicated to ending the occupation of Palestinian territories, to the benefit of all people living in Israel/ Palestine. More here:
http://coalitionofwomen.org/
Envisioning a better future: Activist Mazin Qumsiyeh interviewed
Ida Audeh, The Electronic Intifada, 11 May 2009
Mazin Qumsiyeh
Mazin Qumsiyeh is a tireless activist for Palestinian human rights who returned to his hometown of Beit Sahour in the Israeli-occupied West Bank last year and now teaches at Bethlehem and Birzeit Universities. The author of Sharing the Land of Canaan: Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Struggle (2004), Qumsiyeh is both a human rights activist and a scientist who has a lengthy list of publications on genetics to his credit. The Electronic Intifada contributor Ida Audeh met with him in April and discussed advocating the Palestinian cause in the United States and his impressions about the current direction of the Palestinian struggle.
During the 29 years he lived in the United States, Qumsiyeh earned masters and doctoral degrees; taught at several prestigious universities, including Duke and Yale; co-founded activist organizations (Al-Awda, the Palestinian Right to Return Coalition and the Wheels of Justice Tour -- a traveling tour bus that stops at different communities to educate them about Palestine and Iraq); and was a board member for numerous organizations. Since the mid-1990s, he has maintained email lists that focus on human rights and international law. His weekly postings now reach approximately 50,000 individuals and include reports of events and comments that are informed by a deep understanding of common struggles in other parts of the world. An optimist who advocates "having joyful participation in the sorrows of this world," he includes in every e-mail at least one action that the reader can take to make a difference.
Ida Audeh: How would you describe the evolution of perceptions of the Palestinian question and advocacy efforts over the 29 years in which you lived in the United States?
Mazin Qumsiyeh: When I went to the US in August 1979, my impression was that the Zionist narrative was dominant in the churches, the synagogues, the media, community centers, everywhere. There were only a few heroic voices of opposition -- people like Edward Said, Naseer Aruri and Elaine Hagopian -- who influenced me a lot in those early years. They really envisioned changing perceptions by speaking about human rights and international law and actual facts on the ground. Things have changed significantly over the years as more people became informed and educated. Nonprofit organizations have been set up and people are doing good work, including meeting with their congressional representatives.
IA: There has been undeniable progress, but are we doing what needs to be done?
MQ: The question I would ask is, are we doing enough? Of course not. Are we doing well? I think we are doing fairly well. We are moving in the right direction, I'd say that that's probably more relevant than anything else. It is not easy. We are faced with an enemy that is very well organized, well financed, and well entrenched into the system of Western government, as we saw most recently in the Durban Review Conference in Geneva, where the representatives of the US, Canada, Australia and white European countries walked out of the conference hall when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke. Those are the countries where the work needs to be done. The question for me is what can I do, and where do I fit as an individual. I don't want to change the world, I just want to push in the direction of justice and human rights.
IA: Dealing with Zionist opposition is straightforward in some ways, because one knows what to expect. But liberals argue the "need" to establish good faith by engaging in dialogue with those whose political values in many instances are hostile to our own.
MQ: Within the so-called liberal peace-oriented movement, there are lots of Zionists with a tribalistic form of nationalism that they hide very well. They claim that they are for peace and for justice and a two-state solution, but when you scratch the surface a little bit, you find that they are racist. One simple test to ask is about the right of return for Palestinian refugees. That immediately exposes what they really think.
That's one aspect. The other aspect is best described by Martin Luther King Jr. in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," in which he chides white liberals for always counseling patience. Their kind of liberalism is paternalistic and colonialist. It says, "If you just listen to us, if you denounce terrorism and do this or that, then maybe some time in the future, we will have it in our heart to make pressure to ... achieve some justice for the Palestinians." As Martin Luther King Jr. said, I am getting impatient and don't want to waste too much time with that.
IA: In the US, much of the focus of Palestine advocates is on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (referred to by Palestinians as the 1967 occupation). Should we instead emphasize the nature of Israel itself and the racist laws that Palestinian citizens of Israel are subjected to?
MQ: I argue in Sharing the Land of Canaan that the focus on the 1967 occupation is really the wrong focus, because it goes down that slippery slope of justifying what happened before. We should be talking not about occupation but about colonization, which started much earlier than 1967. There is really no difference between what happened before 1967 and after 1967.
IA: I was reading Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine, and she describes the Israeli economy as being pretty healthy despite the global recession, in large part because of the number of Israeli companies with a "security" focus.
MQ: Israel is now the biggest exporter of conflicts in the world, in my opinion, surpassing even the United States. For example, the Sri Lankan government uses Israeli weapons and expertise against the Tamils, committing massacres even as we speak. And Israel profits financially. The Israeli economy is booming because it is based on the export of weapons and conflict. In addition, the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip nets Israel billions of dollars each year. Approximately 40 to 45 percent of all humanitarian aid into the Occupied Palestinian Territory ends up in Israeli hands. This is documented by a series of publications and research on the economy of the occupation by Israeli researcher Sher Hever of the Alternative Information Center. The occupation is big business.
IA: Since 2003 I've visited Palestinian towns and villages in the path of the wall, and someone once told me that each village has its own personal tragedy. How would you describe Bethlehem's tragedy?
MQ: The West Bank has Israeli-imposed colonial settlement infrastructure like roads, sewage systems and electric grids. This is built on top of an existing Palestine, an existing group of villages and towns in the West Bank that have been receding into the background over the past 42 years of occupation. The wall makes this literal and concrete, physically removing shrinking Palestinian areas from the landscape and making those that remain into ghettoes and prisons. In the case of Bethlehem, each cluster of villages gets turned into a ghetto with one exit and entrance only to this village or cluster of villages. There are more than 30 such cantons now in the West Bank. In the Bethlehem area, for example, the villages of Nahalin Bettir, Wadi Fukin and other places that are close to the green line [the 1949 armistice line marking the boundary between Israel and the West Bank] are isolated and surrounded by settlements. The Bethlehem district, which includes Beit Sahour and Beit Jala, is surrounded by walls and settlements from the north, the west and the south. There is an area to the east, called Ush Ghrab, that the settlers would like to take over. If they succeed, there will be settlements on all four sides. Right now the Bethlehem district has only one entrance and exit going to the north of the West Bank and another going south to Hebron. So if those access points are shut off, people won't be able to move anywhere.
IA: Many argue that the Palestinian Authority (PA) functions as a subcontractor for the Israeli occupation. Do you see any positive role that the PA can play? Should we be taking to the streets and demanding its resignation?
MQ: [The late Palestinian thinker] Edward Said described the Oslo process [of the mid-1990s] as the worst thing that happened to the Palestinians since the beginning of the Nakba. The Oslo process put in place this slippery slope of endless negotiations while Israel creates facts on the ground and legitimizes Israel's racist structure, institutions, mechanisms and racist demands for its own security at the expense of Palestinians' basic human rights. Even Amnesty International attributed the failure of Oslo to the fact that it ignored human rights. In any case, Oslo is finished. It was supposed to last for five years, from 1993 to 1999. It expired 10 years ago. We need to reevaluate what happened.
Whether we really need a PA or not is another issue. I for one would prefer no PA, because you cannot have one under occupation. It's a misnomer. What we have is more like prisoners being allowed to elect their prison representatives in negotiations with the jailers. One accommodating side is like the village leagues [of the 1970s] in some sense. Other prisoners elect tougher reps to the authorities. In my opinion, dismantle the Palestinian Authority and say to the international community, we are done with this process that started in Oslo. What you need to do is implement international law and take responsibility for boycotting, divesting from and sanctioning Israel until it complies with international law and basic human rights. After Israel complies, we can create our own institutions, which can then negotiate with Israel.
IA: After the dispossession of historic Palestine in 1948, many Palestinians were dependent on handouts from UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, and today tens of thousands are dependent on foreign aid through PA salaries. How do we overcome this situation, which puts us at the mercy of foreign donors and their agendas?
MQ: It is inevitable that people will experience pain if they want their freedom. Although tens of thousands of families depend on salaries from the PA, they still remain a minority of the Palestinian population. The majority of the population are not receiving any salaries, and those people should rise up, and even those who do receive salaries will tell you that they are willing to sacrifice if others do.
[As for the matter of us turning against each other to secure the flow of aid,] that's where leadership is important. If we had decent leadership, they could go to Arab and other countries that want to support us and say that we want to establish mechanisms whereby our people are independent of this. I am sure they could have done it. But it requires leadership instead of these spineless negotiations that end up perpetuating a cycle of colonization and impoverishment and dependency, which reinforces the occupation and colonization.
IA: Do you see any role for the Palestinian political factions?
MQ: We don't have much choice. Fateh and Hamas have large popular backing, and we have to work with all existing factions. We need to educate them, we need to encourage them to adopt changes.
IA: Can you comment on the one-state solution versus two-state solution debate?
MQ: People have to understand the implications and ramifications of support for two states and for one state. We should start with the premise that human rights are inalienable, that there is no compromise on human rights. This means that supporting a two-state solution does not entitle you to oppose the right of return. To do so would be an unacceptable selling out of human rights based on political considerations. If you support two states and also support the right of return, then that's fine by me. Studies by Salman Abu Sitta and others show that most of the villages from which Palestinians were expelled are still empty; people could return to them.
On every level, ranging from the environment, to population growth, to natural resources like water, to theology and ideology -- on every issue that you look at, the possibility and the probability and the desirability of the one-state option far surpasses that of the two-state solution. People frequently cite the two-state option as more achievable, when in fact the likelihood of a truly sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza is infinitesimally smaller than the possibility of a one-state solution. When you talk about two states, are you talking about two sovereign states, with equal rights and responsibilities? Or is it a Bantustan called Palestine and a Jewish state that is nuclear, armed to the teeth, and controls natural resources, air space and so on? If it is the latter, which is what most Israelis seem to support, then that is not a viable solution. If it is the former, most Israelis do not support it and will never support it. If I were in their shoes, I am not sure I would support it; I would support one state because it would enhance my security and be better in every way.
IA: Official discourse on the two-state option makes reference to a territorial swap, which means Israel relinquishing the Palestinian-populated Galilee area in exchange for the settlement blocs in the West Bank. What would that entail?
MQ: This is part of the reason why a two-state option cannot be successful. The Palestinian vision of two states consists of sovereign Israeli and Palestinian states. But for Israeli supporters of a two-state option, there would be something called a Jewish state, which is based on Jewish supremacist ideology and a Jewish majority running state affairs and a minority that (if it is allowed to remain) would be subservient and would be discriminated against. The Palestinian state would also be subservient as a state to the Jewish state and would have no control over its borders or its air space or its natural resources. From a Palestinian and human rights perspective, this is not acceptable.
IA: Is Palestinian society sufficiently mobilized to prevent a sellout of our rights from happening?
MQ: History offers no guarantees. Our situation could turn out like that of the Native Americans, where the probability of them reclaiming their ancestral lands is minimal to zero. Or there is Algeria, where fourth- or fifth-generation French settlers had to pack up and go back to Europe after one million Algerians lost their lives in the struggle for freedom and liberation from the French. In South Africa, the whites were integrated into society, and one person, one vote became a one-state solution. ... I prefer the South African model because it opens the possibility for coexistence and a more durable peace. It is not based on total subjugation of the natives or on total removal of the colonial settlers. The South African model is not ideal, there is still economic apartheid, but at least it eliminated political apartheid and it opens the possibility for a struggle for economic justice and the opportunity to achieve economic justice without violence. ... Although I cannot predict the future, I am optimistic, I think we are moving in the right direction despite the obstacles and despite the physical and metaphysical walls.
IA: Why are you optimistic?
MQ: The Zionist project started out in the middle of the 19th century with support from Britain, and the first Zionist colony in Palestine was established in [1878]. The original Zionist plan included establishing a Jewish empire in the Middle East from the Nile to the Euphrates. That was the goal of most Zionists who advocated a political Zionist project in Palestine. And now, almost 130 years later, that project has failed to achieve a fraction of that goal. From the River Jordan to the Mediterranean, there are 5 million Palestinians. When the Zionist project started in 1880, there were maybe less than 500,000 or 600,000 Palestinians living here. So there is natural increase. And then there are another 5 million Palestinians outside Palestine, and they are doing great work. [Israel's first prime minister, David] Ben Gurion's statement that the old would die and the young would forget has been proven at least half wrong. The old do die, but the young never forget. That's why I believe that there is cause for optimism.
Every day in Palestine, I witness hundreds of instances of brilliant actions. [Besides] the usual forms of resistance, even breathing the air here, having a married life or going to school are all forms of resistance, because we are not wanted in our own land. I find that ingenuity in resistance, the ability to persevere -- what we call sumud -- to be tremendously inspiring. Our people are able to continue their lives despite the incredible odds arrayed against them and not only to persist but also to find some measure of success. As the graffiti on the wall says, to exist is to resist.
Ida Audeh is a Palestinian from the West Bank who lives in Boulder, Colorado. Her op-eds and articles have been published by the The Rocky Mountain News, The Daily Camera, The Electronic Intifada, Countercurrents, and Counterpunch.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
ExpoWorks+ where Marwa, Muhannad and I work, daily fights over who is gonna play music of his\ her taste is a tradition which won't break when three of different tastes sit in the same space... Marwa is a constant complainer, whatever music Muhannad and I play... we had to turn it down or change to match her taste... Muhanands loves playing what she hates.. which is basically everything he plays...
today, I would say luckily i was the first one to play music, Julia Butros- Ya 2osas, and Marwa surprisingly didn't complain, instead she accompanied Julia :)
today, I would say luckily i was the first one to play music, Julia Butros- Ya 2osas, and Marwa surprisingly didn't complain, instead she accompanied Julia :)
Muhannad was following the music, whistling... I loved that we agreed on something finally.
You rock Julia, you could bring us together at least once.
I have to say, this song feels even more beautiful than a blooming flower...
Saturday, May 24, 2008
a long list is coming
It's happening again for the 7th time maybe, when I inhale its fumes I ask myself: why?
I wished twice that she dies; "she" is 2 different persons. None of them died yet, I guess "she" won't…
We learned that some feeling kills
I started hating her; she is wonderful most of the times…
That when she is upset, she goes silent for hours and days…
I wished he goes to jail for 6 months only, this will destroy him, I know I can't see him sad or humiliated…
Monday, January 21, 2008
Monday, November 19, 2007
i wanted to tell you that
Life was never a bitch, it's a whore... it won't fuck you unless you pay her.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Murdered
I am killing my self slowly for the third time, Ramallah was the third murderer of my soul, stabbed me twice in my soul and then my heart, in less than 5 months, I bled, I bled oceans of emotions and tears.
What is I like to be endlessly happy? What did I do? I know that many live in misery, and can worse than what I am complaining about, but a bleeding heart and soul is the worst.
I envy all animals and those creatures that do not recognize longing, love, death, betrayal and what does it mean to be a human.
Karma! It is KARMA, I am paying back for what I didn't do.
What is I like to be endlessly happy? What did I do? I know that many live in misery, and can worse than what I am complaining about, but a bleeding heart and soul is the worst.
I envy all animals and those creatures that do not recognize longing, love, death, betrayal and what does it mean to be a human.
Karma! It is KARMA, I am paying back for what I didn't do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
