Israel's War Against The Children

On Sep 11, 2001, 19 alleged 'so-called' Muslims hijacked a religion to back their view. After that day, the Bush Administration 'hijacked' an entire nation's freedom and the "right to oppose war" and waged war against the entire world.

Since September 11, 2001 (9/11), the US, Israel and Britain has "punished" the 1.2 billion Muslims around the world for what the alleged so-called 19 Muslims did on 9/11. This is a glimpse of the atrocities committed by our own troops when we fight the 'war against terror'.

Washington needs a deep reconsideration not just of how it engages with Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan, but of how it responds to large-scale international challenges more generally. Under this president, the administration's international engagements have been skewed very strongly toward military action, while the solid, steady work of building international relationships and institutions has been derided and downgraded - with the results we now see in Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, and elsewhere. Redirecting Washington's focus toward diplomacy has never been more necessary. It is the only way, now, to restore order and stability to a world system that has been badly battered by the reckless US militarism of the past five years.

This attempt to show the images of a brutalized, humiliated, maligned, and shattered generation prove that we must do, understand more, and forgive more - if we want to sustain and have a prosperous future for all mankind.

The children are not terrorists. They deserve to live - regardless of creed, nationality, or religion.

Background music is in Urdu/Hindi language (the language spoken in most countries in South-Asia).


Read more...

What Was Israel Supposed to Do?

by Cenk Uygur Cenk Uygur
Tue Jan 6, 5:24 pm ET

The government of Israel keeps saying their actions in Gaza are justifiable because they are doing it in retaliation for what Hamas has done. Hamas says the same exact thing -- that they are firing the rockets in retaliation for what Israel did in imposing a blockade and bombing their tunnels and leaders. I find both points completely unpersuasive -- yes, including Israel's.


Every day now, I hear someone saying, "What was Israel supposed to do? Hamas keeps firing rockets into their country." So, here is a quick list of the things they were supposed to do:

1. Not break the cease-fire in the first place.

Yes, I understand their frustration with the tunnels, which are used not only to smuggle in food, medicine and goods, but also to smuggle in weapons. But those weapons were not being used until Israel started bombing the tunnels.

What were they supposed to do? Wait until the weapons were used? Yes! That's the point of a cease-fire. I know Israel would not like any of their enemies to have any weapons. From their perspective that makes sense. But Israel doesn't need tunnels for weapons, the US just gives them to them and their weapons are a thousand times bigger.

So, yes, you do not bomb just because the other side might acquire one percent of the weapons you have. Otherwise, you will always be bombing, because it is logical for the other side to try to acquire those weapons for what they perceive to be self-defense.

If you're threshold for starting violence is that the other side is thinking about it (close to the rationale we used in Iraq), then you will always be starting wars. Self-defense, my ass. Those are called first strikes. If you think it's necessary, fine, but don't pretend that you didn't start the hostilities.

2. You are stronger. Don't strike back.

I know people will say that's crazy. You have to retaliate! Otherwise you will show weakness! Again, that is exactly what Hamas says to their fellow Palestinians. "We have to strike back! We can't let the Israelis push us around anymore!"

And what do we tell them? Choose non-violence instead. I must have said that a million times in reference to Hamas and the Palestinians. So, why can't I say the same thing to Israel? Why are the Palestinians the only ones that must choose non-violence? Shouldn't Israel also choose non-violence?

In fact, the strong have a responsibility to be better than that. They can lead the way toward peace because they know if it comes down to all out war, they can destroy the other side.

Sometimes an older brother doesn't hit back his younger brother because he knows he can cause more damage than the little guy. That is being smart, responsible and decent. Hitting a UN school and killing 30 civilians, mostly children, is not being any of those things.

3. Make a peace deal already.

Here is the standard response to this: "We are ready to make a peace deal but the Palestinians won't agree. Arafat walked away from a deal in 2000. They don't want peace." That's horse crap. In negotiations, people accept certain deals and won't accept others. That's completely normal. Ehud Barak also walked away from that deal because he had an election coming up in the beginning of 2001. That's also normal. If people don't like deals enough, they walk away from them.

The biggest dispute was over what percentage of the West Bank Israel would keep. That is a perfectly fair dispute. Either side could have given in and taken a lower percentage. Neither side did.

Could Israel have had a deal if they gave up all of the West Bank, split Jerusalem and gave the right of return for Palestinian refugees? Absolutely. Every single negotiator involved in the process will tell you the Palestinians would have taken that deal in a second.

Now, if I was Israel would I take that deal? No. But that's my point; both sides could have a deal instantly if they gave up a little bit more than they are willing. So, to pretend only the Palestinians are unwilling to negotiate is silly. And right now, Israel says they can't negotiate with Hamas because Hamas won't recognize Israel's right to exist. And Hamas says Israel will not recognize their right to exist (which is true; in fact, Israel just started an invasion to eradicate Hamas). Both sides are ridiculously obstinate.

Again, it is incumbent upon the strong to bend a little, especially if they claim they really, really want peace. But even if you don't want to bend during the negotiations and you want to keep a slightly higher percentage of the West Bank, please don't pretend you didn't have a choice.

Finally, let me ask you this personal question to give you a sense of what people mean when they say Israel is acting disproportionately. Let's say you're walking down the street in your local town and you hear gun fire. You have a vague suspicion that someone is firing at you from a nearby school, would you firebomb the school just in case?

You know what the answer to that question is, if you're a decent human being. No way. You might be scared out of your mind. You might be afraid for your life. But you are not going to throw a bomb into a school full of children just in case (especially when you're not even sure that's where the shots are coming from). You would be called a psychopath if you did. But today, we hear excuses like, "Hey, that's what happens in wars." Maybe, that's why it is incumbent upon us to try a little harder to avoid them. So that we don't all act like psychopaths when they start.

Read more...

Is Mayor Bloomberg Running for President of Israel?

by Patricia DeGennaro

Posted January 6, 2009 | 04:34 PM (EST)

Mayor Bloomberg's rush to travel to Israel in a show of solidarity makes one wonder if he has decided to leave the US and run for president over there. After all he has hopped political parties, why not countries?


He and many other US leaders are showing unconditional support of Israel's military actions despite their knowledge about the brutality of war. You would think after a lifetime of hostilities in Israel and the US's Iraq debacle both would be doing everything in their power to think beyond it.

After the Mayor returned from his trip, he was asked about his reasons for going. "Israel's fight is our fight," he told the waiting journalists.

Well, Mr. Mayor, with all due respect Israel's fight is not 'our' fight. In fact, according to a recent Rasmussen poll, Americans "are closely divided over whether the Jewish state should be taking military action against militants in the Gaza Strip" (44-41%, with 15% undecided), but Democratic voters overwhelmingly oppose the Israeli offensive -- by a 24-point margin (31-55%)." Truthfully it would be appreciated if our representatives would take into account opposing opinions when it comes to US policy, especially in the Middle East.

In the words of General William Sherman who served in the American Civil War, "I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell." It would serve us all well to pay attention to the General's insight before concluding battle is the answer.

There is no doubt that the Israelis and Palestinians have a long history of fighting and mistrust. One can go back centuries and blame. The latest carnage though begs us all to question whether we should hang on to the past or develop the courage to make an alternate reality. Staying on the same path will yield certain death and destruction.

Within this context both parties must realize that they are partners. Both parties undeniably have the right to exist. This means that they both need equal rights and equal treatment. It is not ok to just think about security for Israel without security for Palestinians.

For now though some quick steps must be taken.

First and foremost, all parties must stop firing weapons. Outsiders must help. Parties who are at war seldom see clearly. General Jones suggested outside troops to assist in security so why not get them there. Then they can blockade incoming weapons while allowing necessary medicines and food to get through.

Second, all parties must start talking. This means Likud, Labor, Kadima, Hamas and Fatah as well as all other factions and groups. Just like Ireland.

Partial peace does not work. Besides, the Palestinians did elect Hamas freely and democratically as their government. How are they supposed to be a democracy if no one is willing to allow it.

Third, there must be an understanding that the peace process is a two 'nation' solution. Both Israelis and Palestinians need to participate equally and to the fullest. There must be clear negotiation and milestones. All financial and military aid to either party must halt until these milestones are met and these parties finally understand that they are cohorts and neighbors who must co-exist. Until then the situation will not change and children will continue to die.

The most recent explosion of violence tells us all that we do not have time to mull over who did what last year or a decade ago. Weapons must be put down now. In just seven days, over five hundred Palestinians are dead - 111 of them children - and the wounded are rising 2500 and counting. Israel reports that five are dead with random rocket fire continuing. Men, women and children are traumatized and anger is mounting.

So Mr. Mayor, I, for one, do not believe war works. Therefore I do not support it in this case or any other for that matter. Our addiction to combat allows us to deceive ourselves into thinking that hurting others brings security and peace. If bombing people into submission were the ultimate response, this conflict and many others would have been over long ago. Furthermore, based on the world's warring history, all nations would be free of poisonous weapons.


Read more...

Boycott AirTran Airways

On Jan 1, 2009 AirTran denied boarding to a family of husband, wife and their children ages 7, 4, and 2 on Flight 175 to Florida. They were joined by his brother's sister-in-law and a family friend. All were of Muslim origin and U.S. Citizens.

Seems like AirTran does not uphold the equality in race, religion, gender... protocol. As an American, I feel extremely disgusted and sad about this incident. I urge all Americans, Britons, Australians, black, white, Jews, Hindus, Christians, and Muslims to boycott this airline and it's xenophobic practices.

First they came for the Muslims,
I remained silent;
I was not a Muslim.

Then they came for the Christians,
I remained silent;
I was not a Christian.

Then they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Read more...

Israel's 'victories' in Gaza come at a steep price

By Sara Roy Sara Roy
Fri Jan 2, 3:00 am ET

Cambridge, Mass. – I hear the voices of my friends in Gaza as clearly as if we were still on the phone; their agony echoes inside me. They weep and moan over the death of their children, some, little girls like mine, taken, their bodies burned and destroyed so senselessly.

One Palestinian friend asked me, "Why did Israel attack when the children were leaving school and the women were in the markets?" There are reports that some parents cannot find their dead children and are desperately roaming overflowing hospitals.

As Jews celebrated the last night of Hanukkah, the Jewish festival of lights commemorating our resurgence as a people, I asked myself: How am I to celebrate my Jewishness while Palestinians are being killed?

The religious scholar Marc Ellis challenges us further by asking whether the Jewish covenant with God is present or absent in the face of Jewish oppression of Palestinians? Is the Jewish ethical tradition still available to us? Is the promise of holiness – so central to our existence – now beyond our ability to reclaim?

The lucky ones in Gaza are locked in their homes living lives that have long been suspended – hungry, thirsty, and without light but their children are alive.

Since Nov. 4, when Israel effectively broke the truce with Hamas by attacking Gaza on a scale then unprecedented – a fact now buried with Gaza's dead – the violence has escalated as Hamas responded by sending hundreds of rockets into Israel to kill Israeli civilians. It is reported that Israel's strategy is to hit Hamas military targets, but explain that difference to my Palestinian friends who must bury their children.

On Nov. 5, Israel sealed all crossing points into Gaza, vastly reducing and at times denying food supplies, medicines, fuel, cooking gas, and parts for water and sanitation systems. A colleague of mine in Jerusalem said, "this siege is in a league of its own. The Israelis have not done something like this before."

During November, an average of 4.6 trucks of food per day entered Gaza from Israel compared with an average of 123 trucks per day in October. Spare parts for the repair and maintenance of water-related equipment have been denied entry for over a year. The World Health Organization just reported that half of Gaza's ambulances are now out of order.

According to the Associated Press, the three-day death toll rose to at least 370 by Tuesday morning, with some 1,400 wounded. The UN said at least 62 of the dead were civilians. A Palestinian health official said that at least 22 children under age 16 were killed and more than 235 children have been wounded.

In nearly 25 years of involvement with Gaza and Palestinians, I have not had to confront the horrific image of burned children – until today.

Yet for Palestinians it is more than an image, it is a reality, and because of that I fear something profound has changed that will not easily be undone. For how, in the context of Gaza today, does one speak of reconciliation as a path to liberation, of sympathy as a source of understanding? Where does one find or even begin to create a common field of human undertaking (to borrow from the late, acclaimed Palestinian scholar, Edward Said) so essential to coexistence?

It is one thing to take an individual's land, his home, his livelihood, to denigrate his claims, or ignore his emotions. It is another to destroy his child. What happens to a society where renewal is denied and all possibility has ended?

And what will happen to Jews as a people whether we live in Israel or not? Why have we been unable to accept the fundamental humanity of Palestinians and include them within our moral boundaries? Rather, we reject any human connection with the people we are oppressing. Ultimately, our goal is to tribalize pain, narrowing the scope of human suffering to ourselves alone.

Our rejection of "the other" will undo us. We must incorporate Palestinians and other Arab peoples into the Jewish understanding of history, because they are a part of that history. We must question our own narrative and the one we have given others, rather than continue to cherish beliefs and sentiments that betray the Jewish ethical tradition.

Jewish intellectuals oppose racism, repression, and injustice almost everywhere in the world and yet it is still unacceptable – indeed, for some, it's an act of heresy – to oppose it when Israel is the oppressor. This double standard must end.

Israel's victories are pyrrhic and reveal the limits of Israeli power and our own limitations as a people: our inability to live a life without barriers. Are these the boundaries of our rebirth after the Holocaust?

As Jews in a post-Holocaust world empowered by a Jewish state, how do we as a people emerge from atrocity and abjection, empowered and also humane? How do we move beyond fear to envision something different, even if uncertain?

The answers will determine who we are and what, in the end, we become.

Sara Roy is a senior research scholar at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University, and the author, most recently, of "Failing Peace: Gaza and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict."

Read more...

The Mumbai Fraud

by Super Consumer

While the Mumbai incident was certainly an unfortunate ones for Muslims, Jewish, Hindus, Christians as well as others -- it was a shameful attempt by Indian government authorities to hastily point the finger at Pakistan. I guess this is the only was the Indian government can unite it's citizens -- by demonizing Pakistan for everything.

An interesting (and much needed) perspective by a political analyst in Pakistan:
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/video-the-mumbai-fraud-exposed-by-zaid-hamid/




Read more...

Suddenly, it may be cool to be an American again

By WILLIAM J. KOLE, Associated Press Writer William J. Kole, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 30 mins ago

VIENNA, Austria – She was a stranger, and she kissed me. Just for being an American.

It happened on the bus on my way to work Wednesday morning, a few hours after compatriots clamoring for change swept Barack Obama to his historic victory. I was on the phone, and the 20-something Austrian woman seated in front of me overheard me speaking English.

Without a word, she turned, pecked me on the cheek and stepped off at the next stop.

Nothing was said, but the message was clear: Today, we are all Americans.

For longtime U.S. expatriates like me — someone far more accustomed to being targeted over unpopular policies, for having my very Americanness publicly assailed — it feels like an extraordinary turnabout.

Like a long journey over a very bumpy road has abruptly come to an end.

And it's not just me.

An American colleague in Egypt says several people came up to her on the streets of Cairo and said: "America, hooray!" Others, including strangers, expressed congratulations with a smile and a hand over their hearts.

Another colleague, in Amman, says Jordanians stopped her on the street and that several women described how they wept with joy.

When you're an American abroad, you can quickly become a whipping post. Regardless of your political affiliation, if you happen to be living and working overseas at a time when the United States has antagonized much of the world, you get a lot of grief.

You can find yourself pressed to be some kind of apologist for Washington. And you can wind up feeling ashamed and alone.

I'll never forget a ride in a taxi in Vienna when the world was waking up to the abuses wrought by U.S. troops at the detention center for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

My driver, a Muslim, was indignant. "You are American, yes?" he asked in that accusatory tone so familiar to many expats.

"Uh, no, Canadian," I said.

And it wasn't the first time I fudged where I was from. I speak three foreign languages, so I have a bit of flexibility when it comes to faking. At various times, I've been a German in Serbia, a Frenchman in Turkey, a Dutchman in Austria.

I'm not proud of it. But when you're far from home, and you're feeling cornered, you develop what you come to believe are survival skills.

Last spring, after the Bush administration recognized Kosovo's independence, a Serb who overheard my American-accented English lobbed a beer can at me in central Vienna. He missed, but spat out an unflattering "Amerikanac" and told me where to go.

On another occasion, an Austrian who heard my teenage daughter chatting with a friend pursued her, screaming, "Go Home!"

Physical attacks on Americans overseas are rare. Yet some of us felt vaguely at risk.

Maybe it was just the hostility we'd encounter even in friendly venues such as cocktail parties, when our foreign hosts would surround us and demand to know why U.S. troops were roughing up inmates at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. Or refusing to sign the U.N. Convention Against Torture. Or rejecting the Kyoto accord on climate change.

Maybe it was the State Department, which issues regular travel advisories urging Americans to keep a low profile even in tranquil Austria.

Often, of course, I've pushed back — reminding critics that most Americans are decent and generous souls, quick to respond with money and manpower whenever and wherever in the world catastrophe may strike.

My children came of age in Europe, and in a hostile post-9/11 world we had to teach them to avoid being too conspicuously American. Don't speak English loudly on the subway. Don't wear baseball caps and tennis shoes. Don't single yourselves out, guys, and even worldly wise Americans can unwittingly become targets.

We didn't overdo it, but there's always been that tension. That difficult-to-describe sense of vulnerability. That nagging instinct that maybe we'd better watch it, because our government is intensely unpopular and we're not entirely welcome.

I know Americans who at times have felt that way even in laid-back Vienna, where the greatest danger is probably eating a bad pastry.

That's what made Wednesday's unsolicited kiss so remarkable.

I don't want to read too much into an innocent smooch, but it didn't feel particularly pro-Obama, even though the new U.S. president-elect enjoys broad support here. No, it seemed to impart two sentiments I haven't felt for a long time: friendship and admiration.

Obama captured it in his acceptance speech — this sense that despite holding America's feet to the fire, the rest of the world is rooting for it and wants it to lead and succeed.

"Our destiny is shared," he said, "and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand."

Overnight, Americans did something their harshest critics in Europe have yet to do: elect a person of color as head of state and commander in chief. That gives U.S. citizens some bragging rights, even if a lot of us would just as soon eschew hubris and embrace humility.

I'm a marathon runner, and I have a red, white and blue singlet that I've seldom dared to wear on the Continent. Marathons are difficult enough without enduring catcalls and jeers from spectators.

But my best friend and training partner — who is French — just gave me his stamp of approval.

"Will you wear your Stars and Stripes shirt now? You're allowed!" he told me.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — William J. Kole, AP's Vienna bureau chief, has covered European affairs since 1995.

Read more...