Showing posts with label Gaza. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gaza. Show all posts

Monday, January 26, 2009

VIDEO: HAMAS terrorists get exactly what they deserve ...

This video is yet further evidence that Israel never attacks civilians. Its campaign was only against terrorists.

Here is the text accompanying the video:

Israel's cabinet is considering how to protect its soldiers from international prosecution for alleged war crimes in Gaza.

More than 1,300 Palestinians were killed during Israel's three week offensive, many of them women and children.

Al Jazeera's Amr El-Kahky has been to a hospital in Egypt, where doctors claim the wounds they are treating may have been caused by the use of white phosphorus.

This package contains images that may disturb or offend some viewers.



Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Monday, January 19, 2009

VIDEO: Gaza doctor weeps on Israeli TV for his three slain daughters ...

This is truly disturbing. You'd have to be completely heartless not to be moved by this tragedy. This man treated Israelis and Palestinians. He worked as a specialist in both Israeli and Gaza hospitals. He worked to save the lives of both Israelis and Palestinians. In appreciation for his services, the IDF murdered this doctor's three daughters.

Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf



Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

VIDEO: Sir Gerald Kaufman speaks the truth ...



Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Saturday, January 17, 2009

COMMENT: Amira Hass on Israel and HAMAS weapons

Is Israel using illegal weapons in its bombardment of Gaza? Amira Hass, an award-winning Israeli journalist examines this question in a recent report for Haaretz.
Hass begins by painting a picture eerily familiar to those accustomed (as Hass is) to seeing Israel's bombardment of Palestinian territories.

The earth shaking under your feet, clouds of choking smoke, explosions like a fireworks display, bombs bursting into all-consuming flames that cannot be extinguished with water, mushroom clouds of pinkish-red smoke, suffocating gas, harsh burns on the skin, extraordinary maimed live and dead bodies.
All of this is being caused by the bombs Israel is dropping on the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, according to reports and testimonies from there.
This kind of bombardment has been going on for years. Hass has witnessed it and has been writing about it for years. She has spoken to both Palestinian and Israeli authorities, NGO's and human rights groups, not to mention ordinary citizens. But there is something new about the most recent bombardment:
Since the first day of the Israeli aerial attack, people have been giving exact descriptions of the side effects of the bombing, and claiming that Israel is using weapons and ammunition that they have not seen during the past eight years.

Furthermore, the kinds of grave injuries doctors at hospitals in the Strip have reported are providing yet another explanation for the overwhelming dread inhabitants are experiencing in any case.
Enter Mark Galasco, a senior military analyst from Human Rights Watch. Galasco wants to get to the bottom of allegations against Israel. he wants to see for himself. He wants to determine what weapons have been used by Israel, and whether they are illegal. Israel, of course, is cooperating completely, confident that it will be exonerated.
The American-born Garlasco has not been permitted to enter Gaza - as is also the case with people from other human rights organizations and foreign journalists. Therefore, he says, since he is unable to examine actual remnants of the explosives and see the wreckage with his own eyes, he can only guess or make assumptions in some cases. But even from afar, he has no doubt: Israel is using white phosphorus bombs. That was immediately clear to him while he stood last week on a hill facing the Gaza Strip and observed the Israel Defense Forces' bombings for several hours.
So is there anything wrong with using white phosphorus in battle? What are the effects of white phosphorus on civilians? And where did Israel get this stuff from?
The use of white phosphorus is permitted on the battlefield, explains Garlasco, but the side effects on humans and the environment are severe and highly dangerous. The statement notes that the "potential for harm to civilians is magnified by Gaza's high population density, among the highest in the world."

The fireworks-like explosions, the thick smoke, suffocating gas, and flames that are not extinguished by water, but rather are heightened by it - all of these are characteristic of the white phosphorus bombs the IDF is using. Garlasco believes the decision to make such extensive use of these bombs, manufactured by America's General Dynamics Corporation, stems from conclusions drawn from the Second Lebanon War, in which the IDF lost many tanks.

"The phosphorus bombs create a thick smokescreen and if Hamas has an anti-tank rocket, the smoke prevents the rocket from tracking the tank," he explains. There are two ways to use the bombs: The first is to impact them on the ground, in which case the resulting thick smokescreen covers a limited area; the second way is an airburst of a bomb, which contains 116 wafers doused in phosphorus. The moment the bomb blows up and the phosphorus comes in contact with oxygen - it ignites. This is what creates the "fireworks" and billows of jellyfish-shaped smoke. The fallout covers a wide area and the danger of fires and harm to civilians is enormous. The phosphorus burns glass, and immediately ignites paper, trees, wood - anything that is dry. The burning wafers causes terrible injury to anyone who comes in contact with them. The irony is that tear gas is included in the Chemical Weapons Convention and is subject to all kinds of restrictions, whereas phosphorus is not.

And in the meantime, in the hospitals in Gaza there are people lying in beds - among them many children - whose severe injuries and burns have appalled the medical teams.
But in case you thought HAMAS was innocent and spotless in all this, think again. HAMAS doesn't seem to care much for civilians either. It also has some very strange views on international law.
Garlasco and Human Rights Watch also examine the other side, and he says, "We believe that the Grad and Qassam are illegal weapons because they are not accurate enough to be used in this situation." He adds that Hamas makes frequent use of land mines and explosive charges that are liable to injure civilians.

However, because he and his fellow experts can't go into Gaza, "We don't know what the extent of any [Palestinian] civilian casualties is because of Hamas - whether they are shooting soldiers and their bullets end up killing civilians, or whether their anti-tank missiles miss an Israeli tank and hit a house. We don't know."

In 2005, Garlasco met with a political representative of Hamas and told him that use of Grads is a contravention of the Geneva Convention. The reply he got from the Hamas man was: "'All Israelis are military.' And I explained to them that their reading of international law is wrong." It is amazing, he adds, that the Palestinians can manufacture the Qassams under the conditions in Gaza. The Grad, however, "is a real military weapon, three meters long. It has a significant warhead. The problem is that it is designed to be fired in mass, to be fired 21 rockets at a time, so that you are covering an area and you are having a shock effect. You don't only have an explosion, but also a shock and it covers a big area. Shooting one at a time is almost useless from a military perspective."
There are always two signs to every coin. Or as they say in Arabic and Hebrew (and Urdu and Hindi as well), you can't clap with one hand.

Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Thursday, January 15, 2009

COMMENT: Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism ...


I've been impressed with the work of British sociologist Frank Furedi ever since I saw him speak at a symposium on Enlightenment values organised by the (right-of-) Centre for Independent Studies last year.

Furedi is hard to pidgeon-hole. He skirts around the edges of liberal, conservative and libertarian. Perhaps the best way to describe him is independent. He doesn't treat issues like so many cultural warriors do - as if every issue has to be treated as a choice between binary opposites, as spectators in some kind of ideological footbal match where one must barrack for one side or the other. At least that's my assessment in the brief time I've been following his work.

I don't agree with Furedi on many issues, but I can't also help noticing him often displaying the kind of consistency that can pierce through layers of rhetoric and popular hysteria. This is on display in his most recent column published in The Australian today.

Anyone who follows this blog will know that in the current crisis between Israel and HAMAS, my sympathies are firmly with civilians of both sides. I believe the greater aggression is being committed by the Israeli Defence Forces, and Israeli spin-doctors are lying through their teeth.

But how should we respond? Do we automatically assume criticism of Zionism or Israel's actions necessarily represents anti-Jewish sentiment? I agree with Furedi when he writes:

I HAVE always criticised the tendency of some Zionist commentators to dismiss all criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic.

Such a defensive knee-jerk reaction simply avoids confronting the issues and undermines the possibility of dialogue.
If all you can do is place labels on those who disagree with you, it's obvious you aren't terribly interested in dialogue. However, we also need to recognise prejudice wherever it is found. We need to call a spade a spade. If Israeli racism toward Palestinians (where it exists) is evil, so is racism toward Israelis and/or bigotry toward Jews.

In fact, the very notion that the actions of Israel necessarily reflect the sentiments of those who tick the "Judaism" box on their census forms is grossly offensive, even if it is something which some unconditional defenders of Israel regard as an article of faith.

Supporters of the Palestinian cause need to recognise and root out anti-Semitism wherever it exists on their "side". Similarly, Zionists must root out anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and/or anti-Palestinian prejudice where it exists on there "side". When it comes to fighting racism and bigotry, there must be no sides.

So it should be of great concern when someone as independently-minded as Furedi writes paragraphs such as these:
... in recent years, especially since the eruption of the latest conflict in Gaza last month, anti-Israeli sentiments often mutate into anti-Jewish ones. Recent events indicate that in Europe the traditional distinction between anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish feelings has become confusing and blurred.

During a demonstration earlier this month, the Dutch Socialist Party MP Harry van Bommel called for a new intifada against Israel. Of course he has every right to express this political standpoint. However, he became an accomplice of the anti-Semites by choosing to do nothing when he heard chants of "Hamas, Hamas, all Jews to the gas" and similar anti-Jewish slogans. Many people who should know better prefer to keep quiet when they hear slogans such as "Kill the Jews" or "Jews to the oven" at protest demonstrations.

At a demonstration in London, such chants provoked little reaction from protesters who otherwise regard themselves as progressive anti-racists. Nor did they appear to be embarrassed by the sight of a man dressed up as a racist Jewish caricature - wearing a mask with a long, crooked nose - pretending to eat babies.

Increasingly, protesters are targeting Jews for being Jews. The demand to boycott Israeli goods in practice often means a call to boycott Jewish shops ...
And in case you thought this was limited to some crazy Muslim types, consider this:
European anti-Semitism is not simply a rhetorical act confined to a minority of Islamists or pro-Palestinian protesters. In Britain, Jewish schoolchildren have been castigated for belonging to a people with "blood on their hands". Their elders sometimes encounter intimidation and regularly report having to face verbal abuse ...

There is no doubt that the conflict has intensified the frustration and anger of supporters of the Palestinian cause. But it is important to note that the rise of European anti-Semitism is not a direct outcome of the fighting between Israel and Palestinians.
Muslims themselves are not immune from this, often hiding it as anti-Israel feeling.
During the past two decades, and particularly since 2001, anti-Western feelings among European Muslims are often expressed through the language of anti-Semitism. Denunciations of the US are frequently accompanied by the targeting of the Jewish lobby's alleged influence. Such attitudes have gained momentum throughout this century.

For example, one survey carried out in 2002 indicated that 25 per cent of German respondents took the view that "Jewish influence" on American politics was one important reason why the Bush administration invaded Iraq. The association of Jews with business, finance and the media has encouraged current anti-consumerist and anti-modernist sentiments to regard the influence of "these people" with concern. Is it any surprise that last year there was an explosion of conspiracy theories on the internet which blamed Jewish bankers for the financial crisis?
Muslims don't like it when people make up generalisations about them. It is true that some of those generating prejudice against Muslims are themselves of nominally Jewish heritage, including those behind the Obsession DVD that was distributed during the last US elections. But how reflective are these people of mainstream Jewish opinion? And if it is reflective (something which I strongly doubt), does that mean Muslims should replicate? How effective is it to fight prejudice with prejudice?

Around 50% of Gaza's population are children under 18 years. Some 80% live below the official UN poverty line. But before you get angry at Israelis, remember the name of Amira Hass. And before you become angry at Jews, consider all the millions of Jews who refuse to openly support this bombardment.

A seventh century Arab Sage named Ali bin Abi Talib once remarked:

A believer is your brother in faith. A non-believer is your brother in humanity.


A Jewish Sage named Hilel who lived just before the time of Christ once remarked:

If I am not for myself, who is for me? But if I care only for myself, what am I?


The wise ones of either "side" are in fact on the same side.


Wednesday, January 07, 2009

MEDIA/CRIKEY: Western-centric media ignores Al Jazeera



Over the weekend I was watching the 6.30pm edition of SBS World News at a friend's place. The newsreader mentioned that "there are no Western journalists reporting from Gaza". Is SBS seriously suggesting that "non-Western journalists" are incapable of reporting news?

Then this morning The Australian carried a report from AP/AFP stating that "Israel yesterday scrapped arrangements to allow the first foreign reporters into Gaza since it launched an all-out war against Palestinian militants, adding to mounting media frustration at being locked out of the war zone".

When are allegedly authoritative Western newsagencies going to get off their high horses and acknowledge that the English language service of Al Jazeera has beaten them to it? A large number of my friends have discovered that the satellite dish on their roof picks up Al Jazeera English, which boasts such non-Western journalists as Sir David Frost, Rageh Omaar (formerly of BBC World) and Riz Khan (formerly of BBC World and CNN). Quite a few Al Jazeera English reports hail from such third world journalistic backwaters as New Zealand and Australia.

Israel clearly isn't happy with Al Jazeera. Then again, the newsagency has frequently fallen foul of the Iranian, Afghan, Egyptian and Saudi governments. One Al Jazeera photo-journalist, Sami El-Hajj, was captured by the United States and spent years at the Guantanamo gulag.

Al Jazeera has four reporters on the ground in Gaza, including from Gaza City's Shifa Hospital, carrying interviews from European volunteer doctors working for a variety of NGO’s. Al Jazeera’s Jacky Rowland reports from both sides of the Israel/Gaza border. Suffice it to say that their reports don’t exactly confirm claims by senior Israeli leaders like Tzvipi Livni that there isn’t a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Al Jazeera also has’t spared senior HAMAS leaders like Osama Hamdan in Beirut from tough questioning about why they don’t just promise not to fire further rockets into southern Israel.

The AP/AFP cited above reports that "Israeli officials are unapologetic about the ban, saying many foreign reporters are biased against Israel and easily manipulated or intimidated by Hamas". It doesn’t help when Israeli Defense Forces kill family members of Western journalists like Fares Akram.

First published in Crikey on Wednesday 07 January 2008.

UPDATE I: The following responses were left on the Crikey website as at 6pm ...

Tim McCann
Wednesday, 7 January 2009 2:01:15 PM
Thanks Ifran, Sometimes it seems that Australian media outlets assume ordinary folk have no access to satelite or even online media resources and must simply rely upon 'Western Journalists" and commentators for the facts and analysis. Some of the reporting from the ground in Gaza is truly terrifying and at times nauseating, but it is worth it to stay in touch with more than one more BBC "reporter" shouting at us from an Israeli checkpoint overlooking, at a distance, an ongoing war.

steve martin
Wednesday, 7 January 2009 2:42:04 PM

On the few occasions I have accessed Al Jazeera on the internet I have found their reporting as good as any of the "western" reports.

Tom McLoughlin
Wednesday, 7 January 2009 5:07:31 PM

Margaret Simons noted on Content Makers blog that a certain former Channel 9 news producer, and respected ex ABC reporter Max Uechtritzs is also working for Al Jazeera with a link on her blog to the net streaming. It's an excellent reminder here Irfan and put so diplomatically too, considering. Here's the link.


Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf

Delicious
Bookmark this on Delicious

Digg!

Get Flocked

Friday, February 03, 2006

COMMENT: All that time and effort wasted on 12 cartoons ...

In Indonesia, hundreds of thousands of Muslims continue to be traumatised, homeless and in desperate need in the aftermath of the tsunami. In Darfur, Muslims continue to starve. In Pakistan, tens of thousands of Muslims are without shelter after the earthquake disaster. In Gaza, Palestinians face a complete economic breakdown as Israel turns off the fiscal tap.

Thousands of Muslim women are assaulted or killed by family members to protect “honour”. And during a recent visit to the world’s largest Muslim country, a delegation of 5 young Australian Muslims was given a taste of life for many Indonesians.

Our tour was sponsored by the Australia Indonesia Institute. Each year, delegations of young Indonesian Muslim leaders visit Australia and vice versa. This year, the Australian delegation visited the headquarters of the Muslim women’s group Rifka Annisa (literally “Women’s Refuge”) in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

The good people at RA struggle to support Muslim women who are victims of domestic violence. With minimal resources, the organisation is able to provide support to a few hundred women and children each year. The organisation also works with sex workers and other marginalised women across Indonesia.

With so much work to be done, you’d think Muslims are upto their necks in fighting poverty and other economic and social ills. You’d think that protesting mobs in Karachi and other Pakistani cities are busy raising funds for earthquake victims.

Think again. Muslims across the world appear to be suffering from a form of collective stupidity. Instead of focussing on the enormous challenges facing their nations, Muslims are spending much of their time focussing on 12 cartoons first published in a Danish newspaper.

Muslims are protesting against what they see as an attack on the honour of their Prophet. Seriously, as if the Prophet’s honour is affected by one Danish cartoonist. If these Muslim protesters really loved their Prophet, they would struggle in support of the things he and all the other Prophets (including Moses, Noah, Abraham and Jesus) struggled for – human rights, justice and liberty.

Instead, Muslims waste their precious time and resources on infantile protests that achieve nothing except turn the cartoonist into a martyr for free speech.

I could say a lot more. But I have some serious work to do. I’d rather spend my time working and earning money so that a good portion of it can be spent in assisting groups like Rifka Annisa to supplement moneys they already receive from private and government donors in countries such as … yep, you guessed it … Denmark!

So if you really want to know what I think of the nonsensical and over-the-top responses to the cartoons, read this piece from altmuslim.com.

Words © 2005 Irfan Yusuf