When observing the aerial bombardment, heavy artillery and haubitzer shelling of Gaza, three years ago, I remembered Erich Maria Remarqe's, book All quiet on the Western Front, and the passage that has been deeply imprinted into my memory, where he described the shelling of a graveyard during the first world war, while a platoon of troops that got caught in artillery fire while passing the site was desperately seeking cover in the craters riddled with the bones of their rotting fellow human beings. The dead were killed for a second time, he wrote. ^[1]

The mere fact that Remarqe and this passage of his book come to mind when contemplating the situation in Gaza is sufficient for me to know that I need no further contemplation to know that something is going terribly awry in our sense of humanity when it comes to Palestinians, and who would wonder that the people of the world stand idly by when schools, women and children are bombed to unrecognizable pieces of flesh, and when children are taken hostage by IDF troops who are using them as human shields, as occurred during operation Cast Lead. One could read "Palestine Israel, History and Theirstory " ^[2] if one wants to know more about why much of the world does not care about Palestinian suffering.

Early this morning Israeli jets shelled areas in Northern and central Gaza. According to Israeli military forces because the areas had been used to fire a few home made Katusha rockets into what is now called Israel. After having had a look at what these dreaded Qassam Missiles are it becomes obvious that they are nothing more than some super sized firecrackers. The damage that can be caused by 10 of them can hardly be compared to the energy that is released by a single tank shell with a killing radius of the size of a football field.

There is a very useful term called proportionality which elicits much of the problem. When an entire people is systematically deprived of it's humanity by corporate media, entertainment industry and propaganda experts, who are euphemistically called spin doctors, then it becomes understandable that the merciless butchering of a thousand Palestinians by a thousand highly explosive high tech artillery shells plus bombs and rockets, is a proportionate response to two firecracker like Qassam missiles that injured a goat and frightened someone who chose to live on illegally occupied land.

It's absolutely proportional to keep hundreds of Palestinian child prisoners, thousands of adult male and female prisoners who have been illegally arrested in prison, because those terrorists have kidnapped one of the heroic Israeli soldiers who valiantly defend the genocide.

Israeli military sources are reporting that the bombing raid a couple of days ago, on the anniversary of Cast Lead as well as the bombing raid this morning, may be precursors of a new offensive.

It seems Israel is developing a delicate sense for the celebration of genocide. "Bibi, it's the three year anniversary of our murder of 1.200 Palestinian women and children, lets celebrate."

If Bibi Netanyahu and company need a pretext for another large scale massacre, why not wait until New Year. Imagine the awesome firepower of all those celebratory rockets sent into the skies and the countless firecrackers at new years eve. Bibi could even blame the Chinese for delivering those dangerous weapons to the terrorists, right? Or when was the last time you have seen fireworks not made in China?

"There "must" be one or two of them that fall into our liberated Holy Land, so we cam murder a few thousand more Palestinians". "Bibi, you could also have a couple of delicious preemptive strikes against Gaza, because I am sure that those damned tunnels are used to smuggle all kinds of food that they use to celebrate ." "No, General, we must have the tunnels open so they can get their new years firecrackers to Gaza, how else should we find an excuse for bombing them."

My best wishes to the people who are condemned to live within the worlds largest extermination camp, Gaza. My deep respect for those who live in the worlds largest extermination camp and still make full use of their right to resist against the genocide on their people, rather than behaving like a sheep waiting for the slaughter.

And my deepest respect for them not giving up to insist on their right to live on their own land, to self determination, statehood, peace, and their right to defend themselves from an attacking, occupying or besieging military force.

Happy New Year Gaza

Happy new year Palestine

Happy Anniversary of the Cast Lead Genocide, Israel.

Slideshow photos from Gaza Massacre - Cast Lead, 2008:
[[Show as slideshow]]

1) All quiet at the Western Front, Erich Maria Remarque, 1928, https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/All_Quiet_on_the_Western_Front

2) Palestine Israel, History and Theirstory, Lehmann Ch. 2011, nsnbc http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/11/13/palestine-israel-history-and-theirstory/

"Liberty, Oh Liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name."
--Madame Roland, French Revolution, on her way to the Guillotine

Much like Gandhi's Salt March in India in 1930 the "March of Life" in Yemen began in the besieged bombed southern city of Taiz with tens of thousands of men, women, and children, walking for five days to the northern capitol city of Sana to protest the illegal immunity given the blood and money thirsty tyrant, President Ali Abdullah Saleh by the U.S. – Saudi Plan.

The plan calls for a transfer of power from Saleh to his vice president while he remains in power for three months. Yemen's population wholeheartedly rejects this appeasing plan. Saleh is a chronic liar who has never lived up to any promise or agreement he's ever made or signed, much life all of Israel's prime ministers.

Upon arriving in Sana the peaceful March of Life became the "March of Death", when the exhausted protesters were met by the murderous Republican Guard led by Saleh's son, who opened fire on the protesters killing at least 13 and wounding scores of civilians.

In keeping with America's blind support of Arab dictators, the Jewish American Ambassador to Yemen, Gerald Felerstein, held a press conference at the U.S. Embassy (even prior to the arrival of the March to the capitol Sana) arrogantly and obnoxiously warning that this March "is aimed to cause chaos and violence...it seems to have the intention not to carry out a peaceful march...and will provoke a violent response by the security forces."

These shocking remarks earned the Ambassador and the U.S. the scorn and hatred of the Yemeni population who've always known that Saleh is an American mole and puppet.

Like Saleh, President Obama, the Sultan of Drone massacres in the Arab and Muslim world. has betrayed his every promise as well as having shred the American Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the civil liberties of the American people.

He has shown the world that he is a spineless leader who if opposed immediately caves in. A man apparently suffering from an inferiority complex to those in power whether in Corporate America, Congress, the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, special interests, the media; and most especially to Israel that slapped him back into kosher coherence and submissiveness more so than any previous American President.

From left: Ali Abdullah Saleh, Obama, Hillary Clinton and Gerald Feierstein

As a coddler of murderous Arab tyrants he's been late and conflicted to act courageously and forcefully to support the Arab Spring that seeks freedom from tyranny and free democratic governments.

In an inexplicable slap to American interests in Yemen, Obama has stupidly invited Saleh to come to the U.S. under the pretense of medical treatment; making the U.S. a state that harbors terrorists turning the Bush Doctrine of attacking States that harbor terrorists on its head.

What on earth would prompt Obama to harbor and coddle this terrorist and allow him entry into the United States?

The answer my friend is the alleged "war on terror" that has justified America's wars and total support of dictators. As long as these tyrants purportedly are fighting a real or imagined anti-American "terror" group, they are free to annihilate their people while keeping their rule and stolen treasures under American protection.

If you kill "them", you are a U.S. ally, thereby entitled to billions of tax dollars, weapons, international protection, and be hailed as a freedom fighter.

To America, Saleh's value lies in his alleged fight against "Al Qaeda."

Hilary Clinton became the first U.S. Secretary of State to visit Yemen in early January 2011, just two weeks prior to the uprising. She outlined the reason behind America's support for Saleh the murderer.

She said:

"We face a common threat posed by the terrorists and al-Qaeda... I want to be frank about the fact that there are terrorists operating from Yemen's territory today...stopping these threats would be a priority for any nation, and it is a priority for us."

Hence, the lives of billions of civilians on this planet are simply collateral damage to western imperialistic thirst and greed for natural resources found under the feet of the dark people, no more so than the oil beneath Arab feet.

America thinks with its guns; not its mind, and certainly not its heart.

Obama should retain some honor and dignity for himself and his country by refusing to allow Yemen's terrorist, President Ali Abdullah Saleh, to enter this nation.

Rather he should refer him to the International Criminal Court for prosecution of his war crimes. But that would mean America truly believes in the sanctity of life, human rights, and justice; virtues belied by its addiction to war and oil.

American can ill afford to lose the Arab and Muslim world due to its blind adoption of Israel's policies of constant war and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians as well as its support of Arab dictators.

Past and future American Presidents in their stupefying short term foreign policy in the Arab/Muslim world will make the prophecy of a "Clash of Civilizations" a reality; and such a conflict can only lead to the demise of the American-Israeli-European imperial hegemony.

President Obama, for the sake of your legacy, America's national interests, American values of freedom and justice, you must reject Saleh's entry into this country. He deserves prison not a suite in a New York City Hotel.

* Mohamed Khodr is a political activist who frequently writes on the plight of Palestinians living under the brutal occupation of Israel, U.S. Foreign Policy, Islam, and Arab politics.

O little town of Bethlehem
How still we see thee lie
Above thy deep and dreamless sleep
The silent stars go by
Yet in thy dark streets shineth
The everlasting Light
The hopes and fears of all the years
Are met in thee tonight

While carving the turkey for your family and merrily quaffing mulled wine 'midst happy laughter, remember that the romantic Little Town of Bethlehem at the centre of our childhood Christmases is now "an immense prison" in the words of Michel Sabbah, former Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, and entirely surrounded by Israel's ugly 8-metre separation wall bristling with machine-gun towers.

The good citizens of Bethlehem are cut off from their capital Jerusalem, only six miles away, the rest of the West Bank and the whole world.

Consider that the United Nations, for obvious reasons, designated Jerusalem and Bethlehem a protected international zone under UN administration. Israeli rule was not to be permitted.

Consider also that when Palestine was under British mandate Christians accounted for 20 per cent of the population and how 63 years of terror, illegal occupation, dispossession, interference and economic wrecking tactics have whittled their numbers down to less than 2 per cent.

Consider that, at this rate, there will soon be no Christians left in the land where Christianity was born... thanks to the cowardice and inaction of our political leaders.

How will the 26 bishops sitting around in our House of Lords, doing nothing, explain that to their dwindling congregations?

As usual, many Palestinians in Bethlehem and the other cities and villages throughout occupied Palestine will be unable to reunite with their families or celebrate Christmas at their holy places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem due to cruel Israeli-imposed travel restrictions. Imagine for a moment what sort of Christmas the half-starved children in blockaded Gaza are having this year, and every year... and what New Year prospects face all the other Palestinian children struggling to grow up with the Israeli army's boot on their necks.

Deep down it is not about religion at all. The struggle is between justice and a criminal conspiracy of huge international proportions, the tentacles of which spread far beyond the Holy Land and impact on all of us, even here in the deepest recesses of England's green and pleasant land.

In the New Year civil society must resolve to DO SOMETHING about it, one way or another, before the evil spins irreversibly out of control.

* Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. Read other articles by Stuart.

An Israeli solider shoot and kill Mustafa Tamimi at near point-blank range with a tear-gas canister to the face.

There is a famous scene in Mary Shelley's classic where Victor Frankenstein realises that he created a monster and that this monster might be the end of him. Such is the scene that comes to mind when thinking about the news emerging from the occupied West Bank in recent days. Israeli settlers, living in illegal colonies in Palestinian territory, rioted again. This time, however, they did not go after their usual target - Palestinian civilians - rather, they raided an Israeli military base where they injured an Israeli soldier.

Suddenly, the Israeli government sprang into action. An emergency meeting of the Israeli cabinet was called. Officials - Israeli officials - even began to use the term "terrorist" to describe the perpetrators.

Just a day earlier, Israeli settlers from the Settlement of Yitzhar raided the Palestinian village of Asira al-Qibliya, causing damage to property and terrifying residents. Also, in the past week alone, three different Palestinian mosques in Ramallah, Salfit and Jerusalem suffered arson attacks at the hands of Israeli settlers.

These sorts of attacks against Palestinians are a regular occurrence. Arsons, stonings, destruction of property, shootings, physical attacks and harassment are but a few of the daily occurring categories we have kept track of in the Palestine Centre's Settler Violence database. In 2011 there have been a record number of violent settler attacks. In fact, in each of the previous five years, settler violence has increased from one year to the next.

Despite this undeniable fact, the Israeli government has done little to crack down on this type of violence. The main reason why settler violence has been able to increase, year after year, is because the settlers continue to feel emboldened when their attacks against Palestinian civilians go undeterred.

The Oslo Accords divided the West Bank into three geographic areas. In Area A, in which most Palestinian urban centres fall, the Palestinian Authority is responsible for security (although the Israelis routinely enter Area A at will) but in Areas B and C, which comprise over 80 per cent of the territory, it is the Israelis which are responsible for security. This means Palestinian police are not permitted to protect Palestinian civilians from Israeli settlers in most of the West Bank. The problem is, of course, that the Israelis are not doing this job either and so it should come as no surprise that 95 per cent of settler violence occurs in Areas B and C.

Often the Israeli Army turns the other way when Israeli settlers attack Palestinians. In some cases caught on video, Israeli soldiers stand idly by while settlers rampage. In other cases, like the one earlier this year in Qusra, the Israeli army intervenes to protect settlers once they've started altercations with villagers. That is how Isam Oudeh was killed - defending his own village - in September.

Israeli settler violence against Palestinians and the Israeli state's failure to adequately respond to it highlight an important aspect of the Israeli occupation's Apartheid-like policies. The Israeli Human Rights Organisation B'Tselem documented 835 cases of Palestinian minors being arrested for stone-throwing from 2005-2010. Of these, 99.88 per cent were convicted in military trials. There have been hundreds of stone-throwing attacks by Israeli settlers in 2011 alone, yet few are ever arrested - let alone convicted - and throwing stones is among the least of their crimes.

Last week, a 28-year-old Palestinian named Mustafa Tamimi in the village of Nabi Saleh was protesting the continued expansion of Israeli settlements and particularly the confiscation of land and water resources belonging to his village. These had been taken by the neighbouring Israeli settlement of Halamish with the support of the Israeli military.

Tamimi was shot and killed at near point-blank range with a tear-gas canister to the face.

For years, the Israeli military that governs the West Bank and the state that directs it have supported deplorable policies to repress protesters like Tamimi, who oppose settlement expansion. But the state fails to implement policies to crack down on settlers who seek the exact opposite, and often use violent means to achieve their objectives.

No one should be surprised. The problem of settler violence is a monster that Israel has created, nourished and supported. Now, with attacks on Israeli military bases, the monster may even have turned on its creator.

When will this tragic horror end?

When we realise that it is the military occupation and its underlying policies that have brought it to life.

This article originally appeared on AlJazeera.net.

* Yousef Munayyer is a writer and political analyst based in Washington, DC. He is currently the Executive Director of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development.

On December 9, al-Nabi Saleh village residents protested peacefully against settlers stealing their land. At point blank range, an Israeli soldier fired a tear-gas canister directly at Mustafa Tamimi's head, killing him.

On December 10, thousands of Palestinians protested against his cold-blooded murder. Tamimi was the 20th Palestinian killed this way in the past eight years, besides many more by other means, especially in Gaza.

On December 12, a Haaretz editorial headlined, "In Israel, the life of a Palestinian is cheap," saying:

"The pictures from....Nabi Saleh are hard to swallow: An Israel Defense Forces soldier opens the back door of an armored military jeep and, from a distance of just a few meters, fires a tear-gas canister directly at a young man who is throwing stones. After the canister is fired, the jeep continues on its way without stopping."

Al-Nabi Saleh residents, like other West Bank ones, hold weekly nonviolent anti-land theft/Separation Wall demonstrations. It's their country and property. Under international law, they have every right to defend it. Not according to Israel.

Since 1967, under Military Order No 101: "Order Regarding Prohibition of Incitement and Hostile Propaganda Action," It's "forbidden to conduct a protest or march or meeting (involving 10 or more participants for political reasons) without permission of the Military Commander."

The same order forbids distributing political articles, pictures, or other materials.

In other words, an illegal occupier prohibits Palestinians from exercising their free expression and assembly rights on their own land, in their own country, under threat of intimidation, attacks, arrests, imprisonments, torture, and at times death.

In response to Tamimi's murder, an IDF spokesman said, "the army is looking into the incident." "Looking into" means whitewash. Arrests, prosecutions, justice, or even apologies rarely ever follow military, police or settler violence.

Haaretz cited a new Yesh Din-Volunteers for Human Rights report discussing 192 Palestinian complaints and 67 Military Police "investigations" involving harm to Palestinians and their property. It showed that "95.5 percent of the total number of complaints are closed without indictments."

Moreover, nearly always when they occur, penalties at most are minor and inconsequential. The "conclusion is obvious," said Haaretz. "When it comes to shooting a Palestinian, pulling the trigger does not come with a real fear of having to answer to the law."

Soldiers, police and even settlers can kill or otherwise harm with impunity. Tamimi's death and many others show that Palestinian life is "cheap."

Nonetheless, Israel's military called his killing "exceptional," saying the offending soldier's gas mask blocked his vision, despite aiming directly at Tamimi's head from about 9 feet away.

According to journalist/editor Noam Sheizaf:

"(A)s we have reported here in the past, firing tear gas canisters at protesters from close range (in violation of army orders) is a common practice in the West Bank."

"I have seen tear gas canisters shot directly at protesters (including myself) in several demonstrations in Bil'in, in Hebron, and in Nabi Saleh."

"When you viciously fire tear gas canisters like the IDF does, someone is bound to die. The IDF is lying when it implies that incidents like these don't happen often."

According to French photographer Anne Paq, "I am wearing a gas mask all the time to take pics. I can tell you, you can see if somebody is 5 meters in front of you!" Israel lied claiming otherwise.

Moreover, IDF rules of engagement prohibit firing tear gas grenades or other projectiles from rifles pointed directly at demonstrators or from a distance within 40 meters. In addition, soldiers must use rifle sights and verify that no one's in their line of fire.

In practice, however, rules of engagement, as well as Israeli and international laws don't matter. Soldiers, police and settlers attack Palestinians with impunity. The practice is longstanding and lawless. Nonetheless, it persists virtually daily throughout the Territories.

Al-Haq Report on Repression of Nonviolent Protests

On December 10, Al-Haq published a report titled, "Repression of Non-Violent Protest in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: Case Study on the village of al-Nabi Saleh," saying:

Since Israel began constructing its Separation/Annexation Wall in 2002, West Bank Palestinians protested against theft of their land. Villagers usually do it weekly on Fridays.

In response, Israel retaliates "with an intense campaign of violence, intimidation and arrests..." In the past two years especially, escalated viciousness has been common, including increased violence and brutality against peaceful Palestinian protesters. Al Haq knows of at least 13 deaths since 2004, as well as many other injuries and arrests.

Al-Nabi Saleh residents repeatedly lodged complaints in vain, despite Israel's High Court 1978 ruling that land confiscation was illegal and had to be returned to their rightful Palestinian owners. Israeli authorities refused to comply. As a result, West Bank villagers lose more land, and know no other recourse than to protest.

In Al-Nabi Saleh and other villages, Israeli forces "deliberately creat(e) a hostile atmosphere" during protests. Military commanders give soldiers "vast powers to suppress (them) and imprison participants for extended periods of up to ten years."

Residents on their own land are accused of "incitement." As a result, they face long prison terms and large fines.

As soon as protests begin, soldier attack them with tear gas canisters, stun grenades, rubber bullets, "skunk" foul-smelling chemicals, and beatings. In response, some Palestinians throw stones. Doing so escalates retaliatory violence.

Paramedics are prevented from treating and evacuating injured residents. Instead, occupying forces arrest them. Commanders lie saying soldiers only respond to stone-throwers.

Documented testimonies say "force is not directly related to stone-throwing or any other alleged physical threat to the soldiers' safety, and seems instead to be targeted against the protest as a movement."

In other words, soldiers are ordered to use force indiscriminately against nonviolent protesters. When they respond defensively, intense retaliatory violence follows. So do deaths and severe injuries.

Moreover, Palestinian bystanders and in homes are affected. Documented cases show "Israeli soldiers have fired teargas or rubber-coated metal bullets (at) people standing on rooftops, passing by the area, or watching events by their windows."

Residents estimate soldiers fire up to 500 tear-gas canisters during weekly protest demonstrations alone. They're launched from mortars atop militarized jeeps in batches of 20 or more at a time.

Thick clouds of gas then spread over targeted areas. Panic and fear ensue. So does psychological trauma. Women, children, the elderly and infirm are affected. Windows are shattered firing canisters through them. Gas inhalation harms residents inside. Property damage also occurs.

Moreover, "intimidation, arbitrary arrests, beatings, and night raids" occur regularly. Children as young as 10 are affected. Some are seized at home in middle-of-the-night raids and sent to repressive detention centers for intimidating interrogations and threats of torture for not cooperating.

Outrageously, Israel says it abides by Fourth Geneva provisions. At the same time, it doesn't specify what it considers humanitarian. In addition, it claims international law doesn't apply to Occupied Palestine. "The actions of (its soldiers) in repressing Palestinian protests reflect this position."

Nonetheless, international law is clear and unequivocal. Civilians under occupation are protected persons. Violence is absolutely prohibited. Fundamental human rights remain in force. Violations are forbidden.

"Law enforcement activities must always be subject to the international human rights standards applicable to civilian police operations, which may never be conducted like hostilities against combatants."

Israel repeatedly and willfully breaches this and virtually all other international law standards - including the right to life, the most fundamental one of all.

Instead, wanton, excessive, undisciplined force is disproportionately unleashed against peaceful protesters on their own land defending it heroically against hostile soldiers.

Israeli rules of engagement are also violated. Section 8 of the "Permanent commands from the operation department" states:

"As a rule, it is prohibited to shoot live fire in the direction of a stone thrower."

"It is allowed to execute the procedure for a suspect's arrest only when the attack is massive in a manner that endangers the life of the soldier or another person...."

"In unique danger circumstances, when an imminent and real threat to life is perceived....it is necessary to shoot directly with a purpose of hitting the body of the attacker and remove the threat."

Police must also observe these provisions, and take all precautions to avoid gratuitous violence. Nonetheless, civilian and military security forces violate these rules with impunity.

They have no respect for international law or their own. They repeatedly violate basic human and civil rights, including expression, assembly, security, liberty, health, and life.

As a result, Palestinians face daily cruel and unusual punishment. While no precise definition exists, common law refers to disproportionate fines, penalties, confinement or treatment.

America's Eighth Amendment prohibits the federal government from imposing cruel and unusual punishments. Specifically it states:

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted."

America's Fourteenth Amendment due process clause bars states from imposing such punishments. In addition, most state constitutions prohibit cruel and unusual punishment of any kind.

Despite precise definitions, it's like pornography/obscenity. In Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said "I know it when I see it."

It became one of the High Court's most remembered comments, despite lacking legal precision.

In contrast, no ambiguity whatever exists when peaceful protesters are violently attacked defending their rights.

It especially holds when children, the elderly, infirm and innocent bystanders are affected. In Occupied Palestine, they are repeatedly.

* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.

By Julie Webb-Pullman

Drone spotted above Gaza on Friday afternoon

A "security situation" created by Israel's murderous breaking of a truce, with absolutely no cause.

A "security situation" created by Israel sending military forces backed by tanks and bulldozers into Gazan territory, Al Muntar on Tuesday 6th December – a provocation to which Gaza did not respond.

A "security situation" created by Israel on Wednesday 7th December, when Israeli military aircraft targeted a group of citizens near Anas Bin Malek Mosque in Al-shujaeyeh neighbourhood of east Gaza City, killing 22 year old Ismail Salameh and critically wounding two others, and another Israeli warplane fired a missile at another Gazan in al-Zaytoun neighbourhood, seriously wounding him - provocations to which Gaza did not respond.

A "security situation" created by Israel on Thursday 8th December blowing up a car in rush hour in the middle of the city, next to a crowded children's playground, killing two members of the same family and hospitalising two bystanders. Several busloads of high school students on a school trip were nearby, and fled screaming.

Thousands of Gazans walk past that spot every day, as do I, on my way to the NGO I am working with, and no doubt many were thinking, as was I, "There but for the grace of God..."

Finally, in response to these blatant provocations, on the anniversary of the first intifada, some Gazans responded late Thursday afternoon, with rockets fired at Israel, in self-defence – causing no material damage, and no deaths or injury.

The "security situation" was then escalated by Israel on Friday 9th December, with more air strikes killing two civilians in their home at dawn, one of them a 12 year old boy, and injuring 13 more family members, all of whom happened to live next door to an Israeli 'target' – provocations to which Gazans again responded, with rockets that neither damaged, killed nor injured any Israelis.

The current situation is a chilling echo of that immediately prior to Operation Cast Lead in December 2008, when Israel ended a four-month cease fire during which rocket attacks from Gaza had dropped to zero, by killing Palestinians, who then fired rockets into Israel.

Launching of rockets at Israel is a symbolic, rather than a murderous, retaliation. The disproportion in the Gazan response was not only in its relative lack of lethality, but also in its relative lack of civilian victims.

Before Benny Gantz and his henchmen trot out the usual justifications, they would do well to reflect on the January 2009 words of Victor Kattan, a jurist with the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London:

"On the very morning Israel launched its offensive in Gaza, the day it killed 225 Palestinians, Gabriela Shalev, its UN Ambassador, sent a letter to the UN Secretary-General announcing that 'after a long period of utmost restraint, the Government of Israel has decided to exercise, as of this morning, its right to self-defence.' "

This statement flew in the face of the facts, which were that there had been no rocket attacks for four months, yet Israel began killing Gazans regardless.

Article 2 of the UN General Assembly's 1974 Definition of Aggression stipulates that:

"The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression."

This week again, as in 2008, Israel has committed the first use of armed force.

Kattan also pointed out that:

"In 1970, the UN General Assembly in resolution 2649 (XXV) affirmed 'the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial and alien domination recognized as being entitled to the right of self-determination to restore to them that right by any means at their disposal.'"

As Kattan went on to say:

"Most importantly, the law of armed conflict prohibits belligerent reprisals against civilians, civilian populations and certain civilian objects. This is confirmed in Articles 51, paragraph 6 and Article 54, paragraph 4 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. It also goes beyond the proportionality requirement in the law of self-defence."

For the above reasons, Kattan, and more than two dozen international law experts, all rejected Israel's claim in the 2008 letter to the UN.

Kattan concluded in 2009:

"Israel's Gaza offensive cannot be legally justified by any right of self-defense and instead constitutes aggression and a forcible deprivation of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination."

The same holds true today. Israel is not protecting its security, it is deliberately provoking, in order to provide a flimsy justification for another Gaza offensive, a re-cast of 2008-9.

Events in Egypt have Israel worried. It wants Gaza back, but empty of Palestinians.

If the international community does not act now to reign in the rogue state of Israel, it will almost certainly continue with another massacre of innocents. How many thousand Gazans - and anyone else in the enclave, myself included - will die unnecessary deaths this time, at the robotic hands of USraeli drone-delivered missiles decimating civilian targets? (How can there be OTHER than civilian targets when 1.7 million people are herded into a 360 sq km open air prison?)

The international community has no excuses this time.

ENDS

Dr. Christof Lehmann * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

In 50 minutes it's the 16th of September. Twenty nine years have past, my goodness. I'll never forget you wonderful people. Neither will I forget the extremes of inhumanity and human compassion, the ugliness and beauty, the laughter and grins while murdering with a disregard for humanity and life impossible to comprehend, and the tears and cries of deepest despair and suffering no human being, not even an animal should experience. The days of terror I had to share with you were also the greatest lesson on human greatness, and the deepest beauty of the collective Palestinian Spirit, I ever had to endure. Confused ? So am I. Even after 29 years I still can`t comprehend the full impact the experience has had on me, nor on you. At least I had the privilege to leave after it was possible to get out of the ruins of Sabra and Shatila. You could not. It makes me sad, really. So sad that I never returned to face the demons in my memory and my bad conscience over leaving you behind. There is so much I don't know because I left you behind, beaten, bloody in body mind and soul. Broken glass that shines like a diamond in the sun, crying out to the world, "let us live in peace". The only thing I know with absolute certainty is this:

Neither you, nor me, nor anyone should ever experience the inhumanity of pure unleashed evil, and until my last breath I will do what I can to prevent anything like Sabra and Shatila from ever happening again.

As you see, I am utter failure.

Dr. Christof Lehmann

After 29 Years I am Still Speechless. So PLEASE, just watch these Documentaries.

GRAPHIC: VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED

Video link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6251717507378085992&hl=da
50 Minutes Documentary with Interviews of politicians, eyewitnesses, and survivors, as well as Video Documentation of the Aftermath of the Massacres in Sabra and Shatila.

The Massacre in Sabra and Shatila was not the first, nor the last in a still ongoing genocide on the people of Palestine. While the massacre in Sabra and Shatila was committed under the Defence Minitry of Ariel Sharon, the massacre in Jenin was committed while he was Prime Minister. Please also watch Jenin Jenin.

Video link: http://youtu.be/qJmUryVKQrU

About the recognition of Palestine at the u.N. This month please read this article.

Thank you for taking the time to inform yourselves.

Please support Palestinians right to self-determination in Palestine and a worthy life - PNGO – Palestinian NGO Network.

* Dr. Christof Lehmann, a life time peace activist, psychologist, and advisor in behavior, finance, economics and politics.

and here's perhaps the most important

By Stuart Littlewood * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

The following report from Bethlehem University that academic staff had been attacked yet again, this time by Israeli squatters, reminds me of how the Israelis apparently resent the Palestinians' fine education tradition. They have seen to it that Palestinian universities suffer the severest restrictions in delivering knowledge.

Bethlehem University, which includes many Muslims among its students, has been closed a dozen times by Israeli storm-troopers. In 2002 it sustained 4 Israeli missile hits, three to the Millennium Hall and one to the Heritage Centre in the Library. 100 soldiers later stormed into the buildings and did further damage.

In January 2003 the university's president pleaded: "Can anyone do anything to change this systematic strangulation?" Nevertheless staff succeed and students continue to flourish against all odds.

On one of my visits I spoke with Brother Cyril, a kindly, mild-mannered American from Minnesota, who ran the University. He was about to go on leave. "What do your friends back home say when you tell them what's happened here?" I asked.

He shrugged. "They listen for ten minutes then switch off."

It is unclear whether the British government intends joining the US and Israel in their spoiling tactics when the Palestinians' bid for independence is put to the United Nations later this month. I have asked my MP about that and I hope UK readers will press their own MPs on the subject.

* Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. Read other articles by Stuart.

Gaza not represented in blockade whitewash

By Stuart Littlewood * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

"Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law... the flotilla acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade."

That's the conclusion of the Palmer inquiry, brought to you by that freak-show the United Nation, under its Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon.

It's completely at odds with what other experts have said. The UN itself has already accepted that Israel's blockade is illegal. One of its own fact-finding missions declared that it constituted collective punishment of the people living in the Gaza Strip and thus was illegal and contrary to Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The action by Israel's military in intercepting the Mavi Marmara on the high seas was "clearly unlawful" and couldn't be justified even under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations [the right of self-defence]. "No case can be made for the legality of the interception and the Mission therefore finds that the interception was illegal".

The Centre for Constitutional Rights also concluded that the Israeli blockade was illegal. "Due both to the legal nature of Israel's relationship to Gaza – that of occupier – and the impact of the blockade on the civilian population, amounting to 'collective punishment', the blockade cannot be reconciled with the principles of international law, including international humanitarian law... The flotilla did not seek to travel to Israel, let alone 'attack' Israel... Israel could have diplomatically engaged Turkey, arranged for a third party to verify there were no weapons onboard and then peacefully guided the vessel to Gaza."

Craig Murray also knows a thing or two about such matters, having headed the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He was responsible for giving political and legal clearance to Royal Navy boarding operations in the Persian Gulf following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, to enforce the UN authorised blockade against Iraqi weapons shipments. He commented: "Right of free passage is guaranteed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas... Israel has declared a blockade on Gaza and justified previous fatal attacks on neutral civilian vessels on the High Seas in terms of enforcing that embargo, under the legal cover given by the San Remo Manual of International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

But, he explains, San Remo only applies to blockade in times of armed conflict. "Israel is not currently engaged in an armed conflict... San Remo does not confer any right to impose a permanent blockade outwith times of armed conflict, and in fact specifically excludes as illegal a general blockade on an entire population."

Furthermore, Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) emphasizes "the need to ensure sustained and regular flow of goods and people through the Gaza crossings" and calls for "the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment". Israel has imposed a land blockade for decades and until very recently had a hand in keeping Gaza's land crossing with Egypt closed. The 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access between the Palestinian Authority and Israel is also ignored. So the only sensible channel for "unimpeded provision and distribution" is by sea.

Panel "cannot make definitive findings"

The Terms of Reference for the inquiry handed down by Ban Ki-Moon set out a 'method of work', which is described in the report this way...

"The Panel is not a court. It was not asked to make determinations of the legal issues or to adjudicate on liability...

"The Panel was required to obtain its information from the two nations primarily involved in its inquiry, Turkey and Israel, and other affected States.... the limitation is important. It means that the Panel cannot make definitive findings either of fact or law. The information for the Panel's work came primarily through its interactions with the Points of Contact designated by Israel and Turkey."

So it could not summon individuals or approach individuals or organizations direct. It could only do so through the Points of Contact designated by Israel and Turkey.

"The legal views of Israel and Turkey are no more authoritative or definitive than our own. A Commission of Inquiry is not a court any more than the Panel is. The findings of a Commission of Inquiry bind no one, unlike those of a court. So the legal issues at large in this matter have not been authoritatively determined by the two States involved and neither can they be by the Panel."

The 4-man panel included a representative each from the governments of Turkey and Israel, and was headed by Sir Geoffrey Palmer (Chair) and Alvaro Uribe, 58th president of Colombia. Palmer was the 33rd prime minister of New Zealand if that's any consolation.

Note the absence of anyone to represent the views of the party targeted by the blockade. Ban Ki-Moon didn't think it necessary to invite someone from (horror of horrors) the government of Gaza. Can you imagine, if the tables were turned, the merry hell Israel would kick up if not represented on an inquiry about the legality of a blockade on one of its ports?

Limited to this, couldn't do that... Ban Ki-Moon's inquiry was warped from the start. "This Panel is unique. Its methods of inquiry are similarly unique," says the report, slitting its own throat.

Key passages from Palmer's nonsensical 105 pages speak for themselves:

"The naval blockade is often discussed in tandem with the Israeli restrictions on the land crossings to Gaza. However, in the Panel's view, these are in fact two distinct concepts... the land crossings policy has been in place since long before the naval blockade was instituted. In particular, the tightening of border controls between Gaza and Israel came about after the take-over of Hamas in Gaza in June 2007. On the other hand, the naval blockade was imposed more than a year later, in January 2009. Second, Israel has always kept its policies on the land crossings separate from the naval blockade. The land restrictions have fluctuated in intensity over time but the naval blockade has not been altered since its imposition. Third, the naval blockade as a distinct legal measure was imposed primarily to enable a legally sound basis for Israel to exert control over ships attempting to reach Gaza with weapons and related goods.

"Israel has faced and continues to face a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. Rockets, missiles and mortar bombs have been launched from Gaza towards Israel since 2001. More than 5,000 were fired between 2005 and January 2009, when the naval blockade was imposed. Hundreds of thousands of Israeli civilians live in the range of these attacks.... Since 2001 such attacks have caused more than 25 deaths and hundreds of injuries. The enormity of the psychological toll on the affected population cannot be underestimated. In addition, there have been substantial material losses. The purpose of these acts of violence, which have been repeatedly condemned by the international community, has been to do damage to the population of Israel. It seems obvious enough that stopping these violent acts was a necessary step for Israel to take in order to protect its people and to defend itself."

Did they never consider the most obvious step of all - ending their illegal occupation?

"The Israeli report to the Panel makes it clear that the naval blockade as a measure of the use of force was adopted for the purpose of defending its territory and population, and the Panel accepts that was the case.

"Although a blockade by definition imposes a restriction on all maritime traffic... the Panel is not persuaded that the naval blockade was a disproportionate measure for Israel to have taken in response to the threat it faced.

"The Panel considers the conflict should be treated as an international one for the purposes of the law of blockade. This takes foremost into account Israel's right to self-defence against armed attacks from outside territory."

What about Gaza's right to similarly defend its territory and population? It sounds like the Panel regards Gaza and the West Bank as the aggressor.

"It would be illegal if its imposition [i.e. the blockade] was intended to starve or to collectively punish the civilian population. However, there is no material before the Panel that would permit a finding confirming the allegations that Israel had either of those intentions or that the naval blockade was imposed in retaliation for the take-over of Hamas in Gaza or otherwise. On the contrary, it is evident that Israel had a military objective. The stated primary objective of the naval blockade was for security. It was to prevent weapons, ammunition, military supplies and people from entering Gaza and to stop Hamas operatives sailing away from Gaza with vessels filled with explosives... The earliest maritime interception operations to prevent weapons smuggling to Gaza predated the 2007 take-over of Hamas in Gaza. The actual naval blockade was imposed more than one year after that event. These factors alone indicate it was not imposed to punish its citizens for the election of Hamas."

A catalogue of distortion

There are several things wrong with these assertions. Israel's unending acts of violence have also been repeatedly condemned by the international community and there's a string of UN resolutions to prove it. But they are never implemented.

Israel slapped a naval blockade on Gaza long before January 2009. Israeli gunboats were shelling Gaza and shooting up Gazan fishing boats in 2007 when I was there. An Interim Agreement signed in 1995 allowed the Israelis to weave a tangled web of security zoning in Gaza's coastal waters and to dictate what happens off-shore and who comes and goes. It's the sort of agreement no Palestinian would have signed except with a gun to his head.

Being "interim" these restrictions were not expected to last beyond 1999. But they are still in force. They predate rockets from Gaza, speaking of which why doesn't Palmer, instead of trotting out details of these home-made missiles, tell us how many Israeli bombs, rockets, shells and prohibited ordnance have been fired at the Gazan population by Israeli jets, tanks and warships? Palmer talks about the 25 Israeli deaths and hundreds of injuries and "the enormity of the psychological toll" on the Israeli population. Regrettable as those casualties are, they are nothing compared with the mega-deaths and countless thousands maimed, the wholesale destruction of infrastructure and the psychological toll inflicted by Israel on the Gazans.

The people of Gaza couldn't care less whether Israel keeps its policies on land and naval blockades "separate". It's the combined effect that counts.

As for the claim that the primary purpose of the blockade is security, the Panel clearly hasn't studied the Wikileaks cables from 2008, one of which reads: "As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to (U.S. embassy economic officers) on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge." Israel wanted it "functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis".

And according to documents released under a Freedom of Information petition by Gisha, an Israeli law centre, Israel operated "a policy of deliberate reduction" of basic goods in the Gaza Strip. Gisha's director accused Israel of "paralyzing normal life in Gaza". The documents confirmed that the siege was not for security reasons but aimed at keeping Gazans at near-starvation level. Since around half the population are growing children this act of collective punishment has meant that hundreds of thousands are undernourished.

The Panel might have asked why, since no rockets have been fired from the West Bank, the shredded remains of that part of Palestinian territory is still under occupation, blockade and cruel restriction?

Palmer, Uribe and Ban Ki-Moon need to wake up to Israel's never-ending campaign of disinformation. Palmer for example repeatedly refers to "the takeover of Gaza" by Hamas when Hamas, as everyone else knows, was democratically elected.

"It is Hamas that is firing the projectiles into Israel or is permitting others to do so. The Panel considers the conflict should be treated as an international one for the purposes of the law of blockade. This takes foremost into account Israel's right to self-defence against armed attacks from outside its territory."

There's nothing about Gaza's right to self-defence or even self-preservation. Then this warning...

"Once a blockade has been lawfully established, it needs to be understood that the blockading power can attack any vessel breaching the blockade if after prior warning the vessel intentionally and clearly refuses to stop or intentionally and clearly resists visit, search or capture. There is no right within those rules to breach a lawful blockade as a right of protest. Breaching a blockade is therefore a serious step involving the risk of death or injury.

"Given that risk, it is in the interests of the international community to actively discourage attempts to breach a lawfully imposed blockade.

"The imposition of a blockade involves the use of force, which can only be employed in the exercise of a right of self-defence. Measures taken by States in the exercise of their right of self-defence are required under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter to be notified to the Security Council."

Occupier is the victim of resistance?

So Palmer's bizarre re-framing of the situation - that the illegal occupier Israel is the victim of the Palestinians' lawful resistance and that Israel's security must be given priority over everyone else's – will have given Tel Aviv something to smirk about. Worse, it gives Israel and its stooges around the world reason to think they have a green light for imposing a permanent blockade, for Israel will always dream up bogus threats to its security.

But the Palmer report, surely, cuts both ways. By the same token it gives the green light to Palestine, if ever it obtains the weaponry to impose a blockade of its own, and to Lebanon, Syria, Iran and maybe Free Egypt to play the naval blockade game against Israel, whose unsupervised nuclear arsenal, scant respect for international law and liking for armed trespass pose a much greater threat to the region than random garden-shed rockets from Gaza ever did.

And what does this whitewash mean for the Palestinians' UN bid for statehood? Is the newly fledged state to begin its young life with a land and sea blockade in place because Palmer and Uribe say it's all legal and above-board and Israel's security comes first? Let us not forget that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are under blockade too.

The Turkish representative on the panel, Mr. Süleyman Özdem Sanberk, has rightly dissociated himself from some of Palmer's key 'findings': "On the legal aspect of the blockade, Turkey and Israel have submitted two opposing arguments. International legal authorities are divided on the matter since it is unprecedented, highly complex and the legal framework lacks codification. However, the Chairmanship and its report fully associated itself with Israel and categorically dismissed the views of the other, despite the fact that the legal arguments presented by Turkey have been supported by the vast majority of the international community. Common sense and conscience dictate that the blockade is unlawful.

"Also the UN Human Rights Council concluded that the blockade was unlawful. The Report of the Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission received widespread approval from the member states.

"Freedom and safety of navigation on the high seas is a universally accepted rule of international law. There can be no exception from this long-standing principle unless there is a universal convergence of views."

The Palmer report deserves condemnation and is getting it. Such dangerous tripe belongs in the wastepaper basket. At the outset the inquiry Panel said it couldn't make definitive findings and was not competent to determine the legal issues, yet it immediately set about concocting its own distorted judgement based especially on the dubious legal views of Israel, which it admitted are "no more authoritative or definitive than our own".

So what is the Secretary-General's mischievous game in setting this up?

As if we didn't know...

* Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. Read other articles by Stuart.

By Stephen Lendman* | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Rogue state lawlessness and contempt for humanity define both nations.

At home, America is plagued by police state laws, contempt for human and civil rights, out-of-control corruption, banker occupation, corporate control of Washington, record budget and national debt levels, as well as depression-sized unemployment, poverty, homelessness, hunger and despair.

Abroad, America wages permanent wars on humanity, killing millions for wealth, power, and unchallengeable global dominance at the expense of suffering billions.

The rancid stench of Washington's war on the world permeates everywhere, threatening human and environmental survival.

It's no better in Israel, a nation believing only Jews have rights, and increasingly less of them under neoliberalized harshness, favoring the few at the expense of most others.

Like America and other Western states, Israeli policies disproportionately favor the rich. Since at least the mid-1980s, they've caused extreme wealth disparities, unemployment, poverty, hunger, homelessness and gradual loss of social benefits, heading toward ending them entirely.

Israelis finally reacted, protesting for weeks about unaffordable housing, high food and energy prices, onerous taxes on working households, lack of free education and better healthcare benefits, weak labor rights, and a nation no longer fit to live in for Jews.

It never was for Arabs comprising one-fifth of the population. Yet they're treated more like fifth column threats than citizens with equal rights.

On September 3, Haaretz writer Ilan Lior headlined, "Hundreds of thousands of Israelis expected (Saturday night) at massive 'March of the Million' rallies," later saying in a follow-up article:

At 9:30PM, Tel Aviv's Kikar Hamedina plaza filled for the main event, preceded by a march from Habima Square via Marmorek, Ibn Gvirol and Jabotinsky streets.

Protest leaders and supporters addressed eager crowds. Featured entertainers heightened the popular spirit for change. Earlier, student union head Yuval Bdolah expected the rally's size to be unprecedented in Israeli history.

It didn't disappoint as around half a million Israelis massed in cities nationwide. Over 300,000 filled Kikar Hamedina. Protest leader Yonatan Levy said the atmosphere was like "a second Independence Day."

National Student Union Chairman Itzik Shmuli addressed the crowd, saying:

"Mr. Prime Minister, the new Israelis have a dream and it is simple: to weave the story of our lives into Israel. We expect you to let us live in this country. The new Israelis will not give up. They demand change. They demand change and will not stop until real solutions come."

Protest leader Daphni Leef added:

"My generation always felt as though we were alone in this world, but now we feel the solidarity. They try to dismiss us as stupid children, and as extreme leftists," but hundreds of thousands rallying for social justice prove otherwise.

Over 50,000 massed in Jerusalem's Paris Square, double the previous largest number. Actress Orna Banai addressed the crowd, saying:

"I am not amused that there are hungry children here, that we have a soldier rotting in captivity for five years, (and) that Israel is one of the poorest examples there (is for) human rights."

Others also spoke across the country for long denied social justice. Their common theme was keeping up enough pressure to succeed, and in Haifa to end discrimination against Arabs.

Shahin Nasser, Haifa's Arab Wadi Nisnas representative, addressed protesters, saying:

"Today we are changing the rules of the game. No more coexistence based on hummus and fava beans. What is happening here is true coexistence, when Arabs and Jews march together shoulder to shoulder calling for social justice and peace."

"We've had it. Bibi, go home. Steinitz (Israel's finance minister), go and don't come back. Atias (Israel's housing minister), goodbye and good riddance."

Rallying for social justice across Israel since mid-July so far shows no signs of ebbing. Succeeding, of course, depends on sustaining enough energy disruptively for change. Though never easy, it's the only way.

Approaching Zero Hour for Palestinian Statehood

Sovereign independence and full de jure UN membership is the only acceptable alternative for Palestine. However, dark Israeli and Washington forces aim to subvert it.

In February, Washington vetoed a Security Council resolution denouncing expanding Israeli settlements. In a White House statement, Obama "emphasized that a vote at the United Nations will never create an independent Palestinian state," even if the General Assembly grants it by a simple two-thirds majority.

Moreover, Congress near unanimously condemned Palestine's legitimate right to independence. In addition, it threatens to withhold support and perhaps impose sanctions if achieved.

In fact, political Washington contemptuously spurns universal rights, especially everywhere not under its control. As a result, whether democrat or despot, regime change threatens all independent leaders by one means or other, including naked aggression.

Ask Iraqis, Afghans, Haitians, and Libyans among others. They'll explain.

A previous article discussed The New York Times opposition to Palestinian statehood.

In fact, its longstanding policy staunchly supported Israel's occupation, belligerence, and right to reign terror on Palestinian civilians with impunity, in less than so many words.

On September 3, Steven Lee Myers and Mark Landler headlined, "US Appeals to Palestinians to Stall UN Vote on Statehood," saying:

"The Obama administration has initiated a last-ditch diplomatic campaign to avert a confrontation this month over" Palestinian statehood and full UN membership.

Once again it's playing the peace talks game even though past efforts for decades proved stillborn. Moreover, how can Palestinians negotiate without a willing partner, especially since its legitimate government is entirely shut out.

Both writers omitted these and other key facts, focusing instead on worrying whether "Obama would be put in the position of threatening (a) veto (or going along and) risk alienating Israel and its (US) political supporters...."

They also suggested support for Obama "trying to translate the broad principles (he) outlined in May into a concrete road map for talks that would succeed where past efforts have failed...."

In fact, as both writers know or should, equitable peace talks are impossible because Washington and Israel never tolerated them and don't now. Neither country negotiates. They demand. For Occupied Palestinians, it's stay that way, or else.

At the same time, past articles explained that Washington earlier provisionally recognized Palestine as an independent nation. According to UN Charter Article 80(1), it can't reverse its position by vetoing a Security Council (SC) resolution calling for Palestine's UN admission.

Doing so is illegal, subject to further SC action under the Charter's Chapter VI. Ultimately, the SC only recommends admissions. The General Assembly affirms them by a two-thirds majority. At this time, enough support exists to get it.

Moreover, if Washington does, in fact, play its veto card, the General Assembly can circumvent it under the 1950 Uniting for Peace Resolution.

Abbas Holds the Wild Card

Ultimately, long-time Israeli collaborationist Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas may prove the wild card. Ahead of petitioning the General Assembly, he's expected to explain his strategy, according to presidential aide Nabil Abu Rudaineh, saying:

"The president will define all the political moves which will be taken before submitting the UN bid, so as to make clear where the Palestinian cause is headed."

He'll "address the Palestinian people, telling them exactly why the (PA) will go to the UN, and what caused the current political situation after negotiations stopped, and after the international community failed to work out solutions to the question of Palestine, and to move the negotiation process forward based on clear foundations."

Abu Rudaineh added:

Palestinian leaders will petition the UN "as long as negotiations have not started, and Israel has not committed to clear references to start" them.

"We will go to the UN Security Council in coordination with all Arab countries. Going to the UN will be the only way to gain our rights and to maintain our gains."

Clearly, Abbas left himself wiggle room to avoid confronting Washington and Israel by backing down at the 11th hour, despite enough world support and international law on his side to succeed.

If so, millions of Palestinians will be betrayed by their own president, proving again his collaborationist ties to to Israel and Western interests for whatever personal benefits he's afforded.

Planned Settler West Bank/East Jerusalem Belligerence

According to International Middle East Media Center writer Saed Bannoura, Palestinians also face another threat.

On September 2, he headlined, "Settlers Plan Attacks Against Palestinians In September," saying:

Armed by Israel's military with tear gas, stun grenades and other weapons, "extremist right wing factions (are) preparing (to) respond to any popular Palestinian move" to petition the UN for statehood and full membership.

Already, settlers are heavily armed with automatic weapons and "unlimited amounts of ammunition." Using them and other weapons, they prepared a plan called "children against children, women and women" to attack unnamed West Bank and East Jerusalem populations.

Extremist MK Michael Ben-Ari heads the scheme along with militant settlers, apparently spoiling for a fight and using Palestinian statehood efforts as a pretext.

"The eight-page plan includes instructions regarding operations in Palestinian cities and villages in the West Bank and in Jerusalem. Its main slogan is 'let's transform September from a threat to a historic opportunity to change the rules of the game.' "

It adds:

"should the UN officially recognize a Palestinian independent state, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will take off to the streets, to celebrate, and they might approach the settlements."

"Unarmed Palestinian women and children will lead the processions heading to the settlements. This will push the Israeli soldiers to open fire at them, and this issue will lead to a full collapse in the security situation, and the Palestinians will resume their attacks against the settlements."

The plan calls for Israeli children to confront their Palestinian counterparts, Israeli women and men doing the same thing.

Palestinian settlers have a long history of attacking Palestinians with impunity, including acts of vandalism, desecrating mosques, and murder.

Their most extremist elements now see a chance to escalate violence to the next level, aided and abetted by Israel's military, operating under Operation Summer Seeds provisions.

A previous article explained.

* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.

Democracy Now! - Turkey has downgraded diplomatic ties with Israel and frozen military cooperation ahead of a long-awaited United Nations report on Israel's deadly attack on a Gaza-bound aid ship in 2010. The report accuses Israel of "excessive and unreasonable" force in its attack—which killed nine people—on the Mavi Marmara ship, and says Israel should issue a statement of regret and compensate the families of the dead as well as wounded passengers. But it also chides passengers aboard the Marmara and the other flotilla ships for what it calls a "reckless" attempt to breach Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip. In a major development with broader implications, the U.N. report concludes that the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip is legal under international law. We speak with Norman Finkelstein, author of several books on the Israel-Palestine conflict, including "'This Time We Went Too Far': Truth & Consequences of the Gaza Invasion." We are also joined by Huwaida Arraf, one of the organizers of the Free Gaza Movement. Both Arraf and Finkelstein blast the U.N. report, calling it a "whitewash" and "morally debased."

Norman Finkelstein, author of several books on the Israel-Palestine conflict, including "This Time We Went Too Far": Truth & Consequences of the Gaza Invasion.

Interview Part 1/2:

Video link Part 1/2: http://youtu.be/XlLm1Ym3Pbc

Interview Part 2/2:

Part 2/2: http://youtu.be/ZwRHJBAr0q8
Interview transcript:

JUAN GONZALEZ: Turkey has downgraded diplomatic ties with Israel and frozen military cooperation ahead of a long-awaited United Nations report on Israel's deadly attack on a Gaza-bound aid ship in 2010. According to leaked excerpts, the report accuses Israel of, quote, "excessive and unreasonable force" in its attacks on the Mavi Marmara which killed nine people. The report says Israel should issue a statement of regret and compensate the families of the dead as well as wounded passengers. But the report also criticizes passengers aboard the Marmara and the other flotilla ships for what it calls a, quote, "reckless" attempt to breach Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip. And in a major development with broader implications, the United Nations report also concludes that the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip is legal under international law.

AMY GOODMAN: The U.N. investigation was overseen by Geoffrey Palmer, a former prime minister of New Zealand. Turkey says it will expel the Israeli ambassador and downgrade diplomatic ties to their lowest level until Israel drops its refusal to apologize for the raid and provides compensation.

For more, we're going to go to Ramallah, where we're joined by Huwaida Arraf, one of the organizers of the Free Gaza flotilla movement. She's on one of—she was on one of the six ships that were in the Gaza flotilla when the Mavi Marmara was attacked. She's joining us by Democracy Now! audio stream. And here in New York, we're joined by Norman Finkelstein, author of a number of books on Israel-Palestine conflict, including "This Time We Went Too Far": Truth & Consequences of the Gaza Invasion.

In Ramallah, Huwaida Arraf, your response to the leaked report—the New York Times posted it online—of the U.N.?

HUWAIDA ARRAF: Hi, Amy, Juan, Norman.

Sadly, it's a completely expected whitewash of Israeli crimes. This panel's composition—not only its composition, but its mandate—was problematic in so many ways. And it wasn't designed to get at the truth of what happened or to achieve—to get at justice for the victims of Israel's attack, but rather to arrive at political compromise between Israel and Turkey. And that's what we have. It's an attempt to whitewash the crimes, set them aside, and in addition, it came up with some outrageous claims that completely contradict the findings of numerous human rights organizations and international law authorities, including various bodies of the U.N. itself, about the legality of the Israeli blockade. So, very problematic.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And the report's criticism or faulting of one organization, in particular, a Turkish organization, that had some members—helped organize the flotilla. Could you talk about what it said and your response to that?

HUWAIDA ARRAF: Sure. It did say—you did quote that we were "reckless," but it also said that Israeli soldiers faced organized violence when they tried to board the Mavi Marmara, which is completely untrue. We spent a long time preparing for this flotilla. And our—everything that we prepared, the passengers and our—the foundations of our movement and what we do is based on nonviolent direct action resistance.

This is not to deny that Israeli soldiers did face some attacks when they boarded, but you can't say that these attacks were anything more than self-defense, because of the obnoxious way in which Israeli soldiers—and very violent way in which they took over the ships, in the way that was intended to cause tremendous fear and commotion. They boarded the ships firing, even on our very small boat. The boat that I was on was traveling right next to the Mavi Marmara, and we only had about 17 people on that boat. They boarded, beating down people, using tasers, firing stun grenades and paintball pellet at people's faces. It was completely uncalled-for violence, so that some people, a handful out of 700 volunteers, reacted in what can be called a violent way. It was self-defense, so it was in no way organized. And this is—I'm saying this, being part of the central organizing committee of the flotilla.

AMY GOODMAN: The U.N.'s report notes that, quote, "On the basis of public statements by the flotilla organizers and their own internal documentation, the Panel is satisfied that as much as their expressed purpose of providing humanitarian aid, one of the primary objectives of the flotilla organizers was to generate publicity about the situation in Gaza by attempting to breach Israel's naval blockade. The purposes of the flotilla were clearly expressed in a document prepared by IHH and signed by all flotilla participants," unquote.

The report then cites the document's statement of purpose, which reads, quote, "Purposes of this journey are to create an awareness amongst world public and international organizations on the inhumane and unjust embargo on Palestine and to contribute to end this embargo which clearly violates human rights and delivering humanitarian relief to the Palestinians."

Norm Finkelstein, your response?

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: Well, I noticed that Juan was looking perplexed at that statement. I have to say, last night, when I was reading the report, I was completely dumbfounded, and I had to keep repeating—rereading these passages over and over again. What the report stated—and all of your listeners should hear closely, because it was so shocking, so morally debased—the report said that we doubt, or we question, the true motives of the organizers of the flotilla. They said, we have evidence that their real motive was not humanitarian. And the statement that you just quoted was the evidence that their real motive was not humanitarian, that they had this really sinister, nefarious motive. Their real motive was not humanitarian; the real motive was, they said, the report said, to cast publicity on Israel's illegal and immoral blockade of Gaza.

Now I have to say, that is—and I'm meaning this literally—it is a new low. I read all the Israeli reports, in particular the Turkel report, the one put out by the former Supreme Court justice. It's about 300 pages. They never stooped to that level. They claimed that this handful of what they call jihadists, that they were looking for a confrontation with Israelis or the Israeli soldiers, and they brought on weapons for a confrontation. This report does not claim that they were looking for a confrontation. It holds them morally culpable for trying to cast publicity on an illegal and inhumane blockade. With the Israelis, at least we're in the same moral universe, and it's a question of fact. What was the intent of these commandos—excuse me, what was the intent of the activists? Was it to get a confrontation, or was it to cast humanitarian—cast light on what's happening? But with this report, we've entered a new moral universe. They are actually saying that to cast light on an illegal and inhumane blockade is a morally sinister act.

JUAN GONZALEZ: I'd like to ask, there were four members on this committee: one from Turkey, one from Israel, then there were two supposedly independent ones, the former prime minister of New Zealand and Álvaro Uribe, the former president of Colombia, who himself presided over a period of the most—the highest level of extrajudicial killings and assassinations in his own country. It seems amazingly strange to have someone like Álvaro Uribe on this panel as an objective member of the committee.

AMY GOODMAN: The Colombian president.

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: Well, it was clear from the moment that Ban Ki-moon, the alleged secretary-general of the United Nations—it was clear from the moment he appointed Uribe on the panel that it was going to be a farce. Beyond all the crimes for which Mr. Uribe has been accused and also have been documented, he was also known as being very close to Israel and advocating closer military relations with Israel. So, from the get-go, from the moment the members were named, it was clear which way the report was going to go.

But, you know, you always wonder, what are they going to come up with? How could they possibly justify certain things? They said that the blockade of Gaza—now, we have to be clear. They said the naval blockade was legal. They separated it from the land blockade, for technical reasons, which it's no point in going into here. But they said the naval blockade was legal. And the grounds they gave were this: that Israel clearly faces security problems from Gaza, the rocket and mortar fire. OK. And they say, to document this security problem, since 2001, some 25 Israelis have been killed by these rocket and mortar attacks. Fair enough. And then they say that many people have suffered psychologically, psychological trauma from these attacks. Fair enough.

Then there's the other side of the equation. There is not one word, one syllable, on how many Gazans have perished as a result of Israeli attacks. It's not 25. It's not 250. It's at least at an order of magnitude of 2,500. We're not just talking about the 1,400 Palestinians who were killed in Operation Cast Lead. Israel always has operations in Gaza, has very fancy names—Operation Summer Rains, Operation Autumn Clouds, Operation Hot Winter, Operation Rainbow. All of it vanishes from this report. The only people who have suffered deaths in Gaza due to armed hostilities are Israelis.

Now, let's say it's true. Fair enough. They have a right to impose a naval blockade to prevent weapons from going to Gaza, for security reasons. Don't the people of Gaza have the right to impose a military blockade on Israel, to prevent weapons from going to Israel? You can't even raise that question. It's beyond their comprehension. In fact, the irony is, that's the law. The law is, as Amnesty International pointed out in its report "Fueling Conflict," under international law and domestic American law, it's illegal to transfer weapons to any country or—any state or non-state party which is a consistent violator of human rights. So, if that commission, the Palmer Commission, named after, you know, the former New Zealand president, if they had any integrity, they would have said, OK, Israel has the right to impose a blockade on Gaza, and the international community" — because this is what Amnesty said. Amnesty says the international community has an obligation—that's what they said—to impose an arms embargo on Israel, as well, because it's a consistent violator of human rights.

AMY GOODMAN: I want—I wanted to bring Huwaida Arraf back into the discussion, who's in Ramallah, chair of the Free Gaza Movement, was part of the aid flotilla last year that the Mavi Marmara was a part of. The U.N. investigation did accuse Israel of excessive and unreasonable force. Now Turkey has announced the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador, the suspension of military cooperation, hours before the report was published. But also, in the last attempts of the Gaza flotilla, just in the last months, they themselves stopped a ship from going forward. Can you talk about all of this, Huwaida?

HUWAIDA ARRAF: Sure. Really quickly, I'd like to just touch on a couple of important points that Norman made, the first one being about the legality of the blockade. And Norman did say that they considered it very separate from the rest of the closure, which has been declared completely illegal and a violation of Israel's obligations, so there's no way that this maritime blockade can be legal, no matter what way you look at it. It's a violation of Israel's obligations under international law as an occupying power.

Also, in regards to Uribe and the problems that Norman mentioned, the other thing is that he is known to have a complete disdain for human rights defenders. And you can look at complaints from human rights organizations within Colombia. Also, an organization called Human Rights First called this out, that him referring to human rights defenders as "terrorist sympathizers" endangers human rights defenders. So, from the start, he had a disdain for people like us who like to call attention to and take action, nonviolent action, against these human rights abuses.

And the last really important thing before I get to your question is this report and the attention that it's supposed to get, when we already had an independent U.N. fact-finding mission that released a report almost one year ago, comprehensive, interviewed over a hundred victims and participants, and that was put together by scholars in international law and known judges on international tribunals. This should be the authority on what actually happened, not this farce of a report.

But in terms of what you said about Turkey stopping—about being part of stopping the last flotilla, known as Freedom Flotilla 2, which was supposed to launch last summer, or this past summer, not exactly. It was Israel placed a lot of pressure on a lot of countries, the European countries, to stop their citizens from participating. Not many—you know, some leaders of these countries made statements that the flotilla is not helpful and that they warn their citizens not to take part. But the country that was—that really cooperated with Israel—and it was a shock and quite sad—was Greece. And it did—we did learn that it came under a lot of political and economic pressure also because of the economic situation that they're in. But they did impose restrictions and did not let our boats leave. So it really became complicit in Israel's blockade. And we are challenging that on different levels.

Turkey itself didn't really. It did communicate to us and to our Turkish partners that it might not be helpful at this time, but what happened—but the Turkish organization IHH remained fully a part of the flotilla. The Mavi Marmara was not able to go, because it was not physically, mechanically ready to go. In fact, up until the date that we were supposed to launch, they still had people working to meet all of the guidelines for being certified to go into international waters on the kind of mission that we wanted it to. So we knew—at a point, we realized it wasn't going to be ready, and we took that boat out of the equation. But the Turks remained fully a part of the organizing. And in fact, we were going to launch one boat from Turkey. One of the boats—it was the Irish ship—was located in Turkey, but it was sabotaged by, we believe, Israeli agents and was not able to launch. So, they didn't really place any barriers, certainly not like Greece did.

AMY GOODMAN: But the fact that this report did find that Israel's use of force was excessive and unreasonable, and the significance of Turkey expelling the Israeli ambassador?

HUWAIDA ARRAF: Definitely. Well, it's kind of funny that Turkey expelled the Israeli ambassador today after the release of this report, because the whole point of this report was to reach a political compromise and to repair the relation between Israel and Turkey. And we're glad that Turkey has taken the position that it has taken. And in fact, Turkey's foreign minister has said that it's time that Israel paid a price. And it's true, because Israel does not pay a price for any of its human rights violations. It continues to act with impunity. And even the fact that this report did say Israel acted using excessive force, it doesn't—it doesn't go enough to—money or paying compensation is not—is no kind of justice for the families or for the people that—for the victims of Israel's actions. And that's what we want to see. We want to see some kind of accountability. And that's different from the U.N. report that was issued last September by the independent fact-finding mission, which recommended that human rights abusers be held accountable. And that's what we're waiting to see. So, this report, the Uribe-Palmer report, pays some lip service to the victims, but its main—again, its main goal, to repair relations, and we're glad to see that Turkey is not falling for that.

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: I'd like to say—

JUAN GONZALEZ: Norman, if we can, we just have a little bit of time.

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: Sure.

JUAN GONZALEZ: If you could just briefly talk about the implications of this report coming out now and the continuing schism between Turkey and Israel, as we head into the United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood.

NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: Well, actually, many Israelis worried that this would be Pyrrhic victory for the Israeli government, because being so stubborn about refusing to make an apology—there are two of consecutive words that just don't translate into Hebrew. The two words, consecutive words, are "excuse me." They can't comprehend that. And the Israeli—many Israeli officials were saying, "Make the apology, because we need Turkey. Turkey is our—has historically been our strongest ally in the Muslim world. Things are now turbulent with our other main ally in the Arab world, Egypt. Make the apology, and move on." But there were members of the Netanyahu government—in particular, Mr. Lieberman, the foreign minister, and his party—who refused, because they said if they made the apology, Erdogan, the prime minister of Turkey, would run with it and would embarrass the Israelis, and Israelis would be humiliated. But they didn't think it was a wise move. And actually, I don't think it is, either. Losing the military relationship with Turkey, suspension of diplomatic relations, and now you know Turkey, when the state issue—statehood issue comes up in September, they are going to be in the forefront now, because Erdogan has been humiliated by this report. It was a complete spit in the face of the Turks, what this report said.

So I think, from a moral point of view, it was a disgrace. But from a political point of view, it will probably end up helping the Palestinians. You have to remember the whole point of the report. It described the killing of the nine members of the—on the—passengers on the Mavi Marmara. You know the phrase they used? It was a "major irritant" to diplomatic relations. Killing nine people is an "irritant." And they said, "We have to get over this irritant, so that Israel and Turkey can restore diplomatic relations." That's their moral level.

AMY GOODMAN: We're going to leave it there. Norman Finkelstein, we thank you for being with us, author of, among other books, "This Time We Went Too Far": Truth & Consequences of the Gaza Invasion, and Huwaida Arraf, chair of the Free Gaza Movement, co-founder of the International Solidarity Movement, was on one of the six ships that were in the Gaza flotilla when the Mavi Marmara was attacked. She was joining us from Ramallah, on the West Bank.

By Lawrence Davidson * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

In the wake of the dubious UN investigatory report which all but exonerated Israel for its May 31, 2010 attack on the Mavi Marmara–an attack that killed 8 Turkish citizens and 1 Turkish-America–Turkey has downgraded its diplomatic relations with Israel and suspended all military cooperation. Ankara had little choice in this matter. The Israeli attack was egregious. It took place in international waters against an unarmed civilian vessel and was carried out in defense of a barbaric and illegal policy of collective punishment against one million Palestinians bottled up in Gaza by an Israeli blockade.

For their part, the Israelis claim that they murdered the Mavi Marmara Turks in self-defense. I juxtapose the words self defense and murder quite purposefully, for the Turkish passengers were in the process of defending themselves from a violent assault when they were gunned down by Israeli soldiers who now describe their actions as self-defense. This scenario is a tragic parody of a hundred years of Zionist action in the Middle East. Having come to the region in the baggage train of an imperial occupying power (Great Britain) and successfully establishing themselves by evicting the native population (a process that is on-going), the Israelis define all acts of resistence to their aggression as attacks which require their defending themselves. The Mavi Marmara action fits neatly into this Zionist world of peculiar logic. In this sense, they turn the world upside down.

The Turkish government will have none of this and demanded the minimum of decency from the Israelis–an apology and compensation. In so doing they stand for civilized behavior. The Israelis refuse to apologize. After all, when you have turned the world upside down in the fashion described above, any admission that there lies a bit of faulty reasoning in your outlook threatens to collapse your universe like a deck of cards. So what can Ankara do? It can and has distanced itself from these crazy people and refuses any military affiliations. Why militarily assist the murders of your own citizens?

In making the announcement Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu observed that the Israelis apparently see "themselves above international laws and human conscience." Actually, that is not the half of it. Not only do the Israelis disregard international law, be on the high seas, in the maintenance of the obscene ghetto of Gaza, or through their colonial impositions in the West Bank, but they assiduously seduce others to support their criminal behavior anywhere and everywhere they have lobby influence. Everywhere they go they are the poor victims who need carte blanche to protect themselves. They are the victims who victimize others in the name of self-defense. Israel is taking us all back to a barbaric state of nature.

You can see this perverse influence in the way the UN investigatory report on the Mavi Marmara assault was manipulated and distorted. Though headed by Geoffrey Palmer, a New Zealand lawyer and politician with a reputation for integrity and honesty, he was hemmed in by having to share the investigation with ex-Columbian president Alvaro Uribe–a devoted follower of the Israeli line and ally of Washington. The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who is currently under attack by the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight for weakening the moral integrity of the organization, also bowed to a combination of American and Israeli pressure. As a result the panel restricted itself to "reviewing reports from Israel and Turkey, thus sidestepping any independent gathering of evidence or hearing of testimony from eyewitnesses." Ban Ki-Moon insisted that no report would be released unless Palmer and Uribe could reach consensus. That guaranteed equity for Israel’s perverse and lopsided logic. Thus the best the investigation could do is come up with a report that has an Alice in Wonderland quality to it: Israeli assault troops acted in self-defense against civilians even through they (the Israelis) used excessive force bordering on slaughter and mayhem. The investigatory process was suppose to be "transparent" to avoid this sort of corruption, but Ban Ki-Moon refused to let that happen.

Turkey, of course, has rejected the UN report. Now you might say all of this is in vain. Israel’s influence in the halls of power both in the U.S. and Europe is too great for Turkey’s position to be anything but symbolic. Well, you never know. The Turks do have some leverage. Israel dreams of the day when it can officially associate itself with NATO. Turkey is a member of NATO. Indeed, it has the second largest military force in that alliance and will soon host an extension of the organizations early warning system. Under present circumstances hell will freeze over before Israel becomes a full member of NATO. Unfortunately, within Zionist world of illogic, Turkey’s position will just reinforce Israel’s narcissistic sense of victimhood. Yasir Arafat once said that Israel acts like a homicidal "big baby." He was so right.

* Lawrence Davidson is professor of history at West Chester University. He is the author of numerous books, including Islamic Fundamentalism and America's Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood.

By Stephen Lendman* | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

On May 31, 2010, Israeli commandos willfully and maliciously interdicted Freedom Flotilla vessels in international waters, bringing humanitarian aid to besieged Gazans.

In the process, they slaughtered nine Turkish nationals aboard the mother Mavi Marmara ship, wounding dozens more, and arresting everyone on board.

A same day article described what happened as known at the time.

It was a well planned premeditated attack against unarmed, nonviolent humanitarian activists, trying to break Israel's illegal blockade to deliver essential aid. Cold-blooded murder resulted.

Note:

Under international and US law, blockades are acts of war, variously defined as:

• surrounding a nation or objective with hostile forces;
• measures to isolate an enemy;
• encirclement and besieging;
• preventing the passage in or out of supplies, military forces, or aid in time of or as an act of war; and
• an act of naval warfare to block access to an enemy's coastline and deny entry to all vessels and aircraft.

Law Professor Francis Boyle calls blockades:

"belligerent measures taken by a nation (to) prevent passage of vessels or aircraft to and from another country. Customary international law recognizes blockades as an act of war because of the belligerent use of force even against third party nations in enforcing the blockade. Blockades as acts of war have been recognized as such in the Declaration of Paris of 1856 and the Declaration of London of 1909 that delineate the international rules of warfare."

America approved these Declarations, so they're binding US law as well "as part of general international law and customary international law." Past US presidents, including Dwight Eisenhower and Jack Kennedy, called blockades acts of war. So has the US Supreme Court.

Occupied Palestine poses no threat to Israel. In the past, Israel admitted it. As a result, imposing a blockade violates the UN Charter and other international and US laws. It's also an illegal act of aggression that under the Nuremberg Charter constitutes the "supreme international crime against peace."

Last September, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), issued damning findings, "conclud(ing) that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers in Israel prior to deportation."

By imposing an illegal blockade, Israel willfully and maliciously caused a grave humanitarian crisis, affecting nearly 1.7 million Gazans, mostly civilians. Aid is vitally needed. Blocking it is a crime against humanity. Moreover, Israel's international waters interdiction was piracy.

A "vessel on the high seas (posing no threat) is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of its flag State."

Under the laws of armed conflict, a blockade is also illegal if:

(a) its sole purpose is starving the civilian population or denying it other essentials for life; or

(b) the damage to civilians is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete or direct military advantage anticipated.

In other words, no blockade is permitted it it disproportionately harms civilians. Israel has done it maliciously for over four years, collectively punishing Gazans illegally, despite admitting no security threat exists.

HRC said Israel's interdiction was lawless "since there was no legal basis for the Israeli forces to conduct an assault and interception in international waters."

Moreover, in doing so, Israel was "obligated" to respect international law and its own "international human rights obligations."

HRC thus concluded that force used "was unnecessary, disproportionate, excessive, inappropriate and resulted in the wholly avoidable killing and maiming of a large number of civilian passengers."

In addition, Israel made "a deliberate attempt....to suppress or destroy evidence," besides fabricating its own version of events, including fake videos and other falsified materials.

Despite indisputable crimes against humanity and piracy, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon shamelessly named his own, largely pro-Israeli commission, mocking justice and his own credibility in the process.

Former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer chaired it along with former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe as vice-chairman. His appalling record in office and contempt for human rights should have automatically disqualified him.

Notably, he was tainted by corruption and scandal, with close links to his country's drug cartels and paramilitary death squads. As a result, he bore direct responsibility for murdering thousands of trade unionists, campesinos, human rights workers, journalists, and others opposing Colombia's narco-state terrorism and ties to US imperialism.

Nonetheless, he was shamelessly appointed to decide whether or not Israeli commandos committed high crimes because as Colombia's president, and now, he staunchly supports the worst of US and Israeli crimes.

He, Palmer and Joseph Siechanover, former head of Israel's Defense Mission to the US and Canada, proved their loyalty in contrast to the commission's fourth member, former Turkish official Ozdem Sanberk, who likely wanted conclusions other than those reached.

They were mixed, largely absolving Israel of cold-blooded murder and condemning its illegal siege.

The full report can be accessed through the following link:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Palmer-Committee-Final-report.pdf

The New York Times obtained it a day ahead of its expected September 2 release. Writers Neil MacFarquhar and Ethan Bronner headlined, "Report Finds Naval Blockade by Israel Legal but Faults Raid," saying:

The UN report "found that when Israeli commandos boarded the main (Mavi Marmara) ship they faced 'organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers' and were therefore required to use force for their own protection."

However, it determined that its use was "excessive and unreasonable," calling deaths and injuries caused as well as Israel's treatment of passengers abusive.

Haaretz writer Barak Ravid also covered the story, saying:

"The report harshly criticizes the flotilla organizers, stating 'they acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade,' " adding that "there exist serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH (a Turkish charity)."

Also emphasized was that Turkey could have done more to persuade its nationals not to participate. Nonetheless:

"Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel."

The report was ready for publication months ago, but was delayed to give Turkey more time to press Israel for an apology not forthcoming. In fact, Israel never says it's sorry, even when caught red-handed.

Fact check

As explained in part above:

(1) Gaza's siege is illegal. Saying otherwise doesn't wash. Neither Hamas, other Palestinian resistance groups, or the PA threaten Israel, except in self-defense retaliation against premeditated Israeli attacks as international law allows.

(2) All Flotilla participants were unarmed, nonviolent human rights activists. Nonetheless, they were maliciously attacked in international waters. Moreover, Israeli commandos had photos of Turkish nationals marked for assassination. They identified and shot them in cold blood multiple times at point blank range.

(3) The UN Human Rights Commission (HRC) examined the same evidence, holding Israel culpable for high crimes.

Turkey's Response to the Palmer Commission Report

On September 1,Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the Palmer Report's release constituted Israel's last chance for a formal apology. Without it, he warned of possible sanctions and other consequences.

Israel never apologized. Moreover, Netanyahu told US officials that decision's unchanged. As a result, Turkey may scale back its diplomatic representation, including expelling Israel's ambassador (Gabby Levy) and his deputy (Ella Afek).

Turkey also is expected to initiate a diplomatic and legal campaign against Israel through the UN, and will help loved ones of those killed sue Israel in world courts.

In addition, legal action may be taken against responsible Israeli officials, including Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, then Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, and Navy Commander Adm. Eliezer Marom.

Moreover, billions of dollars of trade between the two country are at risk.

Turkey also was angry that the commission mostly adopted Israeli friendly conclusions. At the same time, Israel was pleased.

Final Comments

Absolution is unacceptable. Nonetheless, Israel again got largely off the hook, free to commit more crimes of war and against humanity, besides ongoing daily ones in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

At issue is stopping them, ending Gaza's siege, Israel's occupation, and granting Palestine statehood and full UN membership later this month when the UN General Assembly meets.

Even then, Israeli lawlessness won't end. Perhaps it'll only be slowed, but any committed will be against a sovereign state able to sue through the World Court for redress, and be able to get a temporary restraining order to stop it.

In other words, sovereign Palestine will have statehood rights Israel fears. What better way to slap it down, using the power of the law, not retaliation.

* Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon.

WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE

By Mantiq al-Tayr * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

1. Minnesota House member Erik Paulsen (Likud) continues his hasbara work on behalf of the State of Israel doing so via the funding of the AIEF which is a US tax-deductible arm of AIPAC. In his fifth post from Israel he writes approvingly of the views of an Israeli war criminal with whom he had apparently a lengthy discussion. Paulsen ought to be publicly tarred and feathered and his passport ought to be revoked before he can return to the United States. Fortunately some of the readers here at Mantiq al-Tayr have been posting comments to his ridiculous blog posts and have been making Paulsen and his Israel-first supporters a little uncomfortable.

So far Paulsen has made six daily posts, all of them utterly devoid of any substance and all of which could easily have been written by AIPAC staffers. Maybe they were. Pure unadulterated Zionist Bullshit, but I'll get to that later. First I'm going to quote in full from his website from a page called "Issues and Legislation". The first "issue" he lists is "Defending Our Homeland" and it reads like it could have been written by a Nazi. Maybe it was. Here's the whole thing. Note to Shas Party members, the red highlighting is mine. Second note to Shas Party members: Could you guys get Paulsen to join your party and run for the Knesset? But I digress.

"Our national sovereignty rests in our ability to defend the nation from those who want to harm us. Despite the fact that we've made great strides in terms of national security since 9/11, securing the safety of our nation and citizens remains our greatest duty. We are still facing a very real enemy - an enemy that will stop at nothing to bring harm to the American people.

"We must never relent in defending against this enemy and I support a strong national defense to ensure that the American people are safe and secure. A strong defense includes strong law enforcement, secure borders, a strong military and vigorous intelligence services. It also includes drastically reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

"As our brave men and women continue to serve in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world they deserve our full and unwavering support. The security we all enjoy is a direct result of their selfless sacrifice and I stand firmly behind these brave Americans, their families and their mission."

If that doesn't give you the creeps then you must be a Zionist.

Paulsen doesn't even mention who this enemy is that requires utterly bankrupting our country in order to defend ourselves against it. But the obvious enemy is them thar Moooooooooooselims.

It's interesting too that I can't seem to find any mention of his hasbara trip to Israel on his actual web site, his posts are put on the TC Jewfolk page instead. You'd think he'd want to proclaim his allegiances proudly on his own website too. But I digress.

So, let's look at one of his posts and seriously exam it and make endless fun of it in the process. Sit back and enjoy the ride.

Let's look at post number five because, well, because he meets an Israeli war-criminal who sometimes can't travel outside of Israel for fear of arrest. He seems to like this war criminal, Avi Dichter, very much. Let's see what Paulsen tells his "constituents," and I use that term loosely, about meeting Avi boy.

Oh wait, before I get to what Paulsen says, dig this picture of Avi.

Pretty cool, mish kida?

Anyway, let's see what good old Rep. Paulsen, in Israel on a trip paid-for by an arm of AIPAC that is recognized as a tax-deductable charity, has to say about Avi.

"Began the morning meeting with the opposition leader of parliament from the Kadima party, Avi Dichter. Avi is the former head of our FBI equivalent and gave an in depth briefing on a variety of security issues and the peace process."

Hold it, before I quote further I need to make a comment. Dichter is the "former head of our FBI equivalent"? Really? Let's be more specific. Avi Dichter is the former head of Shin Bet (aka Shabak), the Israeli "internal" security service that also is deeply involved in f***ing up Palestinians living under occupation in Gaza and the West Bank. In fact, it is because of his highly criminal activities while heading Shin Bet from 2000 to 2005 that Avi has a little trouble traveling – could not even go to Madrid last year for fear of being arrested. It's kind of like saying, "Began the morning meeting with O.J. Simpson, the former husband of Nicole Brown Simpson" and leaving it at that. But I digress. More on Avi later. Let's get back to the Zionist Bullshit from Paulsen.

"I found this particularly interesting not for the subject matter, but because as the leader of the opposition party I expected he would really spend his time with us discussing his party's policy differences with the ruling party. The fact that he used his time to share a united vision with the majority party really does demonstrate that Israelis are pretty unified on safety and security issues. Rockets were fired on his hometown early this morning."

Oh, poor baby, during a week in which Israeli killed at least 23 Palestinians from Gaza plus three Egyptian security officers, Paulsen bitches and moans about rockets being fired on Avi's home town – clearly doing so to show how the "enemy" is just plain evil.

What is Avi's hometown? Well, surprise, surprise it is Ashkelon which, when it was called al-Majdal, was largely ethnically cleansed by the Israelis in 1948 with the job being finished off in 1950. Many of its inhabitants were forcefully removed by Israel and the Haganah to Gaza. Think they might be pissed off by this?

Let's look at some of the lovely history of "Ashkelon" under the tender mercies of Zionism.

"In July 1950, Majdal - today Ashkelon – was still a mixed town. About 3,000 Palestinians lived there in a closed, fenced-off ghetto, next to the recently arrived Jewish residents. Before the 1948 war, Majdal had been a commercial and administrative center with a population of 12,000. It also had religious importance: nearby, amid the ruins of ancient Ashkelon, stood Mash'had Nabi Hussein, an 11th-century structure where, according to tradition, the head of Hussein Bin Ali, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, was interred; his death in Karbala, Iraq, marked the onset of the rift between Shi'ites and Sunnis. Muslim pilgrims, both Shi'ite and Sunni, would visit the site. But after July 1950, there was nothing left for them to visit: that's when the Israel Defense Forces blew up Mash'had Nabi Hussein."

Even the Zionist-infested Wikipedia shows just how wonderfully the Jews treated the town's original inhabitants.

"During the 1948 war, the Egyptian army occupied a large part of Gaza including Majdal. Over the next few months, the town was subjected to Israeli air-raids and shelling. All but about 1,000 of the town's residents were forced to leave by the time it was captured by Israeli forces as a sequel to Operation Yoav on November 4, 1948."

It gets better. Look at the wonderful treatment the Jews continued to give to the goddamn ungrateful terrorist Arabs.

"General Yigal Allon ordered the expulsion of the remaining Arabs but the local commanders did not do so and the Arab population soon recovered to more than 2,500 due mostly to refugees slipping back and also due to the transfer of Arabs from nearby villages. Most of them were elderly, women, or children. During the next year or so, the Arabs were held in a confined area surrounded by barbed wire, which became commonly known as the "ghetto". Moshe Dayan and Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion were in favor of expulsion, while Mapam and the Israeli labor union Histadrut objected. The government offered the Arabs positive inducements to leave, including a favorable currency exchange, but also caused panic through night-time raids. The first group was deported to the Gaza Strip by truck on August 17, 1950 after an expulsion order had been served. The deportation was approved by Ben-Gurion and Dayan over the objections of Pinhas Lavon, secretary-general of the Histadrut, who envisioned the town as a productive example of equal opportunity. By October 1950, 20 Arab families remained, most of whom later moved to Lydda or Gaza.

After kicking the Arabs out the Jews then undertook a very-well organized campaign to fill the town with Jews. It was quite successful.

"Re-population of abandoned Arab dwellings by Jews became official policy by December 1948 but the process began slowly. The Israeli national plan of June 1949 designated Majdal as the site for a regional urban center of 20,000 people. From July 1949, new immigrants and demobilized soldiers moved to the new town, increasing the Jewish population to 2,500 within six months. The town was initially called Migdal Gaza, Migdal Gad and Migdal Ashkelon. In 1953, the nearby neighborhood of Afridar was incorporated and the name "Ashkelon" was adopted. By 1961, Ashkelon ranked 18th amongst Israeli urban centers with a population of 24,000.

And in that thoroughly ethnically cleansed place, war criminal Avi Dichter was born in 1952. And Paulsen has the nerve to mention those stupid rockets which seem to serve Israel's interests far more than those of the Palestinians for whom Paulsen cares nothing.

I guess Paulsen did do one good thing in this post. He unintentionally makes Salam Fayyad look like the sell-out that he is. But then, after a Zionist-Bullshit-filled reference to Hizbullah Paulsen moves on to how he ended the day.

"Arrived at the hotel and had a late dinner. The fun event for the day – a midnight swim in the Sea of Galilee!"

Fortunately for Paulsen, the area around the sea of Galilee was also ethnically cleansed by Israel back in 1948, so Paulsen could enjoy his swim.

"The Israeli military activities were confined to the Galilee and the sparsely populated Negev desert. It was clear to the villages in the Galilee, that if they left, return was far from imminent. Therefore, far fewer villages spontaneously depopulated than previously. Most of the Palestinian exodus was due to a clear, direct cause: expulsion and deliberate harassment, as Morris writes 'commanders were clearly bent on driving out the population in the area they were conquering'.

"During Operation Hiram in the upper Galilee, Israeli military commanders received the order: 'Do all you can to immediately and quickly purge the conquered territories of all hostile elements in accordance with the orders issued. The residents should be helped to leave the areas that have been conquered'. (31 October 1948, Moshe Carmel) The UN's acting Mediator, Ralph Bunche, reported that United Nations Observers had recorded extensive looting of villages in Galilee by Israeli forces, who carried away goats, sheep and mules. This looting, United Nations Observers report, appeared to have been systematic as army trucks were used for transportation. The situation, states the report, created a new influx of refugees into Lebanon. Israeli forces, he stated, have occupied the area in Galilee formerly occupied by Kaukji's forces, and have crossed the Lebanese frontier. Bunche goes on to say "that Israeli forces now hold positions inside the south-east corner of Lebanon, involving some fifteen Lebanese villages which are occupied by small Israeli detachments".

"According to Morris altogether 200,000–230,000 Palestinians left in this stage. According to Ilan Pappé, "In a matter of seven months, five hundred and thirty one villages were destroyed and eleven urban neighborhoods emptied [...] The mass expulsion was accompanied by massacres, rape and [the] imprisonment of men [...] in labor camps for periods [of] over a year".

Wherever Paulsen goes on his trip he is standing on stolen land belonging to the native population that has been under and endless onslaught by Israel's Jews for well over 60 years. Over six decades of pillage, murder, rape – you name it. Kind of like what's in the Bible, but I digress.

2. So just who is Avi Dichter and why is he so universally hated? The Center for Constitutional Rights is a good place to start. Turns out that Avi likes to kill lots of Arabs at a time no matter who they are. So in July of 2002, as head of Shin Bet, he decided to assassinate Salah Shehadah, the leader of Hamas' military wing at the time. In order to do this, he had a one-ton bomb dropped into a residential apartment building in Gaza city knowing that this would lead to killing and injuring countless others.

"Just before midnight on July 22, 2002, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) dropped a one-ton bomb on Al-Daraj, a densely-populated residential neighborhood in Gaza City in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). Among the 15 people who were killed were 8 children, and more than 150 were injured in the aerial bombing. The attack completely destroyed 9 apartment buildings and partially destroyed or seriously damaged 30 more."

Killing Palestinians is the national pass-time in Israel, as I have documented more than once on this site. The more you kill the more pissed off the Palestinians get so they retaliate and Israel then uses Palestinian retaliation as an excuse to kill even more Palestinians, continue to steal their land, and to get aid and support from tools like Paulsen who are all too happy to have US blood shed on behalf of Israel and the phony war on terror. The Center for Constitutional Rights notes:

"According to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), approximately 724 individuals were killed in these extrajudicial killings carried out by Israel between September 2000 and March 2008; the victims included 228 civilian bystanders, of whom 77 were children."

A law suit was filed in 2005 against Dichter on behalf of his victims in the 2002 bombing. Sadly, it was done in the Southern District of New York where it was virtually doomed to failure. And in fact, in 2007 Judge William Pauley dismissed the case on a technicality saying that Dichter was immune from prosecution because he was acting "in the course of his official duties" as the Center reports. The dismissal was appealed but Pauley's ruling was upheld. Therefore, according to US law, the deliberate murder of innocent civilians including children undertaken by someone on a government payroll at the time is not a crime that can be prosecuted. War crimes are now legal.

Let me digress. In 2009 Judge Pauley allowed Israeli spy Ben-Ami Kadish to walk free. Fining him 50 thousand dollars but no jail time. Okay, back to your regularly scheduled blogging.

Fortunately, many people in the US and around the world realize what bullshit this is and Dichter has trouble when he travels. Even in the Zionist bastion of Brandeis University students protested his appearing there in April of this year.

"In addition to ordering the torture of Palestinians during his tenure as the head of Israel's General Security Services, Dichter has been charged with possible war crimes for his part in the 2002 killing of Hamas member Salah Shehade and 14 other Palestinian civilians, including 9 children, who were in his Gaza Strip apartment building when a one-ton Israeli bomb was dropped on it.

"As Dicther was speaking at Brandeis, a dozen Brandeis students listed charges against Dichter, including torture and the bombing of civilians, distributed warrants for his arrest, and demanded he turn himself in to authorities,

"They ended their disruption by chanting in Hebrew "Don't worry Avi Dicther, we'll meet you in the Hague."

In 2007 Dichter had to cancel plans to go to the UK because of the likelihood that he could be arrested if a complaint were filed against him and in 2010 he had to cancel plans to go to Madrid for the same reason.

And then there is also the organization known as WANTED made up of anonymous Israelis who have created a website called wanted.org.il that contains bills of indictment against a number of Israeli past and present officials. Dichter is prominent among them and the photo insert near the top of this post is from their website.

Hey you good folks at WANTED how does this one look?

Courtesy of Skulz Fontaine

3. Okay, it's video time. Here's a short clip of the students at Brandeis.

Video link: http://youtu.be/tyH8iQByNlY

The video below shows that not all of Paulsen's constituents are morons. They also don't like his relationship with the Koch brothers. I love the woman who says: "And again it's always interesting that we never seem to be able to talk to Representative Paulsen, he's always gone or doing something else and yet we are all his constituents." She's right, presently he's off kissing Israel's ass and posting Zionist propaganda on a pro-Israeli website while saying nothing about the trip on his own website.

Video link: http://youtu.be/QiT2cjj68EA

A faithful reader, quite literally from down under going by the name of "bin dead awhile" has been requesting another Haifa video. This is a nice one.

Video link: http://youtu.be/PyppUVrcOY8

As the bird sang:

"خبيني عندك خبيني دخلك يا نونو"

The angelic voice of اميمة الخليل

Video link: http://youtu.be/OaGLNWyb5Lk

Here's a slightly edited comment from the youtube url above explaining the song for those of you who do not know the language.

"The song is a dialogue between a bird and a girl called Nunu. The bird arrives at Nunu's window seeking refuge; he explains that he comes from the borders of the skies, from the neighbours'; that he has escaped from his cage and asks Nunu to hide him. The bird is scared and weak; he has lost his feathers, and has lost all hope. Nunu shows the bird the rising sun and the nearby forest where other birds fly freely, and reassures him that he too will eventually gain his freedom."

* Mantiq al-Tayr is a blogger who is attempting to wake up other American citizens to the true dangers and challenges which face their country and is devoted to justice for the Palestinian people. Truth is his objective, satire is his tool. He also enjoys reading the Qur'an from time to time. See his website.

By James M. Wall * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

Mahmoud Abu Samra (left) and two of his friends (Source: The Palestine Chronicle)

Mahmoud Abu Samra was killed August 19 in an Israeli air raid near Gaza City. He was 13 years old. The Palestinian news service, Ma’an, tells the story of Mahmoud’s death:

Renewed air strikes across the Gaza Strip late Thursday killed a Palestinian teenager and injured more than a dozen others amid an escalation in violence that left some 20 people dead throughout the day.

Just after midnight Friday, Israeli warplanes launched a series of raids targeting Gaza City, the northern towns of Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiya, and Khan Younis in the south.

Gaza medical official Adham Abu Salmiya said an air strike on a home near the former intelligence services headquarters in Gaza City killed 13-year-old Mahmoud Abu Samra and injured 18 others.”

Mahmoud (at left in the picture above) is number 150 in the list of 173 men, women and children who have been killed  this year by Israeli forces.

Each person who dies in the struggle against the Occupation, is identified by Palestinians as a Shaheed, the Arabic word for “martyr”.

Some of the men killed are identified as members of the Gaza-based Al Quds Brigade, the armed wing of the Islamic Jihad. The women and childen are all civilians. They are, also, all Shaheeds.

The website, Occupied Palestine | فلسطين | iRemember… | الشهداء  prints the names of the 173 Shaheeds who have been killed between January 1, 2011, and August 25. The site further indicates that this list includes only those deaths confirmed by media sources. The 173 are recorded in the order in which they died. The list grows as other deaths are recorded.

The site reports that Mahmoud died on April 19, after midnight, which would suggest he was killed in his sleep. The media stories that recorded the deaths may be accessed by clicking on each name listed on the site.

Israel, of course, does not launch air strikes on the spur of the moment. The Israeli air attack that killed Mahmoud after midnight, August 19, had the earmarks of another of those Israeli military strikes already on the drawing board, waiting for a trigger event to justify the action.

Israel’s December, 2008, Operation Cast Lead invasion of Gaza, was obviously a long planned military assault. At the time, Israel claimed the military assault was a “retaliation” against Gazan rocket fire.

On August 18, 2011, Israel was quick, once again, to blame Gaza “terrorists” (falsely) for the Eilat bus attack. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told the Israeli news agency, Ynet, “this terror attack originated from Gaza. We will exhaust all measures against the terrorists.”

The Guardian quoted Israeli officials flatly asserting that the PRC was responsible.  The officials even had a scenario that explained how “militants” traveled 125 miles from Gaza into Israel to carry out the attacks.

The Gaza-based Popular Resistance Committees (PRC) was responsible for the attacks near the Red Sea resort of Eilat. A large squad of militants crossed through tunnels from Gaza into Egypt, and then travelled 125 miles (200km) south through the lawless Sinai peninsula before crossing into Egypt north of Eilat, according to officials.

This scenario quickly collapsed, except in US media and political circles, where Israel’s initial cover story was adopted as the Gospel according to Ehud Barak.

American Jewish blogger Richard Silverstein does not believe in that Gospel. He has been tracking the phony Israeli scenario from the outset. He wrote in his Tikun Olam blog:

Al Masry Al Youm, an independent liberal Egyptian newspaper, reports “Egyptian authorities have identified three of the people responsible for carrying out a terrorist attack in Israel, just north of Eilat, on Thursday [August 18], in which seven Israelis were killed, according to an Egyptian security source.

The same source added that one of the men identified is a leader of terrorist cells in Sinai, while another is a fugitive who owns an ammunition factory.”

What is intriguing about this story is that it would explain many things which appeared to be discrepancies when the theory was that Gazans were involved. First, the Israeli bus driver said the attackers wore Egyptian army uniforms. Now, it might be possible for Gazans to get such uniforms, but it would be much easier for Egyptians to do so.

Second, the Israelis themselves have disagreed about the authors of the crime, with [Prime Minister] Netanyahu claiming the Popular Resistance Committee was behind it and the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) spokesperson specifically rejecting her boss’ claim.

All of which leads one to believe that the Israelis don’t have a clue who was behind it.

Israel’s neighbors also rejected the Ehud Barak version. They know the deceptive nature of their enemy. In the August 24, The Palestine Chronicle, Tammy Obeidallah, writes:

Of course, the Israeli spin machine claims the bombardment of Gaza was in response to the [August 18] Eilat operation, although there is no evidence that Hamas or the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC) perpetrated the attack.

He adds:

Israel’s 63-year campaign of mass murder and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people is neatly packaged as ‘retaliation’ against ‘mortars fired by Palestinian militants’ or the hackneyed ‘homemade rockets.’ Mysteriously, the media never reports on these mortars or rockets until Israeli forces “retaliate” for them; then it serves as an excuse for continued genocide.

If Israeli strikes are ‘retaliation’ we are left to wonder just what the Israeli military was ‘retaliating’ for during the first four months of 2011, when 49 Palestinians in Gaza were murdered during Israeli raids, including a missile strike that killed three children in the same family, all under age 16. A fourth family member also died in that strike and 13 others, mostly children, were wounded.

Obeidallah further ponders whether or not the US main stream media would ever be interested in publishing the names of those Palestinians listed on the “I remember” Palestine Chronicle page. He assumes they would not.

After all, Mahmoud Abu Samra is just another Arabic name which the majority of news anchors could not pronounce correctly. At 13 years of age, his bright eyes and infectious smile were memorialized momentarily on a few social network pages, then joined the sea of images of dead Palestinian children, all victims of a 63-year genocide endorsed by most of the world’s nations.

One week after the launching of Israel’s phony “retaliation” cover story, which led to the death of Mahmoud Abu Samra, Ha’aretz reported that on August 25 that Israel and Egypt had agreed to conduct a joint investigation “of the events surrounding last week’s terror attacks in southern Israel which left eight Israelis dead.”

Having reached a political arrangement with its powerful neighbor, the newly unpredictable Egyptians, Israel continued its attacks against Palestinian “militants” in the Gaza Strip, still claiming the strikes were “retaliatory”.

This time, Israel claimed it was attacking Gaza in response to the firing of more than 20 rockets at southern Israel since Wednesday. Five Palestinians have already been killed in this latest Israeli “retaliation”.

When a nation’s foreign policy is based on a platform of lies, deception becomes that nation’s constant obsession. Without the support and help of the nation it loves, the USA, that obsession becomes increasingly difficult to sustain.

What would Israel do without the constant presence of journalists like the New York Times’ Ethan Bronner? Bronner can always be depended upon to serve as a conduit of Israeli spin to American readers.

Bronner, the Times Jerusalem correspondent, writes from the rarefied air of Israel’s government offices. He is always a reliable source of the latest Israeli spin. In his latest weekend update, published August 27, nine days after the Eliat bus bombing, Bronner examined the interaction between Middle East regional powers.

His conclusions are rather obvious: The current Egyptian government is not as Israeli-friendly as Egypt’s deposed dictator, Hosni Muburak, had been.  That would explain why Benjamin Netanyahu and his Congressional pals in Washington, were so upset when President Obama finally faced the inevitable and called on Muburak to step down.

We also learn another obvious fact: Turkey is not happy with Israel for reasons related to Gaza and Mavi Marmara. Bronner cannot bring himself to admit (he is writing an analysis, not a news story) that Israel has no qualms about killing Palestinians.

Turkey does not like to see Israelis randomly killing Palestinians and then telling the lie that radical Palestinians made us do it.  This is the tortured analysis Bronner offers to “explain” the big lie:

Last weekend, [Israeli] officials were contemplating a major military assault on Gaza. But that plan was shelved by the crisis that emerged with Egypt, by the realization that Hamas itself was uninvolved in the terrorist attack and by the worry about how such an assault would affect other countries’ views during the United Nations debate of a Palestinian resolution in September.

Those “other countries” include Turkey, of course.

The plan to create more Shaheeds (martyrs) in Gaza was “shelved” for political expediency? Bronner is finally given the freedom to write that Hamas was not involved (an admission slow to arrive in Israel’s ruling circles). He also was freed up to write that killing Palestinians would “affect other country’s views” when the UN vote is taken September 20?

Amira Hass, Ha’aretz‘ West Bank/Gaza correspondent, does not spend her time in Israeli government offices. She writes from Gaza where she finds persuasive circumstantial evidence that there were no Palestinians involved in the Eilat bombing.

It has been one week since the terror attacks near Eilat, and there is no sign of the traditional mourners’ tents for the relatives of militants killed by the Israel Defense Forces, or indeed any reports of Gazan families who are grieving as a result of IDF actions near the Egyptian border last Thursday. Nor were there reports of families demanding the return of their loved ones’ bodies for burial. A longtime social activist told Haaretz that even in the event that families were instructed to conceal their grief, news like that is difficult to hide in the Strip.

The absence of mourners’ tents reinforces the general sense in the Strip that the perpetrators of the attack were not from Gaza, contrary to Israeli defense establishment claims. Gazans also doubt that members of the Popular Resistance Committees and their military wing (the Nasser Salah al-Din Brigades ) were behind the attack. Support for this view can be seen in a report on Monday by the Egyptian daily Al-Masry Al-Youm, according to which Egyptian security forces had identified three of the planners as Egyptians.

Bronner ignores the absence of mourners’ tents in his analysis. Instead he clings to the Israeli spin:

Israeli officials say they are certain from detailed intelligence that the Aug. 18 infiltration that killed eight Israelis was planned and carried out from Gaza by Palestinians associated with a small radical group.

Bronner also writes that “in its pursuit of the killers into Sinai and its assassinations of the group’s leaders in Gaza, Israel found itself with less room to maneuver than in the past.”  In short, Israel is not prepared to stop the killing, just bring it down to pre-August 18 levels.

Not much in the way of progress, but it is a reminder that Israel cannot depend forever on America’s vetoes to clean up the mess it creates for itself.

* James M. Wall is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois. From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine. Jim launched personal blog April 24, 2008.