Toespraak van Tzipi Livni voor de Verenigde Naties

Hieronder een verslagje van de recente toespraak van de Israëlische minister van buitenlandse zaken, Tzipi Livni, voor de Algemene Vergadering van de VN. Ze sprak zich volmondig uit voor een twee-staten oplossing, en klonk hoopvol over het draagvlak daarvoor.

 

Ook Achmadinejad hield kortgeleden een VN toespraak, waarin hij als een Egyptische filmster mooie woorden predikte over verbroedering, maar Israël daarvan uitsloot.

 

Het handvest van de Verenigde Naties bevat ook zulke mooie woorden over de gelijkheid der volkeren, maar nochthans maakt het voor Israël een uitzondering. Wat is het toch met die Joden?

 

Terecht bracht Livni het met 2 maten meten binnen de VN ter sprake, en ook het probleem dat het internationale recht niet berekend is op het bestrijden van terrorisme, daar het zich primair richt op de relaties tussen staten onderling en hoe zij conflicten dienen te beslechten.

Er moeten dringend regels worden vastgelegd voor de strijd tegen organisaties als Hamas en Hezbollah, die de burgers van een staat aanvallen zonder zelf onder verantwoordelijkheid van een staat te vallen.

 

Wouter & Ratna

 

De volledige speech van Livni is hier: TRANSCRIPT: Israeli FM Tzippi Livni Addresses the UN General Assembly
Zie voor een portret van Livni: Tzipi Livni portrait: Her Jewish State

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=24096&Cr=general&Cr1=debate

Israel's Foreign Minister urges UN to act on its founding principles

1 October 2007 – The Foreign Minister of Israel today called on the United Nations to act on its founding principles by ensuring that the work of its Human Rights Council is balanced and by standing up to those who openly espouse violence.

"What is the value, we have to ask, of an Organization which is unable to take effective action in the face of a direct assault on the very principles it was founded to protect?" asked Tzipi Livni in her address to the General Assembly's annual high-level debate.

"It is time for the United Nations, and the States of the world, to live up to their promise of never again," she declared.

She added that "it is also time to see this same kind of moral conviction in the Human Rights Council so that it can become a shield for the victims of human rights, not a weapon for its abusers."

Israel, she said, "has never tried to avoid genuine discussion of its human rights record. But so long as the Council maintains its wildly disproportionate focus on Israel, it weakens the UN's moral voice, and the price of this blindness is paid by the victims of human rights atrocities in Darfur and Myanmar and throughout the world."

The Foreign Minister also issued a call for the development "at the global level what democracies apply at the national one" – namely a universal set of standards for participation in democratic elections.

"We need a universal democratic code that requires that all those seeking the legitimacy of the democratic process earn it by respecting such principles as State monopoly over the lawful use of force, the rejection of racism and violence and the protection of rights of others."

She cautioned against "buying off extremists" in search of a short-term fix to instability. "Instead, groups such as Hamas and Hizbollah must be presented with a clear choice: between the path of violence and the path of legitimacy."

The Israeli Foreign Minister said responsible States agree that "Iran is the most prominent sponsor of terrorism" and that it is actively pursuing means to "wipe a Member State – mine – off the map."

She charged that despite this, "there are still those who, in the name of consensus and engagement, continue to obstruct the urgent steps which are needed to bring Iran's sinister ambition to a halt."

Despite all the obstacles to the Middle East peace process, she said "there is a new moment of opportunity, an alliance that favours peace."

Guided by shared principles regarding the need to establish two States, living side by side in peace and security, "the parties can define a common border and turn the two-State vision into a reality," she said.

Using the right of reply, Iran's representative said Ms. Livni had made "baseless allegations" and distortions against his country to distract the international community from the "criminal policies and… atrocities" carried out by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory and elsewhere in the region.

Palestijns vluchtelingenkamp in Libanon: Geen huis staat meer overeind

Waarom roept niemand 'war crimes', en is Libanon niet fel veroordeeld door Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, de Arabische Liga en de linkse politieke partijen? Waarom organiseren GroenLinks en de SP geen demonstratie, samen met United Civilians for Peace en Novib, tegen de Libanese oorlogsmisdaden? Waarom wordt niet tot een boycot van Libanon opgeroepen?

 

Omdat de meeste mensen wel begrijpen dat het Libanese Leger de extremisten van Fatah al Islam moest verslaan, die zich in het kamp hadden verschanst. Men had, net als het Israëlische leger in Libanon vorige zomer, de bewoners opgeroepen het kamp te verlaten, maar niet iedereen kon ergens heen. Men had, net als het Israëlische leger vorig jaar, te maken met 'strijders' die zich tussen de burgerbevolking verschansten.

 

"Vier maanden lang bombardeerden de Libanese militairen het kamp vanuit de lucht om de jihadisten letterlijk uit te roken. Met succes, maar in Nahr al-Bared is bijna geen pand onbeschadigd gebleven."

 

 

Ratna

 

 

Eerder bericht hierover (in het Engels): Libanon: Fatah-al-Islam eindelijk verslagen - Palestijns kamp in puin (4-9-2007)

_________________________________________________________

 

http://www.depers.nl/Buitenland/?ID=111237&ref=rss

Libanon Terug naar vluchtelingenkamp Nahr al-Bared

Geen huis staat meer overeind

Door: Eva Ludemann
Gepubliceerd: woensdag 10 oktober 2007 21:44
Update: woensdag 10 oktober 2007 21:52

Na bijna vijf maanden mochten inwoners van het Palestijnse vluchtelingenkamp Nahr al-Bared in Noord-Libanon gisteren weer naar huis. 'Ze hebben alles verwoest.'

'Mijn handen zijn helemaal zwart, ik kan ze niet wassen.' Directeur Abdallah van Beit Atfal Assomoud, een welzijnsorganisatie in Nahr al-Bared, rommelt hoorbaar door de puinhopen, op zoek naar nog enigszins bruikbare spullen. Op de achtergrond schreeuwt een man. Een vrouw en een kind huilen. 'De mensen zijn in shock, ze weten niet wat ze zien. Alles is kapot, alle huizen zijn volledig uitgebrand. Ik probeer ze een beetje op te vangen.'

Het Libanese leger laat vanaf gisteren elke dag honderd gezinnen terugkeren naar Nahr al-Bared. De ongeveer 30.000 inwoners van het kamp nabij Tripoli ontvluchtten eind mei hun huizen, toen zware gevechten uitbraken tussen het Libanese leger en de door Al-Qaida geïnspireerde beweging Fatah al-Islam. Naar schatting ruim honderd strijders van die organisatie hadden zich verschanst in het dichtstbevolkte deel van het kamp. Volgens een overeenkomst tussen de PLO en de Libanese overheid mag het Libanese leger de vluchtelingenkampen in Libanon niet betreden. Vier maanden lang bombardeerden de Libanese militairen het kamp vanuit de lucht om de jihadisten letterlijk uit te roken. Met succes, maar in Nahr al-Bared is bijna geen pand onbeschadigd gebleven.

'Mijn vrouw en vier kleine kinderen blijven voorlopig nog in Beddawikamp, hier vlakbij', vertelt Abdallah. 'Ik wil niet dat ze de verwoestingen zien. Ze hebben de afgelopen maanden al genoeg meegemaakt, ik moet eerst ons huis weer opbouwen.' Van dat huis is zo weinig over dat Abdallah het eerst niet kon terugvinden. 'Ik herkende onze straat bijna niet, het is een oorlogszone geworden. Er staat geen huis meer overeind en alle puin is zwart geblakerd. Ze zijn hier hard te keer gegaan.'

Hoewel het leven in Nahr al-Bared vrijwel onmogelijk is geworden, keren de gevluchte inwoners zodra zij mogen massaal terug, ook omdat ze bang zijn hun vluchtelingenstatus kwijt te raken als ze elders in Libanon gaan wonen. De VN-organisatie voor Palestijnse vluchtelingen UNRWA heeft de afgelopen dagen vastgesteld welke panden nog veilig te betreden zijn en vangt daar de mensen op met directe noodhulp: matrassen, voedselpakketten, mobiele watertanks en klinieken. Sinds de gevechten uitbraken heeft de UNRWA een kleine dertien miljoen dollar aan hulpgelden ontvangen voor Nahr al-Bared. 'Dat is veel te weinig', zegt Mohammed Addellal, hoofd van het UNRWA-team in het kamp. 'We hebben alleen al 54 miljoen dollar nodig om de mensen de komende tijd uit de brand te kunnen helpen. Ingenieurs bepalen de komende weken wat de totale schade is en hoeveel geld we nodig hebben om dit kamp weer bewoonbaar te maken.' Drie internationale organisaties zijn gisteren begonnen met kleinschalige reparaties aan huizen die nog veilig zijn. Daar zullen zoveel mogelijk dakloze gezinnen verblijven tot ze een nieuwe woning krijgen toegewezen.

 

Filmfestival Egypte voor verbroedering - maar niet met Israël

Citaat uit het onderstaande artikel:

 

The Israelis applied for a place at this year's 31st edition of the Egyptian festival - whose motto ironically is "to advance understanding through the language of art between all the peoples of the world" - through the event's representatives in Germany.

But Soheir Abdel Kader, the festival's vice president, told AFP, "It is out of the question that an Israeli film plays here."

 

Is de Arabische wereld klaar voor vrede met Israël? Egypte heeft officiëel lang geleden vrede gesloten met Israël, maar dat zou je niet zeggen als je de regeringsgetrouwe krant Al Ahram of berichten als deze leest.

 

Wat kan Israël van vrede met andere Arabische staten verwachten? Zal alles opeens radikaal veranderen, nadat men zich uit de Westelijke Jordaanoever en de Golan Hoogvlakte heeft teruggetrokken? Als dat zo is, waarom hebben de terugtrekkingen uit de Sinai, Zuid-Libanon en Gaza dan zo weinig, en in de laatste gevallen zelfs averechts effect gehad?

 

Ik zou graag willen geloven dat er vrede komt als Israël zich verder terugtrekt, maar dit geloof moet wel ergens op zijn gebaseerd. Helaas zit de haat en de wrok tegen Israël veel dieper dan haar behandeling van de Palestijnen, zoals onder andere blijkt uit de onverschilligheid voor hun lot wanneer Israël niet de boosdoener is. Zo heeft het Libanese leger flink huisgehouden in het Palestijnse vluchtelingenkamp Nahr al-Bared, waarbij vele burgers zijn omgekomen en bijna geen huis meer overeind staat, maar daar hoor je niemand over.

 

Ratna
----------

Egypt festival launches barrage against Israeli film
By AFP First Published: October 8, 2007
www.dailystaregypt.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=9688

CAIRO: An Egyptian film festival has rejected an Israeli production and threatened to boycott any Arab movie fest that breaks a taboo on admitting films from the Jewish state.

Organizers of the Cairo International Film Festival, which opens next month, have loudly opposed an application by Eran Kolirin's "The Band's Visit," a fictional tale of an Egyptian police band that gets stranded in Israel.

The director has said his movie, which won praise at the Munich and Cannes film festivals, sends a strong pro-peace message.

But Soheir Abdel Kader, the festival's vice president, told AFP, "It is out of the question that an Israeli film plays here."

The Israelis applied for a place at this year's 31st edition of the Egyptian festival - whose motto ironically is "to advance understanding through the language of art between all the peoples of the world" - through the event's representatives in Germany.

"They will no longer be on our contact list, we didn't even answer their email," said Abdel Kader. "They should have known we are against the showing of an Israeli film."

A solid "anti-normalization" front exists in Egypt's cultural circles which reject collaboration or contact with Israeli artists or intellectuals, despite a peace deal signed between Egypt and Israel in 1979.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to fuel anger in Egyptians who believe the US-sponsored peace deal changed Egypt's role from regional heavyweight to mediator whose decision-making power is largely defined by Washington.

Three members of the festival committee did watch a preview of the "The Band's Visit" but did so in their personal capacity, not as officials of the film fest which runs from Nov. 27 to Dec. 7.

The film delves into unlikely cross-cultural relations when an Alexandrian police band invited to perform in Israel gets lost in the Negev desert after their hosts fail to pick them up.

The musicians end up staying at a local cafe, and the initial, begrudging interaction between the Egyptians and the Israelis eventually develops into a warm exchange.

The film was also well received in its native Israel and is being considered for two prizes by the European Film Academy.

"We regret to hear that the film has not been accepted [in Egypt] for political reasons without consideration for its artistic merit," Israeli embassy spokesman Benny Sharoni told AFP.

The Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot said the movie had been expected to be shown at the Abu Dhabi film festival this month. But the paper said this infuriated the Egyptians and the showing was quickly cancelled after the Egyptian Actors Union threatened to boycott the Emirati festival if "The Band's Visit" was aired.

"It is clear that we will not participate in any Arab film festival if an Israeli film is shown," Ashraf Zaki, union secretary general, told AFP.

The weekly Rose Al-Youssef magazine, meanwhile, ran an article under the headline

"The Israeli squad was ready to attack the Arab festivals," charging that the bid to show the Israeli film at the Egyptian festival was part of what it called a well-orchestrated conspiracy to ignite a crisis within the local cultural scene.

The magazine said some in Egyptian artistic circles believed Culture Minister Farouk Hosni was ready to intervene in favor of Kolirin's film, as a way to polish his image as candidate for the post of chief of the United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (Unesco), though the ministry denied this.

The refusal to screen "The Band's Visit" is the latest episode in long-standing objections to normalizing cultural ties with Israel.

In August, Zaki launched a virulent attack against rising star Amr Waked for agreeing to perform alongside an Israeli actor and threatened to block him from working in Egypt.

Waked is to star as the late Iraqi president Saddam Hussein' son-in-law in "Between Two Rivers," a television film currently in development, on the life of the late dictator played by Israeli actor Yigal Naor.

Abbas medewerker: de Klaagmuur is van ons

Nadat Abbas niet alleen 100% terugtrekking van Israël uit de Westelijke Jordaanoever eiste, maar ook het voormalige niemandsland claimde voor een Palestijnse staat, vroeg ik wat zijn volgende eis zal zijn.

 

Hier is het antwoord: de Klaagmuur.

 

Volgens Adnan Husseini is deze 'deel van de islamitische erfenis die niet kan worden opgegeven, en moet zij onder moslim controle zijn'. Hij voegde toe dat de hele Oude Stad van Jeruzalem deel dient uit te maken van een toekomstige Palestijnse staat.

Zoals eerder betoogd, is deze positie niet nieuw, en heeft Abbas ook in 2000 zowel de gehele oude stad geclaimd als een onbeperkt 'recht op terugkeer' van de vluchtelingen, maar de claim op de Klaagmuur wordt zelden zo openlijk geuit. Benieuwd naar de islamitische connectie met de Klaagmuur? Mohammed zou er zijn half-paard, Al Burak, hebben vastgebonden voordat hij opsteeg naar Allah.

Overigens wordt Jeruzalem in de Koran überhaupt niet vermeld.

 

 

Ratna
----------

Abbas aide: Western Wall is ours
JTA Published: 10/11/2007
www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104603.html

An adviser to Mahmoud Abbas said the Kotel should be under Palestinian control.

Adnan Husseini, aide to the Palestinian Authority president, said Thursday that Palestinian demands for Israel to cede eastern Jerusalem under any peace accord also includes the Western Wall.

"This is part of Islamic heritage that cannot be given up, and it must be under Muslim control," Husseini told Israel's NRG Web site, adding that all of Jerusalem's Old City should be part of a future Palestinian state. He made similar comments in an interview with Israel Radio.

The Western Wall is a last vestige of the Second Temple, which was razed by the Romans in 70 CE. Today it abuts the Temple Mount, which houses Islam's third-holiest shrine. Muslims refer to the wall as Al-Burak, a reference to the Prophet Mohammed's horse, which he is said to have tethered at the site.

Abbas had no immediate comment on Husseini's statements, which appeared to contradict several past land-for-peace proposals that had won international consensus and called for Israel to retain control of the Western Wall and Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem's Old City.

Husseni's assertions caused uproar in Israel's right-wing opposition, which accused the Olmert government of escalating Palestinian territorial demands by proposing a division of Jerusalem into two capitals for two peoples.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said a future peace accord with the Palestinians would require Israel to give up on some of its long-standing national claims but did not specify a plan for Jerusalem.

Boycot de twee-staten oplossing?

Wie is er niet voor vrede door compromis in het Midden-Oosten conflict, dus voor een twee-staten oplossing?

 

Er zijn extremistische Joodse groeperingen, in Israël, de VS en elders, die zich tegen elk compromis verzetten. De religieuze kolonisten in Hebron zijn daarvan het beruchtste voorbeeld. Geen enkele Europese 'fact finding mission' laat dan ook na om Hebron te bezoeken, maar gelukkig zijn deze agressieve Hebron kolonisten in de minderheid, zelfs onder de religieuze kolonisten.

 

Het Palestijnse afwijzingskamp lijkt echter op brede steun te kunnen rekenen bij veel "linkse" partijen en "vredes-" en mensenrechtenorganisaties in het Westen. Zo zijn daar bijvoorbeeld de Palestijnse vluchtelingenorganisaties, PACBI, Electronic Intifada en de International Solidarity Movement, die tot de favoriete links behoren van pakweg een Anja Meulenbelt, Palestina Komitee of de quasi-linkse mesthoop van Indymedia. Verzot als ze zijn op boycots, steunen ze ook een boycot van een échte vredesorganisatie, nl. de One Voice Movement, die langzaam aan kracht en invloed lijkt te winnen met hun programma voor een twee-staten oplossing, en daarmee een bedreiging zou kunnen worden voor het streven om Israël op te doeken...

 

 

Wouter

--------------

Boycotting the OneVoice Summit?

Posted on October 3rd, 2007 by daniel

OneVoice Palestine has recently been attacked by a new campaign by disgruntled people (apparently funded out of Lebanon) who believe the OneVoice Summit should be boycotted.

Some of our staff and friends got emails urging them to boycott the efforts of OneVoice Palestine - they all came from someone in Lebanon who claimed that our mobilization of moderate voices to call for an end to the conflict across both sides is an effort at normalization rather than at ending the occupation.

A couple weeks ago, on the other side, we also heard boycott calls from an extremist Jewish American group that plans to protest our Washington DC event and claimed OneVoice Israel was a tool of appeasement betraying Jewish values. 

This is not the first and will not be the last time that violent extremists and radical absolutists from either side will try to undermine the OneVoice Movement.

Indeed, the more we grow and threaten these extremist visions, the more they will try to undermine our call to empower mainstream nationalists on both sides to break the shackles that violent extremists have placed on our world for too long.

But OneVoice is built and engineered not just to withstand that, but to use those attacks to expose radical extremists, absolutists and fatalists who claim they are "for peace" but who realistically prefer eternal warfare to compromise.  Let's call the bluff on anyone who says they are "for peace" but don't want to accept the other side has a right.  Let them be honest and at least say, "we are not for peace, we want it all, or war."

There are only two options: a) Two States for Two People, or b) Continued Conflict.

People need to make a choice. 

Are they going to stand up and be counted and help us build the critical mass to unleash the power of moderation - or are they going to be silenced by violent extremism?

As OneVoice continues growing, it will be the subject of more criticism from those very violent extremists we seek to neutralize and isolate.  They will isolate themselves by opposing a popular movement that aims to build dignity, respect, humanity, and a two state solution for both peoples. 

In the process, they will also highlight the OneVoice message.

Any Palestinian that wants to end the occupation and achieve independence, and any Israeli that wants to end terror and achieve security, must ultimately understand the only way to do so is through an agreement among both peoples to end the conflict.

Tags: PeaceWorks Foundation, Middle East, OneVoice Movement //

1. Christine // Oct 3, 2007 at 10:22 pm

   The International Solidarity Movement is calling for a boycott as well.

   http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2007/10/03/pacbi-celebrating-peace-or-camouflaging-apartheid/

2. The Bad Guys Uncovered… | Daniel Lubetzky // Oct 4, 2007 at 2:29 am

   […] Per my prior blog post, I could have placed my bet on who is behind the "boycott" of the OneVoice Summit… […]

3. Daniel Lubetzky // Oct 4, 2007 at 2:33 am

   I could have placed my bet on who is behind the "boycott" of the OneVoice Summit…

   …No one other than the "International Solidarity Movement."

   This is a fringe movement of extremists that do not support the two-state-solution, of any kind. It is not an issue of 67 borders, or Jerusalem, or refugee rights. Don't let them hide behind any of that - because all of those issues have answers the vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians support, embodied in the Clinton Parameters - and also in the Taba talks that Arafat himself fully endorsed.

   If any one doubts that the ISM and all those opposing the OneVoice Summit are just ultimately the very extremists we seek to expose, just confront them and ask them. You will get evasive politicized answers that only will confirm these people are the "false messiahs" that promise absolute solutions to the Palestinians, only to manipulate them and deliver nothing to them.

   The "International Solidarity Movement" has been exposed and defeated at numerous college campus events. Before, they could hide under the mantle of Palestinian nationalism, out of the comfort of their homes in Virginia.

   But when OneVoice Youth Leaders from Palestine, from Gaza to Jenin, who are living with the consequences tell the public that they want a two-state-solution, they help unmask intransigent groups that rather eternal warfare than a historic compromise.

   The problem does not exist among Palestinian extremist circles alone, who covet "all of Palestine" and will not accept the existence of a Jewish State by their side. There are parallel Jewish groups that want a "Greater Israel" and will not recognize a Palestinian State by their side.

   They too get unmasked by mainstream Israelis that are just fed up with absolutists messing their lives for far too long.

   They will try to hide behind diatribe and formulations, but the bottomline question you must ask them to expose them is, do you recognize the right of both the Israeli and Palestinian people to live in freedom, dignity, and with security - for two states to co-exist side by side?

   Anyone that does not accept this formulation is either uninformed or hiding their absolutism.

   One-State-Solution may be beautifully-intentioned but both the Israelis and the Palestinians want a separate State of their own. Eventually after peace comes you could hope for a confederacy agreement between proud independent states, but the fact is that the ONLY solution out there is the Two-State-Solution embodied in the Clinton Parameters - and the OneVoice Pillars available at www.OneVoiceMovement/negotiate.

   There are just no other answers out there and it is time that we come to terms with that and not allow violent extremists to derail the hopes and dreams of millions for an end to the conflict.

OneVoice Movement houdt 18 oktober internationale manifestatie

Eén van de hoopgevende signalen in het zo vaak uitzichtloos lijkende conflict is de One Voice Movement, die inmiddels (in 5 jaar tijd) een kwart miljoen Palestijnse en een kwart miljoen Israëlische ondertekenaars heeft van hun manifest voor een twee-staten oplossing.

 

Het zou mooi zijn als deze grassroots beweging hun respectievelijke leiderschap ertoe kan bewegen op eindelijk de sprong naar een echte vredesovereenkomst te wagen. De vredesconferentie in november is daarvoor wel erg kort dag, maar voor 18 oktober 2008 moet toch kunnen lukken?

 

 

Wouter

________________

Press Release: Over Half a Million Palestinian & Israeli Signatories Demand Uninterrupted Negotiations, Two-State Solution

OVER HALF A MILLION PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI SIGNATORIES DEMAND UNINTERRUPTED NEGOTIATIONS, TWO-STATE SOLUTION

DEADLINE SET BY THE PEOPLE: TWO STATE AGREEMENT BY OCTOBER 18, 2008

 

Jericho/Tel Aviv, September 19, 2007 — Today, the OneVoice Movement, a youth-led mainstream nationalist movement with parallel operations in Israel and the Palestinian Authority, announced that it had exceeded its original goal of recruiting half a million Palestinian and Israeli citizens as signatories of a mandate demanding a two-state solution. The OneVoice Mandate calls on Palestinian President Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Olmert to start immediate, uninterrupted negotiations until a comprehensive two-state solution is reached.

As of the latest audit on September 17, 2007, 536,443 Israeli and Palestinian signatories (262,008 Israelis and 274,435 Palestinians) have joined the movement. Having exceeded its goal of recruiting half a million Palestinians and Israelis in roughly equal numbers four months earlier than planned, OneVoice aims to get to One Million citizen signatories by the end of 2007.

The groundswell of Israeli and Palestinian citizens committing themselves to the movement will gather on an unprecedented scale on October 18th, 2007, when OneVoice will host the One Million Voices to End the Conflict people's summits. The summits will be held simultaneously in Jericho and Tel Aviv, and linked via satellite to international "echo" events in London, Washington D.C. and Ottawa. Hundreds of thousands are expected to participate, showing their solidarity in support of a two-state solution and demanding accountability to the will of the people.

The Mandate sets a deadline for the Heads of State to achieve an agreement no later than October 18, 2008, one year from the date of the peoples' summit.

"While risky, setting a deadline is vital to send a message that business as usual is no longer acceptable to the people. Every minute delayed in ending the conflict is a minute gained by forces of militant absolutism committed to erase the possibility of a two-state solution," said Daniel Lubetzky, Founder of the OneVoice Movement.

"If the Israeli and Palestinian Heads of State demonstrate progress over the coming months, they will be able to eventually reverse the debacle in Gaza, by pointing to a positive alternative that will undermine extremism," added Lubetzky. "But if they don't, the opposite will happen and fundamentalist extremist ideologies will spread to the West Bank, and eventually Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and the world."

"The voice of the people is the critical element in reaching a viable solution for the region that has been missing in the resolution process thus far," said Dr. Fathi Darwish, General Director of OneVoice Palestine. "If the Palestinian people want to end the occupation, and if the Israeli people want to ensure security and normalization with the Arab world, then each individual must play a real role to bring that about."

Through a series of groundbreaking negotiations held among Palestinian, Israeli and international experts and advisors, OneVoice revealed that a hidden consensus amongst the people exists on the basis of a two-state solution. 76% of both Israelis and Palestinians are in favor of a two-state solution, and would be willing to compromise to live in strong, independent, stable states at peace with their neighbors. Building off of these Citizens Negotiations is the OneVoice Mandate, which calls upon the region's elected representatives to:

• Recognize the right of both peoples to independence, sovereignty, freedom, justice, dignity, respect, national security, personal safety, and economic viability,
• Implement concrete confidence-building measures that will improve the lives of the Palestinian and Israeli people, including ensuring freedom of movement for ordinary civilians and fostering education against incitement on both sides, and
• Immediately commence uninterrupted negotiations until reaching an agreement, no later than October 18, 2008, for a Two-State Solution, fulfilling the consistent will of the overwhelming majority of both populations.

Founded after the Oslo process collapsed in the aftermath of the Camp David II negotiations, and frustrated with years of stalemated negotiations, violent conflict, and continued terror and occupation, OneVoice works to mobilize the moderate majority, which has been heretofore silent against the forces of violent extremism.

"If the people of Israel and Palestine want to end the conflict, they must create a support system for the peace process," said Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, who announced he is joining the OneVoice Movement's Honorary Board. "The events on October 18th represent a potential tipping point for OneVoice's longstanding commitment to seize back the agenda from violent extremism by mobilizing the vast numbers of moderate citizens on both sides."

Rabbi David Rosen, Chairman of the International Jewish Committee, also a member of the Honorary Board, added, "This is not a conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. It's not a conflict between Muslims and Jews. The real conflict is between the moderates on both sides against violent extremism that seeks to wreak havoc and hopelessness."

###

About the OneVoice Movement:

The OneVoice Movement is a mainstream nationalist grassroots movement with over half a million signatories in roughly equal numbers both in Israel and in Palestine, and 3,000 highly-trained youth leaders. It aims to amplify the voice of the overwhelming but heretofore silent majority of moderates who wish for peace and prosperity, empowering them to demand accountability from elected representatives and work toward a two-state solution. OneVoice counts on its Board over 60 foremost dignitaries and business leaders across a wide spectrum of politics and beliefs, joining as OneVoice against violent extremism and for conflict resolution. Learn more by visiting www.OneMillionVoices.org.

Originally Posted on September 19, 2007 at http://blog.onevoicemovement.org/one_voice/2007/09/press-release-o.html

 

Olmert & Abbas en vrede na 60 jaar ("The cat's tail")

Yoel Marcus neemt geen blad voor de mond. Een goed artikel, maar zoals Ami Isseroff in No one ever died from talking, or did they? terecht opmerkt, is de laatste zin onjuist: "No one ever died from talking."

Praten kan wel degelijk schade aanrichten, want het kan slechte organisaties versterken en legitimeren. Bovendien kunnen mislukte vredesconferenties een boel schade aanrichten. De gematigde leiders leiden gezichtsverlies tegenover hun radikalere tegenstanders, mensen verliezen vertrouwen in onderhandelingen als manier om tot een oplossing te komen en zullen daardoor vatbaarder zijn voor de retoriek van extremisten, etc.

Daarom zijn goede voorbereidingen en de wil aan beide kanten om tot een compromis te komen essentiëel om in Annapolis resultaat te boeken. Daarbij moet niet alleen Israël, maar ook de Palestijnse Autoriteit van Machmoud Abbas onder druk worden gezet om zich flexibel op te stellen.

 

Ratna
----------

The cat's tail

By Yoel Marcus
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/910746.html

If peace breaks out between the Israelis and Palestinians at the Annapolis summit, I'll eat my hat.

Coincidentally or not, three days after the scheduled opening date, on November 29, it will be 60 years since the UN General Assembly approved the Partition Plan for creating two states in Mandatory Palestine. The Jews greeted the resolution with singing and dancing. The Arabs flatly rejected it, opening fire on two Egged buses the very next day.

The declaration of statehood on May 14, 1948 kicked off the War of Independence, and the blood spilled since then has smeared every page of the history books. Arab stupidity, intransigence and hatred dragged Israel into the Six-Day War, leading to 40 years of occupation and dominion over the Palestinian people.

It has taken us a long time to understand that this glorious victory, studied in military academies around the world, was a pyrrhic victory. Today no democratic country rules another people, except Israel. Israel has become a prisoner of its 40-year occupation, turning us into a chronic target of terrorism and censure. We are denounced by both the Islamic world and the enlightened world.

The Annapolis summit takes us back 60 years, but with one difference. Most of the Palestinians are prepared to divide the country today, but on condition that they don't pay a penny for their idiocy, their ineptitude and their crimes, not to mention the Jewish blood they have spilled. They demand that we turn the clock back, that we pay them restitution, that we agree to their right of return, and so on and so on.

I don't know what Arab Palestine would have looked like if the Palestinians had accepted the UN Partition Plan in 1947. My guess is that their state would have been bigger, we would have been reasonably good neighbors, and they would be better off than they are today. But the world has changed. Political interests have changed. Imperialism has gone out of style. The Cold War between the superpowers has turned into a struggle against a new enemy: crazed Islamic fundamentalists who have declared global war on the infidels, on the Great Satan, on the Little Satan. All are targets of deadly, indiscriminate terror - terror that is nurturing nuclear claws.

Who would have believed that after the annihilation of 6 million Jews, a Holocaust-denying Muslim leader would get up in New York and openly declare that his goal is wiping out Israel? Who would have believed that his emissaries and instructors would be infiltrating Israel to help Palestinian extremist organizations complete the job that Hitler didn't finish?

If there was ever a time when strong leaders were needed to reach an agreement between the two peoples, before a third intifada breaks out, the time is now. The first to realize this was Ariel Sharon, who sent the dream of a Greater Israel into the deep freeze and focused on disengaging from the territories and dividing the land. No one knows what he would have done had he seen how the evacuation of Gush Katif turned out, with Gaza turning from a liberated territory into a Hamas base for attacks on Israeli towns. But it is clear now that unilateral disengagement was a mistake. There is no substitute for an agreement between the parties, and there never will be.

On the eve of the summit, the problem is the feeble leadership of Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). They look more like two British gentlemen meeting for a drink at the club than tough statesmen who can force the extremists in their camps to accept peace based on mutual concessions and conciliation with the enemy.

I find it hard to imagine Abu Mazen putting his foot down in Gaza, halting terror, dissolving the terrorist organizations and ending the Qassam rocket fire. I find it hard to imagine Olmert, under a cloud of criminal investigations, getting a quarter of a million Greater Israel groupies to give up the territories and kiss some of their settlements goodbye. In the cabinet, I don't see how Olmert will get around Ehud Barak, who opposes the summit and calls it "hot air," or Tzipi Livni and Avi Dichter, who are riddled with doubt, or Shaul Mofaz, who says that "Jerusalem is not a piece of real estate."

These guys can't even tie a knot in a cat's tail, Pinhas Sapir used to say about politicians of the Olmert and Abu Mazen ilk. With George W. Bush and Olmert scraping the bottom of the barrel in the public opinion polls, and Abu Mazen lacking his people's support, peace is not going to erupt in Annapolis. But the importance of this summit is that it is held at all. No one ever died from talking.

Bad News from the Netherlands

De Miami Herald beschrijft het mechanisme dat door alleen melding te maken van slecht (negatief) nieuws over Israël, er een vertekend beeld ontstaat. Ratna besteedde in haar IMO Blog al eerder aandacht aan het initiatief van Manfred Gerstenfeld (See also Bad News from Israel in English).

 

Wouter

__________________

http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/261021.html Posted on Fri, Oct. 05, 2007 Reporting the (bad) news By FRIDA GHITIS   JERUSALEM -- Who can blame Europeans for hating Israel? In Britain, the University and College Union has just announced it has to cancel plans to boycott all Israeli academics and promote Palestinian views because the boycott, surprise of surprises, would break anti-discrimination laws. The British government, as well as academics around the world, criticized as immoral, inappropriate and counter-productive the one-sided approach to the complicated Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But who can blame Europeans for trying, really? After all, when you look at the news, it is clear that Israel is a country run by vicious and malevolent thugs. Placid Netherlands? News coverage from Israel in the European press is often little more than a parody of honest journalism. Israelis have complained about this for decades, but more evidence of what you might call atrocities against journalism surface every day in European court rooms and in the work of scholars. To highlight at least one of the techniques used by European -- and some American -- news organizations, one Israeli has launched his own news parody. ''Bad News from the Netherlands,'' run by Manfred Gerstenfeld, reports on the Netherlands focusing exclusively on negative news. By the time you run through the clippings -- all real news stories -- the usually placid Netherlands sounds like the abode of the devil himself: Dutch soldiers suspected of torturing prisoners and killing civilians; soldiers beating an immigrant to death; Dutch politicians guilty of incitement against foreigners. The list goes on, with items pouring into Gerstenfeld inbox every day from his fans in the Netherlands and from the Dutch newspapers he reads. His point? You can make any country look bad by the way you report about it. Focusing on the negative is one way to do this, failing to show context and willingly distorting facts or falling for hoaxes from one side of a conflict is another. Staged killing In Paris, a court has given television network France 2 until next month to release the raw footage of an incident that shows Israelis as brutal killers and appears to have been staged. The September 2000 killing of 12-year-old Muhammad al-Dura in Gaza has been cited by terrorists, including Osama bin Laden and the killers of Daniel Pearl, and it has been immortalized with the help of commemorative postage stamps and countless memorials. Al-Dura's killing was shown around the world in a one-minute edited video by France 2, a heart-breaking montage that shows him cowering behind his father, both caught in a cross-fire between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian gunmen. The edited video shows Israelis killing him, but those who have seen the uncut material say it was filled with scenes obviously staged for the cameras and shows the boy was killed by Palestinian bullets. Several investigations have shown it would have been physically impossible for Israeli fire to hit Al Dura. France 2 for years refused to release the video, but a judge now says it must. Last April, the BBC -- already embattled for other violations of journalistic standards -- won a hard-fought battle to suppress a report on its Middle East coverage. The Balen Report is believed to detail the British news organization's systematic anti-Israel bias. The BBC spent hundreds of thousands of pounds to prevent its release, which Jewish groups and others had eagerly sought. ''The American media are not as bad as the Europeans,'' says Gerstenfeld, adding it is not always free of bias. One organization he notes is my former employer, CNN, whose recent documentary, God's Warriors, angered Israelis as distorted and unfair. Israeli newspapers have carried articles from people interviewed by CNN, telling how their words were manipulated. According to Gerstenfeld, ``CNN placed the actions of a tiny minority of Israelis -- many of whom have expressed regret for what they did -- on a par with the extreme violence [of large numbers of Muslim extremists].'' Harsh spotlight Journalists here insist they do the best they can to explain a complicated situation. But often you see the bias without having to look very far. A few weeks ago, Israeli forces uncovered a plot to send a suicide bomber to kill civilians in Tel Aviv during the Yom Kippur holiday. On satellite television I saw all about the incursions into Palestinian territory. Lost in the images of mayhem and devastation was the fact that a real plot to murder Israelis was, in fact, stopped. The suicide belt was found in an apartment only a few miles from my hotel. Many times Israel does deserve a harsh spotlight. The country and its leaders make grave mistakes for which they should be held accountable. But, like anyone else, anywhere else, they deserve the full story be told before the guilty party is declared. Without that, how are passionate European activists supposed to know which side they should boycott?   Frida Ghitis writes on global affairs.

---

© 2007 Miami Herald Media Company. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miamiherald.com  

Abbas eist voormalig niemandsland op

100% van de Westelijke Jordaanoever en de gehele oude stad van Jeruzalem is niet genoeg voor de Palestijnen, aldus president Abbas.

Hij eist nu ook alle niemandsland van voor de Zesdaagse Oorlog op. Dit zou ondermeer betekenen dat een stukje van de weg van Tel Aviv naar Jeruzalem op Palestijns grondgebied zou komen te liggen. Op deze weg, de belangrijkste verbinding tussen Jeruzalem en de rest van Israël, werden in 1948 Joodse konvooien zo veelvuldig aangevallen, dat zij onbegaanbaar werd en water en voedsel Jeruzalem niet meer konden bereiken. Pas in juni 1948 werd met de zogenaamde 'Burma Road', een alternatieve route vanuit het zuiden, de blokkade opgeheven.

Wat zal Abbas' volgende eis zijn?

 

 

Ratna
--------------------------

Abbas stakes land claim
Date: 10 / 10 / 2007  Time:  14:50
www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=25789

Bethlehem - Ma'an - In an unprecedented move Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday stipulated the amount of land required for a future Palestinian state.

Abbas called for a complete Israeli withdrawal from land occupied after the 1967 Six-Day War.

Abbas' demands were made in the midst of ongoing talks between Israeli and Palestinian negotiation teams as they attempt to formulate a joint statement in advance of the US-sponsored autumn peace summit in November.

Abbas made his declarations during an interview with Palestine TV and stated that the Palestinians require a future state on 6,205 square kilometers of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"We have 6,205 square kilometers in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip," said Abbas. "We want it as it is."

According to leaked documents of the Palestinian negotiation team, the Palestinian land demands include areas which were considered no-man's land before the Six-Day War.

Abbas emphasized that his land claim is reinforced by United Nations Resolutions.

Abbas also said that it is imperative that the joint statement being composed by the negotiation teams addresses six major issues.

"The international conference must include the six major issues that are Jerusalem, refugees, borders, settlements, water and security," said Abbas.

EU woordvoerster: vredesoverleg moeten recht op terugkeer bevatten

Hoe verhoudt het kritiekloos steunen van het Arabische vredesplan zich met de positie van neutrale bemiddelaar? Het Arabische vredesplan biedt mogelijkheden, maar is - zoals de naam al zegt - Arabisch en verwoordt de Arabische positie. Op sommige punten is het onduidelijk, zoals wat de erkenning van Israël precies zal inhouden (gaat die bijvoorbeeld verder dan de erkenning en relaties van Jordanië en Egypte met Israël?), en het zogenaamde recht op terugkeer van de Palestijnse vluchtelingen.

 

Dit laatste zou de EU eenduidig moeten afwijzen, zoals men ook de Israëlische nederzettingen krachtig veroordeelt. In plaats daarvan verklaart een hoge EU functionaris dat het 'recht op terugkeer' onderdeel moet zijn van alle onderhandelingen tussen Israël en de Palestijnen. Dit houdt de hoop levend onder de vluchtelingen en hun nakomelingen dat zij inderdaad zullen kunnen terugkeren naar Israël, wat onverenigbaar is met een twee-statenoplossing. Bovendien belemmert dit het vinden van een daadwerkelijke oplossing voor het vluchtelingenprobleem door ze permanent te huisvesten in de landen waar zij nu leven en/of in een toekomstige Palestijnse staat.

 

Ratna
_______

EU official: Peace talks must include right of return
Speaking ahead of international peace conference, European Union spokeswoman says EU supports Arab initiative in full, and will demand right of return be included in all negotiations between Israel and Palestinians; calls on Arab League to step up involvement in talks

Ronny Sofer  YNET Published: 10.10.07, 15:53
www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3458515,00.html

BRUSSELS - The right of return must be included in all negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, a senior spokeswoman for the European Union told Israeli reporters in Brussels on Wednesday.

Christiane Hohmann said the EU supports the Arab initiative in full, including all of its clauses.

She added that the matter of the right of return of Palestinian refugees will be discussed in talks between the parties and that a widespread solution was needed to solve the deep conflict.

In response to the question whether the EU supports a withdrawal from the Golan Heights as part of the Arab initiative, Hohmann said the union supports the implementation of all relevant United Nations resolutions.

She also commented on the possibility that the EU become more involved in trying to solve the conflict in the region and said the solution should stem from within the Middle East.

The United States and the EU are already involved and the Arab League should also be involved, Hohmann said.

According to Hohmann, the Annapolis conference will include a number of EU representatives, including High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana and European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighborhood Policy Benita Ferrero-Waldner.

On expectations for the Annapolis conference, Hohmann said the EU expects to see a document by both parties that defines how they plan to move forward on a realistic schedule.

Hohmann stressed that the EU plans to continue applying pressure on both parties in order to reach an agreement.

Duizend raketten en mortieren afgevuurd sinds Hamas machtsovername

Omdat er meestal geen doden bij vallen, berichten de media zelden over de dagelijkse aanvallen met raketten en granaten vanuit de Gazastrook. Duizend in nog geen half jaar tijd.

"The use of simple mortar rounds is not considered serious despite the dangers involved. It does not elicit a significant response from the IDF and allows Hamas to continue building up its forces in the Strip," the official continued.

Wat mag Israël hier van weldenkende en progressieve journalisten en politici tegen ondernemen, behalve de grenzen opengooien in de hoop dat de Hamas dan opeens inziet dat Israëli's eigenlijk best OK zijn, en er niks mis is met een Joodse staat en Joden ook rechten hebben? Ik wacht vol verlangen op uw antwoord.

 

Ratna
----------------------

1,000 rockets and mortars fired since Hamas takeover
IDF says number of rockets, mortars fired at Israel since Hamas uprising has increased dramatically; nearly 650 mortar, 250 rocket attacks since June 14

Hanan Greenberg YNET Published: 10.10.07, 19:56
www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3458630,00.html

Palestinian terrorists in Gaza have fired 1000 mortar rounds and rockets towards Israel since Hamas took power four months ago, Israeli security officials said Wednesday.

A military official told Ynet that "Hamas-sponsored terror groups are trying to maintain a constant level of terror activity against Israel.

"The use of simple mortar rounds is not considered serious despite the dangers involved. It does not elicit a significant response from the IDF and allows Hamas to continue building up its forces in the Strip," the official continued.

The IDF estimates that approximately 350 Qassam rockets and 650 mortar rounds have been launched at Israel since then.

Most of these were directed at Israeli territory although some were fired at IDF forces operating inside Gaza.

These numbers only represent launches that have been identified and recorded, so the actual number of attacks is likely to be much higher.

Mortar attacks preferred

The mortar seems to be the weapon of choice for Palestinian terrorists. According to a July Ynet report, the IDF recorded 80 mortar attacks and 57 Qassam launchings in the first month after the Hamas takeover.

This trend has continued since then and has reached a rate of around 160 mortar rounds and 80 Qassams landing in Israel each month.

Although a number of Israelis have been injured in mortar attacks, Israel continues to view these attacks as low-profile terror activity.

De twee gezichten van Al Qaeda

Niet het Westerse buitenlandse beleid (Midden-Oosten/Irak/Afghanistan) vormt de grondslag voor het islamitisch terrorisme, maar islamitische theologie, aldus ex-jihadist Hassan Butt. Bin Laden zelf schreef: "Battle, animosity, and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them."

 

Ken Uw vijand.

 

 

Wouter

__________

 

The Chronicle of Higher Education  - The Chronicle Review http://chronicle.com:80/temp/reprint.php?id=8ytztvdt6sy6x5p550p2m258myk1c1nm

From the issue dated September 21, 2007

The Two Faces of Al Qaeda

By RAYMOND IBRAHIM

When the September 11 attacks occurred, I was in Fresno, Calif., researching my M.A. thesis on the Battle of Yarmuk, one of the first yet little-known battles between Christendom and Islam, waged in 636 A.D. That battle, in which the Arab invaders were outmatched and yet still triumphed, would have immense historical repercussions. A mere four years later, Egypt and Mesopotamia, and all the land between, would become Islamic. A century later, all the land between southern France and India would be added to the House of Islam.

The next time I came across any reference to this pivotal battle was four years later, as I was translating the words of Osama bin Laden. Surprisingly, an event that seemed so distant, almost irrelevant, to the West was to bin Laden a source not only of pride but of instruction. For him it was not mere history but an inspiring example of outnumbered and underequipped mujahedin who, through faith-inspired courage, managed to defeat the Western empire of Byzantium. When the Arab and Afghan mujahedin, including bin Laden's nascent Al Qaeda — outnumbered and underequipped — defeated the Soviet invaders, history was repeating itself.

Yet why would this band, so reminiscent of their seventh-century forebears, attack the United States, its onetime ally against the Soviets, and in such a horrific manner? What was its motivation?

Finding answers seemed easy enough. From the start, the Internet — unregulated, uncensored, unfettered — has been Al Qaeda's primary mouthpiece. Then, as now, whenever Al Qaeda has wanted to communicate with the West, it has posted videotaped messages, some complete with English subtitles.

After the events of 9/11, my increased interest in Arabic language and history led me to enroll in Georgetown University's Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. Before and during my studies at Georgetown, I avidly read any and all posted Al Qaeda messages. The group's motivation seemed clear enough: retaliation. According to its widely disseminated statements, the West in general, and the United States in particular, had been — overtly and covertly — oppressing and exploiting the Islamic world. The accusations included: unqualified U.S. support for Israel at the expense of Palestinians; deaths of Iraqi children due to U.N. sanctions; U.S. support for dictatorial regimes in the Muslim world; and, most recently, Western occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. Every single message directed to the West by Al Qaeda includes most of these core grievances, culminating with the statement that it is the Islamic world's duty to defend itself. "After all this, does the prey not have the right, when bound and dragged to its slaughter, to escape? Does it not have the right, while being slaughtered, to lash out with its paw?" bin Laden asks.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Even the 9/11 strikes are explained as acts of reprisal. After describing the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, where several high-rise apartment buildings were leveled, reportedly leaving some 18,000 Arabs dead, bin Laden, in a 2004 message directed at Americans, said: "As I looked upon those crumpling towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in kind by destroying towers in America — giving them a taste of their own medicine and deterring them from murdering our women and children."

Soon after relocating to Washington in order to attend Georgetown, I landed an internship, which later evolved into a full-time position, at the Near East Section of the African and Middle Eastern Division of the Library of Congress, where thousands of new books, serials, and microfilms arrive yearly from the Arab world.

Numerous Arabic books dealing with Al Qaeda passed through my hands in this privileged position. A good number contained not only excerpts or quotes by Al Qaeda but entire treatises written by its members. Surprisingly, I came to discover that most of these had never been translated into English. Most significantly, however, the documents struck me as markedly different from the messages directed to the West, in both tone and (especially) content.

It soon became clear why these particular documents had not been directed to the West. They were theological treatises, revolving around what Islam commands Muslims to do vis-à-vis non-Muslims. The documents rarely made mention of all those things — Zionism, Bush's "Crusade," malnourished Iraqi children — that formed the core of Al Qaeda's messages to the West. Instead, they were filled with countless Koranic verses, hadiths (traditions attributed to the Prophet Muhammad), and the consensus and verdicts of Islam's most authoritative voices. The temporal and emotive language directed at the West was exchanged for the eternal language of Islam when directed at Muslims. Or, put another way, the language of "reciprocity" was exchanged for that of intolerant religious fanaticism. There was, in fact, scant mention of the words "West," "U.S.," or "Israel." All of those were encompassed by that one Arabic-Islamic word, "kufr" — "infidelity" — the regrettable state of being non-Muslim that must always be fought through "tongue and teeth."

Consider the following excerpt — one of many — which renders Al Qaeda's reciprocal-treatment argument moot. Soon after 9/11, an influential group of Saudis wrote an open letter to the United States saying, "The heart of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is justice, kindness, and charity." Bin Laden wrote in response:

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us — till you believe in Allah alone." So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility — that is, battle — ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed, or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! Allah Almighty's Word to his Prophet recounts in summation the true relationship: "O Prophet! Wage war against the infidels and hypocrites and be ruthless. Their abode is hell — an evil fate!" Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.

Bin Laden goes so far as to say that the West's purported hostility toward Islam is wholly predicated on Islam's innate hostility toward the rest of the world, contradicting his own propaganda: "The West is hostile to us on account of ... offensive jihad."

In an article titled "I was a fanatic ... I know their thinking" published by the Daily Mail soon after the London and Glasgow terrorist plots, Hassan Butt, a former jihadist, helps explain the Islamist dichotomy between the propaganda of reciprocity and the theology of eternal hostility toward the infidel: "When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network ... I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings, and 7/7 was Western foreign policy."

One is reminded of the captured video showing bin Laden laughing and gesticulating soon after the 9/11 strikes, boasting that many of the hijackers weren't even aware that they were on a suicide mission. Butt continues:

By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair's bombs" line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology. ... As with previous terror attacks, people are again saying that violence carried out by Muslims is all to do with foreign policy. For example, on Saturday on Radio 4's Today program, the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "What all our intelligence shows about the opinions of disaffected young Muslims is the main driving force is not Afghanistan, it is mainly Iraq."

Whatever position one takes as to why Al Qaeda has declared war on America, one thing is clear: We must begin to come to terms with all of Al Qaeda's rhetoric, not just what is aimed specifically at Western readers. We must particularly come to better appreciate the theological aspects that underpin radical Islam. As Butt puts it:

The main reason why radicals have managed to increase their following is because most Muslim institutions in Britain just don't want to talk about theology. They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever — and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace and hope that all of this debate will go away.

When news of The Al Qaeda Reader leaked to the press in 2005, some on the left questioned whether the book would be a pseudoscholarly attempt to demonize Muslims. Others on the right worried that unfiltered exposure to the radical beliefs and propaganda of bin Laden and his cohorts might unintentionally lead to more converts or sympathizers.

My reply is simply this: Whatever one's position in regard to the "war on terror," understanding the ideas of our enemy is both a practical necessity in wartime and a fundamental liberal value. It is my hope that both sides in this bitter debate will profit from a deeper acquaintance with these works. In any case, it simply will not do to dismiss Al Qaeda as an irrational movement without ideas.

 

 

Raymond Ibrahim is editor and translator of The Al Qaeda Reader, recently published by Broadway Books. All translations in this article are from the book.

---

http://chronicle.com
Section: The Chronicle Review
Volume 54, Issue 4, Page B13

Israël heeft uiteraard helemaal geen belang bij de moorden op anti-Syrische politici, want het is een vijand van Syrië en ziet liever een anti-Syrische dan een pro-Syrische regering. Hoe meer anti-Syrische politici worden vermoord, hoe zwakker de overgeblevenen komen te staan en hoe meer mensen ervan zullen afzien om anti-Syrische visies te uiten. Bovendien heeft geen enkel ander land dan Syrië gedetaileerde kennis van de bewegingen van de diverse politici in Libanon door de nog altijd aanwezige veiligheidsdiensten daar, en natuurlijk via bondgenoot Hezbollah.

 

Het is goed gebruik onder islamisten en andere extremisten om Israël van alles de schuld te geven, en Hezbollah weet dat het door velen als een even betrouwbare bron wordt gezien als Israël. In vele 'neutrale' berichten en reportages over de Libanon oorlog werden immers de visie van Hezbollah en Israël als gelijkwaardig tegenover elkaar gezet. Dat het één een democratische rechtsstaat is en het ander een militie met Middeleeuwse ideeën over andersdenkenden en als doelstelling het vermoorden van Joden, doet blijkbaar niet ter zake. Hezbollah hoopt nu wellicht dat Westerse journalisten in hun ijver 'neutraal' te zijn, deze aantijging even serieus zullen nemen als de beschuldigingen aan het adres van Syrië...

 

 

Ratna

______

Hezbollah beschuldigt Israël van moorden in Libanon

Gepubliceerd: zaterdag 6 oktober 2007 14:11
Update: zaterdag 6 oktober 2007 14:26

http://www.depers.nl/buitenland/109784/Hezbollah-beschuldigt-Israël-van-moorden-in-Libanon.html

 

Israël zaait onrust en onenigheid in Libanon door anti-Syrische politici te vermoorden. Dat heeft Hezbollahleider Hassan Nasrallah vrijdag gezegd. Israël heeft belang bij de vele moorden op Libanese politici van de afgelopen jaren, omdat Israël wil dat Hezbollah wordt uitgeput door interne strijd, zei Nasrallah.

De militante groepering Hezbollah is bondgenoot van Syrië en naar dat land, en dus ook naar Hezbollah, wordt onmiddellijk met een beschuldigende vinger gewezen als er weer een politieke moord plaatsheeft in Libanon. Israël weet dit en doet er zijn voordeel mee, zei Nasrallah. Hij verblijft op een onbekende locatie, omdat hij bang is dat Israël hem vermoordt, zoals het land in 1992 zijn voorganger vermoordde. Hezbollah, dat vooral in Zuid-Libanon veel aanhang heeft, en Israël vochten vorig jaar een oorlog van ruim een maand uit.

 

Palestijnse vluchtelingen tegen twee-staten oplossing

'Sluit geen vrede', zeggen afgevaardigden van de Palestijnse vluchtelingen tegen president Abbas:

 

"But what has drawn our attention more than anything else is Israel's attempt to redefine the idea of the two-state solution. Israel now wants mutual recognition - Israel as the national homeland of the Jews and, on what's left of the land, Palestine as the national homeland of the Palestinians."

Abu Sitta described the Israeli formula as "extremely dangerous," saying it should be rejected by all Arabs. He said accepting this formula would be tantamount to abandoning the Arab right to Palestine and accepting the Jews' ostensible historical and biblical rights to the land.

 

Vrede op basis van een twee-statenoplossing en wederzijdse erkenning is extreem gevaarlijk en moet koste wat het kost worden voorkomen. Hij roept niet alleen de Palestijnen, maar alle Arabieren op dit af te wijzen. En uiteraard moeten alle vluchtelingen kunnen terugkeren naar Israël. Abu Sitta begrijpt waarschijnlijk wel, dat Israël hier nooit mee in zal stemmen, en dat Amerika Israël hier ook niet toe zal dwingen. Hij roept dan ook op door te gaan met vechten om het hele land te 'bevrijden' in plaats van een compromis te zoeken op basis van gemeenschappelijke belangen en de erkenning dat beide volken rechten hebben in Israël/Palestina.

 

 

Ratna

_____

 

Don't accept two-state solution, refugees tell Abbas
Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST Oct. 6, 2007
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1191257234810&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Representatives of Palestinian refugees warned Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas over the weekend against surrendering their "right of return" by accepting a two-state solution during next month's planned US-sponsored peace conference in Maryland.

The warning came as former PA prime minister Ahmed Qurei, who is better known as Abu Ala, said the Palestinians would not accept a state that did not include Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

He said the Palestinians would boycott the conference unless an agreement was reached with Israel beforehand on all the "fundamental" issues: the status of Jerusalem, the borders of the future Palestinian state and the problem of the refugees.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, meanwhile, is likely to address the diplomatic process at Sunday's weekly cabinet session, where the ministers are expected to hear assessments on the recent talks between Olmert and Abbas.

Abbas said Saturday that Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams would hold their first meeting on Monday to draft a joint statement on principles for future peace talks ahead of the planned conference in Annapolis.

In a letter to Abbas, Salman Abu Sitta, a prominent spokesman for Palestinian refugees, wrote: "We are aware of the pressure you are facing to abandon the Palestinian position and endorse Israel's vision. But what has drawn our attention more than anything else is Israel's attempt to redefine the idea of the two-state solution. Israel now wants mutual recognition - Israel as the national homeland of the Jews and, on what's left of the land, Palestine as the national homeland of the Palestinians."

Abu Sitta described the Israeli formula as "extremely dangerous," saying it should be rejected by all Arabs. He said accepting this formula would be tantamount to abandoning the Arab right to Palestine and accepting the Jews' ostensible historical and biblical rights to the land.

In addition, Abu Sitta argued, the Israeli stance abolishes the right of return for Palestinians on two levels: recognition of this right and its fulfillment.
"This would constitute a historic burden; no Palestinian could bear its consequences in front of his people and history," he cautioned. He said it was inconceivable that the Palestinians would abandon the right of return after decades of fighting.

Representatives of Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon also appealed to Abbas not to relinquish the right of return. In letters to Abbas, they criticized Abbas's promise to hold a referendum on any deal he reaches with Israel. "Since when are our rights a disputed matter?" they asked. They said such a referendum would be meaningless because it would be held only in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Qurei was recently appointed head of the Palestinian team negotiating with Israel. In a series of interviews with Arab newspapers over the weekend, he said the Palestinians were hoping to strike a deal with Israel within five to six months.

"There must be a clear timetable outlining when the negotiations begin and when they are supposed to end," Qurei said. "Otherwise, the issue will remain open forever. We can reach an agreement quickly provided that there is a serious intention [on the part of Israel]."

Qurei added that the document he and his colleagues were hoping to draft with their Israeli counterparts before the conference would form the basis for future negotiations on a final settlement. "What's important is the content of the document," he said. "If it's going to be an unclear document, then we don't need it."
Qurei said the document must include an Israeli pledge to return to the pre-1967 borders. However, he did not rule out the possibility that the Palestinians would agree to "limited border amendments."

Asked how the Palestinians would react if an agreement on the core issues was not achieved in the coming weeks, he said: "Then this would not be a good situation. We will be forced to look into other options - including whether or not we would attend the conference."

The Prime Minister's Office declined to comment on Qurei's statements.

On the refugees, Rami Khouri, a prominent Palestinian-Jordanian editor, wrote in Lebanon's English-language Daily Star: "The hardest issue to resolve is the status and rights of Palestinian refugees, of whom there are now 4.5 million living outside Palestine (they were 750,000 when they first became refugees in 1948). All other contentious matters - land, sovereignty, recognition, settlements, water, security, Jerusalem - now appear resolvable, given the years of negotiations that have taken place by the concerned parties. The refugee issue, however, remains both intractable and existential for both sides."

Khouri said Abbas was dangerously close to being seen by many in the Arab world as a hapless American-Israeli puppet; his political party, Fatah, has been largely discredited as a corrupt, bloated and inefficient burden on society, and no longer represents majority Palestinian thinking; and the absence of Hamas from the Annapolis meeting would render the Palestinian delegation's credentials "rather thin."

"There is one way that Abbas can overcome these constraints, which recalls a major weakness that contributed to the collapse of the Camp David talks in 2000: He should consult widely, deeply and sincerely with ordinary and politically active Palestinians throughout the world, in order to be able to attend the Annapolis talks as a credible representative of the Palestinians," Khouri wrote.

Abbas said Friday that he expected at least 36 nations to attend the conference, including 12 Arab states, another three Muslim nations, the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the G-8.

"We hope that the number will increase to 40 states," Abbas was quoted as telling Palestinian dignitaries from Jerusalem, during a meal breaking the dawn-to-dusk Ramadan fast.

The remarks were quoted by the Palestinian news agency WAFA and confirmed by a participant.

Abbas did not provide a list of countries expected to attend. The US has not released such a list or set a date for the conference.

In Friday's meeting with Palestinian dignitaries, Abbas told his guests that a solution for Jerusalem would be a key to any peace deal.

"Jerusalem has always been in our hearts, and the hope that we have been looking at," Abbas said. "There is no independent Palestinian state without Jerusalem as its capital. It is a concern in the coming, difficult days."

Herb Keinon contributed to this report.

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

Hamas meldt Katusha aanval op Netivot nederzetting in "bezet" Palestina

Wat is het verschil tussen Gush Katif en Netivot? De eerste bestaat niet meer, want is in 2005 door Israël ontruimd. Voor Hamas is dit echter irrelevant, want beide zijn illegale nederzettingen. En als Israël uit Gush Katif te verdrijven is, is het ook uit Sderot, Netivot en Ashkelon te verdrijven. Precies wat de kolonisten altijd hebben gezegd: "wij staan aan het front, en na ons volgt de rest van Israël". Opvallend hoe Hamas en de kolonisten elkaar soms kunnen vinden en versterken.   

 

 

Ratna

_________

 

Resistance fired Katyusha at Naqab area
7 October 2007 - website of   Ezzedeen Al-Qassam Brigades - the armed branch
of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas).
www.alqassam.ps/english/?action=showdetail&fid=650


Palestinian resistance men  on Sunday fired a Katyusha rocket from the Gaza Strip at the area of Naqab , which was occupied since 1948.

The rocket, identified as a Grad-type Katyusha, landed in the settlement  of Netivot, in the area of Naqab.

The Popular Resistance Committees , a Palestinian resistance organization claimed responsibility for the attack, which coincided with a number of mortar shells.

The mayor of "Netivot" said that the Zionist government had denied the town funds intended to provide for civil rocket defense. He said the stated reason for denying the funds, was that the town is located 11 kilometers from the Gaza border.

The Russian-invented Katyusha has a longer range than the more makeshift Qassam rocket that has been fired by the thousands at the Naqab and the Zionist settlements.

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il