maandag 17 januari 2011

WikiLeaks en NOS: Hans Laroes wil ook even James Bond spelen

 
Ik ben graag tegendraads, en nu WikiLeaks door de massa bewierookt wordt en Assange nog net geen Messias-status maar wel een Robin Hood-status heeft, vraag ik me toch af of het niet illegaal is om vertrouwelijke documenten te stelen en die in georganiseerd verband te doorzoeken, publiceren en verspreiden? Blijkbaar niet, want zelfs de publieke omroep NOS doet eraan mee, en ik heb nog niet meegekregen dat daar überhaupt Kamervragen over zijn gesteld.
 
Openbaarheid van bestuur is één ding, en er komen zeker wel wat misstanden aan het licht, maar sinds wanneer heeft het volk 'het recht om te weten' wat en hoe diplomaten berichten aan hun regeringen? Om zo'n manier kun je de diplomatie wel opdoeken, want die draait toch grotendeels op vertrouwelijkheid.
Voor zover er een daadwerkelijk 'recht om te weten' is, kun je toch met de Wet Openbaarheid van Bestuur in de hand naar de rechter stappen in een land als Nederland, en in de meeste Westerse democratieën dunkt me. En om zulke vertrouwelijke documenten te stelen in een land waar het er echt toe doet (pakweg Rusland of China), daar hebben de WikiLeakers volgens mij toch niet de ballen voor.
 
Dan wil ik ook nog steeds weten waarom een vermeend idealistische organisatie als WikiLeaks een antisemiet als Israel Shamir in haar gelederen dult.
 
Wouter
______________
 
 
WikiLeaks en de NOS: de verantwoording
15-1-2011 14:08

WikiLeaks, de organisatie van Julian Assange en een hoop vrijwilligers, is niet eenvoudig te spreken.

Dat is niet zo opmerkelijk. Ze hebben nogal wat te doen. Meer dan 250.000 cables (communicatie tussen Amerikaanse ambassades en het State Department) bewaken, bewaren en checken.

De CIA in hun nek, financiële problemen, servers die hen niet meer willen 'hosten'.  Een Zweeds uitleveringsverzoek tegen Assange zelf vanwege de verdenking van verkrachting. Amerikanen-van-naam die zeggen dat ze het niet erg vinden als Assange zou worden vermoord. Samenwerkingsafspraken met vijf grote eigenzinnige kranten, als The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais, Der Spiegel (weekblad), Le Monde.

En ongetwijfeld honderden nieuwsorganisaties die ook de cables willen.

Net als wij.

 *

In december leggen we de eerste contacten. Dat gaat via mobieltjes, skype, beveiligde programma's op internet, gecodeerde boodschappen.  Een paar afspraken in IJsland en eigen land.

Al snel blijkt dat anderen het materiaal ook willen: het AD wordt genoemd, de Volkskrant misschien en in ieder geval NRC in combinatie met RTL.

Namens de laatste twee laat een NRC-journalist aan WikiLeaks weten dat de NOS niet voldoende betrouwbaar is omdat het een publieke omroep betreft. Ik schrik ervan. Is dat de manier waarop de concurrentie opereert?

Ik besluit in de contacten niets over RTL, NRC of wie dan ook te zeggen, maar op eigen kracht te vertrouwen: wie zijn we, wat ze zijn we, wat is ons bereik, hoe betrouwbaar vindt ons publiek ons?

Voor WikiLeaks zouden we gegeven onze impact een goeie partner kunnen zijn. De vrijwilligersorganisatie die cables op z'n eigen site zet, loopt het risico in een hoekje van de aandacht te belanden. Samen met gerespecteerde mediaorganisaties kan en zal de impact anders zijn.

*

Het duurt lang voor we wat meer te weten komen. Als we informeren horen we dat er niets te zeggen valt, maar dat de positie van de NOS op waarde wordt geschat.

Zo gaat het een paar weken lang. Soms lijkt het dichtbij, dan weer ver weg.

Afgelopen weekend wordt er contact gezocht.

Dinsdag wordt gevraagd of ik naar Engeland kan komen, omgeving Norfolk, waar Assange huisarrest heeft. Daar krijg ik nadere instructies voor de woensdag.

Er komt een auto voor me te rijden en ergens op het platteland kom ik bij een vakantiehuis waar een aantal van Assange's mensen aan de slag zijn.

We maken de afspraak:  de NOS krijgt alle documenten die over Nederland gaan.

En dan legt een van hen een usb-stick op tafel.

*

Het wachten is  op, uhh, laten we zeggen Caroline. Assange heeft een Engelse vrouwennaam in de communicatie over de mobiele telefoon.

Caroline moet eerst bij de politie langs. Iedere dag, binnen een zeker tijdslot. En 's avonds op tijd binnen zijn op het landhuis waar hij te gast is, waar cameraploegen, supporters en vijanden buiten staan; en waar ongetwijfeld ook MI5 aandacht is.

Want, zo bespreken we, de Amerikanen zullen ongetwijfeld van de Engelsen willen weten wat Assange allemaal doet. En ze zullen tegelijkertijd ook niet het risico willen lopen dat hij op Engels grondgebied wordt neergeschoten, door de een of andere door de beschuldigende retoriek getriggerde gek.

*

We zijn een beetje paranoia met z'n allen, grapt een van de vrijwilligers. Als iemand iets meer heeft dan een griepje, dan zeggen we dat de CIA erachter zit.

En ik heb nog nooit zoveel politieagenten voor of achter me gezien. Althans, dat denk ik nu, zegt hij.

*

Assange, de man met het witte haar, is langer dan ik dacht. Jongensachtiger. Hij oogt ontspannen, ondanks al die druk en de rechtszaak in Londen een dag eerder. Hij is ervan overtuigd dat hij geframed is in de Zweedse verkrachtingszaak, dat hij zal winnen, dat de publiciteit en zijn supporters hem min of meer onaantastbaar maken.

Hij geniet er zichtbaar van dat hij het tegen de supermacht opneemt.

Zijn mensen vinden de Amerikaanse reactie prachtig. Geen betere publiciteit dan de Amerikaanse waarschuwingen en veroordelingen, die Assange en WikiLeaks in het centrum van de belangstelling zetten.

De Britten gaan er wat ontspannener mee om. Je moet niet lekken, nou ja, en als er gelekt wordt, pech…

Assange blijft een paar uur. Langer dan de bedoeling is, omdat hij het wel leuk vindt door te praten, over Nederland bijvoorbeeld. En omdat hij het wel leuk vindt degenen die op hem zitten te wachten nog even wat langer te laten wachten.

*

Ik rij terug met de usb-stick in mijn binnenzak en een stevig bonkend hart. Slapen is moeilijk, en als ik de volgende dag douche, doe ik dat met de deur van de badkamer open.

Not bad, NOS.

Ben ik ook een tikje aangestoken door de plaatselijke paranoia? Via mail en over de telefoon zeg ik in ieder geval al een poosje niets meer.

Hoe dan ook: het is fijn om samen met WikiLeaks aan dit project te werken. We zijn toch de eerste audiovisuele organisatie die voor deze cables zijn geselecteerd, naast de vijf genoemde kranten.

*

Op donderdag en vrijdag zetten we de al langer voorbereide research- en leesoperatie in gang. Het enige wat we nog nodig hebben en vrijdag krijgen is de code, waarmee we de sterk beveiligde bestanden kunnen openen.

We zijn een tikje trots, en vooral benieuwd.

Als we over de cables spreken, verwachten we geen grote alles verzengende verhalen, maar vooral schetsen over de context waarbinnen de Amerikanen naar ons kijken, hier en daar een opvallende typering of een aardig feit, dat soort zaken.

*

En dan is het vrijdagmiddag en kondigen RTL en NRC aan dat ze de cables hebben,

Dat viel wat tegen, om eens een understatement te gebruiken.

Good for them.

Ze hebben de cables via de Noorse krant Aftonposten. Die hebben de documenten van een ex-WikiLeaks-vrijwilliger die uit boosheid is weggelopen en de bestanden heeft gekopieerd.

In Engeland wordt gevloekt, door WikiLeaks. In Hilversum ook, door mij en anderen.

Maar zo gaat dat, ieder zijn eigen route, en dit project gaat om transparantie en openbaarmaking, niet om scoops, hoe graag we ze ook hebben. Maar: we hebben onze eigen verhalen en gaan onze eigen gang, alleen een paar dagen eerder dan de bedoeling was.

*

Ik verbaas me om het commentaar in de NRC, waar gesteld wordt dat ze eigenlijk helemaal niet met WikiLeaks in zee wilden, omdat er te veel beperkende voorwaarden zijn gesteld.

Vind het merkwaardig. Het klopt niet met de pogingen die door hen zijn ondernomen om met WikiLeaks afspraken te maken, maar wie wil er –in dit stadium, nu niet met WikiLeaks samenwerken?  Wat maakt NRC beter dan The Guardian, The New York Times?

Maar goed, ieder zijn eigen afweging natuurlijk.

Het verhaal over de beperkingen lijkt mij onwaarschijnlijk.

Wij hebben een hele verstandige overeenkomst, van beide kanten. Die gaat over zorgvuldigheid waarmee we met het materiaal om gaan. Over het gegeven dat er geen geld met onze afspraken is gemoeid. Vind ik essentieel.

En het belangrijkste, nog essentiëler: in een enkel geval moeten mensen in de cables worden beschermd, maar alleen als er sprake zou kunnen zijn van daadwerkelijk levensgevaar, of mensen die genoemd worden de doodstraf zouden kunnen krijgen.

Dat lijkt mij redelijk.

Nadrukkelijk spreken we af dat WikiLeaks geen invloed heeft op of bemoeienis met onze journalistieke afwegingen, met de verhalen die we maken, hoe we ze maken, en met wat we weggooien. Het fijne is, dat willen ze ook niet, ze weten hoe het werkt.

De enige afspraken waarin we overleggen, los van die zorgvuldigheid, gaan om gelijktijdige publicatie van geselecteerde cables op de sites van de NOS en van WikiLeaks zelf.

Hele normale, hele logische afspraken, waarbij niemand in de bevoegdheden van de ander treedt.

*

Vanaf gisteren zijn we aan het lezen. We zullen zorgvuldig opereren. Betrokkenen voorleggen wat er over hen wordt opgemerkt. Benadrukken dat het de Amerikaanse visie is, niet per definitie de werkelijkheid. Weten dat het materiaal 'gestolen' is. Maar we handelen, net als WikiLeaks, in het belang van openbaarheid, transparantie, en willen inzicht geven in hoe de diplomatieke wereld werkt en denkt, hoe besluitvormingsprocessen worden beïnvloedt, hoe er met vertrouwelijke informatie wordt omgegaan.

(En ja, journalisten vinden het bijzonder en prettig, vertrouwelijke informatie te hebben en op basis daarvan verhalen te maken. Dat ook.)

*

In de komende tijd zullen we verhalen maken gebaseerd op de cables. Sommige verhalen zullen –denk ik- groot zijn. Andere wat beperkter. Misschien zullen sommige dossiers alleen op de website worden behandeld. Dat gaan we zien.

We zullen samen met WikiLeaks zoveel mogelijk cables publiceren. Alles openbaar, tenzij. Zodat iedereen kan lezen.

In de volgende week zullen we, via de website, ook iedereen vragen zijn of haar zoekwoorden aan ons te sturen, voor als iemand alvast iets specifieks wil weten.

Dat zal nog even duren, want er is veel te doen in korte tijd.

*

Ik vind het fijn dat we de cables hebben. Goed dat WikiLeaks met de NOS wilde samenwerken. Toch ook: bijzonder om Assange te ontmoeten.

En: juist dat we publiceren.

The people have the right to know, stelde de New York Times recent. En zo is het.

*

Ik ben beschikbaar voor vragen, kritiek en opmerkingen.

 

De 2% van het Midden-Oosten en Noord-Afrika die in vrijheid leven

 
In the Middle East and North Africa, only 2% of the population live in countries that are considered "free" while 88% live in countries considered "not free" and 10% in "partially free" countries.

Het valt te hopen dat dit percentage de komende tijd zal veranderen, al ben ik niet zo optimistisch als sommige Arabische bloggers en twitteraars. Ook na het verdrijven van een gehate dictator komt de vrijheid niet automatisch aanrijden; nieuwe demagogen en opportunisten zien hun kans schoon, en veel politieagenten en anderen die decennialang onder een corrupt regime hebben gediend, zullen in hun oude gewoonten terugvallen. Toch valt een gedeeltelijke, imperfecte en wellicht instabiele vrijheid te verkiezen boven een dictator die alleen zichzelf en zijn vriendenkliek verrijkt.
 
Maar hoe zit dat dan met die 2% die wel in een vrij land leven? Kan men daar geen voorbeeld aan nemen? Tja. Dat zou men inderdaad kunnen doen, als de eeuwige wrok tegen dit landje plaats kan maken voor samenwerking....
 
RP
--------------
 

The 2% that drives the hypocrites crazy

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/01/2-that-drives-hypocrites-crazy.html
 
 
Freedom House put out their annual survey of how free every country in the world is.

Here's the graphical representation of freedom in the Middle East and North Africa. Click to enlarge.

 

In the Middle East and North Africa, only 2% of the population live in countries that are considered "free" while 88% live in countries considered "not free" and 10% in "partially free" countries.

In fact, out of the five regions that Freedom House used for their statistics, the Middle East/North Africa was by far the least free in the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, only 37% live in "not free" countries.


And the 2% in the Middle East/North Africa who do live in freedom? All of them happen to live in Israel.

It puts the Middle East problem in perspective, doesn't it?

(h/t Mostly Kosher)

Tunesië de dag na de opstand

 
De stemming is optimistisch, maar de toekomst nog zeer ongewis.
 
Eerdere berichten en commentaren over Tunesië:
 
 
__________________________________________
 

Tunisia: The day after

It was extremely calm, almost serene in Tunis this morning. It was hard to believe that only yesterday, thousands marched in the same streets calling for an end to President Zine al-Abidin Ben Ali's rule, and got their wish.

We walked from the hotel to the centre of town, passing through Habib Bourguiba avenue – the sight of yesterday's protest in front of the Ministry of Interior – to reach the office of Amnesty International in Tunis.

If not for the sight of tanks and soldiers patrolling the streets, the absence of daily papers, and some broken glass and rocks on the pavement, it would have just seemed like an exceptionally quiet morning in a normally busy capital.

The calm did not last long, especially when news emerged that across the country Tunisians protested in the streets last night, despite the curfew and the licence to "shoot on sight" granted to security and military forces.

They were calling for the resignation of Mohammed Ghannouchi, who just assumed power as President some hours earlier. Protestors considered the move unconstitutional and leaving the door open to the potential return of Ben Ali.

He had in the meantime found refuge in Saudi Arabia after being rejected by arguably his strongest ally in Europe, France, no doubt mindful of further damage to its image due to its close association with the toppled president.

Tunisians are still angry with President Sarkozy's statement when he visited Tunisia on the growing space for freedom in the country, when they were suffocated by repression.

Again, the power of the Tunisian street was overwhelming yesterday. Before noon, an official announcement was made that the Speaker of Parliament was provisionally assuming presidential powers, until elections are held in 60 days.

Tunisians who had the same president for 23 years had three presidents in 24 hours.

Almost immediately after the announcement, we heard shots outside of Amnesty International office's window facing the main train station in Tunis.

We saw riot police heading in the direction of the Habib Bourguiba avenue, and got a call from a contact advising us to leave the centre of town for security reasons.

Walking to the Palais de Justice, the main court building in Tunis, to meet lawyers who just held an extraordinary meeting to respond to the unfolding events, we could see that the city was no longer serene.

We walked by scenes of police searching and roughing up a youth in the street and several others being made to kneel on the pavement before a police truck.

Despite the tension, the atmosphere in front of the court building was jubilant. Human rights lawyers, some of them former prisoners of conscience, were debating the future of the country.

Lawyers have been at the forefront of the struggle for human rights in the country and some paid a high price for their activism. One told us that despite his overwhelming relief concerning the end of Ben Ali's rule, he feared anarchy.

Indeed, Tunis along with many other cities in Tunisia has witnessed gangs of unidentified men attacking, looting and vandalizing public buildings as well as private residences.

All our interlocutors, from all political backgrounds, from the left to Islamists, placed the blame on elements within Ben Ali's circle. They argued that his supporters, mainly within the security sector, were seeking to show Tunisians and the world that in the absence of Ben Ali, Tunisia risks becoming a failing state, void of law and order.

Members of a Tunisian human rights NGO took us to Ariana, a suburb of Tunis, to show us the aftermath of the destruction. We saw three police stations and several supermarkets full of nothing more than some debris. Smoke was still coming out of one of the police stations vandalized and burned during the night.

We were also confronted with a different sight – youth armed with sticks, metal batons, chains and swords patrolling the streets against more potential attacks all around what our guides described as "a working class neighbourhood".

One scene, outside the main police station in Ariana, was particularly striking. Youth and boys carrying wooden sticks, some of them looking as young as 10 years old, were standing side by side with military and police and were, unlike me, undisturbed by the sight of machine guns and revolvers.

Back in the hotel in time for the 5pm curfew, we barely had time to digest the events of the day, when we heard shots being fired. They lasted intermittently for some two hours, until the city became silent again – though there is a persistent sound of helicopters circling above.

Tunisia's political future remains uncertain. In the meantime, the current government must do its utmost to protect Tunisians from further violence – regardless of who is behind it – and ensure that in doing so it only uses proportionate force, when strictly necessary to protect lives.

It must also reign in the security forces and overhaul both the security apparatus and the justice system, the two arms of repression in Tunisia. Maybe then, Tunisians will trust that a page in their history of rule by force and repression has been turned.

By Diana Eltahawy in Tunis, Amnesty International researcher for North Africa

 

Revolutie in Tunesië?


Barry Rubin is minder optimistisch dan sommige Arabische bloggers en twitteraars. Hij wijst erop dat Tunesië meer westers is dan de meeste andere Arabische staten en de islamisten er weinig steun hebben. Toch sluit ook hij niet uit dat dit kan overslaan naar andere landen. Er zijn, aldus Rubin, de afgelopen jaren wel vaker voedselrellen geweest in de Arabische wereld en dat leidde niet tot de omverwerping van enig regime. Laten we hopen dat Rubin er naast zit en de kracht en vrijheidsdrang van de Arabieren onderschat. Maar ik zelf ben eerlijk gezegd ook sceptisch. In instabiele landen ligt machtsmisbruik altijd op de loer (in stabiele landen ook overigens :-().
 
Daar Tunesië geen goed georganiseerde oppositie heeft met sterke leiders, is er volgens Rubin ook nog een grote kans dat uiteindelijk dezelfde elite de touwtjes in handen houdt.
 
In een Nederlandse krant las ik niets over de vermeende invloed van WikiLeaks, maar wel zou Facebook een rol hebben gespeeld als communicatiemiddel voor de protesten.
 
RP
-------------


By Barry Rubin

A popular uprising fueled by unemployment, economic suffering, and long-term discontent has overthrown the dictator--but not necessarily the dictatorship--in Tunisia. In 55 years of independence, the country has been governed by two dictators, the current--until now--one being Zine al-Abedin Ben Ali, who has been in power for 23 years and was a key power in the regime even before that.

Is this going to spread? Does it mark some new phase in Arab politics?
Probably not. Tunisia is a very distinctive country. It has been the most Europeanized state in the Arab world, due in part to the secular-oriented policies of the regimes. There has been an Islamist movement but the regime has kept it weak, perhaps making Tunisia the Arabic-speaking state with the lowest proportional support for Islamism among its population.

There have been economic riots in other countries over the years, especially in Algeria or, for example, against reductions in bread subsidies in Egypt. Notably, there was the Beirut Spring movement against Syrian control of the country. But in Tunisia the opponents lack of leadership and organization is likely to mean that the same elite and the army will remain in control of the country.

Here's the bottom line: Statist and dictatorial policies have led to serious limits on freedom throughout the Arabic-speaking world. Economic stagnation and lagging living standards are prevalent, except in those countries that have large oil and natural gas incomes compared to small populations.

How have regimes kept in control? Through giving rewards to supporters and punishing opponents; military and police power; redirecting hostility toward other (America, Israel, the West) targets; and other means. While revolutionary Islamists have promoted rebellion, Arab nationalist regimes have opposed them with a wide arsenal of tactics. And the very fear of an Islamist transformation can also be a good tool in keeping the elite together and the masses in line.

That system got too far out of balance in Tunisia. There is a chance of parallel developments elsewhere--Algeria has also experienced riots--but it is not likely. At any rate, this issue will have to be watched closely.

Incidentally, the idea that this began dut to Wikileaks is silly. After all, what did the cable say? That the situation in Tunisia was so bad that a revolt might erupt! Good State Department analysis but not the cause!

Of course, let's try out this kind of logic. I hereby predict there will be a moderate democratic revolution in Iran. There! Now if it happens give me credit.

By the way, nobody has yet remarked that U.S. State Department diplomats correctly predicted this revolution--as we can see in the Wikipedia leaked cable--and they should get credit for that.

Reading the material below is for extra credit:

PS: Why does the idea that the Tunisian revolution began because of Wikileaks irritate me?

Because it symbollizes a lot of the idiocies of Western news analysis, scholarship, and media. After all, why do people in the West believe that Tunisians need Wikileaks to know about their own country?

Actually the underlying unconscious idea of many elite Westerners (especially those who purport that they are so sympathetic to "the other") is the patronizing concept that Third World people don't really exist in their own right but are merely minions to be maneuvered. So if they do something--terrorism, revolution, etc.--it must be based on some external factor. Namely, us! (Which is why these Western elite members blame America and/or Europe and/or Israel for all the problems in the rest of the world.)

Now, they ask: what do we know about Tunisia that could account for this revolt? Hm, Wikileaks! Yes, these peasants must have read Wikileaks and been moved to revolt.

Um, might there be some other motive? How about not having a job and being hungry and seeing wealthy Tunisians stealing and a government not meeting your needs and the situation getting worse and worse? Things are desperate even compared to the past and there's no prospect for improvement. There are lots of young people who feel they have no future. Also you feel that you have a good chance of demonstrating or throwing a rock or defying the police and not risk a chance of death or torture? Might that do it?

Or do you need Wikileaks to tell you that corruption is going on?

Now, where did theAmerican diplomats who wrote the cable get their information? Duh! They spoke to--wait for it!--Tunisian,s who told them!!!!

So here's how it the chain of transmission went:

Tunisians-American diplomats-State Department-Wikileaks-newspapers publishing Wikileaks-experts-newspapers publishing expert opinions saying that this was caused by Wikileaks-you.

BUT the origin of all this information--the beginning of the chain--was not Wikileaks but....Tunisians who knew about the corruption already.

Now, if they told US diplomats, don't you think they'd tell each other?

Note: If Tunisians actually say they were motivated by Wikileaks, I will happily withdraw this analysis. So far I have not seen that. Folowing this article's publication, reporters in fact said that people in Tunisia told them this wasn't a factor and didn't even know about it.
 
===========
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). You can read more of Barry Rubin's posts at Rubin Reports.

Boycotcampagnes het andere gezicht van Jodenhaat

The fence around Gaza: 'A vast prison'? Photo: Efraim Bar-El
 
 
Naast terechte kritiek en kwaadheid over de boycotcampagnes tegen Israel en de delegitimatie van zijn land, maakt Moshe Dann hieronder duidelijk dat hij een 'tweestatenoplossing' afwijst en vindt dat Israel het hele gebied van de zee tot de Jordaan toekomt. Iedereen die de bezetting van de Westoever door Israel afwijst en vindt dat daar een Palestijnse staat gesticht moet worden, lijkt hij tot de 'Jodenhaters' te rekenen. Zo gedacht bestaat bijna de hele wereld uit antisemieten, en dat levert wel een zeer beangstigend wereldbeeld op.
 
Gelukkig zijn er veel mensen die en Israel een veilige en welvarende toekomst toewensen, en de Palestijnse Arabieren ook een veilige en onafhankelijke staat toewensen, en dat beide in vrede naast elkaar mogen bestaan. Dat dat een moeilijke opgave is, bewijzen de afgelopen 100 jaar wel, maar eens moet het er toch van komen, en hopelijk binnenkort. Doel van zionisme was om een Joods thuisland te stichten dat in vrede met haar buren bestaat en internationale erkenning geniet, en dat doel is nog steeds niet echt bereikt.
 
Er is helaas een breed palet van boycot-initiatieven, van regelrechte antisemieten en antizionisten die Israel opgedoekt willen zien tot groeperingen die alleen produkten uit de nederzettingen willen boycotten, waaronder zelfs Israelische professoren en artiesten die niet (meer) naar Ariel willen gaan en IDF soldaten die geen dienst meer willen doen op de Westoever. Dat deze soms op één hoop worden geveegd, hebben ze mede aan zichzelf te wijten, omdat ze zelden een duidelijke lijn trekken en zich niet helder distanciëren van de antizionistische campagnes die de vernietiging van de Joodse staat voorstaan. Zoals je niet gezien moet willen worden in een demonstratie waar ook Hamas-aanhangers hun walgelijke leuzen schreeuwen, moet je ook niet mee willen doen aan boycotcampagnes waarin antisemieten meefolderen. Alleen al daarom is een boycotcampagne gericht tegen Israel of tegen bepaald Israelisch beleid zoals de nederzettingenpolitiek, een onbruikbaar middel.
 
Wouter
_______________
 

Jew-hatred's other face

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4013059,00.html

Op-ed: BDS campaigns promote intentionally ugly, one-dimensional representation of Israel

Moshe Dann

Published: 01.14.11, 00:45

Anti-Semites around the world have found a new and more subtle form of attack: Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaigns.

The Ramallah-based Palestinian BDS National Committee, an umbrella organization for dozens of Palestinian organizations supported by the Palestinian Authority, is a global movement. Behind anti-Israel actions by churches, unions and student groups, it is aided by the Muslim Brotherhood, with branches in 70 countries, and hundreds of campus and civic/social organizations and anti-Israel NGOs.

Wielding clichés like "apartheid," "war crimes," "stealing Palestinian land," "oppressing Palestinians," and "end the occupation," these groups seek to delegitimize and isolate Israel as part of their program to destroy Israel.

No need for swastikas and terrorism; Arab and Muslim countries and organizations have developed a sophisticated propaganda campaign, joined by Christians, atheists, socialists and anarchists dedicated to Israel's demise. Bedecked with ethics, law and justice, they insist that Israel withdraw to the 1949 Armistice lines, or 1947 UN proposed boundaries, leaving it vulnerable to terrorists. Their weapons are non-violent resistance that appeals to a sense of idealism and fair play, civil and human rights.

Backed by European governments, the UN, and Arab and Muslim organizations and countries, a host of NGOs condemn Israel as a pariah state, unworthy of existence. Their hate-campaign is currently focused on the Conference on Racism, to be held at the UN in New York City this summer.

If this were just a handful of Islamist fanatics, one might dismiss them; but they have lined up diplomatic and organizational support from many non-Muslims. That's why the campaign to delegitimize Israel is so unique and dangerous.

Anti-Israel campaigns overlap with anti-Jewish sentiments, bringing together diverse groups that are otherwise ideologically, philosophically and theologically incompatible. Hatred of Israel seems to be the single overriding issue that unites fascists and communists, anarchists and fundamentalists, religious leaders and atheists, rich and poor.

Challenging Israel's identity as a nominally Jewish state - a form of de-legitimization - seems to be an acceptable way of denying Israel's right to exist. Objecting to the right of Jews to live in areas acquired in 1967, likewise, ignores Israel's legal and historical claims, the proven consequences of withdrawal, and the dangers posed by creating another Arab Palestinian state.

Claiming the moral high ground

Paradoxically, a "two-state" plan, instead of reducing resistance to Israel, increases it. The prospect of a Palestinian state and sovereignty only raises expectations that it will replace Israeli sovereignty, and bring Israel's downfall.

By arguing against what they claim are Israel's "racist policies," its "illegal occupation of Arab lands," its "colonialism," anti-Israel groups claim moral high ground.

Decrying "the occupation as a moral disaster" for Israel, therefore, identifies Jews as "occupiers," immoral, backed by a state-sponsored immorality, a legal and historical fraud that sharpens the sword of de-legitimization and justifies BDS campaigns.

When the Gaza Strip is considered "a vast prison," for example, then attacking those who made that prison is justified.

If a Jewish, democratic state is inherently discriminatory and "racist," those who oppose it can be honored as "freedom fighters." If Israel "steals Arab lands," those who struggle to regain what is rightfully theirs are reasonable and justified. If Israeli settlements are "illegal," that crime should be punished. This ugly representation of Israel is an intentional, one-dimensional portrait of evil.

The goal of BDS campaigns is not only to remove Jewish/Israeli presence from Judea and Samaria, the Golan and eastern Jerusalem, but total Israeli surrender. Moreover, anti-Israel BDS campaigns can be used on many issues simultaneously, ad infinitum.

This explains the misconception that Palestinian leaders "never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." It's not a mistake; it's policy - never recognize Israel's right to exist; never negotiate the refugee issue; never compromise on Jerusalem. The problem, therefore, is not territorial, but existential.

Ironically, BDS campaigns and unilateral Palestinian moves towards UN recognition and statehood sweep away illusions and clarify the real issues: Secure and recognized borders, and ending the conflict.

The convergence of BDS hate-campaigns, de-legitimization efforts, anti-settlement activities, anti-Semitism and a virulently anti-Israel media are not only dangerous to Israel; they are shameful examples of bigotry and intolerance.

 

Hamas sloot radiostation van gehandicapten in Gaza

 
...maar Israel is mede schuldig?
 
Wouter
_______________
 

Blind man can't find job in Ramallah, Israel blamed

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2010/12/blind-man-cant-find-job-in-ramallah.html
 
 
From Al-Arabiya:
Ramzy Abul Jedian is a blind radio presenter who worked for the Gaza-based Sawt al-Erada (The voice of determination) station for the handicapped, the first of its kind in Palestine and the whole world.

The station was established by the Higher Committee for Defending the Rights of the Handicapped in the Deir al-Balah refugee camp in central Gaza Strip then was closed after Hamas took control of the strip in 2007.

"According to human rights activists, the station started facing pressure by the Hamas government and eventually had to close," Abu Jedian told AlArabiya.net. "In October 2007, I left Gaza."

Accompanied by his younger brother Ahmed, also blind, and Abul Jedian left for Ramallah, leaving behind his wife and children and hoping he would be able to find a job in one of Ramallah's radio stations.

"I wanted a job that allows me to speak for my fellow handicapped, but the society still underestimates the handicapped and does not understand the role they can play in the media."

After failing to secure the job he wanted, Abul Jedian now roams the streets of Ramallah with his brother, who he can't leave alone at home, with coffee flasks in order to earn his living.
A sad story that shows the problems of the handicapped in any society as well as the problems from the Hamas takeover of Gaza.

But how does Al Arabiya introduce this article?
The sight of former Palestinian radio presenter Ramzy Abul Jedian selling coffee in the streets of Ramallah sheds light not only on the suffering of Palestinians under the Israeli occupation, but also the effects of internal divisions between Palestinian factions.
How exactly Israel is hurting Jedian is never mentioned. But then again, it is obvious that every Palestinian Arab who ever suffers must blame Israel. Israel is the one unifying factor that allows Palestinian Arabs to escape responsibility for their own shortcomings.

Tunesië is een waarschuwing aan Arabische dictators

 
In het westen zijn velen verheugd over wat al de fluwelen revolutie in Tunesië wordt genoemd, maar westerse regeringen als die van Frankrijk en ook de VS onderhielden banden met president Ben Ali en ook met veel andere Arabische dictators. Enerzijds bekritiseert men de repressie, het gebrek aan democratie en de corruptie, anderzijds drijft men handel met deze regimes, onderhoudt er diplomatieke banden mee en steunt ze soms ook politiek, zogenaamd om de islamisten buiten de deur te houden. Die vormen inderdaad in sommige landen een bedreiging, maar dat wordt juist versterkt door de corrupte regimes en de steun die zij krijgen. Overigens heeft niet alleen het westen, maar ook de PA boter op zijn hoofd:
 
The Palestinian Authority, which had strong ties with the Tunisian regime, did not comment on the dramatic developments. Tunisia played host to the PLO after the organization was expelled from Lebanon in the early 1980's. Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas had their offices and homes in Tunis for nearly a decade before they moved to the Palestinian territories after the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.
 
Hamas slaat hier meteen politieke munt uit door zich als de ware bevrijders van de Palestijnen voor te stellen en de PA als een 'tiranniek' en corrupt regime, maar in de Gazastrook weten ze wel beter. Onder het Hamas regime is aan veel vrijheden een einde gekomen, en is zelfverrijking helaas bepaald niet uitgebannen. Het valt zeer te hopen dat er eens een nieuwe Palestijnse partij of beweging ontstaat, die zuiver bestuur en democratische waarden hoog in het vaandel heeft staan en de Palestijnen meer te bieden heeft dan ronkende retoriek tegen Israel.
 
RP
-------------
 

The Jerusalem Post
Analysis: A warning to Arab dictators
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH
01/15/2011 17:36
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=203717

Some in Arab world hope intifada that erupted in Tunisia spreads to the rest of the Arab countries, signaling start of a new, more promising era.


Arab dictators have good reason to be afraid in light of the ouster of Tunisian President Zein al-Abideen Bin Ali, political analysts and newspaper columnists in the Arab world said over the weekend.

Some even went as far as voicing hope that the intifada that erupted in Tunisia would spread to the rest of the Arab countries, signaling the beginning of a new and more promising era for the Arab world.

"The revolution of the Tunisian people has left many Arab leaders panicking," said political analyst Sami al-Buhairi. "What happened to Bin Ali was an unprecedented humiliation for an Arab leader."
Ahmed Abu Matar, another political analyst, noted that similar protests in Algeria could also result in regime change.

"The leaders of Algeria and the rest of the Arab world must draw the conclusions from the Tunisia experience," he said. "The question that needs to be asked these days: Why are Arabs the only ones who fall in love with their seats and insist on staying in power forever?"

Analyst  Ahmed Lashin said he did not rule out the possibility that the entire Arab world would be engulfed in chaos in wake of the Tunisian "revolution." He noted that anti-government demonstrations have already taken place in Algeria and Jordan.

"The Arabs have been repressed for too long," he said. "They are eager for change and are on the verge of explosion."

Under the title, Thank You To the Tunisian People, Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi, wrote: "The next few days could be critical for most of the Arab dictatorships. The living conditions in Tunisia are still better than most of the Arab countries. Moreover, the Tunisian dictatorship was less repressive than its sister dictatorships in the Arab world."

Atwan suggested that the US Administration prepare an island in the Pacific Ocean to receive its Arab friends and dictators "the same way it opened Guantanamo Prison for Al-Qaida men."

He said that the Tunisian people deserved to be thanked twice – "for proving that the Arab street is not dead as many had expected and is capable of waging an intifada and making sacrifices for change, and for exposing the Arab regimes that claimed to care about human rights and the values of justice and democracy."

Writing in the same paper, commentator Hussein Majdoubi said that in light of the collapse of the Tunisian regime, the future of the Arab dictatorships was now in question. He added that the rulers of Morocco, Libya, Algeria and Egypt could be next in line. He also expressed disappointment that the West was continuing to support Arab dictators, while ignoring the plight of the Arab masses.

Majdoubi said that the popular uprising in Tunisia showed the Western fear of radical Islam was unjustified and baseless.

In the Palestinian territories, many Palestinians also welcomed the removal of Bin Ali's regime from power.

The Palestinian Authority, which had strong ties with the Tunisian regime, did not comment on the dramatic developments. Tunisia played host to the PLO after the organization was expelled from Lebanon in the early 1980's. Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas had their offices and homes in Tunis for nearly a decade before they moved to the Palestinian territories after the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.

Hamas, for its part, warned that the PA leadership in the West Bank was likely to meet the same fate of Bin Ali.

"Mahmoud Abbas and his sons are among the wealthiest Palestinians," Hamas said on Saturday. "Fatah leaders in the West Bank are very corrupt. "All indications are that the residents of the West Bank, who live under a tyrannical regime, are close to toppling the regime there. The people of the West Bank can no longer accept humiliation."

zondag 16 januari 2011

Of Hariri premier Libanon kan blijven hangt af van Druzen

 
Hoewel de Libanese regering onder Hariri meewerkt aan het VN tribunaal dat de moord op de vader van de premier onderzoekt, lijkt de kans klein dat men verdachten van Hezbollah gaat uitleveren aan het tribunaal. Bij een poging hiertoe zou Hezbollah er niet voor terugdeinzen om naar de wapens te grijpen, en wellicht een coup plegen. Ze noemen zich niet voor niets de 'partij van God'.
Ook de leiders van Syrië en Iran zullen niet komen opdraven bij het tribunaal. Dat zal zich voorlopig moeten beperken tot waarheidsvinding en eventueel veroordeling, want bestraffing van de daders valt ver buiten haar bereik.
 
Wouter
____________
 

Lebanese Druze leader to decide Hariri's political fate

Draft indictment in the 2005 murder of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri is expected to charge senior figures in Hezbollah over the assasination.

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/mess-report/lebanese-druze-leader-to-decide-hariri-s-political-fate-1.337226
By Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff

 

A draft indictment by the international tribunal in The Hague that has been investigating the 2005 murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri will go to a judge for review on Monday. Several senior figures in Lebanon's Shi'ite Hezbollah movement are expected to be charged.

This was announced on Sunday by Lebanese Labor Minister Boutros Harb following a meeting with the president, Michel Suleiman. The prosecutor for the special tribunal, Daniel Bellemare, will deliver the draft charge sheet to Judge Daniel Francine, who is expected to consider the document for six to 10 weeks before deciding on possible legal proceedings.

The delivery of the draft indictment is expected to be highly damaging to Hezbollah in the eyes of the Lebanese public, but it is not clear what steps the organization will take. Precisely how the international tribunal will proceed is also not clear. It is not certain, for example, whether the full text of the draft indictments will be released.

The several Hezbollah figures expected to be charged with murder include Mustafa Badr al-Din, the brother-in-law of the head of Hezbollah's military wing, and Imad Mughniyeh, who was himself assassinated in Damascus about three years ago.

An indictment would be a major development, which Hezbollah has been trying to head off in any way possible.

The organization has put Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, son of the slain Rafik Hariri, under tremendous pressure to disassociate himself from the tribunal and stop Lebanon's contribution to its funding even before indictments are issued.

Hezbollah withdrew its support for the Lebanese government last week, resulting in the government's collapse. Saad Hariri is now caretaker prime minister.

In a surprise report on Sunday, the Lebanese daily Al Nahar cited an item from November on the conservative American Newsmax website, which said Iran's spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, would ultimately be accused by the international court of ordering Rafik Hariri's murder.

It said evidence would be introduced showing that the murder was carried out by members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in cooperation with Hezbollah.

Newsmax said Syrian President Bashar Assad and his brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, who was head of Syrian intelligence, were also involved.

Hariri arrived back in Lebanon Friday after meetings in Washington and Paris. He returned home despite concerns for his safety and the view of some Western sources that he would not return to Lebanon at this point.

On returning to Lebanon, Hariri went immediately to meet with a key powerbroker, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt. Al Nahar reported that Hariri told Jumblatt that "they have a gun pointed at my head and they want me to surrender."

The daily said Hariri still seeks an agreement with the opposition headed by Hezbollah, but the gaps are large. The sources said Hariri accused Hezbollah of failing to honor past agreements.

Jumblatt's parliamentary faction will apparently decide Hariri's political future. If the 11 members support Hariri, he will be able to retain his job as prime minister. If they support Hezbollah, it is expected that a Sunni politician tied to Syria will be appointed premier.

The Lebanese constitution requires the prime minister to be a Sunni Muslim. Jumblatt is one of Lebanon's most veteran politicians. He has often shifted his support on the political spectrum.

After Rafik Hariri's assassination, Jumblatt allied with Saad. Jumblatt became a leader of the so-called Cedar Revolution, took an anti-Syrian stance and criticized Syrian's interference in Lebanon.

Since the last Lebanese elections, however, he has reconciled with Syria and become a major supporter of the country.

Israeli intelligence officials say all the sides seek to avoid violence and arise as a compromise over the crisis.

 

Vindt Libanon de moed om voor haar vrijheid op te komen?

 
Hezbollah had al jaren geleden ontwapend moeten worden. Ze is een bedreiging voor Libanons fragiele democratie, voor haar onafhankelijkheid en vrijheid, en ze dreigt Libanon opnieuw in een oorlog met Israel te storten. Het probleem is dat noch de Libanese regering noch de VN het aandurven of bij machte zijn Hezbollah te ontwapenen, en Israel is het in 2006 ook niet gelukt. Een fikse verkiezingsnederlaag zou Hezbollah misschien een toontje lager doen zingen, maar nog meer zou een machtswisseling (a la Tunesië?) in Syrië helpen, dat de terreurbeweging annex politieke partij van illegale wapens blijft voortzien.
 
Wouter
______________
 

Can Lebanon find the courage to be free?




With the US at the forefront, the int'l community should make it absolutely clear how it intends to offer Lebanon's gov't support in facing down Hizbullah.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=203523
 
 
The UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon, appointed to investigate the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, will soon release its findings, which will reportedly place blame for the murder on Hizbullah. In response, Hizbullah has toppled Lebanon's government, headed by Hariri's son Saad, in an attempt to bully it into denouncing the tribunal before it announces its verdict.

So far, Hariri has refused to cave in to Hizbullah, whose fighting forces are known to be stronger than the Lebanese Armed Forces. Doing so would compromise his own, his family's and his country's honor, though it demands supreme courage on his part – and assurances of Western support.

Just before his government collapsed, Hariri was in Washington seeking US President Barack Obama's backing to stand up to Hizbullah. Undoubtedly, Hizbullah and its allies will attempt to place additional pressure on Hariri in the coming days and weeks. Meanwhile, IDF troops in the North are on alert over concerns the political turmoil in Lebanon might spill over into renewed violence.

As The Jerusalem Post's military correspondent Yaakov Katz noted on Thursday, while Hizbullah is ultimately interested in taking over Lebanon, it hopes to do so not via a violent coup, but in a way that does not undermine its legitimacy. Hizbullah is jealous of Hamas's 2006 Palestinian parliamentary election victory, which set the ostensible groundwork for its violent takeover of Gaza the following year. The Shi'ite terrorist organization to our north hopes for a similar political success, but a UN tribunal indictment for the murder of a popular Sunni politician would make it much harder for Hizbullah to straddle the Sunni-Shi'ite divide. It would also convince the less politically savvy Lebanese who did not already know it that Hizbullah was responsible for the Hariri murder – not Israel, as Hizbullah preposterously claims.

Getting the Lebanese government to discredit the tribunal would mitigate much of the political damage that would be caused to Hizbullah by the the public punishment of its operatives.

Under this state of affairs, it is absolutely essential that America, France – where Hariri went to meet with President Nicolas Sarkozy on his hurried route home from Washington – and other Western countries and moderate Arab nations, in particular Saad Hariri's patron Saudi Arabia, continue to provide Lebanon's prime minister with full support.

Cracks are already forming in the consensus calling to prosecute those responsible for Rafik Hariri's assassination.

Walid Jumblatt, a bellwether of internal Lebanese politics as leader of an embattled Druse minority with well-developed survival instincts, backtracked on his original support for prosecuting those found guilty by the tribunal.

"Madness" was how he described that support in a recent interview with New York Times columnist Roger Cohen, who was so impressed by Jumblatt and his arguments that he, too, concluded, "Lebanese stability is precious and tenuous: It trumps justice delayed, flawed and foreign."

CAVING IN to Hizbullah might enable transient short-term stability, but a state of lawlessness will ultimately only lead to more violence. Assassins not held accountable for their crimes will be encouraged to perpetrate additional assassinations.

With the United States at the forefront, the international community should make it absolutely clear how it intends to offer Lebanon's government support in facing down Hizbullah, even if that provokes a renewal of sectarian violence among Sunnis, Christians and Shi'ites. But as Elliot Abrams, former US deputy national security adviser, pointed out in a recent blog entry, the present crisis is less a test of the US, France or any other country than of the Lebanese. It is for them to lead the resistance to Hizbullah. Maronite Catholics, Druse, Sunni and, yes, Shi'ites, too, must demonstrate the will to keep their country from complete domination by an Iranian-controlled terror group that spells nothing but doom for Lebanon.

The Lebanese tasted the beginnings of vibrant democracy after mass demonstrations protesting Hariri's assassination – known as the Cedar Revolution – ousted Syrian occupation forces from Lebanon. This short-lived period of freedom ended traumatically in the spring of 2008 when Hizbullah turned its arms against the Lebanese people to forcibly take control.

Which will hold sway over the Lebanese, the memory of freedom or the trauma of civil war?
 
 

VN tribunaal gaat leider Iran als opdrachtgever moord Hariri aanwijzen

 
De hoogste Iraanse leider, nee niet Achmadinejad maar ayatollah Khamenei, zou opdracht hebben gegeven tot de moord op Libanons premier Hariri in 2005, volgens bronnen bij het Hariri tribunaal van de VN.
 
Wouter
___________
 

Report: UN tribunal to link Iran's Supreme Leader with Hariri assassination

Newsmax report quotes sources blaming Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah for Hariri hit; Lebanese labor minister says UN tribunal will submit a draft indictment on Monday.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-un-tribunal-to-link-iran-s-supreme-leader-with-hariri-assassination-1.337118
By Avi Issacharoff and Haaretz Service

A United Nations tribunal is to indict Iran's spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with ordering the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, U.S. news website Newsmax reported on Saturday, adding that the hit itself was planned executed by Iran's Revolutionary Guards in collaboration with Hezbollah.

The report comes just days into Lebanon's latest political crisis, as minister affiliated with Hezbollah and its allies withdrew from the unity cabinet led by Saad Hariri earlier this week, citing Hariri's cooperation with the UN-led probe of his father's killing.

Saturday's Newsmax report, also cited by Lebanese news website Naharnet, quotes source close to the UN investigation of the Hariri killing who claimed that the order to assassinate the former Lebanon premier was given by Khamenei.

The order was then reportedly passed on to Hezbollah military leader Imad Mughniyeh by the head of the IRG's Quds foece, Qassem Suleymani. Upon receiving the order, Mughniyeh and brother in law Mustapha Badr al-Dine allegedly put together an assassination squad.

Mughniyeh himself was killed in a car bombing in Damascus on February 12, 2008. Hezbollah has blamed Israel for the assassination, but Israel has denied any involvement.

Speaking with Newsmax, a conservative news website, sources close to the probe are quoted as saying that the "Iranians considered Hariri to be an agent of Saudi Arabia, and felt that killing him would pave the way for a Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon."

The report also alleges that both Syrian President Bashar Assad and the head of Syrian intelligence and brother in law Assef Shawkat were also involved in the operation.

Lebanese Labor Minister Boutros Harb said on Saturday that the UN tribunal probing Hariri's murder would submit a draft indictment on Monday.

Harb's announcement came after he met with Lebanese President Michel Suleiman.

Earlier on Saturday, the Lebanese daily Al Nahar had reported that the draft would be submitted later in the day.

The draft indictment is to be submitted to Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen who will then have around six weeks before he decides whether or not to proceed toward a trial.

The report of Iran's alleged involvement in the planning and execution of the Hariri assassination comes in an already volatile period in Lebanese politics, as many fear that indictments against Hezbollah officials could spark a new round of factional violence, if not full-on civil war.

Hezbollah, which is supported by Syria and Iran and maintains an arsenal that far outweighs that of the national army, denounces the Netherlands-based tribunal as a conspiracy by the U.S. and Israel. It had been pressuring Hariri to reject any of its findings even before they came out, but Hariri has refused to break cooperation with the tribunal.

Now, the chasm between the two sides is deepening with Hezbollah accusing Hariri's bloc of bowing to the West. Hezbollah's ministers timed their resignations to coincide with Hariri's meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington, forcing him to meet the American president as a caretaker prime minister.

Lebanon suffered through a devastating civil war from 1975-1990, a 1982 Israeli invasion to drive out Palestinian fighters in the south, a 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, and deadly sectarian fighting between Sunnis and Shiites in 2008.

An indication that some of those fears may have been founded came late Thursday as unknown individuals hurled grenades at the headquarters of Hezbollah ally Free Patriotic Movement's headquarters north of Beirut. No injuries were reported.

Speaking of the need to regain control of the potentially volatile Lebanese political scene, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said earlier Thursday that he was sure there would be no civil conflict between Shiites and Sunnis.

According to a Channel 10 report citing the Al-Jazeera news network, Nasrallah, who had been reportedly holding meetings with other Hezbollah officials in recent days to discuss the political situation in Lebanon, blamed Hariri for the current political crisis, urging the Lebanese prime minister to remain on his overseas trip and not return to Lebanon.

 

Hamas heksenjacht: in Gaza 150 vrouwen gearresteerd in 2010

 
Wie durft nog te stellen dat Hamas er géén middeleeuwse ideeën op nahoudt?
 
Wouter
____________
 

Hamas Hunts "Witches" In Gaza, 150 Women Arrested In 2010

 
From ANSAmed:
(ANSAmed) - GAZA, JANUARY 14 - Hamas leaders are committed to a systematic ''witch hunt'' and 150 women were arrested in 2010 in Gaza for having made recourse to witchcraft of some sort. During a symposium held in recent days in Gaza, it was stated that in the eyes of Hamas, the activities of these women represent a real social danger, also because they risk ''breaking up families,'' causing divorce and frittering away of money. Sometimes their activities also have criminal repercussions. One awareness campaign against ''the witches'' was launched using large posters in mosques, universities and public offices frequented by women.

The issue emerged again in August last year when a 62-year-old woman, Jabryieh Abu Ghanas, considered to be active in the field of ''witchcraft'' and the production of ''voodoo dolls'', was shot dead in a street in the centre of Gaza. This murder caused great alarm in the Palestinian human rights defence organisations al-Mezan and Pchr-Gaza. It seems however that for now Hamas are not using an iron hand in regard to the women suspected of witchcraft. They are forced to sign an undertaking to abandon their practices, consider incompatible with Islam, for good. It seems this measure has been sufficient and to date there is no news of any ''witch'' being imprisoned by Hamas.

WNL: Wat hebben Thomas Lepeltak en Gretta Duisenberg gemeen?

 
Toen Lepeltak eerder deze week op de TV was, vroeg ik het me ook al even af: is dat dezelfde Lepeltak die ook in het Comité van Aanbeveling van Stop de Bezetting zit? Ja dus. Een zeer nette man, geen linkse anarchist of extremist, geen reltrapper, en dan in het Comité van Aanbeveling van zo'n idiote antisemitische club, die de Holocaust op de Joden minimaliseert en waarvan de voorzitster keer op keer de Joodse gemeenschap beledigt en schoffeert. Nee, antiziosemitisme is niet voorbehouden aan links, zoals velen steeds weer beweren. Het is een ziekte die overal voorkomt, onder links en rechts, gelovig en seculier, moslim en christen. Laat iedereen het binnen zijn eigen kring/geloof/partij bestrijden in plaats van het steeds te gebruiken om andere politieke gezindten of religies zwart te maken.
 
RP
------------- 
 
 

Met enige bombarie werd vorige week aangekondigd dat WNL's Ochtendspits een vijftal rechtse mannen heeft aangetrokken als commentatoren voor het ochtendprogramma. Van Arend Jan 'Boekie' Boekestijn tot Frits 'Bonnetjes' Huffnagel. Klinkende namen die onomstotelijk passen bij de liberaal-conservatieve omroep. En Thomas Lepeltak; vriend van haatoma Gretta Duisenberg. Pardon? Want wat is de overeenkomst tussen Marcel van Dam (rode brombeer op een landgoed), Mohamed Rabbae (Wilders-aanklager en ongewenst GroenLinks-mastodont) en Thomas Lepeltak (Telegraaf-grootheid, levensgenieter en sigarenroker)?

Ze zitten allemaal in het Comité van Aanbeveling van Stop de Bezetting, de stichting van Gretta Duisenberg. De weduwe Duisenberg is niet onomstreden zoals u wellicht weet.

'ZES MILJOEN!'
Enkele voorbeelden? De joden
annexeren Amsterdam, de joden beheersen de Nederlandse overheid en mevrouw Duisenberg wilde ook nog eens 'zes miljoen' handtekeningen ophalen om te protesteren tegen Israël. En meest recentelijk nog moest Duisenberg door het stof nadat het Meldpunt Discriminatie Internet een tekst op haar site bestempelde als antisemitisch.

Wat ons brengt op de vraag: wat heeft Thomas Lepeltak te zoeken bij de omstreden Duisenberg? En Van Dam en Rabbae? Geen idee, Ronny Naftaniel van het CIDI heeft het hem wel eens gevraagd maar de kans is klein dat Lepeltak twittert. Enfin, binnenkort in WNL Ochtendspits: een exclusief verslag van Thomas Lepeltak op de boot naar Gaza!

Rest mij u nog even te wijzen op de solidariteitsactie 'Ook ik vind dat Gretta de eretitel antisemiet verdient!'

Demonstratie in Tel Aviv tegen Lieberman en onderzoek naar financiering linkse aktiegroepen

 
Rechtse partijleden en anderen bekritiseren Kadima omdat het gebroederlijk samen met Arabische antizionisten tegen deze wet demonstreert, en sommigen zetten deze demonstranten graag weg als allemaal zelfhatende Joden en antizionisten, maar juist de deelname van Kadima laat zien hoe onzinnig dat is. In demonstraties worden vaak gelegenheidscoalities gesloten, daar kan rechts over meepraten, waar extreme kolonisten in demonstraties dankbaar worden aangegrepen door westerse journalisten en antizionisten om te laten zien hoe fout Israel is. Zo bekeken doen rechtse demonstraties heel wat meer kwaad dan linkse, die juist laten zien naar de buitenwereld toe dat het rechtse beleid van Lieberman en de regering op veel tegenstand stuiten. De uitspraak dat Lieberman een groter gevaar is dan Iran vind ik overigens wel over de top. Lieberman is inderdaad een groot gevaar voor Israels imago en de zo noodzakelijke buitenlandse steun en sympathie en hij wil ook aan bepaalde kenmerken van de rechtsstaat tornen, maar het gevaar van Iran mag op geen enkele manier worden onderschat.
 
RP
--------
 

Peace Now at Tel Aviv rally: Lieberman threat greater than Iran

Protesters in Tel Aviv carry signs with slogans such as 'Danger! End of Democracy Ahead' in response to Lieberman's call to investigate funding sources of Israeli human rights groups.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/peace-now-at-tel-aviv-rally-lieberman-threat-greater-than-iran-1.337188
By Ilan Lior

Thousands of activists from left-wing movements and human rights organizations marched in Tel Aviv on Saturday in protest of the Knesset's decision to set up a committee of inquiry to probe the funding sources of leftist groups.

The protest march, under the headline "Demonstration (since it's still possible) for democracy", left from Tel Aviv's Meir Park toward the plaza in front of the Tel Aviv Museum of Art, where a rally took place in which Knesset members from Kadima, Meretz, and Hadash as well as officials from Peace Now and human rights groups delivered speeches.

Protesters chanted in support of democracy and free speech, and carried signs with slogans such as "Awaiting Democracy", "Danger! End of Democracy Ahead", "Fighting the Government of Darkness" and "Democracy is Screaming for Help".

Peace Now Director-General Yariv Oppenheimer said during the rally that "the Lieberman threat" is more serious than the Iranian threat.

"The Lieberman threat should worry us all. It is a greater threat than Iran. We must go out and protest," said Oppenheimer.

Sheetrit called on leftist organizations to show contempt for the probe if it is established, since, according to him, the probe would be illegal and the Knesset would have exceeded its authority.

Meretz MK Nitzan Horowitz spoke during the rally and said that no one should be surprised if the inciting words against Israeli human rights groups will turn into actions and that the persecution will turn into knife blades and bullets.

"We are here in opposition to religious radicalization, racist laws, and sickening incitement against foreign workers and against those who are not loyal to Lieberman. And now they are putting human rights organizations in the crosshairs. They don't want to investigate the Carmel fire, so what do they investigate? The free people."

Horowitz added that Netanyahu is to blame, since he is "encouraging the racist celebration in the Knesset." He addressed Labor chairman Defense Minister Ehud Barak, asking "How are you not ashamed Mr. Barak? You and your party are supporting and enabling the existence of the most racist government in the history of the State of Israel. You are responsible just as Liberman, Yishai and Netanyahu."

The executive director of The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Hagai Elad, said during the protest that "the thousands of people who are here understand that our democracy needs protection against its destroyers. We are voicing a clear voice in support of human rights and democracy, and against racism, McCarthyism and future destruction. We will continue to fight for democratic values, freedom of speech, equal rights for citizens and the end of the occupation."

Right-wing factions criticized the demonstration and its leftist organizers. MK Danny Danon (Likud), one of the initiators of the bill calling for a probe into human rights groups, said the protesters were "fighting for the democracy of foreign countries and not of Israel," and said that they are carrying out the protest solely for money.

MK Michael Ben Ari (National Union) said that the protest would not aid the leftists. "Movements on the extreme left have proven that they are some of the people who would like to see the State of Israel destroyed. They are betraying the state and therefore there is no escape from taking steps against them. We will reveal that they are funded by enemy states and we will treat them like Hezbollah," said Ben Ari.

The Knesset plenum voted last week to order the House Committee to consider establishing a parliamentary panel of inquiry into left-wing Israeli organizations that allegedly participate in delegitimization campaigns against Israel Defense Forces soldiers.

Forty-seven legislators voted in favor of the motion while 16 voted against.

The initiative, brought forth by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu faction, called primarily to investigate the sources of funding for these groups. The panel will essentially be charged with looking into where these groups have been attaining their funds, particularly whether this money is coming from foreign states or even organizations deemed to be involved in terrorist activities.

 

Graag meer revoluties zoals in Tunesië

 
De vlucht van de Tunesische president, een dictator die al 23 jaar aan de macht was in Tunesië en in 2009 de vijfde 'verkiezing' had gewonnen met een meerderheid van bijna 90% van de stemmen, doet velen in de Arabische wereld hopen op meer revoluties. In de meeste landen hebben dictators en koningen het al decennia voor het zeggen, en treden met een ijzeren vuist op tegen dissidenten. Ook is de corruptie wijd verbreid en de armoede onder grote groepen schrijnend.
 
Of de 'fluwelen revolutie' in Tunesië zoals sommigen hem al noemen, inderdaad de opmaat zal zijn naar meer omwentelingen en een democratisering van de Arabische wereld, valt nog te bezien. Ook is het natuurlijk verre van zeker dat het oude regime nu echt geweken is en er een nieuw democratisch bewind zal komen in Tunesië. In een aantal Arabische landen bestaat de belangrijkste oppositie uit islamisten, en dat is een belangrijke reden dat het westen deze regimes blijft steunen. Ondertussen versterkt juist hun falende beleid de macht van de islamisten. Het valt te hopen dat de democratische krachten sterker zijn dan die van de radicale islam, en de mensen in de Arabische wereld voor werkelijke vrijheid zullen kiezen.
 
RP
---------
 
Twitter: @monaeltahawy
 

More Tunisias, please

By Mona Eltahawy
Saturday, January 15, 2011
 

For 23 years, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali presided over the most tightly run ship in the Arab world. So perfect a police state was his Tunisia, with its ubiquitous informers and portraits of the president, that no one predicted Ben Ali's ship could capsize.

But capsize it did Friday, after a 29-day popular uprising against unemployment, police brutality and the regime's corruption. It was the worst unrest since Ben Ali took over.

Not once in my 43 years have I thought that I'd see an Arab leader toppled by his people. It is nothing short of poetic justice that it was neither Islamists nor invasion-in-the-name-of-democracy that sent the waters rushing onto Ben Ali's ship but, rather, the youth of his country.

Their rage at political and economic disenfranchisement spilled over last month with the desperate act of an unemployed man. Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, distraught when police confiscated his unlicensed produce stand, set himself on fire on Dec. 17 and died on Jan. 3. Soon, several other unemployed youth tried to commit suicide, and at least one of them did. Is there a more poignant portrayal of what ails the Arab world than images of its young people killing themselves as their leaders get older and richer?

Human rights groups say more than 60 people have died in clashes with Ben Ali's security forces since Dec. 17, but Bouazizi's self-immolation has come to symbolize what many are calling the Jasmine Revolution.

Tunisia is a typical Middle East country in that its population is composed largely of young people. Half the population is under 25 years of age and so have known no leader other than Ben Ali, who was only Tunisia's second president since it gained independence from France in 1956.

For decades, a host of Arab dictators have justified their endless terms in office by pointing to Islamists waiting in the wings. Having both inflated the egos and power of Islamists and scared Western allies into accepting stability over democracy, those leaders were left to comfortably sweep "elections." Ben Ali was elected to a fifth term with 89.62 percent of the vote in 2009.

All around him is a depressingly familiar pattern. Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi (68 years old) has been in power since 1969; Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh (64) has ruled since 1978 and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak (82) since 1981. Algeria's Abdelaziz Bouteflika (73) is a relative newcomer, having been in power only since 1999. Not so much fathers as grandfathers of their nations, these autocrats cling to office - and are increasingly out of touch with their young populaces.

No doubt, every Arab leader has watched Tunisia's revolt in fear while citizens across the Arab world watch in solidarity, elated at that rarity: open revolution.

"Goosebumps all over. I can't believe I lived through an Arab revolution!! Thank you, Tunisia!" tweeted Gigi Ibrahim, a young Egyptian woman whose handle is Gsquare86. "The power of the masses is capable of toppling any dictatorship. Today was Tunisia. Tomorrow is Egypt, Jordan. LONG LIVE REVOLUTION!"

Social media, where young Arabs organize and speak out against their respective regimes, have given the world a clear view of the thoughts, hopes and videos of Tunisians. For days, I have been glued to Twitter, on which events in Tunisia are discussed much faster than mainstream media could report them.

"Tunis now: the chants continue 'No to Ben Ali even if we die,' " tweeted a Tunisian who joined the 6,000 to 7,000 protesting outside the Interior Ministry hours before Ben Ali fled.

Tunisia is not a major U.S. ally. On Jan. 7, the State Department said it was concerned about the regime's online and real-life crackdown. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Jan. 12 that Washington would not take sides, infuriating those who saw a double standard in the vocal U.S. position on Iran.

But others saw encouragement from Washington's reticence. U.S. leaders are "supporting us with their silence," a Tunisian told me on Twitter. "If they say anything, we will lose."

As Arabs everywhere marvel, those in Tunis still seem grounded. Even as Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannoushi announced on state television Friday that he had taken over, people noted online that the acting president was part of Ben Ali's despised inner circle. Surely Ghannoushi is aware that Tunisians who have faced down live ammunition, curfews and tanks on the street the past month have little appetite for more of the same leadership.

Indeed, one Tunisian tweeted me: "What is unfolding is another dictatorship, we must continue the battle!"

Tunisians were fed up with not just Ben Ali but the "quasi mafia" surrounding him, as the family and cronies were described in a WikiLeaks cable, because of their "organized corruption." President Obama issued a statement on Friday in support of the Tunisian people and calling for free and fair elections.

Ben Ali imprisoned or chased into exile viable alternatives to his rule, so what comes next politically is not clear. But the world is watching this small Arab country and wondering if this is the first step in ridding the region of its granddaddies.

Mona Eltahawy is an Egyptian-born writer and lecturer on Arab and Muslim issues. Her e-mail address is info@monaeltahawy.com.