A Peek into Others' mind » Sabbah's Blog

« Expand/Collapse

Sabbah's Blog (24 unread)

August 26, 2008
22:15
Huwaida Arraf treat bully Ranaan Gissin admirably
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Part 1:

Part 2:

You might be also interested to read “Sailing into Gaza” by Huwaida Arraf.
21:57
EXCLUSIVE-US tax breaks help Jewish settlers in West Bank
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Source: Reuters
By Adam Entous

The United States says Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank threaten any peace between Israel and the Palestinians — yet it also encourages Americans to help support settlers by offering tax breaks on donations.

As Condoleezza Rice flew in on Monday for another round of peace talks, Israeli and American supporters of settlements defended the tax incentives, which benefit West Bank enclaves deemed illegal by the World Court and which the U.S. secretary of state has said are an obstacle to Palestinian statehood.

Pro-settler groups say they are entitled to the tax breaks because their work is “humanitarian”, not political, and reject any comparison to Palestinian charities, some of which face U.S. sanctions over suspected links to Islamist groups like Hamas.

The full extent of tax-exempt U.S. funding for settlements is unclear because so many groups are involved and their spending practices are not always transparent.

But a review by Reuters of U.S. tax records found 13 tax-exempt organisations openly linked to settlements that have raised more than $35 million in the last five years alone.

Asked about the tax exemption, Rice spokesman Sean McCormack said such tax and legal issues were not the purview of the State Department. But he added: “Regarding U.S. policy on settlements, it’s clear, it’s the right policy to try to help bring about a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.”

The Internal Revenue Service would say only that groups can qualify if funds go to “charitable, religious and educational purposes”.

Records show money from the tax-exempt groups went to what they described as community development, immigrant absorption, health, education and welfare projects in the enclaves, whose presence Palestinians say cripples their society and economy.

In one example, when settlers took over a new building in the flashpoint city of Hebron last year, a tax-exempt New York organisation sprang into action to solicit funds for renovations to accommodate more families.

The Hebron Fund, which raises an average of $1.5 million a year to support Jewish settlers in the city, and other groups said they were as entitled to tax exemptions as other charities.

“Are you saying you can get a charitable deduction for helping starving people in New York City but you can’t get a charitable deduction for helping starving people in Judea and Samaria,” said Sondra Oster Baras, president of Christian Friends of Israeli Communities, using an Israeli term for the West Bank. “That’s an argument that doesn’t make sense.”

“INCONSISTENT”

Palestinian and some Israeli critics counter that there is an underlying political objective — to expand Jewish enclaves on occupied land — and that the tax exemptions are at odds with stated U.S. foreign policy and international law. Rice has pressed Israel to cut its own financial incentives for settlers.

“It is inconsistent,” said Noam Shelef of Americans for Peace Now, which supports an Israeli group opposed to settlement in the West Bank, where some 2.5 million Palestinians live.

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the tax breaks “contradict American policy”, adding: “Either they stop the settlements or they stop talking about a two-state solution.”

Experts say the millions raised by tax-exempt groups in the United States contribute to settlement expansion by financing public services and by subsidising immigrants who relocate to Jewish enclaves which already house some half a million people.

But that is dwarfed by Israeli spending on settlements, which some groups estimate at over $550 million a year.

Ian Lustick, a political science professor at the University of Pennsylvania, played down the chances the tax breaks will be rolled back. “It’s a political hot potato,” Lustick said, citing the clout of U.S. pro-Israel groups to block any change.

Americans for Peace Now and other anti-settler groups also benefit from U.S. tax breaks — exemptions pro-settler spokesmen said should be questioned because those groups are “political”.

SETTLEMENTS

Hebron Fund Director Yossi Baumol acknowledged that promoting settlements ran counter to U.S. foreign policy but insisted: “The U.S. government has no right to use political considerations when judging humanitarian and non-profit needs.

Geoffrey Aronson, director of research at the Foundation for Middle East Peace in Washington, said the “humanitarian” nature of such settler programmes was “in the eye of the beholder”.

The underlying goal of pro-settler groups, Aronson said, was “controlling Hebron and bringing more Jews to Hebron”, where some 650 settlers live in enclaves guarded by Israeli troops.

Baumol said his fund raised money for renovating a building in Hebron known to Israelis as Beit HaShalom, or House of Peace, after it was controversially acquired by settlers in March 2007.

“Dozens of new families can now come live in Hebron — only if we renovate this building quickly!” the fund said on its Web site. The building lies close to the highly sensitive Tomb of the Patriarchs, a site revered by both Muslims and Jews.

Palestinians in Hebron trade accusations of harassment with settlers. U.S. policy was “empty words”, according to Bassam al-Jabri, who lives near the new settler building. He added:

“Why are the Americans talking about getting rid of settlements when they are building a new one right next door?” (Additional reporting by Joseph Nasr and Arshad Mohammed in Jerusalem, and Haitham Tamimi in Hebron; Editing by Alastair Macdonald and Sami Aboudi)
August 25, 2008
10:01
Democracy and Empire: Both Illusions
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

By Timothy Gatto

The last few weeks have been enlightening, although utterly depressing. If this sounds like a contradiction, all anyone must do to understand what I’m talking about, is to listen to the podcasts from my radio show (http://blogtalkradio.com/headingleft/liberalpro) from the last two weeks. My guests have been some of the most enlightened liberal minds in America, and their message has been that this empire’s days are drawing to a close, along with what is left of our civil liberties and our economic system. Our way of life, our lifestyle itself, is unsustainable in this age of dwindling resources and constant war.

If circumstances were not so dire, the reaction of politicians from the two major parties and the pundits from the mainstream media, along with those from the so-called “progressive blogosphere” on recent world events and the U.S. Presidential race would actually be quite amusing. The mainstream media’s reaction to events is totally predictable, the views of writers from the left, less so. Some are right on the money, others, sadly, have been sucked into this political non-drama between the Republicans and Democrats as if it all actually meant something, as if anything the principle players say or do will change anything at all. The truth about the elections is that the Democrats have again set themselves up to fail, but not without first giving Americans the illusion that they have a choice between opposing ideologies, instead of the truth, which is that there is really no difference between the Democrats and Republicans.

I see a growing number of Americans realizing that they actually have no choice at all. I listen to the fear mongers from both political parties screaming that a vote for a third party candidate will insure the victory of McCain or Obama, as if it really mattered between them whether it is McCain or Obama that sets up shop in the Oval Office. There are some that have been playing party politics for so long that they have failed to notice this. While the political operatives spin their stances on the economy, foreign policy, abortion and God, the people that see the big picture, the ones who see reality, watch the danse macabre in the background, ushering in global collapse and unending war.

The statements made by Condoleezza Rice and George W. Bush about the recent hostilities between Georgia and Russia did not raise an eyebrow from Obama or McCain, nor did they raise questions from those that comment on all things political. The recent chiding given to Russia by Bush and Rice that this is the 21st Century and that sovereign nations do not invade other sovereign nations, was hysterically amusing, if the deaths of more than a million Iraqi’s and thousands of dead Americans weren’t involved, this would be a great plot for a big screen comedy hit.

The reality that we face in the beginning of this 21st Century is that nothing, from military action to economic sanctions to covert “regime change” operations, is “off the table” if it will make a profit for the corporations that control America. The fact that this nation is the largest debtor nation on Earth, with a national debt of 9.5 Trillion dollars (and rising fast), has little or no effect on the future policies of these deaf and dumb corporate politicians. This country could have paid for its energy needs for the next decade with what we have spent to steal them. The gigantic two hundred year party that America has been throwing is rapidly coming to an end. I would like to be able to say that it is the American people that are bringing about the end of the American Empire, but it’s not the people that are turning out the lights, the fact is that this nation is swiftly going belly-up.

The truth, as I see it, is that the last thing the Democrats want right now is to win this election. A victory for Obama in November will insure that it will be the Democrats that end up paying the bill for the excesses of the Bush regime. The American people will also expect the Democrats to bring about these changes they have been calling for. This is something that just won’t happen. The corporate- military-industrial-complex will not allow it to happen. The truth is that it would be better for the Democrats not to have to deal with an angry American populace, or if they respect the people’s wishes, angry corporatists that will pull the plug on their funding and so many political careers.

The people that are running this country have no plan for the future. They have no answers, nor are they looking for any. The climate in the country is that the problems we have are so overwhelming, that they just aren’t being addressed. The people are so involved in just trying to survive from day to day that any type of populist movement for change seems unlikely. Our rights have been stripped away from us and more of them are being abrogated with each passing day. The enemy in this government’s “Global War on Terror”, if you look at the laws passed against them, has been the American people themselves. The American government can spy on us, torture us, deny us representation by legal consul, take our property and kidnap us, just by suspecting that we are terrorist sympathizers. This is dictatorship by innuendo.

While our government goes off the deep end with their wars for corporate profit and for other nation’s natural resources, Americans are coming to the conclusion that it is time that we started fending for ourselves. Some companies, like Donald Rumsfeld’s Searle, manufactures products like Aspartame that many researchers’ claim has ceased an 800% increase in brain tumors since it was released for human consumption in 1984. Many other companies release PCB’s, dioxins and other carcinogens into the soil, water and air. Research on technologies that would reduce our dependence on fossil fuels is not only being deprived of government funding, but they are also being hidden and subverted so that the multi-national oil corporations can continue to make unheard of profits. Companies like Monsanto designed genetically engineered seed that will not produce next year’s crop because the seed is sterile, making farmer’s line up for new seed at whatever the market will bear.

The disparity between the haves and have-not’s in this nation grows each year; the top 1% of the richest families holds 38% of the nation’s wealth. Senator’s bring home a median income of 1.2 million dollars and Congressmen 675,000 dollars and then they don’t require the wealthy Americans that make over $250,000 a year to pay their fair share. I wonder why? Not only that, I see them fill their father’s Senate and Congressional seats as if Congress was based on The House of Lords, but I don’t see them filling the treasury’s coffers. The people following the campaigns of these corporate candidates and report on their religious views, their choice of fast foods and report on things that have no bearing on how they could perform the task they are trying to get elected for ask no difficult questions such as why hasn’t there ever been a criminal investigation into the events that happened on 9/11? No questions as to why we support a regime in Israel that keeps building settlements on the West Bank and keeps Gaza in a state of siege while they bulldoze homes and bomb civilians?

Meanwhile the Attorney General wants to give the FBI more power to spy on American citizens. The articles of impeachment proposed by Rep. Kucinich stay locked away in some desk drawer. No questions as to why we gave Georgia over three billion dollars of military aid and put over 2,000 U.S. military advisers there along with over 1,000 Israeli advisers, decisions that prompted them to foolishly attack South Ossetia. There is no real debate over the positioning of nuclear missiles in Poland that would give us first strike nuclear capability and leave Russia defenseless against any aggression we may initiate. Although this situation could lead to a nuclear confrontation that could conceivably destroy not only both Russia and the U.S., but all human life on Earth! It doesn’t seem to be an area of contention between Obama and McCain, even though the United States is wrong in doing this. Russia has declared Poland a target for a nuclear attack, all over a position taken by the U.S. that is indefensible!

The world at large is facing food and water shortages. The United Nations becomes more ineffective at combating war and famine with each passing day. The United States is virtually bankrupt, our infrastructure is disintegrating and our industry is being sold off overseas. The corporations that run this country don’t care, they can just move to another nation. The American people will be left here, holding the bag, so to speak. The very worst thing about empires is that eventually they fall. This empire will be replaced, maybe not right away, but eventually another nation will create an empire to replace us.

I’ll be glad to see this empire go. Once it’s gone, if we are still left alive, we could concentrate on the things that are actually important, things like restoring our rights and living in dignity. Things like reversing the disparity between rich and poor so that we all share our nation’s wealth more equitably. Things like fixing our infrastructure, access to heath care for all, an educational system that teaches critical thinking and problem solving instead of how to take tests, and things like creating a sustainable level of agriculture and sustainable energy that reduces our reliance on fossil fuels for energy.

Meanwhile, for now, we will hear about increasing our military and where our next barrel of oil will come from. We will hear about threat levels and terrorists. We will argue about where our military should build more bases and what nations we should arm. We will watch as our unions take over the health programs of large corporations and agree to pay cuts for their workers so that their executives can continue to pay themselves hundreds of millions each year while the company uses red ink on their balance sheets. We will see more “free trade” agreements so as to outsource our industry better. We will see the re-created fourth fleet grow in size to counter a “dangerous” Latin America that is becoming increasingly socialist (even though their being a military threat is almost inconceivable). We will continue to pay a private concern to print our money at interest so that we will be forever beholden to the international banking cartel.

I’d like to see McCain or Obama respond to this article. They won’t, simply because they can’t. We will hear all sorts of inane statements and proposals that will be used as diversions to insure that we won’t focus on the real issues. Meanwhile, I’ll try not to laugh at these political analysts that don’t have a clue about the way they are being used by McCain and Obama who I’m sure are laughing at them in private together.

timgatto@hotmail.com
http://liberalpro.blogspot.com
August 24, 2008
22:15
Who is Biden?
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

What Biden’s pick means to Arab and Palestinians? Don’t wonder much… it means, “fuck you Arab/Palestinians!!!” (Excuse my French!)

As our Arabic proverb says: “The straw that broke the camel’s back.” This is how I can describe Obama’s move. The guy (Obama) is ignorant and naive when it comes to cases such as Israeli occupation of Palestine. And now he picks a guy who proudly says “I’m a Zionist. You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist!” So, what are you expecting from Obama if he’s in office? (not that the other puppet is better).

Joe Biden chairs the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, a post that Obama hopes will compensate for his own lack of experience in the global realm. Obama “safe choice” will also help him win the most important part of all USA elections, AIPAC support - the Zionist Lobby.

Biden is a firm supporter of terrorist state of Israel. In his words, Biden said he is a Zionist and wants leniency for Pollard. Israel must be thrilled!

Listen to him in this video:

So, congratulations America for your next Zionist Office!
21:19
Boats Break Israeli Blockade
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Boats Break Israeli Blockade
August 23, 2008
11:42
Free Gaza Boats Under Electronic Piracy
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

A Statement from the International Human Rights Workers Aboard the SS Free Gaza and SS Liberty, Sailing to Gaza

(10am, 23 August, 2008) At 10am this morning, the Cyprus team of the Free Gaza Movement was able to briefly speak with our people on board the SS Free Gaza and SS Liberty. They are all fine, and they asked us to release the following statement:

“The electronic systems which guarantee our safety aboard the SS Free Gaza and SS Liberty have been jammed and scrambled. Both ships are flying Greek flags, and are in international waters. We are the victims of electronic piracy. We are currently in GMS P area A2 and we are relying on our satellite communications equipment to make a distress call, if needed.

We are civilians from 17 nations and are on this project to break the siege of Gaza. We are not experienced sailors. As a result, there is concern about the health and safety of the people on board such an emergency develop.

We are currently experiencing rough sea conditions, and we call on the Greek government and the international community to meet their responsibilities and protect the civilians on board our two ships in international waters.”

ACTION ALERT:

ACTION 1: I just made my donation as a expression of support, please consider making yours.

ACTION 2: Although Israel is jamming the communications with the boats, it is worth trying. Ask your local media to make phone contact with the ships. Satellite phone numbers available on the boats are: a) 00 870 773 160 151; b) 00 870 773 160 156; c) 00 881 651 442 553; d) 00 881 651 427 948.

Last but not least: Pray for their safety and success in their mission.

Free Gaza NOW!
August 22, 2008
11:38
Forty-six international human rights workers are now sailing to Gaza
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Forty-six international human rights workers are now sailing to Gaza

A STATEMENT TO THE PRESS FROM THE FREE GAZA MOVEMENT

Forty-six international human rights workers are now sailing to Gaza through international waters with one overriding goal: to break the Israeli siege that Israel has imposed on the civilian population of Gaza. Any action designed to harm civilians constitutes collective punishment (in the Palestinians’ case, for voting the “wrong” way) and is both illegal under international law and profoundly immoral. Our mission is to expose the illegality of Israel’s actions, and to break through the siege in order to express our solidarity with the suffering people of Gaza (and of the occupied Palestinian territory as a whole) and to create a free and regular channel between Gaza and the outside world.

Israel claims that since the “disengagement” in 2005 it no longer occupies Gaza. However, the International Committee of the Red Cross and other international human rights organizations reject this claim since Israel still exerts effective control over Gaza. As an Occupying Power, Israel has a responsibility for the well-being of the people of Gaza under the provisions of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Israel has abused its control and responsibilities by wrongfully obstructing vital supplies and humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza.

As Israel’s 41-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip defies international consensus, and because Israel has grossly violated its obligations, we do not recognize Israel’s right to stop us outside its own territorial waters, which we will not be approaching. To remove any “security” pretense that Israel may raise, we have had our boats inspected and certified by Cypriot authorities that they carry no arms or contraband of any kind. We have invited Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to join us on our voyage and, in fact, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has itself told us the Israeli government “assume[s] that your intentions are good.”

We are human rights activists, invited to visit Gaza by our Palestinian partners, and each of us has vowed to do no violence, in either word or deed. If Israel chooses to forcibly stop and search our ships, we will not forcibly resist. Such a search will be under duress and with our formal protest. After such a search, we fully expect the Israeli navy to stand aside, as we continue peacefully to Gaza. If we are arrested and brought to Israel, we will protest and prosecute our kidnapping in the appropriate forums. It is our purpose to show the power that ordinary citizens of the world have when they organize together to stand against injustice. Let there be no doubt: the policies of repression against the civilian population of Gaza represent gross violations of human rights, international humanitarian law, and constitute war crimes. The goal of our voyage is to break the illegal siege on the people of Gaza as a step toward ending the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Satellite phone numbers available on the boats will be: a) 00 870 773 160 151; b) 00 870 773 160 156 c) 00 881 651 442 553; d) 00 881 651 427 948.

For more information, please contact:

JERUSALEM: Angela Godfrey-Goldstein
Tel. +972 547 366 393
angela@icahd.org

CYPRUS: Osama Qashoo
Tel. +44 78 333 81660 / +44 79 779 3595
osamaqashoo@gmail.com
August 21, 2008
21:27
Missing Links
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Expose the identity of the criminals responsible for 9/11 - Israel.

Two hours of astonishing and shocking facts that not only confirms Israel links to 9/11, but also their unlimited control of America and American Life.

I feel sad for Americans more than my sadness feeling of being one of Israel the victims. Maybe we (Middle Eastern’s) are remote controlled by them, but Israel’s first hand control of America is probably unmatched in the mankind history.

Bring a lot of popcorn along with your favorite beverage then sit and watch this MUST SEE documentary.

Source: [www.911missinglinks.com]
7:12
CAMERA???s broken lens
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

EI study refutes CAMERA media bias accusation
By Shervan Sardar, The Electronic Intifada, 18 August 2008

[electronicintifada.net]

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) is a media monitoring organization with a large database of supporters known for its staunch support for Israeli policies and its ability to influence media coverage. While CAMERA claims to be objective and interested in holding the media accountable to its own “self-professed standards,” the terminology and views of the organization are largely consistent with those of the Israeli government itself.

Earlier this year, an Electronic Intifada investigation brought CAMERA under scrutiny for its efforts to secretly take control of the administrative structures of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia (story here) CAMERA’S The Washington Post analysis

CAMERA’s analysis of The Washington Post found only four outside commentaries (17 percent) in a 19-month period supporting an Israeli view or criticizing Arab policies and 17 supporting an Arab perspective or criticizing Israel, with two neutral op-eds. Only four op-eds on the conflict during this period would have been an extraordinarily small number considering this was a period which included the Israel-Lebanon war, Israel’s proposed “convergence” plan, the Palestinian elections in which Hamas took control of the Palestinian parliament, the international boycott of Palestinians following the elections, and unprecedented intra-Palestinian violence.

CAMERA’s flawed research led it to the conclusion that “[The] Washington Post Arab-Israeli commentary by outside writers is overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli or both.” “The Washington Post rarely publishes outside commentary by Israelis in the news, or their supporters, whose views contradict those of Palestinians like the terrorists [Hamas advisor Ahmad] Yousef, [Hamas Prime Minister Ismail] Haniyeh, or [Hamas leader Mousa Abu] Marzook; or those of Palestinian apologists like [journalist Daoud] Kuttab, [former US diplomat Aaron David] Miller, and [former Clinton advisor Robert] Malley or anti-Israel polemicists like [former US President Carter ..."

However, a closer look at the data shows that CAMERA had not included 27 relevant op-eds (16 primary, 11 tangential) and had improperly classified others. Furthermore, most of the outside commentaries supporting Arabs or criticizing Israel contained views well within the mainstream international consensus for resolving conflict and support for international law.

During the 19-month period, The Washington Post had actually published not four, but 17 primary guest op-eds supporting an Israeli perspective or criticizing Arab policies, 13 more than claimed in the original CAMERA study. Ten of these 17 primary op-eds were missing from CAMERA's report altogether. There were also 16 primary op-eds supporting an Arab point of view or criticizing Israel with six neutral op-eds.

The primary op-eds omitted by CAMERA included two by Dennis Ross ("The Art of the Possible Peace; Rice's First Task: A Viable Israeli-Palestinian Cease Fire," "The Specter of 'Hamastan'; More Must Be Done to Counter Islamist Gains in Gaza") and one each from David Makovsky ("The Next Mideast War"), Newt Gingrich ("The Only Option Is to Win"), Richard Holbrooke ("The Guns of August"), Michael Oren ("Necessary Steps for Israel; Confronting State Sponsors of Terror Is the Only Option"), David Rivkin and Lee Casey ("Israel Is Within Its Rights"), Philip Gordon ("Air Power Won't Do It"), John McLaughlin ("We Have to Talk to the Bad Guys") and Franklin D. Kramer ("Making Peace Stick in Lebanon").

There were also several improperly classified op-eds including:

* Aaron David Miller ("Palestinians' Crisis of Leadership") criticizes Palestinian leadership as not coherent and "irresponsible" which CAMERA acknowledges. Nevertheless, CAMERA considered the article supportive of an Arab perspective.
* Steven A. Cook ("Don't Blame Democracy Promotion") blames Hamas and Hizballah for much of the conflict with Israel and criticizes their failure to embrace democracy, but CAMERA still considered the article neutral.
* Robert Eisen ("Muslims and Jews: Common Ground") discussed the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from Muslim and Jewish perspectives and supported the role of the clergy in trying to bring people together. CAMERA characterized the article as a pro-Arab dismissal of threats to Israel -- and a failure to understand Islamic fundamentalism.

When op-eds tangentially discussing the Arab-Israeli conflict were considered, the data actually showed that 10 additional guest commentaries took an Israeli perspective or criticized Arab policies (eight of which were not included in the original CAMERA report), bringing the total to 27. Three additional tangential op-eds supported an Arab perspective or criticized Israel, a total of 19 and three more neutral op-eds appeared for a total of nine. Rather than pro-Arab, anti-Israeli or both, the guest commentaries in The Washington Post were actually more supportive of Israel or critical of Arab policies, similar to the rest of the editorial page.

CAMERA's The New York Times analysis

CAMERA's The New York Times analysis found only eight op-eds supporting Israel or criticizing Arab policies and twice as many criticizing Israel or supporting Arab policies which led to its conclusion that "rather than representing the 'nation's most important forum on the most contentious issues of the day,' The New York Times has become a vehicle for one-sided (pro-Arab) advocacy in a contentious debate."

Far from a vehicle for "pro-Arab advocacy," in fact, The New York Times actually published not eight, but 18 primary guest commentaries supporting Israel or criticizing Arab policies. There were another 16 guest commentaries supporting an Arab view or criticizing Israeli policies and with 12 neutral op-eds.

When op-eds only tangentially covering the Arab-Israeli conflict were considered, the data showed that six additional op-eds supported an Israeli perspective or criticized Arab policies, raising the total to 24, two additional op-eds supporting an Arab point of view or 18 total, and two more neutral op-eds or 14 total.

The primary difference between CAMERA's original analysis of guest commentaries in The New York Times and the re-examination was not the omission of articles per se as in their analysis of The Washington Post -- but the finding that CAMERA had arbitrarily classified many of the guest commentaries in a manner that downplayed op-eds supporting Israel or criticizing Arab policies and slightly increased the number commentaries supporting Arab policies or criticizing Israel.

In this regard, CAMERA's approach took several patterns. Some op-eds recommended ideas for how to resolve conflicts focusing primarily on the changes that could be made on the Arab side. These commentaries were considered neutral by CAMERA and not consistent with its own criteria for classifying articles:

* Former Israeli soldier Adir Gurion Waldman ("Lebanon's Force for Good") suggested that a task force between Israeli and Lebanese representatives could work on a broad range of issues but should have a new mandate for overseeing the "disarmament of Hizballah and other terrorist organizations." Although many might agree with this policy, the analysis did not contain equal criticism of the parties involved in the conflict.
* Mark Helprin ("Forced to Get Along") endorsed the West Bank first strategy of isolating Hamas and all other residents of Gaza. Again, the criticism primarily focused on Palestinians and could not be considered neutral.
* Michael Oren ("What if Israel and Syria Find Common Ground") considers the requirements for peace between Israel and Syria -- and in doing so discusses the problems with Syria from US and Israeli perspectives. Nevertheless, CAMERA considered the op-ed neutral.

In addition, some writers appeared to be typecasted as "pro-Arab" regardless of the commentary and even if demands were placed on both sides. Discussing how to resolve the conflict between Israel and Hizballah, the commentaries by authors Chibli Mallat ("Resolve to Put Lebanon in Charge") and Paul Salem ("Stop Bombs, Start Talks") below supported among other elements, the disarmament of Hizballah, called for the Lebanese government to be put in charge of the entire country, and sought the return of prisoners -- but they were still not considered balanced by CAMERA.

Finally, some classifications of op-eds were simply difficult to explain:

* CAMERA's description of an op-ed ("A Conflict that Will Stay Closer to Home") by Edward Luttwak states, "Discusses Israeli-Hizballah conflict as part of a larger conflict financed and directed by Iran and Syria." Although the description clearly blamed Syria for the conflict, the op-ed was placed in a neutral category.
* In another op-ed ("Cold, Hard Cash"), CAMERA claimed that Geoff Porter "urged US, EU funding of a Hamas-led government" when the main purpose of the article was to suggest that Arab states should make an effort to moderate Hamas with aid so that Hamas would not fall under Iran's orbit. This op-ed focused primarily on changing Palestinian behavior -- and whether or not this is an appropriate policy -- criticism was only directed at one side party to the conflict.
* An op-ed by Ted Koppel ("Look What Democratic Reform Dragged In") argued the US was fighting a war with Iran through proxies -- and took the view that Israel's bombing of Lebanon was a function of Israel understanding their "enemy's intentions with greater clarity than most" -- but the op-ed was still considered neutral by CAMERA.

Conclusion

CAMERA is incorrect in its analysis and perception that outside commentaries in The Washington Post and The New York Times reflect an anti-Israeli bias. When CAMERA's own analytic criteria are correctly applied and arbitrarily excluded articles are included, the statistics reflect that supporters of Israel or those critical of Arab policies have a slight advantage in the narrow category of guest op-eds during the period examined. The fact that the editorial staff and regular columnists of these papers are also overwhelmingly supportive of Israel and critical of Arab policies -- an issue not examined by CAMERA -- only drives the point home more clearly of the real problem of bias on the editorial pages.

Overall CAMERA claimed that 59 percent of The Washington Post and The New York Times primary guest op-eds dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict supported an Arab perspective or criticized Israel. In reality, the proportion was only 38 percent. And whereas CAMERA claimed that just 21 percent of primary guest op-eds supported an Israeli perspective or criticized Arabs, in reality 41 percent took such a position. CAMERA based its conclusions on an examination of just 56 articles, when in fact there were 85 primary op-eds (39 in The Washington Post, 46 in The New York Times) that met its criteria for inclusion in the study. Once again it is worth noting that these 85 guest op-eds did not include newspaper editorials, staff op-eds, or nationally syndicated writers.

The broader implication of the research here is that a more balanced presentation of the issues and opinion is sorely needed in the pages of America's newspapers -- where there is a lack of discussion of international law generally, [30] UN Security Council resolutions pertaining to the conflict often do not appear, casualties on the Arab side are given less mention or not discussed at all, and the collective consensus of human rights organizations on critical issues of the conflict are rarely mentioned. If the media cannot portray the issues accurately or fairly — and the national discourse on foreign policy remains unchanged on the pages of these papers, there can be little hope that the foreign policy itself will reflect standards of international decency or lead to a just resolution for all parties involved.

Download the full report [PDF]:
[electronicintifada.net]

Shervan Sardar is a Washington, DC-based lawyer. He holds a MA in International Affairs from American University and can be reached at ssardar_23 A T comcast D O T net.
August 20, 2008
21:53
ACTION ALERT - Keep in Touch With Free Gaza Ships
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Free Gaza Movemebt boats in Crete on their way to Gaza Strip (Photo: Free Gaza)

A storm has delayed two boats, carrying 40 pro-Palestinian activists, from sailing to Gaza according to the Free Gaza Movement, which organized the vessels. The ships left Nicosia, Cyprus on August 7 and arrived in Chania, Crete, on Saturday, August 9,

The activists (now waiting for clear weather to set sail) and their families back home, are receiving anonymous threats, claiming that the ships will be blown up or destroyed, killing all on board.

Human rights observers, aid workers, and journalists who make up the Free Gaza Movement plan to break the siege in Gaza. Forty passengers from 16 countries are transporting badly needed medicine, hearing aids and other humanitarian supplies on sailing ships named Free Gaza, and Liberty (in honor of the 34 Americans killed aboard the USS Liberty when Israel attacked the American ship during the Six-Day War in 1967).

More than 170 prominent individuals and organizations have endorsed Free Gaza efforts, including the Carter Center, former British Cabinet member Claire Short, and Nobel Peace Prize laureates Mairead Maguire and Desmond Tutu.

So far the U.S. media is ignoring this story.

To keep up with the ships’ progress, see photos, read the passengers’ interesting blogs, or donate to help this vital mission succeed, please visit their Web site: www.freegaza.org.

To read Amos Harel’s article “Israel may use force to halt boat trying to break Gaza siege” in Haaretz see: www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1012171.html

The Free Gaza Movement hopes to draw attention to the devastating consequences of the Israeli blockade by actively demonstrating the power of non-violent direct action to change inhumane governmental policies.

For more information, please contact:

Greta Berlin, Cyprus
+357 99 081 767
Iristulip (at) gmail.com

Angela Godfry-Goldstein, Israel
+972 547 366 393
Angela (at) icahd.org
21:01
Despite truce, still no sign of school supplies in Gaza
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Under its truce with Hamas, Israel has permitted shipments of frozen meat, soft drinks, cookies, jam, shampoo, clothing and other items. However, the amounts are insufficient for the entire population.

In September 2007 - three months after Hamas took over the Gaza Strip, and after the main cargo crossing, Karni, had been shut down - the Israeli government decided to allow only humanitarian necessities into Gaza. On June 19, 2008, pursuant to the truce, Israel decided to expand the list of goods allowed into the Strip. But since no formal government decision was ever made, there was never any explicit determination of what would be added to the basket of sanctioned goods.

Moreover, the once-busy Karni and Kerem Shalom crossings remain closed to trucks, though Karni operates a conveyor belt system for transferring cement and animal feed. So that leaves the Sufa crossing, where traffic is capped at 90 trucks a day.

United Nations officials say the volume of goods crossing into the Strip today is 46 percent of that in May 2007, on the eve of the Hamas takeover. PalTrade, the Palestinian private-sector trade center, reports similar findings. Since the truce began, for instance, printing paper has entered Gaza (218 tons in the first third of this month), but no other stationary supplies have come through. And the number of trucks entering Gaza is still just over half of what it was before the Hamas takeover in June 2007, when 9,400 cargo trucks a month entered the Strip.

[www.haaretz.com]
20:39
A Monopoly of Incompetence, Corruption, Failure and Thuggery
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

Years of silence by Palestinian “Sheiks” and intellectuals led us to where we are now. Arafat ruled the PLO and Fatah with iron fist, using bribery, intimidation even physical liquidation to silence every one. There was never a call for accountability of decisions, failures even financial corruptions. Time for a national salvation front to save the Palestinians from themselves and from the Israeli. It is now or never.

If we are to be fair to Palestine and its people, we must first put aside all of the wishful thinking, all of the make believes and all of the lies we have been sold, told and lived through the last 100 years. We must as a start admit that the PLO was, is and will remain a failed organization and that Fatah as an organization, notwithstanding the thousands of martyrs who gave their lives for the cause of Palestine, is nothing more than a failed racketeering organization, that held a monopoly on incompetence, ineptness, failures, ruthlessness and absolute corruption. Let us not fool ourselves with all of the lies we have been fed by professional functionaries who made the cause of Palestine, a business, a big business for themselves and for the organization.

Let us not get carried away with false and fraudulent heroes the likes of Yaser Arafat and for once see the truth, the tragic truth as it is. No need to live a false dream and not recognize the honest truth. The Palestinian revolution of the PLO, Fatah and Arafat is a failed revolution. It is a fraudulent revolution and is the core cause of all of the ills the Palestinians suffer under Occupation and in the Diaspora for the last 45 years.

Hamas and since coming to power proved it is no less ruthless and incompetent than Fatah, and no less than Fatah is putting the cause and interests of the organization and its professional functionaries ahead of the nation and people. Organizations, leadership and cadres are unfit to lead to liberation ad should be put out of business by the people.

The Lebanese journalist Samir Atallah writing in today’s (09/08/08) Asharq Alawsat asks where are the “Sheiks” of the Palestinians to step forward to salvage the nation, people and cause. Mr. Atallah asks where are the likes of Abdul-Muhsin Qattan, Munib Al-Masri, Saeed Khouri and Shafiq Al-Hout? And yes, Mr. Atallah and all Palestinians have every right to ask where are the “Sheiks” of the Palestinian people to step forward and save the people and the nation? The answer is simple. With few exceptions, most if not all Palestinian “Sheiks” gave that role long time ago, when they decided to remain silent and never challenge the corrupt, incompetent and fraudulent Arafat as he took the cause and people from one failure to another. Now we are seeing the result of such silence.

These Palestinians “Sheiks” gave that role long time ago, when they decided to become the beneficiary of the corruption and racketeering business of the PLO and what later became known as the Palestinian Authority, the official administrator of the Israeli Military and Civil Administration of the Occupied Territories.

One has to recognize and appreciate the philanthropic contributions of the likes of Abdul-Muhsin Qattan, Saeed Khouri, and Munib Al-Masri and many others to the Palestinian cause and the people. Some more than other chose to be silent as the Palestinian Trio of Yasser Arafat and later Mahmoud Abbas and Ahmed Qurai proved inept, incompetent corrupt and ruthless to lead the people to independence and liberation. There was for the most part too many intertwining business and professional interests with the PLO and the Palestinians Trio to allow these would be “Sheiks” to have that independence to speak out and take the courageous step to take charge and save the Palestinians from the two evils that are Hamas and Fatah. Too bad business interests proved more powerful than national interests. Too bad for the people, nation and cause that such “Sheiks”, perhaps out of personal fear and safety for their families and business chose to remain silent rather than risk the rather the retaliation of the thugs and armed thugs of both Hamas and Fatah. They were insider who should have known better than remain silent.

I am sure that such committed nationalists like Abdul-Muhsin Qattan, Saeed Kkouri and Munib Al-Masri do see the Palestinian Authority as a security contractor for the Israeli Occupation and do see that salvation requires the gathering of not only three but of thousands of the likes of Qattan, Khouri and Al-Masri to form a national salvation front, calls for the disbanding of the Palestinian Authority, the Palestine Liberation Organization, Fatah, Hamas and call for international administration of the Occupied Territories as first step toward ending the Israeli military and settlers occupation thus allowing the Palestinians the opportunity to have an alternative leadership other than that of PLO, Fatah and Hamas.

I do hope that the likes of Abdul-Muhsin Qattan, Saeed Khouri, Munib Al-Masri and Gaith Soukhtian among others take the lead and form this national salvation front that can make a difference. It is never too late to put the thugs in Ramallah and Gaza out of business.

Sami Jamil Jadallah
Born in the Palestinian city of El-Bireh ( presently under Israeli Military Occupation, Armed Jewish thugs and settlers). Immigrated to the US in 62. After graduating from high school in Gary, Indiana was drafted into the US Army ( 66-68) received the Leadership Award from the US 6th Army NCO Academy in Ft. Lewis, Washington. Five of us brothers where in US military service about the same time. Graduated from Indiana University with BA-72, Master of Public Affairs-74 and Juris Doctor-77, and in senior year at IU,was elected Chairman of the Indiana Student Association. Sami Jamil Jadallah is an international legal and business consultant and is the founder and director of Palestine Agency and Palestine Documentation Center www.palestineagency.com and founder and owner of several business in technology and services.
10:08
Life is still beautiful
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

The drooping Israeli flags were as numerous, unmoving, and lifeless in the desert heat as the Israeli police and military conscripts blocking people from their basic rights. One of those young Israeli conscripts at the “immigration window”, obviously not enjoying her work and trying to make it as hard as possible for Palestinians and visitors, asked do I have another passport.. yes… here it is a US passport. She kept my Palestinian document (called a passport but really not a passport and issued only via approval by Israeli officials) and asked gruffly “Istana” (=wait) and “roh henak” (go there).

But on the window nearby for Palestinians from Jerusalem (blue ID card) there was an even more problematic women: a lunatic Israeli who was literally screaming at the top of her lungs to the line of Palestinians who tried to figure out what to do to get her to calm down and process their documents. We wait, some for one hour some for four or more (and some are denied entry to their own homeland). Mine was a tolerable 3 hours until they called my name; this I think relate to having US Citizenship and thus pushing us around is thought to make us decide not to stay or even visit. The wait gave me time to chat with fellow travelers/sufferers and to begin to jot these notes and reflect on the day’s progress and to think about other things.

The day had started at 4:30 AM in Amman and we were lined up in cars at the Jordanian side of the border at about 6 AM as the morning sun rose strong over the hills in this lowest place on earth near the dead sea. Swarming hungry flies got thicker as the line of cars inched its way amid the restless children and smoking drivers.

Our Amman driver (Hanna) was an old veteran at this and simply let his tape recorder play the songs of George Wasuf , songs that seem to defy reality of the crossing point to the hell of the occupied territories. Lyrics of “Lissa Elhaya 7ilwa” (Life is still beautiful) and “life is short, the fortune is fate”. Hanna is a Palestinian Christian who has not been back to Palestine since 1967 when he as a child and his family were in Jordan as Israeli strolled through the West Bank and then prevented those who were abroad from returning. He has four children. He was not shy to express his dismay at how Palestine was invaded (by British and Zionist colonial powers), betrayed (by Arab leaders), ignored (by the rest of the world), and maligned (in Zionist controlled media). But he has retained rays of hope as he talks about his children who did find jobs, about his dream of visiting Beit Lahem…

After the checks on the Jordan side, we are loaded onto crowded buses and then move to the Bridge area and wait in a line of buses. Images flash before my mind: a girl with torn shoes, a newborn being shielded from the flies by a vigilant mother, a women with a patch on her eye, a man on crutches, pilgrims coming back from Saudi Arabia carrying “holy water”. Most are very poor but there are a few wealthier folks (some zipped us by in the VIP shuttles).

The hardest parts were from 6 AM when we got into the Jordan bridge to 2:30 PM when we were still languishing at the Israeli terminal. Hundreds of Palestinians, more than 70% women and children wait patiently to be bossed around. We witness acts of Israeli insensitivity (e.g. when the young conscript demands children be lifted for her to see them rather than simply lean over the look at them), we witness small acts of treachery (e.g. a Palestinian man cutting in front of old women and children), but we witness more acts of compassion and kindness (offering drinks, food, helping each other with luggage etc).

In between periods of waiting, there are periods of frantic dash to get luggage load it onto one or another bus. I missed two buses as I decided I was not in such a rush and I should help others get onto it. In going from Amman to Beit Sahour, we passed through the following areas of authority (each with checkpoints): Jordanian, Israeli, Palestinian, Israeli, then Palestinian again (the latter four are to pass from the Jericho ghetto/reservation to the Bethlehem Ghetto/reservation). The 11 hour ordeal for what should be a two hour trip is rather exhausting. Maybe they aught to make it an olympic marathon sport!

The apartheid system here is mean and people are being forced to worry more about their food than their freedom (of course they are directly related). But the apartheid system is not sustainable and even Israelis know it. It is the manner of its demise that we should start discussing (e.g. changing the concepts of nationalism to concepts of citizenship and equality). These are things I began to discuss and I find many interested. The conversations are fascinating, the people eminently interested (as well as complex). A friend who just spent the summer here wrote “the situation is so inhumane…How do we bring awareness to what occupation does to the lives of people..How do we get folks to to get it..this in the year 2008–it should not be allowed for one group of people to lawfully be able to murder, maim, torture, demolish homes, confiscate lands…Among the things we witnessed; we sat with the families in Sheik Jarrah.. once again, how can it be that settlers can come and kick the familes out of their homes ..and then arrest the owner..how can it be that Israel can just demolish the Al Kurd home in front of their eyes and those of the community family… then to impose such high taxes..that are nearly impossible for anyone to pay.. It reminds me of the gentrifcation happening in US cities where African Americans and the poor are being pushed out of their homes. I have so much respect for the ISM volunteers and others who are steadfast with the families…yes, a human shield…We saw so much oppression,children so defiant..after visiting a sibling in prison, or daughter not able to see her father for seven years –because he lives in Gaza and she lives in the West Bank..this is Bullshit!”

I do have to watch that I do nor waste time on negative thoughts. I did wonder briefly if people like Palestinian “negotiator” Saeb Erekat goes through the border hassles or cares about the suffering of ordinary Palestinians. I did wonder briefly about many in the “left” in the US who offer lip service to the suffering Palestinians while unwilling to really challenge the Israel lobby grip on US foreign policy. I wondered about Israeli transcripts some younger than my son who rule over millions of what they consider children of a lesser God at best or subhuman at worst. I wondered about collaborators and profiteers. I have to quickly shake off these negative thoughts to focus on actions since reality is far more interesting and there is far more goodness around as well as possibilities for good work (already I witnessed several acts of selfless giving). There are other things. I am glad that a child at the barber shop in Beit Sahour getting his first haircut seem to take more of my thought. A discussion of what to do with too many grapes in the garden far more interesting. Talk about actions to reduce solid waste and recycling far more exciting. Talk about what to with the liberated hill Ush Ghrab that is still under threat in Beit Sahour (see IMEMC video of the chronicle of this struggle and the inspiring message of resistance at [www.youtube.com] )…

So “joyful participation in the sorrows of this world” work is plentiful; come visit us. As we say in Arabic: Ahlan wa sahlan.

Indeed the George Wasuf song is correct that “Life is still beautiful”.

PS: thanks to the hundreds among you who have written personal letters to me about this move. My apologies if I did not answer everyone personally. I am trying to catch up.

Mazin Qumsiyeh
[qumsiyeh.org]
August 18, 2008
12:19
We are running out of time for a two-state solution
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

By Akiva Eldar, Haaretz Correspondent

At the end of my conversation with Sari Nusseibeh at the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem, the highly respected president of Al-Quds University - and cosignatory of “The People’s Choice,” a peace plan that he formulated with former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon - told me he wouldn’t be surprised if one of the Palestinian residents of the city ran for mayor in the municipal elections in November. The candidate would not run as a representative of Jerusalem per se, Nusseibeh stressed. Rather, he would be running on behalf of all Palestinians in the occupied territories.

“Why don’t you do it?” I blurt out. The 59-year-old son of Anwar Nusseibeh, a Jordanian government minister, does not smile. “It’s possible,” says the professor of Islamic philosophy, who briefly replaced Faisal Husseini a few years ago as the top Palestinian official in East Jerusalem. “Anything is possible,” he adds without batting an eyelid.

Nusseibeh’s previous contention that the Oslo “house of cards” had begun to collapse was further confirmed by this week’s report in Haaretz regarding Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s latest peace offering (Israel would annex 7 percent of the West Bank and compensate the Palestinians with territory in the Negev, which would be equivalent to 5.5 percent of West Bank land; an agreement on the future of Jerusalem would be postponed to a later date; there would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees to Israel; and the entire plan would be implemented after Hamas is removed from power in the Gaza Strip).

Nusseibeh says he knows full well what happens during negotiations - or, to be more specific, what does not happen. For over 20 years the Palestinian leadership has been trying to persuade their people to agree to a state along the June 4, 1967, lines, while Israel has been destroying that option, Nusseibeh explains, adding: “You cannot negotiate anything about final status if you don’t talk about Jerusalem. Final status consists primarily, I believe, of Jerusalem and refugees. If you want to postpone Jerusalem, you postpone refugees. Really, you are not dealing with the problem. You have to discuss these issues, and that is exactly where the trade-off has to be made.”

Is Sari Nusseibeh, the secular Palestinian, the symbol of moderation, Ayalon’s guy, burying the two-state solution?

“I still favor a two-state solution and will continue to do so, but to the extent that you discover it’s not practical anymore or that it’s not going to happen, you start to think about what the alternatives are. I think that the feeling is there are two courses taking place that are opposed to one another. On one hand, there is what people are saying and thinking, on both sides. There is the sense that we are running out of time, that if we want a two-state solution, we need to implement it quickly.

“But on the other hand, if we are looking at what is happening on the ground, in Israel and the occupied territories, you see things happening in the opposite direction, as if they are not connected to reality. Thought is running in one direction, reality in the other.”

Nusseibeh says the struggle for a one-state solution could take a form similar to some of the nonviolent struggles waged by oppressed ethnic groups in other places.

“We can fight for equal rights, rights of existence, return and equality, and we could take it slowly over the years and there could be a peaceful movement - like in South Africa,” he notes. “I think one should maybe begin on the Palestinian side, to begin a debate, to reengage in the idea of one state.”

‘Jerusalem is out’

“We have failed in the last 15 years,” Nusseibeh continues, “to create the world we wanted to create. We were supposed to be very clever; we convinced ourselves that we were going to be very democratic and clean, a model for the rest of the Arab world. And Jerusalem was supposed to be our capital. That’s what we believed. But then it turned out that all of this was total rubbish. Jerusalem is out, all we have is Ramallah. And we lost Gaza. There is corruption and inefficiency. This is not what we vouched for when we sat back in the early 1980s and ideologized the two-state solution.

“It so happens that Fatah, in particular, the mainstream party and the only viable alternative to extremes on the left or on the right, now needs a strategy, an ideology. Because the ideology that Fatah has adopted over the last 15 years - a two-state solution - seems to be faltering, and with it, Fatah is faltering. So it is time maybe to rethink, to bring Fatah around to a new idea, the old-new idea, of one state. ”

The recent “bulldozer terrorism” in Jerusalem did not highlight the difficulties inherent in a binational state model?

“These are isolated incidents, but they do reflect a major sickness in our Jerusalem Arab society. A sickness that has resulted in pressure, schizophrenia, the fact that these people speak Hebrew, and listen to Hebrew songs, go out with Israeli girlfriends while at the same time they live in Arab neighborhoods and under the influence of Muslim culture. There are contradictory forces pulling at them.

“What is the driving force behind a two-state solution? The fact that it seems more acceptable to a majority of people on both sides and therefore more applicable. The primary motivation is to minimize human suffering. This is what we should all be looking at. If there will be a one-state solution, it will not come today or tomorrow. It’s a long, protracted thing, not the ideal solution. Unless, in an ideal world, people really want to be together, then it is the ideal solution. The best solution, the one that causes the least pain and that can actually be instrumental to a one-state solution, is to have peace now, and acceptance of one another on the basis of two states.”

Is this an ultimatum?

“That’s an ultimatum. Unless a major breakthrough happens by the end of this year, in my opinion we should start trying to strive for equality. Back in the 1980s, before the first intifada, I was saying there was schizophrenia in the body politic of the Palestinian people. It was like the head was going in one direction, which was the direction of seeking independence, national identity - but the body was slowly immersed in the Israeli system, and I said it can’t last because it looks like it will snap. Either the body will join the head so that there will be a civil disobedience campaign, or the head will have to join the body, so that there will be a civil rights campaign, to become part of the Israeli system.

“Fifty, 100, 200 years down the road there will be some kind of conclusion. Sometime in the future - however far away this future is - I believe we’ll be living at peace with one another, in some way or another. I am not sure how, whether in one state or two states, or in a confederation of states, but people finally will come to live at peace. In the meantime, we will simply cause pain to one another. It’s tragic. It is very tragic, because we know we can do it now. That today it is possible with some guts, leadership, vision, we can make it happen today, we can reach a peaceful solution today. [The Arab Peace Initiative proposed in 2002] is a fantastic chance. The Palestinians have adopted it, they’ll go with it all the way. It is a perfect chance. It doesn’t even mention right of return. It is even better than the Ayalon- Nusseibeh plan, but I am willing to accept it.”

‘Dead money’

Asked why he - who realizes so well how complicated it will be to reach a fair and logical solution regarding Jerusalem - is opposed to Olmert’s idea of postponing discussion on that issue, Nusseibeh says he hopes that the prime minister is not repeating the same mistake made by Ehud Barak at Camp David, and that the idea of postponement was broached strictly for public relations purposes.

“Because for Israel, however important Jerusalem may be, the primary factor is the Jewish character [of the state]. And however important the refugees might be, what is more important for the Palestinians and Muslims is Jerusalem. It is the issue over which the most extremist of refugees will be willing to make a sacrifice. Let’s hope this is not where [Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] are disagreeing. If that is what they’re disagreeing about, then there’s no hope. We have to do everything now, we have to put everything on the table.

“The facts on the ground are making [the situation] irreversible,” Nusseibeh warns. “Take the Clinton parameters - Palestinian neighborhoods are Palestinian sovereignty, Jewish neighborhoods are Jewish sovereignty. They are acceptable in principle, but with realities on the ground, like the expulsion of Arab families from their homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, and the inhabitation of those areas by Jewish settlers, it’s going to be unacceptable on a practical level. That’s why we don’t have time.”

You ruffled some feathers among the Palestinian leadership when you recently asked the Europeans to halt financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. Someone even wondered whether you would be willing to give up the aid provided for Al-Quds University.

“Ramallah’s reaction was a bit worried. They called me a few times, a bit worried.”

Nusseibeh adds that the PA is still dogged by corruption - different from the corruption of which Olmert is accused - whereby donor states subsidize thousands of salaried employees at nonprofit organizations. This creates what he sees as an unhealthy dependency on foreign entities.

“We have a terrible situation. Our political bible, our platform, our moral values - we need to be brought together again. If not for creating a state, then for our own sanity and for own values as a people. Apart from in Ramallah, everybody is living under very bad conditions. The occupation is terrible. The siege is everywhere. Pressure. As it is, the Europeans are financing the occupation. And the Europeans are happy, because they feel they’re doing something, it cleans their conscience. And the Israelis are happy because they’re not paying for it. And the Palestinians are happy because they are getting their wages paid. It keeps the economy going, and people are getting complacent about it. It’s dead money [going] after dead money.”

Nusseibeh mentions the recent meeting he had with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the British consulate in Jerusalem, together with four other Palestinians, during which the premier stated he would like to assume a role in the peace process more central than that of a cash register. “I said, I want to tell you what you can do to transform yourself from a payer into a player: Make your money payments conditional on tangible progress in the peace process.”

Not long ago, the professor continues, “I was in Brussels. I gave a talk and I said to the Europeans: If you want to pass on money, do it only on the condition we build a state, in which case it makes sense for you to spend money to build us an international airport. But if in the end there isn’t going to be an independent Palestinian state, why waste your money? Waste your money, if you need to, on integrating us into Israeli society. Makes more sense. Pay the money for us to become part of Israel, to have equal rights. Raise our level of education, bring our standards of living up. But to have the PA taking all this money, creating all this debt, makes no sense. Maybe the Europeans should link the aid they are giving us to real progress in peace talks, so that both the Israelis and the Palestinians will be shocked out of their complacency, or lack of commitment.”

What do you make of the growing support among Palestinians for the dismantlement of the PA?

“The PA has no use. If we fail to reach a peace agreement by the end of this year, I believe it would be best to go back to the period when we were living happily under occupation. We had a small civil administration, they were paying back some $20 million a year to the Israeli treasury, so they were making money off us. Today, we are creating, year after year, bigger deficits. We are spending billions, we have 160,000 employees, half of them are security personnel, who give us no security whatsoever, we are spending masses of money on guns, which we only use against each other and which provide us no security. The whole thing is a mess.”

Nusseibeh says that to this day, the Palestinians have opposed taking part in the Jerusalem municipal elections because they feared doing so would sever the link between Jerusalem’s Arabs and the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Now, given the diminishing likelihood of a two-state solution, perhaps it is time for the Palestinians to reconsider.

“People in Jerusalem - why should they attach themselves to the Muqata, to Ramallah? There is no reason. There’s nothing. The municipal election in Jerusalem [could serve as a launching point for seeking equal rights in a binational state]. We begin with Jerusalem, not as a separate part, but as a spearhead of the entire Palestinian body. Why not? Why not turn the weakness into a strength?

Are you disappointed by the Israeli peace camp? Did your partner, Ami Ayalon, who joined the same government you now accuse of distancing itself from your proposal, betray you?

“I respect Ami Ayalon. He is a very honest person, that is something that has always attracted me to him. It is not a betrayal of me personally. I look upon it as the ultimate submission by the individual to the wheels of history. You reach the point where you feel no longer able to do what you want, to steer the wheels in the direction you want them to go. And you submit, and become a part of the machine. So it’s not really a betrayal. It’s rather an expression of weakness. I am sad more than surprised. I recognize it as part of human weakness.

“I was still hoping because, before he went to the Labor Party, he came and spoke to me. I like this about him. I knew what he was doing. People were pushing him for a long time, trying to get him into the system, and he resisted. But then at one stage, I think he made up his mind: ‘Maybe I can lead the Labor Party, and then this is the best place for me to be.’ I said, fine, do it. I was unhappy that … he became marginalized as minister without portfolio.”

Nusseibeh says he lost touch with Ayalon since the latter became a minister.

Asked if Abbas would be able to muster Palestinian support for an agreement like “The People’s Choice,” Nusseibeh says both the Palestinian president and Olmert need to courageously take on their respective opposition camps. For instance, if Abbas “would come to the Palestinian people and say, ‘I initialed such a document. I want to dissolve the legislative council and run for election and this is going to be my political platform. Not only for me as a president, but also as leader of Fatah.’ Let us assume that he does this and then he creates a debate in our society. It will be a very far-reaching, democratic debate, in which he will be looked upon as presenting his project. [This would] mark the beginning of a process, of a struggle.

“I believe that on Israeli side, Olmert could do the same. We don’t know whether both leaders will be reelected, but it’s worth doing, even if they’re not, because at least we know we’ve given this peace agreement a chance.”

Ami Ayalon says, in response: “I agree with Sari Nusseibeh that time is running out for the two-state solution. He voices the frustration and desperation of the Palestinians, and we have to consider that. If a man like him, a son of a Palestinian refugee who relinquished his right of return and was bodily attacked because of it, comes to the conclusion that the two-state solution is no longer an option, it means that the whole pragmatic Palestinian approach is crumbling.

“I share his view that Olmert missed a chance to get an agreement due to efforts to insure his own political survival. The Labor Party will not succeed in getting back in power by attacking the other parties, but only by raising the common banner of security and political agreements.”

[haaretz.com]
August 17, 2008
10:29
The story of Palestinian People - Dr. Mustafa Barghouti
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

I produced this video based on the original e-slides presentation which was shared with us by our friend, Ann.

Barghouti Presentation
27 June, 2008 — peoplesgeography

An excellent extended overview of the I-P conflict by Dr Mustafa Barghouti and Israel’s apartheid policies of continued ethnic cleansing and annexation of up to 58% of the West Bank through illegal settlement expansion. It really helps to see it by way of maps and slides. This was delivered recently at the 2008 American-Arab Anti-Discrimination - ADC National Convention…

Grab code to embed this video in your blog/website from here:
[blip.tv]

A higher quality/resolution version of this video can be downloaded from here:
[tinyurl.com]

The original presentation (swf/high res) can be viewed/downloaded here.
August 16, 2008
14:05
What If Israel Had Never Been Created?
» ‎ Sabbah's Blog

William Hughes

“Imagine there’s no countries…Nothing to live or die for…Imagine all the people living life in peace.” - John Lennon

Thanks mostly to U.S. President Harry S. Truman and his “susceptibility to Zionist influence,” Israel came into existence in 1948. (1) Humanity, and in particular, the Palestinians, have paid dearly for his decision. The land on which the Palestinians had been living for centuries, in peace, with a minority Jewish population, has been gradually transformed into an Apartheid state by the machinations of the Zionist Movement. That Apartheid state, in turn, is today dominated by Israel’s Death-Mayhem-and- Occupation Machine. (2)

One wonders: What would the world look like today, if the state of Israel had not been created in 1948? Its improvident formation seems to have set in motion a chain of events, mostly negative, in the affairs of Mankind. In the movie, “Click,” the lead character finds a “universal remote” that allows him to rewind to different parts of his life and to change what had happened. If I possessed such a “universal remote” and could stop President Truman from aiding and abetting the establishment of an Israeli state, then, it is my speculation, (a theory), that the following 25 propositions would probably be our present day reality. They are:

1. The U.S. would not have any enemies in the Islamic World.

2. There would be no Al-Qaeda Terrorist Network.

3. Gasoline would be selling for less than $1 a gallon.

4. There would have been no 9/11.

5. There would be no USA Patriot Law.

6. There would be no Homeland Security Agency.

7. The Israeli Lobby’s “unmatched power” over the U.S.’ foreign policy, for over four decades, would not had existed. (Its support for the Iraqi War was deemed by the experts to be “critical.”) (3)

8. There would also not have been any Neocon ideologues; like Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Richard Perle, et al, to help, (along with other “Special Interests”), to push the U.S. into an illegal war with Iraq. (4)

9. Iran would not be the next target for U.S. aggression. (No Israel. No “A Clean Break” document. No Israeli Lobby. No Neocons. No need for the U.S. to attack Iran.) (5)

10. The Zionist fink, Jonathan Pollard, wouldn’t be in prison for stealing U.S. military secrets and hawking them to Israel.

11. The three million-plus Palestinians, who were forcefully dispersed from their homeland, since 1948, by the Israeli Occupation Forces, (IOF), would, instead, be living happily there today, in a free and independent state of Palestine. There would be no Apartheid Wall, or as a corollary, a Hamas organization. (6)

12. Jerusalem would have a vibrant Christian population. (7)

13. Rachel Corrie of Olympia, WA, would be alive and well. (8)

14. The 2,544 Americans who have died in Iraq would be alive; and the 18,777, who have been seriously wounded there, would be fully participating in our Republic. U.S. taxpayers would have an additional $295 billion, (the cost of the war), in the treasury to use to serve the social needs of the people. Universal Health Care would be a real possibility and Social Security would not be in jeopardy. Iraq would be at peace. T

A Peek into Others' mind » Sabbah's Blog » August 2008

Feeds

Sabbah's Blog (24 unread)

Huwaida Arraf treat bully Ranaan Gissin admirably

EXCLUSIVE-US tax breaks help Jewish settlers in West Bank

Democracy and Empire: Both Illusions

Who is Biden?

Boats Break Israeli Blockade

Free Gaza Boats Under Electronic Piracy

Forty-six international human rights workers are now sailing to Gaza

Missing Links

CAMERA???s broken lens

ACTION ALERT - Keep in Touch With Free Gaza Ships

Despite truce, still no sign of school supplies in Gaza

A Monopoly of Incompetence, Corruption, Failure and Thuggery

Life is still beautiful

We are running out of time for a two-state solution

The story of Palestinian People - Dr. Mustafa Barghouti

What If Israel Had Never Been Created?