Paranoid, Pathetic, Miserable…Contemptible Israel: Oppressor robbing Oppressed

otlc

It’s beyond shameful! It’s an international crime of highway robbery. At the very least it’s Robbery in the First Degree! Israel commits every sin unimaginable to the Palestinians…and gets away with it!

deniro Thank you for the mugshot, Mr. DeNiro. Will you ever admit Israel is an existing apartheid parasite?

Comparably Palestine is a rape victim, raped again and again…and again in a court of law, i.e. the UN, while jurors, i.e. the international community, debate on whether or not to convict the incontestable rapist, Israel.

Geeeeez… people, what will it take for common sense and righteous outrage to finally reign?MoneytoIsraelfromUS

Activists for Palestine have mostly been aware of Israel’s blatant withholding of funds and donations specifically due to Palestine probably for decades, but what to do about it?! Since the UN has proven quite useless in standing up to Israel’s glaring criminal behavior towards Palestine, and the international community invariably…

View original post 339 more words

Advertisements

War Against the People: Israel, the Palestinians and Global Pacification – Book Review by Richard Falk

Quote

Reviewed by Richard Falk — The Palestine Chronicle

(Jeff Halper, War Against the People: Israel, the Palestinians and Global Pacification, Pluto Press, 2015, 296 pp., ISBN 9780745334301.)WarAgainstthePeople_bookpic_JeffHalper

Jeff Halper is an unusual hybrid presence on both the scholarly and political scene. He describes himself as an “activist-scholar” (6), which adopts a controversial self-identification. The conventional stance erects a high wall between scholarship and activism. To his credit and for our benefit, Halper excels almost equally in both roles. He is one of the most lucid speakers on the lecture circuit combining clarity with wisdom and a rich fund of information and firsthand experience, and his work as a writer is influential and widely known. His activist credentials have been built up over many years, especially in his work as co-founder and leader of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, which has bravely confronted Israeli demolition crews and IDF soldiers, helped Palestinians on multiple occasions to rebuild their destroyed homes, thereby responding humanely to one of Israel’s cruelest occupation practices, an instance of unlawful collective punishment. Halper has estimated that less than 2% of demolitions can lay claim to a credible security justification (the respected Israeli human rights NGO, B’Tselem, estimates 1.3% of demolitions are justified by security, while the rest are punitive or 621 of 47,000 since 1967). As an author his main prior book makes an unsurprisingly strong pitch for activism as the most reliable foundation for analysis and prescription. His important and incisive title gave the theme away—An Israeli in Palestine: Resisting Dispossession, Redeeming Israel.1 This earlier book remains valuable as testimony by a progressive Zionist in Israel that with good faith Jews and Palestinians might yet learn to live together, including finding a formula for sharing the land.

Halper’s own life experience makes this blend of scholarship and activism particularly compelling. He is an American born Jew who grew up in the Midwest and studied anthropology in Wisconsin, taught at a Quaker university for several years, and then moved to Israel where he married an Israeli and has three grown children. What particularly sets Halper apart from most other principled Jews in the ranks of critics of Israel is the striking combination of the radicalism of his opposition to the policies and practices of the Israeli state together with his evident commitment to remain in Israel no matter how far right the governing process drifts. Most other prominent Jewish critics of Israel have remained outside the country throughout their life (e.g. Noam Chomsky) or were born in Israel and then chose to become expatriate critical voices (e.g. Daniel Levy, Ilan Pappé, Gilad Azmun). There are a few internationally prominent Israeli journalists and cultural figures who have sustained sharply critical commentary (e.g. Gideon Levy, Amira Hass) and kept their Israeli residence despite harassment and threats.

In the book under review Halper broadens his own distinctive identity while enlarging the apertures of perception by which he views the Israeli state. He focuses attention on the Israeli arms industry, security doctrines, and policies, and examines Israel’s acquisition of formidable diplomatic influence grossly disproportionate to its size and capabilities. It is this gap between Israel’s significant impact on current world history and the modest scale of its territorial reality and its outsider status in most global settings that is the core mystery being explicated by Halper. He starts the book with some provocative questions that put the underlying puzzle before us in vivid language: “How does Israel get away with it? In a decidedly post-colonial age, how is Israel able to sustain a half-century occupation over the Palestinians, a people violently displaced in 1948, in the face of almost unanimous international opposition” (1)? He indicates that this phenomenon cannot be adequately “explained by normal international relations” nor by the strength of the Israel lobby in the United States nor by strong Israeli pushback to discredit critics by invoking the Holocaust as an indefinite source of impunity (3). What the book demonstrates very persuasively is that Israeli influence is a result of its extraordinary, partially hidden and understated role as arms supplier to more than 130 countries and as an increasingly significant mentor of national police forces and counter-terrorist operations and practices in many countries, including the United States.

Israel as Arms Merchant and Pacification Ideologue

Without exaggeration, War Against the People, is really three books in one. It is first of all a comprehensive and detailed look at the elaborate Israeli arms industry, including the extensive network of private companies engaged in arms production. Halper explores how Israel managed to become such a valued producer of sophisticated weaponry that so many governments have come to depend upon. Part of Israel’s success in the highly competitive international arms market is to identify and develop niches for itself in the wider global arms market that allows it to compete successfully for market share with companies backed by several of the world’s largest states by supplying specific kinds of weaponry that outperform the alternatives available for purchase. By so serving as an arms merchant to no less than 130 countries gives Israel a powerful unacknowledged source of leverage throughout the entire world. An aspect of Israel’s success is to be apolitical in its operations as an arms supplier, provided only that the foreign government poses no security threat to Israel.

Secondly, the book is a detailed examination of the specific ways that Israel has adapted its security doctrine and practice to the varieties of Palestinian resistance over the decades. The Israeli approach rests on adopting a goal toward internal security that seeks to achieve a tolerable level of “pacification” of the Palestinian population. As such it does not seek to “defeat” the Palestinians, including even Hamas, and is content with keeping violent resistance contained so that Israelis can go about their lives with reasonable security and the economy can prosper. At the same time, the threat of violent resistance never entirely disappears or is absent from the political consciousness and experience of Israeli society, and the fear factor keeps Israelis supportive of oppressive internal policies. Pacification in the face of a potentially very hostile minority Palestinian presence in pre-1967 Israel has presupposed a fusing of Israel’s military, paramilitary, police, and intelligence capabilities, but also a less understood Israeli politics of restraint. The capabilities to sustain pacifications must be continuously updated and adapted to evolving circumstances, including shifts in Palestinian tactics of resistance.

This mental shift from “victory” over the natives to their relentless “pacification” to some extent reflects the ethical orientation of a post-colonial world. In many respects Israel represents a species of settler colonialism, but it takes the form of seeking some kind of imposed accommodation with the native population rather than their extinction or spatial marginalization. Actually, as Israeli politics have moved further and further to the right, the tactics of pacification have become more coercive and brutal, and do seem to push the original dispossession of the nakba toward some kind of “final solution” by way of settlement expansion as likely supplemented at some point by population transfer and by periodic massive military operations of the sort that have occurred in Gaza in 2008-2009, 2012, and 2014. In other words, pacification as conceived in the 1950s has become quite something more ominous for the Palestinians in the twenty-first century as “Palestine” shrinks in size and diminishes in threat while Israel’s territorial ambitions continue to expand and seem to be within reach.

The Israel/Palestine encounter is certainly unique in several of its aspects, yet it bears sufficient similarity to a range of threats facing many governments in the world to allow the Israeli government to serve as an exemplary practitioner of counterinsurgency war/politics. It is precisely the generality of contemporary security challenges situated within society that makes the Israeli experience seem so valuable to others, especially when reinforced by the widespread impression that Israel’s security policies have succeeded in the face of difficult challenges over an extended period. This combination of considerations gives Israel’s weapons, training programs, and security doctrines their global resonance. Especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the long-term character of the Israeli experience became a strong credential on the arms market and among strategy-minded think tanks. Israel’s perceived counterinsurgency record has even led other governments to mute or even abandon their criticisms of the manner in which Israel suppresses Palestinians and flaunts international law. In this way, the Israeli network of arms sales arrangements has not only functioned as direct sources of influence and economic benefit to Israel, but also contributed a political payoff by weakening motivations at the UN and elsewhere in the world to exert meaningful pressure on Israel to modify its policies and uphold its obligations under international law. What Halper helps us to understand is this rarely discussed relationship between the arms trade and what might be called an international diplomacy of pacification. In effect, Israel has quietly bought off most of its potentially most dangerous governmental adversaries by making itself an invaluable collaborator in the security domain, which is given priority by every government when it comes to shaping its foreign policy. The reach of this weapons diplomacy is further extended due to Israel’s willingness to do arms deals discreetly with the most repressive of regimes around the world even while at the same time it takes great pains to substantiate the claim that Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East.

Thirdly, this long experience of coping with Palestinian resistance has given Israel continuing field experience with tactics and weapons useful to subdue a non-state adversary, including convincing demonstrations of what works and what doesn’t. In fundamental respects the work of pacification is never finished, and so Israel continuously modifies its weapons mix to take account of battlefield lessons and technological innovations, and this is of great value to governments that were seeking to choose among several alternatives to meet the requirements of their particular security challenges. Israel can claim both the reliability of its weaponry through their field testing in response to varying conditions and success in adapting to ever changing tactics of Palestinian resistance. No other country has achieved this mastery over the hardware and software of a pacification approach to internal security.

Halper also makes us aware that pacification is what also best explains the hegemonic ambitions of America’s securitizing approach to world order. What Israel has achieved on a small scale, the United States is managing on a large scale. In other words the several hundred American foreign military bases together with navies patrolling all of the world’s oceans, further reinforced by satellite militarization of space for purposes of intelligence and possible attack are the coercive infrastructure of both neoliberal globalization and American global leadership. The objective is to keep those dissatisfied with this established order under sufficient control so that trade, investment, and basic security relations are not deeply disturbed. Part of Halper’s argument is that Israel understands the dynamics of an effective regime of global pacification better than any other country, and has done its best to be useful to the United States and Europe by providing niche support in terms of weaponry (say for border barriers, surveillance, and control) and doctrine (say targeted assassinations by drone strikes and collective blockades).

Matrix of Control

Halper relies upon an illuminating style of conceptualization to develop his basic analysis. For instance, one of his important contributions is to specify global pacification by reference to a “Matrix of Control.” The basic argument of the book is that the most defining “wars” of our times involve using state violence against a mobilized population that mounts threats against the established economic and political order. The matrix of control is the complex interaction of weapons, policies, practices, and ideas that make this project a reality. The paradigmatic case is the Israeli pacification of the Palestinians, which is less than their defeat or annihilation, but something other than sustained warfare; it is doing enough by way of forcible action to punish, terrorize, and suppress without clearly crossing the line drawn by legal prohibitions on mass atrocity and genocide. It is damping down the fires of Palestinian resistance into a smoldering mass of tensions and resentments that every so often bursts into flames, offering pretexts for launching a new campaign of devastation. The pattern of periodic onslaughts against Gaza since 2008 is indicative of the broader policies, with three massive attacks every 2-3 years, what Israeli officials are comfortable describing as “mowing the lawn” (146), which incidentally stimulates a new round of arms sales.

The Israeli matrix of control (143-190) is specified by reference to its various main components, forming an integrated and distinctive form of what Halper describes as “urban warfare” resting on the premise of “domestic securitization,” that is, conceiving of the enemy as mainly operating within the boundaries of the state, ultimately to be contained rather than defeated. Such an integrated approach relies on walls to keep the unwanted from entering, surveillance, fragmenting the population to be controlled, periodic and punitive violent suppression designed to prevent, preempt, and demoralize, and proactive intelligence that seeks to gain access to the inner circles of militant opposition forces. Such a matrix of control both deploys a mixture of traditional counterterrorist measures and the latest innovations in sophisticated technology, including armed robotics, drones, and a variety of overlapping surveillance techniques. The approach relies on a vertical layering of security measures that rests on redundancy to ensure effective control. What is original about this approach is its conscious realization that “victory” over hostile subjugated forces is not an acceptable or realizable policy option, and what works best is a system of permanent control sustained by a mix of coercive and psychological instruments.

Pacifying Palestinians and Pacifying the World

Halper shows how this matrix of control, which developed to enable Israeli settler society to achieve a tolerable level of security with respect to the indigenous Palestinian population, seeks to fulfill an elusive requirement. It maintains security without resorting to genocide or to the kind of destructive forms of mass slaughter that characterized earlier experiences of settler colonialism where the land occupied was cleared of natives. At the same time, it pacifies in a post-colonial era where the power of the colonial master has been effectively challenged throughout the world. It is no longer possible to beat the native population into a condition of passive resignation as had been the case so often during the heyday of the extensive European colonial empires. These two considerations suggest a policy puzzle for the pacifier who must avoid extreme violence and yet depends on a sufficient degree of violence to intimidate a restive population that believes resistance is justified and currently accords with the flow of history.

The Israeli answer in a variety of acknowledged and disguised forms is best understood by reference to the Dahiya Doctrine, which incorporates a logic of disproportionate retaliation (174-176). In effect, for every Israeli killed or home damaged or destroyed, a far greater number of Palestinians will be killed and entire residential neighborhoods destroyed. The Dahiya Docrtine was proclaimed originally to justify the destruction of the Dahiya neighborhood in south Beirut during the Lebanon War of 2006. The people living in densely populated Dahiya were viewed by Israel as supportive of Hezbollah, but it is descriptive of Israeli behavior generally with respect to Palestinian acts of resistance, particularly with respect to Gaza since falling under Hamas’s control. The supposedly centrist Tzipi Livni, the Israeli political leader who served as Foreign Minister during the massive attack on Gaza at the end of 2008, expressed this Israeli way of dealing with Palestinian resistance in Gaza in the following chilling words: “Hamas now understands that when you fire on its [Israel’s] citizens it responds by going wild—and this is a good thing” (quoted in Halper, 175). I would add that “going wild” is a euphemism for rejecting the efforts of international humanitarian law and the just war tradition to constrain the intensity of violence and suffering by insisting on proportional responses. In effect, to reject so overtly this admittedly vague effort of international law to impose limits on the conduct of warfare, Israel is incorporating into the core of its security approach a repudiation of the humanizing ambition of international law, and implicitly claiming the right on its own to use force as it wishes. This is a step back from the extensive attempt during the prior century to put the genie of war, if not back in its bottle, at least to gesture toward that end. With Israel’s concept of securitization, also descriptive of the approach taken by the United States, as well as such other countries as Russia, France, and China, it is arguable that international society has turned the normative clock back to a nihilistic zero.

There is another crucial feature of the matrix of control that is of wider relevance than Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians that Halper associates with “Framing: A Tendentious Definition of ‘Terrorism’” (149-151). This framing idea is to make it appear that “the terrorists” are always those resisting control by the established political order, and never those that are exercising authority however oppressively. As Halper points out, the IDF may kill over 2,000 Palestinians, two-thirds of whom are civilians, in the course of an armed confrontation in Gaza, as opposed to Hamas killing five Israeli civilians, but Hamas will still be depicted as the practitioner of terror and Israel’s violence will be put forward as defensive measures that are reasonable and necessary for the protection of the civilian population of Israel. The Israeli government will describe Palestinian civilian deaths as regrettable collateral damage, while attributing Hamas’s comparatively trivial lethality to a deliberate intention to kill Israeli civilians. The final step in the ideologizing process is to make this construction of the respective intentions of the two sides hinge on the question of deliberate intention, and since Hamas’s rockets are fired in the general direction of civilian populations the intention is declared to be deliberate, while Israel is seeking to destroy militarily relevant personnel and weaponry. This kind of manipulative framing by Israel has been borrowed by the United States and other governments to lend moral authority to the form of disproportionate violence that has characterized counterinsurgency warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan in the post-9/11 era as well as lesser military operations around the world in the course of “the war on terror.”

What Israel has been doing within Palestinian territory it is seeking to control, the United States does globally. The introduction of drone warfare and special ops covert forces into dozens of countries throughout the world is an extension of the matrix of control as perfected by Israel within its limited field of operations. It also reformulates the parameters of permissible violence without regard to the limitations of international law, regarding any point of suspected adversaries throughout the planet as subject to deadly attack, borrowing notions of targeted assassination from the repertoire of Israeli practices. As with Israel, the operative goal of the so-called long war is not victory in the World War II sense, but rather the exercise of a sufficiency of control that is able to establish tolerable levels of security for Western societies and transnational economic activity. It is worth pointing out that as with Israel, the United States is unwilling to pay the costs in reputation and resources that would be required to achieve victory, although in the Iraq occupation as earlier in Vietnam it did seek to do more than pacify but in the end found the costs too high, and abandoned the undertaking.

Halper’s book gives essential insights to a key set of interrelated concerns: the political benefits to Israel arising from its dual role as quality arms supplier and counterinsurgency mentor; the degree to which Israel’s success in managing a hostile Palestinian population as well as a series of dangerous regional threats offers the United States a model for global securitization with a primary objective of preempting threats to the American homeland and safeguarding neoliberal global markets and trade routes from hostile forces; as also noted, the Israeli domestic security apparatus has been influential in the equipping and training of American and other national police forces. Additionally, Isreali technologies and knowhow have been relied upon to monitor borders and to erect barriers against unwanted entry; the advantages of having a seemingly permanent combat zone such as Gaza for field testing weapons and tactics increases the attractiveness of Israel as supplier of choice. This kind of combat zone is real world simulation that has many experimental advantages over the sorts of war games that are used to assess the effectiveness of weapons and tactics. Without incoming rockets from Gaza it would be impossible to reliably test the effectiveness of a defensive system such as the Iron Dome.

Concluding Comments

In the end, Halper answers the question as to why Israel’s seeming international unpopularity based of its long-term suppression of the Palestinian people does not harm its image or status. Israel manages to get away with its abusive human rights record while a more powerful and populous country such as apartheid South Africa was sanctioned and censured repeatedly. Of course, U.S. geopolitical muscle is part of the answer, but what Halper adds to our understanding in an insightful and factually supported manner is an appreciation of Israel’s extraordinary usefulness as arms supplier and counterinsurgency guru. A further implication of Israeli usefulness is a realization that governments give much more weight to relationships that bolster their security capabilities than they do to matters of international morality and law. Given these realities, it remains clear that the Palestinian national movement will have to wage its struggle on its own with principal support coming from civil society. Israel, it must be acknowledged has substantially neutralized both the UN and the foreign policy of most important countries, although public opinion around the world is moving in directions that could exert mounting pressure on Israel in the years to come.

As the title of Halper’s book suggests, what is transpiring worldwide, and is epitomized by the Israeli response to Palestinian opposition, can be best understood as part of a wider shift in the nature of global conflict in the post-Cold War period. Instead of most attention being given by security bureaucracies to rivalries and warfare among leading states, the most salient, dangerous, and cruelest conflicts are between state and society, or wars waged against people. There are no significant international wars between two or more states taking place now, while at least 30 internal wars are raging in different parts of the world. To be sure there have been a series of military interventions as part of the global pacification project under the direction of the United States and proxy wars in the Middle East in which major states intervene on opposite sides of a civil war. Yet whether we think of Syria as the paradigm of twenty-first century warfare or the Israeli matrix of control, it is “the people,” or a mobilized segment, that is being victimized. Halper’s book does the best job so far of depicting this new cartography of warfare, and deserves to be widely read and its main theses debated.

– Richard Falk is a UN Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council for Occupied Palestine (2008-2014), and a Professor of International Law. Visit his website. (The review below was published in the current issue of Journal of the Society for Contemporary Thought and Islamicate World. )

“…and countries like Sri Lanka have yet to ensure full accountability in addressing serious human rights violations…”

Dear Ambassador Elissa Golberg, Your statement on Sri Lanka at UNHRC in Geneva ~ LankaWeb
Posted on June 25th, 2012

Asoka Weerasinghe Kings Grove Crescent . Gloucester . Ontario . K1J 6G1. Canada

25 June 2012

Ambassador Elissa Golberg

Canada’s Ambassador & Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva
5 Avenue de l’Aviana, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.

Dear Ambassador Golberg:

I have just read your statement of June 18, 2012, on behalf of Canada to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.   In  your statement you said “….and countries like Sri Lanka have yet to ensure full accountability in addressing serious human rights violations…”

With that statement, you have failed us Canadians one more time when commenting on Sri Lanka, as did Foreign Minister John Baird when he performed his Song and Dance at the UN Security Council about Sri Lanka, and former Conservative Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon  who put out a pathetic Press Release after the Tamil Tigers, the most ruthless terrorist group in the world were militarily eliminated after a 27-year long blooding war, on 19 May 2009.  He had difficulty to acknowledge the amazing feat when every other western country patted the back of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government saying , “Marvellous, well done, chaps, we got lots to learn from you guys how to get rid of terrorists single handed without requesting  for even Canadian troops to come and help you all as is being done in Afghanistan!”  So the Canadian’s negative policy on Sri Lanka keeps marching on unabated.

As a Sri Lankan-Canadian here is the problem that I am grappling with.  All you Canadian Sri Lanka watching politicians and Foreign Affairs Sri Lanka watching bureaucrats obviously do not believe in the Cosmic Law of‘Cause and Effect’ like I do.  Perhaps, this is a deliberate effort in case you all paint yourselves into the corner as a bunch of hypocrites.

The “Effect” that you are complaining about is, “….ensure full accountability in addressing serious human rights violations”.  Right, Ambassador Golberg?  Are you not interested to find out the “Cause” of all this and go after the culprits who kept the Tamil Tigers life-line alive providing them with oxygen?  Well, I don’t think you are going to challenge me when I say that one of the culprits was none other than, yours and my Canada.  Here’s the reason why Canada should hang its head low in shame and not white-wash ourselves and say, “Sri Lanka, we Canadians are Holier than Thou.”

For 13 long Liberal years under the helm of Prime Ministers Jean Chretien and Paul Martin, Canada let the Canadian Tamil Tiger sympathizers collect, mainly by extortion,  2 million dollars a month to stuff the Tamil Tiger war-chest to buy a sophisticated armoury of guns, bullets, land mines, claymore mines, et cetera to go on killing innocent Sri Lankan civilians in scores of hundreds, and taking away their ‘right-to-life’ which had been hijacked for 27 years by Tamil Tigers.  And you with a straight ‘We are Holier thou” face, complained to the UNHRC demanding Sri Lanka’s accountability for getting rid  single handed of these Tamil Tigers, the most ruthless terrorists in the world.   That is a bit pretentious, onerous, vulgar, and disingenuous, isn’t it, Ambassador Golberg?  You experienced what terrorism was all about having watched the Talibans in Kandahar going about with their Tamil Tiger copy-cat killings that also killed our Canadian soldiers.

Aren’t we Canadians a bunch hypocrites, when on May 6, 2000, Liberal Finance Minister, Paul Martin, and his cabinet colleague, Minister responsible for CIDA, Maria Minna and several Liberal MPs, supported the fund raising event for the Tamil Tigers by attending a $60-a plate dinner in Toronto.  And you complain about “Sri Lanka’s accountability”.   Ha!  What rubbish, and your comment is not worth two prairie straws swaying in the wind in the more sky than land country.

Perhaps, Canada can be a bit more honest and accept being accountable for the deaths of 114 people and for the 1,338 others who were maimed for life being victims when the Tamil Tigers brought down the Central Bank Building in the Fort, Colombo, on 31 January 1996. Ambassador Golberg, you can claim your right to ask me, “Why should Canada admit to be  accountable for those deaths and injured?”

Here’s why, Ambassador Golberg.  It was in 1994 that Canada allowed a Tamil Tiger sympathizer to cut a cheque from his account in a bank in Vancouver for $7.5 million to buy 50 tonnes of RDX and plastic explosives from a Chemical Factory in the Ukraine.  These were the explosives that were used in the truck bomb that brought down the Central Bank Building in Colombo, on January 31, 1996.    And it were the same explosive material that were used to bomb the  entrance to the Temple of the Buddha’s Tooth Relic in Kandy on 25 January 1998, killing 12 and seriously injuring 13 others.  You better believe it, whether you and I like it or not, we both have Sinhala and Muslim blood on our palms together with 34 million other Canadians.  And my Conservative Government had the gall and temerity to get you to make a statement saying,  “…and countries like Sri Lanka have yet to ensure full accountability in addressing serious human rights violation.”  That is being bombastic,  cruel, and having a colonial attitude saying that “we are the masters of your destiny, Sri Lanka”.  That shows our hypocrisy to its 10th degree.

And you slapped the wrist of the UN Human Rights Council Commissioner for “her reference in her report to the situation in Quebec.”  You said, “The Government of Quebec has pursued mediation efforts with student representatives.  Demonstrations continue to occur – daily.  Freedom of assembly is alive and well in Quebec.  The law adopted in Quebec frames the exercise of these freedoms by preserving peace, order and public safety.”

Hmmm…I am not sure of that!  I think the reference to Canada and human rights violation in the context of the Quebec students, was as according to the students spokesperson Leo Bureau-Blouin, Bill 78 is the biggest set back to the students fundamental rights.  The students marched down Montreal streets and knocking on cauldrons along the sidewalks in defence of Free Speech.    It is important to note that the Quebec bar association, many legal experts, unions, opinion leaders and even anti-corruption hero Judge John Gomery, severely criticized Bill 78 for its restrictive laws that impedes on human rights.  So which ever way you try to slice the pie and white-wash Canada, the issue of the freedoms of fundamental rights sticks out like a sore thumb.  If Sri Lanka had tried this stunt and curb the University student’s freedom of speech, you bet, Canada would have been one of the first countries who would have pounced on Sri Lanka as human rights violators and advocating that “Canada is Holier than Thou”.

While the worst student protests in Canadian history took place at Concordia University in Montreal in 1969, when hundreds of students protested against a professor who consistently gave lower marks to black students.  They destroyed the computer lab, set fire to the building, rioted in the streets and caused more than $2 million in damage. That the curbs by the Quebec Government on the ongoing protest by the students in Montreal that the UNHRC Commissioner has pointed out as a human rights violation, you bet, will very likely earn a page in Canadian history too like the Concordia incident!

Since Sri Lanka is on it way to recovery, rehabilitation and reconciliation having been haemorrhaged for 27 bloody years by a  Tamil terrorist war that was aided and abetted by Canada, it is time that Canada jump off Sri Lanka’s back and stop playing the monkey, in the game of “We are Holier than Thou”, because  however much we try to pretend, we are just not as bunch of bright eyed goody two-shoes.

Sincerely,

Asoka Weerasinghe (Mr.)

Upon review of Mr. Weerasinghe’s outrage at Ambassador Elissa Golberg’s statement to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, WCI has the following reflection:

Mr. Weerasinghe’s opinion of human rights issues in Canada and account of LTTE funding by Canada is interesting. The good, bad and ugly of human rights is an infinite topic of debate.

“For 13 long Liberal years under the helm of Prime Ministers Jean Chretien and Paul Martin, Canada let the Canadian Tamil Tiger sympathizers collect, mainly by extortion,  2 million dollars a month to stuff the Tamil Tiger war-chest to buy a sophisticated armoury of guns, bullets, land mines, claymore mines, et cetera…” Is there corroboration of his facts and figures?

Sri Lanka is not a country promoting free speech. Media is scrutinized and controlled by the Sinhalese-run government. Most news from and about Sri Lanka principally written and published by Sri Lanka’s Ministry Of Defence and Urban Development is biased and written in government-favored premeditated light.

The LTTE and the Sri Lankan government are accountable for war crimes against all Sri Lankan civilians during their civil war.

President Rajapaksa’s military annihilated the LTTE, ending the war.

Mr. Weerasinghe’s journalistic tantrum failed to address the existing ongoing impunity of kidnappings and murders of Sri Lankan journalists and human rights activists who dare to speak out against the current Rajapaksa regime.

Amnesty International knows which side their bread is buttered on. However their latest report,

The Human Rights Situation in Sri Lanka, June 2012
A statement for the June Human Rights Council Session

published 13 June, 2012 reconfirms that human rights conditions have not improved for Sri Lanka’s Tamils in the three years since the end of the war.

| Symbolic ‘war crimes’ tribunal to try Bush, Blair ~ time for a Real Trial next indicting Obomber too!

| Symbolic ‘war crimes’ tribunal to try Bush, Blair ~ time for a Real Trial next indicting Obomber too!

Symbolic ‘war crimes’ tribunal to try Bush, Blair

By SEAN YOONG,

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — Malaysian-led activists will hold a symbolic trial this month for former President George W. Bush and British ex-leader Tony Blair on charges of committing crimes against peace in the Iraq war, the event’s organizers said Tuesday.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal is an initiative of Malaysia’s retired Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who staunchly opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The tribunal will convene a four-day public hearing starting Saturday to determine whether Bush and Blair committed crimes against peace and violated international law in the Iraq invasion, said Malaysian lawyer Yaacob Hussain Marican.

“For these people who have been immune from prosecution, we want to put them on trial in this forum to prove that they committed war crimes,” Yaacob told The Associated Press.

Activists sent information about the charges to Bush and Blair recently but received no response, Yaacob said.

Francis Boyle, an American international law professor based in Illinois, will be among the prosecutors at the hearing, which follows two years of investigations by a Malaysian peace foundation founded by Mahathir that looked into complaints by people affected by the Iraqi war.

The effort is modeled after a 1967 Vietnam war crimes panel convened in Sweden and Denmark by philosophers Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre, Yaacob said. The Vietnam tribunal said the U.S. committed acts of aggression against Vietnam and bombarded civilian targets, but it was mostly ignored in United States.

The Kuala Lumpur tribunal will have a seven-member panel of judges including two retired judges from Malaysia’s highest court, peace activist Alfred Lambremont Webre of the United States and Mumbai-based lawyer Niloufer Bhagwat of India.

If the tribunal finds Bush and Blair guilty, it will enter their names into a symbolic “Register of War Criminals.”

The tribunal is also scheduled to hold a separate hearing next year on charges of torture linked to the Iraq war against former U.S. officials including ex-Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld and ex-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Yaacob said.

Also see earlier blog post:

| Witness legal history being made by the in absentia due trial of Bush + Blair for War Crimes: Nov 19-22! http://wp.me/p1xXtb-nb

Al Jazeera World: Gaza Lives On

The more israel wants to break and destroy Palestine and her People, the more determined the Palestinian People are to live and save their country, cultures and beliefs.

Uploaded by AlJazeeraEnglish on Nov 15, 2011

The Israeli blockade may have taken a heavy toll on Gazans, but this film reveals life and hope among the devastation.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

| Voices from East Jerusalem

New DCI report: Voices from East Jerusalem, The Situation facing Palestinian Children (2011)

[25 October 2011] – Today, DCI-Palestine released a new report: Voices from East Jerusalem, The Situation facing Palestinian Children. The report addresses the impact of Israel’s unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem, through administrative and legal measures aimed at limiting the population growth and development of the Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem, while actively encouraging the influx of Israeli settlers into the occupied territory.

Through the voices of 15 children and three mothers, the report sheds some light on the day to day hardships they face living under prolonged military occupation, focusing on three main issues:

House demolitions – This affects approximately 32 percent of all Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem that do not comply with Israeli zoning requirements, exposing at least 86,500 Palestinian residents to the risk of having their homes demolished.

Settler violence – Between January 2010 and the end of May 2011, the UN recorded 24 cases in which Palestinian children have been injured by settlers in East Jerusalem, and one fatality.

According to the UN, these figures are ‘comprehensive but not exhaustive.’ The figures also do not include cases of harassment or intimidation which did not result in physical injury.

Arrest and detention – Between November 2009 and October 2010, 1,267 criminal files were opened against Palestinian children living in East Jerusalem who were accused of throwing stones. In a sample of 20 cases, 80 percent of the children reported being subjected to physical violence during their arrest, transfer or subsequent questioning.

PDF Report: “Voices from East Jerusalem, The Situation facing Palestinian Children”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Truth about gaza (WAKE UP WORLD)!

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the worlds major sources of instability. Americans are directly connected to this conflict, and increasingly imperiled by its devastation.

It is the goal of If Americans Knew to provide full and accurate information on this critical issue, and on our power and duty to bring a resolution.

“I saw the images and they were disturbing. Images are of the Israeli assault against civilians in Gaza. I did not imagine things in Gaza are going as they are; therefore I forwarded it on to you so that you witness the crimes against humanity that the Israelis carry out.”

Vodpod videos no longer available.

URGENT! ADD YOUR VOICE to HELP the VOICELESS of SRI LANKA | WE, the PEOPLE, NEED 5,000 SIGNATURES BY 29 OCT. 2011

URGENT! WE MUST ACT NOW! PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE THIS PETITION created by AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL WIDELY!

WE, the PEOPLE, NEED 5,000 SIGNATURES BY

29 OCT. 2011, on

THIS PETITION

located on THE WHITE HOUSE, WASHINGTON DC website

BECAUSE…

WE, the PEOPLE, PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
SUPPORT AN INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION INTO WAR CRIMES AND OTHER HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES COMMITTED IN SRI LANKA!

Both the Sri Lankan government and the opposition Tamil Tigers reportedly COMMITTED WAR CRIMES, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES during the war in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan government has a poor record of effectively investigating violations by its forces, as documented by Amnesty International.

An international investigation into the crimes and abuses committed by both sides during the war is needed if the victims are to receive justice.

The U.S. government should publicly support such an international investigation as a first step toward achieving accountability in Sri Lanka for these crimes and abuses.

Created: Sep 29, 2011
Issues: Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement, Foreign Policy, Human Rights

Human Rights Laws are only as good as the Executors who enforce them

© HWB, September 27, 2011

In theory, human rights should be a simple concept, but the reality of human rights laws is a sphere of complexity. Adding to that particular realm representing humanity is the fact that not everything is simply black and white.

Though it should be exactly that simple.

Because as human beings our human rights are inalienable.

However, the truth is, this is just not so. As recent as the twentieth century right here in Virginia, the infamous Dr. Walter Ashby Plecker, a small-town doctor who was registrar of the state’s Bureau of Vital Statistics from 1912 to 1946, worked very hard to refute the existence of the indigenous peoples in Virginia. To accomplish this feat, Dr. Plecker made it his life’s priority to help pass the 1924 Racial Integrity Act, “An Act to Preserve Racial Integrity”.

Denouncing the existence of a people, not only by means of robbing them of their homeland and dumping them into Bantustans, but performing ethical genocide, as well as literal, of their identity, their history and traditions is nothing short of the worst of crimes against humanity and human rights.

In 2010, the ACLU posted about the atrocity taking place in Virginia concerning the plight of three women, who were brought here under false pretenses and forced to work against their will in the home of a military attaché to the Embassy of Kuwait, where they were subjected to physical and psychological abuse. Eventually, these women fled and filed suit against their abusers. It comes as no surprise that due to “diplomatic immunity”, their suit was dismissed.

It cannot be denied that if the “Land of Liberty and Justice”, the greatest nation in the world, does not uphold and implement human rights laws, the rest of the world will follow in those footsteps only too readily.

The struggle for human rights is a ruthless, as well as never-ending, world war for humankind, and no matter the United Nations’ “Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” of nations and individuals, or the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, agreements and laws written to insure the execution of human rights for all humans, these agreements and laws are only as good as those willing to enforce them.