Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

donderdag 7 februari 2008

Watch Out Wikipedia

'The problem with Wikipedia and bias

By Tim Anderson

The popular online encyclopaedia Wikipedia has come to play an important
role in informing and also shaping public debates. Yet as a Florida-based,
US creation, it brings its own baggage to those debates.

US corporate media sources (Time, CNN, Fox, and so on) are privileged as
reliable and "neutral" sources in Wiki entries, despite the fact that many
of these bodies are intimately involved in many of the most contentious
public debates, such as privatisation, intervention and war.

The online tool Wikipedia Scanner also demonstrates that Wiki is heavily
edited by powerful organisations, such as the CIA, the Vatican, US
government funded agencies, news corporations, banks and embassies.

Yet perhaps even more important is the role played by Wiki's 1,000
administrators, who have "special powers" to edit and summarily remove
content, determine what constitutes Wiki's stated policy of a "neutral point
of view", excluding other points of view, disputed fact and "biased"
sources.

Here is one example of the US worldview in Wikipedia when, as a voluntary
"editor", I tried to help explain Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's
accusation that former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar was a
"fascist".

The Wiki page in question was on the sideshow generated by the King of Spain's
frustrated demand at the November 2007 Ibero-American summit in Chile, that
Chavez "shutup". The page is called: Por qué no te callas? (Why don't you
shut up?).

The Wiki page begins by putting the incident in context of an implicit
critique of Venezuelan economic policies, using mainly Time magazine
sources:

Chávez repeatedly interrupted the speech of the Prime Minister of Spain José
Luis Rodríguez Zapatero to call [his] predecessor, José María Aznar, a
"fascist" . and accuse Aznar of having supported a failed coup d'état aimed
at removing Chávez from power. Zapatero had earlier irritated Chávez by
suggesting that Latin America needed to attract more foreign capital to
combat its chronic deepening poverty; Chávez's leftist policies shun outside
investment.

It goes on to repeat the Time magazine line ("Behind the King's Rebuke to
Chavez", November 12, 2007) that a dispute over "free markets" and poverty
policy may have been behind the "fascist" accusation against Aznar:

What may have motivated Chávez was that Zapatero - who is a socialist -
"insisted that Latin America needs to attract more foreign capital if it's
going to make a dent in its chronic, deepening poverty". Because Chávez
blames capitalism and insists that only socialism can address inequality in
Latin America, he went on the tirade against "Aznar and other free-market
'fascists'," resulting in Zapatero's reminding him that Aznar had been
democratically elected.'

De Commerciele Massamedia 112





Het niveau van de mediakritiek is erbarmelijk laag in Nederland. Hieronder een voorbeeld van de website 'de nieuwe reporter.' Waarom zouden Nederlandse journalisten niet serieus over hun vak kunnen nadenken en Britten en Amerikanen, Duitsers. Fransen en Italianen wel? Zou het toch door het veel geroemde poldermodel komen? Ik beodel, hoe is het in godsnaam mogelijk dat een absolute lichtgewicht als Larous hoofdredacteur van het NOS-Journaal werd?

'Hans Laroes en Gerard Dielessen over Hyves, Twitter en de oorlog met spindoctors

Kirsten Verdel

Hans Laroes (hoofdredacteur NOS Journaal) en Gerard Dielessen (directeur NOS) waren begin februari in New York om met verschillende omroepen, zoals bijvoorbeeld CNN, te praten over ontwikkelingen op multimediaal gebied. Beide heren bezochten tijdens hun tour door the Big Apple de PvdA-afdeling New York. Elke paar maanden organiseert de ongeveer 80 leden tellende afdeling een dinner & debate avond, waarbij gediscussieerd wordt met Nederlandse gasten. De Nieuwe Reporter was er bij.Dielessen legt uit waar de NOS vandaan komt: ‘Zo’n 4 Ă  5 jaar geleden was de NOS monomediaal. Nu zijn we multimediaal ingesteld. Naarmate een uitzending dichterbij komt, concentreren medewerkers zich meer op het medium waarvoor zij verantwoordelijk zijn. Een nieuwsbericht kan in eerste instantie in tekst worden gegoten en op de website gepubliceerd worden, maar daarna kunnen bezoekers doorklikken naar bijvoorbeeld achtergrondfilmpjes. We chatten nu ook na het Journaal met kijkers, die commentaar kunnen leveren op de uitzending, of vragen kunnen stellen. Dat is een wereld van verschil met hoe het ooit was. Journalistiek werk was toch een metier waarin de vakgroep bepaalde wat er aan nieuws werd voorgeschoteld. Journalistiek was datgene produceren waarvan journalisten dachten dat er behoefte aan was. Dat is nu anders, vaak veel interactiever. Maar we zijn er niet om het publiek te behagen. Journalisten selecteren.’
PeilingenHet is natuurlijk geen toeval dat Laroes en Dielessen juist deze week in de Verenigde Staten waren. Super Tuesday speelde ook mee in de overweging om de oceaan over te vliegen. Ook daar heeft de NOS interesse in, onder andere om te kijken hoe de media in de VS omgaan met peilingen. In Nederland wordt de kijker al jarenlang met wekelijkse peilingen van TNS-NIPO en Maurice de Hond bestookt. Het is maar de vraag of het journalistiek verantwoordelijk is om dat te doen. Dielessen: ‘Een peiling kan directe invloed uitoefenen op het gedrag van een politicus of een politieke partij. Het beĂŻnvloedt ook het gedrag van de kiezer. Het probleem is dat peilingen er vaak flink naast zitten. Dat hebben we in de voorverkiezingen in Amerika nu al een paar keer kunnen zien en bij de afgelopen Tweede Kamerverkiezingen in Nederland zaten alle peilingen er ook naast. Alleen de trend lijkt redelijk voorspeld te kunnen worden.’'

Lees verder: http://www.denieuwereporter.nl/?p=1490

De Commerciele Massamedia 111


'MEDIA LENS: Correcting for the distorted vision of the corporate media

February 7, 2008

MEDIA ALERT: ‘CREATIVE DESTRUCTION’ – THE MADNESS OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY - PART 2

Exchange With The Independent’s Hamish McRae

In Part One of this alert, we noted an observation made by Hamish McRae, economics columnist at the Independent:

“Bankers, like the rest of us, make mistakes, but the scale of the mistakes, particularly in US banks, has been enormous.” (McRae, ‘The markets are bad, but don’t panic just yet’, The Independent, January 23, 2008)

We asked him why he talked merely of “mistakes”, adding:

“Why are the terms of your analysis so narrow; so skewed towards the perspective of financial power?” (Email, January 23, 2008)

As an alternative, we suggested a few observations made in Part One; in particular, that the current economic system is both innately unstable and destructive. We asked McRae why he appears to reject such a rational analysis. On the same day, he wrote back confusingly:

“Thanks - I see your point. I suppose I feel I should deal with the world as it is, rather than as it might be. Is that narrow? Well, yes if you are seeking a discussion of the merits and demerits of the present global market economy, but no if you are trying to understand and calibrate what is actually happening. I think I am probably more use doing the latter.”

We responded:

“You say: ‘I feel I should deal with the world as it is.’ Perhaps it would be more accurate to rephrase this as: ‘I feel I should deal with the world as I see it.’”

His reply, sent as he was about to head for the World Economic Forum in Switzerland:

“Not sure - let me think about it. But in all earnestness I do think that you should not discount the huge progress made in India and China in lifting people out of poverty. I visited both in recent months and am in awe. I shall have to stop this interchange as I have to pack for Davos now.”

But just how accurate is McRae’s observation of the “huge progress made in India and China”, a mantra that appears regularly in the corporate media?


India And China: The Latest ‘Success Stories’ Of Capitalism

Cheerleaders for capitalism are keen to advertise the system’s ‘successes’. Earlier, model countries were said to include Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Thailand. But that was before the East Asian financial crisis of 1997-98. India and China are today’s poster states for capitalism.

Some progress in these countries is real. However, as we noted before, any social progress under ‘neoliberal reforms’ has not been sustained and, moreover, has been to the detriment of people losing out elsewhere in the global economy (not to mention the damage to global ecosystems).

Another important factor, glossed over in conventional reporting, is that massive state intervention and subsidies have been required to ameliorate the worst consequences of ‘shock therapy’ in following neoliberal doctrines of ‘market reforms.’ Political economist David Kotz notes that China’s strategy of opening up its economy since 1978 “bears almost no resemblance to the neoliberal approach followed by Russia.”

For example, government price controls were lifted only gradually in China. Also, the large-scale privatisation of state-owned enterprises, upon which many people depended, did not begin until 1996, 18 years into the transition. The state continued to direct and support large state enterprises, only gradually loosening its regulation as experience grew of operating in a market environment.

Public spending and public investment continued to grow, rather than shrink as in Russia. China did not privatise its banks, as Russia did, but retained a state-controlled financial system. And rather than rapidly eliminating barriers to trade and capital movements, China has retained significant controls over both. (Kotz, ‘The Role of the State in Economic Transformation: Comparing the Transition Experiences of Russia and China’, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, October 1, 2004; http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_51-100/WP95.pdf)'


De Commerciele Massamedia 110

Sonja maakte me attent op het volgende:

'Our media have become mass producers of distortion
An industry whose task should be to filter out falsehood has become a conduit for propaganda and second hand news

Nick Davies
Monday February 4, 2008
The Guardian

Here's a little example of what I call Flat Earth News. In June 2005, Fleet Street told its readers about a gang of feral child bullies who had attempted to murder a five-year-old boy by hanging him from a tree; the boy had managed to free himself. This story was not true. Indeed, it was obviously not true from the moment it started running. There was the commonsense problem that even a fully grown man with 10 years of SAS training who found himself hanging by the neck would have the greatest difficulty in reaching up and lifting his entire body weight with one hand while using the other to remove the noose. How would a five-year-old boy do it?
More than that, there was the evidence in the story itself. From the first day, the police refused to say the boy had been hanged. The parents and neighbours, who told the press how shocked they were, never claimed to know what had happened. The one and only line on which the whole story was built was a quote from the boy's adult cousin, who said he had told her: "Some boys and girls have tied a rope around my neck and tried to tie me to a tree." That's "tie me to a tree", not "hang me from a tree".
It was a nasty case of bullying but not an attempted murder. A 12-year-old girl had put a rope around the boy's neck and led him round like a dog, pulling on it hard enough to leave marks on his neck. That was clearly dangerous. But the boy never claimed she had hanged him from a tree. Indeed, he never even claimed that she had tied him to a tree, only that she had tried to. To double check, we spoke to Professor Christopher Milroy, the Home Office pathologist who handled the case. He said: "He had not been hanged. That was not correct and I couldn't understand why the press were insisting that he was."
Nevertheless, the tabloids ran all over it; and TV and the rest of Fleet Street joined in. The London Evening Standard called it a lynching; the Mail, Guardian and Times ran headlines which stated boldly that the boy had been hanged; the Independent ran a moody feature about fear descending on the boy's estate. Sundry columnists joined in with solemn comment about the youth of today and the impact of violence on television.
The ingredients in this little story run routinely through a stream of other small stories, through stories as big as those about the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and then into a flood of media commentary that feeds into government policy and popular understanding - falsehood as profound as the idea that the Earth is flat, widely accepted as true to the point where it can feel like heresy to challenge it.
There never was a time when news media were perfect. Journalists have always worked with too little time and too little certainty; with interference from owners and governments; with laws that intimidate and inhibit the search for truth. But the evidence I found in researching my new book, Flat Earth News, suggests our tendency to recycle ignorance is far worse than it was.
I commissioned research from specialists at Cardiff University, who surveyed more than 2,000 UK news stories from the four quality dailies (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent) and the Daily Mail. They found two striking things. First, when they tried to trace the origins of their "facts", they discovered that only 12% of the stories were wholly composed of material researched by reporters. With 8% of the stories, they just couldn't be sure. The remaining 80%, they found, were wholly, mainly or partially constructed from second-hand material, provided by news agencies and by the public relations industry. Second, when they looked for evidence that these "facts" had been thoroughly checked, they found this was happening in only 12% of the stories.'

Lees verder: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2251982,00.html

woensdag 6 februari 2008

De Israelische Terreur 315

Deze informatie die de Nederlandse media verzwijgen, stuurde mijn vriend Jeff Handmaker me vanochtend:

'Commissioner-General's statement on UNRWA and Palestine refugees in today's context

Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

The Hague,

The Netherlands


Thank you, Director Rade, for your kind words of introduction, andgood afternoon to you all.I very much appreciate this opportunity to speak to you and exchangeviews on one of the most testing international issues of our day. Themajority of the 4.4 million registered Palestine refugees, for whom myagency is responsible, are located in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, the WestBank and Gaza. Yet for many complex reasons, the Palestine refugeeissue transcends the geographic borders of the Near East, preoccupyingthe Foreign Ministries of the European Union and beyond, and consuminga considerable amount of diplomatic time and resources.The Palestinian question is quintessentially international in nature.It impinges on the principles, law and practice on which the post-1945construct of international relations was established. A shortlist ofthese would include: human rights and fundamental freedoms and theirrelationship to the regional and global security of States; theinternational rule of law and its dependence on a multilateral systemof global governance; the efficacy of international humanitarian lawin the context of a conflict of asymmetrical capabilities; the questto eliminate poverty and achieve human development and now theMillennium Development Goals; and the nexus between the peacefulresolution of disputes, self-determination and durable solutions tothe plight of refugees.When we consider these areas in relation to the Palestinian issue,there is no escaping the sense that something is not quite right. Onewould have expected that an international community that has hastenedthe end of colonialism, the demise of apartheid, the collapse ofcommunist States on the continent in Europe, the dissolution of theUSSR and the conclusion of the cold war might have made moresignificant progress in bringing the Palestinian issue to closure.I would suggest that a solution continues to elude us for reasonslying outside the humanitarian sphere, as that is the one dimension inwhich the international community has on balance been responsive andattentive to the needs of Palestinians and Palestine refugees. Theestablishment of UNRWA and the consistent support it has received fromhost countries and donor governments, not least among them theGovernment of the Netherlands, is evidence of this.At UNRWA, we have taken up the humanitarian and human developmentchallenge of our mandate in earnest, maintaining a range of essentialservices for Palestine refugees and constantly seeking to improve thequality of our work. Through UNRWA's primary and preparatory schools,the human right to =96 and Millennium Development Goal of - free primaryeducation became a reality for Palestine refugee children as far backas the 1950s. Today, nearly half a million of refugees =96 boys andgirls in equal number =96 are educated in UNRWA schools each year,benefiting from courses on human rights, tolerance and conflictresolution that are unique to UNRWA's curriculum. In all of UNRWA'sfive fields our vocational training centres offer youth theopportunity to acquire marketable skills.Again, consistent with the MDG's, UNRWA's primary health programme haseradicated communicable diseases and achieved a close to 100%childhood immunization record. The programme handles nine millionpatient visits annually and is a vital part of the support on whichthe refugee community relies. UNRWA's relief and social services haveensured that the most vulnerable refugees =96 the poor, the elderly andthose with disabilities - receive attention and care to help themcope. We also promote community-based programmes to enhance the skillsand prospects of women and youth.We build and maintain refugee homes and infrastructure, thus helpingto raise living standards and contribute to public and environmentalhealth in and around refugee camps. Through UNRWA's micro-financeprogramme, refugees in the business sector enjoy access to flexiblecredit, enabling them to weather difficult economic circumstances andto generate sustainable livelihoods. In addition to these programmeinterventions, the impact of UNRWA's work is evident in its responseto emergency situations that have arisen in Lebanon and the occupiedPalestinian territory. For refugees most affected by armed conflict,we offer emergency health and shelter programmes, cash and foodassistance to families living in special hardship, and temporary paidpositions for the unemployed.Our efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of ourservices to refugees are part of our drive for comprehensivemanagement reforms =96 which we refer to as our organizationaldevelopment process. We are linking our approach to programme planningand implementation to the human development paradigm. UNRWA emphasizesenhanced life choices and sustainable self reliance for refugees asstrategic goals, and recognizes that our methods for achieving themmust include partnerships with UN and other entities. We appreciatethe significant role that host countries and authorities currentlyplay and are committed to exploring new ways of working with them inthe best interests of Palestine refugees.All UNRWA programmes are constrained by uncertain finances. This year,we anticipate an income shortfall of about 90.5 million euros for ourGeneral Fund budget of approximately 372 million euros. Thesedeficits, which have been an unfortunate feature of UNRWA's financiallife for many years, hamper our ability to maintain essentialeducation and health services to the required standards. Our emergencyprogrammes have shared a similar fate, with a few welcome exceptions.In 2007, our 168 million euro emergency appeal for the occupiedPalestinian territory was in arrears of 72.8 million euros. LastSeptember, we launched a 12-month emergency appeal for 37.6 millioneuros to meet the needs of displaced refugees in northern Lebanon. Wehave received 24 million euros so far and very much hope that thebalance will be forthcoming.UNRWA's immediate focus in Lebanon is on ensuring decent housing andessential services for displaced refugees, planning for their orderlyreturn.The rebuilding of Nahr El Bared promises to be a huge task for UNRWAand the government of Lebanon, an undertaking for which a few hundredmillion dollars will almost certainly be required. A master plan forthe reconstruction effort is being finalized and will be the basis ofa fundraising effort. Beyond Nahr El Bared, UNRWA will continue toimplement existing plans to improve living conditions in the elevenother refugee camps across the country. In this we are conscious thatcamp improvement will not only raise the quality of refugee lives, butwill also contribute to the stability of the community.UNRWA is not alone in ensuring that the relief, humanitarian and humandevelopment needs of Palestinians and Palestine refugees in the NearEast are well served. A variety of UN, non-governmental agencies anddonor entities carry out important work to support governments andauthorities. The Temporary International Mechanism is an example of adonor arrangement which alleviates the effects of sanctions on manythousands of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.I have offered this short sketch of UNRWA's work to show how mucheffort and investment is being made, by and on behalf of theinternational community, to service the humanitarian needs ofPalestinians and Palestine refugees. The results are far from perfect,refugees' living conditions are far from ideal, and too many thousandsof refugees across our five fields still struggle with poverty andlimited life choices. And yet, in spite of the shortcomings, very fewPalestinians doubt the sincerity of humanitarian and human developmentefforts, or question the intentions of agencies leading these effortson behalf of the international community.What about the international community's policies and approach onmatters within the domain of political and diplomatic action? How isthe performance of the international community in these areas judgedby Palestine refugees who mark, this year, the sad anniversary ofsixty years of exile? Integrity and consistency of effort andeven-handedThe fact that no solution to their plight appears readily in prospect,six decades after they were compelled to flee their homes, is ameasure of the frustration refugees feel. The desire for a just andlasting solution has not faded with the passage of time. On thecontrary, that desire intensifies. It is passed on from generation togeneration along with a great deal of incomprehension as to why thisparticular conflict seems beyond the collective will of theinternational community themselves to resolve.The absence of a State of Palestine from the community of nationsmeans the indefinite deferral of the Palestinian right to self-determination.'

De Israelische Terreur 314



In het voorbijgaan zag ik vanochtend, ik geloof in de Volkskrant, een voorpagina-artikel over Hamas die weer met terreur zou zijn begonnen. Dat is nieuws. Het gekke is dat de terreur van Israel nooit gestopt is, maar kennelijk geen nieuws is. Misschien omdat de Volkskrant-correspondent in Israel, Alex Burghoorn, voor het CIDI optreedt, een volgens Haaretz "pro-Zionistische lobbygroep", waarvan een bestuurslid meewerkt aan de bouw van de, volgens het Internationaal Gerechtshof, illegale muur op bezet gebied. Hoeveel Burghoorn daar al dan niet mee verdient weet ik niet, maar uit zijn berichtgeving blijkt in elk geval wel hoe weinig onafhankelijk hij is. Daarom maar weer eens echte informatie over de Israelische terreur uit een serieus tijdschrift, The Nation. Informatie die de Nederlands commerciele massamedia doorgaans verzwijgen:

' "Gaza is on the threshold of becoming the first territory to be
intentionally reduced to a state of abject destitution, with the
knowledge, acquiescence and--some would say--encouragement of the
international community,"
the commissioner-general of UNRWA warned
recently.

The Strangulation of Gaza
by SAREE MAKDISI

[posted online on February 1, 2008]

The people of Gaza were able to enjoy a few days of freedom last
week, after demolition charges brought down the iron wall separating
the impoverished Palestinian territory from Egypt, allowing hundreds
of thousands to burst out of the virtual prison into which Gaza has
been transformed over the past few years--the terminal stage of four
decades of Israeli occupation--and to shop for desperately needed
supplies in Egyptian border towns.

Gaza's doors are slowly closing again, however. Under mounting
pressure from the United States and Israel, Egypt has dispatched
additional border guards armed with water cannons and electric cattle
prods to try to regain control. It has already cut off the flow of
supplies crossing the Suez Canal to its own border towns. For now, in
effect, Suez is the new border: even if Palestinians could get out of
Gaza in search of new supplies, they would have to cross the desolate
expanses of the Sinai Desert and cross the canal, on the other side
of which they would find the regular Egyptian army (barred from most
of Sinai as a condition of the 1979 Camp David treaty with Israel)
waiting for them.

Now that Gaza's fleeting taste of freedom is beginning to fade, the
grim reality facing the territory's 1.5 million people is once again
looming large. "After feeling imprisoned for so long, it has been a
psychological relief for Gazans to know that there is a way out,"
said John Ging, the local director of the United Nations Relief and
Works Agency (UNRWA). "But it does not resolve their crisis by any
stretch of the imagination."

Indeed, all the frenzied shopping in Egyptian border towns brought
into Gaza a mere fraction of the food that UN and other relief
agencies have been blocked by Israel from delivering to the people
who depend on them for their very survival. As long as the border
with Egypt is even partially open, Israel refuses to open its own
borders with Gaza to anything other than the bare minimum of
industrial fuel to keep the territory's one power plant operating at
a subsistence level, and a few trucks of other supplies a day.

UNRWA has almost depleted the stocks of emergency food aid it had
previously built up in Gaza. Only thirty-two truckloads of goods have
been allowed to enter Gaza since Israel imposed its total closure on
January 18; 250 trucks were entering every day before last June, and
even that was insufficient to meet the population's needs.

On January 30 UNRWA warned that unless something changes, the daily
ration that it will distribute on the 31st to 860,000 destitute
refugees in Gaza will lack a protein component: the canned meat that
is the only source of protein in the food parcels--which even under
the best of circumstances contributes less than two-thirds of minimum
daily nourishment--is being held up by Israel, and the stock of those
cans inside Gaza has been exhausted. The World Food Program, which
feeds another 340,000 people in Gaza, has brought in nine trucks of
food aid in the past two weeks; in the seven months before that, it
had been bringing in fifteen trucks a day.

Gazans have been ground into poverty by years of methodical Israeli
restrictions and closures; 80 percent of the population now depends
on food aid for day-to-day subsistence. With the aid, they were
receiving "enough to survive, not to live," as the International Red
Cross put it. Without it, they will die.

All this is supposed to be in response to Palestinian militant
groups' firing of crude homemade rockets into Israel, which rarely
cause any actual damage. There can be no excuse for firing rockets at
civilian targets, but Israel was squeezing Gaza long before the first
of those primitive projectiles was cobbled together. The first fatal
rocket attack took place four years ago; Israel has been occupying
Gaza for four decades.

The current squeeze on Gaza began in 1991. It was tightened with the
institutionalization of the Israeli occupation enabled by the Oslo
Accords of 1993. It was tightened further with the intensification of
the occupation in response to the second intifada in 2000. It was
tightened further still when Israel redeployed its settlers and
troops from inside Gaza in 2005 and transformed the territory into
what John Dugard, the UN's special rapporteur on human rights in the
occupied territories, referred to as a prison, the key to which,
Dugard said, Israel had "thrown away." It was tightened to the point
of strangulation following the Hamas electoral victory in 2006, when
Israel began restricting supplies of food and other resources into
Gaza. It was tightened beyond the point of strangulation following
the deposition of the Hamas-led government in June 2007. And now this.

When Israel limited commercial shipments of food--but not
humanitarian relief--into Gaza in 2006, a senior government adviser,
Dov Weisglass, explained that "the idea is to put the Palestinians on
a diet but not to make them die of hunger."

Israel's "diet" was taking its toll even before last week. The World
Food Program warned last November that less than half of Gaza's food-
import needs were being met. Basics including wheat grain, vegetable
oil, dairy products and baby milk were in short supply. Few families
can afford meat. Anemia rates rocketed to almost 80 percent. UNRWA
noted at about the same time that "we are seeing evidence of the
stunting of children, their growth is slowing, because our ration is
only 61 percent of what people should have and that has to be
supplemented."

By further restricting the supply of food to an already malnourished
population, Israel has clearly decided to take its "diet" a step
further. If the people of Gaza remain cut off from the food aid on
which their survival now depends, they will face starvation.

They are now essentially out of food; the water system is faltering
(almost half the population now lacks access to safe water supplies);
the sewage system has broken down and is discharging raw waste into
streets and the sea; the power supply is intermittent at best;
hospitals lack heat and spare parts for diagnostic machines,
ventilators, incubators; dozens of lifesaving medicines are no longer
available. Slowly but surely, Gaza is dying.

Patients are dying unnecessarily: cancer patients cut off from
chemotherapy regimens, kidney patients cut off from dialysis
treatments, premature babies cut off from blood-clotting medications.
In the past few weeks, many more Palestinian parents have watched the
lives of their sick children ebb slowly, quietly and (as far as the
global media are concerned) invisibly away in Gaza's besieged
hospitals than Israelis have been hurt--let alone actually killed--by
the erratic firing of primitive homemade rockets from Gaza, about
which we have heard so much. (According to the Israeli human rights
organization B'Tselem, these rockets have killed thirteen Israelis in
the past four years, while Israeli forces have killed more than 1,000
Palestinians in the occupied territories in the past two years alone,
almost half of them civilians, including some 200 children.)

Israel's squeeze is expressly intended to punish the entire
population for the firing of those rockets by militants, which
ordinary civilians are powerless to stop. "We will not allow them to
lead a pleasant life," said Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert when
Israel cut off fuel supplies on January 18, thereby plunging Gaza
into darkness. "As far as I am concerned, all of Gaza's residents can
walk and have no fuel for their cars."

Olmert's views and, more important, his policies were reaffirmed and
given the legal sanction of Israel's High Court. In what human rights
organizations referred to as a "devastating" decision, on January 30
the court ruled in favor of the government's plan to further restrict
supplies of fuel and electricity to Gaza. "The decision means that
Israel may deliberately deprive civilians in Gaza of fuel and
electricity supplies," pointed out Sari Bashi, of the Gisha human
rights organization in Israel. "During wartime, the civilian
population is the first and central victim of the fighting, even when
efforts are made to minimize the damage," the court said. In other
words, harm to the civilian population is an inevitable effect of war
and therefore legally permissible.

That may be the view of Israel's highest legal authority, but it is
not how the matter is viewed by international law, which strictly
regulates the way civilian populations are to be treated in time of
war. "The parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between
the civilian population and combatants in order to spare the civilian
population and civilian property," the International Red Cross points
out, invoking the Geneva Conventions and other founding documents of
international humanitarian law. "Neither the civilian population as a
whole nor individual civilians may be attacked."

Moreover, no matter what Israel's High Court says, what is happening
in Gaza is not a war in the conventional sense: Gaza is not a state
at war with the state of Israel. It is a territory militarily
occupied by Israel. Even after its 2005 redeployment, Israel did not
release its hold on Gaza; it continues to control all access to the
territory, as well as its airspace, territorial waters and even its
population registry. Over and above all the routine prohibitions on
attacks on the civilian population and other forms of collective
punishment that hold true in case of war, in other words,
international law also holds Israel responsible for the welfare of
the Gaza population. Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention
(1949) specifically demands, for example, that, "to the fullest
extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty
of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it
should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical
stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory
are inadequate."

Israel's methodical actions make it clear that it is systematically
grinding down and now actually starving people for whose welfare it
is legally accountable simply because it regards Gaza's 1.5 million
men, women and children as a surplus population it would, quite
simply, like to get rid of one way or the other: a sentiment made
quite clear when Israel's chief Ashkenazi rabbi proposed, shortly
after the current crisis began, that the entire Palestinian
population of Gaza should just be removed and transferred to the
Egyptian desert. "They will have a nice country, and we shall have
our country and we shall live in peace," he said, without eliciting
even a murmur of protest in Israel.

The overwhelming majority of Gazans are refugees or the descendants
of refugees who were expelled from their homes when Palestine was
destroyed and Israel was created in 1948. Like all Palestinian
refugees, those of Gaza have a moral and legal right to return to the
homeland from which they were expelled. Israel blocks their return
for the same reason it expelled them in the first place, because
their presence would undermine its already tenuous claim to
Jewishness (this is the nature of the so-called "demographic problem"
about which Israeli politicians openly complain). As long as the
refugees live, what Israel regards as the mortal threat of their
right of return lives on. But if they would somehow just go away...

"Gaza is on the threshold of becoming the first territory to be
intentionally reduced to a state of abject destitution, with the
knowledge, acquiescence and--some would say--encouragement of the
international community," the commissioner-general of UNRWA warned
recently.

The question now is whether the world will simply sit and watch, now
that this unprecedented threshold is actually being crossed.

Having taken matters into their hands and destroyed the wall cutting
them off from the outside world, it is most unlikely that the people
of Gaza will simply submit to that fate. A hermetic closure
ultimately depends not merely on Israel's whims but on Egypt's
willingness--or ability--to cut off the Palestinians of Gaza and
watch them starve. For all the US and Israeli pressure on Egypt, and
for all the steps Egypt is now taking, it seems most unlikely that it
would let things go that far. Not intervening to save fellow Arabs
from the Israeli occupation is one thing; actually participating in
their repression is quite another. The Egyptian government would have
to answer not only to the people of Palestine but to its own people,
and indeed to all Arabs.

Working together, Hamas and the people of Gaza have forced Egypt's
hand and made much more visible than ever before the role it had been
playing all along in the Israeli occupation and strangulation of
Gaza; now that its role in assisting Israel has been revealed, it
will be difficult for Egypt to go back to the status quo. Gazans have
thrown Israel's plans into disarray, because Israel's leaders could
do little more than watch with pursed lips as the people of Gaza
burst out of their prison. And they have placed Palestinian Authority
President Mahmoud Abbas and the government of Ramallah in a corner:
they will have to choose between defending their people's rights and
needs or confirming once and for all--as indeed they are doing--that
the PA is there to serve Israel's interests, not those of the
Palestinians. In which case they too will one day be called to account.'

- Saree Makdisi, professor of English and comparative literature at
UCLA, is the author of Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation
(Norton).

Lees verder: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080218/makdisi

En de Nederlandse politiek en het Nederlandse volk zwijgen even hard als toen Nederlandse joden door nazi's werden vernietigd. We hebben het te druk met onszelf en bovendien hebben we nooit echt geloofd in mensenrechten en internationaal recht. Alleen als het uitkomt en het ons geen geld kost. Dus mag deze vernietiging van de Palestijnse burgerbevolking en etnische zuivering doorgaan. Dankzij mijn collega's, hun broodheren en de politici, die hun mond altijd weer vol hebben over de persvrijheid.

maandag 4 februari 2008

The Empire 352

De hoofdaap heeft gesproken, de parlementaire pers en de correspondenten hebben als lakeien gefungeerd en nu het echte verhaal.

'The State of Whose Union?
by Nomi Prins

Earlier this week, speaking for Washingtonia and unburdened by high expectations, President Bush said “all of us were sent to Washington to carry out the people’s business.”
The question remains - exactly which people? And what business, Mr. Bush?
Because if it’s the majority of the population, and it’s life not war, we’re not even close to having it carried out.
He acknowledged, “at kitchen tables across our country, there is a concern about our economic future.”
The question remains - our? Who do you mean by ‘our‘, Mr. Bush?
Because for three-quarters of the population’s kitchen table concerns are over gas costs, health insurance, debt payments, tuition, and home values. For nearly 24% of the population, depending on what race you are, the issue of paying for one’s next meal and balancing child-care with multiple jobs is center stage.
It turns out that it doesn’t matter. And that it’s easy to engage in bi-partisan synchronized applause, commending the commander-in-chief for well enunciated, yet totally bankrupt, words of empathetic understanding about ‘our’ collective economic plight. Less than 24 hours later, it was equally easy, apparently, for the House of Representatives to overwhemingly approve (385-35) a stimulus package designed to invigorate corporate quarterly earnings (through corporate tax cuts or promotion of public consumption, whichever does the trick), and avoid what the president characterized as the ‘temptation’ to ‘load up the bill’ with sundry items like food-stamps or unemployment insurance expansion - in other words, items that might have a long-lasting helpful impact on people who need it most.
Flanked by Vice President Cheney, who is certain to nab a lush CEO spot by this time next year, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who regretfully capitulated on those sundry items, President Bush unleashed his true legacy wish: to render those oh-so-helpful-to-the-economy tax cuts about to expire, permanent. Otherwise, he warned his fellow politicos under the glare of those camera lights, you’ll have some “explaining to do to the 116 million American taxpayers whose taxes would rise by an average of $1800.”
It’s chilling to witness such an underestimation of American taxpayers - as if their only expense in life is taxes. Here’s an idea - to avoid all that uncomfortable explaining, how about raising taxes on the people and companies that can afford it, like, say Exxon, whose profit more than quadrupled in the past seven years, as the average price of a gallon of gas doubled? Mr. Bush, why not use some of that excess for those alternative energy programs?
To catch a free falling dollar, reduce a one-sided trade relationship with the outside world (with whom America’s trade deficit has doubled during the Bush presidency), and curtail growth in deficit spending to $354 billion in 2007 (from a 236 billion surplus in 2000), Bush talked about cutting 151 government programs, for a grand savings of $18 billion. This, he said, would enable the government to balance its budget - the way he thinks Americans should as well. This president began his first term in office with a $5.2 trillion national public debt, and despite promises in his first State of the Union address to cut it in half, that debt, due to substantive war addendums and reckless tax cuts for the wealthy and private equity funds, now stands nearly doubled, at $9 trillion. So it’s not clear how that $18 billion is going to effect a dramatic about-face in the national books.'

Lees verder: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/02/6796/

Truthout Sunday 20/11/2026

  SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2026 Walking September 11’s Other Crime Scenes Millions had fled along the highway I had taken. Behind them Iraq was...