Amerikaanse Oorlogsmisdaden 23

De onafhankelijke Amerikaanse journalist Dahr Jamail schrijft: 'Another US Cover-Up Surfaces.

Baghdad - In the wake of the Haditha massacre, reports of another atrocity have surfaced in which U.S. troops killed two women in Samarra, and then attempted to hide evidence of their responsibility.
Among the innumerable such cases people speak of, this one too has now come to light.
According to an earlier account, Nabiha Nisaif Jassim, a 35-year-old mother of two, was killed in firing along with her 57-year-old cousin Saliha Mohammed Hassan on May 30 when they were being transported to Samarra General Hospital for Nabiha to give birth.
What was not reported, according to an Iraqi human rights investigator who spoke with IPS on condition of anonymity, was that both women were shot in the back of the head by U.S. snipers.
"I investigated this incident myself, and both of these women were shot from behind," said the investigator. "Nabiha's brains were splattered on her brother who was driving the car, since she was in the back seat."
The U.S. military said soldiers fired on the car after it entered a "clearly marked prohibited area near an observation post" after failing to stop despite "repeated visual and auditory warnings." The U.S. military said in a statement that "shots were fired to disable the vehicle."
The brother of the pregnant woman, Redam Nisaif Jassim, who was driving the car, told IPS that he neither saw nor heard any warnings by the U.S. military. Two men who witnessed the incident from a nearby home also said they saw no signs of any warning.
"These kinds of killings by the Americans happen daily in Iraq," said Jassim, "They gave no warning to us before killing my cousin and sister. Of course we know they have no respect for the lives of Iraqis."
The U.S. military claims the incident is being investigated.' Lees verder:
http://www.dahrjamailiraq.com/hard_news/archives/hard_news/000403.php#more Of:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061306Z.shtml

De Bush Bende 14

Op de bovenste foto ziet u Elizabeth Cheney, de dochter van Dick Cheney, die beiden hetzelfde gewelddadig beleid voorstaan. Op de onderste foto ziet u het resultaat van hun ideologische opvattingen. De onafhankelijke Amerikaanse onderzoeksjournalist Robert Dreyfuss schrijft: 'Since 2005, Dick Cheney's daughter Elizabeth has held a powerful position guiding Middle East policy. And like father, like daughter: Liz is a key player in the push for regime change in Iran and Syria. At the very heart of U.S. Middle East policy, from the war in Iraq to pressure for regime change in Iran and Syria to the spread of free-market democracy in the region, sits the 39-year-old daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney. Elizabeth "Liz" Cheney, appointed to her post in February 2005, has a tongue-twisting title: principal deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs and coordinator for broader Middle East and North Africa initiatives. By all accounts, it is an enormously powerful post, and one for which she is uniquely unqualified.
During the past 15 months, Elizabeth Cheney has met with and bolstered a gaggle of Syrian exiles, often in tandem with John Hannah and David Wurmser, top officials in the Office of the Vice President (OVP); has pressed hard for money to accelerate the administration's ever more overt campaign for forced regime change in both Damascus and Teheran; and has overseen an increasingly discredited push for American-inspired democratic reform from Morocco to Iran.
With the unspoken support of her father, Cheney has kept a hawk's eye on Iraq policy within the department, intimidating opponents of the neoconservative axis within the administration. And, less visibly, according to former officials who've worked with her, she has made her influence felt in choosing officials, selecting (or blocking) the appointment of ambassadors and other foreign service officers, and weighing in on other bureaucratic battles at the department.
Now, according to the Financial Times of London, Cheney is coordinating the work of a new entity called the Iran-Syria Operations Group. The unit was established "to plot a more aggressive democracy promotion strategy for those two 'rogue' states," reported the Times. In February, the State Department announced that Cheney would oversee a $5 million program to "accelerate the work of reformers in Syria," providing grants of up to $1 million each to Syrian dissidents.' Lees verder: http://www.alternet.org/story/37490/

Het Nederlandse Staatshoofd

Welke banden heeft het Nederlandse staatshoofd, koningin Beatrix, met de van oorlogsmisdaden beschuldigde Henry Kissinger, adviseur van multinationals? In een email van Danny Schechter trof ik dit bericht aan: 'THE B-WORD: SHADOWY GROUP MEETS IN CANADA.

AFP: ”The world's political elite, top thinkers and powerful business folk gathered here for an annual, ultra-secretive Bilderberg conference as heavy security kept conspiracy theorists and curious onlookers at bay.
Global luminaries such as former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, US banker David Rockefeller and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands were greeted at the airport by limousine drivers holding single-letter "B" signs late Thursday, said local reports.
"They were quickly whisked away to the Brook street Hotel in a serene suburb of Ottawa for three-day talks on oil markets, security concerns tied to Iran's nuclear ambitions, terrorism, and immigration, the Ottawa Citizen reported.
"Conspiracy theorists who follow the group accuse it of plotting world domination at its informal annual gatherings.' Heeft u iets ervan vernomen via de Nederlandse commerciele media? Speciaal uitgekozen 'betrouwbare' journalisten, die de 'partijlijn' volgen, worden uitgenodigd op voorwaarde dat ze er niet over zullen berichten. Maar toch, die andere journalisten kunnen toch wel berichten dat ze weer bij elkaar zaten. Of moet ook dat geheim blijven. Of beschouwt men het als normaal dat in een democratisch bestel een kleine selecte elite van invloedrijke en schatrijke mensen bij elkaar komt om over de toekomst van de Westerse democratie te praten?

De Israelische Terreur 29

De Israelische journalist Danny Rubinstein schrijft in Haaretz: 'We came, we shelled, we killed

The bloodshed on the Gaza beachfront late last week was not the result of a tragic error. It was clear to everyone that in the exchanges of fire in the narrow Gaza Strip, where the population density is among the highest in the world, it was just a matter of time before an entire family was hit. The Palestinian response was also known in advance. More and more attacks - and the number of Israeli victims that can be expected in the near future - will only be determined by luck, for better or worse. It is a known fact that there is no military solution to the overall Palestinian-Israeli conflict. But now it is becoming increasingly clear that there is no military solution for putting an end to the Qassam rocket attacks. The Israel Defense Forces has struck at the rocket-launching crews and their commanders; it has destroyed the bridges and the roads leading to the launching areas; it has carried out what it calls "exposure" activities and has destroyed farmland; it has bombed the launching sites, over and over. The army has dispersed fliers warning the population and threatening to destroy entire neighborhoods and towns. And let us also remember the IDF's "war on the lathes" that targeted the metalworking shops in Gaza. Dozens of Palestinian lathes were bombed and destroyed due to the suspicion that they were being used to manufacture rockets. None of this helped. On the contrary: There are many more rockets and missiles in Gaza today than in the past. The know-how, the means and the capabilities to launch them against targets in Israel have only improved and become more sophisticated. And there is no doubt that the continued deterioration of the security situation will only sharpen Palestinian martial skills and broaden their activity in this area. We can even assume that sooner or later, in the absence of a diplomatic option, the motivation, the means and the know-how for launching missiles will also reach the West Bank.' Lees verder:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/725832.html

De Israelische Terreur 28

De Birmingham News bericht: 'Divestment a stand for equality in Israel

HILTON OBENZINGER
As an American Jew who has spoken out against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza for many years, I have been regularly smeared as a "self-hating Jew" and worse.
It little matters that the "radical" ideas I advocated 25 years ago are now common policy: that Israel withdraw from the territories it occupied in 1967, that a viable Palestinian state be established, and that security be assured for all. On Thursday in Birmingham, the Presbyterian Church will decide if it will take a stand on the conflict, and it must prepare itself for attacks. It is indeed fitting for this discussion to take place in Birmingham, a city where decades ago, church leaders risked much to take a stand for equal rights.
In its 217th General Assembly Conference, Presbyterian Church leaders will deliberate on whether to call for some form of selective divestment from Israel in response to Israel's continuing occupation of Palestinian land and ongoing human rights abuses. This is an urgent question for all Americans. We are indirectly implicated in these abuses, whether we are aware of it or not.
This year, $2.5 billion in aid will be sent to Israel, the most to any country, and the bulk of it goes to the Israeli military. In addition, American businesses continue to invest in Israel, particularly in military weapons systems.
If you wonder why so many people in the Middle East hate American foreign policy, just look at the "special relationship" between Israel and the U.S. government and American business. People in the Middle East know that Israel's human rights abuses - including land seizures, home demolition and segregation of non-Jews in the occupied territories - would not be possible without unconditional support from the United States.
In 2004, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church passed a resolution to investigate selective divestment of holdings in multinational corporations doing business in Israel. Divestment - in which churches and other institutions withdraw investments from companies that profit from human rights abuses - has worked in the past, especially during the movement against South African apartheid. Such nonviolent, material action can work now.
But the Presbyterian Church is facing pressure to pass resolutions that would overturn its previous commitment to divestment. If it does support divestment, the church will be attacked. Organizations that support Israeli policies will say the church is one-sided, aiding extremists and anti-Semitic.
Moral vision demands courage in the face of pressure, and Presbyterians will have to steel themselves. They will doubt themselves, and they will search their hearts. Many will succumb to the pressure. Wisdom and courage are not easy under those conditions.
But if Presbyterians - and all Americans - regard the conflict with honest eyes, they will see the moral imperative clearly, and they will see the parallels to other injustices they have confronted before. Calling Israeli expansion "settlements" seems benign, for example, but if we understand them to be in reality "segregated housing projects," they suggest dynamics we understand and have rejected. Israel's separation wall, maze of arbitrary checkpoints, assassinations and other abuses condemned by international law are uncomfortably similar to other relics of past injustices, like South Africa under apartheid.
Presbyterians will be told to focus their attention on other bloody conflicts, such as in Darfur. They should indeed speak out against all injustices - but not to the exclusion of the one conflict in which American taxpayers, businesses and churches have been so deeply implicated.
They will be accused of condoning Palestinian outrages, and they will need the wisdom to know that condemning Israeli policies is not turning a blind eye to terrorist violence. They will also need the courage to stick to their love of justice and peace and take a stand.
All Americans seeking an end to violence in the Middle East should pray the Presbyterian Church will find that courage.

Hilton Obenzinger is a writer who teaches advanced writing and American literature at Stanford University. E-mail him at mailto:obenzinger@stanford.edu.

De Volkskrant 4

De journaliste Amira Hass van de Israëlische kwaliteitskrant Ha'aretz, die in tegenstelling tot de Nederlandse correspondenten op de Westoever woont, interviewde Israelische militaire sluipschutters die in bezet gebied kinderen doodschoten. Een van hen vertelde haar: 'Wanneer de officieren te velde de scherpschutters opdracht geven te vuren, dan is de intentie om het hoofd te raken, want als hij schiet, doet hij dat om te doden… Meestal doodt het… Twaalf jaar en ouder mogen we neerschieten,' aldus de Israëlische militair. Hij gaf overigens toe dat het moeilijk is om leeftijden te schatten. 'De richtlijnen… veranderen elke dag, soms zelfs meermalen per dag. Wanneer er aan Israëlische zijde doden vallen, mogen wij meer schieten.' Over het aantal Palestijnse doden zei hij: 'Zes per dag is normaal, het kunnen er ook veel meer zijn.' Het alleen verwonden van kinderen wordt doorgaans als ondoeltreffend beschouwd, want 'verwondingen hitsen de gemoederen veel meer op.' Zie ook: http://home.planet.nl/~houck006/israel.html

Sinds het begin van de Tweede Palestijnse volksopstand, 28 september 2000 zijn volgens de mensenrechtenorganisatie Defence for Children International 746 Palestijnse kinderen door het Israelische leger en joodse kolonisten vermoord. Op dit moment zitten 388 kinderen in Israelische gevangenissen, sommigen van hen worden gemarteld. Zie: http://www.dci-pal.org/english/home.cfm

Ik meld dit omdat de commerciele media maar te vaak vanuit onuitgesproken aannames berichten, zoals dat Israel een fatsoenlijk leger heeft en de joodse natie een democratische rechtstaat is, die geen Palestijnse burgers vermoordt. Die meestal verborgen veronderstelling blijkt ook weer uit een 'analyse' van de Volkskrant correspondent in Israel, Alex Burghoorn, die schrijft: 'De 11-jarige Huda Ghaliya heeft haar vader en vijf broers en zussen verloren bij de explosie op het strand van de Gazastrook, vermoedelijk veroorzaakt door een afgezwaaide granaat.' De cursivering is van mij. Hoezo vermoedelijk? Waarop berust deze veronderstelling? Het kan ook zijn dat - zoals in het verleden meermaals gebeurd is - de Israelische regering een gewelddadige reactie van de Palestijnen probeert uit te lokken. Leest u het werk van de Israelische 'nieuwe historici' er maar op na. Het kan ook zijn dat er in de buurt waar het projectiel ontplofte iemand was voor wie deze moordaanslag was bedoeld, net zoals de Israelis een flatgebouw bombardeerden met talloze burger doden als gevolg, louter en alleen omdat er een Hamas functionaris in zat. Het kan van alles zijn. We weten het niet. Maar wat ik uit directe ervaring wel weet is dat veel journalisten elkaar napraten. Over die 'afgezwaaide granaat' van Alex had ik al gisteren gelezen in de New York Times, en de Herald Tribune en de grote persbureau's. Dus schrijft de correspondent dat klakkeloos na, want de journalistiek gaat uit van talloze veronderstellingen die bij nader onderzoek op niets zijn gebaseerd.

Het is een paar uur geleden dat ik dit schreef. Het is nu 17.33 uur en ik las net bij de BBC:
'Beach deaths "not Israel's fault"
Palestinian PM Ismail Haniya visited the wounded in hospital
An Israeli military inquiry into the deaths of eight Palestinians on a Gaza beach is close to deciding Israel was not responsible, media reports say.
The explosion was initially blamed on Israeli shelling near the area where a family was enjoying a picnic.
The internal probe is based on TV film of the aftermath and shrapnel taken from injured being treated in Israel.
Correspondents say the findings will not be conclusive and are likely to be dismissed by the Palestinians.
Friday's civilian deaths, including three young children, sparked worldwide condemnation of Israel, which was accused of using gunboats stationed off the Gaza coastline to shell the beach.
The militant group Hamas, which heads the Palestinian government, ended an informal ceasefire and fired dozens of home-made rockets at Israel, causing panic and several injuries. ' Lees verder: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5074792.stm

Hoe kan nu de Israelische 'afgezwaaide granaat' van Alex Burghoorn ineens zijn veranderd in een Palestijnse mijn? Waar kreeg Alex en zijn Amerikaanse collega's de informatie over een afgezwaaide granaat vandaan? Op wat berustte zijn vermoeden? Wie heeft hem wat ingefluisterd?

Duidelijk is in elk geval dat de beelden van de vermoorde familie de wereld zijn rondgegaan en niet gunstig waren voor de Israelische propaganda. Zie: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13593.htm

Gruwelijke beelden, dus ligt het voor de hand dat het Israelische leger de Palestijnen nu maar al te graag de schuld geven voor het vermoorden van hun eigen mensen. En met journalisten als Alex kom je daar ook nog mee weg. Die lepelt klakkeloos de Israelische legerberichten op, net als vele van mijn collega's die in Israel zijn gestationeerd.

Martelen 50

De New York Times: 'Deaths at Guantánamo.

The news that three inmates at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, hanged themselves should not have surprised anyone who has paid attention to the twisted history of the camp that President George W. Bush built for selected prisoners from Afghanistan and antiterrorist operations. It was the inevitable result of creating a netherworld of despair beyond the laws of civilized nations, where men were to be held without any hope of decent treatment, impartial justice or, in so many cases, even eventual release.

It is a place where secret tribunals sat in judgment of men whose identities they barely knew and who were not permitted to see the evidence against them. Inmates were abused, humiliated, tormented and sometimes tortured. Some surely are very dangerous men, committed to a life of terrorism and deserving of harsh justice. But only 10 of the roughly 465 men at the camp have been charged with crimes. The others, according to senior officers who served there, were foot soldiers of the Taliban or men who just happened to live in a country invaded by the United States after the 9/11 attacks.

Inmates at Guantánamo Bay have tried seeking help from the American courts, and one case has reached the Supreme Court. But most of these appeals were thwarted by claims of national security. Any new appeals will fall under a shocking new law that deprives the inmates of the centuries- old right to challenge their imprisonment. Government lawyers have even tried to use that law retroactively, to dismiss all pending appeals.

Guantánamo and other American detention centers have sparked outrage around the world, deeply harming America's image as the defender of humanity against just these sorts of abuses. Last month a UN panel called for the prisons to be shut down. The administration's response to all of this has been defiance.

When dozens of inmates went on hunger strikes last year, the authorities strapped them into metal "restraint chairs" and ordered doctors to force-feed them. Military officials said they did this only to inmates on the brink of death, but The New York Times has reported that the restraint chair was used on all hunger strikers, regardless of their condition.

Medical groups were overwhelmingly appalled by this practice, but the Pentagon issued new rules this month reaffirming that military doctors can be ordered to force-feed prisoners. The only role for psychiatrists at Guantánamo seems to be to help prepare prisoners for interrogation.

So it was not surprising in the least when inmates attempted suicide. Twenty-three tried to kill themselves over eight days in August 2003, but the military covered it up for 18 months. Now, three inmates have succeeded. Camp officials say one was a mid- or high-level Al Qaeda operative. One was captured in Afghanistan (doing what, we don't know), and the other was from something the camp commander, Rear Admiral Harry Harris Jr., called a splinter group.

Harris's response was as appalling as the suicides. "I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us," he said. The inmates, he said, "have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own."

These comments reveal a profound disassociation from humanity. They say more about why Guantánamo Bay should be closed than any UN report ever could.


The news that three inmates at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, hanged themselves should not have surprised anyone who has paid attention to the twisted history of the camp that President George W. Bush built for selected prisoners from Afghanistan and antiterrorist operations. It was the inevitable result of creating a netherworld of despair beyond the laws of civilized nations, where men were to be held without any hope of decent treatment, impartial justice or, in so many cases, even eventual release.

It is a place where secret tribunals sat in judgment of men whose identities they barely knew and who were not permitted to see the evidence against them. Inmates were abused, humiliated, tormented and sometimes tortured. Some surely are very dangerous men, committed to a life of terrorism and deserving of harsh justice. But only 10 of the roughly 465 men at the camp have been charged with crimes. The others, according to senior officers who served there, were foot soldiers of the Taliban or men who just happened to live in a country invaded by the United States after the 9/11 attacks.

Inmates at Guantánamo Bay have tried seeking help from the American courts, and one case has reached the Supreme Court. But most of these appeals were thwarted by claims of national security. Any new appeals will fall under a shocking new law that deprives the inmates of the centuries- old right to challenge their imprisonment. Government lawyers have even tried to use that law retroactively, to dismiss all pending appeals.

Guantánamo and other American detention centers have sparked outrage around the world, deeply harming America's image as the defender of humanity against just these sorts of abuses. Last month a UN panel called for the prisons to be shut down. The administration's response to all of this has been defiance.

When dozens of inmates went on hunger strikes last year, the authorities strapped them into metal "restraint chairs" and ordered doctors to force-feed them. Military officials said they did this only to inmates on the brink of death, but The New York Times has reported that the restraint chair was used on all hunger strikers, regardless of their condition.

Medical groups were overwhelmingly appalled by this practice, but the Pentagon issued new rules this month reaffirming that military doctors can be ordered to force-feed prisoners. The only role for psychiatrists at Guantánamo seems to be to help prepare prisoners for interrogation.

So it was not surprising in the least when inmates attempted suicide. Twenty-three tried to kill themselves over eight days in August 2003, but the military covered it up for 18 months. Now, three inmates have succeeded. Camp officials say one was a mid- or high-level Al Qaeda operative. One was captured in Afghanistan (doing what, we don't know), and the other was from something the camp commander, Rear Admiral Harry Harris Jr., called a splinter group.

Harris's response was as appalling as the suicides. "I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us," he said. The inmates, he said, "have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own."

These comments reveal a profound disassociation from humanity. They say more about why Guantánamo Bay should be closed than any UN report ever could.' Lees verder:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/12/opinion/edguan.php