Memorial Service For Florence Richards, Feb. 2, 2008

Photo by Samir Twair, Dec. 9, 2006, Glendale Public Library.

questioning Mohamed Omer, Gaza Correspondent of WRMEA

A Special Gathering

To Celebrate the Life of

Florence Richards

Who Dared to Speak Out

Friend of the Palestinian People
And of All Those Seeking
Peace and Justice
In Our World

*

Born June 2, 1924
Indianapolis, Indiana

*
Died December 23, 2007
Whittier, California

*

Memorial Service
February 2, 2008
11: 00 a.m.

*

Reverend Bert Newton
Dr. Maher Hathout
First Friends Church
13205 E. Philadelphia St.
Whittier, California

*

Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be
called the children of God (Matthew 5:9)

*

Celebrating Florence,

Friends Reflect

*

Reverend Bert Newton, Welcome and Opening Prayer

Musical Selection:
Dr. Nabil Azzam, Maestro of MESTO Orchestra performing
his composition on the violin, “The Crescent”

George Hanna, Arab-American Republican Club of
Orange County (AARC)

*
Noor Zubeida Khan (Chairwoman, Muslim Public Affairs
Council Foundation)

*
Pat McDonnell Twair, Washington Report on ME Affairs

*
Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak (statement to be read)

*
Norman Tanber, AARC

*
Tareef Nashashibi, AARC

*
Samir Twair, Past President Arab American Press Guild

*
Donna Curtis, editor, WRMEA (statement to
be read)

*
Robin McLaren, Peace and Justice Activist
Nick Dibs, Educator/Peace & Justice Activist
Mary Daniels, Peace and Justice Activist

*
Delinda Hanley, Exec Editor WRMEA (statement to be read)

Open to the audience for additional reflection


Closing and Prayer
Dr. Maher Hathout
Spokesperson of the Islamic Center of Southern California
Senior Adviser, Muslim Public Affairs Council

By Pat McDonnell Twair


Few Palestinians are aware of the articulate speeches and letters Florence Richards composed in their behalf, but on Dec. 23, they lost one of their most articulated and devoted advocates when she died in her sleep in her Whittier home.

Richards, an educator, community activist and self-taught scholar on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, was born June 2, 1924 in Indianapolis, IN, and met her future husband, Charles, when both were students at Mount Vernon Junior High School in Los Angeles. They were married July 30, 1947. Charles, a mechanical engineer, was president of a Los Angeles business his father established in the late 1930s.

Florence earned a bachelor’s degree from California State University and in 1967 received a master’s degree in history from that institution. Her thesis was on the Spanish philosopher, playwright and poet Miguel de Unamuno. She subsequently taught history at Fullerton Junior College.

A staunch Republican, Richards ran for but didn’t win a seat in the California State Assembly in 1981. She was a member of the Whittier Chapter of the League of Women Voters and publicity chairman for the Whittier Art Association

Over the past two decades, Richards wrote articles for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and The Beirut Times. In addition, she wrote opinion pieces and letters to the editor of the Whittier Daily News and Orange County Register. She also was a resource person and discussion leader on Middle East issues for the Whittier United Nations Association and Whittier’s Great Discussion Series.

Richards articulately expressed her views on U.S. foreign policy to the White House hotline, The Los Angeles Times Washington bureau, Senate and Congressional offices. Many legislative aides and reporters welcomed her views and asked for additional information on facts rarely reported in the American media.

At age 78 in 2003, Florence participated in her first political protest -- against the approaching war on Iraq -- on Whittier Boulevard and Painter Avenue. When a motorist shouted “Get a life”, the diminutive dynamo retorted “Read a book.”

Hybernation

This blog is going in to hybernation for a while. I will be back when I am back, until then, may whoever is reading here, know, that forever, I shall stand by my core belief, that we are all created equal by the same creator who wants nothing but for us all to live in peace, that violence is not a morally acceptable means to any sort of ends, and that not any one of us singularly can accomplish change without uniting in non-violent solidarity.

Blessings to all, and may we all in our actions speak and exemplify as MUCH as we can, peace, knowing we are human, but reaching out to each other in equality and RESPECT.

Israel must ensure access to medical treatment for Gaza patients

Israel must ensure access to medical treatment for Gaza patients
9:42 PM ET

Miri Weingarten [Coordinator oPt Department,
Physicians for Human Rights-Israel]: "PHR-Israel has been immersed in the crisis that has engulfed Gaza since the takeover by Hamas in June 2007, and the resultant closing by Israel of all crossing points to goods and persons. Patients who prior to June had the possibility of accessing Egypt for medical care found this way barred from the 9th of June, leaving the Erez Crossing the only point of exit for patients.

In order to enter Israeli hospitals or to cross Israel into medical centers in the West Bank, East Jerusalem or Jordan, patients are required to undergo elaborate, opaque and ever-multiplying bureaucratic procedures in order to procure an exit permit. Patients whose requests are rejected due to a “security prohibition” or whose requests are so delayed as to cause repeated re-scheduling of appointments apply to PHR-Israel for redress.

Since June, the number of patients’ applications from Gaza to PHR-Israel has increased dramatically. Whereas from January to May 2007 PHR-Israel fielded 20-40 applications each month, in June this figure increased to 60 per month, and in October a peak number of 160 applications was recorded.

Increases in negative or delayed responses correspond closely to Israeli policy decisions: The first increase corresponds to the closing of the Erez and Rafah Crossings while the second corresponds to the Israeli declaration of Gaza as a hostile entity and its declared decision to impose collective measures against the civilian population.

On the ground, PHR-Israel has met increasing difficulties in ensuring access to healthcare of Gaza patients who need care in external medical centers. Since September 2007, even life-threatening conditions have been refused exit repeatedly. Nine of the patients who applied to PHR-Israel have died while waiting for a permit.

In its work, PHR-Israel applies to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) as a last instance to ensure access of patients to medical care that is unavailable within Gaza. When analysed, the Court rulings are shown, overall, to echo deteriorating State policy. High Court judges voice attitudes ranging from total identification with State policies to confusion rather than courage:

• In June, after PHR-Israel together with partner organization “Gisha” submitted an urgent petition to the HCJ demanding that the Erez Crossing be opened to patients in need of care unavailable in Gaza, the State responded that it no longer bore any legal responsibility toward the civilians of Gaza, that patients would be permitted entry as a “humanitarian gesture” only, and that only life-threatening conditions would merit permission. Danger of amputation or of the loss of an eye, for example, would be defined as endangering “quality of life” and not life itself, and therefore would not justify entry. In its ruling the Court questioned this distinction between life and limb, but did not intervene on behalf of the 26 patients in the petition, and refused to rule either on the policy of access to health care of patients from Gaza, or on the legal status of Gaza itself.
  
  
• In November, the cases of 11 patients in life-threatening condition were heard. Two separate hearings were held, delaying the court decision. While waiting for a ruling, 21-year-old cancer patient Nael El Kurdi died at home in Gaza. This did not persuade the Court to oblige the State to formulate a policy ensuring access of patients to medical centers outside Gaza.
  
  
• In December, Justice Elyakim Rubinstein ruled that “even a total criminal” had a right to access to care, if in urgent and life-threatening condition, and asked that the State examine the possibility of ensuring access to Egypt or to Jordan of several specific patients in life-threatening condition. He too refrained from addressing policy.
  
  
• In January 2008, the previous ruling was overturned by three judges, who reviewed the cases of 8 patients, all in urgent life-threatening condition, and “were persuaded that there are no grounds for our intervention in the decision of the Respondents to prevent the entry of these appellants into the territory of Israel.” (HCJ ruling 11105/07, 8.1.08).
  
  
• Less than a fortnight later, leukemia patient Amin Fayyad was also refused redress by the Court. Justices Prokatcha, Alon and Naor saw no grounds for intervention and suggested that his case be reviewed “by the end of February” (HCJ ruling 559/08, 22.1.08) – thus justifying a delay that could cost the patient his life.

The possibility of legal redress for Palestinians has been seriously eroded by this process, raising grave questions regarding the independence of the judiciary system in Israel. PHR-Israel reiterates its demand that the State of Israel ensure the access of Gaza patients to medical care unavailable in Gaza in external medical centers, as a matter of policy."

Opinions expressed in JURIST's Hotline are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, or the University of Pittsburgh.

SOURCE

Gaza Siege claims the lives of 83 patients, including 16 children

Saturday January 26, 2008 07:25 by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies saed at imemc dot org

Palestinian medical sources in the Gaza Strip reported on Saturday at night that two patients died in the Gaza Strip after the Israeli Authorities barred them from leaving the Gaza Strip for medical treatment abroad. A total of 83 Palestinian patients, including 16 children, died due to the ongoing Israeli siege and blockade over the coastal region.

Archive Pohto

The Palestinian News Agency, WAFA, reported that resident Mislih Mohammad Qalja, and Fatin Majdi Al Hafnawi, 10, died on Saturday after being barred from leaving the Gaza Strip for medical treatment.

The two latest casualties raise the number of patients who died in the Gaza Strip since several months to 82 residents.

Dozens of seriously ill patients are facing imminent death as Gaza Hospital ran out of medical supplies while the Israeli authorities are barring them from leaving the Gaza Strip for medical treatment elsewhere.

The ages the residents who died due to the siege and lack of medical attention vary between several months old and 80 years old.

Following are the names of children who died due to the ongoing blockade;

1) Fatin Majdi Al Hafnawi, 10.
2) Ibrahim Abu Nahil, 1year and four months old.
3) Sana Mohammad Al Hajj, six months.
4) Rawan Diab, 13 months.
5) Hala Zannoun, 3 months.
6) Yousef Eyad Abu Mariam, 5 years.
7) Razan Mohammad Ata, 6 years.
8) Dua’ Hani Habeen, 5 months.
9) Ibrahim Abu Jazar, 2 years.
10) Shereen Abdullah Abu Shawarib, 10 years.
11) Hammad Maher Abu Hamda, 1.5 months.
12) Ameer Al Baziji, 9 years.
13) Nada Eyad Al Asgha, 13 years old.
14) Rawan Nassar, 15.
15) Dua’ Abed Amran, 18.
16) Mahmoud Nahedh Hussein, 14.

SOURCE

Why Annapolis Was Meant To Fail

Excellent essay describing why the Israeli's really do NOT want peace and why Abbas's bootlicking will NEVER work to achieve peace for the Palestinian people:

Illustration by Nino Jose Heredia/Gulf News

The Annapolis spirit in action

By Adel Safty, Special to Gulf News Published: January 28, 2008, 00:11

If we put aside diplomatic niceties and self-serving proclamations of an urgent need for peace and Israeli readiness to "make painful sacrifices" to achieve it, the Annapolis conference in fact confirmed the logic of war. The current Israeli assault on and collective punishment of the Palestinians in Gaza prove it. Annapolis confirmed the logic of war because American and Israeli positions indicated that whatever negotiations take place between Israelis and Palestinians would not be within the context of justice and law, but overshadowed by the realities of power produced by the Israeli war machine. The wrongdoer insists on imposing its terms on the victim as a condition of "peace". And Washington agrees; while those who represent the international community consensus on the conflict - such as the United Nations - are politely relegated to the insignificant status of observer. And Washington agrees. In fact, at Annapolis, President George W. Bush confirmed - in disregard of the principles of justice and international law - his support for the Israeli position on two of the principal substantive issues of the conflict. He repeated his support for the Israeli refusal to allow Palestinians expelled in 1948 to return to Israel - a gross injustice to the Palestinians. He also repeated assurances given earlier to the Israelis to support their demand to keep some of the Palestinian land they seized by force in 1967 - a violation of the very preamble of UN Security Council Resolution 242 which confirms the inadmissibility in law of the acquisition of territories by force. Illegal Bush also sided with the Israelis on the question of colonies by only referring to the outposts as illegal, but not the colonies themselves - universally considered by the international community as illegal. In an advisory opinion in 2004 the International Court of Justice confirmed the illegality of the Israeli colonies in the occupied territories including East Jerusalem. Strengthened by the knowledge that they have Washington's support to impose their terms and create more facts on the ground, Israeli leaders announced - shortly after Annapolis - plans to construct more colonies in the occupied Palestinian territories. It is within this context of the realities of power and of the Israeli strategy of making them even more unfavourable to the victim that the recent assault on the Palestinians must be viewed. The sealing off of Gaza and the cutting of power and petrol supplies have been condemned as likely to cause a humanitarian crisis and amounted to collective punishment of the civilian population - a clear violation of international law. John Holmes, the UN undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, described the Israeli action as "unacceptable" and "morally unjustifiable". The European Union urged Israel not to impose "collective punishment" against the Palestinian population in Gaza. The Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem reported that in 2006 and 2007 the Israeli forces killed 816 Palestinians, including 152 minors, of whom 48 were children under the age of 14. The head of the Israel Security Agency Yuval Diskin was quoted as telling the Israeli Cabinet that Israel had killed 1,000 "terrorists" in the Gaza Strip in the past two years - thus describing the victims, including innocent civilians, women and children, as "terrorists". As in the past when peace threatens, Israeli leaders escalate the violence either to show that all Palestinians are terrorists who cannot be trusted and therefore not ready for peace, or to try to liquidate Palestinian nationalism by force as was tried in Lebanon in 1982. The ferocity of the Israeli response to the actions of Hamas militantism and the collective punishment imposed on the 1.5 million Palestinians are not only grossly disproportionate responses, they are ineffective. And the Israelis know it. Israel's Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai recently told Israel Radio that he did not expect the latest sanctions to halt rocket fire from the Gaza Strip. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that defence officials believed that the Palestinian fighters would intensify their attacks in response to the sanctions. Israeli actions, the paper reported, is "a new form of escalation" to prepare the grounds for a major assault on Gaza. Israel's Defence Minister Ehud Barak is reported to have said a few weeks ago that Israel "is getting closer" to a major operation in Gaza. The Israeli strategy for a possible agreement with the Palestinians is clear: If there is to be an agreement it must reflect the superior power of the conqueror, not the legitimate rights of the victim. This reality is openly admitted and debated, framed differently to be sure but substantially unchanged. For instance, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is reported to have sought additional support from Bush during the latter's recent visit to Israel. The Israelis want a free hand in the West Bank during negotiations with the Palestinians to maintain constant pressure on their interlocutors. They also want Washington's support for the demilitarisation of the future Palestinian state and for Israel's right to monitor all border crossings. They also want Bush's support for Israel's right to redeploy its troops in the future Palestinian state should the Israelis decide that there was a threat of invasion. In other words they want a Palestinian state that is a vassal reoccupied at a moment's notice. Imagine if the Palestinians were to ask for reciprocity and insist on the same security guarantees; after all it is the Palestinians whose lives are shattered by Israeli violence, dispossession and collective punishment, who have more to fear from the Israelis. The helplessness of the Palestinian position was already evident at Annapolis. In the face of the latest Israeli assault all the Palestinian leaders could do was to appeal to the international community to help stop "'the blazing destruction of Palestinian lives and property and a continuation of the Israeli policy of undermining the peace process". Prof Adel Safty is author of From Camp David to the Gulf, Montreal, New York. His latest book, Leadership and Democracy, is published by IPSL Press, New York. 2004. Source

Israel: Camcorders VS Waking Up To It's Own Brutality

In a move to solicit sympathy for Israel, the government there has come up with a plan: (Posted HERE)

Some Sderot teenagers will be issued camcorders to document the difficulties of living under Palestinian rocket attacks.

Israel's foreign ministry will provide four Sderot teens and two youths from nearby farming communities with camcorders, Yediot Achronot reported Sunday. The teens are being asked to record the anxiety caused by rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip, with a view to posting the footage on film-sharing sites such as YouTube.

Given international attention on the Palestinian plight in Gaza, Israel is searching for ways to stir foreign sympathy for its civilians targeted in the almost daily shelling attacks.

___________________________________________________________________

But wait a minute, isn't this the same government that is telling the world that the siege of Gaza,
the illegal collective punishment of the entire population of that small strip of land is justified? Now we have to have proof positive of their right to blockade Gaza by documenting THEIR anxiety when the documented SUFFERING of the ENTIRE population of Gaza is their OWN fault?

Isn't Israel telling everyone it is their right to do this and that the people of Gaza DESERVE this blockade and seek in all ways through their Hasbara to say that the Palestinians are either FAKING their misery and even if they aren't "faking" then whatever they "get" is due to their choice in leadership?

When will Israel EVER learn, it is not a question for the world who is turning against them (OUTSIDE the Arab world) and also did the same when Israel invaded and destroyed much of Lebanon in summer 2006, it is a question of looking at Israel's choice in how they react to any given situation and that their "reaction" is always a brutal OVER-REACTION. Israel continues to think that they have the God-given right to commit genocide on the Palestinians who have the audacity to remain on the land they have lived on for millenium. Rather than CHOOSING to live in peace with the Palestinians, they come up with even more ideas of how to RID the land they feel "God gave to them" of it's indigenous population.

That is the bottom line, Israel has NOT chosen to live in peace with its' Palestinian people neither outside OR inside Israel proper.

From the Carter Center:

Carter Center Calls for Ceasefire and Dialogue in Gaza

By admin - Posted on January 27th, 2008

26 January 2008 -- After two years of almost complete isolation, the people of the Gaza Strip breached the iron wall along the border with Egypt, pouring over the border to seek basic supplies, receive needed health care, and some said, to "breathe a breath of freedom." Although Egypt seems poised to close the border again, most Gazans are giving Hamas credit for relieving their misery, even if the relief is temporary.

The current crisis in Gaza underscores the need for immediate action and a new approach by the key actors, including a mutual ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza, and reconciliation between the Palestinian leaders in Fatah and Hamas.

Although some Israeli leaders had expressed hope that the siege in Gaza would lead to an uprising against Hamas, the group enjoys significant popular support among Palestinians, as well as electoral legitimacy from their victory in the parliamentary elections in 2006. As a result, efforts to defeat Hamas militarily or to strangle them economically are unlikely to succeed, while serving to strengthen their image as the leader of the resistance to what most Palestinians see as an illegal occupation of their territory.

The Carter Center strongly condemns the rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza against Israeli civilians, which cannot be justified under any circumstances, and respects the Israeli government's right and duty to take measures to protect the security of its people. At the same time, the Center also condemns Israel's collective punishment of the 1.5 million inhabitants of Gaza, an action that violates international standards of political and humanitarian rights.

The government of Egypt made an appropriate response to the breached wall by allowing the movement of people into its territory to alleviate this humanitarian crisis, though its previous decision to seal the border contributed to the siege and desperation of the people of Gaza. The Center hopes these events prompt a new border agreement between Egypt and Gazans that will allow more regular movement of people and goods.

More broadly, as Israel, Egypt, the United States, and the Palestinian leadership consider how best to proceed in light of the forced opening of the Rafah crossing, the Center strongly urges all sides to seek another road - a road of negotiation, dialogue, and conciliation, rather than of force, punishment, and the continuous ratcheting up of the vicious cycle of violence.

Israel and Hamas should explore without delay a possible agreement for mutual cease fire throughout Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza that would allow citizens of both Israel and Gaza to live free from fear of rocket attacks, air strikes, and military incursions. Such an agreement could be a first step toward a more comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and all of the Palestinians.

The Government of Israel should lift the blockade of the Gaza border crossings and resume not only the regular delivery of electricity, fuel, and humanitarian supplies to Gaza, but also the normal movement of imports and exports necessary to maintain economic life.

Palestinians should act soon to heal the rift that has torn their community apart. As proposed by Egypt, talks should proceed to reach a political solution between President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party and Hamas' political leaders. A resolution of the crisis in Gaza, reconciliation among Palestinians, and the viability of any peace agreement between Israel and Abbas are inextricably linked. (source)

Source: Carter Center

Mohamed Aboutrika "Booked" for Supporting Gaza on T-Shirt

Africa's best soccer player, Mohamed Aboutrika who states HERE:

" “Every athlete has a humanitarian role in society,” says Aboutrika. “He doesn't live solely for himself, but for others too. I like to participate in charity work and try my best to help the poor and penniless. I'm also seeking to use soccer in humanitarian work."

has been "warned" and booked for the following action:

Egypt midfielder warned over Gaza slogan

CAIRO, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Egypt's Mohamed Aboutrika has been warned by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) for displaying a slogan in support of Gaza at the African Nations Cup finals in Ghana.

Aboutrika lifted his strip to reveal a tee-shirt with the slogan 'Sympathy with Gaza' as he celebrated scoring in the 3-0 win over Sudan in Friday's Group C match in Kumasi.

The midfielder was booked for his actions.

CAF officials said Aboutrika had been warned after the incident for breaching regulations by displaying political slogans.

Aboutrika's action came on the same day as clashes between Palestinian residents, seeking to break the blockade of Gaza, and Egyptian police.
Source

BRAVO Mohamed, you truly are not only one of the greatest soccer players of all time, but INDEED, a humanitarian also who stands UP for what is right!

Chavez Urges Pulling Latin American Reserves From the US

As the world focuses on the Middle East, my favorite Latin American firebrand, Hugo Chavez is rattling the US cage again

Chavez: Pull Reserves From US

By IAN JAMES – 8 hours ago

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez urged his Latin American allies on Saturday to begin withdrawing billions of dollars in international reserves from U.S. banks, warning of a looming U.S. economic crisis.

Chavez made the suggestion as he hosted a summit aimed at boosting Latin American integration and rolling back U.S. influence.

"We should start to bring our reserves here," Chavez said. "Why does that money have to be in the north? ... You can't put all your eggs in one basket."

To help pool resources within the region, Chavez and other leaders launched a new development bank at the summit of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Nations of Our America, or ALBA.

The left-leaning regional trade alliance first proposed by Chavez is intended to offer an alternative, socialist path to integration while snubbing U.S.-backed free-trade deals.

Chavez noted that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited Colombia in recent days, saying "that has to do with this summit."

"The empire doesn't accept alternatives," Chavez told the gathering, attended by the presidents of Bolivia and Nicaragua and Cuban Vice President Carlos Lage.

Chavez warned that U.S. "imperialism is entering into a crisis that can affect all of us" and said Latin America "will save itself alone."

Rice left Colombia on Friday after a trip aimed at reviving a free trade deal that has stalled in the U.S. Congress. She sidestepped an opportunity to confront Chavez, who accused Colombia and the United States of plotting "military aggression" against Venezuela.

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega joined Chavez in his criticism of U.S.-style capitalism, saying "the dictatorship of global capitalism ... has lost control." Three days earlier, Ortega had shouted "Long live the U.S. government" as he inaugurated an American-financed section of highway in his country.

The ALBA Bank is "being born with the aim of boosting development in our countries," Venezuelan Finance Minister Rafael Isea said Saturday as he and other officials gathered at the bank's Caracas office for an inaugural ceremony.

Isea has said the bank will be started with $1 billion to $1.5 billion.

Chavez welcomed the Caribbean island of Dominica into the ALBA — an acronym that means "dawn" in Spanish — joining Nicaragua, Bolivia and Cuba. Attending as observers were the prime ministers of Antigua and Barbuda and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, along with officials from Ecuador, Honduras, Haiti and St. Kitts and Nevis.

Chavez said a new fund created by Venezuela and Iran to support projects in third countries would have links to the ALBA Bank. (source)

---

ALBA Bank to Open in Three Months Caracas, Jan 25 (Prensa Latina) The Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) will have its own financial institution three months from now to boost regional development projects, Cuban Central Bank President Francisco Soberon said on Friday. Soberon told Prensa Latina that the ALBA ministers signed the Foundational Act and approved the constitutive fund of the ALBA Bank, as well as a schedule to start up operations within the next 60 days. The project will be submitted for approval to the presidents or representatives of the ALBA member countries (Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela), who will end the Sixth ALBA Summit on Saturday. The Cuban minister pointed out that the new financial body will fund projects that similar institutions would reject. Unlike commercial banks, which reject low-profit loan requests, the new mechanism will consider the productive, social and ecological impact of the projects. Therefore, each partner country will supply capital to the bank, which will also receive funds from third parties, because it will open so strong that it will be a perfectly-viable alternative in a relatively short term, Soberon added. He explained that the bank would cover expenses and generate profits to grow moderately, but it would never be aimed at obtaining excessive profits. In the end, loans will go to companies from the partner countries, so there is no point in acting with a capitalist mentality to obtain large profits in detriment of those who must be the beneficiaries, Soberon pointed out. He noted that one of the main characteristics of the bank, unlike other similar institutions, is that it will not play a hegemonic role, and its decisions will be based on equal votes, independently from the partner's level of participation. The creation of the ALBA Bank is one of the main issues being debated at the Sixth ALBA Summit, during which Dominica is expected to become the fifth member on Saturday. hr/jg/iep/ml

(source)

Sunday Offering #44: "Listening to the Ghosts of Hope"

"If God can work through me, he can work through anyone"
St. Francis of Assisi

Arun Gandhi Resigns From Peace Institute He Co-Founded

I want to make it clear when posting the below, I feel the hurling of the word, "Jew" as a word to denote Zionism is unacceptable and highly inaccurate when condemning Zionism. For the sake of all reading here, Zionism and Judaism are connected but SEPARATE entities, not all Jews are Zionists by FAR and not all Zionists are Jews, many are Christians and others.

Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, has been forced to tender his resignation to the peace institute he co-founded (which had been moved to the University of Rochester)due to the uproar over an article he posted in the On Faith section of the Washington Post, January 7th.

No, I do not think he should have been forced to resign, not at all, but I do think it is a lesson in how to use your vocabulary properly, not because you might be forced to bite the dust, but because it is the right thing to do, again, because not all Jews are Zionists by any means, it is simply misleading and racist in nature. Moreover, many Jews (and others) did learn from the Holocaust to NEVER AGAIN repeat in any manner what had happened to them. Hedy Epstien is just one such person that you can read about HERE

I feel his apology should have been accepted and the below letter from the ADL is a bunch of Zionist CRAP! In fact AGAIN it states that the Holocaust is a reason for creating the state of Israel and it's current policies . Quote from the ADL

"You do little to ease concern that you truly believe there is a direct connection between the unspeakable atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis in their maniacal effort to eradicate the Jewish people and the policies of the government of Israel. Israel's policies are designed to protect the safety and well-being of its citizens against terrorism by sworn enemies of the Jewish people, some of whom are determined to finish the job Hitler started."

Israel is a rogue state which has taken what happened to the Jewish people in WWII and used it as PART of the reason (the other is the claim to the land by God's own grant deed to them) to displace hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, destroy villages, oppresses by continued occupation, have racist laws within it's own borders, and refuse to abide by international law. The whole world is supposed to go along with this plot because if you DON'T, then you are against them for what they ARE-Jews, NOT what they are doing. This is what Arun Gandhi was saying and very unfortunately stated himself in a manner in which he should have apologized, but that should have been the END OF THE MATTER.



Having said that, here are some articles being published on the resignation of Arun Gandhi from the M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence

The original post which caused the contraversy:

Jewish Identity Can't Depend on Violence

Jewish identity in the past has been locked into the holocaust experience -- a German burden that the Jews have not been able to shed. It is a very good example of a community can overplay a historic experience to the point that it begins to repulse friends. The holocaust was the result of the warped mind of an individual who was able to influence his followers into doing something dreadful. But, it seems to me the Jews today not only want the Germans to feel guilty but the whole world must regret what happened to the Jews. The world did feel sorry for the episode but when an individual or a nation refuses to forgive and move on the regret turns into anger.

The Jewish identity in the future appears bleak. Any nation that remains anchored to the past is unable to move ahead and, especially a nation that believes its survival can only be ensured by weapons and bombs. In Tel Aviv in 2004 I had the opportunity to speak to some Members of Parliament and Peace activists all of whom argued that the wall and the military build-up was necessary to protect the nation and the people. In other words, I asked, you believe that you can create a snake pit -- with many deadly snakes in it -- and expect to live in the pit secure and alive? What do you mean? they countered. Well, with your superior weapons and armaments and your attitude towards your neighbors would it not be right to say that you are creating a snake pit? How can anyone live peacefully in such an atmosphere? Would it not be better to befriend those who hate you? Can you not reach out and share your technological advancement with your neighbors and build a relationship?

Apparently, in the modern world, so determined to live by the bomb, this is an alien concept. You don't befriend anyone, you dominate them. We have created a culture of violence (Israel and the Jews are the biggest players) and that Culture of Violence is eventually going to destroy humanity.

Source

His apology read:

Arun Gandhi

President and co-founder of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence.

Born in 1934 in Durban, South Africa, Arun Gandhi is the fifth grandson of India’s legendary leader, Mohandas K. “Mahatma” Gandhi. He is president and co-founder of the M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, now at the University of Rochester in New York. He is a regular participant in Renaissance Weekend deliberations with President Clinton and other Rhodes Scholars. He worked for 30 years as a journalist for The Times of India. He is the author of several books, including "A Patch of White" (1949) and "The Forgotten Woman: The Untold Story of Kastur, the Wife of Mahatma Gandhi," which he wrote with his late wife Sunanda. Close.

Arun Gandhi

President and co-founder of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence.

Arun Gandhi is the fifth grandson of India’s legendary leader, Mohandas K. “Mahatma” Gandhi. He is president and co-founder of the M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, now at the University of Rochester in New York. more »

My Apology for My Poorly Worded Post

I am writing to correct some regrettable mis-impressions I have given in my comments on my blog this week. While I stand behind my criticisms of the use of violence by recent Israeli governments -- and I have criticized the governments of the U.S., India and China in much the same way -- I want to correct statements that I made with insufficient care, and that have inflicted unnecessary hurt and caused anger.

I do not believe and should not have implied that the policies of the Israeli government are reflective of the views of all Jewish people. Indeed, many are as concerned as I am by the use of violence for state purposes, by Israel and many other governments.

I do believe that when a people hold on to historic grievances too firmly it can lead to bitterness and the loss of support from those who would be friends. But as I have noted in previous writings, the suffering of the Jewish people, particularly in the Holocaust, was historic in its
proportions. While we must strive for a future of peace that rejects violence, it is also important not to forget the past, lest we fail to learn from it. Having learned from it, we can then find the path to peace and rejection of violence through forgiveness. | Readers Respond to Gandhi. | Statement by president of the University of Rochester. (source)

The ADL's response reads:

Mr. Gandhi,

Your apology is appropriate and welcome, as far as you have taken it. While you may have clarified some of the substance of your original comments, what is sadly lacking in your latest posting is a retraction of the suggestion that Jews "overplay" the Holocaust to manipulate the international community.

You do little to ease concern that you truly believe there is a direct connection between the unspeakable atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis in their maniacal effort to eradicate the Jewish people and the policies of the government of Israel. Israel's policies are designed to protect the safety and well-being of its citizens against terrorism by sworn enemies of the Jewish people, some of whom are determined to finish the job Hitler started.

Indeed, the apology only seems to reinforce your original conclusion by again suggesting that Holocaust survivors and their families "…hold on to historic grievances too firmly…." This is an outrageous statement -- suggesting that just 60 years after the Holocaust, survivors and their relatives should "let go" of their anger at losing their entire families, homes, livelihoods, and at having their communities wiped out. The memory of the six million who perished in the Nazi gas chambers, concentration camps, work camps and death marches should be preserved as a lesson for all time.

Especially offensive was your suggestion that "Israel and the Jews are the biggest players" in promoting a "culture of violence that is eventually going to destroy humanity." This outrageous libel of an entire people and of a country that wants nothing more than to live in peace and security with its neighbors -- and has said so repeatedly -- is mind-boggling coming from someone so respected in the field of nonviolence education and advocacy. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which the Palestinians have fostered exactly the sort of "culture of violence" you denounce so vociferously.

We believe you owe a true apology to the Jewish people for your insensitive and offensive remarks about the Holocaust, and your suggestion that the memory of its victims is being misused to advance a nation's violent behavior. This is a classic attempt to blame the victim.

Sincerely, The Anti-Defamation League

Source

And now Arun Gandhi has resigned.

IMPORTANT READING:

Gandhi, The Jews And Palestine

A Collection of Articles, Speeches, Letters and Interviews

University of Rochester's President Joel Seligman's statement regarding Arun Gandhi’s resignation

January 25, 2008

Arun Gandhi has now resigned as president of the board of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. He was not a member of our faculty or of our staff. When I met with him yesterday after he resigned, he gave me a copy of his resignation letter that recognized that language in his recent Washington Post blog "was hurtful and contrary to the principles of nonviolence" and he deeply regretted "the pain, anger, confusion, and embarrassment" caused by his words.

A fundamental value of the University of Rochester is a commitment to diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome and support all who teach, study, learn, or work here. Our commitment to diversity and inclusiveness occurs simultaneously with our fundamental commitment to the value of ideas and of free speech.

Universities exist and best serve all of us if they foster open and virtually unregulated teaching, research, discussion and debate, including viewpoints that are diametrically opposed to each other. A University's role in society is not to impose intellectual orthodoxy, but to provide the opportunity to develop and articulate opinions or beliefs that may be unpopular or little believed. We progress because we are a marketplace for ideas, the most enduring of which often only emerge after considerable debate and initial doubt. We all benefit from the tradition of rational debate within our universities in which we have the opportunity to bring together people, often with long and tragic histories of grievances and violent interactions, to speak freely to each other.

Arun Gandhi's January 7 statement in the Washington Post's "On Faith" blog did not reflect the core values of the University of Rochester or the values of the M.K. Gandhi Institute itself. Under the circumstances, I believe that Arun Gandhi's resignation was appropriate.

The M.K. Gandhi Institute itself is separate from Arun Gandhi and will continue its mission here. The Institute is not formally part of the University of Rochester, but has been provided space and staff support at the University since it moved here in June 2007. The Institute's mission is to educate about nonviolent conflict resolution and to inspire and support efforts that promote harmony among people.

The University of Rochester will host a forum later this year to provide Arun Gandhi, a leader of the Jewish community and other speakers the opportunity to address the issues raised by Mr. Gandhi's statements and related issues. A University can and should promote dialogue in which we can learn from each other even when the most painful or difficult issues will be discussed.

Source

I have a question for you President Seligman, do you feel that the horrendous events of 60 years ago and it's resulting "pain" which does seem to be tiresome when it's used as an excuse to do all it has been doing for sixty plus years, is sufficient cause to uproot an entire OTHER people from their land? Or can you possibly see that this might cause some lasting resentment and PAIN for those who were forced to give up their homeland so that ONLY Jewish people could live in a land they personally had NEVER lived in. That just is the basic question President Seligman, what about the PAIN of the Palestinian people? Will they get to discuss that at your future forum?

Here's a good place for you to brush up President Siligman.

As We Witness the Brutal Blockade of Gaza, Remember The Blockade of Iraq and How Many People Died

This post is in response to Ted's comment on THIS post concerning the siege of Gaza and the humanitarian crisis which is its' result. He wrote: " If governments would learn that if they talked to each other and met each other half way things would be better.

Blockades, embargo's, sanctions don't hurt anyone but the people and all they do is make the people resentful against the country causing their hardship.

It didn't work on Cuba, North Korea, Iran or anyone else. "

I fully agree Ted. And now we see the US blocking a UN sanction against Israel, with Obama going so far as suggesting: "

"All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families," wrote Obama, a U.S. senator from Illinois, in his letter to Khalilzad. "However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this. Gaza is governed by Hamas, which is a terrorist organization sworn to Israel's destruction, and Israeli civilians are being bombarded on an almost daily basis." (source)

No government is FORCED to do what Israel is doing, they have CHOSEN collective punishment of the Palestinians in Gaza.

Lest we forget, Hamas offered a cease fire on numerous occasions and on each occasion Israel refused it.

As the world looks on as Gaza suffers and they break down the wall to get to the supplies, foods,
medicine, other things unavailable or too costly in Gaza, as we see Palestinians refused exit for necessary life saving medical care, we should look back and remember, the US who is now refusing to condemn the blockade of Gaza, themselves led the sanctions against Iraq which resulted in more than one million deaths there. Is it any surprise that the US refuses to confront Israel, (who they RARELY confront anyways) when they themselves were responsible for the genocide of more than one million Iraqis BEFORE the invasion/occupation?

No it is not.

Video: PAYING THE PRICE: Killing the Children of Iraq (1 of 7)





Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7

Israel Holds French Envoy at Checkpoint for Hours

I suppose this will be explained............but then again........

Israel police ignored multiple requests by consulate

French envoy held at Israeli checkpoint for hours

Diplomat and his entourage were stopped for three hours (File)

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM (AFP)

Israeli security authorities were on Friday preventing the French consul-general from crossing a checkpoint outside the West Bank town of Bethlehem into Jerusalem, a consulate official said.

By late evening, Alain Remy and his entourage had been held for almost three hours at the crossing by security personnel wanting to search their diplomatic vehicles, the official told AFP.

"The vehicles are not allowed to cross the checkpoint despite multiple requests by the consulate for the relevant Israeli authorities to intervene," he said.

Bethlehem is located several kilometers (miles) south of Jerusalem

There was no immediate reaction from the Israeli army.

Israel deploys hundreds of checkpoints and roadblocks across the occupied West Bank in a bid to stop militant attacks, rendering the free movement of Palestinians across the territory almost impossible.

Source

Episcopalians Send Aid To Gaza

Now keep in mind please, these are Christians who FULLY recognize that the siege of Gaza (which has a predominantlyMuslim population) is UNJUST, has resulted in a HUMANITARIAN crisis, and will NOT "stop the rockets". Something all those Christian Zionists and Israel have YET to learn.

Gaza's Ahli Arab Hospital receives support from American Friends, ERD

By Matthew Davies, January 25, 2008

[Episcopal News Service] The Ahli Arab Hospital, one of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem's oldest institutions, has been severely affected after Israel's blockade of Gaza on January 17 created fuel shortages throughout the territory, resulting in the closing of the region's main power plant.

Emergency funding from the American Friends of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem and Episcopal Relief and Development (ERD) is ensuring critical assistance reaches the hospital as it struggles to serve the predominantly Muslim population in Gaza where about 80 percent of the 1.2 million residents are living below the World Health Organization poverty line.

AFEDJ's board, after meeting for two days in Los Angeles and hearing chilling updates about the situation in Gaza, decided unanimously to send $18,000 to Ahli Arab Hospital for immediate humanitarian purposes, the first step in a large nationwide appeal for funds. AFEDJ, a nonprofit, nonpolitical organization which supports the work of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem, donated more than $160,000 to the hospital in 2007.

ERD is providing support to help the hospital procure fuel to operate its generator and steam boiler to enable it to remain open and continue to serve the community.

Christian leaders in Jerusalem, including Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem Suheil Dawani, condemned Israel's closure of Gaza's borders as an immoral act that violates international law.

"To deny children and civilians their necessary basic commodities are not the ways to security," the heads of churches in Jerusalem and the Holy Land said in a January 22 statement.

On the same day, the blockade was eased to allow for emergency fuel shipments. "The closure by Israel of its border crossings with Gaza was intended to put pressure on Palestinian militants to stop firing rockets into southern Israel," reported Ecumenical News International.

But, the Christian leaders said, "this siege will not guarantee the end to rocket firing, but will only increase the bitterness and suffering and invite more revenge, while the innocents keep dying."

On January 23, tens of thousands of Palestinians crossed into Egypt from Gaza "after masked gunmen used land mines to blast down a seven-mile barrier dividing the border town of Rafah," the Associated Press reports. This border breach came in response to the January 17 closure.

The AFEDJ meeting was hosted by Los Angeles Bishop Jon Bruno, a board member, to review and revise the partnership's operating procedures and future goals. However, the board decided to revise its agenda to discuss the immediate needs of Palestinians in Gaza. The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles shares a companion relationship with the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem.

The Ahli Arab Hospital, which was founded as a mission of the Anglican Church in 1882 and has been a service ministry of the diocese since 1982, is considered a beacon of hope in Gaza, where there are an estimated 3,000 Christians. In addition to dispensing free medical treatment and services to everyone, the hospital also provides food and other necessities to the needy.

The hospital, because of its location in the center of the city, is able to receive casualties from a number of heavily populated neighborhoods. It works closely with the Palestinian National Authority Ministry of Health, so when there is a demand for patient care, Ahli Arab Hospital is the first to receive the overflow from the government hospital in the central area of Gaza.

Suhaila Tarazi, the Ahli Hospital director, sent a pointed message to ERD stating the severity of the crisis. "Life in Gaza has become terrible and people suffer from fear, humiliation, and poverty."

To help people affected in Gaza, make a donation to ERD's "Emergency Relief Fund" online here or by calling 1-800-334-7626, ext. 5129. Gifts can be mailed to: Episcopal Relief and Development "Emergency Relief Fund" P.O. Box 7058, Merrifield, VA 22116-7058.

AFEDJ is also appealing for financial support so that it can continue to direct funds to the hospital. Gifts can be mailed to American Friends of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem, P.O. Box 2040, Orange, CA 92859, or made online here.

-- Matthew Davies is editor of Episcopal Life Online and Episcopal Life Media correspondent for the Anglican Communion.

Source

Egypt/ Palestine Border in Photos

Palestinians push a cow over a destroyed section of the border walll as they return to Rafah between the Gaza Strip and Egypt 25 January 2008. Palestinians rushed home to the Gaza Strip Friday afternoon, as a 3 pm (1300 GMT) deadline set by Egypt for them to return expired. Egyptian border guards, who had been gradually re-closing theborder since the morning, fired multiple volleys of gunfire into the air as they tried to impose the deadline, witnesses said. EPA/KHALED EL FIQI

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14

Source

Amy Goodman Interviews Ali Abunimah: Where Do the Presidential Contenders Stand on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

Where Do the Presidential Contenders Stand on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

As the news out of Gaza makes international headlines, we take a look at where the Republican and Democratic presidential contenders stand on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We speak with the co-founder of the online publication Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah. [includes rush transcript]

LISTEN WATCH

Real Video Stream Real Audio Stream MP3 Download More...

Guest:

Ali Abunimah, co-founder of the online publication The Electronic Intifada and the author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.

Rush Transcript

This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, More...

---

Related Links

• Electronic Intifada

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to Chicago to Ali Abunimah, the co-founder of the online publication The Electronic Intifada, author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.

Welcome to Democracy Now!, Ali Abunimah. Your response to what’s happening now in Gaza, from here in the United States?

ALI ABUNIMAH: Well, I’d like to say that the suffering in Gaza has been so unremitting and so horrible and will continue. But I think we have to recognize and celebrate the resistance and the people power of the people in Gaza. And we have to recognize that there has been a deliberate siege on them by Israel, a decision taken by the leaders of Israel to starve and inflict suffering on a million-and-a-half people.

The government of Egypt has been complicit in this. They could have opened the borders months ago. Israel has been besieging Gaza for almost two years in this way. Egypt didn’t have to wait until Palestinians took matters into their own hands to free themselves from this barbaric siege.

The United States is complicit. And, by the way, Amy, this is another setback for the Bush Doctrine. The people of Gaza have been the victims of an experiment by the Bush administration and Israel, where, first of all, they had a democratic election. The US and Israel didn’t like that result, so they tried to overthrow Hamas using Contra-style militias and using a starvation siege. Hamas turned the tables on them and got rid of those militias. So they decided to tighten the siege on the people of Gaza, and the people of Gaza decided to break out of it themselves.

But the thing we have to absolutely focus on is the responsibility here. Israel, as the occupying power in the Gaza Strip, remains fully responsible for everything that happens there. Under Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, passed, by the way, after the horrors of World War II, Israel is legally required to provide as much food, water, medicine and fuel as the civilian population needs.

And the excuse that the Israelis are using, that they’re doing this in response to rocket fire, we know for a fact that Israel has rejected ceasefire after ceasefire put forward by Hamas and other Palestinian factions. We know for a fact that there are no rockets coming out of the West Bank. And yet Israel continues to carry out extrajudicial executions in the West Bank and military attacks on Nablus, on Balata refugee camp and all the other places in the West Bank.

We have to be clear that what Israel is trying to do is a massive experiment in ethnic cleansing to get rid of a million-and-a-half people who do not fit its demographic desires and the desire to remain a state where one ethnic group has special and better rights by virtue of its religion. That’s what’s going on.

AMY GOODMAN: Ali Abunimah, I wanted to ask you about the candidates in the United States. You’re speaking to us from Chicago, so let’s start with Barack Obama. The stances of the presidential Democratic and Republican candidates on the Israel-Palestine conflict. I can’t remember when in a debate they were asked about the mounting crisis there.

ALI ABUNIMAH: I don’t know if they’ve been asked in a debate, but whenever they have been asked, they have all gone out of their way to express full support for what Israel is doing. Barack Obama is not distinguished from the rest of the pack, except by for how far he has moved to try to appease AIPAC and pro-Israel movements.

I remember, Amy—I knew Barack Obama for many years as my state senator—when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time. I remember personally introducing him onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. And that’s just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation. And just yesterday, he apparently sent a letter to Zalmay Khalilzad, the US ambassador at the UN, to urge the US not to allow any resolution to pass criticizing Israel and saying how Israel was forced to impose this barbaric medieval siege on Israel.

None of the other candidates in the mainstream have spoken out for Palestinian rights. The only ones who have taken forceful positions opposing the current US strategy are Dennis Kucinich on the Democratic side and Ron Paul on the Republican side. The mainstream are all perfectly comfortable with the war crimes that Israel is committing, no matter how much they talk about human rights elsewhere.

AMY GOODMAN: Hillary Clinton, her view on the Israel-Palestine conflict, specifically also what’s happening now in Gaza?

ALI ABUNIMAH: Again, we saw Hillary Clinton, the moment her political ambitions became pronounced, shift. You’ll remember, when she spoke in the 1990s in favor of a Palestinian state, since then she has become one of the most anti-Palestinian hawks. For example, a couple of years ago, she went and staged a photo opportunity in an Israeli settlement by the apartheid wall and talked about how the wall was necessary. This wall, of course, which has been condemned as illegal by the International Court of Justice, which has ordered Israel to tear it down, Hillary Clinton went and stood in front of it and endorsed it.

And we’ve seen that time and again. John Edwards, the same, staunchly pro-Israel. On the Republican side, you have John McCain, who talks like a maverick on other issues, but on this one he has gone out of his way to offer full support for Israel. You have Huckabee, who is on the Christian evangelical right, that is historically not very friendly towards Jewish people, but is very strongly pro-Israel for reasons of biblical prophecy. And Huckabee, who is—according to a report in the Jerusalem Post, talked about a Palestinian state in Egypt or Saudi Arabia, so really talking about the forced transfer or ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians as a solution. That, unfortunately, is the level of discourse.

And maybe it’s because there’s such a consensus in the mainstream on unconditional support for Israel, no matter how illegal its actions or how harmful they are to the United States, perhaps because there’s such a consensus, that’s why there’s no debate.

AMY GOODMAN: Governor Romney?

ALI ABUNIMAH: Governor Romney, I haven’t heard his specific words, except that he has been particularly outspoken in claiming that Islamic militancy, of which he claims Palestinians are a part, is the greatest threat to the United States. And what we’ve seen is this debate happening, this discussion happening in a broader context, Amy, where many of the candidates, not just on the Republican side, whereas they claim to be running against Bush or at least away from Bush, have actually absorbed some of the basic tenets of Bush’s worldview, which sees the United States and the West engaged in this massive civilizational struggle against Islam. It’s a very dangerous and false idea.

And many Muslims feel that they are now the targets of a hysteria, which is similar or has even become worse than the anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s, where Islamic militancy is under every bed and where any form of resistance, any form of resistance to US imperialism, to Israeli colonization and occupation, is defined as extremism. And there’s nobody who’s—you’re not even allowed to go and get food for your family from Egypt if you’re starving without being called an extremist, without being accused of militancy or terrorism. That’s level we’ve reached.

No resistance is permitted, Amy. But what we’ve seen from Gaza and what we’ve seen time and again in Lebanon is that resistance will continue, that people will not quietly accept the fate that has been designed for them in the boardrooms of the Pentagon and the White House and the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv. People will resist.

AMY GOODMAN: Ali Abunimah, I want to thank you very much for joining us from Chicago, co-founder of The Electronic Intifada. His book is called One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.

---

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Women Seeking Peace Meet

And as for women seeking peace in their countries......

Women cite utility in peace efforts

By Elizabeth Eldridge
January 25, 2008

Shahgul Rezaie, who attended the forum, is one of the female members of Afghanistan's parliament, 25 percent of whose members must be women.

---

The men were supposed to be ending the war in Liberia, but they were getting nowhere. Talks were deadlocked; fighting was still raging in the countryside.

A group of women, frustrated by years of war and the loss of husbands and children, finally took matters into their own hands by surrounding the building and threatening to take off their clothes.

It worked. By embarrassing the men and threatening to break a taboo on female nudity, the "sex for peace" campaign, waged by activists such as Asatu Bah-Kenneth, forced the men to settle their differences.

Mrs. Bah-Kenneth, now the deputy inspector-general of police for administration in Liberia, told the story this week to 400 participants at a Washington forum on the role of women in national and regional security.

Women account for only 5 percent of the jobs in the security sector worldwide, and in some countries are totally excluded, the delegates were told. Yet several speakers argued that women can make a vital contribution to sustainable peace because of their skills in reconciliation.

It is of primary importance that leaders in troubled regions listen to their citizens and learn to see threats in their broader social context, said U.S. Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute in a keynote speech Tuesday. He said there can be "no reconciliation without civil participation."

Amal Jadou, the director general of international affairs for the Palestinian Authority, even suggested the United States could advance the cause of peace by refusing to meet with any foreign delegation that did not include women.

Delegates from Afghanistan, Colombia, Liberia, Haiti, Israel and Palestinian territories participated in round-table discussions with the State Department, U.S. armed forces, police and advocacy organizations at the forum, sponsored by the Cambridge, Mass.-based Hunt Alternatives Fund, run by former U.S. Ambassador Swanee Hunt.

Shukria Barakzai, a member of Afghanistan's parliament, said she found the forum useful for three reasons.

"Firstly, we recognize we are not the only women suffering from war and violence; secondly, we can try to find similar ways to deal with the same problems; and thirdly, we see how women are united themselves, and that this solidarity means something," she said.

Orzala Ashraf, the founder of a group called Humanitarian Assistance for the Women and Children of Afghanistan, said, "The most important thing is introducing the definition of security from a woman's perspective.

"It is not a man in a uniform standing next to a tank armed with a gun. Women have a broader term, human security, the ability to go to school, receive health care, work and have access to justice," she said.

"Only by improving these areas can the threats of insurgents, Taliban, druglords and warlords be countered."

The delegates devised policy initiatives on how to place more women in senior roles in their countries' police and armed forces, with the goal of making them more responsive to their people and winning public trust.

Mrs. Barakzai was asked whether the highly conservative men who run her country would ever accept an increased security role for women.

"Yes, it is difficult, but it is my right to raise my voice," she said. "They ignore me. They hate me. But it is my right to represent the people."

In Afghanistan, 28 percent of parliament is female, even more than the 25 percent required by the country's 2004 constitution. Mrs. Barakzai said she is sure the number will rise in the next election to 30 percent.

"It is difficult," said the self-described anti-drug, antiwar, liberal democrat. "Warlords and the Taliban have the same view of women — that they should be at home with babie
Source

Further reading: Liberian Women Demand Full Inclusion Into Security Sector Structures

K-School Organizes Conference for Women

Four-day program connects women with public policy makers

CRIMSON/ ALAN C. CHIU

Buy this photo

A panel discussion at the Institute of Politics on Wednesday addresses the role of women in creating peace across the world.

Published On Thursday, January 17, 2008 11:40 PM

By SARAH J. HOWLAND

Crimson Staff Writer

Thirty women from war-torn countries discussed the role of women in peace building Wednesday as a part of a four-day program aimed at bringing women leaders together to shape public policy.

“We share a common goal, which is that security isn’t about tanks and soldiers, it’s about the ability to go to school, to get help, to get food,” said Wazhma Frogh, a gender and development specialist in Afghanistan.

The panel, titled “Engendering Peace: Security Through an Inclusive Lens,” featured four women from Afghanistan, Israel, Colombia, and Palestine at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum on Wednesday night. Other participants included reporters, human rights lawyers, and grassroots organizers.

The talk was part of the annual Women and Security Executive Program, which explores the ability of women to seek out compromise during times of intense conflict.

“I think that men are more willing to take risks with war than with peace,” said retired Israeli general Israela Oron. “Peace is very risky, you know, but women are better at taking risks for peace.”

The panelists compared their efforts to improve security, which included the experiences of the first female Colombian minister of defense and a young Afghan’s social activism beginning at age 17.

The proper role of the international community in protecting women during conflicts was also discussed.

Amal Jadou, the director general of international affairs for the Palestinian president, said that arriving at security is more complex than ending violence.

“To talk about the security issue is not an easy issue for the Palestinian woman because there are different layers of insecurity,” she said, referring to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its effects on Palestinian society.

Jadou and Oron both said that although it was hard for them to accept one another’s positions, they could relate to each other because they are women.

But program participant Maria-Emma Wills said their gender was not the key to holding a dialogue.

“I do not think that women, per se, are more peaceful than men,” said Wills, who works to educate Colombians about their country’s decades-long conflict between leftist guerillas, paramilitaries, and the government.

She added, however, that taking gender into account may facilitate negotiations.

In addition to the panel, the Women and Security Executive Program hosts other sessions about security and public policy in conjunction with Harvard faculty.

Source

Read more about Amal Jadou HERE in an interview at the website If Americans Only Knew titled "

Hope for the Future:
An Interview with Amal Jadou

Learn more about Israela Oron, the highest ever ranking female in the IOF who is a member of the committee tasked with implementing the recommendations of the Winograd Report in an article she penned, "Terms of Peace"

Thoughts?

Tom Young: Wants to Tell the Truth in Lebanon, Not Just the Tragedy but the Beauty

The following is one of the most beautifully profound articles I have read.

[ Saalouk #2: Tom Young ] 'I want to tell the truth – not just the tragedy but also the beauty'

Posted January 25th, 2008

The paintings of David Roberts, depicting an idyllic 19th-century Levant, are ubiquitous in many households in the region. Now, another romantic British painter, Tom Young, follows in Roberts' footsteps but with a difference. In Young's 21st-century Levant, not all is idyllic, as the artist takes his sketchbook to places like bombed-out South Beirut.

By JACKSON ALLERS in Beirut

Self-portrait of the artist under interrogation by Hezbollah.

Editor's Note: During the 'Jahiliah,' the days of ignorance before the coming of the Prophet, the poets were the media. While some sang the praises of whoever was in power, others refused to sell out and vowed only to tell the truth. They were the 'saalik' or 'tramps.' In this new section, MENASSAT.COM profiles people who we consider to be the modern-day 'saalik.' Our 'Saalouk #2' is British painter Tom Young.

[ Saalouk #2: Tom Young ] A modern-day David Roberts

MENASSAT.COM: As a British painter who has done work in so many idyllic settings, the south of France, Italy, the Thames River, what are you doing in Lebanon?

TOM YOUNG: "Well, I spent a lot of time when I was young in countries surrounding Lebanon. I studied architecture and art for a term at Istanbul University and had been to Israel when I was 11, in 1984.

"So I became aware of the struggle in this part of the world from a very early age.

"As well, the whole of the British TV news was saturated with reports about the war in Lebanon at a very important time in my life, when I was 10 and 11, back in the 80's.

"There's a tragic event that happened in my family. My mother died when I was eleven. She actually took her own life. And so, at that time, I was completely shocked and devastated by that event in my own life.

"While I was going through that experience, I was watching TV reports about what was going on in Beirut and maybe there was some connection deep inside of me that I made, some type of connection between the two. And so [Lebanon] was always in my consciousness."

When was the first time you actually came to Lebanon?

"I came to Lebanon in 2006 in the spring. I was deeply shocked and saddened and affected by the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and my interest in this part of the world was greatly heightened at that point because I felt what my country was doing at that time was wrong, and I wanted to somehow express my feelings. So I went on the big anti-war march in London.

"I was planning to actually go to Baghdad and do some painting of some kind, I suppose, a sort of protest but also to show empathy with the people there.

"And, I was planning this project but then the situation there just escalated into total – well, it just got much worse. So that idea got shelved. As soon as this happened – well, I've got a friend in London who is Lebanese and actually runs the car mechanic business that fixes my car. And he's done well for himself. He immigrated to England during the civil war.

"He had always taken interest in my painting, and had always said to me that he would like to buy a painting – a landscape – because he loves my landscapes. And, then he said, 'Right Tom, I want to buy a painting from you now.'

And I said to him, ‘Why do you want a painting of England or France? Why don't you have a painting of your homeland?'

He said, 'That is my dream. I would love to have a painting of my home because I miss it so much. You've got go to Lebanon! I'll pay for your ticket – you can meet my family.' "

'My work is rather like Roberts' – it is romantic and ideal. But it also takes into account the sadness and tragedy'

'Damaged.' © tomyoung.com

Do you fancy yourself a sort of contemporary David Roberts?

"Yes, I do. His work does interest me from the point of view of its uplifting quality and by the way he manages to cross sectarian divides and paint the land of Palestine and The Levant in a way that appeals to everyone.

"I am interested in this idea of art being a unifying force that joins people divided by religious and political divides, conflicts. I am interested in the idea that the work of Roberts now hangs on the corrugated iron walls of the Palestinian refugee camps here in Lebanon and this part of the world because it harks back to the land they once had and it puts them in touch with something that is very close to their hearts.

"I think this is what art can do when it works well. And my work is rather like Roberts' work – it is romantic and ideal. So I am interested in making work that is uplifting and gives people warmth and some hope. But it also takes into account the sadness and tragedy.

"I think in Roberts' work, he hasn't necessarily got a sense of this. But I’d like to take the best of his work and infuse it with something contemporary and real."

It's a much smaller world now; people are much more connected. In your painting – as you say you're trying to contemporize Roberts' vision because it is not a perfect world here – are you trying to challenge the West's perceptions of the Arab world as well?

"Yeah, I would really like to challenge and reverse these rather patronizing visions of the Orient, as it were. Some elements of this idea of romantic idealism do appeal to me because I find this part of the world beautiful and inspiring. I'd like to tell the truth of the whole of this part of the world, not just the tragedy and the violence, but also the beauty."

How are you going to avoid the concept of coming to Lebanon, extracting your experience, putting it down on canvas and then taking it back to the U.K. and keeping it there?

"Obviously I will have to do that in the beginning because I've got to earn my living. I'm an artist. I need to make paintings and I'll go back and have an exhibition.

"But I want to invite the Middle Eastern community in London – as you say, ‘It's a much smaller world now’ – I want to draw the Middle Eastern community in the West to my exhibition. For example, to invite the ambassadors of Lebanon, Syria and Israel all to come to the exhibition so that maybe the exhibition in my part of the world becomes a platform for people to meet and talk – and to appreciate what might be lost if more effort is not taken to protect and improve the lives of people here. So that is one level on which I'd like to work.

"I'd also love to have an exhibition here in Lebanon. Don't take it back home. Keep it here where it belongs. This is something I'd love to do, and not just be a traveler tourist who comes and takes. But I want to come and contribute and add to some of the culture here if I can."

'Painting and drawing is a common language that everyone speaks, rather like music'

'Downtown Beirut.' © tomyoung.com

Do you find as painter that it is difficult to go into sensitive areas here in Lebanon – like Hezbollah areas or the Palestinian camps? Talk to me about the process that you go through. As a painter, how do you approach that?

"I think painting and drawing really has a got a special quality that appeals to everyone. It is a common language that everyone speaks, rather like music.

"When I was in Lebanon for the first time in the spring of 2006, whilst I was doing a commission for a wealthy Christian family, I also wanted to go into the Palestinian refugee camps. I went to Chatila and I spent a couple of days there doing portraits of children. Really as a way of connecting and just trying to have some fun.

"It was a wonderful experience and the kids loved it so much that they were queuing up to be drawn. There were kids sharpening my pencils for me, picking up my paper if I dropped it. It was just a lovely communal experience that went beyond the fact that I was British and they were Palestinian.

"I think that is something that painting has got that perhaps photography and film-making haven't got. And that became particularly apparent when I was in Chatila, because as I was drawing these portraits, a photographer appeared and he began taking photos of people. As soon as the kids saw the camera, they all ran away and I was left alone with my sketchbook.

"They all hid behind bits of wall near their shacks. As soon as the photographer disappeared, they ran back out to have their portraits drawn again. And that told me something about drawing and painting and what it can do particularly in the technological age because it is a language that crosses all boundaries and that kids find fun. And the mothers joined in as well.

"I also met some older people there at Chatila who spoke quite good English, and they questioned me about the whole history of British involvement in what has happened in this region. And this is something I've always been aware of too.

"I'm an Englishman and I love my country. But I'm deeply shocked and saddened by some of the things that my country has done. And in some senses, I don't know if I feel guilt, but it's certainly a deep concern for what my forefathers have done.

"It does inspire me to perhaps try and do something to counter the terrible effect that the Balfour Declaration and before that the Sykes-Picot Agreement that led to it – has had on people here. People's lives have been ripped apart here. And it is just not right!

"I'm not a politician. I'm not a doctor and I'm not a soldier. There's perhaps not much I can do in practical terms. But as an artist I'd like to think I can do something to help or to aid in understanding. Even it's just a drop in the ocean, I feel compelled to make this drop."

'There's no big clever concept here, I just want to express my feelings about what I see. Be it beauty or be it destruction'

Your painting, "20 Years," which is clearly in the Dahiyeh, which was devastated during the Israeli war – that was one of those pieces that came from your trip to Lebanon in September of 2006?

"Yes, it did. It came directly from that. A very good friend of mine – a Shi'a Lebanese – took me to places in Dahiyeh where some of his family had been living and where their homes had been destroyed. It was a very moving experience – the devastation, the desolation.

"Actually, we met one woman who refused to leave her house throughout the entire Israeli bombing campaign. She had an amazing dignity and strength. My friend introduced me to her – and she let me draw her and photograph her.

"I did some drawings of her that really personified for me, you know, the strength and the defiance of the people here which I find moving and inspiring, and I wanted to express that in my work.

"Also to express a sense of her individuality - she's not a statistic. She's not just a number on a news report – these are people here, and I wanted to try to get that across in my drawing.

"Also when I was in Dahiyeh, I decided to try and find a group of children there that I could work with because of course, it's the children that really suffer and have these terrible experiences so early in their lives.

"Through an NGO social worker in Beirut, we went into the heart of Dahiyeh where it had been most bombed and we worked with a group of kids in this playground surrounded by bomb craters.

"From London, I had brought two very big primed canvases with me, and my idea was to do some workshops with kids. We created these two big collaborative paintings and drawings which all of the kids joined in on. It was a great experience for me because I learned a lot about their tenacity and their enthusiasm. And they got to do these great drawings and paintings, which I still have.

"I made a short film of the making of these projects and now I still have these big paintings and the short film, which form a sort of video installation, which I hope to exhibit and sell and then hopefully that money will eventually go back to the very children who made the work.

"So, I'm working on this idea. But I didn't want to take, as you say, everything that they’d done back to England. All of the individual drawings and paintings that they did in the run up to the collective pieces they kept and took back to their homes.

Can you address the irony of the romantic idealist painter dealing with scenes of destruction. How do you reconcile the concept of romantic idealism with this concept of tragedy in a landscape – is it some sort of sick sense of humor? How do you characterize it?

"I guess I'm interested in challenging myself and taking my work into a completely different environment, and seeing how it will work.

"But, I'm mainly just interested in the world around me, and I just paint it. There's no big clever concept here, I just want to express my feelings about what I see. Be it beauty or be it destruction."

Do you worry about that falling into an orientalist perspective and that being abstracted from the suffering?

"The only way to prevent being abstracted from the suffering is to get involved with people who are suffering. I am aware that I might disappear into this ivory tower of this orientalist romance and just the ivory tower of art itself. And I know I may be guilty of that sometimes, but I want to challenge that.

"The only way I can see to challenge that is to get involved with people and to not just think about my voice but to try and give other people a platform to express themselves.

"So that it's not just about me coming here to do what I want to do here, but by doing these projects with kids in Dahiyeh, that it's about giving them a chance to express themselves in a way that they want to. And I just want to perhaps be a medium for that. I don't want to control anything."


www.tomyoung.com

Source

For Tom Young's upcoming exhibitions, link HERE

Further reading in this series "Saalouk":

[ Saalouk #1: Ghaith Abdul-Ahad ] 'You don't get extra credit for being an Iraqi'