Zafar Bangash, a free-lance writer for Crescent International.
Media Monitors Network Sunday February 04 2007
"Just as nationalism is alien to the political culture of Islam, so sectarianism is the very antithesis of Muslim unity."
It is difficult to say which is worse: nationalism or sectarianism in the Ummah (Muslim World). The ruling elites in the Muslim world exploit both these weaknesses to advance their own nefarious agendas. Just as nationalism is alien to the political culture of Islam, so sectarianism is the very antithesis of Muslim unity. While most Muslims have little reason to indulge in divisive polemic against fellow Muslims, there are groups within the Ummah whose survival depends on keeping us divided.
Let us consider two recent developments: Hizbullah's successful resistance to zionist aggression in Lebanon last summer and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's standing up to the US. The first elevated Hizbullah leader Shaikh Seyyed Hasan Nasrallah's stature among the Muslim masses, while the second turned Ahmedinejad into a symbol of the courage and defiance so lacking in other Muslim rulers. The popularity of both shot up among Muslims all over the world. Their photographs were prominently displayed in people's homes and in restaurants and coffee shops throughout the Middle East. It did not matter that both are Shi‘a; people instinctively identified with them because their stature and conduct stood in sharp contrast with the spineless cowardice habitually displayed by their own rulers.
These developments clearly alarmed other Muslim rulers and the US, who are struggling to neutralize them. When the two Abdullahs, Saudi and Jordanian, condemned Hizbullah, the Muslim masses reacted angrily and both men had to back down. Their retreat, however, was tactical; aware that the elation at Hizbullah's victory and Ahmedinejad's courage would dissipate in the face of new problems, real or imagined, they waited for an opportune moment to strike back. They did not have to wait long. The US, too, the main loser in these developments, needed to recover lost ground.
In October, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made a highly publicized trip to the Middle East to rally “moderate regimes” against the “extremists”, meaning Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas and Syria. In December, members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) met in Bahrain to offer their own pearls of wisdom about confronting extremists. Rice was in the region again in mid-January to mobilize the Arab dinosaurs for a confrontation with the forces of Islam. By this time, events in Iraq, grossly mishandled by the incompetent Iraqi government, were effectively supporting the US effort. “The reality of the current situation is that we are approaching an open Sunni-Shi'ite conflict in the region,” Emad Gad, a specialist in international relations at the government-financed Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo, told the New York Times on January 17. “And Egypt will also be a part of it as a part of the Sunni axis. No one will be able to avoid or escape it.” Egypt is not alone in stoking sectarianism; the Saudis are even worse. They fear the growing power of Iran as a threat to their illegitimate rule. Abdul Rahman al-Barak, a Saudi ‘alim close to the ruling family, has described the Shi‘a, whom he referred to by the derogatory term ar-rafideen (the rejectionists), as worse than Jews and Christians.
Members of the GCC also jumped on Rice's anti-Iran bandwagon when their foreign ministers met in Kuwait on January 16. The communiqué they issued must have sounded like music to American ears: “The participants welcomed the commitment by the United States as stated in President Bush's recent speech [January 10] to defend the security of the Gulf, the territorial integrity of Iraq and to ensure a successful, fair and inclusive political process that engages all Iraqi communities and guarantees the stability of the country.” Their concern about inclusiveness would be more convincing had Iraq under Saddam been a model for inclusiveness or if the regimes themselves were so inclined. Their concern is more mundane: to join America's anti-Iran crusade because they fear Iran's growing influence. To undermine Iran, they are willing to resort to crude tactics: fan sectarian tensions by financing it on behalf of the US.
All this is, unfortunately, nothing new; some parts of the Ummah have a long history of falling into the sectarian trap. Soon after the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, the former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger convened a secret meeting in Cairo to instigate Shi‘a-Sunni conflict by staging an uprising against the regime in either Sudan or Syria. The plan was to embarrass Iran. If Tehran supported the uprising, it would disrupt its relations with these regimes; if it sided with the regimes, Islamic movements worldwide would condemn it for not supporting a part of the Islamic movement. The Syrian Ikhwan were pushed into staging an uprising against the Syrian regime, even though a significant faction, led by Dr. Issam al-Ataar, refused to join this US-engineered conspiracy. Inevitably, Hafez al-Asad brutally crushed the uprising, killing thousands in Hama. As planned, this led to years of virulent anti-Iranian propaganda because of Tehran's good relations with Damascus.
The question now, as history threatens to repeat itself, is whether the Ummah has learnt anything from the tragedy of Hama, or whether it will again fall into the traps being laid to advance Uncle Sam's agenda.
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/40608/
Monday, February 5, 2007
Mahathir Mohamad : Bush, Blair 'worse than Saddam'
News24 05/02/2007 14:02 - (SA)
Kuala Lumpur - Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad condemned British premier Tony Blair and US President George W Bush as "child killers" and "war criminals" as he launched an anti-war conference on Monday.
Mahathir, who has been nominated by Bosnian civil society groups for the 2007 Nobel peace prize for helping the country after its bloody civil war, said the pair should be put on trial for their military action in Iraq.
"History should remember Blair and Bush as the killer of children or the lying prime minister and president. What Bush and Blair had done is worse than what Saddam had done," he said, referring to hanged Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Mahathir also turned his scorn on Australian Prime Minister John Howard, deriding him as the "pocket Bush of the bushlands of Australia".
The 81-year-old firebrand was a strident critic of the West during his two decades in power, and has continued to hit out since stepping down in 2003, seizing on the issue of conflict in the Middle East during his retirement.
War crimes tribunal
Last week he unveiled plans for an unofficial war crimes tribunal to focus on victims of abuse in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, saying that the existing international court at the Hague was biased.
This week's war crimes conference will be attended by some 17 Palestinians, Iraqis and Lebanese, who allege they are the victims of abuse and torture.
Mahathir has said he will also form a new war crimes commission, to be located in Kuala Lumpur, which will investigate their cases and then refer them to the tribunal if warranted.
"We should not hang Blair if the tribunal finds him guilty, but he should always carry the label 'war criminal', 'killer of children', 'liar'." Mahathir said in his speech.
The tribunal will carry no legal authority and is not backed by any government, but Mahathir has said it will ensure that offenders' wrongdoings are recorded in the history books.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2064563,00.html
Kuala Lumpur - Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad condemned British premier Tony Blair and US President George W Bush as "child killers" and "war criminals" as he launched an anti-war conference on Monday.
Mahathir, who has been nominated by Bosnian civil society groups for the 2007 Nobel peace prize for helping the country after its bloody civil war, said the pair should be put on trial for their military action in Iraq.
"History should remember Blair and Bush as the killer of children or the lying prime minister and president. What Bush and Blair had done is worse than what Saddam had done," he said, referring to hanged Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Mahathir also turned his scorn on Australian Prime Minister John Howard, deriding him as the "pocket Bush of the bushlands of Australia".
The 81-year-old firebrand was a strident critic of the West during his two decades in power, and has continued to hit out since stepping down in 2003, seizing on the issue of conflict in the Middle East during his retirement.
War crimes tribunal
Last week he unveiled plans for an unofficial war crimes tribunal to focus on victims of abuse in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, saying that the existing international court at the Hague was biased.
This week's war crimes conference will be attended by some 17 Palestinians, Iraqis and Lebanese, who allege they are the victims of abuse and torture.
Mahathir has said he will also form a new war crimes commission, to be located in Kuala Lumpur, which will investigate their cases and then refer them to the tribunal if warranted.
"We should not hang Blair if the tribunal finds him guilty, but he should always carry the label 'war criminal', 'killer of children', 'liar'." Mahathir said in his speech.
The tribunal will carry no legal authority and is not backed by any government, but Mahathir has said it will ensure that offenders' wrongdoings are recorded in the history books.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2064563,00.html
Hillary Vows New Push Against Hate Rhetoric In Palestinian Textbooks
Tells AIPAC crowd in Manhattan she’ll increase awareness of issue with Senate event next week.
Adam Dickter - Assistant Managing Editor
The Jewish Week Friday, Feb. 2, 1 p.m.
Palestinians have done little to remove hateful rhetoric against Jews and Israel from their schoolbooks despite international attention to the problem, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton told guests at Thursday’s AIPAC Northeast Region dinner.
Before hundreds of Israel supporters and activists at the Marriot Marquis in Manhattan, New York’s junior senator and Democratic presidential hopeful promised to increase awareness of the issue.
“In 1999, I raised the problem of anti-Semitism in Palestinian textbooks,” said Clinton, referring to her efforts as first lady. “Now eight years, later we continue to hear reports that the textbooks have not been changed. I will be doing an event in Washington in the Senate next week to highlight the anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric that is still part of the curriculum.”
Clinton also made headlines by insisting that “no option can be taken off the table” in thwarting Iran’s attempt to become a nuclear power. “We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force,” she said.
She also emphasized that the U.S. must continue to demand that Hamas completely renounce violence and recognize Israel before it can be viewed as a legitimate peace partner by the U.S. and Israel.
The event was clearly an important venue for Clinton, who has worked hard to overcome a mixed reputation on Israel since her days as first lady, while earning high marks as a senator.
Clinton was stuck in Washington Thursday awaiting a Senate vote to raise the minimum wage, and was prepared to address the gathering via satellite.
For most of the day it was not known when the votes would be cast. But Clinton said her worries were eased when she received a call from an AIPAC representative informing her that the vote would be at 5:30, allowing her to catch a 7 p.m. shuttle.
“Your intelligence sources are better than anything we have in Washington,” she joked during her 8:30 p.m. address.
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13617&print=yes
Adam Dickter - Assistant Managing Editor
The Jewish Week Friday, Feb. 2, 1 p.m.
Palestinians have done little to remove hateful rhetoric against Jews and Israel from their schoolbooks despite international attention to the problem, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton told guests at Thursday’s AIPAC Northeast Region dinner.
Before hundreds of Israel supporters and activists at the Marriot Marquis in Manhattan, New York’s junior senator and Democratic presidential hopeful promised to increase awareness of the issue.
“In 1999, I raised the problem of anti-Semitism in Palestinian textbooks,” said Clinton, referring to her efforts as first lady. “Now eight years, later we continue to hear reports that the textbooks have not been changed. I will be doing an event in Washington in the Senate next week to highlight the anti-Semitism and anti-Israel rhetoric that is still part of the curriculum.”
Clinton also made headlines by insisting that “no option can be taken off the table” in thwarting Iran’s attempt to become a nuclear power. “We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force,” she said.
She also emphasized that the U.S. must continue to demand that Hamas completely renounce violence and recognize Israel before it can be viewed as a legitimate peace partner by the U.S. and Israel.
The event was clearly an important venue for Clinton, who has worked hard to overcome a mixed reputation on Israel since her days as first lady, while earning high marks as a senator.
Clinton was stuck in Washington Thursday awaiting a Senate vote to raise the minimum wage, and was prepared to address the gathering via satellite.
For most of the day it was not known when the votes would be cast. But Clinton said her worries were eased when she received a call from an AIPAC representative informing her that the vote would be at 5:30, allowing her to catch a 7 p.m. shuttle.
“Your intelligence sources are better than anything we have in Washington,” she joked during her 8:30 p.m. address.
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13617&print=yes
Israel restricts access to al-Aqsa
Al Jazeera SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 04, 2007
Israeli police and army forces deployed on Sunday around al-Aqsa mosque's compound in occupied Jerusalem in an attempt to prevent wide access to the site. Security forces manned barricades and checked Palestinians' identification, allowing only men over 45 years of age and women near the site.
The Israeli government recently set a date to start demolishing a hill near al-Maghariba gate, one of al-Aqsa's entrances, to build a road for Jewish settlers.
A demonstration was planned for Sunday in the mosque yard after calls by Taysir al-Tamimi, Palestinian chief judge, to protect it from Israeli development plans. He said: "I have appealed to all Palestinians to head on Sunday towards the holy Al-Aqsa mosque to hinder the Israeli order to demolish parts of the western fence of the holy al-Aqsa mosque."
Excavations
"Israel is now carrying out wide excavations under the mosque and is building a synagogue in front of the Dome of the Rock," al-Tamimi said, adding the mosque was seriously threatened and could collapse. Israel occupied and annexed the compound containing the holy sites after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The annexation of the compound is not recognised by international law. The al-Aqsa and Dome of the Rock mosques sit above the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site. The al-Aqsa mosque is Islam's third holiest shrine. The area is referred to by Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif and by Jews as the Temple Mount. Al-Tamimi said appeals had been made to Islamic and Arab states, the OIC, the Jerusalem Committee and the Arab League to intervene, but to no effect. "Unfortunately, none [of these nations or bodies] has done anything as it seems that Jerusalem, al-Aqsa mosque and Palestine are not on their agendas." For his part, Khaled Meshaal, the political bureau chief of Hamas, on Sunday condemned excavations by Israeli archaeologists near Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque, as Israeli security restricted access to the site. "Israel knows what its violation of the holy Aqsa will bring. It is playing with fire," Khaled Meshaal said on Sunday at a news conference in Syria, where he lives in exile. Inflammatory Meshaal warned that further Israeli threats to the integrity of the mosque would be considered inflammatory. He said: "Sharon's desecration of the Aqsa sparked the 2000 uprising. The Israeli leadership must learn from this lesson. We have confidence in our people, its masses, all of its groups and military wings. "We are facing a dangerous action. Jerusalem's Muslim and Christian holy sites are dear to all Palestinians. Israel is trying to take advantage of the Palestinian internal conflict to commit its crimes." A visit to al-Aqsa mosque compound in September 2000 by Ariel Sharon, then Israel's opposition leader, led to the second Palestinian intifada.
http://english.aljazeera.net/News/Templates/Postings/DetailedPage.aspx?FRAMELESS=false&NRNODEGUID=%7bCA5F37D9-656B-4129-8F48-D702D71E3DA5%7d&NRORIGINALURL=%2fNR%2fexeres%2fCA5F37D9-656B-4129-8F48-D702D71E3DA5%2ehtm&NRCACHEHINT=NoModifyGuest
Israeli police and army forces deployed on Sunday around al-Aqsa mosque's compound in occupied Jerusalem in an attempt to prevent wide access to the site. Security forces manned barricades and checked Palestinians' identification, allowing only men over 45 years of age and women near the site.
The Israeli government recently set a date to start demolishing a hill near al-Maghariba gate, one of al-Aqsa's entrances, to build a road for Jewish settlers.
A demonstration was planned for Sunday in the mosque yard after calls by Taysir al-Tamimi, Palestinian chief judge, to protect it from Israeli development plans. He said: "I have appealed to all Palestinians to head on Sunday towards the holy Al-Aqsa mosque to hinder the Israeli order to demolish parts of the western fence of the holy al-Aqsa mosque."
Excavations
"Israel is now carrying out wide excavations under the mosque and is building a synagogue in front of the Dome of the Rock," al-Tamimi said, adding the mosque was seriously threatened and could collapse. Israel occupied and annexed the compound containing the holy sites after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The annexation of the compound is not recognised by international law. The al-Aqsa and Dome of the Rock mosques sit above the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site. The al-Aqsa mosque is Islam's third holiest shrine. The area is referred to by Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif and by Jews as the Temple Mount. Al-Tamimi said appeals had been made to Islamic and Arab states, the OIC, the Jerusalem Committee and the Arab League to intervene, but to no effect. "Unfortunately, none [of these nations or bodies] has done anything as it seems that Jerusalem, al-Aqsa mosque and Palestine are not on their agendas." For his part, Khaled Meshaal, the political bureau chief of Hamas, on Sunday condemned excavations by Israeli archaeologists near Jerusalem's al-Aqsa mosque, as Israeli security restricted access to the site. "Israel knows what its violation of the holy Aqsa will bring. It is playing with fire," Khaled Meshaal said on Sunday at a news conference in Syria, where he lives in exile. Inflammatory Meshaal warned that further Israeli threats to the integrity of the mosque would be considered inflammatory. He said: "Sharon's desecration of the Aqsa sparked the 2000 uprising. The Israeli leadership must learn from this lesson. We have confidence in our people, its masses, all of its groups and military wings. "We are facing a dangerous action. Jerusalem's Muslim and Christian holy sites are dear to all Palestinians. Israel is trying to take advantage of the Palestinian internal conflict to commit its crimes." A visit to al-Aqsa mosque compound in September 2000 by Ariel Sharon, then Israel's opposition leader, led to the second Palestinian intifada.
http://english.aljazeera.net/News/Templates/Postings/DetailedPage.aspx?FRAMELESS=false&NRNODEGUID=%7bCA5F37D9-656B-4129-8F48-D702D71E3DA5%7d&NRORIGINALURL=%2fNR%2fexeres%2fCA5F37D9-656B-4129-8F48-D702D71E3DA5%2ehtm&NRCACHEHINT=NoModifyGuest
Jews in Britain speak out
2 articles
A time to speak out
There is a need for alternative Jewish voices to be heard - especially in the light of the grave situation in the Middle East.
Guardian February 5, 2007 07:05 AM
We are a group of Jews in Britain from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty.
We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of both Israelis and Palestinians as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles:
1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories as it is elsewhere.
2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.
3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to the conflict to comply with international law.
4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-semitism, anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia, in any circumstance.
5. The battle against anti-semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded as anti-semitic.
These principles are contradicted when those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain and other countries consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people. The Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip face appalling living conditions with desperately little hope for the future. We declare our support for a properly negotiated peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people and oppose any attempt by the Israeli government to impose its own solutions on the Palestinians.
It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherent and consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out. We therefore commit ourselves to make public our views on a continuing basis and invite other concerned Jews to join and support us.
Dr Lisa AppignanesiSir Geoffrey BindmanLady Ellen DahrendorfDr Edie FriedmanUri FruchtmannRabbi David GoldbergDr Anthony IsaacsAnn JungmanAnne KarpfDr Brian KlugProf Francesca KlugDr Tony KlugProf Susie OrbachProf Jacqueline RoseLeon RosselsonProf Donald SassoonProf Lynne SegalGillian SlovoHenry StewartJanet Suzman
Plus many others. The full list of signatores can be found at http://www.ijv.org.uk/.. For more information email press@ijv.org.uk.
Click here for a full list of articles in the Independent Jewish Voices debate http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/category/independent_jewish_voices/
ALSO READ........
No one has the right to speak for British Jews on Israel and Zionism
We will not accept the vilification of those who protest at injustices carried out in the name of the Jewish people
Brian Klug
The Guardian Monday February 5, 2007
If there is one thing on which Jews can agree, it is this: it's good to argue. Jewish culture has thrived on argument - frank, sincere disagreement - ever since Moses disputed with God. But today an oppressive and unhealthy atmosphere is leading many Jews to feel uncertain about speaking out on Israel and Zionism. People are anxious about contravening an unwritten law on what you can and cannot discuss, may or may not assert.
It is a climate that raises fundamental questions: about freedom of expression, Jewish identity, representation, and the part that concerned Jews in Britain can play in assisting Israelis and Palestinians to find their way to a better future.
As the situation in the Middle East deteriorates yearly, more and more Jews watch with dismay from afar. Dismay turns to anguish when innocent civilians - Palestinians and Israelis - suffer injury and death because of the continuing conflict. Anguish turns to outrage when the human rights of a population under occupation are repeatedly violated in the name of the Jewish people.
No one has the authority to speak for the Jewish people. Yet during Israel's war with Lebanon last summer, Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, told an American audience: "I believe that this is a war that is fought by all the Jews." His belief is not based on evidence: it is an article of faith, a corollary of the doctrine that Israel represents Jewry as a whole - in Britain included.
This is a fallacy; and, moreover, a dangerous one, since it tars all Jews with the same brush. Yet this misconception is reinforced here by those who, claiming to speak for British Jews collectively or allowing that impression to go unchallenged, only ever reflect one position on the Middle East. On its own account, the Board of Deputies of British Jews (which calls itself "the voice of British Jewry") devotes much of the time and resources of its international division to "the defence of Israel". When a "solidarity rally" was held in London last July in the midst of the conflict with Lebanon, it was the board that organised it.
All of which suggests that British Jewry, speaking with one voice, stands solidly behind the Israeli government and its military operations.
Two things are wrong with this suggestion. First, it's false. Jews were deeply divided over Israel's campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon last year. Certainly, there were those who shared the sentiment of the chief rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, who, addressing the rally, said: "Israel, you make us proud." Others felt roughly the opposite emotion.
Second, the board has no business taking a partisan position on the Middle East. Let groups such as the Zionist Federation or perhaps the Israeli embassy organise solidarity rallies. The role of the board is to promote the welfare of British Jews in all their variety, not to defend Israel. Similarly, the chief rabbi is entitled, ex officio, to bring a religious perspective to political matters, but it is not his role to act as political spokesman for his flock.
Faced with this state of affairs, a group of Jews in Britain has come together to launch Independent Jewish Voices (IJV). We come from a variety of backgrounds and walks of life. Some of us are religious, some not. A number feel a strong attachment to Israel as Jews, others feel none. We do not all share the same vision for the Middle East. We are a network of individuals, not a movement or political party.
But we are united by certain fundamental commitments. These are set out in our launch statement, published today on the Guardian's Comment is Free website and in advertisements placed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Times. They include: putting human rights first; giving equal priority to Palestinians and Israelis in their quest for a peaceful and secure future; and repudiating all forms of racism aimed at Jews, Arabs, Muslims or whomever.
We believe that these commitments - not ethnic or group loyalties - define the limits of legitimate debate. We invite like-minded Jews in Britain to add their names to the list of IJV signatories.
Jews abroad who are confronted with the same climate are taking similar steps to make their voices heard. The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians has been formed to promote "an alternative public Jewish voice" on Israeli policies. Last July "concerned South African Jews" appealed to "all who share our commitment to a common humanity" to call for Israel to stop its bombardment of Lebanon. In the past few years, Jewish groups speaking out against Israel's violations of human rights have proliferated, notably in the United States, but especially in Israel itself.
We are not setting ourselves up as an alternative to the Board of Deputies or any other body. But we challenge the standard concept of "the Jewish community" as a collective entity for which the board is the secular voice and the chief rabbi the religious voice. This system was developed in another era - though it is being used today as a template for other minorities. It pictures "the Jewish community" as a single bloc that, whatever its internal complexity, presents a common face to the outside world via its ambassadors.
There is an affinity between our initiative and the New Generation Network, which was launched in the Guardian last November. A diverse group of Britons questioned the idea that the pie of British society (or that portion consisting of "minorities") can be divided into neat ethnic or religious slices: discrete "communities" with authoritative "leaders". For many of us, this model is suffocating and goes against the grain of our experience.
Among other things, it places a premium on keeping disagreement "in the family". For Jews, this ethos is especially stifling if the subject is Zionism or Israel. Some people, rightly condemning demonisation of the Jewish state, do not hesitate to demonise fellow Jews who, when expressing their views on these subjects in public, cross an invisible line of acceptability. We reject any attempt to suppress legitimate public debate and we abhor the culture of vilification.
The slur of "traitor" or "self-hating Jew" is especially noxious. For, if we feel compelled to protest against injustice to Palestinians, this is partly because of the lessons of our own history: the Jewish experience of marginalisation and persecution. Furthermore, when the language of human rights is spoken, many of us (secular and religious) hear the voices of those Hebrew prophets, rabbis, writers, activists and other Jewish figures down the centuries for whom Judaism means nothing if it does not mean social justice.
So, when we speak out against Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or the bombing of Lebanon, or discrimination against Palestinians within Israel itself, we are not turning against our Jewish identity; we are turning to it. Some of us, recalling that nearly 40 years have passed since Israel's occupation began, hear a resonance. This was the length of time the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, near the end of which Moses gave them a directive: "Justice, justice shall you pursue" (Deuteronomy 16:20). It is a compass bearing for all humanity, especially when we are trying to find our way - or help others to find theirs - to a better future.
· Brian Klug is senior research fellow in philosophy at St Benet's Hall, Oxford, and associate editor of Patterns of Prejudice
http://www.ijv.org.uk/
A time to speak out
There is a need for alternative Jewish voices to be heard - especially in the light of the grave situation in the Middle East.
Guardian February 5, 2007 07:05 AM
We are a group of Jews in Britain from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty.
We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of both Israelis and Palestinians as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles:
1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories as it is elsewhere.
2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.
3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to the conflict to comply with international law.
4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-semitism, anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia, in any circumstance.
5. The battle against anti-semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded as anti-semitic.
These principles are contradicted when those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain and other countries consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people. The Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip face appalling living conditions with desperately little hope for the future. We declare our support for a properly negotiated peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people and oppose any attempt by the Israeli government to impose its own solutions on the Palestinians.
It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherent and consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out. We therefore commit ourselves to make public our views on a continuing basis and invite other concerned Jews to join and support us.
Dr Lisa AppignanesiSir Geoffrey BindmanLady Ellen DahrendorfDr Edie FriedmanUri FruchtmannRabbi David GoldbergDr Anthony IsaacsAnn JungmanAnne KarpfDr Brian KlugProf Francesca KlugDr Tony KlugProf Susie OrbachProf Jacqueline RoseLeon RosselsonProf Donald SassoonProf Lynne SegalGillian SlovoHenry StewartJanet Suzman
Plus many others. The full list of signatores can be found at http://www.ijv.org.uk/.. For more information email press@ijv.org.uk.
Click here for a full list of articles in the Independent Jewish Voices debate http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/category/independent_jewish_voices/
ALSO READ........
No one has the right to speak for British Jews on Israel and Zionism
We will not accept the vilification of those who protest at injustices carried out in the name of the Jewish people
Brian Klug
The Guardian Monday February 5, 2007
If there is one thing on which Jews can agree, it is this: it's good to argue. Jewish culture has thrived on argument - frank, sincere disagreement - ever since Moses disputed with God. But today an oppressive and unhealthy atmosphere is leading many Jews to feel uncertain about speaking out on Israel and Zionism. People are anxious about contravening an unwritten law on what you can and cannot discuss, may or may not assert.
It is a climate that raises fundamental questions: about freedom of expression, Jewish identity, representation, and the part that concerned Jews in Britain can play in assisting Israelis and Palestinians to find their way to a better future.
As the situation in the Middle East deteriorates yearly, more and more Jews watch with dismay from afar. Dismay turns to anguish when innocent civilians - Palestinians and Israelis - suffer injury and death because of the continuing conflict. Anguish turns to outrage when the human rights of a population under occupation are repeatedly violated in the name of the Jewish people.
No one has the authority to speak for the Jewish people. Yet during Israel's war with Lebanon last summer, Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, told an American audience: "I believe that this is a war that is fought by all the Jews." His belief is not based on evidence: it is an article of faith, a corollary of the doctrine that Israel represents Jewry as a whole - in Britain included.
This is a fallacy; and, moreover, a dangerous one, since it tars all Jews with the same brush. Yet this misconception is reinforced here by those who, claiming to speak for British Jews collectively or allowing that impression to go unchallenged, only ever reflect one position on the Middle East. On its own account, the Board of Deputies of British Jews (which calls itself "the voice of British Jewry") devotes much of the time and resources of its international division to "the defence of Israel". When a "solidarity rally" was held in London last July in the midst of the conflict with Lebanon, it was the board that organised it.
All of which suggests that British Jewry, speaking with one voice, stands solidly behind the Israeli government and its military operations.
Two things are wrong with this suggestion. First, it's false. Jews were deeply divided over Israel's campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon last year. Certainly, there were those who shared the sentiment of the chief rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, who, addressing the rally, said: "Israel, you make us proud." Others felt roughly the opposite emotion.
Second, the board has no business taking a partisan position on the Middle East. Let groups such as the Zionist Federation or perhaps the Israeli embassy organise solidarity rallies. The role of the board is to promote the welfare of British Jews in all their variety, not to defend Israel. Similarly, the chief rabbi is entitled, ex officio, to bring a religious perspective to political matters, but it is not his role to act as political spokesman for his flock.
Faced with this state of affairs, a group of Jews in Britain has come together to launch Independent Jewish Voices (IJV). We come from a variety of backgrounds and walks of life. Some of us are religious, some not. A number feel a strong attachment to Israel as Jews, others feel none. We do not all share the same vision for the Middle East. We are a network of individuals, not a movement or political party.
But we are united by certain fundamental commitments. These are set out in our launch statement, published today on the Guardian's Comment is Free website and in advertisements placed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Times. They include: putting human rights first; giving equal priority to Palestinians and Israelis in their quest for a peaceful and secure future; and repudiating all forms of racism aimed at Jews, Arabs, Muslims or whomever.
We believe that these commitments - not ethnic or group loyalties - define the limits of legitimate debate. We invite like-minded Jews in Britain to add their names to the list of IJV signatories.
Jews abroad who are confronted with the same climate are taking similar steps to make their voices heard. The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians has been formed to promote "an alternative public Jewish voice" on Israeli policies. Last July "concerned South African Jews" appealed to "all who share our commitment to a common humanity" to call for Israel to stop its bombardment of Lebanon. In the past few years, Jewish groups speaking out against Israel's violations of human rights have proliferated, notably in the United States, but especially in Israel itself.
We are not setting ourselves up as an alternative to the Board of Deputies or any other body. But we challenge the standard concept of "the Jewish community" as a collective entity for which the board is the secular voice and the chief rabbi the religious voice. This system was developed in another era - though it is being used today as a template for other minorities. It pictures "the Jewish community" as a single bloc that, whatever its internal complexity, presents a common face to the outside world via its ambassadors.
There is an affinity between our initiative and the New Generation Network, which was launched in the Guardian last November. A diverse group of Britons questioned the idea that the pie of British society (or that portion consisting of "minorities") can be divided into neat ethnic or religious slices: discrete "communities" with authoritative "leaders". For many of us, this model is suffocating and goes against the grain of our experience.
Among other things, it places a premium on keeping disagreement "in the family". For Jews, this ethos is especially stifling if the subject is Zionism or Israel. Some people, rightly condemning demonisation of the Jewish state, do not hesitate to demonise fellow Jews who, when expressing their views on these subjects in public, cross an invisible line of acceptability. We reject any attempt to suppress legitimate public debate and we abhor the culture of vilification.
The slur of "traitor" or "self-hating Jew" is especially noxious. For, if we feel compelled to protest against injustice to Palestinians, this is partly because of the lessons of our own history: the Jewish experience of marginalisation and persecution. Furthermore, when the language of human rights is spoken, many of us (secular and religious) hear the voices of those Hebrew prophets, rabbis, writers, activists and other Jewish figures down the centuries for whom Judaism means nothing if it does not mean social justice.
So, when we speak out against Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or the bombing of Lebanon, or discrimination against Palestinians within Israel itself, we are not turning against our Jewish identity; we are turning to it. Some of us, recalling that nearly 40 years have passed since Israel's occupation began, hear a resonance. This was the length of time the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, near the end of which Moses gave them a directive: "Justice, justice shall you pursue" (Deuteronomy 16:20). It is a compass bearing for all humanity, especially when we are trying to find our way - or help others to find theirs - to a better future.
· Brian Klug is senior research fellow in philosophy at St Benet's Hall, Oxford, and associate editor of Patterns of Prejudice
http://www.ijv.org.uk/
Carter to collect honorary Oxford degree
Alexandra Smith
EducationGuardian.co.uk Monday February 5, 2007
Nobel laureate and former US president Jimmy Carter is one of nine figures set to receive an honorary degree from the University of Oxford this year.
Mr Carter, who won a Nobel peace prize in 2002 for his "untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts", has been marred by controversy since the release of his bestselling book on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid.
The book traces the ups and downs of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process beginning with Mr Carter's 1977-1981 presidency and the historic peace accord he negotiated between Israel and Egypt in 1978.
Although the book is critical of all sides in the conflict, it pays particular attention to the role of Israeli governments, prompting accusations that it is anti-Israel and anti-semitic. After its publication 14 members of the advisory board of his human rights organisation, the Carter Centre, resigned in protest.
Last month, Mr Carter, 82, defended his book at a three-day symposium on his presidency at Georgia University. He told the assembled group: "Not one of the critics of my book has contradicted any of the basic premises ... that is the horrible persecution and oppression of the Palestinian people and secondly that the formula for finding peace in the Middle East already exists."
Oxford said during his presidency, Mr Carter, who in 1982 became university distinguished professor at Emory University in Atlanta, had made significant achievements in foreign policy, including the negotiation of the Panama Canal treaties, the Camp David Accords and the SALT II nuclear limitation treaty with the Soviet Union.
Other recipients of this year's honorary degrees are Lady Hale of Richmond, a barrister and judge who in 2004 became the first woman to join the House of Lords as a law lord, Dame Antonia Susan 'A. S.' Byatt, the Booker Prize-winning author and critic, and Sir Clive Granger, a Nobel prize-winning economist.
The acclaimed stage and film director Ariane Mnouchkine and the musician Daniel Barenboim will also receive honours.
Honorary science doctorates will be awarded to Richard A Lerner and Chintamani Nagesa Ramachandra, both research chemists, and Lord May of Oxford, the former president of the Royal Society.
EducationGuardian.co.uk Monday February 5, 2007
Nobel laureate and former US president Jimmy Carter is one of nine figures set to receive an honorary degree from the University of Oxford this year.
Mr Carter, who won a Nobel peace prize in 2002 for his "untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts", has been marred by controversy since the release of his bestselling book on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid.
The book traces the ups and downs of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process beginning with Mr Carter's 1977-1981 presidency and the historic peace accord he negotiated between Israel and Egypt in 1978.
Although the book is critical of all sides in the conflict, it pays particular attention to the role of Israeli governments, prompting accusations that it is anti-Israel and anti-semitic. After its publication 14 members of the advisory board of his human rights organisation, the Carter Centre, resigned in protest.
Last month, Mr Carter, 82, defended his book at a three-day symposium on his presidency at Georgia University. He told the assembled group: "Not one of the critics of my book has contradicted any of the basic premises ... that is the horrible persecution and oppression of the Palestinian people and secondly that the formula for finding peace in the Middle East already exists."
Oxford said during his presidency, Mr Carter, who in 1982 became university distinguished professor at Emory University in Atlanta, had made significant achievements in foreign policy, including the negotiation of the Panama Canal treaties, the Camp David Accords and the SALT II nuclear limitation treaty with the Soviet Union.
Other recipients of this year's honorary degrees are Lady Hale of Richmond, a barrister and judge who in 2004 became the first woman to join the House of Lords as a law lord, Dame Antonia Susan 'A. S.' Byatt, the Booker Prize-winning author and critic, and Sir Clive Granger, a Nobel prize-winning economist.
The acclaimed stage and film director Ariane Mnouchkine and the musician Daniel Barenboim will also receive honours.
Honorary science doctorates will be awarded to Richard A Lerner and Chintamani Nagesa Ramachandra, both research chemists, and Lord May of Oxford, the former president of the Royal Society.
Saudi "terror funders" are reform activists: lawyer
Reuters
Yahoo! Inc. Sun Feb 4, 4:38 AM ET
RIYADH - Ten men arrested in Saudi Arabia on suspicion of funding terrorism include known political activists detained in the past over calls for reform in the absolute monarchy, a lawyer said on Sunday. ADVERTISEMENT
The Interior Ministry said on Saturday it had arrested 10 people, including a foreign resident, for collecting donations and giving them to "suspicious elements." It said the arrests were part of police operations against "funding terrorism."
Bassem Alem, a lawyer representing some of the men, said they were reformers who had recently been warned by the Interior Ministry, overseen by hawkish Prince Nayef bin Abdul-Aziz, to halt their meetings and petitions.
"They are pure reformists par excellence. Nothing about them is remotely linked with terrorism," he told Reuters, adding that police later seized books and computer files from their homes.
"They are always being given warnings not to write petitions or to meet. There is a heightened sensitivity over petitions and meetings, I don't know why."
He named some of the men as Sulaiman Rushoudi, Essam Basrawy, Abdel-Rahman al-Shimary, Abdelaziz al-Khuraijy and Mousa al-Qarny.
An Interior Ministry spokesman said he could not confirm the men's names or backgrounds.
A court jailed three reformers in 2005 for petitioning for a constitutional monarchy but King Abdullah pardoned them after he came to power the same year in what analysts said was a sign of changing trends within the ruling family.
King Abdullah is a popular figure for his promise of cautious reforms in Saudi Arabia, a monarchy with no elected parliament and little tolerance for political opposition.
Since then there have been no petitions, but little progress on political reform in a country where over 60 percent of the Saudi population of 17 million is under 21.
Political tension in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories and Iraq, as well as an anti-government campaign launched in 2003 by Islamist militants, have heightened security tension in Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally and the world's top oil producer.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070204/wl_nm/saudi_security_reformists_dc
Yahoo! Inc. Sun Feb 4, 4:38 AM ET
RIYADH - Ten men arrested in Saudi Arabia on suspicion of funding terrorism include known political activists detained in the past over calls for reform in the absolute monarchy, a lawyer said on Sunday. ADVERTISEMENT
The Interior Ministry said on Saturday it had arrested 10 people, including a foreign resident, for collecting donations and giving them to "suspicious elements." It said the arrests were part of police operations against "funding terrorism."
Bassem Alem, a lawyer representing some of the men, said they were reformers who had recently been warned by the Interior Ministry, overseen by hawkish Prince Nayef bin Abdul-Aziz, to halt their meetings and petitions.
"They are pure reformists par excellence. Nothing about them is remotely linked with terrorism," he told Reuters, adding that police later seized books and computer files from their homes.
"They are always being given warnings not to write petitions or to meet. There is a heightened sensitivity over petitions and meetings, I don't know why."
He named some of the men as Sulaiman Rushoudi, Essam Basrawy, Abdel-Rahman al-Shimary, Abdelaziz al-Khuraijy and Mousa al-Qarny.
An Interior Ministry spokesman said he could not confirm the men's names or backgrounds.
A court jailed three reformers in 2005 for petitioning for a constitutional monarchy but King Abdullah pardoned them after he came to power the same year in what analysts said was a sign of changing trends within the ruling family.
King Abdullah is a popular figure for his promise of cautious reforms in Saudi Arabia, a monarchy with no elected parliament and little tolerance for political opposition.
Since then there have been no petitions, but little progress on political reform in a country where over 60 percent of the Saudi population of 17 million is under 21.
Political tension in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories and Iraq, as well as an anti-government campaign launched in 2003 by Islamist militants, have heightened security tension in Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally and the world's top oil producer.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070204/wl_nm/saudi_security_reformists_dc
Nobel Peace Prize Nominee's Freedom of Speech Trial
by eileen fleming
Eileen is an activist, author, poet, reporter and editor of wearewideawake.org She has been reporting from the Occupied Palestinian Territories since June 2005. Her first novel "Keep Hope Alive" was released in August 2006. 100% of all proceeds go to provide olive trees for peace in Israel Palestine, through the 501 3-c Olive Trees Foundation for Peace. Her second book, "Third Intifada: NONVIOLENT, But With Words Sharper Than a Two-Edged Sword SUBTITLE: Memoirs of a Nice Irish American "Girl" in Occupied Territory" will be released March 2007.
OpEdNews February 4, 2007 at 15:38:36
Annually, for the last twenty years Mordechai Vanunu has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
This year, Vanunu has been nominated by Bishop Desmond Tutu, who received the Nobel Prize in 1984, for his courageous and fearless opposition against the South African apartheid system.
At the Russian Compound in Jerusalem on February 2, 2007, Vanunu's freedom of speech trial which began on January 25, 2006 was concluded. The court brought 21 charges against him for giving interviews to foreign media in 2004: but the media has been missing in action during this historic trial.
The only journalist present was also the final witness.
Peter Hounam, the London Sunday Times journalist who in 1986 broke the story of Israel's WMD Program utilizing the 60 odd photos Vanunu easily obtained due to the lax security system in the Dimona testified in Vanunu's behalf and was only allowed five minutes to speak with him.
Although Vanunu was only a low tech worker in Israel's WMD facility, he easily obtained the keys to the restricted areas after they had been carelessly left in the shower room. Vanunu was able to shoot two rolls of film in the underground WMD facility without detection.
Although released after 18 years in jail on April 21, 2004, Vanunu has lived under the draconian 1945 British Mandate State of Emergency Regulations, which forbids him from leaving Israel and speaking to media and foreigners.
Vanunu informed this foreigner and reporter in March 2006 that "This administration tells me I am not allowed to speak to foreigners, the Media, and the world. But I do because that is how I prove my true humanity to the world."
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." -Article 19, UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
"On the day of the termination of the British mandate and on the strength of the United Nations General Assembly declare The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations." - The Declaration of the establishment of Israel, May 14, 1948
The court brought 21 charges of giving interviews to foreign media against Vanunu. The first and most serious of the charges alleged that Peter Hounam, who himself was arrested in April 2004 and "charged with conducting the first interview upon Vanunu's release by the Israeli secret service, locked in a cell and accused of spying for nuclear secrets.
"Hounam was freed after a diplomatic and legal battle but was declared persona non grata. Hounam, was the last witness called in Vanunu's trial on Friday [February 2, 2007] accused the Israeli police of making mistakes both in arresting him in 2004 and in alleging that he had conducted the Vanunu interview.
"I was only doing my job in arranging the interview with Mordechai," Hounam said after the hearing. "What the police and secret police failed to understand is that to comply with the inhumane restrictions on him, I arranged for the Israeli journalist Mrs Yael Lotan to ask all the questions."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2583162,00.html
The restrictions against Vanunu are eerily similar to the "banning" that was practiced in South Africa under Apartheid, which also controlled human interaction, place of residence, and type and content of communications.
"The charges against Vanunu are a red flag to the world media. A man is actually being charged for the "crime" of speaking to reporters."-Attorney Fredrik Heffermehl, March 18, 2004 http://www.exodusnews.com/worldnews/world082.htm
In 2004, Rayna Moss, Israeli peace activist stated: "A government with grave security, public safety and social problems to deal with; a government that includes several members who are under investigation on criminal and corruption suspicions; a government that continues to pursue a secret nuclear program that it conceals from its own citizens and from the world - is prosecuting a citizen merely for speaking to the media. This is a shameful attempt to silence Vanunu and a gross violation of his human rights. The restrictions against Vanunu should be revoked immediately, these pathetic charges should be withdrawn and he should be let free."
http://www.exodusnews.com/worldnews/world082.htm
Also in 2004, the International Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu issued the following statement:
"Recent developments in Israel - including the planned distribution of purported "anti-radiation" pills to people residing near the Dimona and Nachal Sorek reactors; Israel's refusal to open its nuclear installations to independent international inspection in the course of Mohammad El Baradei's official visit to Israel; and the State's restriction of Mordechai Vanunu even after the completion of his full prison term, indicate, that Israel is determined to continue manufacturing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, while hiding its illegal and dangerous acts behind an iron curtain of concealment and intimidation. As hundreds of additional parliamentarians, performers, academics, scientists and activists around the world are daily adding their names to the petition, the International Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu calls on Israel to end its mistreatment of the nuclear whistleblower and let him go free.
http://keywords.dsvr.co.uk/freepress/body.phtml?category=&id=720
In March 2006, Vanunu informed this reporter and foreigner that, "The Dimona is 46 years old; reactors last 25 to 30 years. The Dimona has never been inspected and Israel has never signed the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty but all the Arab states have...Twenty years ago when I worked there they only produced when the air was blowing towards Jordan ten miles away. No one knows what is happening now. The Israelis have 200 atomic weapons and they accuse the Palestinians and Muslims of terrorism. The world needs to wake up and see the real terrorism is the occupation and the Palestinians have lived under that terror regime for 40 years...It's very sad that Hilary Clinton went to the Jewish Wailing Wall and forgot the real crying wall is the Palestinian wall...the apartheid wall... the wall is not for defense, but to keep this conflict permanent... Israel is only a democracy if you are a Jew."
The verdict in Vanunu's historic freedom of speech trial is expected by April 2007.
"30 Minutes With Vanunu"
Streaming FREELY on WAWA: http://www.wearewideawake.org/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_eileen_f_070204_nobel_peace_prize_no.htm
Eileen is an activist, author, poet, reporter and editor of wearewideawake.org She has been reporting from the Occupied Palestinian Territories since June 2005. Her first novel "Keep Hope Alive" was released in August 2006. 100% of all proceeds go to provide olive trees for peace in Israel Palestine, through the 501 3-c Olive Trees Foundation for Peace. Her second book, "Third Intifada: NONVIOLENT, But With Words Sharper Than a Two-Edged Sword SUBTITLE: Memoirs of a Nice Irish American "Girl" in Occupied Territory" will be released March 2007.
OpEdNews February 4, 2007 at 15:38:36
Annually, for the last twenty years Mordechai Vanunu has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
This year, Vanunu has been nominated by Bishop Desmond Tutu, who received the Nobel Prize in 1984, for his courageous and fearless opposition against the South African apartheid system.
At the Russian Compound in Jerusalem on February 2, 2007, Vanunu's freedom of speech trial which began on January 25, 2006 was concluded. The court brought 21 charges against him for giving interviews to foreign media in 2004: but the media has been missing in action during this historic trial.
The only journalist present was also the final witness.
Peter Hounam, the London Sunday Times journalist who in 1986 broke the story of Israel's WMD Program utilizing the 60 odd photos Vanunu easily obtained due to the lax security system in the Dimona testified in Vanunu's behalf and was only allowed five minutes to speak with him.
Although Vanunu was only a low tech worker in Israel's WMD facility, he easily obtained the keys to the restricted areas after they had been carelessly left in the shower room. Vanunu was able to shoot two rolls of film in the underground WMD facility without detection.
Although released after 18 years in jail on April 21, 2004, Vanunu has lived under the draconian 1945 British Mandate State of Emergency Regulations, which forbids him from leaving Israel and speaking to media and foreigners.
Vanunu informed this foreigner and reporter in March 2006 that "This administration tells me I am not allowed to speak to foreigners, the Media, and the world. But I do because that is how I prove my true humanity to the world."
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." -Article 19, UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
"On the day of the termination of the British mandate and on the strength of the United Nations General Assembly declare The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations." - The Declaration of the establishment of Israel, May 14, 1948
The court brought 21 charges of giving interviews to foreign media against Vanunu. The first and most serious of the charges alleged that Peter Hounam, who himself was arrested in April 2004 and "charged with conducting the first interview upon Vanunu's release by the Israeli secret service, locked in a cell and accused of spying for nuclear secrets.
"Hounam was freed after a diplomatic and legal battle but was declared persona non grata. Hounam, was the last witness called in Vanunu's trial on Friday [February 2, 2007] accused the Israeli police of making mistakes both in arresting him in 2004 and in alleging that he had conducted the Vanunu interview.
"I was only doing my job in arranging the interview with Mordechai," Hounam said after the hearing. "What the police and secret police failed to understand is that to comply with the inhumane restrictions on him, I arranged for the Israeli journalist Mrs Yael Lotan to ask all the questions."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2583162,00.html
The restrictions against Vanunu are eerily similar to the "banning" that was practiced in South Africa under Apartheid, which also controlled human interaction, place of residence, and type and content of communications.
"The charges against Vanunu are a red flag to the world media. A man is actually being charged for the "crime" of speaking to reporters."-Attorney Fredrik Heffermehl, March 18, 2004 http://www.exodusnews.com/worldnews/world082.htm
In 2004, Rayna Moss, Israeli peace activist stated: "A government with grave security, public safety and social problems to deal with; a government that includes several members who are under investigation on criminal and corruption suspicions; a government that continues to pursue a secret nuclear program that it conceals from its own citizens and from the world - is prosecuting a citizen merely for speaking to the media. This is a shameful attempt to silence Vanunu and a gross violation of his human rights. The restrictions against Vanunu should be revoked immediately, these pathetic charges should be withdrawn and he should be let free."
http://www.exodusnews.com/worldnews/world082.htm
Also in 2004, the International Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu issued the following statement:
"Recent developments in Israel - including the planned distribution of purported "anti-radiation" pills to people residing near the Dimona and Nachal Sorek reactors; Israel's refusal to open its nuclear installations to independent international inspection in the course of Mohammad El Baradei's official visit to Israel; and the State's restriction of Mordechai Vanunu even after the completion of his full prison term, indicate, that Israel is determined to continue manufacturing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, while hiding its illegal and dangerous acts behind an iron curtain of concealment and intimidation. As hundreds of additional parliamentarians, performers, academics, scientists and activists around the world are daily adding their names to the petition, the International Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu calls on Israel to end its mistreatment of the nuclear whistleblower and let him go free.
http://keywords.dsvr.co.uk/freepress/body.phtml?category=&id=720
In March 2006, Vanunu informed this reporter and foreigner that, "The Dimona is 46 years old; reactors last 25 to 30 years. The Dimona has never been inspected and Israel has never signed the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty but all the Arab states have...Twenty years ago when I worked there they only produced when the air was blowing towards Jordan ten miles away. No one knows what is happening now. The Israelis have 200 atomic weapons and they accuse the Palestinians and Muslims of terrorism. The world needs to wake up and see the real terrorism is the occupation and the Palestinians have lived under that terror regime for 40 years...It's very sad that Hilary Clinton went to the Jewish Wailing Wall and forgot the real crying wall is the Palestinian wall...the apartheid wall... the wall is not for defense, but to keep this conflict permanent... Israel is only a democracy if you are a Jew."
The verdict in Vanunu's historic freedom of speech trial is expected by April 2007.
"30 Minutes With Vanunu"
Streaming FREELY on WAWA: http://www.wearewideawake.org/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_eileen_f_070204_nobel_peace_prize_no.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)