Notable 31.03.09

Posted in Disclosure, Editorials, Zionism | Leave a comment

Dead Palestinian babies and bombed mosques – IDF fashion 2009

I shot two kills

The office at the Adiv fabric-printing shop in south Tel Aviv handles a constant stream of customers, many of them soldiers in uniform, who come to order custom clothing featuring their unit’s insignia, usually accompanied by a slogan and drawing of their choosing. Elsewhere on the premises, the sketches are turned into plates used for imprinting the ordered items, mainly T-shirts and baseball caps, but also hoodies, fleece jackets and pants. A young Arab man from Jaffa supervises the workers who imprint the words and pictures, and afterward hands over the finished product.

Dead babies, mothers weeping on their children’s graves, a gun aimed at a child and bombed-out mosques – these are a few examples of the images Israel Defense Forces soldiers design these days to print on shirts they order to mark the end of training, or of field duty. The slogans accompanying the drawings are not exactly anemic either: A T-shirt for infantry snipers bears the inscription “Better use Durex,” next to a picture of a dead Palestinian baby, with his weeping mother and a teddy bear beside him. A sharpshooter’s T-shirt from the Givati Brigade’s Shaked battalion shows a pregnant Palestinian woman with a bull’s-eye superimposed on her belly, with the slogan, in English, “1 shot, 2 kills.” A “graduation” shirt for those who have completed another snipers course depicts a Palestinian baby, who grows into a combative boy and then an armed adult, with the inscription, “No matter how it begins, we’ll put an end to it.”

There are also plenty of shirts with blatant sexual messages. For example, the Lavi battalion produced a shirt featuring a drawing of a soldier next to a young woman with bruises, and the slogan, “Bet you got raped!” A few of the images underscore actions whose existence the army officially denies – such as “confirming the kill” (shooting a bullet into an enemy victim’s head from close range, to ensure he is dead), or harming religious sites, or female or child non-combatants.

In many cases, the content is submitted for approval to one of the unit’s commanders. The latter, however, do not always have control over what gets printed, because the artwork is a private initiative of soldiers that they never hear about. Drawings or slogans previously banned in certain units have been approved for distribution elsewhere. For example, shirts declaring, “We won’t chill ’til we confirm the kill” were banned in the past (the IDF claims that the practice doesn’t exist), yet the Haruv battalion printed some last year.

The slogan “Let every Arab mother know that her son’s fate is in my hands!” had previously been banned for use on another infantry unit’s shirt. A Givati soldier said this week, however, that at the end of last year, his platoon printed up dozens of shirts, fleece jackets and pants bearing this slogan.

“It has a drawing depicting a soldier as the Angel of Death, next to a gun and an Arab town,” he explains. “The text was very powerful. The funniest part was that when our soldier came to get the shirts, the man who printed them was an Arab, and the soldier felt so bad that he told the girl at the counter to bring them to him.”

Does the design go to the commanders for approval?

The Givati soldier: “Usually the shirts undergo a selection process by some officer, but in this case, they were approved at the level of platoon sergeant. We ordered shirts for 30 soldiers and they were really into it, and everyone wanted several items and paid NIS 200 on average.”

What do you think of the slogan that was printed?

“I didn’t like it so much, but most of the soldiers wanted it.”

Many controversial shirts have been ordered by graduates of snipers courses, which bring together soldiers from various units. In 2006, soldiers from the “Carmon Team” course for elite-unit marksmen printed a shirt with a drawing of a knife-wielding Palestinian in the crosshairs of a gun sight, and the slogan, “You’ve got to run fast, run fast, run fast, before it’s all over.” Below is a drawing of Arab women weeping over a grave and the words: “And afterward they cry, and afterward they cry.” [The inscriptions are riffs on a popular song.] Another sniper’s shirt also features an Arab man in the crosshairs, and the announcement, “Everything is with the best of intentions.”

G., a soldier in an elite unit who has done a snipers course, explained that, “it’s a type of bonding process, and also it’s well known that anyone who is a sniper is messed up in the head. Our shirts have a lot of double entendres, for example: ‘Bad people with good aims.’ Every group that finishes a course puts out stuff like that.”

When are these shirts worn?

G. “These are shirts for around the house, for jogging, in the army. Not for going out. Sometimes people will ask you what it’s about.”

Of the shirt depicting a bull’s-eye on a pregnant woman, he said: “There are people who think it’s not right, and I think so as well, but it doesn’t really mean anything. I mean it’s not like someone is gonna go and shoot a pregnant woman.”

What is the idea behind the shirt from July 2007, which has an image of a child with the slogan “Smaller – harder!”?

“It’s a kid, so you’ve got a little more of a problem, morally, and also the target is smaller.”

Do your superiors approve the shirts before printing?

“Yes, although one time they rejected some shirt that was too extreme. I don’t remember what was on it.”

These shirts also seem pretty extreme. Why draw crosshairs over a child – do you shoot kids?

‘We came, we saw’

“As a sniper, you get a lot of extreme situations. You suddenly see a small boy who picks up a weapon and it’s up to you to decide whether to shoot. These shirts are half-facetious, bordering on the truth, and they reflect the extreme situations you might encounter. The one who-honest-to-God sees the target with his own eyes – that’s the sniper.”

Have you encountered a situation like that?

“Fortunately, not involving a kid, but involving a woman – yes. There was someone who wasn’t holding a weapon, but she was near a prohibited area and could have posed a threat.”

What did you do?

“I didn’t take it” (i.e., shoot).

You don’t regret that, I imagine.

“No. Whomever I had to shoot, I shot.”

A shirt printed up just this week for soldiers of the Lavi battalion, who spent three years in the West Bank, reads: “We came, we saw, we destroyed!” – alongside images of weapons, an angry soldier and a Palestinian village with a ruined mosque in the center.

A shirt printed after Operation Cast Lead in Gaza for Battalion 890 of the Paratroops depicts a King Kong-like soldier in a city under attack. The slogan is unambiguous: “If you believe it can be fixed, then believe it can be destroyed!”

Y., a soldier/yeshiva student, designed the shirt. “You take whoever [in the unit] knows how to draw and then you give it to the commanders before printing,” he explained.

What is the soldier holding in his hand?

Y. “A mosque. Before I drew the shirt I had some misgivings, because I wanted it to be like King Kong, but not too monstrous. The one holding the mosque – I wanted him to have a more normal-looking face, so it wouldn’t look like an anti-Semitic cartoon. Some of the people who saw it told me, ‘Is that what you’ve got to show for the IDF? That it destroys homes?’ I can understand people who look at this from outside and see it that way, but I was in Gaza and they kept emphasizing that the object of the operation was to wreak destruction on the infrastructure, so that the price the Palestinians and the leadership pay will make them realize that it isn’t worth it for them to go on shooting. So that’s the idea of ‘we’re coming to destroy’ in the drawing.”

According to Y., most of these shirts are worn strictly in an army context, not in civilian life. “And within the army people look at it differently,” he added. “I don’t think I would walk down the street in this shirt, because it would draw fire. Even at my yeshiva I don’t think people would like it.”

Y. also came up with a design for the shirt his unit printed at the end of basic training. It shows a clenched fist shattering the symbol of the Paratroops Corps.

Where does the fist come from?

“It’s reminiscent of [Rabbi Meir] Kahane’s symbol. I borrowed it from an emblem for something in Russia, but basically it’s supposed to look like Kahane’s symbol, the one from ‘Kahane Was Right’ – it’s a sort of joke. Our company commander is kind of gung-ho.”

Was the shirt printed?

“Yes. It was a company shirt. We printed about 100 like that.”

This past January, the “Night Predators” demolitions platoon from Golani’s Battalion 13 ordered a T-shirt showing a Golani devil detonating a charge that destroys a mosque. An inscription above it says, “Only God forgives.”

One of the soldiers in the platoon downplays it: “It doesn’t mean much, it’s just a T-shirt from our platoon. It’s not a big deal. A friend of mine drew a picture and we made it into a shirt.”

What’s the idea behind “Only God forgives”?

The soldier: “It’s just a saying.”

No one had a problem with the fact that a mosque gets blown up in the picture?

“I don’t see what you’re getting at. I don’t like the way you’re going with this. Don’t take this somewhere you’re not supposed to, as though we hate Arabs.”

After Operation Cast Lead, soldiers from that battalion printed a T-shirt depicting a vulture sexually penetrating Hamas’ prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, accompanied by a particularly graphic slogan. S., a soldier in the platoon that ordered the shirt, said the idea came from a similar shirt, printed after the Second Lebanon War, that featured Hassan Nasrallah instead of Haniyeh.

“They don’t okay things like that at the company level. It’s a shirt we put out just for the platoon,” S. explained.

What’s the problem with this shirt?

S.: “It bothers some people to see these things, from a religious standpoint …”

How did people who saw it respond?

“We don’t have that many Orthodox people in the platoon, so it wasn’t a problem. It’s just something the guys want to put out. It’s more for wearing around the house, and not within the companies, because it bothers people. The Orthodox mainly. The officers tell us it’s best not to wear shirts like this on the base.”

The sketches printed in recent years at the Adiv factory, one of the largest of its kind in the country, are arranged in drawers according to the names of the units placing the orders: Paratroops, Golani, air force, sharpshooters and so on. Each drawer contains hundreds of drawings, filed by year. Many of the prints are cartoons and slogans relating to life in the unit, or inside jokes that outsiders wouldn’t get (and might not care to, either), but a handful reflect particular aggressiveness, violence and vulgarity.

Print-shop manager Haim Yisrael, who has worked there since the early 1980s, said Adiv prints around 1,000 different patterns each month, with soldiers accounting for about half. Yisrael recalled that when he started out, there were hardly any orders from the army.

“The first ones to do it were from the Nahal brigade,” he said. “Later on other infantry units started printing up shirts, and nowadays any course with 15 participants prints up shirts.”

From time to time, officers complain. “Sometimes the soldiers do things that are inside jokes that only they get, and sometimes they do something foolish that they take to an extreme,” Yisrael explained. “There have been a few times when commanding officers called and said, ‘How can you print things like that for soldiers?’ For example, with shirts that trashed the Arabs too much. I told them it’s a private company, and I’m not interested in the content. I can print whatever I like. We’re neutral. There have always been some more extreme and some less so. It’s just that now more people are making shirts.”

Race to be unique

Evyatar Ben-Tzedef, a research associate at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism and former editor of the IDF publication Maarachot, said the phenomenon of custom-made T-shirts is a product of “the infantry’s insane race to be unique. I, for example, had only one shirt that I received after the Yom Kippur War. It said on it, ‘The School for Officers,’ and that was it. What happened since then is a product of the decision to assign every unit an emblem and a beret. After all, there used to be very few berets: black, red or green. This changed in the 1990s. [The shirts] developed because of the fact that for bonding purposes, each unit created something that was unique to it.

“These days the content on shirts is sometimes deplorable,” Ben-Tzedef explained. “It stems from the fact that profanity is very acceptable and normative in Israel, and that there is a lack of respect for human beings and their environment, which includes racism aimed in every direction.”

Yossi Kaufman, who moderates the army and defense forum on the Web site Fresh, served in the Armored Corps from 1996 to 1999. “I also drew shirts, and I remember the first one,” he said. “It had a small emblem on the front and some inside joke, like, ‘When we die, we’ll go to heaven, because we’ve already been through hell.'”

Kaufman has also been exposed to T-shirts of the sort described here. “I know there are shirts like these,” he says. “I’ve heard and also seen a little. These are not shirts that soldiers can wear in civilian life, because they would get stoned, nor at a battalion get-together, because the battalion commander would be pissed off. They wear them on very rare occasions. There’s all sorts of black humor stuff, mainly from snipers, such as, ‘Don’t bother running because you’ll die tired’ – with a drawing of a Palestinian boy, not a terrorist. There’s a Golani or Givati shirt of a soldier raping a girl, and underneath it says, ‘No virgins, no terror attacks.’ I laughed, but it was pretty awful. When I was asked once to draw things like that, I said it wasn’t appropriate.”

The IDF Spokesman’s Office comments on the phenomenon: “Military regulations do not apply to civilian clothing, including shirts produced at the end of basic training and various courses. The designs are printed at the soldiers’ private initiative, and on civilian shirts. The examples raised by Haaretz are not in keeping with the values of the IDF spirit, not representative of IDF life, and are in poor taste. Humor of this kind deserves every condemnation and excoriation. The IDF intends to take action for the immediate eradication of this phenomenon. To this end, it is emphasizing to commanding officers that it is appropriate, among other things, to take discretionary and disciplinary measures against those involved in acts of this sort.”

Shlomo Tzipori, a lieutenant colonel in the reserves and a lawyer specializing in martial law, said the army does bring soldiers up on charges for offenses that occur outside the base and during their free time. According to Tzipori, slogans that constitute an “insult to the army or to those in uniform” are grounds for court-martial, on charges of “shameful conduct” or “disciplinary infraction,” which are general clauses in judicial martial law.

Sociologist Dr. Orna Sasson-Levy, of Bar-Ilan University, author of “Identities in Uniform: Masculinities and Femininities in the Israeli Military,” said that the phenomenon is “part of a radicalization process the entire country is undergoing, and the soldiers are at its forefront. I think that ever since the second intifada there has been a continual shift to the right. The pullout from Gaza and its outcome – the calm that never arrived – led to a further shift rightward.

“This tendency is most strikingly evident among soldiers who encounter various situations in the territories on a daily basis. There is less meticulousness than in the past, and increasing callousness. There is a perception that the Palestinian is not a person, a human being entitled to basic rights, and therefore anything may be done to him.”

Could the printing of clothing be viewed also as a means of venting aggression?

Sasson-Levy: “No. I think it strengthens and stimulates aggression and legitimizes it. What disturbs me is that a shirt is something that has permanence. The soldiers later wear it in civilian life; their girlfriends wear it afterward. It is not a statement, but rather something physical that remains, that is out there in the world. Beyond that, I think the link made between sexist views and nationalist views, as in the ‘Screw Haniyeh’ shirt, is interesting. National chauvinism and gender chauvinism combine and strengthen one another. It establishes a masculinity shaped by violent aggression toward women and Arabs; a masculinity that considers it legitimate to speak in a crude and violent manner toward women and Arabs.”

Col. (res.) Ron Levy began his military service in the Sayeret Matkal elite commando force before the Six-Day War. He was the IDF’s chief psychologist, and headed the army’s mental health department in the 1980s.

Levy: “I’m familiar with things of this sort going back 40, 50 years, and each time they take a different form. Psychologically speaking, this is one of the ways in which soldiers project their anger, frustration and violence. It is a certain expression of things, which I call ‘below the belt.'”

Do you think this a good way to vent anger?

Levy: “It’s safe. But there are also things here that deviate from the norm, and you could say that whoever is creating these things has reached some level of normality. He gives expression to the fact that what is considered abnormal today might no longer be so tomorrow.”

Source

Israelis told to fight ‘holy war’ in Gaza

War crimes in Gaza: Israel told to investigate

Israel unleashes sonic booms on Gaza

Israel accused of ‘new Gaza crime’

U.N. reports say Israel targeted civilians in Gaza

Israeli use of phosphorus ‘a crime’

Posted in Middle East, Palestine, Redneckia, Zionism | Leave a comment

Quote of the month – Menachem Begin – Israeli Prime Minister 1977–1983

Menachem Begin - Israeli Prime Minister 1977–1983

“Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.” — Menachem Begin – Israeli Prime Minister 1977–1983

Incidentally Menchem Begin also won the Noble Peace Prize

Posted in Quotes, Zionism | Leave a comment

The President’s Message to the Iranian People

Posted in Empire, Iran, Video | Leave a comment

The State That Tolerates No Criticism – How Israel Gives Jews a Bad Name By SAUL LANDAU

Israel Criticism not Allowed - http://latuff2.deviantart.com/

Most Jews I know get little pleasure from the existence of Israel; just the opposite. They feel disgusted by the behavior of their tribal kin toward Palestinians. This antipathy doesn’t concern Israel’s right to exist, a phony argument still maintained by hard line Zionists. Israel exists, period. Most of the world recognizes that. Anyone wanting to eliminate it belongs in the loony bin or prison.

Israelis have just elected a right wing majority. The number three vote-getting party, Yisrael Beytenu led by Avigdor Lieberman, will occupy a strong place in the new government. Lieberman will become a Minister in the Netanyahu Cabinet. Last year, Lieberman rammed through Israel’s Central Election Committee a ban on Arab political parties. The Israeli Supreme Court ruled the ban unconstitutional before the recent election. Lieberman also demanded the Knesset expel Arab Members. He went further. If Arab citizens of Israel don’t sign oaths of loyalty to Israel, they should have their citizenship revoked. Disloyalty for Arabs included students wearing kefiyahs to school; Muslim Israelis collecting medicine and aid for Gaza relief also falls into the non-trustworthy category.

During the 2008-9 invasion of Gaza, Lieberman wanted the military operation to continue until Hamas “loses the will to fight.” In a speech at Bar-Ilan University, he said Israel’s government had “to come to a decision that we will break the will of Hamas to keep fighting.” Lieberman concluded in the January 13 Jerusalem Post: “We must continue to fight Hamas just like the United States did with the Japanese in World War II. Then, too, the occupation of the country was unnecessary.” In 1945, US Air Force planes dropped atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Japan surrendered unconditionally.

Lieberman has acquired a powerful defender in the United States. Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, backed Lieberman’s plan to require Israeli Arab citizens to sign an oath of allegiance to the Jewish state.” (Feb 10, Jewish Telegraphic Agency)

Foxman ignored the ADL’s mission, opposing racial discrimination and the words of the ADL Charter. The Anti-Defamation League aims “to secure justice and fair treatment to all.” In Israel, it’s apparently OK with Foxman to strip an Arab wearing the wrong covering of citizenship. Without citizenship, Arabs can’t vote or participate in politics; very old Jews from some European countries may recall similar rules.

My grandfather taught me, growing up during the Holocaust, that Jewish tradition teaches each person to strive to become a pillar of ethics, learn the law and behave so as to answer to God for transgressions – not to rulers of a so-called Jewish state.

Ironically, in the name of all Jews, Foxman and colleagues in AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and other Israeli lobby groups along with right wing and centrist political parties in Israel invoke the Holocaust to justify the very behavior embodied by Holocaust initiators. Israel calls itself a Jewish state. Yet, one fifth of Israel’s population is non-Jewish. I don’t belong to that state and despise its policies of constant war and occupation.

Count Israel’s wars: 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, plus civil wars against two Intifadas in the 1980s and 2000, and finally the invasions of Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in late 2008, the latter leaving in its wake 1,300 plus dead Palestinians, most of them civilians and less than 20 Israelis, some from “friendly fire.”

Condemned by the Red Cross, Amnesty International and a host of organizations for violating human rights of Gaza’s people, Israel’s new government will almost certainly continue or even harden the policies. They don’t care what others say.

Dr. Erik Fosse, a Norwegian cardiologist, working in Gaza hospitals during the Israeli invasion described his patients’ wounds. “It was as if they had stepped on a mine,” he says of certain Palestinian. “But there was no shrapnel in the wound. Some had lost their legs. It looked as though they had been sliced off. I have been to war zones for 30 years, but I have never seen such injuries before.”

The “focused lethality” weapon, to which Fosse referred does minimal damage to buildings, but catastrophic harm to humans. The United States supplied these to Israel.

Israeli Defense Forces have also used white phosphorus in Beirut in 1982 and again in Gaza. The intense heat of the metal inflicts appalling damage. The IDF knows international law prohibits its use near populated areas. Donatella Rovera of Amnesty International labeled as “a war crime” the use of phosphorous “in Gaza’s densely-populated residential neighborhoods.” (Guardian, January 21, 2009)

Israel initially denied using the chemical. On January 13, Israeli Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi solemnly declared: “The IDF acts only in accordance with what is permitted by international law and does not use white phosphorus.” Gazans and Israelis, however, saw the material and the victims of it. On January 20, the IDF admitted using phosphorus artillery and mortar shells on “Hamas fighters and rocket launching crews in northern Gaza.”

On January 15, three shells hit the UN Relief and Works Agency compound. The resulting fire destroyed tons of humanitarian supplies. A phosphorus shell also hit Al-Quds hospital in Gaza City. According to the Guardian, the Israelis claimed Hamas fighters had hidden near the two targets. Witnesses denied the charge. (January 21, 2009)

UN officials cited witnesses who claimed Israel killed 31 family members whom Israeli troops had led into a house in Zeitun. Twenty four hours after the IDF warned the Palestinians to remain, the IDF shelled the dwelling. Half of the dead were children. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it “one of the gravest incidents since the beginning of operations” by Israeli forces in Gaza. (AFP, December 27, 2008).

Such facts caused distinguished people like Jimmy Carter and Bill Moyers to question Israeli behavior. Foxman quickly labeled Moyers as anti-Semitic. Those opposing Israel’s invasion of Gaza, or her occupying of Palestinian territory (for 40 plus years), or her mistreatment of all Palestinians receive the anti-Semitic label. Any criticism of Israel begets that description.

In discussions with Jewish defenders of the recent invasion of Gaza, however, I found more defensiveness. During one argument an ardent pro Israeli changed the subject. “But Israel enjoys free speech and press!”

Yes, a small minority vigorously criticize Israeli government policy – there, not here in the United States where a Member of Congress characterized an attack by the Israeli lobby as the equivalent of a pit bull biting him in the leg. Israeli’s daily Ha’aretz provides an example of such criticism, including articles damning the latest invasion as both a failure and immoral (Gideon Levy, February 19, 2009). Similar criticism in a US newspaper would cause Foxman and company to call major press conferences to “expose anti-Semitism.” When Jimmy Carter published his 2006 book, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, critical of Israeli policy, Foxman stopped just short of accusing the former President of anti-semitism. “You have been feeding into conspiracy theories about excessive Jewish power and control,” he wrote in a letter. “Considering the history of anti-Semitism, even in our great country, this is very dangerous stuff.” (Shmuel Rosner, Ha’artez Dec. 20, 2006)

When less powerful Jewish American scholars write books or give lectures attacking Israeli policy, they get fired or their tenure withheld. Norman Finkelstein (son of Holocaust survivors) was denied tenure in 2007 by the President of DePaul University, despite favorable recommendations by faculty and students. In 2000, he published The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering. The President of Bard College recently dismissed Joel Kovel, another internationally applauded scholar. Kovel’s 2007 book, Overcoming Zionism, triggered the action.

In the Finkelstein case, an important Zionist activist, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, demanded the action. He had threatened Finkelstein with law suits after Finkelstein accused him of plagiarism and lying – charges documented in his 2005 book, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History. (University of California Press) Kovel attacked militant Israeli supporter Martin Peretz, longtime editor of The New Republic.

The ADL supported both dismissals. In past decades, ADL vibrated with anger over anti-Semitic signs spray painted on subway bathroom walls. Now, its leader endorses a McCarthyite platform in his beloved Israel. Anyone who does not conform to ADL’s fiercely pro Zionist agenda becomes vulnerable to accusations of anti-Semitism.

From 1998-2006, I occasionally invited speakers to campus who criticized Israeli policy. Inevitably, I would then receive letters, e-mails (copies to the University President), and phone calls accusing me of bias or being a “self-hating Jew.”

“How can you say that?” I asked one caller. “You don’t know me.”

“You’re all alike, you people who hate Israel,” the man responded.

“You’re the Jew-hating Jew,” I responded. “You hate me and don’t know me. I wish you could listen to your own voice.”

“I know anti-Semites when I talk to them,” he shouted into the phone and hung up.

“Long Live Israel,” scream the US fans. “Anyone who doesn’t like our team is an anti-Semite.”

I want to shout: “Go Back to Israel where you didn’t come from.”

Saul Landau is an IPS Fellow, author of A BUSH AND BOTOX WORLD (Counterpunch) and director of forty films, available on dvd from roundworldproductions.com

Source

Obama pick quits over Israel lobby – Al Jazeera – Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Posted in Disclosure, Editorials, Empire, Ideaology, Middle East, Zionism | Leave a comment

Why Pakistan cares about Chaudhry

Iftikhar Chaudhry became a supreme court judge in 2000 and was appointed as the youngest ever chief justice in June 2005

Why is Pakistan’s deposed chief justice causing such a political storm?

Iftikhar Chaudhry became a supreme court judge in 2000 and was appointed as the youngest ever chief justice in June 2005.

He was sacked from the position by Pervez Musharraf, who led Pakistan from 1999 to 2008, and the campaign for his reinstatement, which has seen multiple street protests, became a popular cause in Pakistan.

When Ali Asif Zardari, who took over as leader of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) on the death of his wife, Benazir Bhutto, became president, he formed a coalition on the basis that he would reinstate Chaudhry.

Zardari enticed Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), to join him by promising to reinstate Chaudhry but Sharif soon declared it was apparent Zardari was going back this agreement and pulled out of the government.

Why is Chaudhry such a controversial figure?

As chief justice, Chaudhry used his position to reopen a number of cases, including one into the disappearance of people picked up by security agencies on suspicion of being involved in “terrorism”.

He ordered the security agencies to produce people, thought to be “missing”, in court.

He upset a number of prominent people, including Shaukat Aziz, prime minister under Musharraf, by taking up a case looking into the privatisation of a steel firm and cancelling the sale.

Chaudhry was also widely expected to try and insist Musharraf stand down as army chief – a constitutional requirement – in order to seek another term as president.

What happened next?

Musharraf’s administration pressured Chaudhry to quit, but he refused to go, and on March 9, 2007, Musharraf suspended Chaudhry, accusing him of abusing his position.

A panel of judges was established to look into the accusations against Chaudhry, who appointed Aitzaz Ahsan, a parliamentarian and former minister from the PPP, to lead his defence team.

Protesting lawyers, led by Ahsan, held rallies to demand the independence of the judiciary and both the PPP and the PML-N got behind the cause.

In July 2007, the judges delivered the first ever finding against a military ruler by lifting Musharraf’s suspension of Chaudhry.

Musharraf engineered his re-election anyway by a subservient parliament in October without stepping down as army chief and while the supreme court allowed the vote to go ahead, it deliberated over whether the result should stand.

Musharraf declared emergency rule, sacked the judges and only reinstated those who took a fresh oath of office, which Chaudhry refused to do.

Having secured the presidency, Musharraf stepped down as army chief.

Chaudhry declared Musharraf’s actions unconstitutional.

With Musharraf gone, why was Chaudhry not reinstated?

The PPP came to power off the back of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto and the popular sentiment over the judges.

But after it won elections, despite reinstating most of the judges sacked by Musharraf, Chaudhry remained deposed.

Analysts say Zardari worries that Chaudhry could rule Musharraf an illegal president and overturn an amnesty given to Zardari and Bhutto in 2007 that allowed them to return to Pakistan without fear of prosecution on corruption charges, which they said were politically motivated.

They say that Zardari is resisting reinstating the judges for fear they might revoke his protection from corruption charges.

“The return of Benazir Bhutto and Zardari to Pakistan took place under a deal with Mushrraf in 2007. As part of the deal all the corruption charges, through a special presidential ordinance called NRO [National Reconciliation Ordinance], were removed, against Zardari especially,” Ishtiaq Ahmad, a professor of international relations at Islamabad’s Qaid-e-Azam University, told Al Jazeera.

“The NRO remains, but the fear of the Zardari-led regime is, if they restore chief justice Chaudhry – given his assertive background – the NRO might be revoked and then obviously all those charges will come back to haunt Zardari and other party leaders.”

Following intense opposition protest, the government climbed down and on March 16, 2009, announced that Chaudhry would be reinstated.

The date given for his reinstatement is March 21.

Source

Sharif calls off ‘long march’ protest – The Dawn

Is stability without democracy possible in Pakistan?

Another View of Pakistan  – Men in Black By M. REZA PIRBHAI

Posted in Pakistan | Leave a comment

Paradise Lost – Zahid Hussain

Swat Valley

Residents of Mingora often wake up to find bodies of those executed by the militants slung from electric poles in the town’s central square in the full view of the military, with a note of warning not to remove them till midday. Some 28 people, most of them women, have been executed over the past few months and their bodies thrown in the square which is now known as ‘Zibahkhana Chowk’, or Slaughter Square.

Bakht Zeba, a former member of Swat district council, virtually signed her death warrant when she criticised the Taliban for preventing girls from attending school. On November.26, masked gunmen dragged her out of her house in the Mulakabad area of Mingora, brutally thrashing her before shooting her in the head. Her body lay there for several hours.

Zeba, who also ran an NGO, was made an example of, for daring to defy the militants. She was yet another victim of the Taliban reign of terror, which has swept the scenic Swat valley. Educated women like Zeba are being particularly targeted. “For a woman, even to come out of her house is considered a crime by the militants,” says Sarfraz Khan, a professor at Peshawar University, who comes from a village in the restive area.

Executions and public beheadings of government officials, soldiers, alleged spies and criminals are frequently used by the militants to terrorise the population into submission.

The rising Taliban influence in one of the most progressive and culturally rich, former princely states, comes as a serious blow to Pakistan’s battle against militancy. More people have been killed in Swat by the militants than in Gaza by Israeli forces. An estimated 1,500 people have, so far, perished in the fighting raging for the past 18 months.

Pakistani army troops deployed in the area have failed to stop the rampaging Taliban, who now control a large swath of 5,337 square kilometres in the valley, less than 200 miles from Islamabad. The militants established their own courts to dispense ‘Islamic justice,’ as the government’s control faltered.

Watching television, singing and dancing, shaving beards and allowing girls to attend school have all been proscribed as un-Islamic activities. “Anyone resisting them is punished with death,” says Zubair Toorwali, an official of an NGO, who fled his home in the Madian district of Swat, following threats from the militants.

The names of those who have already been executed by the Taliban for violating their decrees and those they plan to kill next, are regularly broadcast on their FM radio, which is used by the militants as a tool for spreading fear among the population. Every night, terrified residents listen to the transmission to find out if any of their kin are on the dreaded list.

Among those slain recently was a local dancer known as Shabana. Her body was dumped in the square, after she was brutally murdered. “She deserved death for her immoral character,” proclaimed the Taliban radio.

People are commonly killed for not complying with a retrogressive code of conduct prescribed by the Taliban. Amjad Islam, a school teacher in Mingora, was shot dead for refusing to pull up his shalwar above his ankle, which the militants believed was against the Shariah.

All educational institutions, in the region have been shut down after the Taliban banned girls’ education declaring it to be un-Islamic. Parents were warned of dire consequences if the restriction was flouted.

“Female education is against Islamic teachings and spreads vulgarity in society,” declared Shah Dauran, a Taliban spokesman, in his daily broadcast on radio.

Militants have blown up more than 185 schools since the start of the army operation last year. This has affected at least 80,000 female students and thrown some 8,000 female teachers in unemployment. “We don’t have any future,” says Mah Gul, a female school teacher who now lives in Peshawar. The violence has forced some 300,000 people to leave their homes. “There is no one left in my village, except for the Taliban,” says Sarfraz Khan, another local.

Senior government officials concede that the writ of the state has completely broken down, as a large number of police officers and local officials have left their jobs for fear of their lives. Seventy police officers have been killed – most of them beheaded – by militants, last year alone. Their decapitated bodies were exhibited to inculcate fear among others. In some cases, police and local government officials place advertisements in local newspapers, renouncing their jobs. “It is the only way a man can save his family’s and his own life,” remarks a police officer, who deserted his post recently and is now residing in Peshawar.

At least 800 policemen – half the strength of the district police force – have deserted their posts. So deep is the fear of the Taliban that all 600 police commandos, specially trained by the military to serve in Swat, refused to join their duty this month. Clinics and hospitals have been closed down because of the refusal of doctors and paramilitary staff to serve in the affected areas. “The absence of a government has provided an open field to the militants,” says Khalid Aziz, a former chief secretary of the province.

Unlike the remote semi-autonomous tribal region, Swat, with a population of 1.3 million, is a part of the NWFP which is governed by a coalition government led by the ANP. But the government seems to have abdicated its responsibility to the militants. Most of the local nazims and members of the national and provincial assemblies have fled the area, leaving the local population at the mercy of the marauders. A provincial assembly member of the ANP, last month in an advertisement in a local newspaper, thanked the Taliban for sparing his life. Afzal Khan, a veteran politician, is the only one to have stayed in his village, despite several assassination attempts on his life.

The federal government also seems to have little understanding of the unfolding situation and the threat to national security posed by the rising militancy. There is no coherent policy to deal with the worsening situation in Swat and other parts of the NWFP. No federal or provincial government leader has bothered to visit the troubled area, further fuelling the demoralisation among the people.

Islamabad sent thousands of troops at the end of 2007 to quell the insurgency led by Maulana Fazlullah, a fiery Wahhabi cleric, also known as Mullah Radio for his sermons on FM radio. The long-haired, 33-year-old cleric started out as a preacher a few years ago, but gained huge popularity among the local population with his powerful speeches, broadcast from his illegal radio station. Subsequently, he raised a militant force to wage a holy war against the Pakistani state.

Fazlullah is now a senior leader of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), an outlawed militant outfit led by Baitullah Mehsud, the most wanted militant commander operating from his base in South Waziristan’s tribal region. Mehsud has also been accused of masterminding the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

The Taliban have extended their influence not only in the tribal areas, but also some parts of the NWFP. Even though Swat does not border Afghanistan, Fazlullah pledges his allegiance to Mullah Omar, the spiritual leader of the Afghan Taliban movement. The militants have also won the support of the poor farmers of Swat by redistributing lands seized from the big landlords among them.

Last week, Fazlullah, in a radio broadcast, announced a list of 43 people, including federal and provincial ministers and members of parliament, who he ordered to appear before his Islamic court. “They will face trial and be punished for working against Islam,” the cleric told his supporters.

According to security officials, a large number of Mehsud’s men from Waziristan, along with Uzbeks and Chechens, have joined the militant forces in Swat. And some 6,000 to 8,000 highly trained and well-armed militants are engaged in fighting the government forces. They maintain that the insurgents are being funded by some Saudi and Arab charity groups.

A large number of fighters belonging to banned militant outfits like Jaish-e-Mohammed, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have also joined the new jihad. According to a provincial government official, most of them are battle-hardened, having fought in Kashmir and Afghanistan. “This has created a very dangerous situation,” remarks a security official.

Eighteen months of military operation has produced little results. The army achieved some significant successes last year, when they pushed out the militants from most of the areas, but an ill-fated peace deal signed by the provincial government allowed the militants to regroup and return to the area. Local residents blame the army for looking the other way as the militants continue to operate with impunity. “The troops remain inside their camps while the militants freely move around,” says Sher Mohammed, a senior lawyer from Swat.

The scepticism regarding the military’s role is widespread. The rise of the Taliban amid a large army presence has fuelled suspicion that the soldiers lack the will to fight. Local residents complain that indiscriminate artillery fire by the troops has killed more civilians than militants.

A military spokesman maintains that these allegations are unjustified as hundreds of soldiers have died fighting militants. Senior army officers blame the provincial government for the worsening situation. “How can a military operation work, when there is no government in the area?” says a senior military official.

However, military officials concede that there was a need for putting in place a new strategy to reach out to the population. As part of this new strategy, some additional troops are being deployed in the affected areas. “The troops have been ordered to take a more proactive approach,” says Major General Athar Abbas, the chief military spokesman. “It will be a protracted battle.”

Source

Pakistan’s Swat gets sharia courts-Al Jazeera -18.Mar.09 

Posted in Conspiracy, Empire, Ideaology, Pakistan, South Asia | 4 Comments

A Myopic Bargain – The Pakistani Monster By WAJAHAT ALI

The tempestuous relationship between the United States and Pakistan is akin to a sordid soap opera featuring a fickle, selfish lover and her unpredictable mistress prone to volatile tantrums.

The ensuing violence and instability paralyzing Central Asia is their inevitable progeny.

Recently, a top US diplomat warned that Pakistan poses a bigger security threat to the world than Afghanistan. This ominous statement tracks a series of alarming developments: the surreal video of twelve gunmen brazenly attacking the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore’s broad daylight; Pakistan’s capitulation to the Taliban on implementing sharia law in the Swat Valley; several days of riots after the Supreme Court banned popular opposition leader Nawaz Sharif and his brother from holding office; evidence directly linking Pakistani terrorist groups to November’s Mumbai tragedy; a significant increase in suicide bombings within Pakistan; and, of course, the rapid Talibanisation of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) – a Grand Central Station for multicultural extremists seeking training, support and safe haven.

Although Barack Obama’s initial language, tone and action towards Pakistan reflected a unilateral belligerence reminiscent of his predecessor (he’d launched two controversial predator drone attacks as of March), the new president recently conceded: “We’ve been thinking very militarily, but we haven’t been as effective in thinking diplomatically – we haven’t been thinking effectively around the development side of the equation.”

In fact, neither the leaders of the US nor Pakistan have ever sincerely committed their resources and money to empowering Pakistan’s electorate, building infrastructure or creating sustainable social, economic and political reform programmes.

California senator Dianne Feinstein’s recent disclosure regarding CIA predator drones doesn’t bolster Pakistanis’ confidence in their ineffectual leadership – despite the government’s assurance to citizens that it will never compromise its “sovereignty”. Feinstein revealed the painfully obvious: the unmanned CIA predator aircraft responsible for successfully eliminating 11 to 20 high-profile threats – as well as killing hundreds of innocent Pakistani civilians – were flown from Pakistani air bases. A prominent Pakistani attorney and activist told me last year that the prevailing attitude among Pakistanis is that their government is either a complete ghulam (servant) of the US or a toothless, complicit partner, since “the road to Islamabad leads to the White House”.

That “road” was paved by the CIA and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence during the 1980s as the US funded and supported the dictatorship of General Zia ul Haq, whose “Islamisation” period nurtured the proliferation of radical Islamic madrassas and trained the mujahideen soldiers – future Taliban and al-Qaida members – to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

Insisting on supporting military dictators to the detriment of Pakistan’s democratically inclined electorate, the Bush administration championed General Pervez Musharraf, who spearheaded freedom and democracy by imposing martial law, sacking a critical and independent judiciary, arresting activists and lawyers and shutting down private television stations. He was rewarded with nearly $12bn as an ally in the “war on terror”.

According to Ahmed Rashid in his book Descent into Chaos, the ISI played Jekyll and Hyde as it spent some of these resources providing valuable intelligence, while covertly supporting the Taliban as a buffer between Pakistan and India – which they believe uses Afghanistan to gain “strategic depth” and fund Balochi insurgents to undermine Pakistan. Musharraf’s India obsession also gave deferential, protective treatment to terrorist organizations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba – which initially fought for the nationalist, political struggle in Kashmir, but then flourished into a full-fledged, ideological militant jihad responsible in part for the Mumbai tragedy.

The bargain myopically forged by the US and Pakistan in training radicalised militias to fight as their proxies spawned a terrible monster that has effectively escaped from the laboratory, set it on fire and then evolved into a multi-headed hydra chasing its own creators.

FATA now serves as a haven for international jihadists of all stripes. The Taliban are no longer a homogenous group, as they have splintered operationally into the “Afghan Taliban” and “Pakistan Taliban”, which in turn have divergent movements. For example, Jalaluddin Haqqani‘s Taliban and Mullah Omar exhort limiting jihad against US and Nato forces in Afghanistan and criticize those who commit acts of terrorism on Pakistan, as they are “bringing a bad name to mujahideen,” according to Omar.

However, Baitullah Mehsud‘s group, which is indigenous to Pakistan, openly perpetrates attacks on the Pakistani government and its security forces.

As Brookings scholar Stephen Cohen told me, “the root problem is that Pakistan is unable to exercise sovereign control over its own territory in FATA.” If the Obama administration is sincere about changing America’s egregiously short-sighted Pakistan policy and truly embracing the tools of diplomacy, then it requires a dedicated partnership with Pakistan’s military and leadership. Too bad that leadership has been equally self-serving, callous and foolish in its policy initiatives and cynical alliances.

Only by mutually endorsing a long-term vision that gradually invites those operating in FATA – including some of the radical elements – to join a committed programme of political reform, economic aid, social welfare and educational development can the US and Pakistan hope to satiate, tame and ultimately pacify the unleashed beast forged by their own hands.

Wajahat Ali is a Muslim American of Pakistani descent. He is a playwright, essayist, humorist and Attorney at Law, whose work, “The Domestic Crusaders” is the first major play about Muslim Americans living in a post 9-11 America. His blog is at http://goatmilk.wordpress.com/

Originally published in The Guardian

Source

Posted in Conspiracy, Empire, Pakistan | Leave a comment

Vatican promotes Islamic finance in face of global crisis

ROME – The Vatican said banks should look at the rules of Islamic finance to restore confidence amongst their clients during the current global economic crisis.

The ethical principles on which Islamic finance is based may bring banks closer to their clients and to the true spirit which should mark every financial service, the Vatican’s official newspaper Osservatore Romano said in an article in its latest issue.

The article argues that Western banks could use tools such as the Islamic bonds, known as sukuk, as collateral.

Sukuk may be used to fund the car industry or the next Olympic Games in London, it said.

The article also said that profit share, gained from sukuk, may be an alternative to the interest, underlining that the sukuk system could help automotive sector and support investments in infrastructure area.

Using the Islamic sukuk system, money would be invested in concrete projects and profit share – instead of interest earned – is distributed to clients.

The Osservatoreï’s editor, Giovanni Maria Vian, said that the great religions have always had a common attention to the human dimension of the economy, Corriere della Sera reported.

Source

Posted in Economics, Empire, Ideaology, Religion of Abraham | Leave a comment

Hal Turner and the “Amero”

The bottom line to all this is simple: The U.S. dollar is going to be intentionally exhausted into worthlessness. Anyone holding any assets denominated in “dollars” such as Checking accounts, Savings accounts, IRA’s, 401-K’s, Pensions, Stocks, Bonds, Money market funds, will wake up one day to find all their “dollars” are no longer “money.”

Posted in Economics, Empire, Video | 1 Comment