Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Israeli Soldiers kill thirteen year old boy in full view of ISM activists
These daily occurrences would not stand the light of day if it were reported by the media -- who don't say a word about the daily killings and torture of Palestinians but freak out when an Israeli is injured or killed.
In Nablus on Sunday 22nd September at approximately 12:45, Baha Al-Bahesh, a 13 year old boy was shot and killed by the IDF. A group of four internationals from the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) were with Baha at the time. The following is an account of the events leading up to his tragic death.
Baha was well known by many of the internationals and often accompanied them around the city as a friend. He regularly worked as a volunteer with a wide range of international and Palestinian organisations.
On Sunday morning a tank and Armoured Personel Carrier (APC) were in the streets just east of the old city of Nablus. The tank and APC were firing at children who were throwing rocks. This situation lasted approximately one hour. This is a typical day in Nablus. Usually we (the internationals) would find a safe place out of the line of fire where we could observe the situation and where the IDF would be able to see that we were watching which we hope makes them moderate their response. In such situations we ask Baha to leave us for his own safety. However, on Sunday morning we could not find a suitable place due to the layout of the roads so we waited in adjacent streets in safety.
The situation came to an end and the children began to disperse. We looked around the corner of the street to see that the tank and APC had moved approximately 200m up the road and stopped. There was no gunfire and only a few children remained none of whom were throwing rocks. We decided to slowly walk up the middle of the road towards the tank. This is another typical situation in Nablus, tanks and APCs sitting on the road with people moving carefully along the roads. We had covered 20m when the tank began to move back towards us. We slowly moved to the side of the road outside a closed shuttered shop and remained in full visibility at all times. The tank then turned down a side street which was 120m from us. The APC began to make the turn but stopped.
We were still outside the shop in a group. Some children still stood at the junction from which we had come and we five were the only ones in the street. We were talking at the time.
One of the internationals noticed the soldier on the top aiming some kind of weapon down the street. This is usual behaviour as they use the sights as a telescope. Suddenly a single shot was heard and Baha was on the ground in the porchway of the shop. The APC drove on following the tank. Baha lived for two to three minutes, blood welling up in his mouth, his eyes in deep shock. We held his hands and talked to him. The ambulance arrived in two minutes. We cannot say exactly when he died.
Baha was well known by many of the internationals and often accompanied them around the city as a friend. He regularly worked as a volunteer with a wide range of international and Palestinian organisations.
On Sunday morning a tank and Armoured Personel Carrier (APC) were in the streets just east of the old city of Nablus. The tank and APC were firing at children who were throwing rocks. This situation lasted approximately one hour. This is a typical day in Nablus. Usually we (the internationals) would find a safe place out of the line of fire where we could observe the situation and where the IDF would be able to see that we were watching which we hope makes them moderate their response. In such situations we ask Baha to leave us for his own safety. However, on Sunday morning we could not find a suitable place due to the layout of the roads so we waited in adjacent streets in safety.
The situation came to an end and the children began to disperse. We looked around the corner of the street to see that the tank and APC had moved approximately 200m up the road and stopped. There was no gunfire and only a few children remained none of whom were throwing rocks. We decided to slowly walk up the middle of the road towards the tank. This is another typical situation in Nablus, tanks and APCs sitting on the road with people moving carefully along the roads. We had covered 20m when the tank began to move back towards us. We slowly moved to the side of the road outside a closed shuttered shop and remained in full visibility at all times. The tank then turned down a side street which was 120m from us. The APC began to make the turn but stopped.
We were still outside the shop in a group. Some children still stood at the junction from which we had come and we five were the only ones in the street. We were talking at the time.
One of the internationals noticed the soldier on the top aiming some kind of weapon down the street. This is usual behaviour as they use the sights as a telescope. Suddenly a single shot was heard and Baha was on the ground in the porchway of the shop. The APC drove on following the tank. Baha lived for two to three minutes, blood welling up in his mouth, his eyes in deep shock. We held his hands and talked to him. The ambulance arrived in two minutes. We cannot say exactly when he died.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Warning: This is Graphic
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/uploads/bahaa14yearsdead.jpg
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/uploads/bahaa14yearsdead.jpg
Wow, no comments about how "he deserved to be killed" or "Dirty little sand-nigger got what he wanted, a bullet"
...did all the Freeper trolls go to sleep?
...did all the Freeper trolls go to sleep?
Is the Israel does nothing wrong crowd finally realized that at least sometimes Israel targets civilians just like Hamas? No probably not, where is the person who is going to say this is a hoax?
THE DAY BAHA DIED – Nablus - 22 Sept 02
Fourteen year old Baha was a committed friend and guide to international peace activists on the West Bank. And then one Israeli bullet ended his life. In her third dispatch to SQUALL, Ewa Jasiewicz describes the day she felt a bullet whizz by and end the life of her new found teenage colleague.
The blocking of the roads to Ramallah and the redefinition of Nablus as a 'Closed Military Zone' renders us pretty much trapped in Nablus. The light-aircraft din of a tank and Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) vrooming past sees myself, Hanneen (stunning and feisty Palestinian/German girl here visiting family and doing volunteer work), Al (pragmatic, cool-headed Welshman from the UK anarcho scene)and Carol(no-shit taking or talking American woman with Polish Gypsy blood), get up and make our way into the Old City to see what's happening. We were accompanied by Baha. Baha is an energetic, vibrant local kid, 14 years-old, with twinkly green eyes. He's wearing his usual green and black stripey cotton polo t-shirt, tucked into his jeans; one of those insightful kids that can smell bullshit from a mile.
Baha's always all 'mush mushkele’ (‘No Problems'), and is as capable as an adult, looking after international activists staying in the old city by doubling up as guide and mediator between hostile kids and us. He takes time out to explain who we are and why we're in their town when our governments are funding the occupation. He's always accompanying activists on their wanders round the city. Lisa, an ISM activist from up north first met him six weeks ago when she was being sexually harassed by a youth on the darkened stairway of the internet cafe building. She'd been really really scared. Baha drove the offending creep away. She'd called him her 'guardian angel' ever since. We made friends the first time I came to do some checkpoint monitoring opposite the Mukhata. The shebab (yoof) were doing the usual - luzzing stones at the soldiers, waving the odd raggedy Palestinian flag, stomping on a torn Israeli flag. The soldiers were shooting back teargas, live ammo, growling up the tank. I ran down to join the kids.
He was there with the best of them, rock after rock - thunk, hurl, thunk - most of the stones just cracked on the road, nowhere near the tank, uphill as it was, but its the frustration release and attack that counts. One kid handed me a rock, and said 'go on go on!'. I couldn’t resist, picked up a big one and hurled. It went nowhere near, the soldiers wouldn't even have seen it, their vision was obscured by a clump of trees. Instant kudos with the kids. They leapt about happily and gave me their open palms to slap. Especially Baha. He was really surprised but really happy. After that he was always calling my name and waving with a great big grin 'Aeva! Aeva! Haow arr you!?’ So we go out on the tank-hunt. Baha in tow. It's the usual. The APC and tank out on curfew patrol. We stay back at a street corner on our way into the old city, next to the wrecked bus (engine scalped, windows smashed). The old city is a warren of sandy big-rocked houses, archways, and piles of rubble (bulldozed ex-homes, factories, workshops) some from last month, some left over from the April incursion. The April attack saw 25,000 soldiers, approx. 400 tanks, an unknown quantity of APC’s and multiple apache rocket-fire hit the city and surrounding camps. The 4th strongest army on the planet doesn't fuck about when it goes in for the kill. Eighty seven Nablus residents were slaughtered within four days. Over 200 people were used as human shields.
Back to the present...The APC soldier gets on his phone. We think he might be calling the military plod. Nablus was declared a closed military zone about an hour ago. We could be nicked and dumped in Tel Aviv or deported. Whatever. We stay put. Kids pelt the APC with stones. A couple of stones chucked over from behind the safety of a wall, clop the soldier on the top. He responds with a round of live ammo. Bullets ping off the wrecked bus. No casualties. The kids move off down the street leading into the old city, stones in hands. We follow. The tank and APC rumble along up on a higher road, the streets below still visible to them. The tank stops at the top of the street up ahead which leads down to the old city. Kids throw and throw, from round the corner. The tank is about 80 metres up. The stones barely make it. Shots ring out.
Noone's hit. A family wants to cross the road, right in front of the tank's line of fire. They're in a hurry and looking fraught, mother, father, and four kids. All thinks it's way to risky with all the stone-throwing kids about. But Baha helps them across. We rush up to be in front of him and them at once. Baha's brave, just goes straight across, head-on, by their sides, defiant. Nothing happens.
Baha then shows us up a dusty flight of slab steps. He knows the city like the back of his hand. In the aftermath of the April incursion he was one of the most plucky volunteers, clearing rubble, running around, helping the sick. He had wished he could have had been in Jenin too, his mother will tell us, later. We make our way down the street to where we expect the APC and tank to be. It's empty. A few kids are moseying about, the odd stick or stone in their hands. But it seems like they've rumbled off. Just curfew enforcement we think. No big deal. Later we'll find out that its illegal for the Israel Army to use anything stronger than teargas to enforce curfew. Definitely not live ammo. They do what they want anyway though. The entire occupation is illegal under the Oslo Accords, the Geneva Convention, multiple United Nations’ directives etc etc etc.
We sit on the Kerb for a bit. Where to next? Internet cafe? Checkpoint watch? The tank and APC are outside. We decide to just check out what they're doing and after that Haneen's going back to her aunt's in Balata. As we make our way down the road we hear the sound of the two vehicles whurring towards us. We get to the side of the road. I'm in front, Carol a bit behind, Haneen behind a bit and Al and Baha at the back. The tank veers into view and then turns down a side street, 120 metres or so away. The APC looks like its going to turn but shudders to a halt. It's blazing hot. The sun's burning down. The street is clear at this point. Nothing is being thrown. The APC's too far away, the road is long, no hiding places, bad vantage point to throw from. Kids loiter to the sides, not far from the burned out bus, out of sight. I see the soldier in the APC take aim. I think it's with his M16 but it could be the mounted gun.
I'm not afraid. Tanks and APC’s always look like they’re aiming at you here. Guns are constantly being pointed at Palestinians in the territories - at their backs, in their faces, up at their windows, from the middle of the street, from the mountains. A shot rings out, whizzes straight past me. I feel the air rush and duck down instinctively.
'FUCK that was so close', I say, turning round. Al is looking about, 'okay, is everyone alright' he says, 'is...Oh my God, Oh-oh My God'.
Baha is lying on his back in the porchway of a closed shop. Blood is blooming from the right side of his chest. His eyes are bulged back in shock. Al is immediately beside him holding his shoulder, Haneen is by his other side, holding his hand. A Palestinian man is instantly above him, administering CPR, pumping his chest with short sharp thrusts of his crossed hands. 'It's his arm', says Al, 'No it's not it's his chest', says Haneen. The Palestinian man quickly 'corrects' her, 'no no, it's not, it's not'. He knows Baha can still hear him. Blood is welling up in Baha's mouth, flowing freely, it streams fast from his nose, his ear. 'Turn his head, turn his head, he's going to choke' I yell. It's too late though. We all know. I’m on the phone, calling an ambulance, along with several other local people who have all come out.
There's a crowd around Baha. I talk desperately, in English and way too fast to the operator, he can't understand me, I have to hand the phone to someone else. Everything just seems to slide. Within about a minute an ambulance is on the scene. Medics lift Baha up swiftly and take him away. A thick pool of blood is left behind. I never knew blood was so thick. Haneen's hand and sandals are covered in Baha's blood.
AFTERMATH…… The examining doctor at El Ethad Hospital in Nablus said the following about Baha's killing: "...shot under the axila passed through the left lung to right lung and heart. There was an accumulation of blood in thorax cavity. Died of Haemo-Thorax. X-Ray showed multiple fragments in chest. Main injuries in left lung and the heart." He said that the location of the shot in the upper torso and massive internal damage caused by the "dum-dum" bullet was consistent with an intentional kill.
Dum-dum's explode and fragment on impact, a bit like landmines, causing maximum multiple injuries.
The Israeli army initially stated that Baha was carrying a bomb at the time of his assassination. This is not true. It does however prove that the shot was fired to kill, not to stun or frighten but to kill. The statement then changed to accuse Baha of carrying a molotov cocktail.
This was supposed to have exploded in his hand. Setting him on fire and killing him. 'It was his fault'. This is what the IDF said about the boy they shot in the head in Balata the night before. Seventeen-years-old. He died when the ambulance carrying him was refused entry through a checkpoint to the hospital. A double killing. They said he killed himself, shot himself. This a common statement released after the Army murders people here. All armies and police do it. Blame and demonise the victim.
328 children have been murdered by the Israeli army or armed settlers since September 2000.
The next day I went to Israel, to the pristine air-conditioned studios of Canal 2 in Jerusalem. They put make-up on my face, sat me down infront of a sleek-haired news presenter and I told the story. Don't know how they translated me but there appeared to be sympathies. 'I don't know what goes through their heads', the presenter had said afterwards. Did two radio interviews. Stoney faces. Brusque technique.
'Very convincing' said the Radio 4 interviewer. Heard it went well.
Told and retold the story, told and retold the story. To United Press, The Guardian, The Scotsman, The Telegraph, B'Tselem, the Palestine Monitor, my sister, friends, countless friends, the Bushkar Family, it never got easier.
Yesterday we went to see Baha's mother and father. It was somewhere in the old city. We went into a big carpeted, ornate looking room, plusher than the grieving room I walked into in Tubas, when the IDF rocket-attacked and killed five children. Baha's father was a trim looking man, white crocheted round cap on his head. His eyes were wide, too wide. 'Ham Du Allah (said Hamdulullah) Ham Du Allah' he said, smiling when he greeted us. He shook my hand warmly, up and down, up and down, all the while 'Ham Du Allah'. It means Praise be to God, Thanks be to God. Baha was with his God, he was in heaven. He kept saying it, even when we sat down. Dates were passed down. We all, the three of us who were there with Baha when we died (Haneen we couldn't get hold of but went later, just stared straight ahead. He spoke, translated through Hussein, a close close friend of Baha, of how much Baha loved to help the International volunteers and how happy he was, how much he loved Lisa.
We then went to where his mother was. She was sat in a room full of other female relatives. She was wearing black, a long black dress and Hejab. Her face welcomed us. The room was full. The first question she asked us was hard for her, full of doubt but quietly, almost urgently asked, 'Was Baha carrying anything? Was he? Did he really have this bomb or something?'. She was confused. No. We explained. She nodded, firm mouthed but her eyes still full of pain. Al began to explain what actually happened. Right from the beginning. When he got to the part about Baha helping the family across the road in front of the tank, she covered her face with her hands and let out a long low moan, which turned into a sob and more sobs and tears. 'Habibti, Habibti' she kept saying, crying, 'My love, my love'. She cried and cried, cried harder when Al told her how we all came to know Baha, when he met Lisa on the stairs of the internet cafe.
An older relative began to chastise her. 'Stop, enough, stop your crying, he is with God, he is in a better place, he is with God, he is safe, take heart, enough'.
When we leave, she shakes our hands, absent. His father shakes our hands. He's still got that same wide-eyed energy, the kind that comes from shock and grief. The riding of the shockwave that is sudden, torn away from you in death, and which you crash through at some point, privately. 'HamDulAllah, HamDullallah'.
Fourteen year old Baha was a committed friend and guide to international peace activists on the West Bank. And then one Israeli bullet ended his life. In her third dispatch to SQUALL, Ewa Jasiewicz describes the day she felt a bullet whizz by and end the life of her new found teenage colleague.
The blocking of the roads to Ramallah and the redefinition of Nablus as a 'Closed Military Zone' renders us pretty much trapped in Nablus. The light-aircraft din of a tank and Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) vrooming past sees myself, Hanneen (stunning and feisty Palestinian/German girl here visiting family and doing volunteer work), Al (pragmatic, cool-headed Welshman from the UK anarcho scene)and Carol(no-shit taking or talking American woman with Polish Gypsy blood), get up and make our way into the Old City to see what's happening. We were accompanied by Baha. Baha is an energetic, vibrant local kid, 14 years-old, with twinkly green eyes. He's wearing his usual green and black stripey cotton polo t-shirt, tucked into his jeans; one of those insightful kids that can smell bullshit from a mile.
Baha's always all 'mush mushkele’ (‘No Problems'), and is as capable as an adult, looking after international activists staying in the old city by doubling up as guide and mediator between hostile kids and us. He takes time out to explain who we are and why we're in their town when our governments are funding the occupation. He's always accompanying activists on their wanders round the city. Lisa, an ISM activist from up north first met him six weeks ago when she was being sexually harassed by a youth on the darkened stairway of the internet cafe building. She'd been really really scared. Baha drove the offending creep away. She'd called him her 'guardian angel' ever since. We made friends the first time I came to do some checkpoint monitoring opposite the Mukhata. The shebab (yoof) were doing the usual - luzzing stones at the soldiers, waving the odd raggedy Palestinian flag, stomping on a torn Israeli flag. The soldiers were shooting back teargas, live ammo, growling up the tank. I ran down to join the kids.
He was there with the best of them, rock after rock - thunk, hurl, thunk - most of the stones just cracked on the road, nowhere near the tank, uphill as it was, but its the frustration release and attack that counts. One kid handed me a rock, and said 'go on go on!'. I couldn’t resist, picked up a big one and hurled. It went nowhere near, the soldiers wouldn't even have seen it, their vision was obscured by a clump of trees. Instant kudos with the kids. They leapt about happily and gave me their open palms to slap. Especially Baha. He was really surprised but really happy. After that he was always calling my name and waving with a great big grin 'Aeva! Aeva! Haow arr you!?’ So we go out on the tank-hunt. Baha in tow. It's the usual. The APC and tank out on curfew patrol. We stay back at a street corner on our way into the old city, next to the wrecked bus (engine scalped, windows smashed). The old city is a warren of sandy big-rocked houses, archways, and piles of rubble (bulldozed ex-homes, factories, workshops) some from last month, some left over from the April incursion. The April attack saw 25,000 soldiers, approx. 400 tanks, an unknown quantity of APC’s and multiple apache rocket-fire hit the city and surrounding camps. The 4th strongest army on the planet doesn't fuck about when it goes in for the kill. Eighty seven Nablus residents were slaughtered within four days. Over 200 people were used as human shields.
Back to the present...The APC soldier gets on his phone. We think he might be calling the military plod. Nablus was declared a closed military zone about an hour ago. We could be nicked and dumped in Tel Aviv or deported. Whatever. We stay put. Kids pelt the APC with stones. A couple of stones chucked over from behind the safety of a wall, clop the soldier on the top. He responds with a round of live ammo. Bullets ping off the wrecked bus. No casualties. The kids move off down the street leading into the old city, stones in hands. We follow. The tank and APC rumble along up on a higher road, the streets below still visible to them. The tank stops at the top of the street up ahead which leads down to the old city. Kids throw and throw, from round the corner. The tank is about 80 metres up. The stones barely make it. Shots ring out.
Noone's hit. A family wants to cross the road, right in front of the tank's line of fire. They're in a hurry and looking fraught, mother, father, and four kids. All thinks it's way to risky with all the stone-throwing kids about. But Baha helps them across. We rush up to be in front of him and them at once. Baha's brave, just goes straight across, head-on, by their sides, defiant. Nothing happens.
Baha then shows us up a dusty flight of slab steps. He knows the city like the back of his hand. In the aftermath of the April incursion he was one of the most plucky volunteers, clearing rubble, running around, helping the sick. He had wished he could have had been in Jenin too, his mother will tell us, later. We make our way down the street to where we expect the APC and tank to be. It's empty. A few kids are moseying about, the odd stick or stone in their hands. But it seems like they've rumbled off. Just curfew enforcement we think. No big deal. Later we'll find out that its illegal for the Israel Army to use anything stronger than teargas to enforce curfew. Definitely not live ammo. They do what they want anyway though. The entire occupation is illegal under the Oslo Accords, the Geneva Convention, multiple United Nations’ directives etc etc etc.
We sit on the Kerb for a bit. Where to next? Internet cafe? Checkpoint watch? The tank and APC are outside. We decide to just check out what they're doing and after that Haneen's going back to her aunt's in Balata. As we make our way down the road we hear the sound of the two vehicles whurring towards us. We get to the side of the road. I'm in front, Carol a bit behind, Haneen behind a bit and Al and Baha at the back. The tank veers into view and then turns down a side street, 120 metres or so away. The APC looks like its going to turn but shudders to a halt. It's blazing hot. The sun's burning down. The street is clear at this point. Nothing is being thrown. The APC's too far away, the road is long, no hiding places, bad vantage point to throw from. Kids loiter to the sides, not far from the burned out bus, out of sight. I see the soldier in the APC take aim. I think it's with his M16 but it could be the mounted gun.
I'm not afraid. Tanks and APC’s always look like they’re aiming at you here. Guns are constantly being pointed at Palestinians in the territories - at their backs, in their faces, up at their windows, from the middle of the street, from the mountains. A shot rings out, whizzes straight past me. I feel the air rush and duck down instinctively.
'FUCK that was so close', I say, turning round. Al is looking about, 'okay, is everyone alright' he says, 'is...Oh my God, Oh-oh My God'.
Baha is lying on his back in the porchway of a closed shop. Blood is blooming from the right side of his chest. His eyes are bulged back in shock. Al is immediately beside him holding his shoulder, Haneen is by his other side, holding his hand. A Palestinian man is instantly above him, administering CPR, pumping his chest with short sharp thrusts of his crossed hands. 'It's his arm', says Al, 'No it's not it's his chest', says Haneen. The Palestinian man quickly 'corrects' her, 'no no, it's not, it's not'. He knows Baha can still hear him. Blood is welling up in Baha's mouth, flowing freely, it streams fast from his nose, his ear. 'Turn his head, turn his head, he's going to choke' I yell. It's too late though. We all know. I’m on the phone, calling an ambulance, along with several other local people who have all come out.
There's a crowd around Baha. I talk desperately, in English and way too fast to the operator, he can't understand me, I have to hand the phone to someone else. Everything just seems to slide. Within about a minute an ambulance is on the scene. Medics lift Baha up swiftly and take him away. A thick pool of blood is left behind. I never knew blood was so thick. Haneen's hand and sandals are covered in Baha's blood.
AFTERMATH…… The examining doctor at El Ethad Hospital in Nablus said the following about Baha's killing: "...shot under the axila passed through the left lung to right lung and heart. There was an accumulation of blood in thorax cavity. Died of Haemo-Thorax. X-Ray showed multiple fragments in chest. Main injuries in left lung and the heart." He said that the location of the shot in the upper torso and massive internal damage caused by the "dum-dum" bullet was consistent with an intentional kill.
Dum-dum's explode and fragment on impact, a bit like landmines, causing maximum multiple injuries.
The Israeli army initially stated that Baha was carrying a bomb at the time of his assassination. This is not true. It does however prove that the shot was fired to kill, not to stun or frighten but to kill. The statement then changed to accuse Baha of carrying a molotov cocktail.
This was supposed to have exploded in his hand. Setting him on fire and killing him. 'It was his fault'. This is what the IDF said about the boy they shot in the head in Balata the night before. Seventeen-years-old. He died when the ambulance carrying him was refused entry through a checkpoint to the hospital. A double killing. They said he killed himself, shot himself. This a common statement released after the Army murders people here. All armies and police do it. Blame and demonise the victim.
328 children have been murdered by the Israeli army or armed settlers since September 2000.
The next day I went to Israel, to the pristine air-conditioned studios of Canal 2 in Jerusalem. They put make-up on my face, sat me down infront of a sleek-haired news presenter and I told the story. Don't know how they translated me but there appeared to be sympathies. 'I don't know what goes through their heads', the presenter had said afterwards. Did two radio interviews. Stoney faces. Brusque technique.
'Very convincing' said the Radio 4 interviewer. Heard it went well.
Told and retold the story, told and retold the story. To United Press, The Guardian, The Scotsman, The Telegraph, B'Tselem, the Palestine Monitor, my sister, friends, countless friends, the Bushkar Family, it never got easier.
Yesterday we went to see Baha's mother and father. It was somewhere in the old city. We went into a big carpeted, ornate looking room, plusher than the grieving room I walked into in Tubas, when the IDF rocket-attacked and killed five children. Baha's father was a trim looking man, white crocheted round cap on his head. His eyes were wide, too wide. 'Ham Du Allah (said Hamdulullah) Ham Du Allah' he said, smiling when he greeted us. He shook my hand warmly, up and down, up and down, all the while 'Ham Du Allah'. It means Praise be to God, Thanks be to God. Baha was with his God, he was in heaven. He kept saying it, even when we sat down. Dates were passed down. We all, the three of us who were there with Baha when we died (Haneen we couldn't get hold of but went later, just stared straight ahead. He spoke, translated through Hussein, a close close friend of Baha, of how much Baha loved to help the International volunteers and how happy he was, how much he loved Lisa.
We then went to where his mother was. She was sat in a room full of other female relatives. She was wearing black, a long black dress and Hejab. Her face welcomed us. The room was full. The first question she asked us was hard for her, full of doubt but quietly, almost urgently asked, 'Was Baha carrying anything? Was he? Did he really have this bomb or something?'. She was confused. No. We explained. She nodded, firm mouthed but her eyes still full of pain. Al began to explain what actually happened. Right from the beginning. When he got to the part about Baha helping the family across the road in front of the tank, she covered her face with her hands and let out a long low moan, which turned into a sob and more sobs and tears. 'Habibti, Habibti' she kept saying, crying, 'My love, my love'. She cried and cried, cried harder when Al told her how we all came to know Baha, when he met Lisa on the stairs of the internet cafe.
An older relative began to chastise her. 'Stop, enough, stop your crying, he is with God, he is in a better place, he is with God, he is safe, take heart, enough'.
When we leave, she shakes our hands, absent. His father shakes our hands. He's still got that same wide-eyed energy, the kind that comes from shock and grief. The riding of the shockwave that is sudden, torn away from you in death, and which you crash through at some point, privately. 'HamDulAllah, HamDullallah'.
For more information:
http://www.squall.co.uk/squall.cfm?sq=2002...
ZIONIST claim that Hitler and the Nazis victimized them. On the other hand, THEY are currently committing crimes and massacres far worst than the Nazis ever committed. Such crimes committed by the ZIONIST against the Palestinians have never been witnessed before in the human history.
The true beastly face of the ZIONIST Jews has appeared after their fragile innocent mask, with which they cheated people, was removed, from their faces.
The two posts above (1:28 and 1:14) may very well have been done by pro-Israelis posing as Arabs. The language used would suggest that. Truth is, we'll never know, but before jumping to conclusions, realize that pro-Israelis have been posing as Arabs on this site for a while...
The tell-tale signs are denying the Holocaust and attempting to attribute such denials to Arabs and an obsessive use of the word "Jews". This is the strategy used when trying to discredit an article or argument they find very embarrassing but cannot dispute.
Basically, they try to create the kinds of enemies they want.
Leila from GUPS was spoofed; here she sets the record straight:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/05/128726_comment.php#151832
In an effort to smear their opponents, pro-Israelis create websites like this:
http://www.voiceofpalestine.org/
Which is clearly propaganda and mimic real Palestinian sites like the Palestine Chronicle:
http://palestinechronicle.com/
Both sites are very similar. This was done intentionally by Zionists. They copied the graphics and look and feel of a real site (The Palestine Chronicle) and then created posts on Indymedia to point to the fake one (making it look like a Palestinian post in fact).
Their intention is to smear Palestinians as nothing more than anti-Semites and blacken legitimate websites like the Palestine Chronicle which contains serious articles and is very sensitive to Jewish concerns.
The tell-tale signs are denying the Holocaust and attempting to attribute such denials to Arabs and an obsessive use of the word "Jews". This is the strategy used when trying to discredit an article or argument they find very embarrassing but cannot dispute.
Basically, they try to create the kinds of enemies they want.
Leila from GUPS was spoofed; here she sets the record straight:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/05/128726_comment.php#151832
In an effort to smear their opponents, pro-Israelis create websites like this:
http://www.voiceofpalestine.org/
Which is clearly propaganda and mimic real Palestinian sites like the Palestine Chronicle:
http://palestinechronicle.com/
Both sites are very similar. This was done intentionally by Zionists. They copied the graphics and look and feel of a real site (The Palestine Chronicle) and then created posts on Indymedia to point to the fake one (making it look like a Palestinian post in fact).
Their intention is to smear Palestinians as nothing more than anti-Semites and blacken legitimate websites like the Palestine Chronicle which contains serious articles and is very sensitive to Jewish concerns.
I feel so sorry for those poor Israeli Snipers. Having to kill all those Palestinian Kids for throwing rocks at their tanks. (rocks can hurt!) WHERE ARE THE PALESTINIAN PARENTS? (of course, everyone knows that Palestinian parents don't like their kids) There should be an IDF investigation! Poor Israeli Snipers!
"Aren't these children legitimate targets?" pro-Israelis ask.
Justifying the murder of Palestinian children by showing pictures of them with toy guns (take a close look at the guns right above) shows the moral level of pro-Israelis.
Justifying the murder of Palestinian children by showing pictures of them with toy guns (take a close look at the guns right above) shows the moral level of pro-Israelis.
"Justifying the murder of Palestinian children by showing pictures of them with toy guns (take a close look at the guns right above) shows the moral level of pro-Israelis."
Nope, the guns on the other picture are real ak47s. The child on the picture above showing off his suicide belt goes to show that no Palestinian child can be considered harmless until proven so. You better use better judgment when reading articles about Israeli soldiers shooting at these "defenseless" children.
Nope, the guns on the other picture are real ak47s. The child on the picture above showing off his suicide belt goes to show that no Palestinian child can be considered harmless until proven so. You better use better judgment when reading articles about Israeli soldiers shooting at these "defenseless" children.
the picture below that, however, shows palestinian children with toy guns. Sort of like boy scouts playing around...
I'm suspicious about the first picture. Looks pretty propagandistic, as though arrested children were forced to hold the weapons for a photo op...
I'm suspicious about the first picture. Looks pretty propagandistic, as though arrested children were forced to hold the weapons for a photo op...
Palestinian cynical use of children get them killed
Palestinian cynical use of children get them killed
Palestinian cynical use of children get them killed
I think it is wrong for people to post such negative opinions about something the obviously know nothing about.
IF YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING NICE DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL!
IF YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING NICE DON'T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL!
Why cannot anybody say bad things about the Palestinians if they are real?
Amnesty International Condemns Palestinian Use of Children for Terror
(March 24, 2004)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amnesty International is gravely concerned about reports that earlier today a 14-year-old Palestinian child was found to be carrying explosives when attempting to pass through the Israeli army checkpoint at Huwara, at the entrance of the West Bank town of Nablus.
Reports indicate that the boy was wearing an explosive belt, which would suggest that he was knowingly carrying it. According to Israeli army reports the boy may have intended to detonate the explosive belt, and thus commit suicide, near soldiers manning the checkpoint.
Last week, Israeli soldiers discovered a bag of explosives in the possession of an 11-year old Palestinian child at the same checkpoint. The boy, who regularly carried bags for travellers from one side of the checkpoint to the other, was reported not to have been aware that one of the bags on his cart contained explosives.
Amnesty International has repeatedly condemned suicide bombings and other attacks against civilians by Palestinian armed groups as crimes against humanity. Using children to carry out or assist in armed attacks of any kind is an abomination. We call on the Palestinian leadership to publicly denounce these practices.
Palestinian armed groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al-Aqsa Martyrs's brigades, must put an immediate end to the use or involvement of any kind of children in armed activity.
Background Information
In the past three years there have been other cases in which Palestinian children have been used by Palestinian armed groups to carry out or attempt to carry out suicide bombings or other attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers.
In January a 17-year-old Palestinian detonated an explosive belt he was wearing as he was being tracked down by Israeli soldiers, killing himself and without hurting anyone else. The boy apparently intended to carry out a suicide attack to revenge the killing the previous week by the Israeli army of his 15-year-old brother and his cousin, neither of whom were armed when they were shot dead by Israeli soldiers. He had reportedly been given the explosive belt by members of the Palestinian armed group Islamic Jihad.
Palestinian armed groups have pressured families of those who have been killed while carrying out attacks, including children, not to condemn but to welcome and endorse their relatives' actions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Amnesty International
(March 24, 2004)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amnesty International is gravely concerned about reports that earlier today a 14-year-old Palestinian child was found to be carrying explosives when attempting to pass through the Israeli army checkpoint at Huwara, at the entrance of the West Bank town of Nablus.
Reports indicate that the boy was wearing an explosive belt, which would suggest that he was knowingly carrying it. According to Israeli army reports the boy may have intended to detonate the explosive belt, and thus commit suicide, near soldiers manning the checkpoint.
Last week, Israeli soldiers discovered a bag of explosives in the possession of an 11-year old Palestinian child at the same checkpoint. The boy, who regularly carried bags for travellers from one side of the checkpoint to the other, was reported not to have been aware that one of the bags on his cart contained explosives.
Amnesty International has repeatedly condemned suicide bombings and other attacks against civilians by Palestinian armed groups as crimes against humanity. Using children to carry out or assist in armed attacks of any kind is an abomination. We call on the Palestinian leadership to publicly denounce these practices.
Palestinian armed groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al-Aqsa Martyrs's brigades, must put an immediate end to the use or involvement of any kind of children in armed activity.
Background Information
In the past three years there have been other cases in which Palestinian children have been used by Palestinian armed groups to carry out or attempt to carry out suicide bombings or other attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers.
In January a 17-year-old Palestinian detonated an explosive belt he was wearing as he was being tracked down by Israeli soldiers, killing himself and without hurting anyone else. The boy apparently intended to carry out a suicide attack to revenge the killing the previous week by the Israeli army of his 15-year-old brother and his cousin, neither of whom were armed when they were shot dead by Israeli soldiers. He had reportedly been given the explosive belt by members of the Palestinian armed group Islamic Jihad.
Palestinian armed groups have pressured families of those who have been killed while carrying out attacks, including children, not to condemn but to welcome and endorse their relatives' actions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Amnesty International
http://www.counterpunch.org/rooij10132004.html
October 13, 2004
Double Standards and Curious Silences
Amnesty International: A False Beacon?
By PAUL de ROOIJ
Given the current escalation of Israeli depredations in Gaza and the daily US bombings of Falluja, it is interesting to examine Amnesty International's (AI) statements on the situation. AI is widely viewed as an authority on human rights issues, and thus it is of interest to analyze its output on these recent events. Careful scrutiny of AI's record reveals that, its typical response to the daily obscene deeds by either Israeli or US armies is a few barely audible ruminations with an occasional lame rebuke. The impotence of these responses raises many questions.
Occupation with human rights?
Consider the title of a recent press release: "Israeli army must respect human rights in its operations" [1]. According to AI, the Israeli depredations on occupied land are acceptable as long as they "respect" human rights. This is analogous to recommending that a rapist should practice safe sex [2]. It is also difficult to imagine that a military occupation could ever be imposed while observing "human rights".
Consider the context. During September 2004 the Israeli army killed on average 3.7 Palestinians per day; it injured an average of 19.3 p/day; it demolished many houses affecting the lives of thousands; it has transformed vast areas of Gaza into a denuded moonscape. It is also clear that these gruesome statistics will be worse in October. The Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz openly states that the Palestinians should be punished, and the measures advocated entail collective punishment. The entire Palestinian population is taken hostage; pressure is exerted on them as a whole. Ethnic Cleansing is on going, and the construction of the grotesque wall stands as proof of the criminality of this policy.
Given the devastation inflicted by the Israeli army and clear violations of international law, one would expect at least a tiny condemnation. However, this is the extent of AI's reaction:
"[AI] is concerned that the Israeli army's use of excessive force in this latest incursion in the Gaza Strip will result in further loss of lives and wanton destruction of Palestinian homes and property. Reprisals against protected persons and property are prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention and Israel is obliged to ensure that any measures taken to protect the lives of Israeli civilians are consistent with its obligations to respect human rights and international humanitarian law.
Israel should immediately allow international human rights and humanitarian organizations to enter the Gaza Strip. At present [AI] delegates and staff members of other international organizations are denied access to the Gaza Strip."
Note that this lame statement was uttered in reaction to the attack on Jabalya, an onslaught which Dr. Mustafa Barghouti described as follows: "Sharon's tanks are rampaging through Jabalia and Beit Lahia, just as they did in Khan Yunis, Rafah and Beit Hanun. The simple fact is that Sharon is doing to Gaza what he did to the West Bank in 2002." [3] AI's hypocrisy in issuing this limp statement is evident when it is compared with the press release analyzed below.
Double Standard?
In May 2004 AI issued a press release headed "AI condemns murder of woman and her four daughters by Palestinian gunmen." The body of the text contains the following condemnation:
"Such deliberate attacks against civilians, which have been widespread, systematic and in furtherance of a stated policy to attack the civilian population, constitute crimes against humanity, as defined by Article 7 (1) and (2)(a) of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal."[4]
So, when Palestinians kill some civilians, then it constitutes a "crime against humanity" -- one of the most serious crimes under international law, and a precursor to genocide. But, when Israel kills far more civilians "in furtherance of a stated policy" (the phrasing AI used against Palestinians) to "exact a price" (to use the words of Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz [5]), all that AI can do is to wring its hands and worry about "the Israeli army's use of excessive force". Thus, we see that AI does not hesitate to use against Palestinians terms, such as "crime against humanity", which it has never unambiguously leveled against Israel.
Note that the Israeli woman killed by Palestinians in the above episode was a settler. Thus, AI was stretching a point a to call her a civilian -- settlers are armed and they consider themselves, when they feel like it, the shock troops of an expansionist zionism whose stated goal is to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from, at least, all the land west of the River Jordan.
Regarding the Palestinian attack, AI also states: "deliberate attacksagainst civilians, which have been widespread, systematic and in furtherance of a stated policy to attack the civilian population." Whoa! It is astonishing that such a description was added to its accusation pertaining a Palestinian attack, but at the same time, it is not willing to classify any Israeli actions as "systematic, deliberate and widespread [etc.]". AI portrays Palestinian violence as worse than Israeli violence, and this amounts to a clear double standard.
Neglecting settler violence?
On Sept. 27, 2004 a settler from the Itamar settlement killed a Palestinian in cold blood, and the Israeli authorities even sought to exempt the settler from house arrest; at most -- though not likely -- he will be charged with manslaughter [6]. While AI was willing to issue a press release about the settler woman and her kids who were killed, it was not willing to issue any statement about this incident. What makes this neglect curious is that around the same time it issued a press release regarding an abducted CNN stringer -- someone who was eventually released unharmed [7].
Researching AI's public record reveals an odd sense of proportion in selecting which events it chooses to discuss.
It seems that AI regards settlements as mere misplaced suburbs, and its residents as just some Western suburbanites. For some settlements, this may be the case, but several settlements are home to racist zionist fanatics. Jeff Halper, the director of the Israel Committee Against House Demolitions, observes that there is now a second generation of settlers, those born in the settlements; he calls them the "clockwork orange" settlers who are more extreme, racist and violent than their predecessors [8]. The clockwork orange settlers frequently violently harass Palestinians, demolish homes, and occasionally kill with impunity. This context raises questions about AI's repeated calls to exempt settlers from Palestinian retribution.
During the second intifada, AI has not issued any statement about settler violence.
What happened to the supreme crime?
AI is not an anti-war organization, and this stance creates numerous contradictions. With the onset of the US war against Iraq, it issued statements about the means the US would employ in warfare, but curiously, AI didn't condemn the war! This is particularly curious given that the war was one of aggression and thus constitutes a supreme international crime. This is what Prof. Michael Mandel (Prof. of Law at York Univ., Toronto) had to say about the matter:
When the attack was launched, stern warnings were issued to all the 'belligerents' by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International [...], reminding them of their duties under the laws and customs of war. But neither said a single word about the illegality of the war itself or the supreme criminal responsibility under international law of the countries that had started it. [9]
And pertaining to the press releases AI issued during this period:
Amnesty also questioned whether the required precautions were being taken to protect civilians, and called for investigations into civilian deaths like those at the Karbala checkpoint, and the shooting of demonstrators in Falluja. But never once did Amnesty International [...] mention the fundamental reason why none of the incidents really had to be investigated at all -- namely that all of this death and destruction was legally, as well as morally, on the heads of the invaders, whatever precautions they claimed to take, because it was due to an illegal, aggressive war. Every death was a crime for which the leaders of the invading coalition were personally, criminally responsible. [10]
Again, AI ruminations amount to recommending the "rapist to engage in safe sex" -- no mention of the crime! Even though AI often refers to international law to issue its statements, when it comes to US depredations, then even supreme crimes are not mentioned.
Another double standard?
Consider AI's statement issued regarding the situation in Darfur:
"The United Nations Security Council should stop the transfer of arms being used to commit mass human rights violations in Darfur [AI] urged today while releasing a report based on satellite images showing large-scale destruction of villages in Darfur over the past year."[11]
The situation may be awful in Darfur, and the measure suggested may be warranted. However, the curious aspect of this statement is that AI has never called on the UN or any other body to impose an arms embargo on Israel, although there are ample grounds for such a recommendation.
An American academic inquired about this double standard, and she received the following answer from Donatella Rovera, AI's principal researcher on Israel-Palestine:
"The situations in Sudan and in Israel-Occupied Territories are quite different and different norms of international law apply, which do not make it possible to call for an arms embargos on either the Israeli or the Palestinian side. The West Bank and Gaza Strip are under Israeli military occupation (not the case for the Darfour region in Sudan). Hence, certain provisions of international humanitarian law, known as the laws of war (notably the 1907 Hague Convention and the Fourth Geneva Convention) apply in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (and not in the Darfour region)." (email communication July 5, 2004).
AI is couching its double standards in dubious legalese, but consider what Prof. Francis Boyle (Professor of International Law at Univ. of Illinois Champaign) has to say about Rovera's statement:
This is total gibberish. When I was on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA near the end of my second term in 1990-92, we received the authority to call for an arms embargo against major human rights violators, which Israel clearly qualified for at the time and still does -- even under United States domestic law. Of course no one at AI was going to do so because pro-Israel supporters were major funders of Amnesty International USA, which in turn was a major funder of Amnesty International in London. He who pays the piper calls the tune -- especially at AIUSA Headquarters in New York and at AI Headquarters in London.
What about the prisoners?
The core of AI's efforts have to do with "prisoners of conscience", prison conditions, and torture. So, it is of some interest to determine how this issue is dealt with pertaining Palestinian prisoners and the Abu Ghraib torture scandal [12]. The table below provides some context for the Palestinian prisoners.
Number of Palestinian Prisoners (July 8, 2004)
Total
5,892
Children (age < 18)
351
Women
75
Age > 50
42
42 Violation of accords [1]
433
Pct of prisoners put on trial
25%
Administrative detention [2]
786
Notes: [1] All prisoners held prior to the signing of the Oslo Accords should have been released. [2] Administrative detention is illegal under international law. Administrative detention orders may last for up to six months, with Palestinians held without charges or trial during this period. Israel routinely renews the detention orders thereby holding Palestinians without charge or trial indefinitely. During this period, detainees are often denied legal counsel.Source: http://www.nad-plo.org/faq1.php
The Palestinian case
Technically, AI doesn't publish the lists of prisoners of conscience [POC], and one must trawl through its public record to determine ifthere are Palestinian POCs. During the second intifada, its record indicates two POCs and two "possible" POCs, and no other information on Palestinian prisoners is evident. There are many Palestinian "administrative detainees" -- those held without charges, without trial, and for indefinite terms -- yet AI doesn't deem fit to bestow on them its magic POC label. The contrast with the treatment of Cuban POCs is stark: here even people paid by the US embassy for subversive activities earned a POC status, and simple search of the AI-USA website or some of the right-wing Cuban-American websites reveal 88 POCs [13]. This implies that a large percentage of "political" prisoners in Cuba are POCs [14]. While the Palestinian POC list is not made public, when it comes to Cuba, a different standard applies [15].
In the case of Cuba AI issues stern statements and calls to release the prisoners. Such statements may be justified given that there are 88 Cuban POCs. However, AI has not issued a similar statement about the much larger number of political prisoners held by Israel. Maybe the mere "four" Palestinian POCs do not warrant this effort.
Conditions for Palestinian prisoners in Israel and the occupied territories are appalling, and torture of prisoners is common. Earlier this year, Palestinian political prisoners went on hunger strike to protest these conditions. Israeli prison authorities engaged in awful tactics to disrupt the hunger strike, e.g., prison staff barbecued meat in the prison courtyard to unnerve the hungerstrikers, confiscated salt, etc. [16]. Given AI's interest in prison conditions, torture, and denial of medical treatment, when it came to the Palestinian hunger strike there was no statement whatsoever. A request for a position on this issue revealed a similar unwillingness to utter a peep. A comparison with the treatment of Cuban POC would be instructive, but beyond the scope of this article.
The Iraqi case
There is no doubt that US forces in Iraq are engaged in the systematic use of torture -- contrary to initial US reports aimed to minimize the damage, it was not a case of "a few rotten apples," and the evidence for the most perverse forms of torture --and indications that responsibility for them goes up the chain of command-- is damning. Furthermore, it is also clear that many prisoners were killed while in detention-- several deaths clearly due to torture. So, what does AI have to say about this?
AI wrote a letter to "His Excellency Mr. John D. Negroponte" to ask under which legal framework the prisoners would be treated. First, it is odd to see AI deferring to Negroponte in such an abject manner. Negroponte has a sinister past and it is odd to refer to him as "His Excellency". The letter then requests a clarification of the legal framework applying to the prisoners -- and this in the face of the torture revelations:
"Recalling reports of torture of Iraqis not only by the occupying powers but also by the Iraqi police, [AI] would welcome information about the legal and practical safeguards that will apply to arrest, detention and internment; what access international and Iraqi organizations will have to those held; and whether prisons and detention centres will be placed under Iraqi government or other control. The international community should know what measures are in place to ensure that the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment will be strictly observed by Iraqi, US and other forces. In this respect, we would appreciate knowing your views about our recommendation that the United Nations should have a specific monitoring mandate to supervise all places of detention." [17]
It is curious that AI has to inquire about the rights of prisoners in Iraq by appealing to a representative of the country that launched an illegal war of aggression. The abject tone of the letter is disturbing -- it also means that AI has no desire to confront serious US crimes in a forceful manner. Whereas in the past AI reports could cause trepidation among some dictators, today AI's statements hardly make mass human rights abusers take notice. For this type of preferential service AI received a Nobel Peace Prize.
All other AI press releases are of a similar nature. For example:
[AI] calls on the MNF to take all necessary precautions to protect civilians and respect the principles of necessity and proportionality, and to take measures to ensure that they comply fully with their obligations under international law. [18]
It sounds familiar because AI is using the template which they have used to report on Israeli "abuses".
A right to "defend itself"?
AI, just like the US government, issues ritual statements that "Israel has a right to defend itself". AI accepts military interventionin the occupied territories to make sure that Israel obtains its elusive "security". The only difference between AI's position and that of the US is that AI urges the military intervention to "respect human rights" or for it not to be "excessive" [19]. Both accept Israel's right to build the Apartheid Wall, AI just urges that it be built on the Green Line [20].
Prof. Mandel offers an interesting view on this so-called right to self-defense:
"An aggressor has no right to self-defense. If you break into someone's house and hold them at gunpoint and they try to kill you but you kill them first, they're guilty of nothing and you're guilty of murder." [21]
Israel is the aggressor in the region, and its actions are meant to hold on to land it conquered by force. Ethnic cleansing has been on going since 1948 until the present day, and it is irrational to suggest that Israel has a right to repress those whom it seeks to dispossess. Today Israel tries to repress Palestinians who happen to have kept the keys to their houses that were stolen from them since 1948; so, Mandel's analogy is appropriate.
AI statements about measured violence to obtain "security" also flies in the face of a history of ethnic cleansing. Israeli policy has been one of stealing the land and dispossessing the population. Given this history, it is outrageous to suggest that Israel has a right to "defend" itself since its actions have amounted to continued aggression.
AI's position is riven with contradictions. On the one hand, it seeks to defend "human rights", but on the other, it "understands" war or weapons of war, or accepts the right of "self-defense" of an aggressor. AI also attempts to equate the violence of the oppressor with that of the oppressed; the latter it tries to de-legitimize, while the former it tries to contain so that it "respects human rights". Without addressing the underlying injustice, AI's position is simply absurd. The implication of AI's stance is that it does not promote a solution with a modicum of justice; it seems to accept the status quo, but with "human rights" -- whatever that means in AI's warped lexicon.
A false beacon
Anyone concerned with justice for the Palestinian cause or seeking to end the obscene war in Iraq will be disappointed with Amnesty International's stance. It is no use appreciating the bits of its reports that are useful; the problem is that its overall position on key issues is at best contradictory. Many of the well-intentioned and idealistic volunteers working on AI's campaigns may be wasting their efforts given that the AI framework adopts a blinkered understanding of the problems. Donating to AI doesn't translate into effective action for these causes, and given AI's record, the Palestinians certainly cannot expect fair coverage or representation. Will AI ever clearly and categorically condemn Israel for the large number of killings and the havoc and destruction it has caused in Jabalya or Beit Hanoun? Don't count on it.
Each Israeli assault on Palestinian refugee camps, each US bombing of cities in Iraq, and each assassination of yet more Palestinians or Iraqis reveals AI's dubious stance. Today, most AI pronouncements range between moral flatulence and moral fraudulence.
Paul de Rooij is a writer living in London. He can be reached at proox [at] hotmail.com
(NB: all emails with attachments will be automatically deleted.)
Paul de Rooij © 2004
Further Reading
1. Nabeel Abraham, et al.; International Human Rights Organizations and the Palestine Question, Middle East Report (MERIP), Vol. 18, No. 1, January-February 1988, pp. 12 -- 20. Available online: http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=4388
2. Dennis Bernstein and Francis Boyle, "Amnesty on Jenin": an interview, CAQ, Summer 2002, pp. 9 -- 12, 27. Available online http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=4573.
3. Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away with Murder, Pluto Press 2004. (important book).
4. Paul de Rooij, "AI: Say It Isn't So," CounterPunch, Oct. 31, 2002
5. Paul de Rooij, "Ambient Death in Palestine," CounterPunch, June 26, 2003.
6. Paul de Rooij, "AI: The Case of a Rape Foretold," CounterPunch, Nov. 26, 2003.
7. Sara Flounders, "Massacre in Jenin, Human Rights Watch and the Stage-Management of Imperialism," CAQ, Fall 2002. Available online: http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=3220.
Endnotes
[1] Amnesty International, "Israeli army must respect human rights in its operations", MDE 15/094/2004, October 1, 2004.
[2] A very similar statement was issued in its "Excessive use of force" [MDE 15/095/2004, October 5, 2004] press release, where it demanded that Israel "put an immediate end to the use of excessive lethal force" [2]. The implication is that a lower level of violence is acceptable. Again, AI didn't condemn the continued occupation of Palestinian land. Another point must be made about its press releases regarding Israeli violence. Invariably these contain some finger pointing against Palestinians. However, the opposite is not the case, i.e., statements about Palestinian violence don't contain condemnation of Israeli violence. Yet another double standard.
[3] Mustapha Barghouti, Occupation as withdrawal (http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/711/op3.htm), Al Ahram, Oct. 7, 2004.
[4] AI, "AI condemns murder of woman and her four daughters by Palestinian gunmen", MDE 15/049/2004, May 4, 2004.
[5] Ha'aretz, 1 October 2004, http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=8944
[6] Arnon Regular, Court: Settler to stay under house arrest over killing driver, Haaretz, Sept. 29, 2004.
[7] AI, "[AI] calls for immediate release of journalist Riad Ali", MDE 15/093/2004, Sept. 28, 2004.
[8] Jeff Halper, A deeper look into the unfolding crisis in Palestine, http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=7884, July 19, 2004. This is an important interview.
[9] Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away With Murder, Pluto Press 2004, p. 7.
[10] ibid, p. 8. NB: this book contains more examples of AI's inconsistencies and other problems with its moral backbone.
[11] Amnesty International, "Sudan: The UN Security Council should stop arms transfers to Sudan and the Janjawid militia", AFR 54/074/2004, July 2, 2004.
[12] NB: the propaganda compliant term is "abuse scandal" -- it is clearly more serious than that.
[13]See for example: AI-USA, "Amnesty International Urges Release of Prisoners of Conscience in Cuba on One-Year Anniversary of Arrests", March 16, 2004.
[14] It is difficult to classify prisoners in Cuba, and there is some discussion about this on the web. For their own ends right-wing Cuban-Americans claim large numbers, but these claims are doubtful. However, the same groups use AI's POC with relish. NB: many of the prisoners in AI's Cuba POC list were paid by the US embassy to engage in black propaganda, and several were caught red-handed receiving money from embassy staff. Never mind that these people may be thus tainted, AI raised no questions about their "embassy" business to bestow a POC status.
[15] Source: personal communication with the principal AI researcher on Israel-Palestine.
[16] As an example of the measures taken against the prisoners see: Arnon Regular, Jonathan Lis, and Jackie Khoury, "Prisons Service will set up barbecues to combat hunger strike by Palestinian security prisoners", Ha'aretz, Aug. 16, 2004. Here is one quote:
"Barbecues have been set up to grill meat near the cells of Palestinian security prisoners in an effort to combat a hunger strike that the prisoners launched yesterday. Prisons Service guards confiscated cigarettes and candy, along with large quantities of salt, which the prisoners had hidden in their mattresses apparently to provide themselves with minerals during the strike. The guards also removed pens and newspapers. In addition to setting up barbecues to whet the appetite of security prisoners, the Prisons Service is halting all family visits for the strikers, while radios and televisions have been removed from their cells."
[17] AI, "Clarification needed on status of prisoners after 30 June", MDE 14/031/2004, June 18, 2004.
[18] AI, "End bloodshed and killing of children", MDE 14/050/2004, Oct. 1, 2004.
[19] AI, "Excessive use of force" MDE 15/095/2004, October 5, 2004.
[20] AI, "The fence/wall violates international law," MDE 15-018-2004, Feb. 189, 2004.
[21] Mandel, op. cit., p. 9.
/
October 13, 2004
Double Standards and Curious Silences
Amnesty International: A False Beacon?
By PAUL de ROOIJ
Given the current escalation of Israeli depredations in Gaza and the daily US bombings of Falluja, it is interesting to examine Amnesty International's (AI) statements on the situation. AI is widely viewed as an authority on human rights issues, and thus it is of interest to analyze its output on these recent events. Careful scrutiny of AI's record reveals that, its typical response to the daily obscene deeds by either Israeli or US armies is a few barely audible ruminations with an occasional lame rebuke. The impotence of these responses raises many questions.
Occupation with human rights?
Consider the title of a recent press release: "Israeli army must respect human rights in its operations" [1]. According to AI, the Israeli depredations on occupied land are acceptable as long as they "respect" human rights. This is analogous to recommending that a rapist should practice safe sex [2]. It is also difficult to imagine that a military occupation could ever be imposed while observing "human rights".
Consider the context. During September 2004 the Israeli army killed on average 3.7 Palestinians per day; it injured an average of 19.3 p/day; it demolished many houses affecting the lives of thousands; it has transformed vast areas of Gaza into a denuded moonscape. It is also clear that these gruesome statistics will be worse in October. The Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz openly states that the Palestinians should be punished, and the measures advocated entail collective punishment. The entire Palestinian population is taken hostage; pressure is exerted on them as a whole. Ethnic Cleansing is on going, and the construction of the grotesque wall stands as proof of the criminality of this policy.
Given the devastation inflicted by the Israeli army and clear violations of international law, one would expect at least a tiny condemnation. However, this is the extent of AI's reaction:
"[AI] is concerned that the Israeli army's use of excessive force in this latest incursion in the Gaza Strip will result in further loss of lives and wanton destruction of Palestinian homes and property. Reprisals against protected persons and property are prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention and Israel is obliged to ensure that any measures taken to protect the lives of Israeli civilians are consistent with its obligations to respect human rights and international humanitarian law.
Israel should immediately allow international human rights and humanitarian organizations to enter the Gaza Strip. At present [AI] delegates and staff members of other international organizations are denied access to the Gaza Strip."
Note that this lame statement was uttered in reaction to the attack on Jabalya, an onslaught which Dr. Mustafa Barghouti described as follows: "Sharon's tanks are rampaging through Jabalia and Beit Lahia, just as they did in Khan Yunis, Rafah and Beit Hanun. The simple fact is that Sharon is doing to Gaza what he did to the West Bank in 2002." [3] AI's hypocrisy in issuing this limp statement is evident when it is compared with the press release analyzed below.
Double Standard?
In May 2004 AI issued a press release headed "AI condemns murder of woman and her four daughters by Palestinian gunmen." The body of the text contains the following condemnation:
"Such deliberate attacks against civilians, which have been widespread, systematic and in furtherance of a stated policy to attack the civilian population, constitute crimes against humanity, as defined by Article 7 (1) and (2)(a) of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal."[4]
So, when Palestinians kill some civilians, then it constitutes a "crime against humanity" -- one of the most serious crimes under international law, and a precursor to genocide. But, when Israel kills far more civilians "in furtherance of a stated policy" (the phrasing AI used against Palestinians) to "exact a price" (to use the words of Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz [5]), all that AI can do is to wring its hands and worry about "the Israeli army's use of excessive force". Thus, we see that AI does not hesitate to use against Palestinians terms, such as "crime against humanity", which it has never unambiguously leveled against Israel.
Note that the Israeli woman killed by Palestinians in the above episode was a settler. Thus, AI was stretching a point a to call her a civilian -- settlers are armed and they consider themselves, when they feel like it, the shock troops of an expansionist zionism whose stated goal is to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from, at least, all the land west of the River Jordan.
Regarding the Palestinian attack, AI also states: "deliberate attacksagainst civilians, which have been widespread, systematic and in furtherance of a stated policy to attack the civilian population." Whoa! It is astonishing that such a description was added to its accusation pertaining a Palestinian attack, but at the same time, it is not willing to classify any Israeli actions as "systematic, deliberate and widespread [etc.]". AI portrays Palestinian violence as worse than Israeli violence, and this amounts to a clear double standard.
Neglecting settler violence?
On Sept. 27, 2004 a settler from the Itamar settlement killed a Palestinian in cold blood, and the Israeli authorities even sought to exempt the settler from house arrest; at most -- though not likely -- he will be charged with manslaughter [6]. While AI was willing to issue a press release about the settler woman and her kids who were killed, it was not willing to issue any statement about this incident. What makes this neglect curious is that around the same time it issued a press release regarding an abducted CNN stringer -- someone who was eventually released unharmed [7].
Researching AI's public record reveals an odd sense of proportion in selecting which events it chooses to discuss.
It seems that AI regards settlements as mere misplaced suburbs, and its residents as just some Western suburbanites. For some settlements, this may be the case, but several settlements are home to racist zionist fanatics. Jeff Halper, the director of the Israel Committee Against House Demolitions, observes that there is now a second generation of settlers, those born in the settlements; he calls them the "clockwork orange" settlers who are more extreme, racist and violent than their predecessors [8]. The clockwork orange settlers frequently violently harass Palestinians, demolish homes, and occasionally kill with impunity. This context raises questions about AI's repeated calls to exempt settlers from Palestinian retribution.
During the second intifada, AI has not issued any statement about settler violence.
What happened to the supreme crime?
AI is not an anti-war organization, and this stance creates numerous contradictions. With the onset of the US war against Iraq, it issued statements about the means the US would employ in warfare, but curiously, AI didn't condemn the war! This is particularly curious given that the war was one of aggression and thus constitutes a supreme international crime. This is what Prof. Michael Mandel (Prof. of Law at York Univ., Toronto) had to say about the matter:
When the attack was launched, stern warnings were issued to all the 'belligerents' by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International [...], reminding them of their duties under the laws and customs of war. But neither said a single word about the illegality of the war itself or the supreme criminal responsibility under international law of the countries that had started it. [9]
And pertaining to the press releases AI issued during this period:
Amnesty also questioned whether the required precautions were being taken to protect civilians, and called for investigations into civilian deaths like those at the Karbala checkpoint, and the shooting of demonstrators in Falluja. But never once did Amnesty International [...] mention the fundamental reason why none of the incidents really had to be investigated at all -- namely that all of this death and destruction was legally, as well as morally, on the heads of the invaders, whatever precautions they claimed to take, because it was due to an illegal, aggressive war. Every death was a crime for which the leaders of the invading coalition were personally, criminally responsible. [10]
Again, AI ruminations amount to recommending the "rapist to engage in safe sex" -- no mention of the crime! Even though AI often refers to international law to issue its statements, when it comes to US depredations, then even supreme crimes are not mentioned.
Another double standard?
Consider AI's statement issued regarding the situation in Darfur:
"The United Nations Security Council should stop the transfer of arms being used to commit mass human rights violations in Darfur [AI] urged today while releasing a report based on satellite images showing large-scale destruction of villages in Darfur over the past year."[11]
The situation may be awful in Darfur, and the measure suggested may be warranted. However, the curious aspect of this statement is that AI has never called on the UN or any other body to impose an arms embargo on Israel, although there are ample grounds for such a recommendation.
An American academic inquired about this double standard, and she received the following answer from Donatella Rovera, AI's principal researcher on Israel-Palestine:
"The situations in Sudan and in Israel-Occupied Territories are quite different and different norms of international law apply, which do not make it possible to call for an arms embargos on either the Israeli or the Palestinian side. The West Bank and Gaza Strip are under Israeli military occupation (not the case for the Darfour region in Sudan). Hence, certain provisions of international humanitarian law, known as the laws of war (notably the 1907 Hague Convention and the Fourth Geneva Convention) apply in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (and not in the Darfour region)." (email communication July 5, 2004).
AI is couching its double standards in dubious legalese, but consider what Prof. Francis Boyle (Professor of International Law at Univ. of Illinois Champaign) has to say about Rovera's statement:
This is total gibberish. When I was on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International USA near the end of my second term in 1990-92, we received the authority to call for an arms embargo against major human rights violators, which Israel clearly qualified for at the time and still does -- even under United States domestic law. Of course no one at AI was going to do so because pro-Israel supporters were major funders of Amnesty International USA, which in turn was a major funder of Amnesty International in London. He who pays the piper calls the tune -- especially at AIUSA Headquarters in New York and at AI Headquarters in London.
What about the prisoners?
The core of AI's efforts have to do with "prisoners of conscience", prison conditions, and torture. So, it is of some interest to determine how this issue is dealt with pertaining Palestinian prisoners and the Abu Ghraib torture scandal [12]. The table below provides some context for the Palestinian prisoners.
Number of Palestinian Prisoners (July 8, 2004)
Total
5,892
Children (age < 18)
351
Women
75
Age > 50
42
42 Violation of accords [1]
433
Pct of prisoners put on trial
25%
Administrative detention [2]
786
Notes: [1] All prisoners held prior to the signing of the Oslo Accords should have been released. [2] Administrative detention is illegal under international law. Administrative detention orders may last for up to six months, with Palestinians held without charges or trial during this period. Israel routinely renews the detention orders thereby holding Palestinians without charge or trial indefinitely. During this period, detainees are often denied legal counsel.Source: http://www.nad-plo.org/faq1.php
The Palestinian case
Technically, AI doesn't publish the lists of prisoners of conscience [POC], and one must trawl through its public record to determine ifthere are Palestinian POCs. During the second intifada, its record indicates two POCs and two "possible" POCs, and no other information on Palestinian prisoners is evident. There are many Palestinian "administrative detainees" -- those held without charges, without trial, and for indefinite terms -- yet AI doesn't deem fit to bestow on them its magic POC label. The contrast with the treatment of Cuban POCs is stark: here even people paid by the US embassy for subversive activities earned a POC status, and simple search of the AI-USA website or some of the right-wing Cuban-American websites reveal 88 POCs [13]. This implies that a large percentage of "political" prisoners in Cuba are POCs [14]. While the Palestinian POC list is not made public, when it comes to Cuba, a different standard applies [15].
In the case of Cuba AI issues stern statements and calls to release the prisoners. Such statements may be justified given that there are 88 Cuban POCs. However, AI has not issued a similar statement about the much larger number of political prisoners held by Israel. Maybe the mere "four" Palestinian POCs do not warrant this effort.
Conditions for Palestinian prisoners in Israel and the occupied territories are appalling, and torture of prisoners is common. Earlier this year, Palestinian political prisoners went on hunger strike to protest these conditions. Israeli prison authorities engaged in awful tactics to disrupt the hunger strike, e.g., prison staff barbecued meat in the prison courtyard to unnerve the hungerstrikers, confiscated salt, etc. [16]. Given AI's interest in prison conditions, torture, and denial of medical treatment, when it came to the Palestinian hunger strike there was no statement whatsoever. A request for a position on this issue revealed a similar unwillingness to utter a peep. A comparison with the treatment of Cuban POC would be instructive, but beyond the scope of this article.
The Iraqi case
There is no doubt that US forces in Iraq are engaged in the systematic use of torture -- contrary to initial US reports aimed to minimize the damage, it was not a case of "a few rotten apples," and the evidence for the most perverse forms of torture --and indications that responsibility for them goes up the chain of command-- is damning. Furthermore, it is also clear that many prisoners were killed while in detention-- several deaths clearly due to torture. So, what does AI have to say about this?
AI wrote a letter to "His Excellency Mr. John D. Negroponte" to ask under which legal framework the prisoners would be treated. First, it is odd to see AI deferring to Negroponte in such an abject manner. Negroponte has a sinister past and it is odd to refer to him as "His Excellency". The letter then requests a clarification of the legal framework applying to the prisoners -- and this in the face of the torture revelations:
"Recalling reports of torture of Iraqis not only by the occupying powers but also by the Iraqi police, [AI] would welcome information about the legal and practical safeguards that will apply to arrest, detention and internment; what access international and Iraqi organizations will have to those held; and whether prisons and detention centres will be placed under Iraqi government or other control. The international community should know what measures are in place to ensure that the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment will be strictly observed by Iraqi, US and other forces. In this respect, we would appreciate knowing your views about our recommendation that the United Nations should have a specific monitoring mandate to supervise all places of detention." [17]
It is curious that AI has to inquire about the rights of prisoners in Iraq by appealing to a representative of the country that launched an illegal war of aggression. The abject tone of the letter is disturbing -- it also means that AI has no desire to confront serious US crimes in a forceful manner. Whereas in the past AI reports could cause trepidation among some dictators, today AI's statements hardly make mass human rights abusers take notice. For this type of preferential service AI received a Nobel Peace Prize.
All other AI press releases are of a similar nature. For example:
[AI] calls on the MNF to take all necessary precautions to protect civilians and respect the principles of necessity and proportionality, and to take measures to ensure that they comply fully with their obligations under international law. [18]
It sounds familiar because AI is using the template which they have used to report on Israeli "abuses".
A right to "defend itself"?
AI, just like the US government, issues ritual statements that "Israel has a right to defend itself". AI accepts military interventionin the occupied territories to make sure that Israel obtains its elusive "security". The only difference between AI's position and that of the US is that AI urges the military intervention to "respect human rights" or for it not to be "excessive" [19]. Both accept Israel's right to build the Apartheid Wall, AI just urges that it be built on the Green Line [20].
Prof. Mandel offers an interesting view on this so-called right to self-defense:
"An aggressor has no right to self-defense. If you break into someone's house and hold them at gunpoint and they try to kill you but you kill them first, they're guilty of nothing and you're guilty of murder." [21]
Israel is the aggressor in the region, and its actions are meant to hold on to land it conquered by force. Ethnic cleansing has been on going since 1948 until the present day, and it is irrational to suggest that Israel has a right to repress those whom it seeks to dispossess. Today Israel tries to repress Palestinians who happen to have kept the keys to their houses that were stolen from them since 1948; so, Mandel's analogy is appropriate.
AI statements about measured violence to obtain "security" also flies in the face of a history of ethnic cleansing. Israeli policy has been one of stealing the land and dispossessing the population. Given this history, it is outrageous to suggest that Israel has a right to "defend" itself since its actions have amounted to continued aggression.
AI's position is riven with contradictions. On the one hand, it seeks to defend "human rights", but on the other, it "understands" war or weapons of war, or accepts the right of "self-defense" of an aggressor. AI also attempts to equate the violence of the oppressor with that of the oppressed; the latter it tries to de-legitimize, while the former it tries to contain so that it "respects human rights". Without addressing the underlying injustice, AI's position is simply absurd. The implication of AI's stance is that it does not promote a solution with a modicum of justice; it seems to accept the status quo, but with "human rights" -- whatever that means in AI's warped lexicon.
A false beacon
Anyone concerned with justice for the Palestinian cause or seeking to end the obscene war in Iraq will be disappointed with Amnesty International's stance. It is no use appreciating the bits of its reports that are useful; the problem is that its overall position on key issues is at best contradictory. Many of the well-intentioned and idealistic volunteers working on AI's campaigns may be wasting their efforts given that the AI framework adopts a blinkered understanding of the problems. Donating to AI doesn't translate into effective action for these causes, and given AI's record, the Palestinians certainly cannot expect fair coverage or representation. Will AI ever clearly and categorically condemn Israel for the large number of killings and the havoc and destruction it has caused in Jabalya or Beit Hanoun? Don't count on it.
Each Israeli assault on Palestinian refugee camps, each US bombing of cities in Iraq, and each assassination of yet more Palestinians or Iraqis reveals AI's dubious stance. Today, most AI pronouncements range between moral flatulence and moral fraudulence.
Paul de Rooij is a writer living in London. He can be reached at proox [at] hotmail.com
(NB: all emails with attachments will be automatically deleted.)
Paul de Rooij © 2004
Further Reading
1. Nabeel Abraham, et al.; International Human Rights Organizations and the Palestine Question, Middle East Report (MERIP), Vol. 18, No. 1, January-February 1988, pp. 12 -- 20. Available online: http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=4388
2. Dennis Bernstein and Francis Boyle, "Amnesty on Jenin": an interview, CAQ, Summer 2002, pp. 9 -- 12, 27. Available online http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=4573.
3. Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away with Murder, Pluto Press 2004. (important book).
4. Paul de Rooij, "AI: Say It Isn't So," CounterPunch, Oct. 31, 2002
5. Paul de Rooij, "Ambient Death in Palestine," CounterPunch, June 26, 2003.
6. Paul de Rooij, "AI: The Case of a Rape Foretold," CounterPunch, Nov. 26, 2003.
7. Sara Flounders, "Massacre in Jenin, Human Rights Watch and the Stage-Management of Imperialism," CAQ, Fall 2002. Available online: http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=3220.
Endnotes
[1] Amnesty International, "Israeli army must respect human rights in its operations", MDE 15/094/2004, October 1, 2004.
[2] A very similar statement was issued in its "Excessive use of force" [MDE 15/095/2004, October 5, 2004] press release, where it demanded that Israel "put an immediate end to the use of excessive lethal force" [2]. The implication is that a lower level of violence is acceptable. Again, AI didn't condemn the continued occupation of Palestinian land. Another point must be made about its press releases regarding Israeli violence. Invariably these contain some finger pointing against Palestinians. However, the opposite is not the case, i.e., statements about Palestinian violence don't contain condemnation of Israeli violence. Yet another double standard.
[3] Mustapha Barghouti, Occupation as withdrawal (http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/711/op3.htm), Al Ahram, Oct. 7, 2004.
[4] AI, "AI condemns murder of woman and her four daughters by Palestinian gunmen", MDE 15/049/2004, May 4, 2004.
[5] Ha'aretz, 1 October 2004, http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=8944
[6] Arnon Regular, Court: Settler to stay under house arrest over killing driver, Haaretz, Sept. 29, 2004.
[7] AI, "[AI] calls for immediate release of journalist Riad Ali", MDE 15/093/2004, Sept. 28, 2004.
[8] Jeff Halper, A deeper look into the unfolding crisis in Palestine, http://www.corkpsc.org/db.php?aid=7884, July 19, 2004. This is an important interview.
[9] Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away With Murder, Pluto Press 2004, p. 7.
[10] ibid, p. 8. NB: this book contains more examples of AI's inconsistencies and other problems with its moral backbone.
[11] Amnesty International, "Sudan: The UN Security Council should stop arms transfers to Sudan and the Janjawid militia", AFR 54/074/2004, July 2, 2004.
[12] NB: the propaganda compliant term is "abuse scandal" -- it is clearly more serious than that.
[13]See for example: AI-USA, "Amnesty International Urges Release of Prisoners of Conscience in Cuba on One-Year Anniversary of Arrests", March 16, 2004.
[14] It is difficult to classify prisoners in Cuba, and there is some discussion about this on the web. For their own ends right-wing Cuban-Americans claim large numbers, but these claims are doubtful. However, the same groups use AI's POC with relish. NB: many of the prisoners in AI's Cuba POC list were paid by the US embassy to engage in black propaganda, and several were caught red-handed receiving money from embassy staff. Never mind that these people may be thus tainted, AI raised no questions about their "embassy" business to bestow a POC status.
[15] Source: personal communication with the principal AI researcher on Israel-Palestine.
[16] As an example of the measures taken against the prisoners see: Arnon Regular, Jonathan Lis, and Jackie Khoury, "Prisons Service will set up barbecues to combat hunger strike by Palestinian security prisoners", Ha'aretz, Aug. 16, 2004. Here is one quote:
"Barbecues have been set up to grill meat near the cells of Palestinian security prisoners in an effort to combat a hunger strike that the prisoners launched yesterday. Prisons Service guards confiscated cigarettes and candy, along with large quantities of salt, which the prisoners had hidden in their mattresses apparently to provide themselves with minerals during the strike. The guards also removed pens and newspapers. In addition to setting up barbecues to whet the appetite of security prisoners, the Prisons Service is halting all family visits for the strikers, while radios and televisions have been removed from their cells."
[17] AI, "Clarification needed on status of prisoners after 30 June", MDE 14/031/2004, June 18, 2004.
[18] AI, "End bloodshed and killing of children", MDE 14/050/2004, Oct. 1, 2004.
[19] AI, "Excessive use of force" MDE 15/095/2004, October 5, 2004.
[20] AI, "The fence/wall violates international law," MDE 15-018-2004, Feb. 189, 2004.
[21] Mandel, op. cit., p. 9.
/
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network