Archive for the ‘Human rights’ Category

Richard Falk:The Shock Resulting from Flotilla Attack has Reinforced the Campaign to de-Legitimize Israel

June 20, 2010

Intifada Palestine, June 19, 2010

Richard Falk  the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967. In 2001 Falk served on a United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Inquiry Commission for the Palestinian territories with John Dugard. He is also an American Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University with a long and distinguished career in academics, politics and law. He recently gave this exclusive and revealing interview to Intifada Palestine’s Elias F. Harb .

Navi Pillay, the UN Human Rights Chief described the Israeli blockade on Gaza as “illegal and must be lifted” and accused Israel of Violating International Humanitarian Law, Also the head of UNRWA operation in Gaza, John Ging, had called upon the UN itself to begin defying the blockade and deliver humanitarian assistance since the blockade is a flagrant direct violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prohibits collective punishment. The state of Israel has stated that the blockade of Gaza is for security purposes; although it is imposing Collective Punishment on 1.5 million, which is a breach of international law and a war crime – Editor Elias Harb

Richard Falk

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW – With Prof. Richard Falk

by Elias Harb – Editor Intifada Palestine

EH: Professor Falk, what is the legality of the Israeli blockade in Gaza in accordance with the San Remo Manual on International Law applicable to armed conflicts at Sea?

Continues >>

Aung San Suu Kyi’s desperate plea to the world

June 18, 2010

By Andrew Buncombe, Asia Correspondent, The Independent/UK, June 18, 2010

Aung San Suu Kyi's lakeside house in Rangoon where a fence was  erected last year
EPA

Aung San Suu Kyi’s lakeside house in Rangoon where a fence was erected last year

As Aung San Suu Kyi prepares to celebrate her 65th birthday tomorrow, confined in the house in which she has spent most of the past two decades, a confidante of the Burmese opposition leader has made a simple but passionate appeal to those in the West to use their freedom to help his country achieve the same.

In a hand-written letter smuggled out of Burma and passed to The Independent, U Win Tin writes: “I want to repeat and echo her own words – ‘please use your liberty to promote ours’. I want to add more to it. Please bring more and more liberty to us, to our country, Burma. We are starving for it and we are waiting for someone or some institutions or some countries to bring it to us.”

Continues >>

Open letter to Obama on behalf of citizens of Bhopal

June 18, 2010
AP
From a protest in Calcutta

Reverse The Out-Of-Court Bhopal Settlement’

Activists write to the US President: ‘Whose ‘ass’ should the citizens of Bhopal kick if governments selectively shield their corporations and officials from legal accountability?’


Mr Barack Obama
President,
United States of America

Dear Mr President Obama,

With a great deal of interest, we have been following your tough stand against BP for the oil spill in the Gulf Of Mexico, particularly your demand to know whose ‘ass needs to be kicked’. We think your demand for corporate accountability for causing huge environmental damages is worthy of emulation by other governments around the World.

May we draw your attention to a bigger disaster that took place in the city of Bhopal in India in December 1984 that has officially killed over 15,000 people (about 25,000 people unofficially) and seriously injured nearly half a million people by now (the situation after twenty five years is attached for ready reference). This disaster was caused by another mega corporate entity called Union Carbide, headquartered in the United States of America, unlike BP whose parent company resides in Great Britain.

Continues >>

Cruel fate of Ahmadis in Pakistan

June 18, 2010

Outlook India, June 14, 2010

AP
Mourning after Grief-stricken Ahmadis
pakistan: the ahmadis
Wretched Of The Land
The attack on their mosques exposes the raw wound that is Ahmadi existence here
Ahmadis In Pakistan Ahmadis In India

Population: 4 million Population: Estimated to be from 60,000 to 1 million
Headquarters: Rabwah town, Punjab Headquarters: Qadian in Gurdaspur district, Punjab, where the sect was established. The 2001 census counted roughly 20,000 Ahmadis in Qadian.
Status: Since 1974, declared non-Muslim Why low numbers: Partition saw the bulk of Ahmadis becoming citizens of Pakistan
What they can’t do: Call themselves Muslim, offer prayers in mosques, quote Quranic verses in their newspaper, propagate their religion Status: Several high court verdicts say they must be treated as Muslim
Threats from fundamentalists: They say it is ‘permissible to kill’ them. Some 2,000 died in riots in 1953, suffered untold misery in 1974. The attacks on them claimed nearly 100 lives. What they can’t do: They don’t sit on the Muslim Personal Law Board, but are governed by Muslims


As the international media frenetically reported the simultaneous terror attacks on the two mosques of the Ahmadi community in Lahore, Pakistani journalists countenanced an arrantly absurd situation—they were required to eschew the M-word under law. In their dispatches, as poignant as any, the two Ahmadi mosques became mere “places of worship”. Between the two nomenclatures—mosque and place of worship—lies the gulf separating Muslims from non-Muslims in Pakistan. The wishes of Ahmadis do not matter, their own definition of themselves as Muslim counts for nothing. The Constitution of Pakistan declares them as non-Muslim and proscribes the use of the word mosque to describe their places of worship. The defiant can flout the law at their own peril.

Petition to End Religious Violence in Pakistan

June 18, 2010

by progpak, June 16, 2010

Black Friday, the May 28th massacre of Ahmadi worshipers while at Friday prayers, has been a dark reminder of the terrible conditions that Pakistan’s non-Sunni and non-Muslim communities live in. At least part of the problem is the Pakistani state’s institutionalization of legalized discrimination against Ahmadis and various other groups. These horrible and inhuman laws must go.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. We call on the Pakistani government to repeal these terrible laws, bring perpetrators of violence to justice, and take steps to separate religion from government.

Please sign our petition calling on the government to take these steps! Signing the petition takes only a few seconds and none of your personal information is saved. Please do this now, and please spread the word widely and ask others to sign the petition as well.

Kashmir democracy under the barrel of Indian guns

June 12, 2010

By Yasmin Qureshi, ZNet, June 12, 2010

Change Text Size a- | A+

Yasmin Qureshi’s ZSpace Page

I had wanted to go to Kashmir ever since I visited Palestine in 2007. There are many similarities in the nature of the occupation as well as the struggles, both being nearly 63 years old.  One difference is that while Israel is seen as an external occupying force in Palestine, the Kashmir issue is considered an ‘internal’ matter or a conflict between Pakistan and India and the voice of Kashmiris is often lost. As a result there are fewer international organizations monitoring the region and little information about the extent and impact of the occupation gets out.

Continues >>

Obama’s License to Kill

June 11, 2010

Obama blurs the line between warfare and summary execution.

Reason Magazine,  June 9, 2010

Nearly a decade after the September 11 attacks, we still have not settled the question of how to deal with terrorism suspects. Should they be in military or civilian custody? Should they receive trials, and if so what kind? After years of acrimonious debate, President Obama is offering a way to settle this argument once and for all: Why not just kill them?

Last week U.N. investigator Philip Alston delivered a report on “targeted killings” in which the U.S. government plays a starring role. Under a policy secretly initiated by George W. Bush and expanded by Obama, the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command track and kill people, including U.S. citizens, based on their alleged ties to Al Qaeda or its allies. The killings, typically carried out by missiles fired from drone aircraft, dangerously blur the line between warfare and summary execution.

As Alston noted, targeted killings “are permitted in armed conflict situations when used against combatants…or civilians who directly engage in combat-like activities.” But “they are increasingly being used far from any battle zone”—in places such as Yemen, where the U.S. fires missiles at “high-value targets” such as the American-born radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

Harold Koh, the State Department’s legal adviser, says such attacks are justified by international law and by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force that Congress passed after the September 11 attacks. “The United States is in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, as well as the Taliban and associated forces,” Koh says. “Individuals who are part of such an armed group are belligerents and, therefore, lawful targets.”

But unlike a conventional war, this “armed conflict” is fought on a “battlefield” that spans the globe by “belligerents” who do not wear uniforms and are not readily identified. Hence Koh’s reasonable-sounding law-of-war argument amounts to claiming that the executive branch has the unreviewable authority to kill enemies that it unilaterally identifies anywhere in the world.

The geographic reach of this license to kill exceeds even that of an old-fashioned tyrant accustomed to shouting, “Off with his head!” Imagine how the U.S. would react if a foreign government claimed it had the right to kill people on the streets of New York because it considered them “belligerents.”

Given the breathtaking scope of the authority claimed by the president, the reassurances of his underlings ring hollow. “Whether a particular individual will be targeted in a particular location,” says Koh, “will depend upon considerations specific to each case, including those related to the imminence of the threat, the sovereignty of the other states involved, and the willingness and ability of those states to suppress the threat the target poses.” This is a long way of saying “trust us.”

Last February, Dennis Blair, then the director of national intelligence, assured members of Congress that “we don’t target people for free speech.” Rather, “we target them for taking action that threatens Americans or has resulted in it.”

Awlaki, for example, is known mainly for his inflammatory yet constitutionally protected sermons. But according to an unidentified “American official” quoted by The New York Times in April, “The danger Awlaki poses to this country is no longer confined to words. He’s gotten involved in plots.”

Before you take the government’s word that Awlaki has been marked for death based on something more than his anti-American tirades, consider its track record in justifying the detention of alleged “belligerents.” Even though the burden of proof is much lighter than it would be in a criminal trial, the American Civil Liberties Union notes, “the government has failed to prove the lawfulness of imprisoning individual Guantanamo detainees in 34 of the 48 cases that have been reviewed by the federal courts thus far.”

Luckily for the government, it does not need to present any evidence against Awlaki or other “high-value targets,” because it does not want to detain them. It only wants to kill them.

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason and a nationally syndicated columnist.

The hijacking of the truth: Film evidence ‘destroyed’

June 6, 2010

Protesters say Israel had an assassination list. Israel says soldiers fired only in self-defence. So what really happened on 31 May? Catrina Stewart reports

The Independent/UK, June 6, 2010

Turkish activists aboard the Mavi Marmara don lifejackets after  they are warned that Israeli naval ships are approaching; nine  protesters died in the commando attack the next morning
ERHAN SEVENLER / AP

Turkish activists aboard the Mavi Marmara don lifejackets after they are warned that Israeli naval ships are approaching; nine protesters died in the commando attack the next morning

Jamal Elshayyal, a journalist with al-Jazeera, woke with a start to the opening salvos of an Israeli assault that would transform the decks of the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish vessel bound for Gaza, into a bloodbath.

From the ship’s position deep in international waters, satellite images of Israeli speedboats and helicopters approaching the vessel were beamed across the globe before communications were abruptly cut off, leaving the events on the Marmara to unfold away from the eyes of the world.

Six days after the bloody assault that left nine foreign protesters, mainly Turks, dead, nobody can recount with any conviction precisely what happened that night. The convoy of ships, whose passengers included writers, politicians and journalists, had been expected for weeks, with organisers loudly broadcasting their plans to run Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip and draw international attention to the situation there.

From the beginning, it was clear that Israeli forces were concentrating in their largest numbers on the Marmara, a ship carrying some 550 peace activists. The remaining five boats were much smaller and easily commandeered. After the Marmara was subdued, the passengers silenced, and their recording equipment confiscated, Israel disseminated a carefully choreographed account of the events that night that would dominate the airwaves for the first 48 hours.

Only as eyewitnesses, traumatised by their experiences, started to return to their home countries, were serious questions raised about the veracity of the Israeli version of events. Israeli commandos initiated the attack on the Marmara with stun grenades, paintballs and rubber-cased steel bullets. They were met with water hoses as the ship’s passengers tried to form a defensive cordon to prevent soldiers from reaching the wheelhouse. Next, the helicopters started their approach, hovering overhead as they tried to disgorge commandos.

From the other ships, passengers looked on helplessly: “The worst thing was seeing the helicopter come up because I knew they were going to invade,” said Ewa Jasiewicz, a 32-year-old organiser. “You could hear the screams when they started shooting … We wanted to stop and go back but there wouldn’t have been anything we could have done.”

From the moment the helicopters arrived, the sequence of events becomes confused. The dizzying number of claims and counter-claims serves only to present an incomplete account of a military operation that went badly, badly wrong. More than 1.7 million viewers have pored over the edited YouTube footage posted by the Israeli navy since Wednesday. In the dramatic clip, commandos rappel down on to the deck from a helicopter, where they are met by angry activists armed with iron bars and sticks.

This is a critical point, for Israel has rallied domestic opinion on the crucial claim that its soldiers dropped into a meticulously planned riot for which they were completely unprepared. Panicked, they acted in self-defence after they landed, shooting only those who threatened them.

The video is problematic, though. The images of angry protesters are striking, but they lack context. What happened before? What happened next? Had the soldiers started shooting when they descended to the deck? The only account offered by the Israelis of what happened next is left to Staff Sergeant S, a commando who claims he shot six of the protesters.

The last of 15 to arrive on the deck, he said he saw that two of his colleagues had gunshot wounds. Pushing others into a protective cordon around the injured soldiers, he shot at the protesters to force them to fall back. It’s a neat account, but several eyewitness accounts tell a very different story.

Mr Elshayyal, a reporter for the Arab channel al-Jazeera, was standing to one side of the ship and had a view of the front and back of the vessel when the fighting started. By his account, soldiers fired down on the protesters from the helicopters before an Israeli soldier had even set foot on the ship. A man next to him was shot through the top of his head, dying instantly.

“What I saw were shots being fired from the helicopter above and moments later from below – from the ships,” Mr Elshayyal said. “As far as I am concerned, it’s a lie to say they only started shooting on deck.”

At least two other eyewitnesses saw soldiers firing from above the ships before they landed on the Marmara’s deck. It is possible that this is what prompted the fierce resistance to the soldiers when they dropped down. Several passengers recount how organisers urged their peers to stop hitting the soldiers, aware of how it would harm their claim to be peaceful protesters.

Others on the ship claim they raised a white flag, but say that it was ignored. They also used a loudspeaker to reiterate their message of surrender and requested that the injured be taken off the ship to get medical assistance. Again, they were ignored.

At some point early on, the activists dragged three, possibly four, injured soldiers to a lower deck, either to keep as hostages or for their own safety. It was then, several passengers say, that the situation quickly deteriorated. Israel has insisted that the protesters took two of the soldiers’ pistols and used them, but others claim the pistols were taken away to prove that Israel planned to use live rounds.

Below, the protesters rummaged through captured soldiers’ belongings and claimed to unearth a document that they allege is a list of people Israel intended to assassinate. The booklet, written in Hebrew and in English, contained some photographs of passengers on the Marmara, including the leader of IHH, the Turkish charity that provided two of the ships, an 88-year-old priest and Ra’ad Salah, head of the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Mr Elshayyal said.

A military spokesman, Lt Col Avital Leibowitz, insisted soldiers acted in self-defence and that she “was not aware” of any list. But one thing is fast becoming clear – many of the dead were shot multiple times at point-blank range. One was a journalist taking photographs. “A man was shot … between the eyebrows, which indicates that it was not an attack that took place from self-defence,” Hassan Ghani, a passenger, said in an account posted on YouTube. “The soldier had time to set up the shot.” Mattias Gardell, a Swedish activist, told the TT news bureau: “The Israelis committed premeditated murder … Two people were killed by shots in the forehead, one was shot in the back of the head and one in the chest.”

When Israeli troops had subdued the ship, they rounded up the passengers, bound their wrists, in some cases forcing activists into stress positions, and prevented them from using toilets. Mr Elshayyal said he was given just three sips of water before he was taken off the ship more than 24 hours later.

Their ordeal, of course, was not yet over. Accused of entering Israel illegally, the captives were transferred to an Israeli prison, where many were held in cramped cells and denied phone calls. Furious, Turkey sent three planes to transport the activists out of Israel, threatening to sever all diplomatic ties if they were not all released.

Meanwhile, much of the video footage confiscated from Marmara passengers remains undisclosed, and Israel has sought to undermine some eyewitness accounts by alleging some of the passengers were terrorist sympathisers bent on martyrdom.

Questions remain unanswered on both sides. But without a full and transparent airing of all the evidence, the truth of that dreadful night on the Marmara may never come to light.

In the meantime, the organisers say they will seek again and again to breach Israel’s defences. Scottish protester Ali El-Awaisi said: “We sent six ships this time. Next time it will be 30 ships.”

Buchanan: Lift the Siege of Gaza

June 4, 2010
by Pat Buchanan, creators.com, June 4, 2010

— In June 1948, our wartime ally imposed a blockade on Berlin, cutting off and condemning to death or Stalinist domination 2 million Germans, most of whom, not long before, had cheered Adolf Hitler.
Harry Truman responded with the Berlin airlift, in perhaps the most magnanimous act of the Cold War.

For nine months, U.S. pilots flew into Tempelhof, carrying everything from candy to coal, saving a city and earning the eternal gratitude of the people of Berlin, and admiration everywhere that moral courage is admired.

That was an America that lived its values.

Continues >>

Israel’s Latest Violation

June 2, 2010

By Stephen Zunes, Foreign Policy In Focus, June 2, 2010

flotilla

Every time Israel’s right-wing government engages in yet another outrageous violation of international legal norms, it is easy to think, “No way are they going to get away with it this time!” And yet, thanks to the White House, Congress and leading American pundits, somehow, they do.

Israel’s attack on an unarmed flotilla of humanitarian aid vessels in the eastern Mediterranean — resulting in more than a dozen fatalities, the wounding of scores of passengers and crew, and the kidnapping of 750 others — has so far not proven any different.

Continues >>