That’s why
Some days ago, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki released an interview for Spiegel on the efforts to resolve the conflict about Tehran’s nuclear program and his country’s right to resist the western threat. By the way he remarked that 50 years ago the nazionalization of Iranian oil was termed by the UN Security Council as a threat to international peace and stability. The preposterous absurdity of the double standard in UNSC Resolutions is not over. While some say that the Pentagon is planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran’s military infrastructure and the British freeze their relations with Teheran, we sit and wait. Everybody knows why the world is being cast into a hell of a situation in the Middle East and it’s very clear who is the victim and who the executioner. Once more we are the bystanders, the hypocrites, the ones who’re going to apologize saying we did not know.
Enzo Baldoni met the journalists of Fallujah
On August 11, 2004, Enzo Baldoni and Ghareeb (Enzo’s Palestinian interpreter in Iraq) went to Fallujah. Enzo reported it in his blog (Blogdhad) and a phone interview with Baldoni was also aired by “Radio Città del Capo” in Italy. Here below the rush transcript of that interview. Enzo Baldoni spoke specifically about that tour and the related delivering of aids to some journalists of a newborn first independent newspaper in Fallujah. Enzo Baldoni and Ghareeb were to be killed in Iraq along the last decade of that very August 2004.
«We’ve travelled to Fallujah, I and Ghareeb, my interpreter, who’s a friend and a guardian angel above all. We’ve got there to deliver some aids and money to an NGO, greet and share solidarity to the journalists of this very first independent newspaper in Fallujah.
Fallujah is presently under armed Mujaheddins’ control. We were pretty tense because a fatwa was issued, just yesterday, against all the foreigners, the reporters, the photographers, and all the Americans of course. The dogs and slaves of their masters.
So really we were… The town was completely shut down, almost completely under siege by the Americans, who surround it. And there was tension around. We entered by a secondary, narrow road. Therefore, pretty luckily, we got to the office of that journal. Everybody there looked at us, thinking we were mad. We gave them the aids we had to, then suddenly they brought and showed us out, even saying to me: “Look, you’ve got to pretend you are an Iraqi, absolutely, do not show you’re a foreigner, sit straight, look straight in front of you, never watch at anyone’s eyes, don’t raise your hand” and all this stuff, don’t even mention picking up photos, of course.
At the checkpoint, one of the journalists [was surr...] He was bringing us on, he went ahead and made some mess in order to keep them a bit apart from us, and then …then they nodded: “Ok, go, go,” namely…
I don’t really know the risk we have run, in my opinion we did not run a particularly elevated risk. For sure there was tension, the worst thing is that they are divided in Fallujah. One Mujaheddin against another, the Mosques, one against another. And Ghareeb said, while getting out he said: “look, in my opinion, Fallujah is fucked up.” He means the Americans encircle it, maybe Moktada is probably hiding within Fallujah, and the Americans are going to carry on a last strike. Eh, yes, yes, yes, because at this point there is a struggle in Iraq, really hard. The Americans and the newborn Iraqi Army, from the one side, the Mujaheddins from the other. They say the Mujaheddins are quite divided and this, …and this is the problem, they cannot elect a clear leader, they’re one against another and this – according to Ghareeb, who knows them well and stuff – he says this will fuck them up.
Look, we went directly to this journal’s office, they gave us a sit and offered us some water, we talked for ten minutes and suddenly they escorted us toward the escape. The way out was watched by these Mujaheddins, all of them dressed in black, and with a bandage on their face not to be recognized, and these journalists and friends tried to get their attention so that we could gain the way out, yes, we got out, more or less unharmed, we got pretty scared because one of them [somew...] chased us on foot and made us open the baggage, but we had nothing inside, therefore…
Of course, when you are into a besieged town you turn a bit paranoid, moreover if there is a fatwa, a curse, a death sentence against all the foreigners, the journalists, against anyone …let alone being Italian. Ghareeb says we’ve run somehow a little risk. You know, in every movement there is a bunch of fanatics with blood in their eyes, sure there are also some of them. In Fallujah…»
[In italian see pipistro on line]
[See also Enzo Baldoni, who's killing him one more time? in this blog and/or footnote #9 in Inge Van De Merlen's In memory of Fallujah]
The usual stuff
The news was obviously embarrassing for L’Unità [Italian left wing newspaper] that didn’t even mention it in its homepage. On the contrary the same news filled up for some time the homepages of the main Italian newspapers, before falling into the emphatic, benedictory notes of the tv reports lead by a legion of ordinary valets, then being forgotten.
Italian President Giorgio Napolitano celebrated the Remembrance Day by equating, substantially, anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, as he stated that “anti-Zionism means negation of the inspirator source of the Jewish State, namely, of the reasons of its birth, yesterday, and of its emergency today, beyond the governments who alternated to the guide of Israel.” (Corriere della Sera, January 25, 2007)
Perhaps his speech – be it right or wrong – made the joy of those who would gain credit for the politics of the State of Israel and forget that the moral credit of the Jewish State does not rest on Israeli’s morality how much as it rests on the European past immorality.
Useless to summarize, or copy-and-past the works by a plethora of academics, journalists, politicians. Useless to remember the writings of Raul Hilberg and Hannah Arendt, Livia Rokach, Edward Said, Baruch Kimmerling and Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe and Tanya Reinhart, Avi Shlaim and Gideon Levy, Michael Warschawski and Norman Finkelstein, or to be astounded by Benny Morris’, Bill Clinton’s, Dennis Ross’, Shlomo Ben-Ami’s somersaults, or watch at Alan Dershowitz’s law techniques, at Moshe Sharett’s, Yossi Beilin’s rethinkings and at the surreptitious circumlocutions made by Ehud Barak. Superfluous to be indignated at Abraham Foxman’s and John Bolton’s statings, at Yasser Arafat’s market, at Bernard Lewis’ misleading precognition. And horrify at Menachem Begin’s, Yitzhak Shamir’s and Ariel Sharon’s misdeeds, as shivering at Golda Meir’s words and annotate Ben-Gurion’s eloquent gestures.
Then it is useless debating, confronting the sources, analyzing the documents, winnowing the interpretation of documents. And useless watching more at the facts than leaning to the labels. Eventually history got to the history books and over people’s skin and life. Someone, sooner or later, read the history books. But meanwhile, skin and life are lost.
Therefore, we cannot but wait (in order to avoid undue, preposterous accusations of anti-Semitism and in order to clear the birth and the premises, the aims, the tools, the goals and the limits of the Zionist movement) the comments written by those, who from the inside, never leant to that drift. “…That’s called covering your ass—because whatever an Israeli scholar says, you’re pretty safe: no one can accuse the journal of anti-Semitism, none of the usual stuff works.” (Noam Chomsky “Understanding Power” – The New Press, 2002)
“We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, ‘What is to be done with the Palestinian population?’ Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘Drive them out!’” (Yitzhak Rabin, July 1948, in occasion of the conquest of Lydda and Ramla)
“We’ll make a pastrami sandwich of them, … we’ll insert a strip of Jewish settlements in between the Palestinians, and then another strip of Jewish settlements right across the West Bank, so that in 25 years’ time, neither the United Nations nor the United States, nobody, will be able to tear it apart.” (Ariel Sharon, 1973, talking to W. Churchill III about Zionists’ aims)
[in Italian see pipistro on line]
Precognition
They say precognition is “a glimpse of a possible future that is based upon present conditions” (wikipedia). Let’s see an abstract from Ha’aretz of January 24, 2007, in order to get an example of present conditions: “…Major General (Res.) Doron Almog on Tuesday presented to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee his findings in the inquiry into the abduction of Israel Defense Forces soldiers Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser. Almog uncovered a chain of failures at all levels of command. Almog told the committee that had the soldiers been briefed on the morning before the abduction, Regev and Goldwasser would not have been kidnapped and their three fellow soldiers would not have been killed. Almog added that had the chief of staff acted responsibly and taken an active role in terms of preparing for the option of abduction, the soldiers would not have been abducted”. So someone claims now that the soldiers patrolling the border should have been prepared for the “option of abduction” before it actually happened. Why? I do not have a clue about that, but we must assume either that precognition is among IDF duties or that the abduction was likely to happen. (See below We are history and That’s just old news)
Foxwhat?
«The Anti-Defamation League on Thursday blasted the United Nations Human Rights Council for appointing Desmond Tutu as head of its fact-finding mission to the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanun. The mission is charged with investigating a botched Israel Defense Forces shelling in Beit Hanun which killed 19 Palestinian civilians. “The appointment of Desmond Tutu as head of the fact-finding mission to Beit Hanun is an extension of the anti-Israel kangaroo court tactics used by the UN Human Rights Council,” said ADL National Director Abraham Foxman [...] Tutu, the former Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town, has spoken out against Israel in the past and publicly denounced the Beit Hanun operation. “It is an outrage that cries out to heaven and we must condemn it unequivocally as we do the atrocities committed by suicide bombers against Israeli civilians,” Tutu said…». (Ha’aretz) Maybe Mr Foxman liked better John Bolton for the Job. Unfortunately, one can`t choose his prosecutor, and everyone must rely on the second`s morality and skillfulness. Maybe Abraham Foxman could choose professor Dershowitz to write down another “Case for Israel” in order to justify Tzahal’s attacks and killings in Beit Hanoun, but I doubt he would find out any other comfortable Joan Peters’ quotes of Mark Twain that fit to the issue. Mr Foxman’s remarks about Tutu’s past speaking against Israel (and I quote, “It is an outrage that cries out to heaven…”) seem pretty ridiculous. By the way the man indeed – I mean Tutu – has to deal with an issue that really cries out to heaven, the alleged “mistakenly slaughtering” of some 20 civilians.
The others
Who decides what a crime against humanity is? Human race as a whole is hit and crippled as a result of the killing of a man. Therefore the entire mankind has to blame itself for the death brought to a man by another man. Under this point of view, the killing of any man is a crime not only against that single one or his group – circumscribed and characterized for position, ethnic group, religion, or simply a bearer of the same contingent interests – but against the whole mankind as well. War is somewhat killing by following some rules that for so much time have constituted a self-absolution that the strongest group has given itself in order to commit a crime. It is not in the nature of man, it’s an invention, a device aimed at satisfying man’s instinct for embezzlement, that get him look for his presumed well-being, moreover not as an absolute but as a difference. War is considered like a viable option for the solution of reciprocal interests and/or for the maintenance of that difference. And thus we are mistaken by considering war as something different from a huge amount of crimes, for the sole fact we subordinated them to rules. It’s a fact that these so called rules have been always dictated by the strongest, the one and at the same time the first to violate them ignobly. And this fact would have made us think of the very absurdity of these rules. So we will get on talking about legal or illegal weapons, lawful or illicit behaviors, terrorists or armies, fair or bias, black or white, good or evil, acquitting ourselves and condemning the others. Until we realize that there ain’t no “others”.
We are history
«Hezbollah captures two Israeli soldiers – Indo-Asian News Service – Beirut, July 12, 2006 – The Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah movement announced on Wednesday that its guerrillas have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon. “Implementing our promise to free Arab prisoners in Israeli jails, our strugglers have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon,” a statement by Hezbollah said. “The two soldiers have already been moved to a safe place,” it added. The Lebanese police said that the two soldiers were captured as they “infiltrated” into the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border. Israeli aircraft were active in the air over southern Lebanon, the police said, with jets bombing roads leading to the market town of Nabatiyeh, 60 kms south of Beirut. Lebanese security sources said the planes were bombarding roads, which might be used by Hezbollah guerrillas. There was no immediate confirmation of the Hezbollah claims from any official Israeli source. An Israeli army spokeswoman, however, said there was “concern” over the fate of the two soldiers. Israeli reports also say four people were wounded by projectiles fired from Lebanon. In Beirut’s southern suburbs, Hezbollah followers were on the streets celebrating the news of the two soldiers’ capture, chanting “God is great … our prisoners will be out soon.” There are still three Lebanese prisoners held in Israeli jails, among them the longest held Lebanese prisoner Samir Kantar, who was captured in 1979 after killing an Israeli scientist and his daughter during an attack on a northern Israeli coastal area. Kantar’s brother Bassam said: “We are now counting on Hezbollah to strike a deal to get my brother and other prisoners released”».
http://www.hindustantimes.com/2006/Jul/12/181_1742306,00050004.htm
«Beirut, July. 12 (BNA) The Lebanese Hezbollah movement announced Wednesday the arrest of two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon. Lebanese police said that the two soldiers were arrested as they entered the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border. Israeli aircraft were active in the air over southern Lebanon, police said, with jets bombing roads leading to the market town of Nabatiyeh, 60 kilometers south of Beirut».
http://english.bna.bh/?ID=47348
«JERUSALEM/BEIRUT, July 12 (Xinhua) — Israeli forces and Lebanon’s Hizbollah militia clashed along the border area on Wednesday and Hizbollah claimed kidnapping two Israeli soldiers. The fierce border confrontation came after at least two rockets hit northern Israel from southern Lebanon, wounding four Israeli civilians in the Shlomi community. Magen David Adom, Israel’s medical service, said that the four wounded were evacuated to hospital for medical treatment and that three of them sustained light injuries while a fourth was in moderate condition. Shortly after the rocket firing, the Israeli army pounded the Lebanese villages of Aita el-Shaab, Ramieh and Yaroun in southern Lebanon, stronghold of Hizbollah, and exchanged fire with Hizbollah militants over the Israel-Lebanon border. Residents in northern Israel were reportedly hearing massive sounds of gunfire and explosions and were ordered to enter bomb shelters. In addition, Israeli warplanes struck bridges and a power plant in southern Lebanon. Meanwhile, Hizbollah claimed via its television channel al-Manar that its militants had captured two Israeli soldiers in the border area during the clashes. The captured soldiers had been sent to a safe place, the report added, without revealing further details».
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-07/12/content_4822913.htm
«The militant group Hezbollah said it captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes across the border in southern Lebanon on Wednesday. Israeli military officials could not immediately confirm whether the soldiers had been captured, but said they were taking Hezbollah’s claim seriously. Hezbollah announced the claim on Al-Manar, its television station in Lebanon, after Israeli aircraft struck guerrilla positions in southern Lebanon in response to rocket attacks on northern Israeli communities. Medics in Israel said four people were wounded in the attacks. Al-Manar reported that Israeli artillery pounded the outskirts of the villages of Aita el-Shaab, Ramieh and Yaroun in the hills east of the coastal border port of Naqoura. Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas occasionally clash along the border in southern Lebanon. It was not immediately clear what prompted the latest flare-up, which came as Israel continued its two-week-old offensive against Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip to try to win the release of another captured Israeli soldier. Israel’s air force dropped a quarter-ton bomb on a residential building in Gaza earlier Wednesday, killing at least six people, including two children. The target of the airstrike had been top Hamas militants meeting in the building, but Hamas said its top fugitive got away». (July 12, 2006)
http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/2947/2006/07/12/191@113428.htm
«AITA AL-CHAAB (AFP) – Le Hezbollah libanais a capturé mercredi deux soldats israéliens et sept autres ont été tués à la suite d’une opération destinée selon son chef à obtenir la libération de détenus libanais en Israël, qui a riposté par une série de raids contre le sud du Liban. [...] Selon la police libanaise, les deux soldats ont été capturés en territoire libanais, dans la région de Aïta al-Chaab près de la frontière, alors que la télévision israélienne a indiqué qu’ils avaient été capturés en territoire israélien». (July 12, 2006)
http://fr.news.yahoo.com/12072006/202/liban-le-hezbollah-capture-deux-soldats-israeliens-sept-autres-tues.html
«Selon la police libanaise, les deux hommes ont été capturés en territoire libanais, dans la région de Aïta al-Chaab près de la frontière israélienne où une unité israélienne avait pénétré. Mais la télévision israélienne a indiqué qu’ils avaient été capturés près du moshav (ferme collective) Zarit en territoire israélien. Trois soldats israéliens ont été tués dans cette même attaque du Hezbollah. Et quatre autres ont péri dans l’explosion d’un char en territoire libanais, lors des recherches menées par l’armée au Liban sud pour retrouver les deux militaires enlevés». (July 12, 2006)
http://www.armees.com/L-enlevement-de-deux-soldats-israeliens-embrase,4753.html
«It all started on July 12 when Israel troops were ambushed on Lebanon’s side of the border with Israel. Hezbollah, which commands the Lebanese south, immediately seized on their crossing. They arrested two Israeli soldiers, killed eight Israelis and wounded over 20 in attacks inside Israeli territor»y. (July 15, 2006)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HG15Ak02.html
«Voici les faits: le Hezbollah exige depuis de longues années la libération de prisonniers détenus par Israël, tel que Samir el Kantar, emprisonné depuis 1978, Nassim Nisr et Yahia Skaff qui est incarcéré depuis 1982. Dans de nombreuses occasion, il a fait savoir qu’il ne manquerait pas de faire prisonnier à son tour des soldats israéliens -si ci-ceux-ci venaient à s’introduire au Liban-, et de les utiliser comme monnaire d’échange. De manière délibérée, Tsahal a envoyé un commando dans l’arrière-pays libanais à Aïta al Chaab. Il a été attaqué par le Hezbollah, faisant deux prisonniers. Israël a alors feint d’être agressé et a attaqué le Liban. Le Hezbollah, qui se préparait à faire face à une agression israélienne que chacun savait imminente depuis le retrait syrien, a tiré des missiles de moyenne portée sur Israël». (July 18, 2006)
http://www.voltairenet.org/article142056.html
«Depuis le supposé enlèvement des deux soldats israéliens, les libanais ont démenti de telle allégation, tout en soutenant que les deux soldats ont été capturés en leur territoire, dans la région de Aïta al-Chaab, proche de la frontière israélienne, où ils s’étaient introduits par inadvertance. Ils venaient de rejoindre leur unité et ne connaissaient pas encore le terrain – ou, peut-être, délibérément. Les deux hommes auraient donc violé la souveraineté du Liban – comme Tsahal en a d’ailleurs l’habitude, surtout par voies maritime et aérienne – et commis ainsi un acte de guerre . Cet affront appelait une réponse adéquate de la part des Libanais, qui n’a pas tardé. [...] Du côté de Tel-Aviv, on soutient que « l’enlèvement » a eu lieu en territoire israélien. Les combattants du Hezbollah auraient utilisé des échelles pour franchir la barrière électrifiée érigée à la frontière, avant de s’introduire quelque deux cents mètres à l’intérieur d’Israël pour attaquer une patrouille de Tsahal et « enlever » les deux soldats restés en vie. [...] La censure militaire israélienne, qui a éludé complètement la question, n’a pas eu de mal à imposer sa version des faits, même si elle n’est pas parvenue à étayer ceux-ci par des preuves matérielles irréfutables. La suspicion dans laquelle ces médias tiennent le Hezbollah et l’autocensure habituelle sur tout ce qui se rapporte à Israël ont fait le reste». (August 12, 2006)
http://www.griooworld.com/article.php3?id_article=1475
Disproportionate memo
I was addressed to and thus I happened to read the following article on the Washington Post of July 2006: «Israel Is Within Its Rights – By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey – Wednesday, July 26, 2006; Page A17 – Israel’s operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza have been widely condemned in Europe, the Arab world and at the United Nations as violations of international law. Some of the critics seem to deny that Israel has any legitimate right to use force [...] In fact, Israel’s conduct has been fully compliant with the applicable norms of international law [...] The legal rights Israel is exercising to defend itself today are the very same legal rights on which the United States must rely in the war on terrorism. Attempts to revise the traditional laws of war — moving toward a law-enforcement paradigm — so that law-abiding states cannot effectively protect their own populations from attack or even defend their territory from armed incursion are not humanitarian advances. They simply make the world safer for those who reject any notion of law in war …». I thought to past here – if you want simply as a (long and) personal memo – some excerpts of my comment about the topic.
I found out the explanation for the Washington Post’s biased position at the bottom of the page. Anyway the very premises of the article are wrong from the first lines, where they talk about the response to Hezbollah’s initial attack. In doing that they must assume that the abduction of the Israeli soldiers happened into Israeli land, and first of all, that seems to be untrue (On July 12, 2006, Israeli soldiers entered the Lebanon border and were captured in the Lebanese town of Ayta ash-Shab by Hezbollah militias that keep control of that land in Southern Lebanon – see Hindustan Times, Bahrain News, Asia Times). So Israel deliberately lied and let the world and the Westerners understand that the soldiers had been kidnapped in Israeli owned land). Second, luckily it’s not up to Washington Post’s journalists to determine if the use of force was disproportionate or not, any argument is up to a hypothetical Court. Third, you cannot have a terrorist threat and a Nations’s threat at the same time, if you state “they are terrorists”, you have no right to bomb Lebanon, but to ask the Government of that Country in order to get collaboration against these so called, terrorists. Otherwise you must assume that Lebanon is at war with Israel, thus you must implement international law, and the bombing of civilian areas doesn’t fit at all with it. As for Geneva convention, we have two Israeli soldiers captured – not kidnapped – by the enemy. They have a right to be kept alive and well, and that is all, till the end of the conflict or till there is a deal for a cease fire. That’s it. Poverty of arguments also emerges when they talk about Lebanese’s failure to control their own territory, as it’s well known the lot of Israeli actions through the border on Lebanese soil. Nonsense at all then talking about Putin’s intervention in Chechnya. what does it mean? If they assume Russians are fit to be tried for those operations, it doesn’t justify any other international crime. But the biased attitude of the writers is well explained when they say: “The legal rights Israel is exercising to defend itself today are the very same legal rights on which the United States must rely in the war on terrorism”. So they keep on telling the world that the enemy is “terrorism”, while they must be well aware of the fact that terrorism is simply a tool and that Neocons’ theory, made to bomb and get rid of the enemies of “their” oil and Project for a New American Century and here for the “New Middle East”, is a fake. About abduction of Israeli soldiers, here are some sources: link, link, link , but there’s a lot on the web. There is also a first link at Hindustan Times of July 12 2006 that unfortunately changes from day to day, so I’ve already posted the picture of its web page in “That’s just old news” of August 8th.
Then we have probably an Israeli aggression and a consequent Israel-Lebanon war. Two sovereign States. Correct? Well, the Geneva Convention (among the others) has then to be fully implemented, without targeting of civilians and, anyway, without a disproportionate use of the force. About it I meant luckily it’s neither up to some biased journalists, nor to you, the decision. Silly is the aim to get peace without justice. Generally speaking, the fact that Israel is illegally occupying other people’s land doesn’t suggest anything to you? E.G. that every Israeli operation against these people is an aggression to mantain an illegal “status quo”, and not self defence? Since Israel occupies Golan and Shebaa Farms (trying to make Litani River its swimming pool) West Bank and East Jerusalem (since 1967), deliberately making Palestinians’ life a hell, there will be no peace for Israel and in the region. While they decide to – honestly and for the first time – put an end to all this, neither Iran, Syria, nor anti-semitism, but demographic “bomb” and its apartheid politics are the real enemies for Israel very existence.
Some say doctrine of proportionality originated with the 1907 Hague Conventions, I’d look also at article 49 in International Law Commission’s Draft about State Responsibility. You can somewhat also refer to the 1977 Additional Protocols of the Geneva Conventions (e.g. article 57), and generally about illegally causing unnecessary suffering for civilians. Moreover the principle is anyway known as customary international law. Otherwise should we say disproportionality is internationally legal? Lot of water flew luckily under the bridges since Pearl Harbour and Hiroshima. To assert Israeli right to protect itself you must assume Israel was attacked unprovoked and get its legitimate case against Hezbollah. There is not evidence about that. In fact many said (and wrote immediately, on July 12 2006) that Israeli soldiers were abducted while they were (at least) illegally operating into Lebanese soil. Then it is anyway a matter of fact investigating not only on proportionality of the use of force (aimed to rescuing its soldiers), but on targeting of nonmilitary targets, on unnecessary suffering for civilians, on inflicting collective punishment. Doctrine of proportionality has been upheld in a number of disputes and you know very well that if legal bodies have failed to indict Israel, that is a matter of politics and not about law. What about talking (randomly) of the US vetoes? What about “bribing, intimidating and threatening others, including members of Security Council”? And about the politically aborted case against Sharon in Belgium? And about US and Israeli fleeing from the the newly born ICC? And about ICJ Advisory opinion on “the wall”?
Michael Ratner, an attorney, former director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, and past president of the National Lawyer’s Guild, dealing with the (first) Gulf War, happened to say: «At Nuremberg, the Nazis were tried for crimes against humanity which included killings of the civilian population and the wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages and devastation not justified by military necessity. These laws are embodied in various treaties, including most importantly the Hague Convention of 1907, the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions. They all reflect a similar set of rules, violations of which are war crimes. They are built around two principles. First, military operations are to be directed at military objectives – the civilian population and civilian objects are not to be targets. So, massive bombing, as was engaged in by the U.S., which kills civilians and destroyed the water supply, is illegal.» About that topic he added that the second limit international law places on the conduct of war is the principle of proportionality.Well, I think that it is not easy to separate the two issues: a) proportionality, b) protection of civilian objects, but there is an interesting provision in Protocol 1, additional to the Geneva Conventions, 1977, chapter III, art. 52, par. 1 e 3. “Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2 [...] “In case of doubt whether an object wich is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed no to be so used”.
That’s just old news
«Hezbollah captures two Israeli soldiers – Indo-Asian News Service – Beirut, July 12, 2006 The Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah movement announced on Wednesday that its guerrillas have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon. “Implementing our promise to free Arab prisoners in Israeli jails, our strugglers have captured two Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon,” a statement by Hezbollah said. “The two soldiers have already been moved to a safe place,” it added. The Lebanese police said that the two soldiers were captured as they “infiltrated” into the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border. Israeli aircraft were active in the air over southern Lebanon, the police said, with jets bombing roads leading to the market town of Nabatiyeh, 60 kms south of Beirut. Lebanese security sources said the planes were bombarding roads, which might be used by Hezbollah guerrillas. There was no immediate confirmation of the Hezbollah claims from any official Israeli source. An Israeli army spokeswoman, however, said there was “concern” over the fate of the two soldiers. Israeli reports also say four people were wounded by projectiles fired from Lebanon. In Beirut’s southern suburbs, Hezbollah followers were on the streets celebrating the news of the two soldiers’ capture, chanting “God is great … our prisoners will be out soon.” There are still three Lebanese prisoners held in Israeli jails, among them the longest held Lebanese prisoner Samir Kantar, who was captured in 1979 after killing an Israeli scientist and his daughter during an attack on a northern Israeli coastal area. Kantar’s brother Bassam said: “We are now counting on Hezbollah to strike a deal to get my brother and other prisoners released.”» (Hindustan Times, July 12, 2006)
Cyber-villains
A virtual machine gun – once was the press, then tv – has been put for decades in the hands of thousands whose only goal was sending lies all over the world. July 2006, thousands of “children” are actually crawling the web in order to spread the same old garbage. You know, that’s Israeli Establishment’s way to try and steal some more credit. Unfortunately the whole world is by now able to see who the villain is.
«While Israel fights Hezbollah with tanks and aircraft, its supporters are campaigning on the internet. Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda. The Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages. In the past week nearly 5,000 members of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) have downloaded special “megaphone” software that alerts them to anti-Israeli chatrooms or internet polls to enable them to post contrary viewpoints …» (Read more on The Times on line)
