Medea Benjamin

“I refuse to accept the idea that man is mere flotsam and jetsam in the river of life, unable to influence the unfolding events which surround him.” ~ Dr. Martin Luther King as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964.

These words will guide me and other passengers aboard the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, a fleet of nine boats scheduled to set sail for Gaza on June 25 from various Mediterranean ports. While the Israelis try to label us provocateurs, terrorists and Hamas supporters, we are simply nonviolent advocates following the teachings of Dr. King. We refuse to sit at the docks of history and watch the people of Gaza suffer.

The U.S. boat, which will carry 50 Americans, is called The Audacity of Hope. It is named after Obama’s bestselling political autobiography in which he lauds our collective audacity of striving to become a better nation. But I prefer to think of our boat as part of Dr. King’s legacy. He, too, talked about audacity, about his audacious faith in the future. “I refuse to accept the idea that the ‘isness’ of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal ‘oughtness’ that forever confronts him,” Dr. King said.

Our intrepid group has its moral compass aimed at the way things ought to be. Our cargo is not humanitarian aid, as some of the other ships are carrying, but thousands of letters from the U.S. people, letters of compassion, solidarity and hope written to people living in the Gaza Strip. We travel with what Dr. King called “unarmed truth and unconditional love.”

More »

Khalid Amayreh

The King of Saudi Arabia, Abdullah Bin Abdel
Aziz (L) and King Abdullah II of Jordan.

Ethnic cleansing in its various manifestations constitutes a crime against humanity.

In the final analysis, more attention ought to be given to what Israel is doing, not just what Israeli leaders are saying.

In a recent interview with the Washington Post, Jordan's King Abdullah II voiced alarm and frustration over Israel's determination to throttle every promise for a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian Israeli conflict.

"I am not convinced that they (Israel) are interested in a two-state solution... They are not interested in peace with the Arabs, because unless they do the two-state solution, that can't happen."

The king lamented the futility of the peace process, saying he is the most pessimistic he has ever been in 11 years.

"2011 will be, I think, a very bad year for peace. Invariably when there's a status quo, usually what shakes everybody up is some sort of military confrontation, at which point we all come running and screaming to pick up the pieces. Nobody wins in a war."

When asked about Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's latest visit to Washington, King Abdullah said,

"Netanyahu basically came to say, 'it is my way or the highway.'"

King Abdullah doesn't mince words and he can't be accused of harbouring extremist attitudes toward Israel and the peace process.

More »

Stephen Lendman

On March 18, Chicago Tribune writers Matthew Walberg and Dan Hinkel headlined, "Northwestern at odds with star professor," saying:

"Cook County prosecutors sparked a media firestorm nearly two years ago when they subpoenaed notes, recordings, and even grades of (his) students (because of their work proving) Anthony McKinney had wrongly been convicted of a 1978 murder."

The battle sparked a feud between Northwestern and Protess, whose Medill Innocence Project uncovered numerous wrongful murder convictions, culminating when former Illinois Gov. George Ryan declared a moratorium on capital punishment in 2000 after 13 prisoners were found innocent and released.

On January 11, 2003, two days before leaving office, he then cleared death row, commuting sentences for 163 men and four women to life imprisonment. He also declared a moratorium on future executions, now banned after Gov. Pat Quinn signed legislation last March, saying it's impossible "to create a perfect, mistake-free death penalty system."

Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism's Protess, also Medill Innocence Project Director, was

"a superstar (investigative) professor, leading teams of students (to uncover 13) wrongful death penalty convictions....One was just hours from execution."

Medill Dean John Lavine, however, suspended him by email, with no further comment about his future. In fact, he was effectively fired, Lavine privately suggesting he wouldn't be welcomed back.

It was a textbook case of academic lynching, affecting a distinguished professor deserving high honors, not denigration and banishment.

More »

Ralph Nader
Nader.org

Congress has appropriated no money for this war, already costing nearly a billion dollars, nor has the lawless Obama asked for it because he knows there will be strong bi-partisan resistance.

The meticulous Harvard Law Review editors should be rolling over in their footnotes. The recidivist violations of constitutional and statutory requirements by their celebrated predecessor at that journal - Barack Obama has reached Orwellian dimensions in the war against Libya.

You see, the widespread daily bombing of Libya, the strict naval blockade of Muammar Gadhafi-controlled Libya, the destruction of Gadhafi's family compound and tent encampment in the desert--killing his son and three grandchildren--and the deployment of special forces inside Libya is not a "War." It is in the Obama White House's evasive nomenclature just a "time-limited, scope-limited military action" Can you find that phrase in the Constitution?

If Obama used the word "War," he would have a more difficult time explaining to Congress and the American people (three out of four oppose this war) why he did not (1) seek a declaration of war under Article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution, or (2) seek Congressional authorization for appropriated funds to further the war with our NATO co-warriors, or (3) comply with the deadlines of the War Powers Resolution. He threw all three lawful restraints on his Presidential unilateralism overboard.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Early morning June 18, lung cancer claimed 62 year old UK anti-war activist Haw after a long battle, a man London Independent contributor Mark Wallinger called "the conscience of the nation grown quiescent."

[VIDEO] His family left a message, saying: "He left us in his sleep and in no pain, after a long, hard fight," ending three months of treatment in Germany. His long vigil, in fact, contributed to his poor heath. It also led to a divorce and largely separated him from his seven children.

After others stopped protesting America's Afghan and Iraq wars, Brian was steadfast against his own government's complicity. In fact, from June 2001, months before 9/11, he camped out in London's Parliament Square against the UN's appalling economic sanctions. They got former UN representative for Iraq's Oil and Food program Denis Halliday to resign for being asked to commit the equivalent of genocide, killing 5,000 children monthly.

Haw, in fact, documented horrific Gulf War depleted uranium birth defects, repeated lies and evasions of US and UK leaders, and imperial lawlessness waging unconscionable wars. Resolutely he remained tenacious against injustice, championing peace and love.

On his own, his decade-long presence pressured his government relentlessly. In return, authorities hounded, arrested, and assaulted him. In 2002, the Westminster City Council petitioned Britain's High Court for an injunction to remove him, claiming he blocked the pavement. The Court, however, declined, ruling his presence wasn't unreasonable.

In 2003, the House of Commons Procedure Committee recommended a law change, prohibiting unlicensed protests on security grounds. He never left.

In 2005, after Tony Blair called him a nuisance to get rid of, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) passed, legislation enacted against him, making it illegal to protest within a one km radius of Parliament without police permission.

Nonetheless, he successfully argued that his vigil predated parliamentary terrorism, winning the right to continue protesting against Britain's lawless participation in Washington's imperial wars.

Preaching "Love....peace....justice....for all," he camped out night and day every day, in good and bad weather, in spite of everything authorities tried to harass, deter, and banish him.

Using a megaphone, banners, placards, homemade signs, peace flags, photos, and slogans, his message resonated in Westminster and worldwide, a testimony to his heroic spirit, dogged presence against war, and refusal to quit until illness forced him.

More »

Ray McGovern
Antiwar

Stuffing my backpack before setting out to board The Audacity of Hope, the U.S. boat to Gaza, I got a familiar-sounding call from yet another puzzled friend, who said as gently as the words allow, “You know you can get killed, don’t you?”

I recognize this caution as an expression of genuine concern from friends. From some others—who don’t much care about Gaza’s plight and/or who do not wish us well—the words are phrased somewhat differently: “Aren’t you just asking for it?”

That was the obligatory question/accusation at the end of a recent interview of me that was taped for a BBC-TV special scheduled to air this coming week as we try to break—or at least draw attention to—Israel’s illegal blockade of Gaza and the suffering it inflicts on the people there.

I also have been cautioned by a source with access to very senior staffers at the National Security Council that not only does the White House plan to do absolutely nothing to protect our boat from Israeli attack or illegal boarding, but that White House officials “would be happy if something happened to us.” They are, I am reliably told, “perfectly willing to have the cold corpses of activists shown on American TV.”

I mention this informal warning for the benefit of anyone who may have harbored hope that the U.S. government would do something to protect us American citizens from the kind of violence used by the Israelis against last year’s flotilla. It seems best to be up-front and realistic about what to expect.

Two millennia ago, “Civus Romanus Sum”[1] automatically won lawful treatment and free passage for Roman citizens in trouble. It was a matter of pride and a benefit of being part of a powerful empire. Today, the contrast could hardly be starker. It is sad fact that “Civus Americanus Sum” would engender ridicule, rather than respect, if invoked in an attempt to secure basic rights for those of us working for justice for the Palestinians.

Americans also face the reality that they are put in harm’s way by the view held by millions around the world—and especially in the Middle East—that the United States is partly responsible for the injustices and the humiliations that Palestinians face daily.

So I want to turn around the question/warning to me about safety and direct it to fellow citizens who will not be aboard The Audacity of Hope: “You know you can get killed, don’t you?”—if the U.S. government continues to enable Israel in keeping a million and a half Gazans in a densely populated open-air prison with few prospects for a normal life. It is a no-brainer. The longer that goes on the more likely it becomes that many more Americans will become the target of terrorists seeking to inflict some pain on the great power that stands behind Israel whatever it does.

More »

Paul Craig Roberts
Global Research

A country whose population has been trained to accept the government’s word and to shun those who question it is a country without liberty in its future.

While we were not watching, conspiracy theory has undergone Orwellian redefinition.

A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps.

For example, online news broadcasts of RT have been equated with conspiracy theories by the New York Times simply because RT reports news and opinions that the New York Times does not report and the US government does not endorse.

In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.

When piles of carefully researched books, released government documents, and testimony of eye witnesses made it clear that Oswald was not President John F. Kennedy’s assassin, the voluminous research, government documents, and verified testimony was dismissed as “conspiracy theory.”

In other words, the truth of the event was unacceptable to the authorities and to the Ministry of Propaganda that represents the interests of authorities.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Israelis Blocking Medical Care in Gaza: A Palestinian wo-
man waits at the Erez crossing. (Time/I. Zaydah/Reuters)

[Part I] On March 25, 2008, Time magazine writer Tim McGirk headlined "Israelis Blocking Medical Care in Gaza," saying:

"Since Gaza is denied (most everything under siege), many complicated surgeries are no longer done there." Those permitted abroad for them, like Bassam al-Wahedi, endure a gauntlet through Israel's "security maze."

Entering Egypt through Erez Crossing,

"(h)e fumbled along tunnels, steel doors that opened and slammed as he passed along, entered a strange cylinder that fired a whoosh of air at him before he finally reached a large hall with an Israeli soldier sitting inside a bulletproof glass booth."

He showed his permit for scheduled surgery that afternoon.

"(T)hree plainclothed Israelis with pistols and walkie-talkies led him past cages with growling dogs to a room where he was strip searched and interrogated by a man who identified himself as a Shin Bet captain."

He pressured al-Wahedi to spy for Israel, saying his permit would be cancelled if he refused.

"He wanted me to go back to Gaza and collaborate for two weeks," [al-Wahedi explained,] "and if they liked what I did, I could come to Israel and have my eye operation with the best doctor in Tel Aviv."

Angry and frustrated, he refused.

"Contacted by Time, Shin Bet denied approaching (him) to collaborate, (saying he was sent back) because of his involvement in 'activities dangerous to the state.' "

Physicians for Human Rights - Israel (PHR - I) believes everyone

"has the right to health in its widest possible sense, as defined by the principles of human rights, social justice and medical ethics."

As a occupying power, international law obligates Israel to provide and/or do nothing to obstruct it. PHR-I explained at the time that Shin Bet denied dozens of other patients vital care for refusing to collaborate. One with severe heart trouble, in fact, was told to "go back and die in Gaza." It's common practice, but Israel denies it.

More »

Stephen Lendman

America's imperial wars are for wealth, power, and unchallenged dominance, never for humanitarian concerns or liberation, notions Washington contemptuously spurns.

Yet rhetorical posturing claims otherwise. In April 1986, Ronald Reagan arrogantly said US air and naval forces

"launched a series of strikes against (Gaddafi's) headquarters, terrorist facilities, and military assets, (carefully) targeted to minimize casualties among the Libyan people with whom we have no quarrel. From initial reports, our forces have succeeded in their mission."

Wrong! The BBC reported "at least 100 people died after USA planes bombed targets in" Libya. In fact, over 100 were killed, mostly civilians, including Gaddafi's infant daughter when his personal compound was bombed, trying to kill him.

In addition, dozens were wounded, including two of Gaddafi's young sons. The French, Swiss, Romanian and Iranian embassies were damaged. So were Japanese and Austrian diplomatic residences. Dozens of residential buildings were also damaged or destroyed. Libya's Central Hospital reported up to 100 people needing treatment for serious injuries, including infants.

Planned months in advance, the mission was one of many Reagan war crimes. Moreover, it succeeded only in arousing mass anger according to an April 17, 1986 Los Angeles Times report, saying:

Washington's attack "sparked worldwide protests....that erupted into violence as demonstrators burned American flags and effigies of President Reagan in Pakistan and attacked US facilities in several capitals."

Today, Obama is attacking Libya, committing far greater war crimes than Reagan, yet arrogantly claimed last March that he:

"ordered our armed forces to help protect the Libyan people from the brutality of (Gaddafi with an operation of) limited scope and specific purpose," adding "it's in our national interest to act. And it's our responsibility."

More »

Adam Morrow & Khaled Moussa al-Omrani
InterPressService

Star of David tattoo on Libyan "rebel"

Developments in Libya have raised fears among Egyptian analysts and political figures of the possible break-up of the North African nation into two warring halves. To support the assertion, they point to longstanding Israeli designs - supported by the western powers - to balkanise the Arab states of the region.

"Libya could be split in two, with Gaddafi staying on in the west of the country and a revolutionary government loyal to the western powers in control of the east,"

Mohamed al-Sakhawi, leading member of Egypt's as-yet-unlicensed Arabic Unity Party, told IPS.

For three months, Libya has suffered internationally sanctioned air-strikes by the western NATO alliance, launched with the stated aim of supporting the ongoing popular uprising against the Gaddafi regime. Revolutionary forces based in Ben Ghazi now hold most of the country's eastern half, while forces loyal to Gaddafi continue to control the country's western half from the capital Tripoli.

Yet the fact that NATO - despite its overwhelming air superiority - has so far failed to dislodge the Gaddafi regime has led many local observers to question the western alliance's intentions.

"The western campaign against Libya wasn't undertaken to protect human rights or foster democracy," said al-Sakhawi. "It was launched with the aim of breaking Libya up politically so as to prevent the unification of three revolutionary Arab states - Egypt, Libya and Tunisia - which together might pose a threat to Israeli regional dominance."

Walid Hassan, international law professor at Alexandria's Pharos University, agreed for the most part, saying that NATO - with Israeli encouragement - "hopes to replace Gaddafi with rulers loyal to the west in advance of breaking the country into small statelets, as they are doing in Iraq.

"The primary objective is to weaken the Arab states of North Africa, which, if they ever united, would represent a potential threat to Israeli and western interests," Hassan told IPS. "Libya's significant oil wealth, of course, constitutes a secondary reason for the intervention."

More »

Professor Denis G. Rancourt

The university executives do not have the authority to subvert the University of Ottawa Act, 1965. Indeed, the executives have a duty and a responsibility to uphold the Act.

Canadian universities have institutional independence guaranteed by a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. This independence from governments and corporations was explicitly granted to universities in order to protect the academic freedoms of its professors and students.

At the University of Ottawa this established institutional independence is used to subvert lawsuits from mistreated students, and to shield the university from sanctions related to its own violations of its professors' academic freedoms. Such is the perversion of legalese in the service of unprincipled administrations.

In addition, observers have been concerned about the influence of private corporate donations; which are never made transparently and which go into the protected slush fund known as "University of Ottawa Foundation".

This becomes of direct concern when the private donations are overtly tied to specific research chairs, to new research themes, or to newly tailored academic programs.

This is why university senate (the highest institutional authority on all academic matters) recently questioned the university administration's unilateral campaign to create a two-for-one graduate degree in law (LL.M.) and exchange program with the University of Haifa, Israel. (See all posts on this matter HERE.)

In addition to being an obvious degree inflation scheme ("two distinct LL.M. degrees after only one year of studies") -- which is becoming too common as a marketing device at the university -- the Haifa deal came with a tied scholarship thanks to "generous support" from the Gerald Schwartz and Heather Reisman Foundation.

It was therefore the duty of senate to examine any conditions tied to the Schwartz-Reisman scholarship that might harm academic integrity and institutional independence in view of any risks to academic freedom.

More »

Stephen Lendman

A recent New York University School of Law Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ) report[.pdf] is titled, "Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the 'Homegrown Threat' in the United States."

Post-9/11, Muslims have been ruthlessly targeted. Paid informants have infested mosques and their communities to entrap them. As a result, over 200 were persecuted on bogus terrorism related charges. Despite "tout(ing) these cases as successes in the so-called war against terrorism....former (FBI) agents, local lawmakers," and many others "have begun questioning the legitimacy and efficacy" of entrapping innocent victims for political advantage.

CHRGJ discussed several high-profile cases, using well-paid informants often performing services in return for reduced charges or sentences they face, a powerful incentive to cooperate.

Nearly always, Washington invents plots foiled in the nick of time, entrapping innocent victims with no intent to commit crimes. America's media headline them. The public feels safer with no idea they've been scammed or that blameless citizens and residents are falsely charged.

In fact, calling Muslims "potential threats" or "homegrown terrorists" violates core constitutional freedoms. Nonetheless, it's now common law enforcement practice assuming that:

● Muslims are more likely to become terrorists;
● they're increasingly "radicalized" and compelled to commit violence in the name of Islam; and
● counterterrorism policies should identify and stop them before they act.

In fact, research contradicts these notions. Moreover, relying on them violates fundamental human rights long ago discarded for political and judicial expediency. As a result, Muslims most often face terrorism charges because "they hate us" or other spurious reasons.

Muslim men (and "Muslim looking people) are especially vulnerable. In addition, Muslim culture and religious practices are also cited as indicators of potential terrorism. As a result, they're maliciously targeted, surveilled, investigated, entrapped, charged, unjustly prosecuted, and convicted.

More »

Gilad Atzmon
Gilad Atzmon's Blog

Over a week ago I emailed to the well- known blogger Philip Weiss, an interesting post written by Nahida (AKA The Exiled Palestinian).

In her article, Jewish Voice For Peace? Really?? , Nahida expresses some sharp criticism of Jewish anti-Zionist groups, forcefully arguing that “Anti-Zionist Jewish organisations are trying to silence Palestine's supporters, to frame the debate” and to “steer the course of the liberation” of her homeland.

Since Weiss runs the most popular Jewish progressive blog, offering an invaluable source of information regarding Israeli crimes, I thought he might be willing to address Nahida’s criticism, and to discuss it with his many progressive Jewish followers.

Weiss did not post Nahida’s article on his blog, but his discussion with me was brave and honest[1], and to a certain extent he affirmed Nahida’s criticism, admitting that it was indeed ‘Jewish self-interest’ that he himself was ‘concerned with’.

Weiss had the following to say on the matter:

“I believe all people act out of self-interest. And Jews who define themselves at some level as Jews -- like myself for instance -- are concerned with a Jewish self-interest. Which in my case is: an end to Zionism. A theory of political life based on altruism or concern for victims purely is doomed to fail.”

Openly and bluntly, Weiss confirmed what many of us have been saying for a very long time: it is not solely ‘altruism’ or concern for Palestinians victims that motivates some of the most prominent Jewish campaigners and organisations, but it is also, as Weiss freely admits, ‘Jewish self-interest.’

More »

Stephen Lendman

12-year-old Sami Abu Jazar is carried into an ambulance
after being shot by the Israeli army in Rafah, southern
Gaza. (Photo: AP)

Under siege, conditions are very uncertain with no assurance Israel or Egypt will accommodate vital needs, including life or death ones.

[Part II] Under siege, Israel continues to strangle Gaza. Poverty and unemployment are extremely high. Over 70% of the population requires humanitarian aid. Virtually everything is in short supply. Except for minimal amounts of some fruits, vegetables and flowers, exports are prohibited. Israel prevents access by sea and air. It's blockade is illegal but persists because Western powers and regional neighbors allow it.

Egypt's recent Rafah Crossing opening falls short of meeting Gaza's needs. On June 16, Gaza Gateway listed 10 reasons why:

1. Crossings to Egypt remain limited, several hundred daily while 10,000 wish to travel. Moreover, it's for designated people only, not goods. Those allowed enter through Kerem Shalom Crossing.
2. The situation on both sides of the border is uncertain and unstable, including whether or not the opening will continue and under what conditions.
3. Rafah doesn't enable travel or movement of goods to the West Bank. Moreover, Gaza ID holders can't enter through Jordan.
4. As explained above, most exports are prohibited.
5. Except for approved international organization projects, importing construction materials is prohibited.

More »

Khalid Amayreh
Palestinian Information Center

Dennis Ross: Netanyahu’s man in the White House

Palestinians at all levels have the right to ask: where are we heading? When will we extricate ourselves from American lies and Israeli deception? And above all, when will we ever learn from the thousands of pitfalls and blunders we have faced ever since we got involved in this scandalous peace process that only gave us more hateful Jewish colonies, more ethnic cleansing, more apartheid and more land theft?

So Dennis Ross is back in town in occupied Palestine. He is succeeding the failed U.S. envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell who proved himself too cowardly, too obsequious and too pliant especially in the face of Israeli arrogance and insolence.

Mitchell thought that by employing nice words and habitually invoking America's iron-clad commitment to Israel, whether it goes right or goes wrong and whether its continues to build illegal settlements on occupied land or not, Israel's would probably make some steps, even reluctant ones, on the road to peace.

However, the shocking insolence (and utter disrespect) he often received during his multiple visits to occupied Palestine at the hands of Israeli leaders and officials, seemed to have convinced the obviously gutless and spineless diplomat to quit it if only to retain his personal dignity and not be accused of anti-Semitism.

Mitchell told his equally helpless superior, President Obama, of his impressions. Obama listened and nodded his head, which could be a gesture of desperation and helpless indignation vis-à-vis the powerful Israeli lobby which controls the American government, congress and much of the media.

Nearly totally at loss as to what ought to be done to restrain Israeli rejectionism and intransigence, Obama decided once again to dispatch Dennis Ross, the once-tried and oft-proven venomous Zionist reptile to occupied Palestine, hoping that he will succeed in convincing the weak Palestinian leadership to succumb to the whims and vagaries of Jewish fascism especially those voiced ad nauseam by clearly psychopathic Jewish supremacists and megalomaniacs such as Benyamin Netanyahu and his cohorts both in Washington and Occupied Jerusalem.

In truth, the last thing in the world that Ross is capable of doing is working toward a true and just peace in Occupied Palestine. In recent statements, he was quoted as saying that in order for peace to prevail, the Palestinians would have to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

For those who can't read behind the headlines, this is a clear allusion to another Palestinian Nakba or catastrophe.

More »