| Feature translated by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC - Saturday, 02 December 2006, 03:12 | |
 by Palestine News Network Last Wednesday, November 29, was the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181, the UN Partition Plan for partitioning Palestine of November 29, 1947. It was considered the first decision that called for partitioning Palestine and the creation of two Arab and Jewish states. Thirty-three countries approved the decision, 13 voted against it and 10 countries abstained. Now, as 2006 is passing away, the Palestinians are living between checkpoints, isolated behind the huge concrete Walls and more than 160 settlements hotting several hundreds of thousands o settlers have bee constructed. Qalqilia city, in the northern part of the West Bank, lived and still living the partitioning resolution, as it lost lands to Israel in 1947, then lost more lands in 1967 and now is losing what is left for the construction of the Annexation Wall. Resident Abdullah Amin J'eidy, was born in Qalqilia in 1920, he lived the different stages Palestinian had to go through, he was 27 when the partitioning resolution was passed, and now he is living in Qalqilia that became totally isolated by the Wall. “We heard about the resolution, but we never saw it”, J'eidy said, “and in 1948 we felt the true loss of our land after Israeli occupied the historic Palestine”. “They stole my land, and they barred me even from seeing it again, I still have papers proving my ownership, but they don't' care”, he added, “Now am here, I will not move from what i have left, I will not give my land away”. He still remembers his lost land, he still remember the first Kibbutz installed there, his old neighbors and every details of what he lost. Qalqilia municipality said that after the Partitioning order, 80% of the farmlands were annexed to Israel, and that Qalqilia used to be 50.000 Dunams, but now only 10.000 are left. Dr. Ali Abdul-Hameed head of the Regional and Civil Planning center in Al Najah University in Nablus, said that the Partitioning order was theoretical and was never implemented. “Now, sixty years after it was approved, the Palestinians are living in isolated cantons, separated by settlements and checkpoints blocking the entrances of the cities and villages”, Abdul-Hameed stated, “the plan Sharon presented in the early eighteens aimed at dividing the West Bank into five sections, now it is implemented with 620 checkpoints spreed all over the West Bank”. Professor Ibrahim Abu Jaber, head of the Studies Center in Um Al Fahim, said that the Partitioning resolution gave the Palestinians 70% of the land to the Palestinian and 30% to the Jews. “Although i reject the resolution, it is still better than what is going on today, now Israel is also expelling the Bedouins from the Negev, and the Arabs from several areas”, Abu Jaber said, “I am an Bedouin from the Negev, my family and I were expelled, and we are living in Kafer Qassim after Israel issued a military order annexing all of the agricultural lands to use them for military proposes”. “After the Partitioning resolution was passed at the UN, I became a refugee in my own land”, he added. The UN Partition Plan for Palestine (Full text) |
Sunday, December 3, 2006
60 years after Partitioning of Palestine, residents stranded between checkpoints, Wall & settlements
UN calls for Israel to pull out from West Bank, Golan
Last update - 01:47 03/12/2006
By Shlomo Shamir , Haaretz Correspondent and AP
NEW YORK - The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution Friday calling for the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. As expected, the resolution passed by a large majority of 157. Seven countries voted against: Israel, the U.S., Australia, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau. Ten members abstained.
The resolution is one of a series passed Friday in an annual debate that has been held for many years in the General Assembly. The debate, consisting of three days of meetings, began on November 29, the date in 1947 on which the U.N. approved the Partition Plan.
The Palestinian U.N. observer, Riyad Mansour, praised the resolution and said the large majority was an expression of the support of the international community to advance the peace process.
Israel did not take part in the debate Friday, and as its custom in previous years, ignored the outcome of the vote. The deputy head of the Israeli delegation to the U.N., Daniel Carmon, told Haaretz yesterday, "Palestine Day at the U.N. has crystalized as a process that has repeated itself for dozens of years in which the Arab and Muslim bloc raises anew unilateral anti-Israeli resolutions, leaning on an assured automatic majority."
"The Arabs feel this yearly debate is their finest hour," he added.
A related resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights passed by a majority of 107, with 60 abstentions.
A majority of 157, with 10 abstentions, also voted to call any attempt by Israel to extend Israeli jurisdiction and law on Jerusalem illegal.
New this year was the resolution welcoming the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and urging both sides to maintain the truce.
The General Assembly has no enforcement powers, and its resolutions have declarative significance only.
Until the General Assembly ends its session at the end of December, which is known in the U.N. as "Israeli month," another 14 anti-Israel resolutions are expected to pass, traditionally ensured a majority of the support of the world body's 192 members.
However three new resolutions will be added to the series this year regarding the outcome of the war in Lebanon. One slams Israel for the impact of the war on human rights.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Anan, who is concluding his term of office at the end of the month, took advantage of the Palestine Day debate to urge the member states to resuscitate the peace process, noting that negotiations were the only way out of the conflict.
Meanwhile, Haaretz has learned that in a meeting Friday in New York between the incoming Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and deputy premier Shimon Peres, Ban told Peres he planned to visit the region and added that the Middle East would be a high priority for him.
He also pledged to work to free Israel's kidnapped soldiers.
By Shlomo Shamir , Haaretz Correspondent and AP
NEW YORK - The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution Friday calling for the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. As expected, the resolution passed by a large majority of 157. Seven countries voted against: Israel, the U.S., Australia, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau. Ten members abstained.
The resolution is one of a series passed Friday in an annual debate that has been held for many years in the General Assembly. The debate, consisting of three days of meetings, began on November 29, the date in 1947 on which the U.N. approved the Partition Plan.
The Palestinian U.N. observer, Riyad Mansour, praised the resolution and said the large majority was an expression of the support of the international community to advance the peace process.
Israel did not take part in the debate Friday, and as its custom in previous years, ignored the outcome of the vote. The deputy head of the Israeli delegation to the U.N., Daniel Carmon, told Haaretz yesterday, "Palestine Day at the U.N. has crystalized as a process that has repeated itself for dozens of years in which the Arab and Muslim bloc raises anew unilateral anti-Israeli resolutions, leaning on an assured automatic majority."
"The Arabs feel this yearly debate is their finest hour," he added.
A related resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights passed by a majority of 107, with 60 abstentions.
A majority of 157, with 10 abstentions, also voted to call any attempt by Israel to extend Israeli jurisdiction and law on Jerusalem illegal.
New this year was the resolution welcoming the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and urging both sides to maintain the truce.
The General Assembly has no enforcement powers, and its resolutions have declarative significance only.
Until the General Assembly ends its session at the end of December, which is known in the U.N. as "Israeli month," another 14 anti-Israel resolutions are expected to pass, traditionally ensured a majority of the support of the world body's 192 members.
However three new resolutions will be added to the series this year regarding the outcome of the war in Lebanon. One slams Israel for the impact of the war on human rights.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Anan, who is concluding his term of office at the end of the month, took advantage of the Palestine Day debate to urge the member states to resuscitate the peace process, noting that negotiations were the only way out of the conflict.
Meanwhile, Haaretz has learned that in a meeting Friday in New York between the incoming Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and deputy premier Shimon Peres, Ban told Peres he planned to visit the region and added that the Middle East would be a high priority for him.
He also pledged to work to free Israel's kidnapped soldiers.
Canada dodges a bullet
Dion is the new Liberal Party leader and likely next PM. If Ignatieff had won, Canada would be faced with only 2 neocon choices for the country's leadership.
---Sunday, December 03, 2006
Stéphane Dion
The Liberal Party of Canada held its leadership convention and elected Stéphane Dion as its new leader (and presumably, the next Prime Minister of Canada; the last Liberal leader who didn’t immediately become Prime Minister or didn’t become Prime Minister as a result of a subsequent election was in the 1880’s!). This wasn’t a huge surprise as there were indications that Dion would slip in between the two front runners, the evil Michael Ignatieff (Harvard professor and supporter of torture, the Iraq war, and George Bush), and the hopeless bungler Bob Rae (former failure as socialist premier of Ontario who left the socialists in favor of the Liberals because the socialists took too sane – i.e., pro-Palestinian – a position on the Middle East). It has been fairly clear that Ignatieff was sent by the Americans to break up Canada, something that was confirmed when Ignatieff, out of the blue, introduced Quebec nationalism into the campaign (immediately picked up by the Conservatives, who have much the same agenda). Dion, on the other hand, is the principle intellectual opponent of Quebec separatism in Canadian politics, having demolished the separatist position by turning their own arguments against them (if Quebec can separate from Canada, why can’t federalist parts of Quebec separate from Quebec?).
The best candidate would have been Gerard Kennedy, who will make a fine Prime Minister one day, but was never given a chance by the mainstream media (the media barons are terrified of the guy, as he expressly fights the influence of stupid American ideas in Canadian politics; btw, why do all the stupidest ideas in the world come out of the United States?). He and Dion concocted an Axis of Anti-Evil, in which the one more likely to win would get the support of the other. The problem with the two front runners was that they had no second or subsequent ballot support; anyone who didn’t really like them, really hated them. Kennedy’s supporters were very loyal, and almost all went over to Dion.
While Dion wouldn’t be my first choice (he was a so-so environment minister, though his dog is named Kyoto!), he’s a good man (not to mention extremely smart and the kind of policy wonk that it is good to see in politics), and you don’t have to hold your nose to vote for him just to remove the Conservatives. The Toronto Liberal establishment really wanted either Ignatieff or Rae, and the party was bailed out by the grass-roots Liberals from across the country (the recent massive Toronto establishment mistakes were their support for losers John Turner and Paul Martin). Dion represents a return to the Trudeau-Chrétien line of moderate-left positions, with a clear emphasis on the environment, just what Canadians appear to want.
The mainstream press has been consistent in counting out the Liberals, despite the fact that the Liberals are now leading in the polls, and despite the facts that:
- the party has not had a leader for months; and
- it has not put up any real opposition to Conservative policies.
With every dead Canadian soldier in Afghanistan the Conservatives are losing about a quarter percentage point in relative support to the Liberals, meaning we are drawing ever closer to another Liberal government. Dion ran on a campaign supporting just social policy and environmental sanity, the two biggest problems, besides Afghanistan, for the Conservatives. To appease the knuckle-draggers, the Conservatives are also going to reopen the same-sex marriage debate, another losing issue for them (former mayor of London, Ontario, and famous homophobe and Christian fruitcake, Dianne Haskett, just returned from working for Elizabeth Dole in Washington to lose in a London area by-election to both the winning Liberal candidate, and, in a new development, to the revitalized – i. e., de-conservatived - Green Party candidate; apparently even the people in the most conservative area of Ontario don’t want to be regarded as hillbillies!). Just in the past couple weeks, Conservative leader Harper has managed to piss off all European leaders, the leaders of China, and the Canadian business establishment.
His obeisance to the Americans is also becoming noticeable (this cartoon might as well have been about Canadian politics, with Bush being the standing figure). All Dion has to do is keep his foot out of his mouth, and the natural order of Canadian politics will be restored.
Israeli Military will ensure cease-fire goes up in flames
Last update - 09:41 03/12/2006
The cease-fire will go up in flames
By Gideon Levy
Here is the forecast: In a few days, there will be a targeted killing operation. The military correspondents will recite: "He was one of the senior operatives of Hamas (or Islamic Jihad), and was responsible for producing and smuggling large amounts of armaments." In response, a barrage of Qassams will fall on Sderot. One of the residents might be injured. In the process of the targeted killing operation, some passersby might also be killed; the correspondents will then recite: "They were armed."
Several days later, there might be a terror attack. The leaders of the right-wing parties and the Labor Party will be interviewed on television and will recite: "Abu Mazen has once again demonstrated that he is incapable and unwilling to fight terror. There is no one to talk to." Public Security Minister Avi Dichter will propose turning Beit Hanun into a ghost town. Eli Yishai will suggest bombing from the air. The next day, Qassams will fall again, and the IDF will enter the northern Gaza Strip. The cease-fire will go up in flames.
This is not a bold wager. This is almost the exact series of events that occurred in previous cease-fires. What was is what will be. There are plenty of examples. In January 2002, after several months of quiet, the Tanzim activist Raed Karmi was assassinated in Tul Karm. Dichter, who was then the head of the Shin Bet, pushed for this action, of course. Immediately afterwards, Fatah began its suicide bombing attacks.
Several months later, the Tanzim announced a unilateral cease-fire. Shortly thereafter, in July 2002, Salah Shehadeh was assassinated in Gaza in a one-ton bombing, which also killed 15 innocent residents. That was the end of the cease-fire.
At the beginning of the summer of 2003, the hudna was declared. A week later, the police counter-terror unit targeted Mahmoud Shawer in Qalqiliyah. During the first week of the hudna, the IDF arrested 320 Palestinians. After two months of the hudna, Israel targeted Ismail Abu Shenab, 53. "He has been a wanted man for years," the reporters recited. The next day, 15 mortar shells were fired at Gush Katif and three Qassams at Israel. In August, Israel also assassinated Mohammed Sidr, the head of the military branch of Islamic Jihad in Hebron, and that was the end of the hudna.
Several months later, in December 2003, the IDF embarked on a broad operation. The objective: Sheikh Ibrahim Hamed, head of the military branch of Hamas in Ramallah. The precise date: the day the Geneva Initiative was launched.
Coincidental timing? Doubtful. In April 2004, when negotiations between Yasser Arafat and Hamas were progressing, Israel assassinated Abed Aziz Rantisi. The negotiations stalled.
In July 2005, the tahadiya was also threatened: In a single day, Israel targeted seven in Salfit and in Gaza. A month later, another five in Tul Karm. In June 2006, just as Mahmoud Abbas was about to declare a referendum vote on the prisoners' document, Israel targeted Jamal Abu Samhadana, the commander of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza. A few days later, the Ghaliya family was killed on the Gaza beach, whether by an IDF shell or "dud." The referendum went up in smoke, together with the prisoners' document. Hamas threatened to resume terror attacks after 17 quiet months. The Qassams started to fall on Sderot in frightening numbers. Thus, systematically: Every time a chance emerges, a liquidation is quick to follow. The IDF and Shin Bet, not the statesmen, dictate the developments.
The current cease-fire was achieved thanks to the U.S. president's visit in Jordan. Israel responded to the Palestinian initiative - again it is a Palestinian initiative, there has never been an Israeli initiative - after the military operations were bitter failures. After "Summer Rains" and "Autumn Clouds," after 80 were killed in one week in Beit Hanun, the firing of Qassams did not stop. The IDF hurried to respond with a typical sour countenance: Senior officers in the Southern Command expressed strong opposition in off-the-record conversations, the chief of staff was quick to declare that "the IDF was only a partially a partner in the decision" and the defense minister expressed reservations about expanding the cease-fire to the West Bank.
The IDF is not interested in the cease-fire. One can assume that neither is the Shin Bet. Reports on how the cease-fire is already being exploited for redeployment on the other side are flooding the media. And the end is known in advance. Instead of Israel promoting the cease-fire, it is acting to undermine it. A cease-fire is bad for the IDF, especially when it stems from its failures as in Lebanon and Gaza.
How intolerably easy it is for the IDF to undermine the relative quiet that has been achieved. One assassination is enough. A single soldier at a checkpoint is capable of igniting a conflagration. When the IDF wants it, every broom opens fire. And the IDF wants it, unfortunately.
Moreover, the IDF is now being asked not only to show restraint, but also to take a series of practical steps to make life easier for the Palestinians. In the meantime, how surprising, there is no sign of this. Anyone wishing to confirm this can drive to the Hawara checkpoint and see with his own eyes the transit of cattle there, which is called a human passageway. Another example? During a two-day period at the end of the week, the IDF arrested over 50 Palestinians in the West Bank. Why exactly now?
"I reach out my hand in peace to our Palestinian neighbors," Ehud Olmert said in his Sde Boker speech, his most impressive speech, which promises the Palestinians half of heaven and earth. This speech is liable to be washed in blood. Perhaps the Palestinians will be to blame, but no less than this is the gnawing fear that the IDF and Shin Bet will return to their destructive patterns of action.
It is now not only a matter of the danger of renewed hostile activity, but a much more fateful question: Who rules in Israel and who is really dictating its path? During the comng weeks, Israelis should carefully monitor the developments. Let's establish a "Cease-Fire Watch," and watch to see who is once again maliciously undermining it.
The cease-fire will go up in flames
By Gideon Levy
Here is the forecast: In a few days, there will be a targeted killing operation. The military correspondents will recite: "He was one of the senior operatives of Hamas (or Islamic Jihad), and was responsible for producing and smuggling large amounts of armaments." In response, a barrage of Qassams will fall on Sderot. One of the residents might be injured. In the process of the targeted killing operation, some passersby might also be killed; the correspondents will then recite: "They were armed."
Several days later, there might be a terror attack. The leaders of the right-wing parties and the Labor Party will be interviewed on television and will recite: "Abu Mazen has once again demonstrated that he is incapable and unwilling to fight terror. There is no one to talk to." Public Security Minister Avi Dichter will propose turning Beit Hanun into a ghost town. Eli Yishai will suggest bombing from the air. The next day, Qassams will fall again, and the IDF will enter the northern Gaza Strip. The cease-fire will go up in flames.
This is not a bold wager. This is almost the exact series of events that occurred in previous cease-fires. What was is what will be. There are plenty of examples. In January 2002, after several months of quiet, the Tanzim activist Raed Karmi was assassinated in Tul Karm. Dichter, who was then the head of the Shin Bet, pushed for this action, of course. Immediately afterwards, Fatah began its suicide bombing attacks.
Several months later, the Tanzim announced a unilateral cease-fire. Shortly thereafter, in July 2002, Salah Shehadeh was assassinated in Gaza in a one-ton bombing, which also killed 15 innocent residents. That was the end of the cease-fire.
At the beginning of the summer of 2003, the hudna was declared. A week later, the police counter-terror unit targeted Mahmoud Shawer in Qalqiliyah. During the first week of the hudna, the IDF arrested 320 Palestinians. After two months of the hudna, Israel targeted Ismail Abu Shenab, 53. "He has been a wanted man for years," the reporters recited. The next day, 15 mortar shells were fired at Gush Katif and three Qassams at Israel. In August, Israel also assassinated Mohammed Sidr, the head of the military branch of Islamic Jihad in Hebron, and that was the end of the hudna.
Several months later, in December 2003, the IDF embarked on a broad operation. The objective: Sheikh Ibrahim Hamed, head of the military branch of Hamas in Ramallah. The precise date: the day the Geneva Initiative was launched.
Coincidental timing? Doubtful. In April 2004, when negotiations between Yasser Arafat and Hamas were progressing, Israel assassinated Abed Aziz Rantisi. The negotiations stalled.
In July 2005, the tahadiya was also threatened: In a single day, Israel targeted seven in Salfit and in Gaza. A month later, another five in Tul Karm. In June 2006, just as Mahmoud Abbas was about to declare a referendum vote on the prisoners' document, Israel targeted Jamal Abu Samhadana, the commander of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza. A few days later, the Ghaliya family was killed on the Gaza beach, whether by an IDF shell or "dud." The referendum went up in smoke, together with the prisoners' document. Hamas threatened to resume terror attacks after 17 quiet months. The Qassams started to fall on Sderot in frightening numbers. Thus, systematically: Every time a chance emerges, a liquidation is quick to follow. The IDF and Shin Bet, not the statesmen, dictate the developments.
The current cease-fire was achieved thanks to the U.S. president's visit in Jordan. Israel responded to the Palestinian initiative - again it is a Palestinian initiative, there has never been an Israeli initiative - after the military operations were bitter failures. After "Summer Rains" and "Autumn Clouds," after 80 were killed in one week in Beit Hanun, the firing of Qassams did not stop. The IDF hurried to respond with a typical sour countenance: Senior officers in the Southern Command expressed strong opposition in off-the-record conversations, the chief of staff was quick to declare that "the IDF was only a partially a partner in the decision" and the defense minister expressed reservations about expanding the cease-fire to the West Bank.
The IDF is not interested in the cease-fire. One can assume that neither is the Shin Bet. Reports on how the cease-fire is already being exploited for redeployment on the other side are flooding the media. And the end is known in advance. Instead of Israel promoting the cease-fire, it is acting to undermine it. A cease-fire is bad for the IDF, especially when it stems from its failures as in Lebanon and Gaza.
How intolerably easy it is for the IDF to undermine the relative quiet that has been achieved. One assassination is enough. A single soldier at a checkpoint is capable of igniting a conflagration. When the IDF wants it, every broom opens fire. And the IDF wants it, unfortunately.
Moreover, the IDF is now being asked not only to show restraint, but also to take a series of practical steps to make life easier for the Palestinians. In the meantime, how surprising, there is no sign of this. Anyone wishing to confirm this can drive to the Hawara checkpoint and see with his own eyes the transit of cattle there, which is called a human passageway. Another example? During a two-day period at the end of the week, the IDF arrested over 50 Palestinians in the West Bank. Why exactly now?
"I reach out my hand in peace to our Palestinian neighbors," Ehud Olmert said in his Sde Boker speech, his most impressive speech, which promises the Palestinians half of heaven and earth. This speech is liable to be washed in blood. Perhaps the Palestinians will be to blame, but no less than this is the gnawing fear that the IDF and Shin Bet will return to their destructive patterns of action.
It is now not only a matter of the danger of renewed hostile activity, but a much more fateful question: Who rules in Israel and who is really dictating its path? During the comng weeks, Israelis should carefully monitor the developments. Let's establish a "Cease-Fire Watch," and watch to see who is once again maliciously undermining it.
Peace worker’s tales of war
Newbury News
December 2nd, 2006 by Neil Welch, December 1st
Human rights worker teams up with Newbury shop owner to raise funds for the woman who saved her life
A HUMAN rights worker who spent last Christmas in an Israeli jail has visited Newbury to help raise money for the woman who saved her life.
Sharon, 33, won’t give out her surname as she fears Israeli authorities will use the information to ban her from the country or lock her up again.
She gave a talk and showed a video at Friends Meeting House in Newbury on Wednesday to highlight the plight of Palestinians in Israel.
Sharon was put in prison after being banned from a peace conference in Bethlehem on December 21 last year, spending 11 days behind bars.
“It was ironic that I was trying to get to Bethlehem and they wouldn’t let me,” she said.
Although her time in prison was hard, she wasn’t subjected to the same abuse as some of her fellow peace workers.
“My colleague Vic was beaten by seven guards to try and convince him to get on the plane back. They just shouted at the girls,” she said.
“Another peace worker arrived on Christmas Day and bought decorations and chocolate coins – those were our presents.”
But this wasn’t the most difficult time in Sharon’s travails. On April 1, 2002, Israeli soldiers opened fire on her and nine other peace workers at a protest. She was left with near-fatal wounds.
“We had our hands in the air and were walking backwards,” she said.
“I was shot in the stomach.
“It was April Fools Day – and the first time the Israeli army had used live ammunition on human rights workers.”
Sharon said that despite the bloodshed, the hospital was nearly empty because the army wouldn’t let Palestinians out of their houses, even for medical attention.
“Children were spending the night in their homes with their dead parents,” she said.
It was in hospital that she met Abla, the nurse whose care helped save her life.
“Her dream was to study public health, and she couldn’t achieve that without outside help,” Sharon said.
Jacqui’s Convenience Store, on the corner of Berkeley Road and Blenheim Road in Newbury, is helping raise money for Abla, 29, with a collection tin.
The shop has raised around £170 so far, which has helped to put Abla through her first two semesters at Al Quds University in Jerusalem.
Jacqui Finch, who owns the store, said she was glad to aid the cause.
“It’s great to help Abla achieve what she has done so far,” she said.
“People are happy to contribute when they hear her story – even school children are putting their pennies in.”
Sharon, who is trained as a medic, works for the International Solidarity Movement, a group made up of Israeli, Palestinian and Western human rights workers.
She visits the Middle East around three times a year, and spends her time in the UK raising awareness of civilians’ plight.
And after spending last Christmas behind bars, she has no intention of relaxing with some turkey and a glass of wine this year.
“I’ll probably go and work in Lebanon for Christmas,” she said.
Posted in Press clippings, Bethlehem Region
UK home secretary threatens Scotland with with terrorist attack
Reid says Scots state would be weak in face of al-Qaeda
By Paul Hutcheon
THE HOME secretary, John Reid, has sparked a row with the SNP by suggesting that independence would make Scotland more vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
The Labour MP said the creation of a separate Scottish state would "weaken" the UK's counter-terrorism strategy. He also said it was "fairytale" politics to claim independence would reduce Scotland's chance of being targeted by al-Qaeda.
The home secretary's remarks were made on a visit to Scotland last week, during which he briefed journalists on his thoughts about the SNP. They followed an earlier attack on the SNP at the Scottish Labour conference last weekend.
continued...
The Labour heavyweight, still viewed as a potential successor to Tony Blair, blasted Nationalists' policies as "inadequate" on terrorism and globalisation.
Asked whether independence would increase the likelihood of a terror attack in Scotland, he said: "Independence will damage the network of security services that operate against terrorists. And in terms of resources to apply to counter-terrorism, in all of those areas you would be weaker."
Reid said separation would hamper Scotland's ability to contribute to anti-terrorism efforts.
"Are they going to have border guards at the Tweed to stop the terrorists? Or, are you just assuming the terrorists will say yes, we've been massacring children as well as adults, we've murdered people who are Christians and Muslims, yes we've slaughtered people from every background and every nationality but we won't touch the Scots?'. This is fairytale politics," he said.
He also claimed the SNP's opposition to the Iraq war would not save Scotland from making it onto al-qaeda's list of targets: "The naivety of those who believe that, somehow, if you run away from the terrorist that the terrorist won't come after you, is illustrated throughout history. The last big arrests on terrorism were in Canada, but Canada not only wasn't in Iraq, Canada opposed the intervention in Iraq."
Reid added that no part of the UK was safe from terrorist attacks: "In the UK, the first attack by Islamic terrorists was outside of London. It was actually in Birmingham. We know that they will attack wherever they can."
By Paul Hutcheon
THE HOME secretary, John Reid, has sparked a row with the SNP by suggesting that independence would make Scotland more vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
The Labour MP said the creation of a separate Scottish state would "weaken" the UK's counter-terrorism strategy. He also said it was "fairytale" politics to claim independence would reduce Scotland's chance of being targeted by al-Qaeda.
The home secretary's remarks were made on a visit to Scotland last week, during which he briefed journalists on his thoughts about the SNP. They followed an earlier attack on the SNP at the Scottish Labour conference last weekend.
continued...
The Labour heavyweight, still viewed as a potential successor to Tony Blair, blasted Nationalists' policies as "inadequate" on terrorism and globalisation.
Asked whether independence would increase the likelihood of a terror attack in Scotland, he said: "Independence will damage the network of security services that operate against terrorists. And in terms of resources to apply to counter-terrorism, in all of those areas you would be weaker."
Reid said separation would hamper Scotland's ability to contribute to anti-terrorism efforts.
"Are they going to have border guards at the Tweed to stop the terrorists? Or, are you just assuming the terrorists will say yes, we've been massacring children as well as adults, we've murdered people who are Christians and Muslims, yes we've slaughtered people from every background and every nationality but we won't touch the Scots?'. This is fairytale politics," he said.
He also claimed the SNP's opposition to the Iraq war would not save Scotland from making it onto al-qaeda's list of targets: "The naivety of those who believe that, somehow, if you run away from the terrorist that the terrorist won't come after you, is illustrated throughout history. The last big arrests on terrorism were in Canada, but Canada not only wasn't in Iraq, Canada opposed the intervention in Iraq."
Reid added that no part of the UK was safe from terrorist attacks: "In the UK, the first attack by Islamic terrorists was outside of London. It was actually in Birmingham. We know that they will attack wherever they can."
Media: A suicide bomber, eh?! Not Muslim? Sorry, not interested
Quiet warfare
Few have been paying attention to that other ongoing terrorist threat
By: JENNIFER L. POZNER
11/28/2006 10:25:26 AM
MINISTER PAUL HILL, who was executed for murdering two abortion providers in 1994, is lionized as a martyr on the Army of God Web site.
On September 11, 2006, the fifth anniversary of the terror attacks that devastated our nation, a man crashed his car into a building in Davenport, Iowa, hoping to blow it up and kill himself in the fire.
No national newspaper, magazine, or network newscast reported this attempted suicide bombing, though an AP wire story was available. Cable news (save for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann) was silent about this latest act of terrorism in America.
Had the criminal, David McMenemy, been Arab or Muslim, this would have been headline news for weeks. But since his target was the Edgerton Women’s Health Center, rather than, say, a bank or a police station, media have not called this terrorism — even after three decades of extreme violence by anti-abortion fanatics, mostly fundamentalist Christians who believe they’re fighting a holy war.
Since 1977, casualties from this war include seven murders, 17 attempted murders, three kidnappings, 152 assaults, 305 completed or attempted bombings and arsons, 375 invasions, 482 stalking incidents, 380 death threats, 618 bomb threats, 100 acid attacks, and 1,254 acts of vandalism, according to the National Abortion Federation.
<>Abortion providers and activists received 77 letters threatening anthrax attacks before 9/11, yet the media never considered anthrax threats as terrorism until after 9/11, when such letters were delivered to journalists and members of Congress.
After 9/11, Planned Parenthood and other abortion-rights groups received 554 envelopes containing white powder and messages like: “You have been exposed to anthrax. . . . We are going to kill all of you.” They were signed by the Army of God, a group that hosts Scripture-filled Web pages for “Anti-Abortion Heroes of the Faith,” including minister Paul Hill, Michael Griffin, and James Kopp, all convicted of murdering abortion providers, and a convicted clinic bomber, the Reverend Michael Bray. Another of their “martyrs,” Clayton Waagner, mailed anthrax letters while a fugitive on the FBI’s 10 most wanted list for anti-abortion related crimes.
“I am a terrorist,” Waagner declared on the Army of God’s Web site. Boasting that God “freed me to make war on his enemy,” he claimed he knew where 42 Planned Parenthood workers lived. “It doesn’t matter to me if you’re a nurse, receptionist, bookkeeper, or janitor, if you work for the murderous abortionist, I’m going to kill you.”
That’s textbook terrorism, defined by the USA Patriot Act as dangerous criminal acts that “appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population” or “to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.”
Which brings us back to car bomber, McMenemy. According to the Detroit Free Press (the only newspaper in the Nexis news database that reported his crime), he targeted the women’s health center because he thought it provided abortions. It doesn’t. (Oops!) It provides mostly low-income patients with pap smears, ob-gyn care, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control, and nutrition and immunization programs for women and children.
The attack caused $170,000 in property damage and left poor families without health care for a week. But long after Edgerton’s water-logged carpets are removed, scorched medical equipment replaced, and new doors reopened to the public, a culture of fear will linger among doctors, nurses, advocates, and patients across the country, who will worry they could be next. Some frightened workers will quit their jobs; some women will be too scared to get the health care they need.
Every fresh incident of anti-abortion terrorism is a reminder that women’s health supporters are not safe in a country where abortion is legal but mobilized zealots believe Jesus has empowered them to kill to prevent women from choosing it.
Is McMenemy a lone nut case, or a member of that network of violent extremists? We don’t know, because journalists haven’t investigated.
Nor have they reported that just last year, nearly one in five abortion clinics experienced gunfire, arson, bombings, chemical attacks, assaults, stalking, death threats, and blockades, according to the 2005 National Clinic Violence Survey. Additionally, 59 percent suffered intimidation tactics such as photo and video surveillance.
Federal efforts to hunt down these terrorists improved with the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act in 1994 and the National Task Force on Violence Against Health Care Providers, established by the Department of Justice in 1998. The feds have taken over McMenemy’s case, charging him with arson against a business affecting interstate commerce. Yet as of October 5, no news outlet on Nexis reported this, despite a second AP story.
As we continue national debates on how to keep America safe from terrorism, journalists do us — and especially women — no good pretending that the threats come only from radical Muslims outside our borders.
This article, which originally ran as an op-ed in Newsday, is published by permission of the author. Jennifer L. Pozner is founder and executive director of Women In Media & News ( wminonline.org ), a national media analysis, education, and advocacy group.
Few have been paying attention to that other ongoing terrorist threat
By: JENNIFER L. POZNER
11/28/2006 10:25:26 AM
MINISTER PAUL HILL, who was executed for murdering two abortion providers in 1994, is lionized as a martyr on the Army of God Web site.
On September 11, 2006, the fifth anniversary of the terror attacks that devastated our nation, a man crashed his car into a building in Davenport, Iowa, hoping to blow it up and kill himself in the fire.
No national newspaper, magazine, or network newscast reported this attempted suicide bombing, though an AP wire story was available. Cable news (save for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann) was silent about this latest act of terrorism in America.
Had the criminal, David McMenemy, been Arab or Muslim, this would have been headline news for weeks. But since his target was the Edgerton Women’s Health Center, rather than, say, a bank or a police station, media have not called this terrorism — even after three decades of extreme violence by anti-abortion fanatics, mostly fundamentalist Christians who believe they’re fighting a holy war.
Since 1977, casualties from this war include seven murders, 17 attempted murders, three kidnappings, 152 assaults, 305 completed or attempted bombings and arsons, 375 invasions, 482 stalking incidents, 380 death threats, 618 bomb threats, 100 acid attacks, and 1,254 acts of vandalism, according to the National Abortion Federation.
<>Abortion providers and activists received 77 letters threatening anthrax attacks before 9/11, yet the media never considered anthrax threats as terrorism until after 9/11, when such letters were delivered to journalists and members of Congress.
After 9/11, Planned Parenthood and other abortion-rights groups received 554 envelopes containing white powder and messages like: “You have been exposed to anthrax. . . . We are going to kill all of you.” They were signed by the Army of God, a group that hosts Scripture-filled Web pages for “Anti-Abortion Heroes of the Faith,” including minister Paul Hill, Michael Griffin, and James Kopp, all convicted of murdering abortion providers, and a convicted clinic bomber, the Reverend Michael Bray. Another of their “martyrs,” Clayton Waagner, mailed anthrax letters while a fugitive on the FBI’s 10 most wanted list for anti-abortion related crimes.
“I am a terrorist,” Waagner declared on the Army of God’s Web site. Boasting that God “freed me to make war on his enemy,” he claimed he knew where 42 Planned Parenthood workers lived. “It doesn’t matter to me if you’re a nurse, receptionist, bookkeeper, or janitor, if you work for the murderous abortionist, I’m going to kill you.”
That’s textbook terrorism, defined by the USA Patriot Act as dangerous criminal acts that “appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population” or “to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.”
Which brings us back to car bomber, McMenemy. According to the Detroit Free Press (the only newspaper in the Nexis news database that reported his crime), he targeted the women’s health center because he thought it provided abortions. It doesn’t. (Oops!) It provides mostly low-income patients with pap smears, ob-gyn care, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control, and nutrition and immunization programs for women and children.
The attack caused $170,000 in property damage and left poor families without health care for a week. But long after Edgerton’s water-logged carpets are removed, scorched medical equipment replaced, and new doors reopened to the public, a culture of fear will linger among doctors, nurses, advocates, and patients across the country, who will worry they could be next. Some frightened workers will quit their jobs; some women will be too scared to get the health care they need.
Every fresh incident of anti-abortion terrorism is a reminder that women’s health supporters are not safe in a country where abortion is legal but mobilized zealots believe Jesus has empowered them to kill to prevent women from choosing it.
Is McMenemy a lone nut case, or a member of that network of violent extremists? We don’t know, because journalists haven’t investigated.
Nor have they reported that just last year, nearly one in five abortion clinics experienced gunfire, arson, bombings, chemical attacks, assaults, stalking, death threats, and blockades, according to the 2005 National Clinic Violence Survey. Additionally, 59 percent suffered intimidation tactics such as photo and video surveillance.
Federal efforts to hunt down these terrorists improved with the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act in 1994 and the National Task Force on Violence Against Health Care Providers, established by the Department of Justice in 1998. The feds have taken over McMenemy’s case, charging him with arson against a business affecting interstate commerce. Yet as of October 5, no news outlet on Nexis reported this, despite a second AP story.
As we continue national debates on how to keep America safe from terrorism, journalists do us — and especially women — no good pretending that the threats come only from radical Muslims outside our borders.
This article, which originally ran as an op-ed in Newsday, is published by permission of the author. Jennifer L. Pozner is founder and executive director of Women In Media & News ( wminonline.org ), a national media analysis, education, and advocacy group.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)