Israeli war crimes: not just in Lebanon

They are still murdering Palestinians in Gaza.

Israel's war crimes in Lebanon - who started it anyway?

Many Western commentators have criticised or condemned Israel's current war crimes in Lebanon. Even Foreign Minister Kim `weasel words' Howells attacked Israel for targetting Lebanese people and infrastructure in its campaign against Hezbollah (until he got to Israel the next day, when he changed his emphasis. What a coward).

However, these same Western commentators are even more unified in their condemnation of Hezbollah for starting the trouble by `kidnapping' two Israeli soldiers. It should come as no surprise that the truth is somewhat different. Joshua Frank at antiwar.com has researched the original reports from Western news sources such as MSNBC, as well as independent reports. What has he discovered?

`These sources contend that Israel sent a commando force into southern
Lebanon and was subsequently attacked by Hezbollah near the village of Aitaa
al-Chaab, well inside Lebanon's southern territory. It was at this point that an
Israel tank was struck by Hezbollah fighters, which resulted in the capture of
two Israeli soldiers and the death of six.

As the AFP
reported, "According to the Lebanese police force, the two Israeli soldiers were
captured in Lebanese territory, in the area of Aitaa al-Chaab, near to the
border with Israel, where an Israeli unit had penetrated in middle of morning."
And the French news site www.VoltaireNet.org
reiterated the same account on June 18, "In a deliberated way, [Israel] sent a
commando in the Lebanese back-country to Aitaa al-Chaab. It was attacked by
Hezbollah, taking two prisoners."

The Associated
Press departed from the official version as well. "The militant
group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across
the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which
sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them," reported Joseph
Panossian for AP on July 12. "The forces were trying to keep the soldiers'
captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said
on condition of anonymity."'

Surprise, surprise. The Israeli soldiers were not `kidnapped' in Israel. They were captured in Lebanon. Israel bears 100% responsibility - not only for its war crimes in Lebanon, but also for how it began. Once again Western journalists have proved to be spineless accomplices in the dissemination of Israeli propaganda.

UPDATE 26.7.06.: Further to Hezbollah allegedly `starting' the current crisis. It seems they have violated the Blue Line on the Israeli-Lebanese border 100 times. How many times has Israel violated it - 11,782. (Info from UN Observers, quoted by Lebanese Speaker of Parliament in an interview with Al-Arabiya TV).

MEPs and Palestine

I still haven't had any reply from Baroness Ludford (Lib Dem) to my letter of June 13th about the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. The Baroness is one of nine London MEPs. However, I see from her newsletter that she has raised the issue of Israeli jets deliberately provoking anxiety through low-level sonic booms over Gaza. She reports thus:

London's Liberal Democrat Euro-MP and peer Baroness Sarah Ludford, a
member of the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, this week asked the government during exchanges in the House of Lords to urge Israel to stop creating sonic booms over the Palestinian territories. Since the withdrawal of Israeli
settlers from Gaza in September 2005, the Israeli air force has reportedly been
using jets to break the sound barrier at low altitude over Gaza, thereby causing
sonic booms.

Sarah Ludford, who afterwards expressed disappointment that her
December 2005 letter to the Israeli ambassador on this topic had remained
unanswered, commented:

"My protest lies in the indiscriminate nature of this practice. I do
strongly support Israel's right to take legitimate action to protect its
security, but the damage caused by the sonic booms appears to be designed to
intimidate, in other words collective punishment which cannot be morally
justified."

"The UN's demand for an end to this practice points out that amongst
children sonic booms can cause anxiety, bedwetting, muscle spasms, temporary
loss of hearing and breathing difficulties. It is wrong for Israel to inflict
this suffering if the military justification present in other Israeli Defence
Force actions is here absent."

It is interesting to note that the Baroness's letter to the Israeli ambassador has been totally ignored. And this despite the fact that she is a member of Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel! It just shows the contempt the Israeli authorities have for any criticism at all, however mild, and whoever it is from. Israel demands the right to `self-defence'. However, this self-defence is the right to commit war crimes against anyone, anywhere as they so choose; and to totally ignore any criticism from any source.

Baroness Ludford needs to take a long hard look at her attitude to Israel. Yes, it is good that she has raised this matter. No, it is not good that she appears to be turning a blind eye to all the other war crimes the Israelis are committing against the Palestinians.

You can write to your MEPs here.

Walthamstow MP Watch: Middle East crisis 2

On the 18th July I wrote to Neil Gerrard, Labour MP for Walthamstow, to ask him if he could in any way bring pressure to bear to stop the Israeli government's current war crimes in Lebanon. I am pleased to say that I have already received a letter in reply. In it he sets out his opposition to Israeli actions, and details a House of Commons motion on the issue. Here is the letter:




You can write to your political representatives via writetothem.com .

MEPs reply on Israel and Lebanon

On the 14th July I wrote to 8 of the 9 London MEPs (excluding the UKIP MEP because he won't do anything). I have now had two replies. This is the letter from John Bowis (Con):

I was pleasantly surprised that he agreed that Israel must be restrained, and that aid should not be cut to the Palestinians. I expected a harder line response from a Conservative MEP. That was to come from Dr Charles Tannock, another Conservative MEP. He e-mailed me as follows:

Opinions are, of course, divided on this controversial issue and I
support the G8 position as well as the EU Council declaration. The
responsibility for the tragic killing on the Gaza beach remains disputed, as
according to admittedly Israeli sources the ordnance used was not theirs.

Furthermore, it is clear that Israel having withdrawn from Gaza and south
Lebanon in what was supposed to be a land for peace deal has instead found this
territory to be rapidly filled by terrorists committed to the total destruction
of the state of Israel and not the two-state solution agreed in Oslo in
1993.

Therefore, I believe Israel was provoked deliberately and although I call
for restraint and dialogue within international law, I accept Israel's right to
self-defence and retaliation against terrorist strongholds. I have
nevertheless questioned the Israeli Ambassador to the EU as to why in Gaza
civilian infrastructure was targeted such as water supplies for which there was
no justification and therefore I condemn this particular act as
disproportionate.

Nevertheless, until Israel can live peaceably within its borders there is
no hope for the 2003 roadmap for peace under the Quartet and I hope that the
recent escalation of Israeli military action will secure the release of Israeli
soldiers and stop rockets being fired on Israeli territory at civilian targets,
as otherwise there are no prospects for a durable peace in the region. I
also believe that Iran and Syria have been connected directly with this
provocation as a distraction from their own disputes with the international
community. I also call upon Lebanon to implement UNSCR 1559 and disarm
Hezbollah as previously directed.

Yours
sincerely


Dr. Charles Tannock MEP

I felt there was a great deal to disagree with here, so I responded as follows:

Dear Dr Tannock,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful
reply to my e-mail. I appreciate you taking the time and trouble to reply to an
individual constituent such as myself. I am heartened to hear that have tackled
the Israeli Ambassador to the EU on the question of the targeting of civilian
infrastructure in Gaza. Would you permit me to briefly respond to some of the
points that you have made?

Firstly, Israel's denials of
responsibility for the killings on Gaza beach are not credible. The Independent
reported (`Revealed: the shrapnel evidence that points to Israel's guilt) on 14
June that a former Pentagon battle damage expert, Marc Garlasco, said "All the
evidence points" to a 155mm Israeli land-based artillery shell as being
responsible. There is much more detail in the article which I will not repeat
here.

Secondly, Israel's withdrawal from Gaza was unilateral, and
not part of any `land for peace deal'. As I am sure you are aware, Israel always
refuses to negotiate with the Palestinians on the grounds that there is no
partner for peace. The plain fact is that Israel does not want a partner for
peace. It simply wishes to impose its own designs unilaterally, in which it is
nearly always aided and supported by western politicians, who have a great deal
to answer for.

You say Gaza was `rapidly filled by
terrorists'. Are you calling the entire Palestinian population terrorists? That
seems to me to be a very extreme comment. Terrorism is often defined as the use
of violence for political ends. It seems very strange how the Palestinians, or
anyone who supports them, seem to be almost uniquely singled out for
this description, and how this is used as a term of abuse i.e. terrorists equal
people who can never be acknowledged or negotiated with. This flies entirely in
the face of history - especially that of the British Empire. Those who used
violence to oppose colonial rule (just as the rulers used violence to
maintain that rule) often became respected statesmen after independence had
been achieved, and established good diplomatic relations. Israel itself was
established through an extensive campaign of terrorism and violence, some of it
against British troops, as I am sure you are very well
aware.

Israel has since maintained its rule through extensive use
of state terror. Western politicians are very quick to condemn Palestinian
suicide bombings (which I should make clear I do not support). But the Israelis
have murdered many more Palestinian civilians than the Palestinian `terrorists'
have Israel civilians. How often are those killings condemned, or even
acknowledged? The Palestinians held free democratic elections and elected Hamas.
Western governments then disgracefully supported Israel's attempts to starve the
Palestinians into submission for having the temerity to elect the `wrong'
government.

You refer to the two-state solution. Whatever the
Israelis may say to placate their supporters in the west, they have no intention
of accepting any such solution. They are still stealing Palestinian land through
their `security wall' with the intention of limiting the Palestinians to a few
disconnected `bantustans' which will never be able to cohere into a state.
Western governments have shamefully colluded in this. The ever more desperate
situation of the Palestinians is a running sore on the face of the world,
and all western politicians will do is blame them for their own situation,
collude with every Israeli act of violence against them, and then wonder why
terrorism is increasing. It is increasing out of desperation.

The
only way to put a stop to this appalling situation is a one-state solution.
Israel/Palestine must be a democratic nation where Jew and Arab are equal
and can live in peace. Everything Israel does is designed to prevent this from
happening. Everything western governments do colludes with this. But there
is no other way.

Thank you for your time.

Yours
sincerely,

Grouchy.

Middle East Crisis: what can we do?

I suggest that the most important thing we can do is go on the demonstrations on Saturday 22nd July. The main one is in London, but there are others in Birmingham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Exeter, Glasgow, Kirkcaldy, Manchester, Newcastle, Norwich, Sheffield, and York.

But I also think it's worth writing to your MP and MEP. It's very easy. Just go to writetothem.com, and as long as you know your own postcode all the details are provided for you. This is the letter I wrote to 8 of the 9 London MEPs (I didn't bother with the UKIP MEP because he won't do anything) on July 14th:

Dear MEP,

I write to you as one of your London constituents. Given the very grave
events currently taking place in the Middle East, I am writing to you to ask you
to use your influence as an MEP to persuade the European Union to take a
constructive role in reversing Israel's actions against its
neighbours.

Up to now the EU has simply seemed to tail the USA in
their quite appalling encouragement of Israel's state terrorism against the
Palestinians. It is vital that the EU plays a more independent role now that
Israel has once again invaded the Lebanon. The EU must call for -

-
the total withdrawal by Israel of all military forces from the Lebanon
- the
ending of the aerial and naval blockade of the Lebanon
- no recurrence of
these attacks
- an end to the blockade of Gaza, and the withholding of
Palestinian revenues

Anything less will do nothing to reduce
the danger of a wider war, and may only increase it.

Thank you for
your time.

Yours sincerely,

Grouchy.

Also, write letters to newspapers. This is my letter to my local newspaper:

Dear Editor,

Walthamstow MP Neil Gerrard made an excellent contribution to a recent
debate in Parliament on the tragic situation in the Middle East.

He said, `No one in this House in any way supports kidnapping or the
firing of rockets into Israel, but...collective punishment is clearly against
international law and has been
regularly and routinely used by Israel over
the years. It is being used again now in Lebanon'.

The Israelis are bombing Lebanon into dust, and have killed over 300
civilians. This has nothing to do with `stopping terrorism'. These are war
crimes against the Lebanese people.
Unfortunately, the British government has
joined the USA in refusing to call for a ceasefire. President Bush only has to
shout `Yo Blair', and Tony comes running like an obedient puppydog for his
orders.

If you think our government should be doing everything it can to help
find a peaceful solution, you can do something about it. For a start you can
contact your MP. It is very easy to send an email via www.writetothem.com . You
only need to know your own postcode.
You can also contact your MEPs about the
European Union's attitude in the same way. I have had some good correspondence
with some of London's 9 MEPs in this way.

Please raise your voice to force the government to take
action.

Yours sincerely,

Grouchy.

BBC News - written in Tel Aviv

It is quite astonishing just how brazen the BBC are in reproducing Israeli propaganda about what Israeli forces are doing in Lebanon.

Dear BBC,

Why is a news service funded by the British licence-fee payer
broadcasting Israeli propaganda about the events in the Lebanon, instead of at
least attempting to report even-handedly?
In today's lunchtime news,
newsreader Sophie Raeworth (I think that's her name) told us that `Israel has
bombed more Hezbollah targets' in the Lebanon.

This is pure Israeli propaganda. The Israelis have bombed roads,
airports, factories, housing and just about everything else. Are all these
`Hezbollah targets'? It is quite disgraceful that a British TV news service is
swallowing and regurgitating blatant propaganda.

If you continue to do this - which no doubt you will - you will forfeit
any right to be funded by the licence fee. You are not entitled to my
licence-fee to produce propaganda for Israel - or anyone else for that matter.

If you can't do the job properly, don't bother doing it at
all.

Yours,

Grouchy.

That was the lunchtime news. I didn't see the six o'clock news. But, lo and behold, at ten o'clock:

Dear BBC,

I have already complained about Sophie Raeworth on the lunchtime news
stating that Israel `had bombed more Hezbollah targets' in Lebanon. Now Fiona
Bruce, summing up the headlines at the end of the News at Ten, said that Israel
`had bombed more Hezbollah targets in Beirut'.

This is absolutely
scandalous. Israel has bombed just about everything in the Lebanon - factories,
airports, housing - anything and everything. Just what is it about these things
that makes them `Hezbollah targets', and just how has the BBC independently
verified this is the case? Quite obviously most of these places have nothing to
do with Hezbollah, and the BBC has verifed nothing independently.

You have simply taken Israeli state propaganda, swallowed it
whole, then vomited it out over the British population. I will ask you again.
Why is a British TV news service, funded by British licence-fee payers,
producing propaganda for the state of Israel? Just what do you think you are
doing? If you continue along this road of producing propaganda you will no
longer be entitled to funding from the licence-fee. Why don't you be honest and
get your funding from Washington and Tel Aviv? You are a disgrace.

Yours,

Grouchy.

I think we need a campaign to remove the licence-fee from BBC News, or just to cancel it altogether and let the BBC collapse. I am tired of being lied to. You can tell the BBC what you think here.

Walthamstow MP Watch: Middle East crisis

If you are a UK citizen, what can you do about Israel's current war crimes against its neighbours? Well, it might not seem like much, but I do think it's worth writing to your political representatives in Westminster and Brussels. This is what I wrote to Neil Gerrard, Labour MP for Walthamstow:

Dear Neil Gerrard,

I am writing to ask you if there is anything you can do as a Member of
Parliament to bring pressure to bear to prevent the Israeli Government from
continuing its current round of war crimes in Gaza and the Lebanon.

Once again Israel is murdering civilians in its neighbour
countries. Once again the USA has vetoed a motion critical of Israel at the
United Nations. Just for once our Government must stop tailending the US
neo-conservatives and speak out for humanitarian values.

Both Britain and the European Union must stop supporting Israeli
war crimes. I would be grateful if you could do anything to
help.

Yours sincerely,

Grouchy.

Neil Gerrard is a principled MP, and it doesn't surprise me at all that he made this contribution to a debate in Parliament on the 17th July on the situation:

No one in this House in any way supports kidnapping or the firing of rockets
into Israel, but does my hon. Friend accept that collective punishment is
clearly against international law and has been regularly and routinely used by
Israel over the years? It is being used again now in Lebanon, with the bombing
of infrastructure and targeted assassinations from the air that inevitably cause
civilian casualties, as the Israelis know when they do it. Those are not the
actions of a responsible Government. In comparing the actions of Hezbollah and
Israel, let us remember that Israel is a Government and a state, not an
organisation like Hezbollah. One expects any state that claims to be a democracy
and is a member of the UN to abide by
international law.

This is a sound and valuable contribution to the debate. Compare it to the weasel words of Government minister, Kim Howells, in reply:

We certainly expect Israel to abide by international law and we are
totally opposed to collective punishment. My hon. Friend is right in recalling
the history of relationships between Israel and its neighbours since the second
world war. There is a great difference now. Hezbollah recognises no
international law and targets civilians directly. Hamas's terrorist elements
murder civilians directly. That is the way in which terrorists operate. It is
difficult, as we have found in this country to our great pain, to understand how
such an enemy operates, and it is still more difficult to erect defences against
such attacks. That is not to excuse collective punishment, as my hon. Friend
puts it, but we must also try to understand that there are some very
unscrupulous organisations around that operate across frontiers, owe allegiance
to no one and are prepared to use any murderous techniques they care to invent
to achieve their ends. That is a very difficult enemy with which to
negotiate.

This is disgraceful, disreputable garbage. About eight Lebanese civilians have died for each Israeli civilian killed since Israel launched its war crimes against the Lebanon. Hezbollah only fired rockets into Haifa (which I do not support) after Israel deliberately killed many civilians and attacked vital Lebanese infrastructure. Howells is a cowardly careerist who - for the sake of his career - crawls to Blair, who - for the sake of what exactly? - crawls on his belly to Bush.

To put pressure on the cowards in the British government, go here.

BBC News lacks balance - so what else is new?

The BBC's coverage of the current tragic events in the Middle East is as unbalanced as we have come to expect. The usual kinds of bias were on show in last night's Ten o'Clock News:

Dear BBC,

Gavin Hewitt's piece on the current strife in the Middle
East was not a balanced report. For example, he asked Lebanese refugees in an
aggressive, accusatory way whether they agreed with Hezbollah firing rockets
into Israel. No such questions about Israel bombing and killing civilians were
put to Israelis.

Also, the order of events is being fudged as well as
the comparative scale. Israel attacked civilians first, on a massive scale.
Hezbollah fired rockets into Israel only after this happened. Civilian deaths on
any side are reprehensible, but why is it that the far fewer Israeli casulaties
are given much greater prominence than the many more Lebanese casualties?

Once again the BBC has failed to provide even-handed reports, instead
propagandising on behalf of the Israelis.

Yours,

Grouchy.

It really is quite stunning that a British news service, funded by British licence-fee payers, should see its role as propagandising on behalf of Israel. Of course, Israel has numerous supporters in this country, and some of them are quite prepared to justify Israel's state terrorism against its neighbours (step forward Maureen Lipman). But it is certain that there is a majority that does not want to see either Israel attacking Lebanon's infrastructure, or Hezbollah attacking Haifa. So why does the BBC see fit to side with the minority against the majority?

Because the British government is a US plaything, and the USA is the principal backer of Israeli state terrorism. It is to the immense shame of both the British government, and the BBC, that they are so gutless and spineless.

You can let the BBC know what you think here.

UPDATE: This is absolutely essential reading. A detailed analysis of the BBC's disgraceful, spineless pro-Israel propaganda.

Waltham Forest Council Election 2006 - what happened to the Conservatives?

Nationwide, the local elections of 2006 were regarded as pretty good for the Tories. They achieved 40% of the popular vote and comfortably outdid Labour and the Liberal Democrats. However, things didn't run quite so smoothly for the Tories in Waltham Forest - in fact they had a mini-catastrophe. By losing all three council seats to the Lib Dems in Hale End & Highams Park ward they fell from second to third-largest party in the borough. This was the only change for the Conservatives since the local elections of 2002:

Hale End & Highams Park........................lost 3 seats to the Liberal Democrats

The Tory vote dropped 5% in this ward, while the Lib Dem vote went up over 7%. This may have been tactical voting as Labour's share of the vote fell by nearly 6%, but it isn't really possible to know. The situation was complicated by the Greens standing and taking 3.6%, so where the votes may have moved since last time is unknowable.

The political geography of the borough is a little unusual in that the Tories are virtually unbeatable in the five northernmost wards, but apart from Hale End & Highams Park they are not in contention anywhere else. They have virtually no chance in any of the wards in the rest of the borough. Where there is any contest, it is between Labour and the Lib Dems, with the Tories basically just in the role of onlookers.

The following chart lists the wards in order of strength of the Tory vote (by percentage). It runs from the safest Tory ward to the hardest for them to win.

WARDS..........................%......(% 2002)...DIFF(+/-)...COUNCILLORS

Endlebury.....................72...........c. 67...........+5......................3
Chingford Green............70...............55.........+15......................3
Larkswood....................62...........c. 63...........+0......................3
Valley...........................61...........c. 54...........+7......................3
Hatch Lane...................58...............55...........+3......................3
Hale End & HP.............41...............46...........-5.......................0
Wood Street.................31................15..........+16.....................0
Hoe Street....................19................20..........-1........................0
Lea Bridge....................16................20..........-4........................0
Chapel End...................16................18..........-2........................0
Markhouse...................15................21..........-6........................0
Forest..........................14................11...........+3.......................0
Leytonstone.................12.................7............+5.......................0
Higham Hill..................10..............c. 10..........0........................0
William Morris..............10................15...........-5.......................0
High Street.....................8..................7...........+1.......................0
Cann Hall.......................8..............c. 5...........+3.......................0
Grove Green...................8..................8.............0.......................0
Cathall...........................7.................16..........-9........................0
Leyton...........................6.................7............-1........................0

The Tories only scored big increases in the safe ward of Chingford Green, and Wood Street. Why in those wards? If you have any ideas, please do tell. They scored increases in all five of their safest wards. Then, apart from Hale End & Highams Park, the ups and downs made no difference to any of the other results. The Conservatives are very much corralled in the north of the borough with no sign of any ability to break out in the foreseeable future.

In fact, for the forseeable future, the only way the Conservatives could control the Council would be in coalition with another party. So it was quite interesting to see a letter in the Walthamstow Guardian of 8th June 2006 (letters page not online) from Councillor G.A.Walker, Leader of the Conservative Group on the Council:

`I sent a letter to every Lib Dem councillor offering to form a joint
Lib Dem/Conservative administration which would have given them a 6:4 majority
in the cabinet and leader ship of the council ... it was not until 72 hours
before the annual council meeting that I received a formal indication from the
Lib Dems that they were declining my offer and had done a deal with the Labour
group ... We offered them the chance to jointly take control ... but they have
bottled out, again preferring to shield behind a Labour group upon whom to cast
the blame for failure.'

It is not at all surprising that the Lib Dems rejected this overture. Apart from the five northernmost wards, the Tories have little support in the borough. If the Lib Dems had put them into (shared) power, the opposition Labour Group would have taken the opportunity to `talk left' and appear as principled anti-Tories (whereas in power they implement Tory neo-liberal policies). The Lib Dems would suffer the consequences at the next election, and in all likelihood, Labour would win a majority in the borough. The Lib Dems would be set back for quite a few years.

To see just how limited the Conservatives chances are, the next table lists the Tories target wards in order from the easiest for them to win, to the hardest. The swing required here is that necessary to win the majority vote in the ward. As these are multi-seat constituencies that would not in itself guarantee winning all 3 seats in the ward (although that would usually be the case).

WARD......................CONS %.....OPPONENTS %.....SWING REQ'D

Hale End & HP..........41................Lib Dem 44..................2%
Wood Street..............31................Lab 44..........................7%
Lea Bridge.................16................Lab 56........................16%
Markhouse................15................Lab 46........................16%
Forest.......................14................Lib Dem 44................16%
Hoe Street.................19................Lab 51........................17%
High Street..................8.................Lab 40.......................17%
Leytonstone..............12................Lab 46........................18%
William Morris...........10................Lab 45........................18%
Higham Hill...............10................Lib Dem 49................20%
Grove Green...............8................Lab 47.........................20%
Cathall........................7................Lab 46.........................20%
Chapel End................16................Lib Dem 56.................21%
Cann Hall....................8................Lib Dem 50.................22%
Leyton........................6.................Lib Dem 47.................22%


To gain overall control, the Conservatives would require a swing from Labour and the Liberal Democrats of about 17%. Barring political earthquakes that isn't going to happen. So any urgings from Labour to vote for them to keep the Tories out are completely meaningless in Waltham Forest. The Conservatives can look forward to opposition in perpetuity here - unless they can persuade another party to go into coalition with them.