Monday, March 8, 2010

New birth defects seen in Gaza due to Israeli weapons

An increase in birth defects among newborns in the Gaza Strip - first documented in the Palestine Telegraph - has become apparent, despite claims to the contrary by some doctors at Al-Shifa Hospital. Pregnant women say they are living in constant fear.

Noha Abu Laban, 37, a resident of Jabalia camp in the northern Gaza Strip, is in her final month of pregnancy and says: "In the war, I inhaled the smoke of white phosphorus, which was fired on the roof of our house. I have been feeling sick since my pregnancy, and have had heavy bleeding." Noha is currently being treated in the High-Risk Pregnancy Care Unit at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.

q1_copy22

Alaa Al-Tunp, a 25-year-old resident in the Al-Tofah neighborhood, says: "When I heard the stories of deformed fetuses, I became so worried, especially since I miscarried once before, during the war, when I was in my third month of pregnancy. I had inhaled the smoke of the white phosphorus. There are many pregnant women here in the High=Risk Pregnancy Care Unit who had the same experience." Alaa says she is very worried that she will miscarry once again, or that her baby will be deformed.

More than 20 pregnant women interviewed at the High-Risk Pregnancy Care Unit at Al-Shifa reported suffering intermittent bleeding.

Ahlam, a nurse in the neonatal intensive care unit, indicated that there have been many infants with birth defects, and some die after just a week. Most of the newborns in this condition are not named, since it is believed they will not survive. One of the babies, for example, suffers from deformities in which his head is twice the size of his body, his skin is wrinkled and covered with thick hair, and his respiratory system struggles to function.

q3_copy2

Dr. Jehad Hisain, who works at the neonatal intensive care unit at Al-Shifa Hospital, confirmed that these deformities are increasing, adding that the parents often do not visit them in the unit for months, since death is their babies' anticipated fate.

Experts regard the most recent birth defect in Gaza as a result of the last one sided war launched by Israel. The Israeli war "massacre" claimed the lives of thousands while DU weapons and white phosphorous targeted only areas populated by civilians in Gaza.

Mads Gilbert , a Norwegian doctor who worked in Gaza in time of war, revealed that Israel used new close-range explosive (DIME) shells that cause severe injuries and battlefield amputations on the civilians being struck by these weapons.

Previous report of the Palestine Telegraph documented birth defect cases that give strong proofs, that Israel has used such weapons.

or http://www.paltelegraph.com/palestine/gaza-strip/3931

Report/Photos: Eman Jomaa
http://gazatoday.blogspot.com/

Mossad comes to America

By James Petras

* Death squads by invitation

The principle propaganda mouthpiece of the Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO), the Daily Alert (DA), has come out in full support for Israel’s practice of extra-judicial, extra-territorial assassination.

In the face of world-wide governmental condemnation (except from the Zionist-occupied White House and U.S. Congress), the PMAJO slavishly backs any brutal murder committed by the Israeli secret police anywhere in the world and at anytime. The recent assassination of Hamas leader, Mahmoud Mabhouh, in Dubai is a case in point. The PMAJO has defended all of Mossad’s criminal actions leading up to the murder, including extensive identity theft and the stealing or falsification of passports and official documents from several European countries, presumably allied to the Zionist state. Among the Mossad agents who entered Dubai to kill Mabhouh, twelve agents used stolen or forged British passports, three Australian, three French, one German and six Irish. These agents assumed the identity of European citizens in order to commit murder in a sovereign nation.

Once again the PMAJO demonstrate that its first loyalty is to the Israeli secret police, even when they violate the sovereignty of major U.S. allies. No doubt the PMAJO would readily support the Israeli Mossad, even if it were shown to have used U.S. documents to assassinate Mabhouh. In fact, two of the 26 Israeli assassins, carrying fake Irish and fake British passports, are known to have entered the United States after the killing and may still be here.

The position adopted by the Daily Alert and the PMAJO in defense of Israel’s international terrorist act followed several lines of attack, which will be discussed below. These include: (1) blaming the victim, (2) claiming that extra-judicial, extra territorial murders are legal, (3) minimizing the murder of ‘one’ individual, (4) deflecting attention from the Zionists by blaming ‘other Arab’s, (5) favorably comparing Mossad assassinations to U.S. killings in Afghanistan, (6) trivializing and relativizing world condemnation, (7) citing “self-defense”, (8) praising the high tech ‘operational details’ of the assassination and (9) discrediting the Dubai police investigators rather than the Israeli perpetrators.

Abridged articles, cited in the Daily Alert, have appeared in the op-ed pages of several U.S., UK, Canadian and Israeli newspapers, as well as in rightwing magazines like Forbes and Commentary. The mainline Zionist propaganda technique is to avoid any discussion of Israel’s egregious crimes against sovereignty, due process, international law and the personal security of individuals. In doing so, the Daily Alert adopts the propaganda techniques common to all totalitarian regimes practicing state terrorism.

(1) Blaming the victim

On February 22, the Daily Alert (DA) headlined two articles, which were entitled: “Killed Hamas Official betrayed by Associates says Dubai Police Chief” and “Hamas: Assassinated Operative put Himself at Risk”. The DA forgot to mention that Israeli secret police had been tracking their prey for over a month (having failed to assassinate him on six previous attempts) and that the Dubai Police Chief was not blaming Hamas officials but was in the process of accumulating evidence, witness statements, videos and documents proving the Israeli identities of the assassins. Needless to say, if we were to accept the American Zionists’ argument that any leading opponent of Israel, who travels without an army of bodyguards, is “putting himself at risk”, then we must acknowledge that ours is a lawless world where Israeli hit squads are free to commit murder anywhere, any time.

(2) Extra-judicial, extra territorial murder is “legal” (At least if the killers are Mossad)

The February 22 and February 24 issues of the DA include two articles arguing that Israel’s practice of extra-judicial, extra-territorial murder is legal. One article is entitled, “The Legality of Killing of Hamas Mahmoud al Mabhoud” and the other, “The Proportionate Killing of Mahmoud al Mabhoud”. These avoid any reference to international law, which emphatically rejects cross-border, state-sponsored murders. Legality, for the PMAJO, is whatever the Israel’s secret police apparatus deems expedient in pursuit of its goal of eliminating leaders who oppose its colonial occupation and expropriation of Palestinian lands. If Israel’s extra-judicial, extra-territorial murder of an adversary in Dubai is legal, why not assassinate opponents in the U.S., Canada, England or any other country where they might travel, live, work or write? What if the critics and opponents of Israel decided that it was now “legal” to murder Israel’s supporters wherever they lived citing the Daily Alert’s definition of legality? We would then find ourselves in a lawless world of “legal” murder and totalitarian cross-border surveillance.

(3) Minimizing the murder

The Feb 22, 24, and 25 issues of the Daily Alert deflect attention from the Mossad murder by making comparison to the hundreds of Afghan civilians killed by U.S. drone attacks. The claim is that “targeting individuals” is less a crime than mass killings. The problem with this argument is that for decades Mossad has “targeted” scores of opponents overseas and killed thousands of Palestinians in the occupied territories (where they work with the domestic secret police, Shin Bet, and the military, IOF). Moreover, this argument linking Israel’s extra judicial assassinations with U.S. colonial killing of Afghans is hardly a defense of either. By implicating the U.S. in its defense of state terror, Israel is holding up the worst aspects of American imperialism as a standard for its own political behavior. One state’s crimes are no justification for another’s.

(4) Blaming the Arabs: Deflecting attention from Israel

The DA Feb. 22 article entitled “The Assassination Heard Around the World” insinuates that the murder was a “result of a Hamas power struggle” or by one of “many Arab groups who loathes the Islamist Hamas”.

In other words, all the forged or stolen European passports of Israeli dual citizens, and the Dubai security videos of Mossad operatives in various costumes, not to mention the jubilant affirmation by top Israeli leaders of the killing, was in reality ‘Arab tricks’. This crude propaganda ploy by the most prominent Jewish American organization reveals their own descent into a fantasy land of self-delusion, possible only in the closed world of U.S. Zionist politics.

(5) Technical proficiency

The DA published several articles praising the technical details of the Mossad assassination in Dubai, an aspect of the operation, with which few Israel security experts would agree. The Feb. 24 DA article entitled, “Assassination Shows Skillful Planning” chastises Israel’s critics for not recognizing the high quality of the “operational aspects” of the killings and recommends its “lessons for all intelligence services around the world”. Like sociopaths and serial killers, U.S. Zionists openly promote Israeli death squad techniques to all fellow state terrorists. In the DA, professional techniques of assassination are far more important than universal moral repugnance of political murders.

(6) Discrediting the investigators while defending the perpetrators

The DA on Feb. 25 cited a long and tendentious attack on the Dubai police, published in Forbes Magazine, which ridiculed their meticulous investigations uncovering Mossad’s roles in the murder. In this article, the Dubai authorities were condemned for uncovering Israeli involvement while not investigating the source of the murder victims’ … Iraqi passport! Instead of encouraging the Dubai police pursuit of justice, the Daily Alert published a long diatribe implicating Dubai in the attacks of 9/11/2001, its continued trade with Iran, its ‘involvement’ in international terrorism etc. There was no mention of Dubai’s relatively friendly position to Israel and Israelis prior to Mossad’s blatant violation of its sovereignty.

* Conclusion

The American Zionist propaganda campaign in defense of Israeli state terror and, specifically, Mossad’s murder of a Hamas leader in Dubai, relies on lies, evasions and specious legal arguments. This “defense” violates all precepts of a civilized society as well as the most recent American federal laws prohibiting all forms of support for international terrorism. The PMAJO can pursue its defense of Mossad’s acts of international terrorism with impunity in the U.S. because of its power over the U.S. Congress, the Obama White House and the American mass media. This ensures that only its version of events, its definition of legality and its lies will be heard by legislators, echoed by Zionist activists and embellished by its solemn defenders in academic and journalistic circles.

To counter the American Zionist defense of Israel’s practice of extra-territorial, extra-judicial executions by the Mossad, we need American writers and academics to step forward. It is time to expose their flimsy arguments, bold-face lies and audacious immorality. It is time to speak out against their impunity, before another Israeli secret police murder takes place, possibly inside the USA itself and with the shameless complicity of Zionist accomplices.

The authorities in Dubai have found clear evidence that the Mossad assassination team received support from European Zionists. The hotels, air tickets and expenses were paid with credit cards issued in the U.S. Two of the killers may be in the US now. Will a time come when American Zionists, who are unconditional public defenders of Mossad killings, cross the line between propaganda for the deed to become accomplices of the deed? The robust American Zionist defense of Mossad’s overseas assassinations does not augur well for the security of Americans in the face of Israel’s willing U.S. accomplices.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/Mossad-comes-to-America.html

The Butcher of Gaza is coming to NYC!

He Belongs in Prison, Not the Waldorf!

On March 9 there will be a $1000-a-plate fundraising dinner for the Israeli Occupation Forces, which murdered 1,400 Palestinians, including more than 400 children, in Gaza last year.

The criminal Gabi Ashkenazi, Chief of Staff.. IDF General will be there

We will be there too!

Stand with the people of Gaza and all Palestine!

Demand the end of U.S support to Israel!

Arrest and prosecute Ashkenazi and all Israeli War Criminals!

Protest! Tuesday, March 9th - 6 pm Outside the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel

49 St. and Park Avenue, Manhattan

For more information, please contact
info@al-awdany.org or call 718-228-8636
http://intifada-palestine.com/

A Tale of Two Richards

By Nadia Hijab* | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

They hail from opposite parts of the globe, but they have much in common: Jewish; experts on and passionate defenders of international law; and pummeling bags for Israel and the Palestinian Authority. And the future of the law of war lies at the heart of the campaigns against them.

Richard Goldstone, whose international stature was cemented as chief prosecutor in the Yugoslavia and Rwanda tribunals, has been excoriated by Israel and its allies ever since his team submitted the report on the Gaza war requested by the United Nations Human Rights Council in September 2009 The steady stream of invective (the report is "full of lies," and he has "used his Jewishness to jeopardize the safety and security of Israel" are just two of the milder attacks) has also targeted his family and taken a toll on the publicly stoic judge.

Richard Falk, professor emeritus at Princeton University and UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, has been attacked by Israel for years. But now, in a new twist, he is being hung out to dry by the Palestinian Authority in perhaps the unkindest cut of all.

The PA pummeling is more discreet. It has quietly suggested to Falk himself that he resign. One reported reason is that Falk can't do his job because Israel will not allow him into the country — though this should, one would have thought, be all the more reason to defend him.

And the PA has asked the Human Rights Council to take Falk's report off the March 22 agenda and "postpone" it to June, which the Council has done. The PA-appointed representative to the UN in Geneva insists that there are simply more important reports than Falk's on the agenda — yet at the same time he says the PA has "many" reservations about the Falk report. The real reasons seem to be that the PA did not like the mention of Hamas in Falk's report and his earlier criticism when the PA tried to "postpone" the Goldstone Report in September under pressure from Israel and the United States. A public outcry among Palestinians reversed that decision.
The attacks on Falk and Goldstone are hard for the two men to bear. And they tear at the very fabric of international law and the mechanisms put in place to uphold it. The Human Rights Council has stepped on a slippery slope by agreeing to postpone Falk's report. Instead of listening to the PA (and Egypt) the Council should have backed its special rapporteur. If it does the unthinkable and relieves Falk of his duties because the PA does not want him, the system of independent special rapporteurs would be undermined, just as it would if the Council gave in to Israeli or American pressure.

Undermining the Goldstone Report would be an equally harsh blow to the human rights system. Several earlier reports have called for the application of international law to the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the International Court of Justice's seminal opinion on the illegality of Israel's separation wall in the West Bank. But the Goldstone Report has been published at a time when people are ready to listen, which is partly why Israel is fighting it with such ferocity and on so many fronts.

On one of those fronts, Israel is trying to change international law itself, as Israeli human rights advocate Jeff Halper reveals in an important article, "The Second Battle of Gaza." Halper identifies the Israeli figures leading the campaign "to alter international law in ways that enable them — and by extension other states involved in 'wars on terror' — to effectively pursue warfare amongst the people while eliminating both the legitimacy and protections enjoyed by their non-state foes."

No one is more aware of the dangers to international law than Palestinian human rights advocates. Their organizations have acted as a group to support the implementation of the Goldstone Report and to protect Falk and his role.

Last month, 11 Palestinian human rights groups wrote to the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay expressing dismay at the PA actions against Falk. His reports have provided "powerful instruments to advocate for Palestinian people's rights" they said, urging Pillay to ensure that Falk enjoyed the highest level of support from her office. They also called on her to reinforce the independence of the special rapporteurs from UN member states so as to protect the UN's own credibility.

More recently, 19 Palestinian groups wrote to PA president Mahmoud Abbas criticizing Falk's treatment and pointing out the repercussions for the Palestinians' internationally recognized human rights.

If the attacks on the two Richards succeed, the Palestinian cause will suffer and the world will be a poorer and more dangerous place — one in which the might of the strong is legally allowed to prevail against the rights of the weak.
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/03/06/a-tale-of-two-richards/#more-5728

Sunday, March 7, 2010

ТУРЦИЯ ОСУЖДАЕТ ПРЕСТУПЛЕНИЯ «ИЗРАИЛЬСКОГО РЕЖИМА» В ПАЛЕСТИНЕ

Отношения между сионистским «Израилем» и Турцией продолжают ухудшаться. Этому в немалой степени поспособствуют те преступления сионистского преступного режима, которые ежедневно совершаются против коренного мусульманского населения Палестины.
На встрече с палестинскими журналистами глава правительства Турции Реджеп Тайып Эрдоган сделал по этому поводу ряд заявлений. Цитаты приводит саудовская газета «Аль-Ватан».

Эрдоган сказал, среди прочего, что «мечеть Аль-Акса, Пещера патриархов в Хевроне и могила Рахели в Бейт-Лехеме никогда не были и не будут объектами сионистско-еврейского наследия. Они принадлежали, принадлежат и будут принадлежать исламу».

Премьер Турции добавил, что «все происходящее в Палестине привлекает внимание Турции, Анкара уделяет этому первостепенное внимание».

Турция поддерживает решение Лиги арабских государств позволить ПА вести переговоры с «Израилем» при посредничестве США в течение четырех месяцев. Эрдоган призвал палестинские фракции и группировки преодолеть разногласия и помириться. «Я люблю своих братьев из ФАТХа и своих братьев из ХАМАСа одинаково, поскольку и те, и другие – мусульмане»,-сказал Эрдоган.

В очередной раз Эрдоган потребовал от «Израиля» снять блокаду Газы и напомнил: «До сих пор ООН приняла более 100 резолюций, поддерживающих соблюдение прав палестинцев. Сколько из этих резолюций «Израиль» выполнил?!»
http://muslims-org.blogspot.com/

Saturday, March 6, 2010

http://palestinechronicle.com/art.php?id=2e25bbf3d51f46fff9ab8da126c6773b&mode=details#2e25bbf3d51f46fff9ab8da126c6773b

Is criticism of specific Israeli policies raising doubts about Israel's right to exist?

By Dr. Alan Sabrosky
Four observations:

First, no country has a "right to exist," and that includes Israel or the United States or even (heavens forbid!) China. The concept is a neat "sound bite" that is historical nonsense, and anyone who has even the slightest grasp of the interplay of international affairs over time understands that elemental truth. Anyone who doesn't might consult the ghosts of the elders of ancient Carthage and Troy, or the leaders of modern USSR and South Vietnam, for their insights.

Second, if a country's or regime's specific policies are sufficiently noxious, then everyone else has both the right and the duty to criticize those policies, and if the result is regime change in that country or its dissolution, so be it, either or both would be morally and legally justified. Hitler's policies justified the removal of his regime, and so, for that matter, did (e.g.) those of Stalin; one lost, the other won for a while, but deserved to go. If the Israelis treated both the Palestinians and their neighbors better, and were less militarist and racist in their overall approach, they wouldn't be in such a situation.
Third, comparisons of apartheid in South Africa before and in Israel forever are only superficially justified. In reality (having seen both on the ground), the South African variant at its worst was a pale shadow of what Palestinians suffer under Israeli hegemony. Whites in South Africa never hated and brutalized blacks there a fraction as badly as Israelis brutalize Palestinians. No Jenin or Gaza City in the old South Africa, for instance. Blacks in the old South Africa could and did serve in the armed forces and police, for instance, and not encounter white civilians with assault rifles swaggering around and randomly shooting them up. Not so with the Palestinians. If apartheid in South Africa justified the BDS (Boycott, Disinvestment, Sanctions) campaign of the day, embargoes and the removal of that regime, then its even nastier cousin in "Greater Israel" more than justifies the same, and if that entails some form of merger into a single state and the disappearance of Israel as it now exists, so be it.

Finally, while Israel has a perpetual motion PR campaign in operation, especially in the US, it isn't so much a matter of it "fighting back" as it is of Israel trying to create a new propaganda reality in public opinion like the geopolitical one it has created on the ground in the West Bank with its settlements. Remember that because of its virtual monopoly on the mainstream media, very few people will hear much of the case against Israel, especially in the Anglo-American countries. Besides, the first battle for Palestine has already been fought and lost in the US, and it is in the US that the real war for Palestine can be won. Israel and its partisans abroad understand this perfectly, and their current PR campaign reflects that understanding. Sadly, the partisans of Palestine largely do not share that understanding, and tend to focus on more of the flea-bitten tactics and street theater that has failed to derail the Israeli juggernaut.

My guess is that we are entering the end game of this conflict, and need to change the dynamics or a few years from now this whole matter will be moot — and the outcome will not be one Palestine's supporters will appreciate.
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/03/06/is-criticism-of-specific-israeli-policies-raising-doubts-about-israels-right-to-exist/#more-5722

Israel and Apartheid

As you’ve probably heard, a number of pro-Palestinian groups have dubbed the first week of March Israeli Apartheid Week. By holding numerous events, mostly on college campuses, these groups hope “to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system and to build Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns as part of a growing global BDS movement.”

Predictably, these events have elicited an angry response from many neoconservatives, who have vehemently argued that Israel is not an apartheid state. Most notably, the Washington Post’s Richard Cohen has written:

“The Israel of today and the South Africa of yesterday have almost nothing in common. In South Africa, the minority white population harshly ruled the majority black population. Nonwhites were denied civil rights, and in 1958, they were even deprived of citizenship. In contrast, Israeli Arabs, about one-fifth of the country, have the same civil and political rights as do Israeli Jews. Arabs sit in the Knesset and serve in the military, although most are exempt from the draft. Whatever this is—and it looks suspiciously like a liberal democracy—it cannot be apartheid.

“The West Bank, more or less under Israeli military rule, is a different matter. But it is not part of Israel proper, and under every conceivable peace plan—including those proposed by Israeli governments—almost all of it will revert to the Palestinian Authority and become the heartland of a Palestinian state.”

Cohen’s first point—that Israeli Arabs are not subject to apartheid—is undoubtedly correct. Although Israeli Arabs face extraordinary discrimination, discrimination that is tantamount to that faced by African-Americans in the Jim Crow South, I wouldn’t say that they are victims of apartheid.

My problem with Cohen’s article lies in his second point. Ever the Israel-defender, he doesn’t say a word about the situation faced by Arabs in the West Bank but simply asserts that most of the West Bank will eventually become part of a Palestinian state and then goes on to accuse Israel’s critics of being racist and dishonest. Needless to say, claiming that the West Bank will eventually become part of a Palestinian state does not prove Cohen’s main point, which is that “[t]he Israel of today and the South Africa of yesterday have almost nothing in common.” Even if we grant that Palestinians will eventually control most of the West Bank (and I honestly don’t see how this is possible), this doesn’t change the fact that Israel has been occupying the West Bank for forty-three years now and that its current treatment of Palestinians there undoubtedly resembles South Africa’s former treatment of its black citizens.

First of all, Israel accords Palestinians and Jewish settlers in the West Bank different legal rights. Only Jewish settlers can vote. Moreover, while Jewish settlers are subject to the Israeli legal system, Palestinians live under military rule. Consequently, “settlers enjoy liberties and legal guarantees that are denied Palestinian defendants…charged with a similar offense. The authority to arrest an individual, the maximum detention before being brought before a judge, the right to meet with an attorney, the protections available to defendants at the trial, the maximum punishment allowed by law, and the release of prisoners before completion of sentence— all of these differ greatly in the two systems of law, with the Israeli system providing the suspect and defendant with more protections.”

Palestinians face discrimination in numerous other ways. For instance, although Palestinians make up 83% of the West Bank’s population, Israel prevents [.pdf] them from accessing the Jordan River and allows them to use just 20% of the Mountain Aquifer, the area’s other main water source. Additionally, Israel excludes the Palestinians from more than 60% of the land in the West Bank. Through a network of walls, checkpoints, and roads, it has splintered the remaining Palestinian land into an archipelago of sixty-four enclaves. While Israel allows its own citizens to travel between Jewish settlements and Israel proper, it often restricts Palestinian movement between these different enclaves, sometimes shutting down roads for several days at a time. It seems clear that Israel often imposes these travel restrictions as collective punishment, something it never does to its own citizens. Other forms of collective punishment Israel has employed include imposing curfews in Palestinian areas and even demolishing Palestinian homes.

And the discrimination does not end there. Israel is far more likely to approve construction permits for Jews than Palestinians. According to the Israeli government’s own numbers, from 2000 to 2007 the government approved just 91 of 1,624 Palestinian building permit requests. During the same time, Jewish settlers built 18,472 homes and apartments. This inequality has forced many Palestinians to build homes without permits. From 2000 to 2007, Israel issued demolition orders against 4,993 Palestinian homes, eventually demolishing 33% of these homes. During the same period, it issued demolition orders against 2,900 settler homes built without permits but only ended up demolishing 7% of them.

One of the ugliest examples of Jewish-Palestinian disparity can be found in the West Bank city of Hebron. As B’Tselem noted [.pdf] in its 2008 Annual Report, “In 2008, Israel continued to carry out its ‘separation policy’ in the center of Hebron. As part of this policy, Israel imposes a long list of prohibitions and restrictions on Palestinian movement on major thoroughfares, along which settlers are allowed to move freely. Israeli security forces routinely delay Palestinian passersby for repeated checks, in which they harass and humiliate them. Palestinian residents of the city center are also exposed to extensive violence by Israeli settlers, much greater than elsewhere in the West Bank. Therefore, the restraint shown by the authorities on enforcing the law against settlers in this city is especially blatant.”

There are certainly differences between the modern West Bank and South Africa from 1948 to 1994, but, as I’ve briefly described, there are also many similarities, and these similarities are striking. Like the South African National Party, the State of Israel has imposed what can only be described as an apartheid system. Given that the American government, and thus our tax dollars, make this system possible, I think it follows that each of us has an obligation to feel outraged by this injustice and to do our part to bring it to an end.
http://donemmerich.blogspot.com/

США РАЗДУВАЮТ НОВЫЙ МИФ О ХОЛОКОСТЕ

Милли Меджлис Азербайджан принял в пятницу специальное заявление в знак протеста против принятого комитетом по внешним связям Конгресса США решения о признании так называемого «геноцида армян».

Как сообщает парламентский корреспондент 1news.az, документ был подготовлен специальной комиссией парламента Азербайджана.

«Принятие комитетом Конгресса США решения о признании так называемого «геноцида армян» наносит вред попыткам восстановить мир и стабильность в регионе. Это может свести на нет все предпринятые ранее попытки по урегулированию Нагорно-Карабахской проблемы», - зачитал текст документа руководитель комиссии Самед Сеидов.

Парламентарий выразил надежду на то, что Конгресс США откажется от принятия к обсуждению вопроса признания так называемого «геноцида армян».

«Никакого армянского геноцида не было, что было также доказано западными экспертами и исследователями. Вся эта шумиха основывается на фальшивых документах. Так называемый «геноцид армян» основывается на неправдоподобных легендах. Армянские националисты не заинтересованы в изучении документов, свидетельствующих о событиях 1915 года, так как их не интересует историческая правда, они, наоборот, заинтересованы в распространении фальшивых слухов. Именно, со стороны армян было уничтожено более двух миллионов азербайджанцев и турков», - заявил Самед Сеидов.

Президент Азербайджанской Республики Ильхам Алиев позвонил Президенту Турецкой Республики Абдулле Гюлю.

Во время телефонной беседы глава Азербайджанского государства, выразив протест против решения, принятого в комитете по внешним связям Палаты представителей Конгресса Соединенных Штатов Америки, решительно осудил его. Президент Ильхам Алиев охарактеризовал это решение как несправедливое, грубо искажающее историческую правду, способное вызвать рост напряженности в регионе. Он подчеркнул, что Азербайджан, как всегда, рядом с Турцией и будет продолжать оказывать Турции полную поддержку. Президент Азербайджана выразил уверенность в том, что попытки армян, которые в различные периоды истории совершали геноцид против народов Турции и Азербайджана, сфальсифицировать историю не будут приняты мировым сообществом и потерпят неудачу.

В свою очередь, Президент Турции, высоко оценив эту позицию Президента Азербайджана, выразил свою признательность.

В ходе телефонной беседы состоялся обмен мнениями о двусторонних отношениях и ситуации в регионе.
http://muslims-org.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post_5271.html

Friday, March 5, 2010

В Лахоре прошли митинги против карикатур на Иисуса Христа в индийских учебниках

Пакистанские мусульмане в городе Лахор 25 февраля провели митинг против карикатур на пророка Иса (мир ему), напечатанных в соседней Индии, сообщает «SperoForum».


В школьных учебниках индийских детей изображается картинка с Иисусом, держащим в руках банку пива и сигарету. Иезуитский священник Херман Роборг, эксперт по христианско-мусульманскому диалогу, считает эту реакцию вполне закономерной. «Иисусу Христу отводится важное место в Коране, и поэтому это точно так же обижает мусульман», - заявил он.


Католический эпископ Лахора Себастьян Шах сказал в интервью «UCA News»: «Никто не имеет права оскорблять кого-либо из пророков. Это безумие».
http://www.islamrf.ru/news/world/w-news/11861/