As US combat troops redeployed to the outskirts of Iraqi cities on June 30, well-staged celebrations commenced. The pro-US Iraqi government declared “independence day” as police vehicles roamed the streets of war-weary Iraq in an unpersuasive show of national rejoicing. US mainstream media joined the chorus, as if commemorating the end of an era.

Meanwhile, top US administration and army officials cautioned Iraqis of their own recklessness. “Biden Warns Iraq About Reverting to Sectarian Violence,” read a New York Times headline. “What will it take to make a good exit from Iraq?” inquired a Kansas City Star analysis. But missing from news headlines and commentary was any indication of direct US responsibility for the genocide that has befallen Iraq.

How can one claim that US ambitions in Iraq have altered if the ongoing legacy in Iraq is being perceived as a strategic mistake, rather than a moral one?

One thing remains the same, for sure: and that is the arrogance that has long permeated US relations with Iraq. “The president and I appreciate that Iraq has traveled a great distance over the past year, but there is a hard road ahead if Iraq is going to find lasting peace and stability,” said Vice President Biden during a visit to Baghdad on July 3rd. Biden’s remarks were saturated with the same hubris that defined the former administration’s attitude towards Iraq for years: ‘we did our share, that of liberating you, and now its your turn to take charge of your own security’, type of rhetoric. “It’s not over yet,” Biden said. Ironically, he is right, since that could only mean the complete withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, the end of foreign meddling in the country’s affairs, and the removal of corrupt politicians that have destroyed the country’s national identity in favor of sectarian camps endlessly fighting for dominance and privilege. Indeed, it’s anything but over.

It’s true that the majority of Americans now accept the once rebuked claim that the Iraq war was predicated on a lie, and readily blame former President Bush for drawing the country into a costly war in Iraq that should have never happened. President Obama’s arrival has seemingly ushered in a new discourse of honesty and national introspection.

Although one wants to believe that the new administration is sincere in seeking an exit strategy from Iraq, one is hardly sure that the US is ready to divorce itself from the war scarred country. There is little reason, aside from tactical redeployment, that should compel antiwar sentiments to weaken, or self-respecting commentators to halt their questioning of US intentions.

The terms “exit” and “exit strategy” are now dominating media discourse regarding Iraq. Some attribute this new language to the new administration. The odd fact is that the recent US army redeployment is not the brainchild of the Obama administration, but a provision of a November 2008 agreement signed between the Iraqi government of Nuri al-Maliki and the Bush administration. Talk of exiting Iraq indeed preceded the entrance of Obama. The new US administration simply honored previous commitments. As per official statements, following the June 30 redeployment, the US is expected to reduce its forces by 50,000 troops by August 2010, and then many of those remaining by the end of 2011.

So, 2012 will witness a fully independent Iraq, right? Wrong. “Many studying Iraq believe the US will end up negotiating with Baghdad to establish a couple of permanent military bases,” writes Matt Schofield. “Those could be essential to leaving behind a stable government, a military loyal to the nation and capable of defending it, and a country that has the backing of the people.” Those who wish to decipher such deceptive language should comprehend the permanent US military presence as permanent occupation. Indeed, the US doesn’t have to be present on every Iraqi street corner to officially occupy the country. The sectarian Iraqi army and police – US armed and trained – should be enough to carry out US wishes in Iraq (under the guise of fighting terrorists), while the US will “stand ready, if asked and if helpful, to help in that process,” as explained by Biden.

Iraq headlines will eventually fade away, making space for the new escalation in Afghanistan, also in the name of fighting terror, bringing democracy and all the rest. The faces of the victims will be hidden so as not to harm our sensibilities, and causality figures will be manipulated, contested and at times blamed on the coward terrorists who hide among civilians. In other words, the US will take the spirit of its Iraq war to Afghanistan, remain in Iraq – as inconspicuous as possible – so as to hold onto its strategic military achievement, and, if necessary, blame both nations for their growing misfortunes.   

However, before we take our eyes off Iraq, Americans must remember their own culpabilities in what transpired there. Antiwar activists and people of conscience must not forget that 130,000 US soldiers remain in the country; that the US has complete control over Iraqi airspace and territorial water; that there is not yet a reason to celebrate and move on. Even if one is trusting enough to believe the administration and army’s own account of its future in Iraq, one should recall comments made by Admiral Mike Mullen last February: “Mr. Obama plans to leave behind a ‘residual force’ of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down terrorist cells and guard American institutions.”

One may be truly eager to see a sovereign, democratic and stable Iraq, but such hopes must not occur at the expense of truth and common sense.

- Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers, journals and anthologies around the world. His latest book is, "The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle" (Pluto Press, London), and his forthcoming book is, “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London)

Today, July 8, 2009, the Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat sent the below letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, demanding that he and the United Nations uphold their responsibilities to protect the rights of Palestinian prisoners and secure their freedom. Well over 400 international organizations and individuals (see below for the full list) have supported this call, and we thank you all for your endorsement and support and urge you to distribute this letter widely, link to the website of the Campaign from your own websites, and continue your important work.

Signatories of the letter include youth, student and workers' unions, solidarity organizations, lawyers' associations, political parties, human rights groups, and numerous activists, academics and supporters of Palestine from around the world.  Please visit our website at http://www.freeahmadsaadat.org/ and contact the Campaign at info@freeahmadsaadat.org to discuss forming local Friends of Ahmad Sa'adat committees and further coordinated statements, days of action and additional activities to inform the world about the case of Ahmad Sa'adat and the struggle of Palestinian prisoners. The Campaign also supports the struggles of political prisoners around the world who fight for justice, freedom and national liberation.

The thousands of Palestinian prisoners are facing an ongoing campaign in denial of their rights - from denial of family visits, to the imposition of solitary confinement and isolation. Every day, they stand on the front lines, confronting the injustice and repression of the occupation, as prisoners for the freedom of Palestinian land and the Palestinian people.

Ahmad Sa'adat, the General Secretary of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and a Palestinian national leader, is a leader in the Palestinian prisoners' movement. His recent hunger strike galvanized attention upon the prisoners' struggle. He is a living symbol of the oppression of the occupier and the steadfastness of the Palestinian people and the prisoners as they struggle for freedom, justice, liberation and return.

International action and attention are critical to stand in defense of Ahmad Sa'adat and all Palestinian prisoners. Contact the Campaign today - your involvement, support and solidarity are much needed!

This letter was delivered to Ban Ki-Moon's office on July 8, 2009.

Statement in Italian | Statement in French

Dear Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-Moon;

We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, call upon you to immediately take action in defense of the lives, health and rights of the over 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners held inside Israeli occupation jails. This number includes numerous elected members of Palestinian Legislative Council, among them Ahmad Sa'adat, General Secretary of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; Marwan al-Barghouthi, Fateh leader; Abdel-Aziz Dweik, Hamas leader and President of the Council, just freed after three years in prison, and dozens of other elected political leaders, in addition to thousands of other Palestinian activists, union members, community organizers, fathers, mothers, sons and daughters.

Palestinian prisoners suffer in conditions that violate international standards and norms, and are imprisoned because they refuse to accept a brutal occupation of their land and their people. Ahmad Sa'adat recently waged a nine-day hunger strike in protest of the policy of isolation and solitary confinement that has recently been escalated against Palestinian prisoners. Palestinian prisoners have been denied family visits, at times for years, denied access to all books and magazines, and denied even communication with their fellow prisoners in the isolation units. Palestinian prisoners, including Sa'adat, are currently denied necessary health care and medical treatment.

Palestinian prisoners are placed into isolation because they are national leaders and because the Palestinian prisoner movement has been an inspiration to all Palestinians and all who struggle for freedom. Ahmad Sa'adat's hunger strike has sparked thousands of people around the world to appeal for his release, as a living example who symbolizes the steadfastness and strength of the Palestinian prisoners amid isolation and dire conditions, and it must compel all of those outside the prisons to act. Many Palestinian and international human rights and social justice organizations have called for the release of Sa'adat and to ensure the safety of his life and health, as well as for freedom and protection for all Palestinian prisoners.

The fate of these 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners is a fundamental issue of justice. Palestinians, in Palestine and in exile, are denied their rights - to return home, to self-determination, and to freedom, and those who seek to secure those rights are subject to imprisonment, whether within the open-air prisons of Gaza under siege or the walled-in West Bank, or the jails of the occupation. The silent, and at times, active, complicity of international agencies, particularly the United Nations, in the denial of Palestinian rights must not continue.

We call upon you to uphold your responsibilities and exert all pressure to end torture, cruel and inhuman treatment of Palestinian prisoners, and to free every Palestinian political prisoner from Israel's occupation jails.

Sincerely,

Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat

Al-Awda NY
Al-Awda Newspaper and Publishing House, Chicago
Al-Awda Omaha
Al-Fajr News, Tunisia
Alliance for People's Health
Almubadara USA
Al-Nakba Awareness Project
American Iranian Friendship Committee
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition - Act Now to Stop War and End Racism
Anti-Imperialist Camp
Artists to End the Occupation
Association Réveil des Consciences
Arab American Community Center, Youngstown, OH
Arab American Union Members Council
Arab Muslim American Federation
Arab Resource and Organizing Center, San Francisco, CA
Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine
BAYAN USA
Bay Area Labor Committee for Peace & Justice
Bay Area United Against War
Campaign to Free Marwan Barghouti and All Prisoners
Canadian Arab Federation
Canada Palestine Association - Vancouver
Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid (Toronto)
Comité 'Libérez-les!'
Comité pour une Paix Juste au Proche Orient, Luxembourg
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Argentina
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Brazil
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Ecuador
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Uruguay
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
Communist Organization of Greece (KOE)
Coordination de l'Appel de Strasbourg pour une Paix juste au Proche-Orient
Danish Communist Party
Droit Solidarite, France
EuroPalestine
Free Gaza Movement
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal/NYC
Free Palestine Alliance
The Freedom Archives
Freedom Road Socialist Organization
French Committee to Free Georges Ibrahim Abdallah (Collectiv pour la libération de Georges Ibrahim Abdallah)
Friends of Al-Aqsa
General Union of Palestine Students/NY
General Union of Palestine Students/SF Bay Area
General Union of Workers of Chile
Hammerhard MediaWorks
International Action Center
International Association of Democratic Lawyers
International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network
International Platform Against Isolation (IPAI)
International Platform of Jurists for East Timor, Leiden, Netherlands
International Republican Socialist Network
International Socialist Organization
International Solidarity Movement - France
Irish Republican Socialist Committees of North America
Irish Republican Socialist Party
Jericho Movement - NYC
Jewish People's Liberation Organization
Justice for Palestinians, San Jose, CA
Kommunistische Initiative Deutschlands (KI)/Communist Initiative Germany
L'Observatoire Tunisien pour les Droits et les Libertés Syndicales
Left Formations of the Youth, Greece
Middle East Children's Alliance
National Boricua Human Rights Network
National Democratic Action Society of Bahrain
National Lawyers Guild
New Jersey Solidarity - Activists for the Liberation of Palestine
New Orleans Palestine Solidarity
NYC Labor Against the War
NY Committee For Human Rights in the Philippines
No One Is Illegal - Vancouver
PalestineFreeVoice
Palestine House
PNN - Palestine News Network
Palestine Solidarity Group - Chicago
Palestine Solidarity Committee - Seattle
Palestine Think Tank
Palestinian American Youth, Youngstown, OH
The Palestinian Cultural and Political Club of Boston
Palestinian Democratic Committee - Chile
Palestinian Federation of Chile
Palestinian Youth Network
Palestinian Youth Organization
PATOIS: New Orleans International Human Rights Film Festival
PROGRESS Lawyers Network
Progressive Labor Action Front, Palestine
Progressive Student Action Front, Palestine
Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism!
Revolutionary Communist Group, Britain
Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR) of Ecuador
Secretariat Nationale de la Voie Democratique Maroc
Socialist Action
Socialist Party of Malaysia
Socialist Viewpoint
SOUL School of Unity & Liberation, Oakland, CA
Students for a Democratic Society, UNC-Chapel Hill chapter
TLAXCALA activist translators' collective
Union of Palestinian Women's Committees
Union of the Working People, Greece
US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
US Palestinian Community Network (USPCN) (Popular Conference)
Vent Libertaire 29, France
Voice of Palestine, Canada
War Times/Tiempo De Guerra
WESPAC Foundation
Women Against Military Madness
Women's Peace Speakers Series, Honolulu, Hawaii
Workers Party of New Zealand

Leila Khaled
MP George Galloway, UK Parliament Member and coordinator of Viva Palestina USA medical aid caravan to Gaza
Ulla Sandbaek, former Member of European Parliament, Denmark
Eleni Sotiriou, 1st stand-in MEP of the Coalition of Radical Left (SYRIZA) , Greece
May Abboud, Lebanon
Chbari Abdelmoumen, journalist, Morocco
Rami Abu Ayash, Jordan
Prof. Bashir Abu Manneh, Columbia University
Susan Abulhawa, author, Pennsylvania
Nader Abuljebain, writer
Yousef Abudayyeh, California
Nasser Abu-khdeir, Jerusalem University Political Science Department, Jerusalem-Shuafat, Palestine
Sheriff Abuzahra, Cambridge, MA
Darwish Addassi, Walnut Creek, CA
Musil Akinsanya, Lagos, Nigeria
Ghassan H. Alami, Jordan
Abdul-Rahman Alawi, publisher and journalist, Cologne, Germany
Reham Alhelsi, Jerusalem, Palestine
Musa al-Hindi, Omaha, NE
Sonia Almonacid, Spain
Abdelwahab Amri Secretary-General of the Federation of PDP, Gabes, Tunisia
Steve Amsel, DesertPeace
Giuseppe Ardizzone, Perugia, Italy
Emmanuel Arenes, France
Justo Arriola, Euskal Herria
Jamal Aruri, attorney, Andover, MA
Prof. Emeritus Naseer Aruri, University of Massachussetts at Dartmouth
Boniardi Ambrogio, Milano, Italy
Mary Avice, Canada
Rahef Awadallah, Chicago, IL
A. R. Ayoubi, UK
Mike Baldwin, California, USA
George Elfie Ballis, Prather, CA
Khaled Barakat, Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat, Canada
Nidal A. Barakat, California
Patrice Bardet, France
Anees Barghouthi, Palestine
Halim Bari, France
David Barsamian, Director, Alternative Radio, Boulder, CO
Pawel Michal Bartolik, journalist, Poland
Abdul-Nasser J.G. Baston, London, UK
Levent Basturk, Red Hook, NY
Tahmeena Bax, UK
Dr. Oren Ben-Dor University of Southampton, UK
B. Benhamid, USA
Arnauld Bengochea, Bordeaux-France
Cheryl Benson, Canada
Simone Bilotta, Faenza (RA), Italy
Patricia Blair, Hawaii, USA
Jeff Blankfort, Ukiah, CA
Yoon Bok-Dong, Korea Truth Commission - Hawaii Representative, USA
Thomas Bolt, England
Giulio Bonali, Italy
Hadassah Borreman, Jeshurun-Judaism Against Zionism, Belgium
Yamina Bounir, Comité Verviers Palestine, France
Glenn Bowman, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK
John P. Brassard, elementary teacher, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Andrea Breuer, Klagenfurt, Austria
Richard Brinton, Salinas, CA, USA
Peter Brown, Olives for Palestine/Olives for Peace
Dr.C.J. Burns-Cox MD FRCP, Gloucester UK
William Buttrey, Los Angeles, CA
George Cammarota, San Jose, CA
Daniele Campione, Milan, Italy
José Canali, France
Hadi Chammah, Gainesville, FL, USA
Sukant Chandan, Chair of the British Section of the International Union of Parliamentarians for Palestine
Vassilis Chatzilabrou, prefectural council of Achaia (Western Greece)
Sharon Clarke, Cambridge, MA
Irene Clausen, Denmark
Ana Cleja, France
Catherine Cobham, St. Andrews University, Scotland, UK
Prof. William A. Cook, University of La Verne
Sebastiano Cosenza, Milano, Italy
Claude Coursin, Assistante Sociale, Marseilles, France
Maya Cutler, Stanley, ID
Professor Seif Da'Na, University of Wisconsin-Parkside
Ilgvar Daga, USA
Elena Davinca, Austria
Rosylin Dean, USA
Prof. Emeritus Dr. Herman De Ley, Ghent University (Belgium)
Paul Delmotte, France
Graham Derrick, UK
Deborah Dexter-Mendez, Fresno, CA
Shaheen Sultan Dhanji, Chairperson, African Socialist Movement
Nicholas Dibs, Long Beach, CA
Waroquiez Dominique, LCR Belgique
Dennis E. Donohue, New York, NY
Idrissi K. Driss, France
Peter Durant, New York, NY
Dr. Adel Elsaie, USA
Ali Faraj, Rennes, France
James C. Faris, Director Emeritus, University of Connecticut Program in Middle East Languages and Area Studies
Mahmoud Faris, Gaza, Palestine
Priscilla Felia, Whitestone, NY
Enrique Ferro, Brussels, Belgium
Franco Ferro, teacher, Italy
Nadia Ferro, teacher, Italy
Sara Flounders, co-director, International Action Center
Linda Frank, Northwest Middle East Peace Forum, USA
Donnie Fraser, UK
Stephanie Frizzell, Garland, CA
Nikos Galanis, member of the National Secretariat of the Coalition of Radical Left (SYRIZA), Greece
Yolanda Garza-Birdwell, Houston, TX
Elisabeth Geschiere, Minneapolis, MN
Ron George, USA
Sarah Gillespie, musician, London
Francesco Giordano, educator, Milano, Italy
Prof. Emerita Sherna Berger Gluck, California State University Long Beach
Richard Gomez, Fresno Greens, Fresno, CA
Margaret Goodheart, Honolulu, HI
Maligorn Gouez, France
Stephen Gowans, Canada
Phil Grace, Liverpool, England
Michela Graham, Italy
Dr. Anne Gray, London, UK
Anne Gwynne, Aberystwyth, Wales
Lamari Habib, Al-Fajr News, Tunisia
Anita Hadjadji, Bordeaux, France
M. Hadjuk, USA
Prof. Emerita Elaine Hagopian, Simmons College
Samia A. Halaby, artist, New York, NY
Corrinne Hales, Fresno, CA
Hatem Hammad, Canada
Dr. Leila Hanaineh, Jordan
Kamal Hassan, USA
Jean Hays, CA, USA
Jennifer Heath, Boulder, CO
Gary Heisinger, Peace Fresno, Fresno, CA
Monadel Herzallah, San Francisco, CA
Nadia Hijab, writer
Isabella Horn, Italy
Paul Hubbard, Providence, RI
Jay Hubbell, Peace Fresno, Fresno, CA
Mary Hughes Thompson, Women in Black Los Angeles, CA
Prof. Mahmood Ibrahim, CSU Pomona, Los Angeles, CA
Barbara Ida, Malone, NY
Sascha Iversen, International Forum, Denmark
Firas Jaber, writer and researcher, Palestine
Karl Ange Angri Jacobsen, Red-Green Alliance, Denmark
Dr. Mohammed Jadallah, Jerusalem Centre For Development
Francois Jadoul, Belgium
Intisar Jardaneh, Jordan
Randa Jazairi, Gainesville, FL
Humberto Jijón, Ecuador
Richard Jones, Swansea, UK
Maya Joulkva, France
Akis Kaloudis, member of the administration of the Private Employees' Union , Greece
Sana Kassem, Athens, Greece
Charlotte Kates, attorney
Stathis Katsoulas, member of the administration of the Teachers' Union of Western Athens, Greece
Ahmad Kawash, Boston, MA
Prof. Mujid S. Kazimi,   Massachusetts Institiute of Technology
Nabil Keilani, California
Basem Khader, Chappaqua, NY
Sobhi Khalaf, Gaza, Palestine
Hocine Khelfaoui, Montreal, Canada
Annette Klepzig, Wilhemsfeld, Germany
Peter Klosterman, Ph.D. Oakland, CA
Norman Koerner, educator, Philadelphia, PA
Khaled Kouteich, France
Pantelis Koutsianas, coordinator of Thessaloniki's Popular Committees against price hikes, Greece
Zbigniew Marcin Kowalewski, researcher and editor, Poland
Garold Langley, Hawaii, USA
Bahauddeen Latif, UK
Carlos Latuff, cartoonist, Brazil
Joelle Laurent-Laneau, France
David Letwin, Brooklyn, NY
Michael Letwin, Co-Convener, New York City Labor Against the War; Former President, Assn. of Legal Aid Attorneys/UAW Local 2325
Mariah Leung, Al-Nakba Awareness Project, Eugene, OR
Dr. Renee Levant, Instructor, Master of Liberal Studies Program, Fort Hays State University
Nessim Liamani, Italy
Catherine Lieutenant, Belgium
Britta Lillesøe, Denmark
Tammy Bang Luu, Los Angeles, CA
Amir M. Maasoumi, Quebec, Canada
Professor Moshé Machover, London School of Economics
Patrick MacManus, Rebellion, Denmark
Rania Madi, Switzerland
Dr. Bruce J. Malina, Dept of Theology, Creighton University
Hanif Manjoo, South Africa
Polly Mann, Women Against Military Madness, Minneapolis, MN
Sharon Martinas, San Francisco, CA
Professor Nur Masalha, London
Beatriz Maturana, President, Architects for Peace, Australia
Bill McGrath, Minnesota, USA
Marcelo Mendoza Azat, Arauco, Chile
Roberto J. Mercado, photographer, Social Impact Photography, New York, NY
Ali Mili, Phillipsburg, NJ
Emil Mishriky, Palestine
Harald Molgaard, Twickenham, UK
Serajeddin Momeni, Phoenix, AZ
Michael Moore, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Lillian Morgan, East Aurora, NY
Talaat Ahmed Mosallam, Retired General, researcher, co chairman Al A'mal Party, Egypt
Tawfieq Mousa, California, USA
Atiya Munir, Policy Analyst, London, UK
Catherine Myles, UK
Linda Nedjaa, France
Marlene Newesri, New York City, USA
Dr. Marcy Newman, Associate Professor of English, An Najah University, Nablus, Palestine
Prof. Osamu Niikura, Aoyama Gakuin University, Tokyo, Japan
Hiyam Noir, PalestineFreeVoice.org, USA/Palestine
Christopher North, Antalya, Turkey
Henry Ode, California
Alain Ollivier, Quebec, Canada
Ivan Olsen, San Francisco Bay, CA
Ardeshir and Eleanor Ommani, Founders, AIFC
Michael Opperskalski, Journalist and Editor, Germany
Manlio Padova, Italy
Yiorgos Papaioannou, member of the administration of the Accountants' Union of Athens, Greece
Marie-Ange Patrizio, psychologist, Marseille, France
Daniel Perez Creus, Ingenio {Gran Canaria} Spain
Jørgen Petersen, Danish Communist Party, Denmark
Lily Phan, Calgary, AB, Canada
Andrea Pietropaolo, Italy
Paola Pisi, Uruknet.info
Gabriel Proulx, Quebec
Karina Rahef, USA
Jespers Raf, Progress Lawyers Network, Belgium
Ahmed S. Rajah, South Africa
Hussin Ramadan, Palestine
Dr. Nagesh Rao, Assistant Professor of English, The College of New Jersey
Gabriele Rapaci, student, University of Milan, Italy
Angel Rebollar, Spain
Dick Reilly, Chicago, IL, US
Mary Rizzo, writer, translator, S Benedetto Tr, Italy
Julian Rodriguez Veiga, Argentina
Diane Roehm, New York, NY
Francesca Rosa, San Francisco, CA
Nadine Rosa-Rosso, recognizeresistance.net, Belgium
Mimi Rosenberg, Esq., Producer & Host Building Bridges: Your Community & Labor Report WBAI Radio, NY
Bob Rossi, union organizer, Salem, OR
Mireille Rumeau, Bordeaux-France
Doug Russell, Dallas, TX
Tony Ryan, Australia
Dr. Hamoudi Hadj Sahraoui, Setif University, Algeria
Nizar Sakhnini, Toronto, Canada
Samia Saleh, northern Virginia, US
Professor Therese Saliba, The Evergreen State College, Washington
Susanne Scheidt, writer, journalist, Italy
Carol Scheller-Doyle, Genève, Switzerland
Guenter Schenk, Strasbourg, France
Einar Schlereth, Sweden
Penny Schoner, paralegal, San Francisco, CA
Paolina Scoccimarro, Italy
Marco Antonio Sechi, Sassari, Italy
Shahin Shabanian, Williamsport, PA
Mark Shapiro, UK
Meena Sharma, USA
Michel Shehadeh, San Francisco, CA
Kemal Sidhoum, Paris, France
Júlio da Silveira Moreira, International Association of People's Lawyers, Brazil
Hilary Smith, UK
Dr. Ahdaf Soueif, author
Professor Mustapha Soueif, University of Cairo
Maryloo Souied, house cleaner/office worker, New York, NY
Edna Spennato, Maceio, Brazil
Stan Squires, Canada
Burton Steck, Chicago
Robert H. Stiver, Hawaii, USA, retiree and activist
Prof. Emeritus Dr. Y.N. Tamimi, University of Hawaii
Zaid Tayem, the Netherlands
Richard S. Thomas, former Hampden County Commissioner, retired
Angie Tibbs, Canada
Brian Tierney, Union organizer, Washington, DC
Luciano Torresani, Italy
Madjid Tounsi, Montreal, Canada
Mary Tuma, artist, USA
Vic and Barby Ulmer, Our Developing World, Saratoga, CA
Peter Urban, International Republican Socialist Movement
Laura Vance, California
JoAnne VanDatta MS, Eugene, OR
Fay Van Dunk, United Kingdom
Ivan Vanney, student, Haifa, occupied Palestine
Nils Vest, Denmark
Valdemar Vest-Lillesøe, Denmark
William Vest-Lillesøe, Denmark
Erin Wade, Seattle, WA
Claudia Wainerman, occupied Palestine
Darlene Wallach, San Jose, CA
Donna Wallach, San Jose, CA
Viola Ware, Artists to End the Occupation
Dr. Dahlia Wasfi, M.D., USA
Alison Weir, If Americans Knew, USA
Tony Whelan, London, UK
Katherine Wilson, CUNY, New York City
Betsy Wolf-Graves, San Jose, CA
R. Worrell, US
Rami Yaseen, Jordan
Ra'ana-Dilruba Yasmin, USA
Patrick Young, USA
Anthony Joseph Geha Yuja, Italy
Dr. A. B. Zahlan, London and Beirut
Edgar Zarifa, Canada
Dr. Ismail Zayid, Canada
Omar Zietawi, Arab American Community Center, Southern California
Said Zulficar, Network for Colonial Freedom

Biden, Israel and Iran

WRITTEN BY GARY LEUPP
Vice President Joe Biden, apparently speaking on behalf of the Obama administration, has just given Israel the green light to bomb Iran.

“Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else,” he told ABC’s “This Week” in an interview broadcast Sunday. “Whether we agree or not, they’re entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that’s going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed. If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice,” he declared.

The statement is presented in logically abstract terms. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do what’s in its interest regardless of what “we” think, surely. How very reasonable—magnanimous, even, coming from the mouth of the vice-president of the superpower that’s in the last eight years brutally imposed its will on two sizable Southwest Asian countries.

But to test Biden’s universalist logic imagine yourself in 1939, substitute Germany for Israel and Poland for Iran and ask whether “any sovereign nation is” really “entitled to do that.”

Of course Israel doesn’t have any “sovereign right” to attack Iran! And Biden’s implied distaste for the attack (“That is not our choice”), which may presage a calculated distancing from an action in the future, doesn’t undo the fact that he explicitly validates such action here.

They’re entitled to do it, says Joe. Just as presumably they’re entitled to remain outside the nuclear nonproliferation treaty regime, and produce and stockpile the only nuclear weapons in the Middle East, while claiming that the Iranian nuclear program (begun under U.S. encouragement under the Shah) can only have military intentions and can only be designed to produced a “nuclear Holocaust” to destroy the Jews.

Just as presumably they’re entitled to deploy vast resources  to pressure the U.S. government to bomb Iran for them. (But no worry about the impact on U.S. foreign policy. “There is no pressure,” says Joe, “from any nation that’s going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed.” What he really means is: There’s actually a whole shitload of pressure from Israel on us to bomb Iran. But we might not do that. Because Obama thinks that the Israeli-demanded attack on Iran, like the assault on Iraq, might be a “strategic blunder.”)

One could argue, of course, that in positing Netanyahu’s “sovereign right” to bomb Iran, a nation which has not attacked another in modern times, Biden is just shooting off his famous mouth again. But there are at least two reasons his comments should be taken very seriously.

First of all, there is obviously much conflict within the U.S. power structure over the wisdom of a U.S. attack on Iran. The Israel Lobby demanding one may have suffered a defeat at the hands of the Pentagon, which sees such an attack as complicating the imbroglios it faces in Iraq and Afghanistan (and down the road in Pakistan?), and the intelligence community which knows that Iran does not possess a nuclear weapons program threatening the world.

Secondly, the state of Israel continues to depict the Islamic Republic of Iran as an “existential” threat to itself, while threatening to attack it with missiles if the U.S. does not do so. The Bush administration always endorsed Israel’s vilification campaign and conceded the possibility that it might act “on its own” (as though it could really do so without a green light from Washington). Dick Cheney told Don Imus on MSNBC in January 2005 that “Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel [sic (disinformation)], the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards.” He implied that if the U.S. didn’t take action, the Israelis would be justified in doing so.

This remains the U.S. position under the Obama administration. And having decided for geopolitical reasons to adopt a tougher line on Israel’s illegal settlements on the West Bank, Washington is perhaps particularly disinclined to deter Israel should it opt to create the mess of which Cheney spoke. “That was not our choice,” it will say.

Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial Crusades.

He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu

http://www.counterpunch.com/leupp07072009.html

Hello, 

Please, think of new ideas we can use and do to put more pressure on the authorities to listen to our demands. They think we're a small number and can do nothing, we want to change this idea.

Iman 

Dear friends

Jenny Linnell is a co-founder of the ISM Rafah group, and an original crew member of one of the "Free Gaza" boats. For the last year she has been accompanying Palestinians and documenting events in the Gaza strip, both before, during and after the war. You can see footage of her work with fishermen and farmers under fire at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDD8ANFgwtA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTUYivihoTE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffishingunderfire.blogspot.com%2F2008_09_01_archive.html&feature=player_embedded

Since the end of May Jenny has been trying to make arrangements to leave and return home via the border crossing at Rafah into Egypt. She keeps getting turned away, most recently under pretty extreme circumstances, as outlined below. The significant part of the story is that Egyptian Border Guards told her and fellow ISMer Natalie that they were being refused exit because of their work with the Free Gaza boats. They were told that they would 'never be let out'.

For the sake of both women and other peace workers it is vital that this treatment is not allowed to continue unchallenged. So if you have some time in the next few days, please help us get them back by ringing the British Foriegn office and the Egyptian Embassy in London.

The Egyptian Embassy in London
phone 020 7499 3304/2401
Fax: 020 7491 1542

The British Foreign Office
Middle East Desk
Tel: 020 70088784
Email: jill.bayliss@fco.gov.uk and trish.wise2@fco.gov.uk

Our approach has been polite, but persistent and lengthy.

The plan is to ring every day for the next three days, step back and assess.

If you get a chance to mail me to let me know when you rang, and how it went, it would be great for helping us keep tabs on how effectively the mobilising going my address is lizthesnook at gmail.com.

Many many thanks on behalf of Jenny, Natalie and their friends and family.

Liz Snook.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
Sample letter:

Dear sir/ madam

I am concerned about the continued refusal at the Egyptian Border with Gaza to let British citizens Jenny Linnell and Natalie Abou Chakra leave Gaza for return via Egypt to the UK. In the past months they have been engaged in humanitarian work in Gaza and it is important that as British Citizens they must be given whatever legal protection and entitlement is necessary for their safe return to the UK.

They had been assured that their documentation was in order and yet on the 28th of June it was deemed to be inadequate despite assurances made to the contrary. There appears to be a missing link in the coordination between the MFA and the Egyptian Intelligence Services, or between these offices and the officials working in the crossing, resulting in Ms Linnell and Ms Abou Chakras continued refused entry into Egypt.

As a matter of urgency, it is essential that a greater level of assurance is acquired from the MFA that this situation does not arise again, either through further coordination or documentation, or by the physical presence of a representatives to ensure the border guards at the Egyptian crossing implement what appears to have been agreed by more senior Egyptian officials.

The women have every reason to believe that simple reiterations of documentation and assurances alone will not be sufficient. They have put their faith in these mechanisms for over a month now, with no effect. They first approached the British Embassy in Cairo on the 31st of May. On the 9th of June they were told that they had the required coordination and paperwork from the MFA, this was faxed through to the British Embassy in Cairo. They took a copy of this fax to the Crossing when they attempted to pass. They had been told that it was acceptable for British nationals to leave before the date of the official opening of the Crossing so they attempted to cross on the 10th of June. After several hours and several trips backwards and forwards by the by the Palestinian official responsible for coordination they were told that the Egyptian Intelligence office at the Crossing had informed him that we were not allowed to go through at that time and said things would work out once the Crossing opened. Despite several calls to Ms. Hayek from the MFA, they were refused entry.

On Saturday 27th June, 2009, the first day of the officially announced three-day opening of the Rafah Crossing, 4 British citizens including Ms Linnell and Ms Abou Chakra passed through six phases of checkpoints, before finally being allowed onto a bus waiting before the gates to the Egyptian side of the Crossing. This meant that they were still on the Palestinian side, in a bus in a queue of around seven buses and dozens of ambulances, stranded waiting for the Egyptians to open the entry gate to the Egyptian terminal. At 7.30pm local time, the Egyptians called the Palestinians to return back. The Egyptians then allowed some ambulances through, although 20 ambulances and the buses were left stranded again until 11pm, when all were returned back to Gaza.

The following day, Sunday 28th June, the four British nationals headed to the crossing in the early morning. At 2pm they were asked to get on a bus heading to the Egyptian gate. At 3pm, the four British nationals had gained entry to the Egyptian terminal. At 7.30pm, the other two British nationals were allowed into Egypt, however Ms. Linnell and Ms. Abou Chakra were told their passports were being checked and were then questioned by the border officials regarding the purpose of their stay in Gaza, their arrival, and marital status. An hour later, Ms. Linnell and Ms. Abou Chakra's names were called as part of the list of those to be “returned back” to Gaza. The afore-mentioned protested against this, thinking that there must have been a misunderstanding, reiterated that they had "tanseeq", or coordination from the MFA based on the request of the British Embassy and repeatedly showed the document from the MFA.

They were told by a uniformed officer that the faxed document was in fact a letter from the British Embassy and what they actually needed was a letter from the Egyptian Government, despite the fact that the document was written on letter-headed notepaper from the MFA emblazoned with a governmental emblem and that it bore a governmental stamp below the text. They were also told that they weren't being allowed to pass because the British Embassy hadn't approved of their departure from Gaza. The officers and Intelligence personnel threw the faxed document on the ground. Ms. Linnell and Ms. Abou Chakra attempted to refuse to leave the Crossing, demanding to know why the permission they had previously been granted was not now being honoured. No answer was given although an Intelligence officer there, Mr. Saeid, insisted that they needed “tassdeeq” which constitutes a call by the MFA to their office at the Crossing. He said the document from the MFA meant nothing. Ms. Dina Hayek from the MFA had previously explained to Ms. Linnell that it would have been impossible for her to have sent the fax to the British Embassy without the approval of the Intelligence Services.

After approaching other Intelligence officers, they were denied entry to the Government Security office that they'd been recommended. At around twelve midnight, when one of the women was speaking to the media about the situation at the Crossing, Mr. Saeid approached her saying “I will make sure you will not leave Gaza,” and assured her “We are untouchable” (literally, meen hayhasibna). During these hours, Ms. Linnell and Ms. Abou Chakra were speaking on the telephone with family members who contacted the British Embassy in Cairo. “We are working on it,” was a repetitive answer.. Hours later, they received a 'phone call from Caroline, the Duty Officer at the Embassy saying, “I've seen this happen before,” “Wait till tomorrow when we can sort things out,” and “You have everything you need to cross, the problem is from them [Egyptian Intelligence Services].”

The two British women informed the Embassy that they would remain in the crossing until an explanation was given as to why they had been denied entry based on unjustifiable and potentially false grounds. The Egyptian officials at the border asked how they entered Gaza, and on explaining that they arrived on the Free Gaza Movement Boats they were told, “So, you don’t need us to answer. You already know why you’re not being allowed out.”

This would seem to suggest that they were detained as a form of unofficial punishment for their humanitarian work in Gaza. This is extremely alarming. Officers then forcibly removed them from the departure hall to where there was a bus waiting outside. Moments later, Ms. Abou Chakra was also assaulted and lost sight of Ms. Linnell. Officers again threatened Ms. Abou Chakra with her continued detention in Gaza saying saying “We will make sure you will never get out,” and, “You are lucky you are not in Jordan. Our boots would be in your mouths by now.”

The treatment Ms. Linnell and Ms. Abou Chakra were subjected to was abusive and unnecessary. The Egyptian authorities at the Crossing have failed to acknowledge their right of passage. As is evident from the verbal exchange mentioned above, this is a direct challenge from the Egyptian authorities to the democratic rights of any person who has been working aiding the desperate situation in Gaza.

I would be grateful if you would fully investigate this matter further and urge you to act on this information to secure an efficient and safe passage from Gaza for these two humanitarian workers, which they have so far been unjustly denied.

I would appreciate you keeping me informed of the results of your enquiries.

–
In Solidarity
from all
International Movement to Open Rafah Border

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=9986479902

"Only a united world against oppression will help unite and free all of Palestine."

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country

2-Biased Corporate Media in America, and how media in the United States are neither objective nor completely honest in their portrayal of important issues, as they convey the news with lack of neutrality.

3-On Tuesday June 30 afternoon Israeli Naval Forces attacked and boarded the Free Gaza Movement boat, the SPIRIT OF HUMANITY, 23 miles off the coast of Gaza, abducting 21 human rights workers from 11 countries. Which is an outrageous violation of international law, The Boat held humanitarian and reconstruction supplies to be given to the people of Gaza whom 80% of Gazans depends on UN aid since the Israeli blockade on the Gaza strip which is currently still on. This incidence was not the first, months earlier IDF navy boats rammed DIGNITY boat which on a humanitarian mission to Gaza.

Neda Agha Soltan, shot dead by Iranian forces during the 2009 Iranian election protests (June 20). May she rest in peace

A new Iran shines in the faces of those marching peaceably with their little daughters on their shoulders, and with their grandparents marching with wheelchairs (see amateur footage on BBC Persian).  To attribute this monumental nonviolent popular movement to western instigation is to dishonor those millions who showed up on the streets for 2 weeks– despite the threat of government-backed "Basiji" hooligans beating them mercilessly, despite the threat of being expelled from their jobs and universities, despite having their homes attacked at night by the Basiji, despite their family members being kidnapped by the various security personnel.  

The 2009 coup d'état, against over 40 million Iranian voters, was an inside job.  

The day after the election results were announced I talked to a friend in Iran who told me “if they [Ahmadinezhad camp] won fair and square, why aren’t they celebrating on the streets?”  The streets of Isfahan (and all other big cities in Iran) were desolate after the announcement. 

People were dumbfounded.

The very next day, people organized and took to the streets again, carrying their children on their shoulders and pushing wheelchairs for the elderly.  

Iranians know what a foreign coup d'état looks like, and feels like.  

One of the most humiliating instances in our history was the 1953 CIA coup d'état that removed the democratically elected government of Dr. Mosadegh from office and installed the Shah. For the next 25 years, the Shah, with his Israeli-trained "SAVAK" torturers, murdered and tortured the nation into silence.  Iranians still remember “the hired help”, the U.S. and Israeli collaborators who got paid only pennies to roam the streets of Tehran (and other large cities); the vigilantes who swung metal chains in the air; metal chains that had bashed many young skulls and ripped through soft tissue of people’s stomach.   No, Iranians have not forgotten the Shah's "Shaboon-Bi-Mokh" (brainless Shaboon) and his other brutal gangs.  

That was a revolution ago, many political fights back, and long before many large and small civil victories. 

Iranians of 2009 expect more from life and demand more of their government.  After all, the most significant popular revolution of this century succeeded in Iran.  We survived a brutal U.S.-instigated, U.S.-fueled war, between Iran and Iraq, for 8 years.  Over a million died, throughout the 1980's.  Every Iranian knows that, were it not for the 8 year long U.S. imposed and fueled war with Iraq, a million Iranian and Iraqi youth would have been spared.  Every Iranian knows that, were it not for the 8-year U.S. imposed and fueled war with Iraq, democratic forces in Iran would have survived.  Every Iranian knows that the new bullies, of the new regime, were strengthened by that war (this is admitted by current leaders of the regime itself). 

Every Iranian knows that democracy was the real casualty of war inflicted on them by the U.S. And Iranians know, in their bones, that what has already happened to Iraq and Afghanistan could easily have happened to them. 

Real democracy (the people's ability to install social mechanisms to protect freedom of speech, freedom of writing, freedom of gathering, etc.) is now the only path that Iranians will accept, if we are to protect ourselves against further U.S. and Israeli wars.  Knowing this in our bones, Iranians poured onto the streets in the millions, to cry for freedom.

May all people of the Middle East hear our call and answer with similar nonviolent rallies.  Resistance to occupation, resistance to invasion; resistance to undemocratic regimes, is our only hope for a safe Middle East where our children can grow to become painters and poets and mathematicians.

Remember your Iranian sisters and brothers who overcame their fear of bullets and tanks by chanting “don’t be afraid, don’t be afraid, we are all together”; and remember the revolution's 1979 chants, which also echoed in Iran after the 2009 elections– “Bullets, tanks, and machine-guns will not work any more”.

Nothing but solidarity, between Iran and its neighbors, will protect us from U.S. and Israeli drones, and from uranium bombs. May all the people of the region hear Iran’s call and answer with comparable nonviolent rallies, especially in the occupied nations.  

Iran is calling you: “don’t be afraid, don’t be afraid, we are all together”. 
–

Dr. Savabieasfahani, a native of Iran, is an environmental toxicologist based in Ann Arbor MI.  Her new book is “Pollution and reproductive damage: pollution induced cell-death and reproductive damage in fish and mammals” published by DVM publishers (Germany).  She has published on effects of plasticizers and pesticides on female reproductive cycle.  Pollution caused by wars and invasions in the Middle East has turned her attention to the effects of war pollutants on public health, in areas now experiencing environmental crisis.

This week, Peres participated in an interfaith conference in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, where he had the audacity to lecture delegates representing the world’s major religions on peace, human dignity, moral ethics and religious tolerance.

During his speech, Peres, whose country carried out a virtual genocide in Gaza only six months ago, urged believers to show respect toward those who differ with them.

He also called on the King of Saudi Arabia to meet with him in occupied Jerusalem, in Riyadh or in any other place “in order to fulfill his prayer for peace among all people, without differences of religion.”

Peres was making his sanctimonious statements about peace with Arabs only a few hours after the Israeli government decided to build additional hundreds of Jewish settler units outside the Adam colony in the West Bank, in utter defiance of calls by the international community, including Israel’s guardian-ally, the United States, for a freeze on Jewish settlement expansion activities.

So, Peres wants to make peace with the Saudis, the Kazakhs, the Indonesians, the Mauritanians, even Muslims in the innermost parts of Black Africa. It is only the Palestinians he insists on stealing their land, arrogating their rights and narrowing their horizons.

Peresrepresents and embodies a country that lives and thrives on murder, theft and mendacity. Hence, it is sufficiently obvious that he can’t be honest about Israel’s criminal behavior. It is a country that is almost totally ugly from head to toe.

It is nearly impossible to gauge the level of Israeli-Zionist hypocrisy. Indeed, one wouldn’t go too far by saying that Israel is the world’s most hypocritical nation-state.

The evidence is as conspicuous as overwhelming.

First of all, Israel itself is built right on top of another people, the Palestinian people, without whose destruction and obliteration, this evil entity wouldn’t have seen the light of the day. This is the fact that some Israelis are beginning to recognize.

In his book, the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, Illan Pappe, Professor of Political Science at Haifa University wrote that “The ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Israel was not an unintended consequence, or fortuitous occurrence, or even a ‘miracle’, as Israel’s first president Chaim Weizmann later proclaimed; it was the result of long and meticulous planning.”

In fact, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine was not a one-time operation that ended with the initial hostilities, e.g. in 1948, as happened in Europe during the Second World War.

It has been going on ever since the establishment of the hateful colonial entity and is now continuing unabated in the form of seizing Palestinian land and property in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and building Jewish colonies on the very land Palestinians are being told will be the home of their future state.

Peres is utterly unqualified to invoke human values since he and his colleagues in racism and terror, people like Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak and other war criminals, have been among history’s worst offenders.
In 1996, during his brief premiership following Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination, Peres ordered his army to commit the genocidal massacre of Qana in Southern Lebanon where Zio-Nazi troops mercilessly massacred more than 100 Lebanese children and women.

The horrific scenes of decapitated and mutilated children could only be compared with some of the worst Nazi atrocities in eastern Europe more than six decades ago.

Interestingly, until this moment, this false man of peace, this virulent hypocrite, has not had the moral courage to say “sorry” for the heinous carnage he committed in cold blood.

Peres has tons of innocent blood on his hands, hence the sins he should apologize for are numerous and nearly countless. In fact, I am not sure that his apologies, even if sincere, which is utterly unlikely, would make much of a difference anyway.

After all, we are talking about an irredeemable liar, hypocrite and war criminal.

This is a man who remained silent while the bulldozers of the Nazis of our time were crushing the bones and sculls of dead Muslims at the Mamillah cemetery in Jerusalem a few years ago in order to build a Museum of Tolerance!!! to celebrate “Zionist tolerance toward non-Jews”
I really wonder why none of the delegates at the Astana conference confronted this despicable thug with this issue?

More to the point, Peres is the President of the country that adamantly refuses to allow millions of Christians and Muslims in occupied Palestine to access their respective religious places in al-Quds.

For example, this writer, who lives not far from Jerusalem, has been utterly unable to enter the city for the past 15 years, even for a brief prayer at the Al-Aqsa Mosque. This is while people from around the world can easily and freely visit the holy city.

So, one is really at loss trying to reconcile this hateful racist policy of religious discrimination against Palestinian Christians and Muslims with Peres’ call for religious tolerance.

In his visit to Astana, Peres was accompanied with another hypocrite, Israel’s Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metger.

Metzger, a firm believer in Jewish supremacy, urged delegates at the conference to help free an Israeli occupation soldier taken prisoner by Palestinian freedom fighters in Gaza a few years ago.

And in characteristic Zionist self-absorbedness, Metzger utterly ignored that fact that his country was holding as many as 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners, including democratically elected officials, in inhuman conditions in slimy dungeons and concentration camps all over occupied Palestine.
So, delegates should at least have asked this pseudo religious leader if he had thought that the safety and freedom of a single Israeli soldier were more important than the safety and freedom of more than eleven thousand Palestinian prisoners languishing in Zionist jails, most of them didn’t commit any real violation, apart from demanding freedom for their own captive people.

Hypocrisy spells moral depravity. It is one of the worst human vices. However, when readily practiced by “religious leaders” who claim to adhere to a higher standard of morality, it becomes a disastrous trait of immensely sinful proportions.

It is indeed lamentable that certified war criminals, like Shimon Peres, and racist rabies representing an evil state, like Yona Metzger, are invited to address religious conferences whose goal is to build a better world based on justice and equality, two characters that are completely incompatible with the Zionist mindset.

It was also sad that only one delegation, the Iranian delegation, walked out of the conference hall when the terrorist President of Israel began giving his speech.

Unfortunately, many of these official delegates represented tyrannical and despotic regimes which are only Muslim by name and don’t really represent the real spirit of Islam which upholds the dignity of human beings and rejects racism, tyranny and oppression.

This was his speech:

The President of the Republic of Kazakhstan,
His Excellency Nursultan Nazarbayev,
Religious leaders,

I thank you for the opportunity to participate in this important gathering which aims at building a better world: A world of justice, a world of fraternity, a world of peace.

Your decision to initiate an interfaith dialogue in your country can serve as an example for the rest of the world, a world that parts of it seem to have forgotten that we all share the same God, who created man in His image and called him to sanctify life, uphold the covenant of peace, to follow in a good and straight path.

While the monotheistic and humanistic believers, Christians, Muslims and Jews, used to believe that there was just one God for all, compassionate, merciful and righteous, there are nowadays others, luckily a minority, that sanctify a different God, a God that permits massacres, forgives cruelty, and calls upon his believers to destroy, kill, lie and ruin.

This distorted stream constitutes a defamation of the Lord. It is not a religion, it is a crime, a crime against God and man. We must separate religion from terror.  This should be a common effort by all believers, regardless of faith, creed or gender.

I recently spoke to His Holiness the Pope when he visited the Holy Land, and he too joins this endeavor. It so happened that his visit took place when our scientists concluded a development of new wheat, that has four heads instead of one. We call it enriching wheat. People should enrich wheat rather than enrich uranium.

Many Muslim religious leaders also expressed their concern at the terrible correlation between religion and terror. And my friends, the Chief Rabbis of Israel, have strongly condemned those that call the name of God in vain, and in His name kill innocent people. Thousands, if not millions of Muslims, have lost their lives at the hands of extremists that call the name of Allah. In the Twin Towers of New-York, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and atheists, all lost their lives as one.

Cultivating interfaith ties of understanding and friendship is vital, not only in interfaith relations, but in the religions' perception of God.

The first question is always whether God created man in His image, or whether man is trying to create God in his compromised image. Whether we should adopt God's moral code, or whether we should refer our personal desires to God.

The real concept of monotheism is that God created all human beings in His image, that we were all born equal, and that none of us has the right to appoint himself as a superior force. Only God who created man has the right to determine life. The one that can not give life should not end life. God had no partners in the creation of the world, so there is nobody that can declare war against.

Bolshevism advocated Baz Buzinkiut - an ideology without God. They believed it would be possible to attain social justice without the moral values of God. Bolshevism failed to achieve justice, it failed to discard God. For humanity, it would be difficult to live without a God of justice and without a God of peace.

Our sixth commandment expresses the major point of humanities struggle in the 21st century: "Do not kill." And it is said in the Holy book Leviticus: "Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the Lord. This leitmotiv of our religion is that "All human beings were created in the image of God."

We must stand up and reject fanatics, and to oppose promoters of hatred and conflicts. Their so-called god is not our God. Their faith is not our faith. Our answer to them is to hold and encourage peace initiatives.

We are aware of the big change which has occurred in the positions of a majority of Arab countries towards peace with israel: a transition from the three Khartoum "no's":  no to negotiations, no to recognition, no to peace - to the three "yes's" of the Saudi Initiative.The King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, King Abdullah II, defined this a readiness for peace between the State of Israel and 57 Arab and Muslim states. 

Here, from this platform, with your permission, Mr. President, I call upon the King of Saudi Arabia, King Abdallah bin Abd al-Aziz Al Saud, the initiator of the Arab peace plan, to meet in Jerusalem or in Riyadh or to travel to Kazakhstan, and together with other Arab leaders we will all be able to realize your vision, our vision and the vision of all believers in our shared God of peace and justice.  

Together with the participants of this prestigious conference, we must stretch our hands one to the other, in a spirit of mutual commitment and a prayer for peace and prosperity in the world; for the brotherhood of man, for his freedom, health and well-being; for social justice, and progress, while respecting our separate and unique heritage and differences.

We have the right to be equal, and we equally have the right to be different. And swords will be beaten into ploughshares, and wars will be forever a thing of the past.

Let it be. Amen.

Allaf begins by repeating the politically convenient, revisionist version of history whereby the Iran-Iraq war is narrated as a proxy war waged by Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Western powers against a revolutionary Iran, and supported by the predominantly hostile Arab regimes.  Pointing out that apart from Syria (ironically the only Arab nationalist regime at the official and rhetorical level although the Syrian regime's espousal of Arab nationalism is similar to modern China's relationship with Karl Marx) which welcomed the fall of the Shah, Allaf expressed her understanding, due to the official Arab response to the establishment of the "Islamic" republic, that it's "No wonder the Iranians didn't warm to their neighborhood." So the writer begins by criticizing Arab regimes for not initially striking a friendlier posture towards the new Iran, but by the end of her piece she is found criticizing the enduring "popular Arab support for Ahmadinajad"  which for many Iranians remains "unpalatable and unforgiveable."   So which is it?  Was the official Arab response which, given the disparity between official regime policies and Arab public opinion must always be distinguished, at fault for not welcoming the Khomeini revolution or is the continuing Arab popular support for Ahmadinajad, the embodiment of that revolution's ideology and tactics, at fault today?

The model of religion and politics Khomeini established, and which the regime's thugs are now maintaining through brutally coercive measures, has captured the imagination of many in the Arab world, but none of them can be labeled Arab nationalists.  In addition to the basic ideological incompatibility between a religious fanaticism and a secular Arab nationalism which rejects the role of the clerical establishment in the promulgation of laws and the administration of the state, Arab nationalists were the first to recognize the threat of the expansionist Khomeini regime to the Arab world, Iraq in particular.  This threat was not merely ideological as Allaf suggests when she writes "Arab wariness stemmed less from the fact of the Iranian revolution than the banner under which it was fought" nor was it a hypothetical threat born out of the imagination of anti-Persian, "Arab chauvinists", an accusation often hurled by those Arabs who actually supported the Iranian theocracy, and remain enthralled by its Islamic rhetoric today.  This threat which Arab supporters of Iran refused to acknowledge at the time was very real, and imminently dangerous to Iraq, and one which subsequent events, especially since 2003, have tragically demonstrated.  Eight years of bloody war and decades of meddling failed to achieve for Iran its declared objectives which included extending its dominion into Iraq in the name of an Islamic revolution and ideology that recognized no international borders.  It was only under the cover of a US military invasion that Iran secured for itself a dominant role in Iraq.  Who can forget the sight of Ahmadinajad in Baghdad visiting Iran's proxies and representatives in the Green Zone Administration under a blanket of security and hospitality provided by the "Great Satan's" military occupation?

When Khomeini instigated the Iraq-Iran war back in the 1980's, it was only the Arab Nationalists that sided with Iraq correctly viewing the war as a defense of a strategic Arab state bordering a now provocative, aggressive, and self-proclaimed expansionist Eastern neighbor that openly made claims on Iraqi territory, repeatedly expressed its intentions of "liberating"  Iraq by toppling the "infidel" regime, and engaged in a series of hostile acts including violations of Iraqi territory and airspace, bombings of border villages, kidnappings, sabotage, attacks on Iraqi police patrols, radio broadcasts beamed into Iraq inciting rebellion, and a terrorist campaign deep into Iraq which lead to the deaths of dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians.  It was the Arab nationalists that recognized the emerging threat the new Iranian regime posed to Iraq and the Arab world, a position which Islamists, leftists, liberals, and the PLO leadership (HAMAS leaders are today pursuing a similarly short-sighted and flawed policy towards Iran) condemned as support for Western proxy wars against a revolutionary Iran that shut down the Israeli embassy in Tehran, adopted the cause of Palestinian liberation, and was the Arabs' natural Islamic ally in the face of Zionism and US Imperialism. The financial support of the Iraqi war effort by oil-rich, US-client states in the Gulf was offered as "proof" that Arabs who opposed the new Iranian regime were indeed collaborating, or at least tacitly allied, with the Western imperialist powers.  Yet these political simpletons (or worse) deliberately fail to mention the Arab oil Sheikhs that have been conspiring with the West against Arab nationalists, and all progressive movements in the Arab world since the days of Gamal Abdul-Nasser, are mere conduits for Western powers, pliant tools with no independent foreign policy of their own.  These US clients enjoyed excellent relations with the Pro-West Shah, and turned on Iran only after his overthrow, forcing them to adjust their behavior to the new reality according US instructions.  The policy of these US clients was disingenuously juxtaposed with the support, motivated by an entirely unrelated set of factors and considerations, first, and foremost the very real danger of an Iranian advance into Iraq, Arab nationalists gave to Iraq irrespective of any other world powers' cynical manipulation of the conflict.

In criticizing Arab support for the Iranian regime Allaf writes that "Arab nationalists, and Arab liberals to a certain extent, have a serious problem. With the noble causes they espouse, they should technically be equally critical of such regimes. And yet, because of the Iranian regimes staunch support for Palestinian groups and for the Palestinian cause in general, many Arabs have spared Ahmadinezhad and his regime from the stinging reproaches they extend to other rulers."  Here Allaf raises a critical issue that Arabs of all political persuasions need to address.  However, in raising this important dilemma Allaf makes two fundamental errors.

First, the continuing, 60-year, Palestinian Nakba is qualitatively different than the plight of any other people in the region both in its magnitude and duration, and not, as she described, merely a matter of "worst conditions."   A more reasonable contrast to be drawn would have been between the Iranian regime and the Arab tyrannies found in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, and by this comparison the Iranian people are living under a relatively more democratic, less repressive system of government.  The perceived support for the Palestinian cause and the modicum of democracy (relative to the Arab regimes) the Iranians exercise does explain, although does not justify, many Arabs' willingness to overlook what is happening in Iran today.  I won't spend much time on the thoroughly discredited Arab liberals.  This particular group amounts to a handful of pseudo-intellectuals and journalists on the Saudi payroll dividing their time between defending Pro-US dictatorships (including their main sponsor, the fanatical Saudi/Wahabi regime) and attacking any form of Arab resistance to American-Israeli wars in the region.  I would point out this is one faction which has not ignored the Iranian regime's oppressive policies and has predictably adopted the hypocritical American position on democracy and Human Rights in dealing with events in Iran.

Nevertheless, Allaf has raised a very important issue when she criticizes those who turn a blind eye to unsavory regimes as long as they express support for the Palestinian cause and presents a very important question:  "Is the enemy of our enemy necessarily our friend, regardless of other factors?"   "Have we become so desperate for support for the Palestinian cause that we would become bedfellows with the least savory of characters" In the case of Iran that question should be presented as follows:  is the apparent enemy of our enemy necessarily a friend, regardless of other factors?  The answer should be "no" in both cases, of course, but the writer fails to recognize the Arab nationalists are the one group who consistently rejected such a political formulation and have been frustrated by the support the Iranian regime enjoys among a politically diverse and significant segment of Arab public opinion willing to also turn a blind eye to Iranian behavior in Iraq.

Second, Allaf asserts an equally flawed political formulation herself when she writes "There must come a point when supporters of freedom for Palestinians, under a brutal military occupation and living in much worse conditions than most people, must take the same stand for others, even if the latter live in relatively milder conditions. Until then, we must not be surprised when Iranians, like Iraqis before them, stop caring about fundamental causes, no matter how righteous."  The Palestinian cause was never very popular among the Iranian people and has historically enjoyed more support in Berlin, London, Paris, and Rome than it has in Tehran, but who said the Iraqis have stopped caring about the Palestinian cause?  And what evidence does Allaf offer for this assertion?  More importantly must be the recognition that the Palestinian cause of Arab liberation is first, and foremost, a universal, morally compelling cause the support of which is not contingent upon the behavior of any political group including the Palestinian leadership itself. 

Secular Arab nationalists rejected the inherently undemocratic Iranian model of religion and politics in the organization of a modern state, and were never swept away with the simplistic Islamic sloganeering emanating out of Khomeini's Iran, and whose echoes are heard today in the public announcements of Ahmadinajad.   They also rejected the empty and counterproductive rhetoric that cast the Palestinian cause in a medieval, religious framework (long before Samuel Huntington's famous essay was published) advocating a worldview that has much in common with the Zionist perspective and has contributed far more to Israel's cause and propaganda efforts than it has to Palestinian liberation.  Arab Nationalists were also never impressed with the anti-Zionist credentials of the Mullahs and often wondered why Israel's support of Iran in the 1980s war is so often overlooked by the typically hypocritical Islamists, and an Arab left whose hatred of the secular, nationalist regime of Saddam Hussein (ostensibly on democratic and Human Rights grounds) and admiration for a repressive theocracy in Iran remains a mystifying contradiction.  It is within these two camps, polar opposites on the political spectrum, yet both with an ideological axe to grind with Arab Nationalism, that the greatest support among Arabs for Ahmadinajad and the Iranian regime has been found, not among the Arab nationalists.

Allaf raises legitimate concerns and criticism that deserve the attention of all those committed to the defeat of the Zionist project, the liberation of Palestine, and a single, non-politicized, International standard of democracy and Human Rights, but much of her disapproval regarding Arab support for the Iranian regime was pointed in the wrong direction.   

Raid Khoury can be reached at raidkhoury@yahoo.com      

We are asking for your endorsement and that of your organization to the below letter, inspired by the hunger strike of imprisoned Palestinian national leader Ahmad Sa'adat, calling upon United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to uphold his responsibilities and take action to protect the rights, health and lives of Palestinian prisoners and demand the freedom of all 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners. This letter will be delivered to Ban Ki-Moon's office on July 8, 2009. Please send your endorsement as quickly as possible in order to ensure it is included, preferably before July 5, 2009. This initiative is being supported by the Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat. Please send endorsements to info@freeahmadsaadat.org. We welcome endorsements from all organizations, individuals, coalitions and institutions in support of the goals of this letter and the rights and freedom of Palestinian prisoners.

Statement in Italian | Statement in French

Dear Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-Moon;

We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, call upon you to immediately take action in defense of the lives, health and rights of the over 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners held inside Israeli occupation jails. This number includes numerous elected members of Palestinian Legislative Council, among them Ahmad Sa'adat, General Secretary of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; Marwan al-Barghouthi, Fateh leader; Abdel-Aziz Dweik, Hamas leader and President of the Council, just freed after three years in prison, and dozens of other elected political leaders, in addition to thousands of other Palestinian activists, union members, community organizers, fathers, mothers, sons and daughters.

Palestinian prisoners suffer in conditions that violate international standards and norms, and are imprisoned because they refuse to accept a brutal occupation of their land and their people. Ahmad Sa'adat recently waged a nine-day hunger strike in protest of the policy of isolation and solitary confinement that has recently been escalated against Palestinian prisoners. Palestinian prisoners have been denied family visits, at times for years, denied access to all books and magazines, and denied even communication with their fellow prisoners in the isolation units. Palestinian prisoners, including Sa'adat, are currently denied necessary health care and medical treatment.

Palestinian prisoners are placed into isolation because they are national leaders and because the Palestinian prisoner movement has been an inspiration to all Palestinians and all who struggle for freedom. Ahmad Sa'adat's hunger strike has sparked thousands of people around the world to appeal for his release, as a living example who symbolizes the steadfastness and strength of the Palestinian prisoners amid isolation and dire conditions, and it must compel all of those outside the prisons to act. Many Palestinian and international human rights and social justice organizations have called for the release of Sa'adat and to ensure the safety of his life and health, as well as for freedom and protection for all Palestinian prisoners.
 
The fate of these 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners is a fundamental issue of justice. Palestinians, in Palestine and in exile, are denied their rights - to return home, to self-determination, and to freedom, and those who seek to secure those rights are subject to imprisonment, whether within the open-air prisons of Gaza under siege or the walled-in West Bank, or the jails of the occupation. The silent, and at times, active, complicity of international agencies, particularly the United Nations, in the denial of Palestinian rights must not continue.

We call upon you to uphold your responsibilities and exert all pressure to end torture, cruel and inhuman treatment of Palestinian prisoners, and to free every Palestinian political prisoner from Israel's occupation jails.

Sincerely,

Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat

Al-Awda NY
Al-Awda Newspaper and Publishing House, Chicago
Al-Awda Omaha
Al-Fajr News, Tunisia
Alliance for People's Health
Almubadara USA
Al-Nakba Awareness Project
American Iranian Friendship Committee
Anti-Imperialist Camp
Artists to End the Occupation
Association Réveil des Consciences
Arab American Community Center, Youngstown, OH
Arab American Union Members Council
Arab Muslim American Federation
Arab Resource and Organizing Center, San Francisco, CA
Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine
BAYAN USA
Bay Area Labor Committee for Peace & Justice
Campaign to Free Marwan Barghouti and All Prisoners
Canadian Arab Federation
Canada Palestine Association - Vancouver
Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid (Toronto)
Comité 'Libérez-les!'
Comité pour une Paix Juste au Proche Orient, Luxembourg
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Argentina
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Brazil
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Ecuador
Committee of Solidarity with the Palestinian People - Uruguay
Coordination de l'Appel de Strasbourg pour une Paix juste au Proche-Orient
Danish Communist Party
EuroPalestine
Free Gaza Movement
Free Palestine Alliance
The Freedom Archives
Freedom Road Socialist Organization
French Committee to Free Georges Ibrahim Abdallah (Collectiv pour la libération de Georges Ibrahim Abdallah)
Friends of Al-Aqsa
General Union of Workers of Chile
Hammerhard MediaWorks
International Action Center
International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network
International Platform Against Isolation (IPAI)
International Platform of Jurists for East Timor, Leiden, Netherlands
International Republican Socialist Network
International Socialist Organization
International Solidarity Movement - France
Irish Republican Socialist Committees of North America
Irish Republican Socialist Party
Jericho Movement - NYC
Jewish People's Liberation Organization
Justice for Palestinians, San Jose, CA
Kommunistische Initiative Deutschlands (KI)/Communist Initiative Germany
L'Observatoire Tunisien pour les Droits et les Libertés Syndicales
Middle East Children's Alliance
National Boricua Human Rights Network
National Democratic Action Society of Bahrain
National Lawyers Guild
New Jersey Solidarity - Activists for the Liberation of Palestine
New Orleans Palestine Solidarity
NYC Labor Against the War
NY Committee For Human Rights in the Philippines
No One Is Illegal - Vancouver
PalestineFreeVoice
Palestine House
Palestine Solidarity Group - Chicago
Palestine Solidarity Committee - Seattle
Palestine Think Tank
Palestinian American Youth, Youngstown, OH
The Palestinian Cultural and Political Club of Boston
Palestinian Democratic Committee - Chile
Palestinian Federation of Chile
Palestinian Youth Network
PATOIS: New Orleans International Human Rights Film Festival
Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism!
Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR) of Ecuador
Secretariat Nationale de la Voie Democratique Maroc
Socialist Action
Socialist Party of Malaysia
TLAXCALA activist translators' collective
US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
US Palestinian Community Network (USPCN) (Popular Conference)
Vent Libertaire 29, France
Voice of Palestine, Canada
War Times/Tiempo De Guerra
WESPAC Foundation
Women Against Military Madness
Women's Peace Speakers Series, Honolulu, Hawaii

Leila Khaled
MP George Galloway, UK Parliament Member and coordinator of Viva Palestina USA medical aid caravan to Gaza
Ulla Sandbaek, former Member of European Parliament, Denmark
May Abboud, Lebanon
Chbari Abdelmoumen, journalist, Morocco
Prof. Bashir Abu Manneh, Columbia University
Susan Abulhawa, author, Pennsylvania
Nader Abuljebain, writer
Yousef Abudayyeh, California
Nasser Abu-khdeir, Jerusalem University Political Science Department, Jerusalem-Shuafat, Palestine
Sheriff Abuzahra, Cambridge, MA
Darwish Addassi, Walnut Creek, CA
Ghassan H. Alami, Jordan
Abdul-Rahman Alawi, publisher and journalist, Cologne, Germany
Musa al-Hindi, Omaha, NE
Sonia Almonacid, Spain
Abdelwahab Amri Secretary-General of the Federation of PDP, Gabes, Tunisia 
Giuseppe Ardizzone, Perugia, Italy
Emmanuel Arenes, France
Justo Arriola, Euskal Herria
Jamal Aruri, attorney, Andover, MA
Prof. Emeritus Naseer Aruri, University of Massachussetts at Dartmouth
Boniardi Ambrogio, Milano, Italy
Mary Avice, Canada
Rahef Awadallah, Chicago, IL
A. R. Ayoubi, UK
Mike Baldwin, California, USA
Khaled Barakat, Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat, Canada
Nidal A. Barakat, California
Patrice Bardet, France
Anees Barghouthi, Palestine
Pawel Michal Bartolik, journalist, Poland
Abdul-Nasser J.G. Baston, London, UK
Levent Basturk, Red Hook, NY
Tahmeena Bax, UK
Dr. Oren Ben-Dor University of Southampton, UK
Arnauld Bengochea, Bordeaux-France
Cheryl Benson, Canada
Simone Bilotta, Faenza (RA), Italy
Patricia Blair, Hawaii, USA
Yoon Bok-Dong, Korea Truth Commission - Hawaii Representative, USA
Thomas Bolt, England
Giulio Bonali, Italy
Hadassah Borreman, Jeshurun-Judaism Against Zionism, Belgium
Yamina Bounir, Comité Verviers Palestine, France
John P. Brassard, elementary teacher, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Andrea Breuer, Klagenfurt, Austria
Richard Brinton, Salinas, CA, USA
Peter Brown, Olives for Palestine/Olives for Peace
Dr.C.J. Burns-Cox MD FRCP, Gloucester UK
George Cammarota, San Jose, CA
Daniele Campione, Milan, Italy
José Canali, France
Hadi Chammah, Gainesville, FL, USA
Sukant Chandan, Chair of the British Section of the International Union of Parliamentarians for Palestine.
Irene Clausen, Denmark
Ana Cleja, France
Catherine Cobham, St. Andrews University, Scotland, UK
Prof. William A. Cook, University of La Verne
Claude Coursin, Assistante Sociale, Marseilles, France
Maya Cutler, Stanley, ID
Professor Seif Da'Na, University of Wisconsin-Parkside
Ilgvar Daga, USA
Elena Davinca, Austria
Prof. Emeritus Dr. Herman De Ley, Ghent University (Belgium)
Shaheen Sultan Dhanji, Chairperson, African Socialist Movement
Dennis E. Donohue, New York, NY
Peter Durant, New York, NY
Dr. Adel Elsaie, USA
Ali Faraj, Rennes, France
James C. Faris, Director Emeritus, University of Connecticut Program in Middle East Languages and Area Studies
Mahmoud Faris, Gaza, Palestine
Enrique Ferro, Brussels, Belgium
Franco Ferro, teacher, Italy
Nadia Ferro, teacher, Italy
Sara Flounders, co-director, International Action Center
Linda Frank, Northwest Middle East Peace Forum, USA
Donnie Fraser, UK
Yolanda Garza-Birdwell, Houston, TX
Elisabeth Geschiere, Minneapolis, MN
Ron George, USA
Francesco Giordano, educator, Milano, Italy
Prof. Emerita Sherna Berger Gluck, California State University Long Beach
Margaret Goodheart, Honolulu, HI
Maligorn Gouez, France
Stephen Gowans, Canada
Michela Graham, Italy
Dr. Anne Gray, London, UK
Lamari Habib, Al-Fajr News, Tunisia
Anita Hadjadji, Bordeaux, France
M. Hadjuk, USA
Prof. Emerita Elaine Hagopian, Simmons College
Samia A. Halaby, artist, New York, NY
Hatem Hammad, Canada
Dr. Leila Hanaineh, Jordan
Kamal Hassan, USA
Monadel Herzallah, San Francisco, CA
Nadia Hijab, writer
Paul Hubbard, Providence, RI
Jay Hubbell, Peace Fresno, Fresno, CA
Mary Hughes Thompson, Women in Black Los Angeles, CA
Barbara Ida, Malone, NY
Sascha Iversen, International Forum, Denmark
Firas Jaber, writer and researcher, Palestine
Karl Ange Angri Jacobsen, Red-Green Alliance, Denmark
Dr. Mohammed Jadallah, Jerusalem Centre For Development
Francois Jadoul, Belgium
Intisar Jardaneh, Jordan
Randa Jazairi, Gainesville, FL
Humberto Jijón, Ecuador
Richard Jones, Swansea, UK
Maya Joulkva, France
Sana Kassem, Athens, Greece
Charlotte Kates, attorney
Ahmad Kawash, Boston, MA
Prof. Mujid S. Kazimi,   Massachusetts Institiute of Technology
Nabil Keilani, California
Basem Khader, Chappaqua, NY
Hocine Khelfaoui, Montreal, Canada
Peter Klosterman, Ph.D. Oakland, CA
Norman Koerner, educator, Philadelphia, PA
Khaled Kouteich, France
Zbigniew Marcin Kowalewski, researcher and editor, Poland
Garold Langley, Hawaii, USA
Carlos Latuff, cartoonist, Brazil
Joelle Laurent-Laneau, France
David Letwin, Brooklyn, NY
Michael Letwin, Co-Convener, New York City Labor Against the War; Former President, Assn. of Legal Aid Attorneys/UAW Local 2325
Mariah Leung, Al-Nakba Awareness Project, Eugene, OR
Dr. Renee Levant, Instructor, Master of Liberal Studies Program, Fort Hays State University
Catherine Lieutenant, Belgium
Tammy Bang Luu, Los Angeles, CA
Amir M. Maasoumi, Quebec, Canada
Professor Moshé Machover, London School of Economics
Patrick MacManus, Rebellion, Denmark
Dr. Bruce J. Malina, Dept of Theology, Creighton University
Hanif Manjoo, South Africa
Polly Mann, Women Against Military Madness, Minneapolis, MN
Sharon Martinas, San Francisco, CA
Professor Nur Masalha, London
Beatriz Maturana, President, Architects for Peace, Australia
Bill McGrath, Minnesota, USA
Marcelo Mendoza Azat, Arauco, Chile
Roberto J. Mercado, photographer, Social Impact Photography, New York, NY
Ali Mili, Phillipsburg, NJ
Emil Mishriky, Palestine
Harald Molgaard, Twickenham, UK
Serajeddin Momeni, Phoenix, AZ
Michael Moore, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Lillian Morgan, East Aurora, NY
Talaat Ahmed Mosallam, Retired General, researcher, co chairman Al A'mal Party, Egypt
Tawfieq Mousa, California, USA
Atiya Munir, Policy Analyst, London, UK
Catherine Myles, UK
Linda Nedjaa, France
Marlene Newesri, New York City, USA
Dr. Marcy Newman, Associate Professor of English, An Najah University, Nablus, Palestine
Hiyam Noir, PalestineFreeVoice.org, USA/Palestine
Christopher North, Antalya, Turkey
Henry Ode, California
Alain Ollivier, Quebec, Canada
Ivan Olsen, San Francisco Bay, CA
Ardeshir and Eleanor Ommani, Founders, AIFC
Michael Opperskalski, Journalist and Editor, Germany
Manlio Padova, Italy
Marie-Ange Patrizio, psychologist, Marseille, France
Daniel Perez Creus, Ingenio {Gran Canaria} Spain
Jørgen Petersen, Danish Communist Party, Denmark
Lily Phan, Calgary, AB, Canada
Andrea Pietropaolo, Italy
Paola Pisi, Uruknet.info
Karina Rahef, USA
Jespers Raf, Progress Lawyers Network, Belgium
Ahmed S. Rajah, South Africa
Hussin Ramadan, Palestine
Dr. Nagesh Rao, Assistant Professor of English, The College of New Jersey
Gabriele Rapaci, student, University of Milan, Italy
Angel Rebollar, Spain
Dick Reilly, Chicago, IL, US
Mary Rizzo, writer, translator, S Benedetto Tr, Italy
Diane Roehm, New York, NY
Francesca Rosa, San Francisco, CA
Nadine Rosa-Rosso, recognizeresistance.net, Belgium
Mimi Rosenberg, Esq., Producer & Host Building Bridges: Your Community & Labor Report WBAI Radio, NY
Bob Rossi, union organizer, Salem, OR
Mireille Rumeau, Bordeaux-France
Tony Ryan, Australia
Dr. Hamoudi Hadj Sahraoui, Setif University, Algeria
Nizar Sakhnini, Toronto, Canada
Samia Saleh, northern Virginia, US
Professor Therese Saliba, The Evergreen State College, Washington
Carol Scheller-Doyle, Genève, Switzerland
Guenter Schenk, Strasbourg, France
Penny Schoner, paralegal, San Francisco, CA
Marco Antonio Sechi, Sassari, Italy
Shahin Shabanian, Williamsport, PA
Mark Shapiro, UK
Meena Sharma, USA
Michel Shehadeh, San Francisco, CA
Kemal Sidhoum, Paris, France
Júlio da Silveira Moreira, International Association of People's Lawyers, Brazil
Hilary Smith, UK
Dr. Ahdaf Soueif, author
Professor Mustapha Soueif, University of Cairo
Maryloo Souied, house cleaner/office worker, New York, NY
Stan Squires, Canada
Robert H. Stiver, Hawaii, USA, retiree and activist
Prof. Emeritus Dr. Y.N. Tamimi, University of Hawaii
Zaid Tayem, the Netherlands
Richard S. Thomas, former Hampden County Commissioner, retired
Angie Tibbs, Canada
Brian Tierney, Union organizer, Washington, DC
Madjid Tounsi, Montreal, Canada
Vic and Barby Ulmer, Our Developing World, Saratoga, CA
JoAnne VanDatta MS, Eugene, OR
Fay Van Dunk, United Kingdom
Erin Wade, Seattle, WA
Claudia Wainerman, occupied Palestine
Darlene Wallach, San Jose, CA
Donna Wallach, San Jose, CA
Viola Ware, Artists to End the Occupation
Dr. Dahlia Wasfi, M.D., USA
Alison Weir, If Americans Knew, USA
Tony Whelan, London, UK
Katherine Wilson, CUNY, New York City
R. Worrell, US
Ra'ana-Dilruba Yasmin, USA
Anthony Joseph Geha Yuja, Italy
Dr. A. B. Zahlan, London and Beirut
Edgar Zarifa, Canada
Omar Zietawi, Arab American Community Center, Southern California
Said Zulficar, Network for Colonial Freedom

This letter will be delivered to Ban Ki-Moon's office on July 8, 2009. Please send your endorsement as quickly as possible in order to ensure it is included, preferably before July 5, 2009. This initiative is being supported by the Campaign to Free Ahmad Sa'adat. Please send endorsements to info@freeahmadsaadat.org.

BEFORE THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE 24

New York, 16 June 2009

Mr Chairman,

Western Sahara remains under the illegal occupation of Morocco. The efforts employed so far by the United Nations with a view to finalising the decolonisation of the Territory have not been successful due to Morocco’s current rejection of the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence.

I

In 1990, when Morocco accepted the Settlement Plan approved by the Security Council, it had committed itself to cooperate with the United Nations with a view to holding a self-determination referendum that would allow the Sahrawi people to choose between independence and integration into the occupying power. That task was entrusted to MINURSO that was deployed in the Territory on 6 September 1991 following the coming into effect of the ceasefire agreed by the two parties.

Such acceptance on the part of Morocco gave rise to real hopes for a fair and lasting solution to the conflict, mainly after the withdrawal of Mauritania from the conflict by virtue of the Mauritanian-Sahrawi peace agreement of 1979. Morocco confirmed this acceptance in 1997 to the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General, James Baker, when the two parties signed the Houston agreements that were also approved by the Security Council. 

Nevertheless, when everything was in place for an effective implementation of these agreements, Morocco reneged on its commitment. This breach was formulated in a letter addressed to the Secretary-General in April 2004, in which Morocco made it clear that it did not accept any solution that would include the option of independence of the Territory.

It has ever since been trying to impose on the intentional community, through influential friends inside the Security Council, the so-called proposal of autonomy whose starting point consists in considering, in advance, that Western Sahara is an integral part of the Moroccan territory. The Security Council is aware that it is dealing with a decolonisation issue on the agenda of the General Assembly, which cannot be resolved outside or against the doctrine established by the United Nations. This doctrine stipulates that the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence is, and should always be, the essential parameter for the solution of the conflict.

It was evident that, with Morocco’s breach of its commitment, the absence or the prolonged obstruction of a peaceful process of solution would imply serious risks for the maintenance of the ceasefire.

In June 2007, the Security Council requested us, the two parties, to begin direct negotiations, without preconditions with a view to achieving that solution in the framework of that essential parameter. The negotiations began in Manhasset in June of the same year, and the fourth round took place in April 2008. It is already known, Mr. Chairman, that there was no progress at all. The reasons for that lie in the fact that Morocco came with a precondition that was simply unacceptable. In reality, it did not want to negotiate but rather to impose its so-called proposal of autonomy as the only possible solution, presenting it on a “take it or leave it” basis. It was unwilling to discuss the proposal presented by the Sahrawi side, of which the Council had taken note. In our proposal, we say that the Sahrawi people should have the chance to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination by means of a referendum that includes all the options recognised by the United Nations in the context of General Assembly resolutions 1514 and 1541. This means that the referendum should necessarily include the option of independence. This option is not only something that cannot be renounced, but is also an option that Morocco had already accepted when it signed the Settlement Plan and the Houston Agreements. In our proposal, we also said that, in case the Sahrawi people would choose the option of independence in that referendum, the Frente POLISARIO would be willing to look to the future and to offer Morocco the chance to negotiate the bases for a strategic relationship in economic, security, commercial and social domains, among others.

Morocco’s rejection of this vision, which is based not only on the criteria established by the abovementioned resolutions of the United Nations but also on logic and common sense, is what caused the lack of progress in the negotiations.

The Secretary-General appointed a new Personal Envoy, Ambassador Christopher Ross, in August 2008. Mr. Ross did not officially assume his functions until January 2009 due to Morocco’s initial rejection.

In February this year, Mr. Ross made a first tour in the region of which he gave an account in the report submitted by the Secretary-General to the Security Council in April 2009. The mandate of the new Personal Envoy was to try to reactivate the negotiations that began in Manhasset, and he proposed, as a preliminary step, informal meetings between the two parties. We expressed our support for the Personal Envoy, but we do not know why those meetings have not yet taken place.

II

Meanwhile, Mr. Chairman, the situation on the ground does not inspire optimism. Morocco maintains occupation forces comprising an estimated 150 thousand soldiers. The Territory is divided in two parts by a shameful wall protected by those forces and 5 million antipersonnel landmines. As an occupying power, Morocco intensifies, on a daily basis, its exploitation and commercialisation of the natural resources of the Territory, especially phosphates and fishing, offering them to the highest bidder, whilst trying to implicate foreign companies in onshore and offshore oil prospecting in our country.

This activity is carried out in flagrant contravention of international legality applicable to a territory pending decolonisation. The Special Committee has a great deal to say about this activity. The graveness of this breach is more than evident when taking into account that, according to what was confirmed by the legal opinion of the then Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and UN Legal Counsel, Dr. Hans Corell, on 29 January 2002, the United Nations does not consider Morocco as a sovereign or administering power of the Territory. We are before an illegal exploitation that is carried out by what General Assembly resolution 34/37 qualified as an “occupying” country. 

The situation does not inspire optimism either if we analyse the situation of human rights in the areas occupied by Morocco. As has been confirmed by the reports of the UN High Commissioner for Human rights in October 2007 and Human Rights Watch in December 2008 and the report of the ad hoc delegation of the European parliament in February 2009, Morocco violates human rights in Western Sahara. All these reports, made by different and unrelated bodies, concur in their assessment by considering that the violation of human rights by Morocco stems from the fact that the right to self-determination has not been respected. Furthermore, they agree on the need for the United Nations, through MINURSO, to play the traditional role played by all other UN missions in relation to monitoring and protection of human rights as long as the conflict has not been resolved in a just and lasting manner. The UN Secretary-General, in all his reports submitted to the Security Council since October 2006, expressed his concern about the situation of human rights in the Territory.

Both in 2008 and 2009, several delegations from non-permanent members of the Security Council tried to include, in the Security Council resolution, an extension of the mandate of MINURSO so as to incorporate the issue of human rights. Morocco, with the support of France, did not allow this noble attempt to go beyond a mere mention of the “human dimension” of the conflict, a fact that unfortunately can only lead to consolidating the perception that there is a double standard policy, which does not serve the credibility of the Council.

III

Mr. Chairman,

More than four decades have already passed since the adoption by the General Assembly of  resolution 1514 (XV) in December 1960 whereby the United Nations assumed the noble responsibility for ensuring that all peoples and countries under colonial occupation could exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. The fact that the decolonisation of Western Sahara remains on the agenda of this Committee makes it a living symbol of the failure by the United Nations to fulfil fully and effectively that collective responsibility.

The Sahrawi people were colonised by Spain from 1884 to 1976. Spain, which had considered the Territory as a “Spanish province”, accepted, by the end of the 60s, the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination and independence. As I had already stated during the sessions of the seminar held in Saint Kits and Nevis in last May, since 1969 Morocco had recognised repeatedly, explicitly and solemnly, before this Committee and before the General Assembly the right of the Sahrawi people to full independence.

The work carried out by the Committee in this regard, which was crowned by the report of its visiting mission dispatched to the Sahrawi Territory in May 1975, the multiple resolutions of the General Assembly on Western Sahara as well as the verdict of the Court of The Hague of October 1975, which rejected conclusively the validity of Morocco’s territorial claims on our country, all constituted a solid legal and political corpus that should have safeguarded the decolonisation process, and should have brought it to its natural conclusion by the peaceful accession of our country to its full independence.

Members of the Special Committee would recall what happened afterwards. Spain, the administering power, abdicated its obligations assumed before the United Nations by calling on Morocco and Mauritania to invade, occupy and partition our country. This act was carried out in Madrid agreements of November 1975. This way, our people were forced to continue their legitimate struggle for national independence against colonisers this time coming from within Africa. The European colonialism had retired, but it had been replaced by African colonialisms. There are no precedents in the annals of decolonisation of this terrible tragedy for Africa. However, several African leaders had warned against this threat to the security and independence of the continent. Hence, the importance that was accorded, at the beginning, to the intangibility of the borders inherited from colonialism in the constitutive Charter of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The Court of The Hague concluded, as I have said earlier, that before the Spanish colonisation there was never any tie of territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and its new colonisers. This verdict and the inclusion of the principle of intangibility of borders into the Charter of the OAU, made that the Mauritanian-Moroccan attempt to annex our country was seen as an act with very serious consequences for Africa.

It was the President of Mozambique, Samora Machel, who said that “colonialism does not have any specific colour”. Already in 1960, against the backdrop of the territorial claims made by Morocco on Mauritania, President Senghor of Senegal said, in a proper way, that some African nations had acquired the illness of the European coloniser. More recently, President Mbeki of South Africa said that it was a shame for Africa that the Sahrawi people had not even been able to enjoy their right to independence.  

IV

Mr. Chairman,

Perhaps one could say that all this is known, and that it may be advisable not to highlight it in order to keep the consciences dormant. That is to say, to accept, as a last resort, the notion that the right to self-determination of peoples in the framework of decolonisation shakes the consciences of some people who end up saying privately and sometimes publically, after perhaps signing or securing a contract here and there with Morocco, that that fundamental right, which made possible the current configuration of the world, should give way in the case of Western Sahara to the “politically correct” notion proposed by Morocco, i.e., pure annexation of our country, disguised in a proposal of autonomy.

The Sahrawi people, armed with the firm conviction in the legitimacy of their right to freedom and independence and in the pre-eminence of the principles and values of the UN Charter over the siren songs of a cynical and dangerous notion of political realism, will never give up the full realisation of that right. We are also convinced that the immense majority of the UN members share this judgement and the vision that, in a case of decolonisation as clear as this one, there should be no exception to the general rule that was established by resolution 1514, which gave birth to this Committee.

It is true, Mr. Chairman, that the Sahrawi people will continue suffering, and will continue seeing their development and progress being mortgaged by an anachronistic, unjust and unjustified occupation. It is our suffering, but it is also your failure as United Nations.

In our modest opinion, this Committee can and should reactivate its commitment to the decolonisation of the last African colony on its agenda. The Committee was historically very courageous in the face of the persistence of the Spanish colonisation of Western Sahara. You should not give up this courage because the decolonisation of Western Sahara has not yet been concluded. Spain left, but Morocco came in its stead. The UN considers Morocco neither a sovereign power nor an administering power, but this country considers itself capable of interfering, conditioning and even changing the principled positions and the minimum rules of procedure of this Committee, as it happened, Mr. Chairman, in the recent seminar. The Sahrawi people have not yet exercised their right to self-determination. Hence, the responsibility of the Committee is still as full as our trust in it and in the international community.

Thank you very much indeed! 

Iran and the West: Hardened fronts the not unexpected result of the western “stunt”

WRITTEN BY NOTSILVIA NIGHT
A hardening of the fronts between Iran and the West, and between westernized liberals and Islamic conservatives inside Iran, is the not unexpected result of last weeks post-election confrontations. Western support and the extremely violent behavior of some armed post-election demonstrators have probably had a damaging effect on the efforts of Iranian women-rights- and other reform-movements. Their efforts might have been discredited so much, that a backslide of Iran into earlier hard-line positions in the matters of women´s rights might occur. Hopefully it won´t.

I could denounce the complacency of the self-absorbed and disconnected leadership of our "Arab" community. But at some point, words and videos (and threats to do unspeakable things to one's hair) don't suffice to express frustration. The complacency somehow manages to confound language and camera lenses.

The US has been strangling the life out of Iraq for the last two decades and killed over a million Iraqis and displaced 4 million and continues to support the zionist presence on Palestinian land. What more does it need to do before we see some raw, self-respecting outrage coming out of institutional Arab-America? Behold (emphasis added):

P. 10 of Forum and Link, a local Arab-American magazine, covers the recent ADC fest in Washington. It whitewashes Clinton's crimes. "As the U.S. continues to push for peace in the area, 'I think it’s really important to give the Palestinian people something to look forward to,' Clinton said to loud applause [from the Arab audience]."
 

Meaning, if Bush says at an Arab convention "I think it's really important to give the Iraqi people something to look forward to", he'll also get "loud applause" from Arabs (also known as people who ought to know better).

The ADC also awarded Congressman John Dingell: "After his speech, he wrapped his arms around Dingell and the congressman’s wife Debbie and chatted at length. In an interview before his award, Dingell said much work is needed by political Washington on behalf of Arab Americans."

Allow me to quote Dingell in his own words. This is from the government's own website, not the Book of Arab Conspiracy Theories: http://www.house.gov/dingell/110/080423israel.shtml "In my 50 years in Congress, I have proudly supported more than $300 billion dollars in aid for the State of Israel".

Furthermore, if I massacre a bunch of squirrels, I'll get praise at a squirrel convention as long as I avoid using the expression "war on squirrels." "Shora praised Obama for avoiding using the phrase 'war on terrorism,' a signature phrase in the Bush era that many Arab Americans feel fanned fears of people of Arab and Muslim descent. Shora’s observation drew applause."

The most radical statement out of that convention was this beauty paegant type answer: "Also receiving an award were Hasan and Shereen Newash of Grosse Pointe. The couple founded the Michigan Citizens for Palestinian Rights, an educational outreach group. Before receiving their award, Shereen Newash said they look forward to “peace in the Middle East.”

Saja

* "House Arab" is a term inspired by Malcolm X's usage of "House Negro" and "Field Negro."

The ADC's Criteria for Usage of the Word "Condemnation" and for Invitation as Keynote Speakers at Convention

In order for the ADC to "condemn" an attack, the victims in question must be either:

1) Jewish (which is understandable, considering the timid nature of AIPAC, ADL and JDL; recall "condemnation" of alleged attack on NY synagogues last month); or

2) members of Congress; or

3) Nobel Laureate winners (see below).

Otherwise, if you're a plain vanilla Arab, attacks on you don't get "condemned" by the American "Arab" Anti-Discrimination Committee. For example, condemnation of the savage bombardment of plain vanilla Arabs in Iraq's Guernica, Falluja, is nowhere to be heard by ADC even though the city was bombed to oblivion by the world's only superpower. Mention of the city comes up once on adc.org, in the context of instructing it to release humanitarian workers.

You have to fall into one of the above three categories to matter to the ADC. No exceptions shall be made. Those who request exceptions shall be condemned.

In order to quality for an invitation as keynote speaker to an ADC convention, the bar is a bit higher:

1) strangulate half a million Iraqi kids (Clinton); or

2) convince the UN that defenseless, sanctioned Arab countries have WMD's (Powell); or

3) bomb Arab medicine factories (Clinton again)

* Journalist Yvonne Ridley and film-maker Aki Nawaz sailed to Gaza with the FGM on the first mission to break the siege in August 2008. Ridley was given a media award at the annual Muslim News awards. Her website is www.yvonneridley.org

The passengers and crew are being forcibly dragged toward Israel. “This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip,” said Cynthia McKinney, a former U.S. Congresswoman and presidential candidate. “President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that’s exactly what we tried to do. We're asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey.” According to an International Committee of the Red Cross report released yesterday, the Palestinians living in Gaza are “trapped in despair.”

Thousands of Gazans whose homes were destroyed earlier during Israel’s December/January massacre are still without shelter despite pledges of almost $4.5 billion in aid, because Israel refuses to allow cement and other building material into the Gaza Strip. The report also notes that hospitals are struggling to meet the needs of their patients due to Israel’s disruption of medical supplies. “The aid we were carrying is a symbol of hope for the people of Gaza, hope that the sea route would open for them, and they would be able to transport their own materials to begin to reconstruct the schools, hospitals and thousands of homes destroyed during the onslaught of "Cast Lead”. Our mission is a gesture to the people of Gaza that we stand by them and that they are not alone" said fellow passenger Mairead Maguire, winner of a Noble Peace Prize for her work in Northern Ireland. Just before being kidnapped by Israel, Huwaida Arraf, Free Gaza Movement chairperson and delegation co-coordinator on this voyage, stated that: “No one could possibly believe that our small boat constitutes any sort of threat to Israel. We carry medical and reconstruction supplies, and children’s toys. Our passengers include a Nobel peace prize laureate and a former U.S. congressperson. Our boat was searched and received a security clearance by Cypriot Port Authorities before we departed, and at no time did we ever approach Israeli waters.” Arraf continued, “Israel’s deliberate and premeditated attack on our unarmed boat is a clear violation of international law and we demand our immediate and unconditional release.

WHAT YOU CAN DO!

CONTACT the Israeli Ministry of Justice tel: +972 2646 6666 or +972 2646 6340 fax: +972 2646 6357
CONTACT the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs tel: +972 2530 3111 fax: +972 2530 3367
CONTACT Mark Regev in the Prime Minister's office at: tel: +972 5 0620 3264 or +972 2670 5354 mark.regev@it.pmo.gov.il
CONTACT the International Committee of the Red Cross to ask for their assistance in establishing the wellbeing of the kidnapped human rights workers and help in securing their immediate release! Red Cross Israel tel: +972 3524 5286 fax: +972 3527 0370 tel_aviv.tel@icrc.org  Red Cross Switzerland: tel: +41 22 730 3443 fax: +41 22 734 8280 Red Cross USA: tel: +1 212 599 6021 fax: +1 212 599 6009 ###

Kidnapped Passengers from the Spirit of Humanity include: Khalad Abdelkader, Bahrain Khalad is an engineer representing the Islamic Charitable Association of Bahrain.

Othman Abufalah, Jordan Othman is a world-renowned journalist with al-Jazeera TV.

Khaled Al-Shenoo, Bahrain Khaled is a lecturer with the University of Bahrain.

Mansour Al-Abi, Yemen Mansour is a cameraman with Al-Jazeera TV.

Fatima Al-Attawi, Bahrain Fatima is a relief worker and community activist from Bahrain.

Juhaina Alqaed, Bahrain Juhaina is a journalist & human rights activist.

Huwaida Arraf, US Huwaida is the Chair of the Free Gaza Movement and delegation co-coordinator for this voyage.

Ishmahil Blagrove, UK Ishmahil is a Jamaican-born journalist, documentary film maker and founder of the Rice & Peas film production company. His documentaries focus on international struggles for social justice.

Kaltham Ghloom, Bahrain Kaltham is a community activist.

Derek Graham, Ireland Derek Graham is an electrician, Free Gaza organizer, and first mate aboard the Spirit of Humanity.

Alex Harrison, UK Alex is a solidarity worker from Britain. She is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Denis Healey, UK Denis is Captain of the Spirit of Humanity. This will be his fifth voyage to Gaza.

Fathi Jaouadi, UK Fathi is a British journalist, Free Gaza organizer, and delegation co-coordinator for this voyage.

Mairead Maguire, Ireland Mairead is a Nobel laureate and renowned peace activist.

Lubna Masarwa, Palestine/Israel Lubna is a Palestinian human rights activist and Free Gaza organizer.

Theresa McDermott, Scotland Theresa is a solidarity worker from Scotland. She is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Cynthia McKinney, US Cynthia McKinney is an outspoken advocate for human rights and social justice issues, as well as a former U.S. congressperson and presidential candidate.

Adnan Mormesh, UK Adnan is a solidarity worker from Britain. He is traveling to Gaza to do long-term human rights monitoring.

Adam Qvist, Denmark Adam is a solidarity worker from Denmark. He is traveling to Gaza to do human rights monitoring.

Adam Shapiro, US Adam is an American documentary film maker and human rights activist. Kathy Sheetz, US Kathy is a nurse and film maker, traveling to Gaza to do human rights monitoring.

### — In Solidarity from all International Movement to Open Rafah Border http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=9986479902 "Only a united world against oppression will help unite and free all of Palestine."

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country