Arsonists and Firefighters: UN's Cholera Role in Haiti

UN Capitalizing on its imported cholera to privatize clean water in poverty-stricken Haiti

by Ezili Danto

With Paul Farmer – who has an ineffective cholera vaccines program in Haiti wasting millions – designated as their “Special Advisor,” on December 11, 2012 at a press conference, the UN announced a “new initiative to help eliminate cholera in Haiti and the Dominican Republic.”

Secretary Ban Ki Moon launched the UN’s grand (10-year water/sanitation) money laundering, no, its fundraising scheme to harm, oops no, to “aid” Haitians. As evidenced in the HLLN letter copied below, this water project is just a re-hashed initiative launched nearly a year ago. ( See, denied June 22, 2012 [ezilidanto] Request to peruse and comment on proposed 10-year plan by PAHO/UN to eradicate cholera in Haiti to be unveiled June 29 at OAS… erzilidanto, 06/22/2012 ; and [ezilidanto] 10-year international plan to PRIVATIZE clean water (funding NGOs) in Haiti unveiled June 29 in Washington, erzilidanto, 06/30/2012.)

The $2.2 billion initiative is unfunded, the $215 million from bilateral and multilateral donors the UN claims is available as newly added money are mostly previously pledged monies from even before the cholera hit Haiti, monies pledged at the March 2010 donor meeting but not given. See the Al Jazeera video interview on UN repackaging its fictitious, non-existent cholera aid to Haiti. Also, the UN refuses to set up a claims commission under the Status of Force Agreement with Haiti. Still doesn’t accept responsibility for its cholera epidemic. Gives no verifiable legal assurances to the Haitian people that their raw sewage are not still being dumped in Haiti’s waterways.

But, capitalizing on its imported cholera plague to Haiti, deflecting liability and responsibility for the death of 8000 Haitians and sickness of 620,000 in two years, the UN appealed for help to raise $2.2 billion in more misery funds to fill their employee/ subcontractor pockets. It seems not to matter that no one’s been held accountable for the misused of the last $6 billions raised in the name of Haiti misery. The UN/US/PAHO/WHO and the NGOtocracy in Haiti continue to play arsonist and firemen.

Al Jazeera on UN repackaging non-existent cholera aid for Haiti

***

Paul Farmer is not a cholera expert, Dr. Piarroux is a cholera expert and says epidemic in Haiti can be eliminated in months if there was the international will to do so
Cholera editorial-Haiti: Ezili Dantò on Wash Post Cholera editorial
Paul Farmer, a total sell-out
Paul Farmer and World Bank president Jim Yong Kim exposed
Paul Farmer relieves himself on Haiti’s dying cholera victims
Paul Farmer is not a God but the face of the UN/USAID/World Bank
A messageto Paul Farmer, the Senate, Dobbins & Francois

The White Savior Industrial Complex


The new monies to be raised will go into the same hands, the same USAID/UN/NGO subcontractors with no public accountability to the Haitians, bolstering up an international system that has failed in Haiti for over 50-years. (US failed aid and false benevolence in Haiti and The White Savior Industrial Complex.)

The grand announcement is another theatrical press gambit and waste of monies on these drones’ travel, food and hotel expenses. It’s where the US/UN internationals act as if their meeting equates to “doing something” solid and urgent to address their filth – their imported disease to Haiti. But it’s about using the image of the UN as the arbiter of human rights and justice, a claim that cannot actually be born out, but its their image. It’s about using this unearned credibility to raise more funds for saving the poor Haitians, have more future occasions to give themselves more titles, awards, jobs, more luxury hotel stays. (Listen to BAI interview Berstein with Kevin Pina on Haiti, Dec. 14, 2012)

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stated the “new initiative will invest in prevention, treatment, and education…The main focus is on the extension of clean drinking water and sanitation systems – but we are also determined to save lives now through the use of an oral cholera vaccine.”

Six month ago when the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO) at the UN, not the Secretary-General, were unveiling this very same bogus 10-year UN plan to end UN cholera in Haiti, HLLN pointed out that world renowned cholera expert, Professor Renaud Piarroux maintains that the cholera epidemic in Haiti could be gone in months, that Paul Farmer’s cholera vaccines are ineffective and a waste of money. “If that is so,” we posted “this would cast great suspicion on the NGOtocracy’s settling in for this opportunistic 10-year, far future - 2022 - plan, as the PAHO/UN Millennium Development-type proposed declarations and its signers seem to be maintaining.” It’s brazen greed, outrageously dishonest and fraudulent.

The fake humanitarians create the problem, use the Shock Doctrine, Disaster Capitalism to occupy Haiti, disenfranchise the people, de-legitimized elections, then with the complicity of the mainstream media and white saviors both from the Left and Right duopoly, they put a black neocon Haiti suit (Laurent Lamothe) up front for publicity purposes to sell the world their 10-year “solution” to cholera as a legitimate Haiti-led initiative.

Then, when one-year later in December 2012, the UN “unveils” its repackaged request for more funds for itself and its subcontractors in Haiti and calls this “eradicating cholera,” this travesty is capped off for public consumption by having the fraudulent progressives and justice-seekers (the weapons of mass distraction) speaking on behalf of Haitians, declaring “SUCCESS.” Basically preparing to collect more funds, inducing more revenue into their coffers, writing articles, showing this UN warmed over six-months rehashed unveiling of a 10-year plan was a result of their advocacy, letters and petitions that were a SUCCESS!

See, for instance, Mark Weisbrot’s Op-Ed: More Pressure Necessary to Get Desperately Needed Clean Water to Haiti which trumpets the suspect UN cholera plan as at least “a beginning,” a showing of the capacity of the UN to what? judge itself fairly, provide what? money to private NGOs with no public accountability to Haitians?

Oh, this cholera eradication plan from the cholera importers in Haiti is “incremental justice to Haiti,” seriously opine the Leftist intellectuals from the West. No joke.
The aim, of course, of most foreign aid to Black countries is to keep them in perpetual poverty, ill health, chaos by design, dependency, and so disenfranchised and desperate to be compelled to do Western biddings. (Haiti’s Gold Rush – an Ecological Crime in the Making.)


Haitian with symptoms of cholera is transported in a wheelbarrow in the slums of Cite-Soleil in
Port-au-Prince the month after the outbreak began in 2010. Photograph: Eduardo Munoz/Reuters
Source: The Guardian, UN seeks $2bn for cholera epidemic ‘introduced by UN peacekeepers’, 
Nov, 29, 2012; Haiti’s case against the UN for importing cholera epidemic, Oct 2010

Ezili Dantò at the Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network (HLLN) repeatedly points out the false benevolence, the basic Haiti rights repealed, the harm, the glorification of disenfranchisement and sweatshops, the conflicts with the white industrial paternalistic, condescending “bridge character” folks in Haiti vis-a-vis Haitian best interests, justice and sovereignty.

No Caucasian typifies the white savior tool of imperialistic Black oppression and trajectory more than Paul Farmer and his cohorts.

Paul Farmer runs Partners in Health which distributes the UN supported oral cholera vaccines. His partner, Jim Yom Kim, now runs the World Bank. Farmer is the UN Special Deputy Envoy to Haiti, a long time board member of Brian Concannon’s Institute of Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH) and now he’s also the special appointed advisor for the UN’s 10-year cholera eradication plan that dodges liability for UN bringing in cholera to Haiti, that denies justice to Haiti victims.

Yet, Brian Concannon’s IJDH with Paul Farmer on its board and obvious conflicting interests, claims to legally be representing the Haiti cholera victims, sending a demand last November 2011 that’s oftentimes, for fundraising purposes, billed as a law suit asking the UN to judge itself guilty and apologize to the victims!

This is an inside job. It’s definitely the fox guarding the chicken coop. These “bridge” characters crowd out most Haiti-led relief, use exploited Haiti fronts to legitimize their fundraising junkets, build bridges for white supremacy and cultural hegemony death crossings while watching each others backs from their various spheres and beltway platforms.

Commenting on the UN’s “new” water project for eradicating cholera in Haiti, here’s the Mark Weisbrot destructive distraction and spin:

“While we are still a long way from implementation, there are important lessons to be learned from this experience. Perhaps most importantly, it shows that organized political pressure can work.. the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti went to the U.N. to file for damages and reparations. Many other groups and individuals kept the issue in the news and wouldn’t let it go away… Newspaper editorial boards such as those of the New York Times and the Boston Globe called on the U.N. to take responsibility for the disaster that it caused. As a result of grassroots organizing, the majority of Democrats in the U.S House of Representatives signed a letter to the same effect...Bill Clinton, U.N. Special Envoy to Haiti, admitted that the U.N military mission was responsible for the deadly outbreak, but the organization maintains its denial. Tuesday’s announcement by the governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, together with the U.N., of a 10-year plan to eradicate cholera from the island shared by the two nations is a step forward, and a result of all the pressure that has been brought to bear over the past two years. Better late than never, but it is still just the beginning…” — Mark Weisbrot, More Pressure Necessary to Get Desperately Needed Clean Water to Haiti

The rescuers have mostly been hard at work re-imaging the Haiti occupation, giving a civil face to the Duvalierists, opening Haiti up for business in the time of cholera, fragmenting Haiti’s voices, denying the horrible evil and international crime scene that Haiti is. Denying the masses’ struggle for fair elections since 2004, obfuscating the main issue which is that Haiti is illegally, unjustly occupied by the US and Paul Farmer’s NGOtocracy ; that Western aid is MEANT and STRUCTURED to fail; that the Haiti majority must take back their sovereignty, Haiti’s mineral and oil wealth must stop being denied and pillaged. The US corporatocracy and Ngotocracracy occupation behind UN proxy guns MUST end. Vicious US imperialism in Haiti, its outright aggressions and uses of the UN peacekeepers to cover this up, its uses of Americans like Bill Clinton at the UN and the Paul Farmer NGOtocracy as its tool of mayhem, of oppressive Haiti decision-making and rule cannot be discounted, ignored or denied.

The U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Susan E. Rice, has put the whole matter in context thus:

“The truth is: the UN Security Council can’t even issue a press release without America’s blessing. The UN depends entirely on its member states, not the other way around. When the UN stumbles, it’s usually because its members stumble—because big powers duck tough issues in the Security Council or spoilers grandstand in the General Assembly. As one of my predecessors, the late Richard Holbrooke, was fond of saying, ‘Blaming the UN when things go wrong is like blaming Madison Square Garden when the Knicks play badly.’”

The US is the respondeat superior for the UN crimes in Haiti. The US is calling the shots at the UN on Haiti (along, to a lesser extent, with France and Canada) as the original Haiti regime change initiators. Together, these member states at the UN are jointly and severally liable for the UN harm done to Haiti since February 29, 2004, including legally responsible and sharing liability for the UN bringing in cholera, for slaughtering innocent Haitians in the populous neighborhoods en mass, for the raging impunity of their re-imaged death-squads and neoDuvalierists civilian fronts and for the rotten child molesting and other crimes perpetrated against defenseless Haiti civilians. There can be no Haiti justice outside of this Haiti context and narrative. Period, no comma.


Denis Bernstein on Flashpoints interviews Kevin Pina on UN’s 10-yr talk to end cholera. Speaks on the UN/Clinton/ NGOtocracy re-branding of Haiti with Hollywood celebrities fronting non-profits, endorsing sweatshop as “building back better”, mere Madison Avenue logo repackaging. Nothing substantially for the cholera victim. It’s the use of Haiti imported misery to fund raise -same old thugs supported by the Internationals, same old “aid” business as usual.


***

The UN, its Haiti policy-making member states and its other neocolonial partners are attempting to collect $2.2 billion more misery funds on imported foreign misery to Haiti while planning to further privatize clean water to dodge public accountability. Yet, this blatant money laundering scheme is seen by the UN apologists as “some” justice, an authentic good for Haiti and the cholera victims? ([ezilidanto] USAID/Chemonics/UN/PAHO/NGOtocracy in Haiti continues to play arsonist and firemen; The U.N. has requested $2.2 billion to battle a cholera epidemic in Haiti that has killed nearly 8,000 people since 2010.; and Unease over UN bid to eradicate Haiti cholera and Audit: USAID Haiti work ‘not on track’).

The whole colonial disaster capitalism model is so disturbingly, boringly predictable and horrid.

Below is the HLLN letter to UN/PAHO back six months ago when the UN had their first or was it their second such public “unveiling” on how to end cholera in Haiti? The UN keeps talking to raise funds for their peacekeeping presence in Haiti, keep cunningly and repeatedly “unveiling” their privatization plans for Haiti water and no justice for Haiti.

The mainstream media and humanitarian progressives willingly swallow the manipulative lies, ignore that foreign aid is about creating jobs for foreigners and selling foreign products and services abroad. Life worsens for Haitians in Haiti when the world’s public are made to foolishly believe these spinning of wheels and high-tech money laundering schemes are about “helping Haitians.” Justice deferred is justice denied.

Just days after the October 2010 UN cholera deaths began, Ezili’s HLLN pointed out, in an interview with broadcaster Yves Point Dujour, that “the accused UN cannot investigate itself…the genocide going on in Haiti is obvious … we’re looking at the evil but we don’t want to compute it.”

It’s not surprising to Haitians that the UN continues to deny liability for their gross and criminal negligence, for bringing death to Haiti.

We know about the Ottawa Initiative. We live the fear of the immigration deportations and unequal immigration policies. We deal each and every nightmarish day of this US hidden occupation with why there is a UN, Chapter 7 peace-enforcement mission in Haiti for 9 years. A country not at war, without a peace agreement to enforce and with less violence than most countries in the Western Hemisphere. Their imported disease provides the opportunity to accidentally kill 8000 Haitians, infect over 620,000, raise and launder more taxpayer and donor country monies, sell more Paul Farmer pharmaceuticals, write more Nicholas Kristof/Tracy Kidder white savior partisan pieces, experiment on the sick as guinea pigs with never-before-used-in-an-epidemic cholera vaccines, stay in Haiti for their 10-year plan to capitalize on cholera: playing arsonists and firemen.

As long as troubled bridges conveniently integrate with – flow or crumble into – the waters of injustice, the world will not change.

Ezili Dantò of HLLN
December 14, 2012 (revised)

Not for the Meek: Torture Reveals the Weakness of Empire

 

Zero Dark Thirty: Torture, Take Two: Maybe Torture Doesn’t Work But Kathryn Bigelow Seems to Like It

by Peter Lee - China Matters

I saw Zero Dark Thirty last night. Most of it, anyway.

 In a bizarre incident, the theater fire alarm went off just as the Seal Team Six helicopter was about to touch down in Abbottabad.

The Arclight made the interesting decision to keep the movie running (or non-decision, to be more accurate: in the brave new world of automated multi-screen projection, there is no grizzled projectionist in the theater booth minding the store, nor, it appears, is there a technerd with an eye on the monitors or a finger on the button in the central control room either).

A lot of people remained in their seats at first, thinking that a descending stealth helicopter makes the same beeping and flashing commotion as a Honda SUV backing out of a driveway.

No announcement was made, so the flummoxed audience ignored the emergency exits and eventually jostled its way out into the jam-packed lobby. There, the black-shirted hipsters who serve as the Arclight staff were wandering through the crowd, seemingly as non-plussed as anyone else. If there is a PA system for the complex, nobody flipped it on to inform and instruct the bewildered herd. Information, or its equivalent, percolated through the scrum as a series of mumbled exchanges. I was able to buttonhole one staffer and take care of the Angeleno’s existential concern—parking validation—and head off into the night with the promise that I could eventually obtain, not a refund, but a voucher for further viewing. Fortunately, the whole thing was either a false alarm or an extremely minor ruckus. If it had been a serious sh*tstorm, there would have been a lot of terminally disappointed people, if you get what I’m sayin’.

So I didn’t get to see the final confrontation. However, by that time the tone of the movie regarding everybody’s pressing interest—torture!—had already been set. Of course, if it turns out in the final reel that the Seal team mistakenly barged in on Dick Cheney shuffling around in his slippers and bathrobe at his secret location, and then the cast popped out of the closets for an end-credit rendition of “Always Look on the Sunny Side of Life” I am mistaken about the direction that the movie was taking. But I don’t think so.

Torture works, at least for Kathryn Bigelow. I think she’s fascinated with it, and it’s really near the heart of Zero Dark Thirty. At the same time I think that she, and her screenwriter, Mark Boal, made the cautious decision not to kill the Oscar-buzz with a queasy piece of torture porn, and instead frame the hunt for bin Laden as a neutral-toned albeit torture-sodden counter-intelligence procedural, a “just the facts, Ma’am” approach for those of you old enough to remember Jack Webb and Dragnet.

The film is grim, and grimly convincing, as a picture of the United States and the CIA spending billions of dollars to bulldoze through a world they despise to kill a man they hate.

The objective tone works against depicting Maya (Jessica Chastain) as a sympathetic character, despite the presence of standard action movie vengeance-shall-be-mine personal motivators-- they killed my (kinda) friend! They tried to kill me! Twice! Instead, her zeal comes across as shrill and impersonal.

Which is probably the way things really are in the CIA. The people who get things done within that massive and murderous bureaucracy are probably more determined, more callous, and more unpleasant than their determined, callous, and unpleasant peers.

When the film shows Chastain wrung out after a tough day of torturing a recalcitrant detainee, one is left to wonder if Bigelow is descending to the dishonest humanizing cliché, or whether Chastain is simply expressing the zero-affect aggravation of a mechanic unable to repair a balky transmission.

In keeping with this approach, the movie cannily throws out enough pro- and anti-torture tropes for people on both sides of the argument to seize upon.

On the one hand, enhanced interrogation techniques are unambiguously portrayed as torture, not fraternity pranks, and the potential for extracting misleading information is referenced in a scene in which a tormented detainee is stuffed in a tiny box while randomly muttering days of the week for an impending attack.

On the other hand…

The end of the torture regime is not occasioned by any handwringing over its legality, morality, or operational efficacy. Instead, the CIA station personnel are shown staring, with at the very best, mute resignation, at a broadcast of candidate Obama promising to discontinue torture. Near the end of the movie there is a lot of “is UBL really in there” suspense-mongering, with probabilities of 60% and up being thrown around. One leading national security honcho bemoans the fact that with the discontinuation of the “detainee program”, confirmation cannot be wrung out of the inmates at Guantanamo.

I don’t think Bigelow is interested in passing judgment on the efficacy of torture as a counter-intelligence policy. But torture does exist, at or beyond the legal extremes of government spook-work, depending on who’s writing the memos, and Bigelow is drawn to exploring its implications and how a hero working heroically in counterintelligence would cope with it. The problem, for me, anyway, is that Bigelow is interested in torture less as a moral dilemma than as a test of personal strength and determination—for the torturer. She apparently regards torturers as potentially cool, because they are out there, on the edge, dealing with the challenge, testing the limits of law, social norms, morality, and endurance, and thereby testing themselves.

For me, Kathryn Bigelow tips her hand with her portrayal of the lead interrogator, or torturer, if you will, “Dan”, played by Jason Clarke. He is studly, grizzled, cool, sympathetic, graceful under pressure—and transgressive, in a Nietzschean will-to-power way, as Kathryn Bigelow heroes often turn out to be.

I don’t know any torturers, at least I don’t think I do, but color me unpersuaded concerning their heroic stature based on what I read about the careful, calculated, and legalistic cruelty practiced in the enhanced interrogation program at Guantanamo and the sadism inflicted on helpless, hapless (and sometimes innocent) detainees at places like Bagram .

The element of the torture scenes (yes, there are several, torture is not just a tone-setting appetizer at the beginning of the film) that I found least convincing was the Hemingwayesque portrayal of the core confrontation between Clarke and detainee “Amar” (Reda Kateb).

There is a lot of macho-man “bro”ing (as in “If you lie to me, I’m going to hurt you, bro”) and a brief, absurd scene in which Clarke engages in some manly wrassling to subdue Kateb for a session of waterboarding.

Subsequently, Clarke and Chastain are shown dining al fresco on Arab fare on a sun dappled patio with a cleaned-up and relaxed Kateb , who calmly starts handing over important intelligence goodies.

One doesn’t get the impression that Bigelow regards the torture as the degradation of a helpless person by a figure of power (a more accurate depiction of torture would probably involve the systematic and unchivalric ego destruction at the core of the Bush era Enhanced Interrogation Techniques).

Instead, it’s a studly conjugal transaction whose noble outcome (the terrorist fought hard but the interrogator broke him; prizes for everyone!) has somehow elevated and affirmed both parties. The feeling of homoerotic subtext is reinforced when Clarke hands over a post-coital cigarette to Kateb , who puffs on it with a dignified but grateful reserve.

In a subsequent meeting at CIA headquarters, Clarke instinctively and immediately mans up to take the rap for the torture program if and when the legal hammer comes down. (Real-life spoiler: it doesn’t.)

The motto of Zero Dark Thirty could well be:

Torture: It’s not for the weak.

Chile's Students Moving Politics

Student Movement Marks Radical Shift in Chilean Politics 

 by TRNN

While students have not achieved their demand for free quality public education, movement develops new strategies with an eye towards upcoming 2013 elections

Watch full multipart Student Movement Marks Radical Shift in Chilean Politics

The Assange Christmas Address

Julian Assange Speaks From Ecuador Embassy in London

Transcript: Six months ago - 185 days ago - I entered this building. It has become my home, my office and my refuge. Thanks to the principled stance of the Ecuadorian government and the support of its people I am safe in this Embassy and safe to speak from this Embassy. And every single day outside, people like you have watched over this embassy - rain hail and shine. Every single day. I came here in summer. It's winter now.
I have been sustained by this solidarity and I'm grateful for the efforts of people all around the world supporting the work of Wikileaks, supporting freedom of speech and freedom of the press, essential elements in any democracy.

While my freedom is limited, I am still able to communicate this Christmas, unlike the 232 journalists who are in jail tonight.

unlike Godfried Svartholm in Sweden tonight

unlike Jeremy Hammond in New York tonight

unlike Nabeel Rajab in Bahrain tonight

unlike Bradley Manning who turned 25 this week, a young man who has maintained his dignity after spending more than 10% of this life in jail, some of that time in a cage, naked and without his glasses.

and unlike the so many others whose plights are linked to my own.

I salute these brave men and women. And I salute those journalists and publications that have covered what has and continues to happen to these people, and to journalists and publications that continue publishing the truth in the face of persecution, prosecution and threat - who take journalism and publishing seriously.

Because it is from the revelation of the truth that all else follows.

Our buildings can only be as tall as their bricks are strong.

And our civilization is only as strong as its ideas are true.

When our buildings are erected by the corrupt. When their cement is cut with dirt. When pristine steel is replaced by scrap-our buildings are not safe to live in.

And when our media is corrupt. When our academics are timid. When our history is filled with half truths and lies. Our civilization will never be just. It will never reach the sky.

Our societies are intellectual shanty towns. Our beliefs about the world and each other have been created by same system that has lied us into repeated wars that have killed millions.

You can't build a sky scraper out of plasticine. And you can't build a just civilization out of ignorance and lies.

We have to educate each other. We have to celebrate those who reveal the truth and denounce those who poison our ability to comprehend the world we live in.

The quality of our discourse is the limit of our civilization.

This generation has come to its feet and is revolutionizing the way we see the world.

For the first time in history the people affected by history are its creators.

As for other journalists and publications - your work speaks for itself, and so do your war crimes.

I salute those who recognize that freedom of the press and the publics right to know- recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the 1st Amendment in the US - is in danger and needs protection like never before.

Wikileaks is under a continuing criminal investigation and this fact has been recognized by Ecuador and the governments of Latin America as one that materially endangers my life and work.

Asylum is not granted on a whim but on facts.

The US investigation is referred to in testimony under oath in US courts, is admitted by Department of Justice and by the District Attorney of Virginia as a fact. It's subpoenas are being litigated in the courts. The Pentagon reissued its threats against me in September and claimed the very existence of Wikileaks is an ongoing crime.

My work will not be cowed. But while this immoral investigation continues, and while the Australian government will not defend the journalism and publishing of Wikileaks, I must remain here.

However, the door is open - and the door has always been open - for anyone who wishes to speak to me. Like you I have not been charged with a crime. If ever see spin that suggests otherwise, note this corruption of journalism. Then goto justice4assange.com for the full facts. Tell the world the truth.

Despite the limitations, despite the extra judicial banking blockade, which circles WikiLeaks like the Cuban embargo, despite an unprecedented criminal investigation and campaign to damage and destroy Wikileaks, 2012 has been a huge year.

We have released nearly a million documents. made significant releases - relating to events unfolding in Syria.

We have exposed the mass surveillance state and hundreds of thousands of documents from private intelligence companies.

We have released information about the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo bay and elsewhere.

We've won against the blockade in the courts and the European Parliament.

And after a two year fight contributions to WikiLeaks have gone from being tax deductible no where to being tax deductible across the entirety of the European Union and the United States.

And last week information revealed by Wikileaks was vital in determining what really happened to El Masri, an innocent European kidnapped and tortured by the CIA.

Next year will be equally busy. Wikileaks already has well over a million documents to release. Documents that affect every country in the world. Every country in this world.

And in Australia an unelected Senator will be replaced by one that is elected.

In 2013 we continue to stand up to bullies. The Ecuadorian government and the governments of Latin America have shown how cooperating through shared values can embolden governments to stand up to bullies and support self determination. Their governments threaten no one: attack no one: send drones at no one. But together they stand strong and independent.

The tired calls by Washington power brokers for economic sanctions against Ecuador, simply for defending my rights, are misguided and wrong. President Correa rightly said, "Ecuador's principles are not for sale.". We must unite to defend the courageous people of Ecuador against interference in its economy and interference in its elections next year.

The power of people speaking up and resisting together terrifies corrupt undemocratic power. So much so that ordinary people in the West are now the enemy of governments, an enemy to be watched, controlled and impoverished.

True democracy is not the White house. It is not Canberra. True democracy is the resistance of people armed with the truth, against lies, from Tahrir to London. Every day, ordinary people teach us that democracy is free speech and dissent.

For once we, the people, stop speaking out, and stop dissenting, once we are distracted or pacified, once we turn away from each other, we are no longer free. For true democracy is the sum of our resistance.

If you don't speak up, if you give up what is uniquely yours as a human being, you surrender your consciousness; your independence, even your sense of what is right and wrong. In other words, perhaps without knowing it, you become passive and controlled, unable to defend yourself and those you love.

People often ask, "What can I do?" the answer is not so difficult.

Learn how the world works. Challenge the statements, actions and intentions of those who seek to control us behind the facades of democracy and monarchy.

Unite in common purpose and common principle to design, build, document, finance and defend.

Learn, challenge, act.

Now.

West Africa’s Gate to Convenient Chaos: Mali Intervention

Mali: West Africa’s Gate to Convenient Chaos, Intervention

by Ramzy Baroud

France is insisting on ‘rapid’ military intervention in Mali. Its unmanned drones have reportedly been scouring the desert of the troubled West African nation - although it claims that the drones are seeking the whereabouts of six French hostages believed to be held by Al-Qaeda. The French are likely to get their wish, especially following the recent political fiasco engineered by the country’s strong man and coup leader Capt. Amadou Haya Sanogo. The Americans also covet intervention, but one that would serve their growing interests in the Sahel region. African countries are divided and have no clear alternative on how to restore Mali’s territorial integrity – and equally important political sovereignty - disjointed between Tuareg secessionists and Islamic militants in the north and factionalized army in the south.

The current crisis in Mali is the recent manifestation of a recurring episode of terrible suffering and constant struggles. It goes back much earlier than French officials in particular wish to recall. True, there is much bad blood between the various forces that are now fighting for control, but there is also much acrimony between Mali and France, the latter having conquered Mali (then called French Sudan) in 1898. After decades of a bitter struggle, Mali achieved its independence in 1960 under the auspices of a socialist government led by President Modibo Keita. One of his very early orders of business was breaking away with French influence and the Franc zone.

Former colonial powers rarely abandon their ambitions, even after their former colonies gain hard-earned freedom. They remain deeply entrenched by meddling in various ways that destabilize the former colonies. Then when opportune, they militarily intervene to uphold the status quo. In 1968 Keita was ousted from power, and few years later in 1977, he died in a lonely cell. His death ushered in mass protests, compelling few cosmetic gestures towards a new constitution and half-hearted democracy.

Turmoil defined Mali for many years since then, even after the country achieved a level of political stability in 1992. At the time it was believed that Mali was fast becoming a model for democracy, at least in the West Africa region. Few years later, thousands of refugees from the ever-neglected and under-represented Tuaregs began returning to their towns and villages mostly in the vast desert region in northern Mali. That return was introduced by a peace agreement signed between Tuaregs and the central government. Little on the ground has changed. Various bands of Islamic groups, some homegrown, others fleeing fighting in neighboring countries, especially Algeria, found haven in Mali’s north and west. At times, they fought amongst each other, at times they served some unclear agendas of outside parties, and at times they created temporary alliances amongst themselves.

While France attempted to keep Mali in its sphere of influence – thus its decision in 2002 to cancel over a third of Mali’s debt - the United States was also taking interest in Mali’s crucial position in the Sahel regions and the prospects created by the ungovernability of the northern regions.

Of course, the all-inclusive definition of Al-Qaeda served as the ever-convenient ruse to justify American involvement. Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has been used by Washington to rationalize the establishment of the US Africa Command (AFRICOM). It was set up in 2008 to manage US military interests in the whole continent with the exception of Egypt. The US State Department claimed that AFRICOM “will play a supportive role as Africans build democratic institutions and establish good governance across the continent.”

The importance of the Al-Qaeda narrative to the American role in the Sahel was highlighted in the last presidential debate between President Barack Obama and his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney. To flex some political muscles, perhaps Romney warned of ‘Al-Qaeda type individuals” threatening to turn Mali into a new Afghanistan. Other western experts on the Sahel dispute the analogy, however claiming that Mali is descending into a Sudan-like model instead. Either way, the people of Mali are currently suffering the consequences of the burgeoning conflict, which reflects a convoluted mix of foreign agendas, extremist ideologies and real grievances of Malian tribes in the north and west.

The south of the country is not exactly an oasis of stability. The ongoing territorial struggle and political volatility are threatening the whole country, which has been battling a cruel famine and pitiless warlords. The most dominant faction in the Malian army is led by US-trained Army Capt. Amadou Sanogo, who on March 22 led a coup against President Amadou Toumani Toure. Sanogo’s reasoning - blaming Toure for failing to stamp out growing militant influence in the north - sounded more like a pretense than a genuine attempt at recovering the disintegrating country.

It remains unclear who Sanogo’s backers are, especially since France and the US are relatively tolerant of his political transgressions and violent conduct. Sanogo’s coup came shortly before elections, scheduled for last April. While the African Union (AU) reacted assertively to the coup by suspending Mali’s membership, western powers remained indecisive. Despite a half-hearted handing over of power from the coup leaders to a civilian government of President Dioncounda Traore, Sanogo remain firmly in charge. In May, the junta struck again, retaking power, as pro-Sanogo mobs almost beat president Traore to death inside his presidential compound.

Sanogo, empowered by the lack of decisiveness to his conduct, continued to play some political game or another. A short lived ‘national unity government’ under Prime Minister Cheick Modibo Diarra was more or less toppled when Diarra was arrested by Sanogo’s men. He was forced to concede power and install a little known government administrator as his predecessor. Sonogo’s political show continues, especially as the West African regional grouping (ECOWAS), along with the AU remains focused on what they perceive as a more urgent priority: ending the territorial disintegration in the north and west.

The conflict in the north is in a constant influx. Alliances change, thus the nature of the conflict is in perpetual alteration. Large consignments of weapons that were made available during NATO’s war in Libya early last year, made their way to various rebel and militant groups throughout the region. The Tuaregs had received support from the ousted Libyan government and were dispersed during and following the war. Many of them returned to Mali, battle-hardened and emboldened by the advanced weapons.

Fighting in the north began in stages, most notably in January 2012. Sanogo’s coup created the needed political vacuum for Tuaregs' National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA) to declare independence in the north a mere two weeks later. The declaration was the result of quick military victories by MNLA and its militant allies, which led to the capture of Gao and other major towns. These successive developments further bolstered Islamic and other militant groups to seize cities across the country and hold them hostage to their ideologies and other agendas. For example, Ansar al-Din had reportedly worked jointly with the MNLA, but declared a war "against independence" and "for Islam" in June, as soon as it secured its control over Timbuktu. Al-Tawhid wa al-Jihad, along with AQIM made their moves. The allies soon became bitter enemies.

Last September, rebels from various Islamic groupings in control of the north began advancing onto other strategic areas in the center and south-west parts of the country. Their territorial advances are now made against government-held towns and areas that are still controlled by Azawad Tuareg rebels.

There is now semi-consensus on the need for military intervention in Mali, although some differences persist over the nature and scope of that intervention. Sanogo himself has little interest in seeing other West African powers jockeying for influence in Bamako, which could threaten his thus far unchallenged rule. Moreover, it is unclear how affective military force can be, as the territorial fragmentation, many militant groupings and political discord throughout the country are almost impossible to navigate.

The stability of West Africa is surely at stake. The chances of a political solution are all but completely dissipated. The growing chaos will likely benefit interventionist states - France and the US in particular. A long-drawn new ‘war on terror,’ will justify further intervention in West Africa and more meddling in the affairs of ECOWAS countries.

A few years ago, a new ‘scramble for Africa’ was unleashed due to China’s growing influence in the continent. It was heightened by a more recent North African turmoil caused by the so-called Arab Spring. Opportunities are now abound for those ready to stake more claims over a long exploited region.



- Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is: My Father was A Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press).

12/21/12 End of World for US/Israel Relations?

Are the U.S. and Israel Heading for a Showdown? No One Thinks So, But It Just Might Happen

by Ira Chernus  - TomDispatch

Here’s the question no one is asking as 2012 ends, especially given the effusive public support the Obama administration offered Israel in its recent conflict with Hamas in Gaza: Will 2013 be a year of confrontation between Washington and Jerusalem? It’s on no one’s agenda for the New Year. But it could happen anyway.

It’s true that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process appears dead in the water. No matter how much Barack Obama might have wanted that prize, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rebuffed him at every turn. The president appears to have taken it on the chin, offering more than the usual support for Israel and in return getting kloom (as they say in Hebrew). Nothing at all.

However, the operative word here is “appears.” In foreign affairs what you see -- a show carefully scripted for political purposes -- often bears little relation to what you actually get.

While the Obama administration has acceded to the imagery of knee-jerk support for whatever Israel does, no matter how outrageous, behind the scenes its policies are beginning to look far less predictable. In fact, unlikely as it may seem, a showdown could be brewing between the two countries. If so, the outcome will depend on a complicated interplay between private diplomacy and public theater.

The latest well-masked U.S. intervention came in the brief November war between Israel and Gaza. It began when Israel assassinated a top Hamas leader deeply involved in secret truce talks between the supposedly non-communicating foes.

Destructive as it was, the war proved brief indeed for one reason: the American president quickly stepped in. Publicly, he couldn’t have sided more wholeheartedly with Israel. (It felt as if Mitt Romney had won, not lost, the election.) In private, though, as he pressured Egyptian President Morsi to force Hamas to a truce, he reportedly pushed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu just as hard.

The truce agreement even had an Obama-required twist. It forced Israel to continue negotiating seriously with Hamas about easing the blockade that, combined with repeated destructive Israeli strikes against the Palestinian infrastructure, has plunged Gaza so deep into poverty and misery. Talks on the blockade are reportedly proceeding, though wrapped in the deepest secrecy. It’s hard to imagine Israel upholding the truce and entering into a real dialogue to ease the blockade without significant pressure from Washington.

Washington is also deeply involved in the tensions between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) in the West Bank. When P.A. president Mahmoud Abbas asked the U.N. General Assembly to accord Palestine observer status, Israel publicly denounced any such U.N. resolution. The Obama administration wanted to offer a far softer resolution of its own with Israeli approval. The Israelis gave in and sent a top official to Washington to negotiate the language.

In the end, the U.S. had no success; the stronger resolution passed overwhelmingly. Israel promptly retaliated by announcing that it would build 3,000 additional housing units in various settlements on the West Bank. To make the response stronger, the Israeli government indicated that it would also make “preliminary zoning and planning preparations” for new Israeli settlements in the most contentious area of the West Bank, known as E1. Settlements there would virtually bisect the West Bank and complete a Jewish encirclement of Jerusalem, ending any hope for a two-state solution.

Washington Can Lay Down the Law

There is a history of the Israeli government publicly announcing settlement expansions for symbolic political effect, and then, under U.S. pressure, pursuing only limited construction or none at all. Some observers suspect Netanyahu is now playing the same game.

As the New York Times reported, “For years, American and European officials have told the Israelis that E1 is a red line. The leaked, somewhat vague, announcement… is a potent threat that may well, in the end, not be carried out because the Israeli government worries about its consequences.” Prominent Israeli columnist Shimon Shiffer was more certain. “Netanyahu,” he wrote, “does not plan to change the policies of his predecessors, who assured the Americans Israel would not build even one house in problematic areas” like E1.

Maybe that’s why Netanyahu sounded so tentative on the subject in an interview: “What we’ve advanced so far is only planning [in E1], and we will have to see. We shall act further based on what the Palestinians do.” Israeli officials admitted to the New York Times that the move on E1 was “symbolism against symbolism.”

But several European nations took the E1 threat seriously and responded with unusually sharp criticism. Some Israeli insiders claimed that Obama’s hidden hand was at work here, too. The American president, they speculated, gave the Europeans “the green light to respond with extreme measures... The European move is essentially an American move.” If so, it was all done in private, of course. (The White House publicly denied the claim.)

However Peter Beinart, editor of the Open Zion page at the Daily Beast and author of The Crisis of Zionism, claims administration officials have told him that such behind-the-scenes maneuvering is Obama’s new strategy. Publicly, Washington will “stand back and let the rest of the world do the confronting. Once the U.S. stops trying to save Israel from the consequences of its actions, the logic goes, and once Israel feels the full brunt of its mounting international isolation, its leaders will be scared into changing course.”

As Beinart suggests, international isolation is what worries Israelis most. A cut-off of U.S. military aid would be troubling indeed but in itself hardly fatal, since Israel already has the strongest military in the Middle East and a sizeable military-industrial-high-tech complex of its own.

What Israel needs, above all, from the U.S. is diplomatic support to protect it from international rejection, economic boycotts, and a diplomatic tsunami that could turn Israel into a pariah state. Political analysts have long assumed that any Israeli leader who loses the protection of the U.S. would pay the price at the polls.

That’s why some insiders, like Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Egypt, think Obama can “lay down the law” to Israel on E1 -- behind closed doors, of course. The influential Israeli journalist Anshel Pfeffer puts the situation in the simplest of terms: “It is clear who is boss.”

Obama’s New Diplomatic Weapon

The rules of Israel’s political game, however, may also be changing. And that’s a key to understanding why 2013 could be the year of confrontation between the leaderships of the two countries. Netanyahu has allied his Likud party with the strongest party to its right, Yisrael Beitenu. To seal his victory in the upcoming election on January 22nd, he’s put his political fate in the hands (or talons) of his country’s hawks.

If he wins (which everyone assumes he will), he’ll have to satisfy those hawks -- and they don’t care about shrewd secret bargaining or holding on to allies. What they want, above all, are public displays of unilateral strength made with much fanfare, exactly like the recent settlement-expansion announcement and the accompanying threat to turn E1 into an Israeli suburb. Many observers have suggested that the primary audience was Netanyahu’s new, ever-more-right-wing partners. Plenty of them still don’t trust him, especially after the ceasefire in Gaza under pressure from Washington.

Most analysts saw the Israeli announcement as a public punishment of the Palestinians for their success at the U.N. The BBC’s Kevin Connolly had a different interpretation: Israeli hawks felt that letting the U.N. vote pass without some strong response “would be seen as a sign of weakness.”

Israeli political life has always been haunted by a fear of weakness and a conviction that Jews are condemned to vulnerability in a world full of anti-Semites eager to destroy them. The hawks’ worldview is built upon this myth of insecurity. It demands instant retaliation so that Jews can show the world -- but more importantly themselves -- that they are strong enough to resist every real or (more often) imagined threat.

To keep the show going, they must have enemies. So they seek out confrontations and, at the same time, “actually welcome isolation,” as the venerable Israeli commentator Uri Avnery says, “because it confirms again that the entire world is anti-Semitic, and not to be trusted.”

“For the sake of his target voter,” writes another Israeli columnist, Bradley Burston, “it's in Netanyahu's direct interest for the world to hate Israelis” and for Obama to be “fed up and furious with Israel. That is, at least until Election Day.”

Obama owes the Israeli prime minister nothing after the recent U.S. election season in which Netanyahu practically campaigned for Mitt Romney and publicly demanded that the U.S. threaten an attack on Iran –- a demand that the administration publicly rebuffed. The president might finally be fed up, and so in a mood to ratchet up private pressure on the Israelis.

If Obama is planning to put more heat on them, he will undoubtedly wait until after their election. Then, in the late winter months of 2013, before spring comes and Netanyahu can revive the possibility of an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, the president might well provoke a showdown.

He has good reason. If he can secure a definitive halt to settlement expansion, he can bring the Palestinians back to the table with a promise to press Israel to negotiate seriously for a two-state solution. In a chaotic region where the U.S. seems to be losing ground weekly, Washington could score sizeable foreign policy points, especially in improving relations with regional powers Turkey and Egypt.

And faced with Netanyahu’s new post-election government, Obama would find himself with a new diplomatic weapon in his arsenal. Suppose -- an administration aide might suggest to an Israeli counterpart -- the U.S. publicly reveals that it’s allowing, perhaps even pushing, other nations to isolate Israel.

Some Israeli hawks would undoubtedly welcome the chance to proclaim Obama as Israel’s greatest enemy and demand that Netanyahu resist all pressure. But Israeli centrists -- still a large part of the electorate -- would be dismayed, or worse, at the thought of losing Washington as their last bulwark against international rejection. The fear that Israel could become a pariah state, blacklisted, embargoed, and without its lone invaluable ally would be a powerful incentive. They’d insist that Netanyahu show flexibility to avoid that fate.

Netanyahu would find himself caught in a political battle he could never hope to win. To avoid such a trap, he might well risk yielding in private to U.S. pressure, with the understanding that the two allies would publicly deny any change in policy and the U.S. would continue to offer effusive public support. (The Israelis could always find some bureaucratic excuse to explain a halt -- even if termed a “delay” -- to settlement expansion.)

Battle on the Home Front

That prospect should be tempting for Obama, but he has domestic political risks of his own to weigh.

There’s a common misconception that the administration worries most about “the Jews.” The latest polls, however, show 73% of U.S. Jews supporting Obama’s policies on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Nearly as many want him to propose a specific plan for a two-state solution, even if it means publicly disagreeing with Israel. Nor is there too much reason to worry about Jewish money, since most Jewish contributors to the Democrats are liberals who are pro-Israel but also pro-peace.

Nor are Christian Zionists the big problem. They do have some clout in Washington, but not enough to make Obama fear them.

The administration’s main worry is undoubtedly the Republican Party and especially its representatives in Congress. Recent polls by CNN, the Huffington Post, and Pew indicate that Republicans are roughly twice as likely as Democrats to take Israel’s side, while Democrats are about five times as likely to sympathize with Palestinians. Men, whites, and older people are most likely to support Israel unreservedly in the conflict.

In the U.S. presidential campaign, Republicans were eager to play on the traditional American belief in Israel’s insecurity: an innocent victim surrounded by vicious Arabs eager to destroy the little Jewish state. Obama, the GOP charged, had “thrown Israel under the bus.”

But the issue never gained real traction, an indication that the domestic political climate may be changing. Another small sign of change: a relatively weak measure threatening a cutoff of funding to the Palestinians, which in the past would have sailed through Congress, recently died in the Senate.

If Obama and the Democrats come out of the “fiscal cliff” process looking strong, they will feel freer to put real pressure on Israel despite Republican criticism. The more they can keep that pressure hidden from public view, while mouthing all the old “we stand with Israel” clichés, the more likely they are to take the risk.

In such a situation, Israeli right-wingers might well give their GOP allies enough evidence to rip off the mask. Then, Obama would have to speak more candidly to the American people, though his honesty would surely be well tempered with political spin.

Our goal, he might say, has always been to make Israel secure, something long ago achieved. We’ve ensured that Israel maintains such a huge military advantage over its neighbors, including its Iron Dome missile defense system, that it is now effectively safe from any attack. And we’ll continue ensuring that Israel maintains its military superiority, as we are required to do by law.

But now at long last, he would continue, we are showing our friendship in a new way: by bringing Israel and its Palestinian neighbors to the negotiating table so that they can make peace. Israelis shouldn’t have to live eternally in a fortress. We refuse to condemn them to that kind of future. We are instead taking steps to help them be free to flourish in a nation that is genuinely secure because it has made peace. Some may call it tough love, but let everyone understand that it is an act of love.

Whether Obama believed such talk or not would hardly matter. Public theater deftly meshed with private diplomacy is the key to peace. And confrontation in 2013 could be the first step on the path toward it.



Ira Chernus is a TomDispatch regular and professor of religious studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He is the author, among other works, of Monsters To Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin and the online collection “MythicAmerica: Essays.” He blogs at MythicAmerica.us.

Copyright 2012 Ira Chernus

Palestinians Refugees Again in Syrian Civil War

Syria: Palestinian Camp Empties Pending Government Counter-Attack

by Franklin Lamb

Information Clearing House - A few thoughts rushed through this observers mind when he saw a distraught looking woman sitting alone, tightly holding two babies, at one corner of the vast parking lot of the central Damascus bus station known as Al-Soumariyeh. It is from here where inexpensive transportation can be had for those traveling west, east, north and south.

One thought was about a character out of a Charles Dickens novel and the other was ‘waif, frail, malnourished, frightened’, so the lady, holding the babies appeared. She managed a polite but weak smile as I passed and she said “hello.”

Long story made short, the lady and I chatted and it turned out that Souha was fleeing the al-Hajar al-Aswad neighborhood on the southern edge of Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp. This is one of the ‘hot-line’ areas of Yarmouk, where on 12/16/12 approximately 400 Jabhat al-Nusra (Nusra Front) militia fighters joined by various other salafist jihadists defeated Palestinian “popular committees” fighters supposedly loyal to Ahmed Jabil’s, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-GC (PFLP-GC). There are various unconfirmed estimates of how many ‘General Command’ fighters defected during the fighting to the rebel forces, but the PFLP-GC admits that some did. Also in the camp are some fighters from the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) and the Popular Front (PFLP).

Souha who is studying English literature, had lost her husband and was trying to travel to Ein el Helwe refugee camp in Saida, Lebanon. She had the name of a distant relative, she thought was still living in Ein el Helwe, but she was unsure how to find her but knew that she desperately needed to get out of Syria.

Nearly 70% (UNWRA puts the figure at 90%) of the 180,000 Yarmouk camp residents in the 2.1 square-kilometer camp area have, as of this morning fled. This figure was provided by, Anwar Raja, politburo member of the ‘General Command” with whom this observer had a three hour meeting during the night of 12/18/2012 inside the north edge of Yarmouk. Any camp resident with a MTN or Syriatel mobile phone got a text message, from the Syrian military to leave the camp for their own safety.

Souha asked me if I had heard about the problems of the Palestinian people and explained that she fled the bombing at Yarmouk camp and that most of her neighbors also scattered. Some of the thousands of refugees who continue to flee Yarmouk can be seen today near central Damascus, and sitting in the streets of Midan. These areas are still safe. Other are huddled in parks and camped under concrete underpasses, in schools, mosques and basically anywhere they can find a spot. Many are sleeping on sidewalks at al-Sabaa Bahrat square. A friend and I spoke last night to a family of four who had only thin UNCHR blankets for the night.

Souha said she was afraid to seek safety in a Mosque because they are no longer a safe refuge and she explained that she passed about a dozen bodies on the steps and front ground next to the Abdul Qader Al-Hosseini mosque as she left Yarmouk.

Happy to learn that there are actually non-stop vans going from central Damascus to Saida, Lebanon, without having to change vehicles, we found the driver, agreed on a price of 30 LL (about $ 45) for Souha and the same price for her two babies. I insisted on a two-for-one price for the little ones and since it was starting to get dark, the nice fellow agreed. I gave Souha what money I had and also contact information for friends in Lebanon who I knew would help her.

As the van pulled off she waved from the window and I could not help thinking that she may not get much help from the Lebanese government on arriving. Yet I knew that Palestinians there would assist her. I recalled the words of the late murdered Khalil al Wazir (Abu Jihad) when he explained nearly three decades ago, to this observer and the American journalist, Janet Stevens,: “At the end of the day, we Palestinians can rely only on ourselves.” I did not dwell much on his words at the time but since then I have come to understand very well what the great Resistance leader meant.

Yesterday morning I assumed Souha was in Lebanon and had arrived to Saida. Then I began to hear the unsettling news of long lines at the Maznaa crossing from Syria into Lebanon. The news got worse. Thousands of Palestinian refugees were lined up, some waiting for 10 hours or more to cross and many being refused entry into by Lebanese General Security because of “inadequate documents.” Many right now are being forced to return to Damascus.

Lebanon has an international humanitarian duty to ease entry and to assist refugees, as required by well-established and globally accepted international law. But with the exception of Zionist occupied Palestine, Lebanon has the worst human rights record toward Palestinians than any country on earth. The Lebanese Parliament still refuses to grant Palestinian refugees in Lebanon the elementary right to work or to own a home. Even though according to various economic studies, if Palestinians could work, they would help dramatically to build Lebanon’s weak economy.

During the morning of 12/19/12 the news got even worse regarding Souha. Someone from Reuters sent me a published photo showing her stuck on a bus at Maznaa for over 12 hours. According to one report she was forced to return to Damascus. Wherever Souha is she is hopefully someone is helping her.

Ahmed Jebril, an ally of the Syrian government is blaming foreign paid terrorists for the attack that is forcing the emptying of Yarmouk and also the rather quick defeat of his fighters. He and his GC staff told this observer that the General Command had no plans to attempt to return to Yarmouk. Reports from the camp claim that more than half of the GC’s 1000 fighters, mainly younger ones, defected to the rebels. It is difficult to know the truth, but it is fairly clear that Yarmouk has substantially been emptied and that government forces are surrounding the camp, presumably in preparation for a massive counter-attack and or aerial bombardment.

One statement that Ahmed Jebril, who contrary to a New York Times report, has not fled to Iran or Tartous, made that is probably accurate is that “As Yarmouk goes, so goes Damascus. As Damascus goes, so goes Syria”. Jabril’s aid Anwar Raja said that the camp will be used by the rebels to destroy the airport and to launch their “final assault” into the center of Damascus. They showed this observer fragments of ‘home made’ weapons similar to those collected from around Syria by military intelligence who in late October briefed this observer.

Franklin Lamb, a former Assistant Counsel of the US House Judiciary Committee at the US Congress and Professor of International Law at Northwestern College of Law in Oregon, earned his Law Degree at Boston University and his LLM, M.Phil, and PhD degrees at the London School of Economics. fplamb@palestinecivilrightscampaign.org

 

UN's Repackaged Aid Response to Haiti's Cholera Crisis

UN responds to cholera crisis in Haiti with repackaged aid

by Roger Annis - Counterpunch and Haiti Liberte (print weekly), December 19, 2012

In a short ceremony in New York City on Dec. 11, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon announced what appeared to be an important nod to international grassroots pressure to fund a universal treatment and prevention program for cholera in Haiti. He said that $215 million from bilateral and multilateral donors and $23.5 million from the UN’s own coffers were being pledged to a plan by the governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic to limit the spread of cholera and eventually eliminate the disease from the island that the two countries share.

However, on closer examination, it turns out that the $23.5 million is the only new money involved, amounting to a mere one percent of the $2.2 billion some estimate it will cost to eliminate cholera.

Also, Ban did not acknowledge that UN troops brought the disease to the Caribbean country, one of the key demands of a year-old suit by Haitian cholera victims. Evidence from numerous studies has established that Haiti’s cholera epidemic, currently the world’s worst, was caused by sewage from a garrison of Nepalese UN soldiers leaking into the headwaters of the country’s largest river, the Artibonite, in October 2010. To date, close to 8,000 have died and over 630,000 have been sickened.

The Secretary-General also announced that Dr. Paul Farmer, a co-founder of the global health agency Partners In Health (PIH), will serve as special advisor to his office on community-based medicine. Zanmi Lasante, PIH’s Haitian arm, is one of the country’s most important health care providers. Farmer already acts as the deputy to the UN’s special envoy to Haiti, former U.S. president Bill Clinton.

While some in global health and aid circles hailed Ban’s announcement, others were rightly circumspect, in view of the string of lofty pronouncements on cholera throughout 2012 that have produced little progress on the ground.

Behind the figures

The Secretary-General’s announcement was in support of the “Call for Action for a Cholera-free Hispaniola” made in January 2012 by the Presidents of Haiti and the Dominican Republic with support from the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)/World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

That call led to the launch in Brazil on June 4 of the “Regional Coalition on Water and Sanitation for the Elimination of Cholera on the Island of Hispaniola.” The Coalition has expanded several times since then, always with plenty of fanfare.

The main focus of the UN’s cholera prevention efforts, Ban said, are construction of clean drinking water and sanitation systems in the two countries and increasing the use of oral vaccines. But his comments on the two paths of treatment focused on vaccination, not on clean water and sanitation systems which experts argue is the only lasting way to eliminate the disease.

Many news outlets headlined that Ban had announced a ten-year, $2.2 billion cholera plan for Haiti, but he gave no such figure. “Haiti will need almost $500 million over the next two years to carry out its national implementation plan,” he said.

The $2.2-billion and 10-year figures come from a UN “media backgrounder” for the Dec. 11 announcement. They appear nowhere in the WHO/PAHO report on the Dec. 11 announcement nor in the Regional Coalition’s page on the PAHO website. The larger plan and figures will undoubtedly be a centerpiece of Haitian government announcements on the third anniversary of the Jan. 12, 2010 earthquake.

“Far from launching an ambitious new initiative, the UN was merely repackaging a still-unfunded, year-old effort,” write former AP correspondent in Haiti Jonathan Katz and international aid blogger Tom Murphy in Foreign Policy on Dec. 18. Almost all of the bilateral and multilateral $215 million announced had been pledged already to Haiti but not yet delivered, they point out.

As for the $2.2 billion plan, it “is purely aspirational.” Unlike the 9,000-strong UN occupation force MINUSTAH which is budgeted to receive $677 million over the next year alone, “The (cholera) initiative is almost totally unfunded.”

Pressure on international authorities

An article by Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) published by Al Jazeera on Dec. 12 said that Ban’s announcement is a sign that organized political pressure on the world body can produce results for Haiti. But the UN’s announced plan is too slow, Weisbrot argues. Some 700 people have died since seasonal rains began in April 2012, including close to 200 since Hurricane Sandy caused widespread flooding on Oct. 23 and 24. “The necessary infrastructure work should begin immediately, not years from now,” he wrote.

Examples of pressure, Weisbrot explained, are the legal action against the UN brought by the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH) and the Office of International Lawyers (Bureau des avocats internationaux or BAI) on behalf of 5000 Haitian cholera victims in November 2011; editorials in the New York Times, Boston Globe, and other major newspapers; a July 2012 letter signed by 104 U.S. Democratic Congresspeople; and constant street protests in Haiti and its diaspora.

Another pressure point on the UN is that cholera has killed nearly 400 people in the Dominican Republic, endangering its tourism industry, which brings in over $4 billion annually. Dominican officials want “to dispel the idea that visitors could be in danger of contracting cholera,” wrote Ezra Fieser on Infosurhoy.com last year. She quotes the Dominican Health Minister as saying, “We as a nation must fight to save our economy, which is basically tourism.”

Weisbrot points to looming funding cut-offs for cholera treatment. PIH, for example, says that its U.S. funding for cholera treatment will run out in February.

“In 2012, the UN requested just $30m for cholera treatment, yet only 34% of this has been raised,” he writes. “There were 205 cholera treatment units and 61 cholera treatment centres in Haiti in August 2011; by June 2012, these had fallen to 38 and 17, respectively.”

The cholera shortfall is consistent with a broader funding shortfall for post-earthquake reconstruction in Haiti. Of $5.3 billion pledged by governments to help Haiti to date, just $2.8 billion (53%) has been disbursed.

Other reactions to plan

A joint statement issued by the IJDH and BAI cautiously welcomed Ban’s announcement, calling its promise of clean water delivery systems “one of the key remedies sought” in their legal action launched in November 2011.

“We are pleased that the UN is finally taking steps consistent with its legal obligations,” said Mario Joseph, lead counsel for the petitioners and Managing Attorney of the BAI. “But more resources are needed, and there needs to be more urgency. In the two years it took to launch this initiative… over 7,700 Haitians have died. Haitians will continue to die from UN cholera until clean water and sanitation is actually installed.”

In an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s radio program As It Happens on Dec. 12, IJDH staff attorney Beatrice Lindstrom explained that the cholera legal action has four main goals: assistance in establishing clean water and sanitation systems in Haiti; a fair hearing before international law for the victims of cholera; compensation to the families of the victims; and an apology for the reckless conduct of the UN Mission to Stabilize Haiti (MINUSTAH) in allowing the cholera bacteria to enter the country via its soldiers and failing to act quickly to prevent its spread.

“The United Nations is good at launching appeals for aid,” wrote Mark Doyle, veteran BBC reporter in Haiti, after the Dec. 11 announcement. “It is less good at admitting its own faults.”

Cholera’s ongoing threat

Joining the UN Secretary-General for the Dec. 11 announcement were Haiti Prime Minister Laurent Lamothe and Dominican Health Minister Lorenzo Wilfredo Hidalgo.

Lamothe spoke for four minutes, thanking governments and agencies assisting with cholera response and saying that his government has a two-year $600 million project to fight cholera. "We have to work together to bridge the remaining gap," he said, implying that the $238.5 million announced would go towards his government’s goal.

To date, officials of the government of President Michel Martelly, including Lamothe, have not uttered a word about the cholera lawsuit against the UN.

According to the most recent data from the World Bank, only 69% of Haitians have access to "improved drinking water" and just 17% have access to "improved sanitation", defined in the plan as "flush toilets, septic tanks, ventilated improved pit latrines or composting toilets." Among the poorest 20%, only 1% has access to improved water and more than 90% "practice open air defecation."

At a press briefing following Ban’s announcement, UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Haiti Nigel Fisher would not comment on whether the MINUSTAH occupation force is to blame for bringing cholera to Haiti. Repeating statements he has made throughout 2012, he said the issue "is with the legal office and as a staff member I am not authorized to say anything about the legal process at this time."

PAHO director Mirta Roses Periago told the briefing that it is not necessarily advisable to screen every UN soldier for diseases before they are deployed on international missions. But she said PAHO has advised the Secretary-General "to have special provisions for people coming from endemic areas and being sure that there is no outbreak going on at the time that people are being deployed."

She said that the main problem for cholera in Haiti is poor sanitation and water infrastructure, noting that about 100 cases of cholera are imported to the United States each year without causing an epidemic. UN officials have used variations of that argument to deny culpability ever since the epidemic’s outbreak.

How you can help

More than 7,500 people around the world have signed an online petition on Avaaz initiated by film director Oliver Stone demanding more and faster UN assistance for clean water infrastructure in Haiti. It is still collecting signatures.

Ongoing information about Haiti after the 2010 earthquake is published by the CEPR on its invaluable Haiti Relief and Reconstruction Watch blog. More recently, the Just Foreign Policy organization that Mark Weisbrot also co-directs has begun to publish the informative and innovative ‘Haiti Cholera Counter’ web page feature. You can place the feature on any website.

You can contribute financially to the IJDH and BAI or volunteer your time to assist their work.

Watch for events around the world to mark the third anniversary of Haiti’s earthquake, including screenings, followed by panel discussions, of Michele Mitchell’s 2012 documentary film, “Haiti: Where Did The Money Go?” and seminars in London, England. Full event listings can be found on the website of the Canada Haiti Action Network.


Roger Annis is a coordinator of the Canada Haiti Action Network and resides in Vancouver, Canada.

Perfect Paper Storm: Gangs, Pickton, and Oppal's Missing Women Inquiry

GANGS, ROBERT PICKTON, AND WALLY OPPAL

by Betty Krawczyk - Betty's Early Edition

The Missing Women’s Inquiry is a good example of how to hold a huge public inquiry, spend lots of money on lawyers (all for the police, none for the murdered women’s relatives) and yet not discover one relevant thing that wasn’t already known. Sometimes I am almost grateful for the time I have spent in the women’s prisons in BC over environmental issues. Those long months, three and a half years’ worth all told, incarcerated with women in the trade and other occupations, have given me a perspective on BC politics that I probably never would have gained anywhere else. However, what I learned there was not comforting.

Still, without this association with so many women who have been blamed, cursed, damned and destroyed, I would never have been conscious of the huge part that criminal gangs play in our society. Certainly one did not hear a whisper about any possible gang connections in Oppal’s inquiry. So I will tell you out loud what the women in prison told me and you can make up your own mind.

Among other things, the women in prison told me that gangs were behind the murders of the missing women whose DNA was found on Pickton’s farm. They told me that the women were murdered, dismembered, and hung on meat hooks and eventually fed to pigs in the process of making “snuff” films. And they told me that some of the police knew about the film making and the murders all along and for whatever reasons, deliberately refused to investigate the killings as long as they could.

Mad, scrambled, criminal rantings from mad, scrambled, criminal women? Perhaps. But, In the first place the women who talked to me in prison were not mad. They were addicts, but they were not mad. Nor were they criminal in the broad sense of the word. In the main, they were survivors of the street. And in the main, they were First Nations, victims all, of losses of such magnitude that non- aboriginals can’t even begin to fathom them. But when Wally Oppal spoke of these losses in his report, he pointed fingers at society as a whole as being indifferent to the losses of First Nations women. There is an element of truth in this accusation. However, I believe Wally Oppal is using this as a smoke screen, along with police incompetence, to divert attention away from the reasons the women were murdered.

This is the main element in the Pickton trial itself that gives me pause... Robert Pickton’s lawyers got his charge of first degree murder reduced to second degree. How did they do this? By convincing the jury that Robert Pickton could not have killed all these women, dismembered them, and fed them to his pigs all by himself. Pickton’s lawyers convinced the jury that Robert Pickton had help in all of this, that other people were involved in the women’s murders. If the jury believed this, and recommend that the charge be lessened, and the judge accepted this, then where are the investigations into who the other murderer(s) might be? There were no investigations then or now. Well, what about media investigations as to why there are no ongoing investigations to find the other accomplice(s)? Why aren’t independent investigative reporters bugging the government about looking for the other accomplice (s)?

And most importantly why didn’t the Attorney General demand an investigation into the possibility of other accomplices immediately after the trial? Police and the RCMP don’t have to wait for the outcome of any possible appeal, or the outcome of anything, to investigate criminal activities. In fact, why wasn’t this search given the highest priorities? And why was Wally Oppal given the job of conducting the no- nothing inquiry in the first place? He was the Attorney General while much of the murdering of the women was going on. Talk about a conflict of interest.

I believe Wally Oppal was the choice to head the inquiry because the BC Liberal government wanted a no- nothing inquiry. Wally Oppal fit the bill as he was part of the problem the Liberals wanted to deny. In my opinion The BC Liberals seemed to fear any connection between possible gang activities around the Pickton murders both then and now. I think the BC Liberals picked Wally Oppal to head the inquiry because they knew he would scuttle it. And why would the BC Liberals want this? Because they were afraid of any information coming out that might reveal the power of the criminal gangs in relation to much that goes on in this province, including the Pickton murders.

Enough of this. The killing of approximately fifty women (Pickton’s boast and I believe him) on a pig farm with their bodies afterwards fed to his pigs is not something that a no-nothing inquiry can gloss over and then we can all forget about. We need a federal inquiry into the most depraved, nightmarish, grisly serial killings that have happened anywhere in the world. If Canadian First Nations and including Canadian citizens in general are refused a federal inquiry then the refusal could be taken to the United Nations. The UN would not refuse, they could not refuse. The entire world has to look at this case. The injustice of it is just too wrong, too inhuman to be borne quietly. And we don’t have to bear it quietly.




UPDATE: SORRY, WALLY OPPAL

Okay, scratch what I said about Wally Oppal being the Attorney General in BC when Robert Pickton was doing his murderous worse.  Of course he wasn’t.  Wally Oppal didn’t become Attorney General under the BC Liberals until 2005 and Robert Pickton wasn’t arrested until 2002.  So I apologize for this with no excuses.  Except that I have seen Mr. Oppal so many times in my own court room experience that it seems like he was Attorney General for an awfully long time. In fact it seemed like a million years, and Shirley Bond, his replacement, offers no comfort, either. The BC Liberals first made a comeback in BC politics in 2001 so the NDP government must also wear the burden of not knowing, or caring, what was happening to the women of Downtown Eastside.

Still, it is very suspicious to have a former Attorney General head an inquiry into such an emotional, horrific case, one so affiliated with a party that still bears investigation into possible other ties to criminal gangs (BC Rail).  So just what is the duty of the provincial Attorney General?
From Wikipedia:

“The Attorney General is responsible for ensuring that public administration is conducted according to the law and as such, he is the advisor of law to the government, in addition to overseeing the court system and Sheriff Services.  Under the Queen’s Counsel Act, the Attorney General is automatically appointed a Queen’s Counsel…”

The Attorney General is supposed to be advisor to the government. I think it is the other way around.  I think the BC Government advised Wally Oppal what they wanted him to do about the Pickton inquiry and he did it.  But I have a feeling that this is not over yet.

©2012 Betty K | Blog: http://bettysearlyedition.blogspot.com Books: www.schiverrhodespublishing.com 

Fillipoff Search Continues: Day 21 for Missing Emma

The continued search for Emma Fillioff after being Gone for 21 Days-Search continues (Dec. 19)

by Rose Henry

Tomorrow will be day 21 for the hunt for Emma who went missing from Sandy Merriman House. It seems like everything Wally Oppal stated yesterday is so true to this day. As the words from PEERS Ed said this morning, there are two active police investigations of two women who died this year, two missing women and more women being assaulted; all the while, one snow border goes missing, one person's dog is stranded on a mountain, and not many people are willing to spend some time looking for these people because of their economics, gender or race.

Emma Fillipoff was and mostly like is under worse medical distress then she was 2 days. Now there is only a hand-full off people going out and looking for her at the expense of her family; with minimal support from the police ( if any).

The people who are actively looking for this sister either don't  know the terrain, or they don't know Emma or her mother.

There are a few of us who have had the privilege of meeting both Emma and her mother. All we want to do is reunite these two ASAP. Emma mum is coping as best as she can under this situation. She is still handing out posters and walking the streets herself. She can't go very far because of no wheels and not knowing the city.

The people at the Quality Inn have been very supportive and have made the colored posters available at the front desk: Zepher, James, Josh, Julian, and the company that puts up posters on most of the poles downtown have too been very supportive.

I think one of Emma's friends has come from back East to be here for Emma and her mum. The last sighting of Emma was reported anonymously on her FB page on Dec 17 at about 1 in the afternoon. The person said that they saw someone who looked like Emma walking through Goldstream park in a dazed and confused appearance.

This is the area where some of her favorite locations are.

People who want or can come and find this lost and missed sister can come and join Josh at the Goldstream entrance on Finlayson Arm road at 10 am.

His contact # is 250 857 1592

Spotting Phony Forestry PR: Lobby Group Crows of Spotted Owl "Protection"

BC Forestry Industry Lobby Boasts about Spotted Owl Protection

by The Wilderness Committee

Reality check: 12 spotted owls remain in wild in BC – logging primary cause of decline

VANCOUVER – In a recent  newsletter from BC's Coast Forest Products Association, the timber lobby group claims the industry has had a decade of "success" in protecting species at risk, such as the critically endangered Northern spotted owl.

"Our success in BC in protecting species like marbled murrelets, spotted owls, Vancouver Island marmots, northern goshawks, tailed frogs, Grizzly bears and others is evidence that populations of species at risk can be managed well without disabling huge tracts of land," read the newsletter.

The statements were included in the Fall 2012 publication distributed by the lobby group, which recommended "improvements" to the federal Species at Risk Act. The Association suggested that the federal government follow the example of BC in protecting species at risk by championing voluntary measures and best management practices instead of a prescriptive law.

"Saying that the spotted owl is an example of good forest stewardship is like saying a heart attack is an example of a healthy diet," said Gwen Barlee, policy director with the Wilderness Committee.

"Scientists acknowledge that the spotted owl is hovering on the brink of extinction in Canada because of poor forestry practices. It is a well-known fact that forestry companies target the same old-growth forests these owls need to survive."

British Columbia is one of two provinces with no endangered species legislation, and it is home to 1,900 species at risk. BC has been heavily criticized by the environmental community for having no endangered species legislation, instead relying on a patchwork of weak regulations and voluntary measures.

Scientists estimate there are just 12 spotted owls left in the wild in BC – the only place they are found in Canada. Historically, BC was home to about 500 breeding pairs of spotted owls.




For Immediate Release - December 18, 2012

For more information contact:

Gwen Barlee, Policy Director, Wilderness Committee
BC Coastal Forest Products newsletter:  [http://www.coastforest.org/newsletter/current-issue/#chap_02]

The Wilderness Committee is Canada's largest membership-based, citizen-funded wilderness preservation organization. We work for the preservation of Canadian and international wilderness through research and grassroots education. The Wilderness Committee works on the ground to achieve ecologically sustainable communities.

Naming: Israeli Soldier's Killing Peaceful Protesters Named

Israeli Army Killing Palestinian Protestors with Impunity say Activists

by TRNN

Following chronic failure of IDF investigations, activists release the name of soldier involved in killing of Palestinian protester

Watch full multipart The Real News in the Middle East

Last week, in one of the first actions of its kind, activists released the names of Israeli soldiers involved in the killing of a Palestinian protester. Mustafa Tamimi, a 28 year-old demonstrator from the village of Nabi Saleh, was killed when a soldier shot a tear gas canister at his face in December last year. Attorney Emily Schaeffer of Yesh Din spoke with The Real News' Lia Tarachansky about why IDF investigations lead to little justice. Maj. Avital Liebovitch, the IDF Spokeswoman questioned why the army is even required to investigate crimes by soldiers, and Abir Kopty of the Palestinian Popular Struggle Coordination Committee spoke about the dozens of protesters who have been killed in recent years in demonstrations.

Palestinian Refugees Caught within Syria War Conflagration

Yarmouk, Syria: Humanitarian needs rising as residents flee fighting, seek safety in UNRWA schools

by UNRWA

17 December 2012

Damascus, Syria - As the Syria conflict and its impact on civilians continue to escalate, UNRWA is exerting all efforts to respond to the humanitarian needs of Palestine refugees. Over the past several days, Syrians and the over 150,000 Palestine refugee resident in Yarmouk, a suburb of Damascus, have experienced particularly intense armed engagements involving the use of heavy weapons and aircraft. Credible reports point to civilian deaths, injuries and destruction of property in Yarmouk. There are also waves of significant displacement as Yarmouk residents, including UNRWA staff and their families, scramble to seek safety as the armed conflict persists.

UNRWA is how housing over 2,600 displaced persons in its facilities and Damascus-area schools, and the number is growing rapidly. The Agency is working in coordination with humanitarian partners, including the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, United Nations agencies and the Danish Refugee Council to ensure that people in need have shelter, mattresses, blankets, food and other essential items.

Palestine refugees are also fleeing beyond Damascus. Although the scale and direction of this movement cannot be precisely determined, some have made their way to Lebanon. Initial reports indicate that well over 2,000 people have attempted or are attempting to enter Lebanon.

UNRWA remains gravely concerned about the safety of the Palestine refugee population in Syria and appeals to all parties to refrain from actions that endanger civilian lives and property. The Agency appreciates that the Government of Lebanon is allowing Palestine refugees from Syria to seek safety in Lebanon, and reiterates that refugees fleeing conflict must be accorded the safety and protection to which they are entitled under international law.

- Ends -

Background information:

UNRWA is a United Nations agency established by the General Assembly in 1949 and is mandated to provide assistance and protection to a population of some 5 million registered Palestine refugees. Its mission is to help Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank and the Gaza Strip to achieve their full potential in human development, pending a just solution to their plight. UNRWA’s services encompass education, health care, relief and social services, camp infrastructure and improvement, and microfinance.

Financial support to UNRWA has not kept pace with an increased demand for services caused by growing numbers of registered refugees, expanding need, and deepening poverty. As a result, the Agency's General Fund (GF), supporting UNRWA’s core activities and 97 per cent reliant on voluntary contributions, has begun each year with a large projected deficit.  

UNRWA has condemned attacks on its staff and Palestine refugees in Syria and urges an end to all hostilities in the country. Read all UNRWA statements on Syria here.

For further information please contact:
Sami Mshasha, UNRWA Arabic Spokesperson

Moore Sums Up Newtown Massacre: Guns Don't Kill People, Americans Kill People"

 

"Americans Kill People" - Michael Moore on Newtown, Mass Shootings, and the U.S. Culture of Violence

by DemocracyNow!

We air an excerpt of an address by the legendary filmmaker Michael Moore delivered just hours after the Newtown massacre. Moore won an Academy Award for his 2002 documentary, "Bowling for Columbine," about gun violence in the United States. He discussed the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre at a New York City event on Friday night.

Video courtesy of filmmaker Lorna Tucker.

Passing: Peace Activist, John Di Stefano

Passing: Peace Activist, John Di Stefano

by Kevin Neish

Hello Friends,

Local political activist John Di Stefano, passed away peacefully in his sleep early this morning (Monday).

He was in fine spirits and a good frame of mind the night before he died, but he was having a very tough time with his struggle against a reoccurring cancer.

For many years he's been a part of, or supported, a number of local, national and international solidarity organisations, often with sizable anonymous donations.

John was 85 years old and true to form is apparently going to bequeath much of his estate to various left wing charities and NGOs.

I only knew John for the last few years, so please forward this information to anyone else who you think should be informed of his passing.

Thanks.

Take care.
Kevin