Wednesday, August 13, 2014

***A Tale Of Two Women- The Saga Of Sam Lowell

 

From The Pen Of Frank Jackman

As she sat across the high-back café table at Rummy Jack’s up in Old Hampstead (that’s in New Hampshire not far from where she lived) Melinda Loring, without rancor (or maybe better with controlled rancor, yes, that would be a better way to put the matter) and without malice softly, as was her manner, told Sam Lowell that he had “two women now, whether he liked it or not, whether he recognized the situation or not.” And that short precise statement set the tone for that afternoon, and for the slippery slope downward that brought their affair to an end so that at last notice they had not spoken to each other, had not e-mailed each other in months. But we had better step back in this Melinda-Sam saga before we go forward where those words of Melinda will get more play than one Samuel Lowell, North Adamsville High School Class of 1964 could have imagined when he decided that he wanted in on his class’s 50th anniversary reunion celebration. 

Naturally one does not wind up at Rummy Jack’s having a late lunch with one woman (of that “spoken” two but more on number two later), one old classmate too boot, without some pre-history since this pair had not known each other back in high school (although he had given her many furtive glances in the corridors back then, had made something of a science out of those glance, she just ignored him, was clueless about who he was back then. That however never stopped those furtive glances of his then or later, no way). They had only recently connected via the class website established by the class reunion committee (of which Sam had become a part before he “met” Melinda). That class website “meeting” turned into a frantic furious exchange of e-mails when they found that while had not known each other back then they shared many academic, social, political, literary and personal connections.  (Wondering aloud in those frantic e-mails, he had made her laugh with their urgency and once when he said that he hoped they would not run out of cyberspace, why the hell they had not met back then). The frantic e-mails led to frantic cellphone calls (she liked his voice, liked his soft-spoken-ness, he liked her fresh spirit, her organized sense of things) which naturally led to that first date where she called him (prematurely, very prematurely, as it turned out) her “forever” man and he, a little slower on the uptake was smitten with her after the second date. Well first date, second date, forever man, smitten all added up to going under the satin sheets together. All along those fierce devoted weeks (it seemed impossible that they could move so quickly, especially with her since she was organized one of the two). Then the other shoe fell.

See Sam was smitten, but he was also conflicted, was not sure where he wanted the relationship to go. Was not sure he and Melinda had staying power, Hell, was not sure about how he felt about Laura. Laura? Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you the name of the second woman before. Sam had had a long- time relationship with Laura, a companion whom Melinda was aware of and who Sam said to her had become, after having been lovers for a number of years, something like roommates. See they shared a house together down in Whelan (in Massachusetts which is where he lived and which was one of the points of contention between Sam ad Melinda since she wanted him to come up and live with her). Well that explanation is what he gave Melinda to believe but as the Sam-Melinda relationship developed he had confront the fact that he had stronger feelings for Laura than he let on to Melinda.

It does not take a great literary mind, a great knowledge of human psychology, or even a treasure trove of common sense, to know that nothing but trouble was brewing, brewing up a storm that would not subside until there was not common language that Sam and Melinda could speak to each other. Naturally Melinda a woman who had been twice divorced, twice divorced under trying circumstances where she had to initiate the proceedings and wanted only one “forever” man and her to be his forever woman. She had made it clear from the beginning that she was a “one man woman” and that she wanted no fling and no affair but the real deal with all the bells and whistles or nothing (although not married, not that institution which she had had enough of, thank you).

She worked her understanding of their relationship under that strategic imperative all through their few months together, pressing Sam as often as she could about when he was going to leave Laura (at one point suggesting that he just move out of Whelan and get a place of his own if he was not ready to live with her). See she had her plans for Sam and they did not include any kind of three-some (truthfully Sam did not want that either) or some such “modern” arrangement. Sam hemmed and hawed but as he got more interested in Melinda, got a better sense that she would be good for him,  got more committed to leaving Laura since they had hit a  very serious dry patch in their relationship and he said he was just waiting for an excuse to move on he would have recurring second thoughts. Melinda meanwhile was getting more and more anxious about putting a life for of them together (they after all were not sixteen, although they both laughed that in some ways they were acting like that) and time was an enemy. And that urgency on Melinda’s part brought them to Rummy Jacks’ after they had exchanged a couple of acrimonious e-mails and decided they needed to meet face to face to hash things out, or split if that was in the cards. And hence Melinda’s opening statement.   

Sam, when he thought about, thought about it constantly for a while, had never been sure about the what or why of Melinda’s breaking off the affair shortly after that lunch (and after another series of acrimonious e-mails and cellphone calls). Was not sure at all on that subject beyond the tense arguments at the end and one ill-advised e-mail where he proposed that they become “friends” for a while. That bothered him considerable over the next few months while he absent-mindedly speculated that she might had decided to go back with man who she had dropped when she took up with Sam, might have had enough of the drama (as had he), or maybe just got her own version of wet feet but in any case she would at some point not answer his calls, answer his e-mails.

Melinda kept putting him off for a couple of weeks, told Sam  they should be apart that long to see if she felt the same after that time and if so would close the whole thing off. But this is what really had (has) Sam more confused than anything because he had actually told Laura he was leaving her for Melinda during this period when Melinda was in the process of dumping him. Fortunately, or so he thought so later, he had hedged his bets with Laura and made that leaving of their joint household conditional on what Melinda’s final decision was to be.

Naturally Laura was not thrilled with Sam behavior. Hell, she was as angry as he had ever seen her since all along he had downplayed his affair with Melinda declaring one night when she confronted him that they were “just friends”).  Almost hit him on another night when Sam burst out during one conversation that he had “two women” and unfortunately said it with a certain dramatic flair saying in such a way like “what is a guy to do with such good luck.” She would bring that remark up constantly to him when after Melinda’s decision became final and Sam in a desperate effort to salvage his long-time relationship with Laura and not face the old world alone begged her forgiveness they decided that they would stay together. She would bring the remark up to friends to embarrass him, to make him seem the fool having “left” Laura for, ah, a “never” woman. Made it plain that he only had only had one woman now. Or else.

But see that is where Laura was wrong, where the ghost of Melinda really had the last laugh. After Melinda dumped him he kept constantly thinking about her, tried to unsuccessfully contact her a couple of times before letting the efforts fade out. Still on many lonesome nights when he would be sitting with Laura talking over dinner he would be thinking of Melinda, thinking about how their thing had really been written in the stars after all and that he had made a mistake in not trying desperately to keep her when he had the chance. Would find himself thinking about Melinda in lots of situations and at strange times. Would get kind of swoony, would make up ways in his head about fantasy reconciliations. Yeah, so in the dark of night, some sweaty summer night when he could not sleep Sam knew, knew deep down that he still had “two women,” Melinda still had her hooks in him, and he was still missing his Linny.   

 

 


As The 100th Anniversary Of The Beginning of World War I (Remember The War To End All Wars) Starts ... Some Remembrances-Poet’s Corner -Siegfried Sassoon's Glory Of Women
 
 
 

Glory of Women


You love us when we're heroes, home on leave,
Or wounded in a mentionable place.
You worship decorations; you believe
That chivalry redeems the war's disgrace.
You make us shells. You listen with delight,
By tales of dirt and danger fondly thrilled.
You crown our distant ardours while we fight,
And mourn our laurelled memories when we're killed.
You can't believe that British troops 'retire'
When hell's last horror breaks them, and they run,
Trampling the terrible corpses--blind with blood.
O German mother dreaming by the fire,
While you are knitting socks to send your son
His face is trodden deeper in the mud.  
 

 
"You Know How To Whistle, Don't You?" Lauren Bacall Passes

Frank Jackman comment;

Bacall and Bogie-You know in To Have And Have Not  this pair did some of the sexiest scenes two people could do-with their clothes on. Enough said-RIP


 

Tuesday, August 12, 2014


Funny Man Robin Williams Passes On At 63

 
 
Frank Jackman comment:

Robin Williams was not the first, nor will he be the last, to be a walking bundle of human contradictions. Nor the first “celebrity” to create masterful works while living under some unknown (unknown to the audiences anyway) inner turmoils to work through the creative process. Heck, the guy was purely a mad monk high priest funny guy who made me laugh. Made me roar with his portrayal of an Army radio DJ in Good Morning, Vietnam because I ran into guys just like that goof DJ in the service. Hey, bringing laughter to a laughter-starved world, that’s the ticket. That too is a fine epitaph.      
 
Saying Goodbye To Comic Master Robin Williams
 

The Courage To Resist –All Honor To The Heroic Israeli Draft Resisters And Soldier Who Have Refused To Take Part In The Bloodbath In Gaza

Frank Jackman comment:

A number of members of Veterans For Peace, an organization of veterans of the American government’s imperial adventures, now made up mostly of Vietnam War veterans as veterans of earlier wars pass on but increasingly veterans of the Iraq and Afghan campaigns, learned the hard way, and too late, like myself, that one could refuse to comply with the government draft and military campaign orders. We have come to appreciate the great courage that it takes to buck one’s government, one’s neighbors, one’s friends when the war drums beat out the marching orders and you are expected to join in lockstep. We salute those brothers and sisters in Israel who have either refused induction in the military or have refused to take part in the bloodbath in Gaza. One day when we live in a more peaceful world those sacrifices will find a well-deserved place of honor. Presente!!!    
 
***********
 

Support Palestinian and Israeli war refusers

Related peace activists: 
War Resisters' International supports nonviolent resisters in Palestine and Israel. We are in solidarity with conscientious objectors and those who refuse to participate in the Israeli army. Conscription is active in Israel for women and men, for Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Druze. As well as conscripting full-time recruits, reservists are also enlisted after their mandatory military service has ended. Many reservists have been drafted in 'Operation Protective Edge', the Israeli military assault on Gaza.
If you are subject to compulsory military service in Israel, and do not want to go, contact New Profile.

What you can do to support war resisters in Palestine and Israel

News

Udi Segal, one of the 130 conscientious objectors who declared their refusal in a letter to the Israeli Prime Minister, was imprisoned on 28th July. Send an email protesting the imprisonment of conscientious objector Udi Segal here.
Listen to Udi explaining why he will not join the Israeli military:

Uriel Ferera, a conscientious objector in Israel, is in a cycle of call up to the military, imprisonment for refusal, and release. This video was taken at a support rally for Uriel outside the military prison that he is incarcerated in

In the film you will see Omar Sa'ad, a Druze Palestinian war refuser who was imprisoned six consecutive times for refusal to join the military.

Links

Check New Profile, WRI's affiliate in Israel, for news of conscientious objectors in Israel. Our Palestinian section, Jenin Creative Cultural Centre, can be contacted through their website. On facebook, Conscientious objectors against the occupation, Refusal to serve in the IDF are good sources of information on new refusers.
WRI affiliate Women Peacemakers Program have released a statement on violence in Gaza.
The European Network Against Arms Trade (ENAAT), in which WRI is involved, has released a statement calling on the European Union to end its military support for Israel.
 
 
 

The Courage To Resist –All Honor To The Heroic Israeli Draft Resisters And Soldier Who Have Refused To Take Part In The Bloodbath In Gaza


Frank Jackman comment:

A number of members of Veterans For Peace, an organization of veterans of the American government’s imperial adventures, now made up mostly of Vietnam War veterans as veterans of earlier wars pass on but increasingly veterans of the Iraq and Afghan campaigns, learned the hard way, and too late, like myself, that one could refuse to comply with the government draft and military campaign orders. We have come to appreciate the great courage that it takes to buck one’s government, one’s neighbors, one’s friends when the war drums beat out the marching orders and you are expected to join in lockstep. We salute those brothers and sisters in Israel who have either refused induction in the military or have refused to take part in the bloodbath in Gaza. One day when we live in a more peaceful world those sacrifices will find a well-deserved place of honor. Presente!!! 
 
 
 
Resistance Is Not Futile Wednesday, 06 August 2014 10:51 By Rory Fanning, Truthout | Op-Ed
2014 806 udi swUdi Segal, a 19-year-old Israeli from Kibbutz Tuval in north Israel, was sent to jail for refusing to enlist in the Israeli military. (Screengrab via Vimeo)The numbers are small, but there are Israeli military resisters actively fighting the occupation of Palestine within the borders of Israel. These draft age teenagers face enormous pressure from their government, family and peers to perpetuate state racism and the siege of the occupied territories. Despite the pressure, these brave Israelis adhere to their conscience and stand for justice in a society that increasingly rejects it. In addition to supporting the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestine from outside Israel involves standing in solidarity with those Israelis who find the courage to say, "I refuse." It is also the responsibility of US conscientious objectors like myself, to see the struggle of Israeli military resisters as part of our own struggle against US imperialism here at home.
Udi Segal, a 19-year-old Israeli from Kibbutz Tuval in north Israel, was sent to jail last week for refusing to enlist in the Israeli military. Segal is tall and skinny, with intense, blue eyes and a long angular face. In an interview with +972 Magazine, his last before being sent to jail, he appeared composed and resolute in his decision, despite his confessed fear of his imminent jail sentence.
"We are using refusal as a tool against the occupation, to end the occupation," Segal said. He was referring to 50 other sarvanim - Hebrew for "refuseniks" - who are members of the group Breaking the Silence, that wrote a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in early March 2014. In the letter, they expressed their collective "opposition to the military occupation of Palestinian territories," where "human rights are violated, and acts defined under international law as war-crimes are perpetuated on a daily basis." There are now over 130 signatories to the letter, according to Segal.
Segel revealed more about his decision in a prior interview, where he said he refuses to serve not only because of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, but because the military supports a nationalist and capitalist system which benefits only a few at the expense of the majority. Segel called on other "soldiers and reservists to refuse orders and not participate in the massacre."
Segal went to a mixed Jewish-Palestinian grade school and Israeli public high school. He said the transition from grade school to high school was difficult. His high school in Kibbutz Tuval has one of the highest percentages of graduates in the country who go on to enlist as combat troops in the IDF. His decision to refuse service was met with silence by his friends and harassment by his peers.
When asked how he felt about conscientiously objecting during Operation Protective Edge, Segal said, "I think that in these times, as the government and the media attempt to silence any critical voice that deviates even slightly from the belligerent mainstream, I think now, specifically, it is important not only to refuse, but to act against the occupation. Especially now when the destructive results of the occupation can be seen on TV right before our eyes."
According to +972 Magazine, when Segal reported to the draft office last week to declare his intentions, he was greeted by chants: "Go to Gaza! You're all traitors! Gaza is a cemetery! Go get f**ked in the a**!" He was also told that this was his "gay coming out party," and was called a "son of a whore," in front of his mother who was there with him. This response to Segal is revealing, particularly in light of Israel's claims that it is a "haven for the LGBTQ community."
Israel requires all citizens with the exceptions of Palestinians and Orthodox Jewish women to serve in the IDF. Men are required to serve three years, and women must serve two. Like the conscription requirements during the Vietnam era in the United States, Israelis can dodge the draft if they are enrolled in higher education.
Refuseniks are rare in Israel: There are only a handful each year, which is a testament to the high levels of propaganda Israelis are fed and the pressure they face to defend militarism in a country with a mandatory draft. Yonatan Shapira, a former Israeli captain and Air Force pilot, was one of the organizers of a 2003 letter signed by 27 Air Force pilots who refused to participate in Israeli military operations against Palestinians. In an interview with Democracy Now! Shapira said:
Today, we are a minority of a minority of activists in Israel. Of course there are more and more people, but we are still a very, very small minority. We have people that are going to jail. I have a friend who is going to jail for refusing to enlist with the army. . . . But overall, there is a disease in my country, and the disease is spreading very fast, and it's called fascism and racism. Fascism and racism is now the biggest threat of the Jewish people in the Middle East.
The Israeli government distinguishes between pacifists who reject the use of force for any reason and those with "selective conscience," or those who specifically refuse to fight because of the occupation in Palestine. The latter are treated much more severely and are more likely to receive a prison sentence.
We know that not all war resisters come to full consciousness of war, empire and occupation - which is why we should stand with all who resist war in the name of peace and justice, even as they sort out their sometimes contradictory rationales. Nevertheless, we can glean much from the way Israel distinguishes between mere pacifists and resisters who vocally oppose the occupation of Palestine in solidarity with the occupied.
Uriel Ferera, a 19-year-old student and social activist, with Orthodox sidelocks dangling below his ears, was jailed in May for refusing to enlist because of his objection to Israel's treatment of Palestinians.
After being released from prison (he expects to be sent back again soon) Ferera said:
Prison was difficult for me. They isolated me. The other prisoners didn't know why I was in here, and I didn't receive any letters - they probably didn't want me to know about all the support on the outside.
I didn't want to put on a [prison] uniform even though they yelled at me for "putting on a show." I couldn't stand up and began shaking; the only thing I could do was pray and recite from the Book of Psalms by heart. Despite everything, I didn't stop praying. They laughed at me. They claimed that God won't hear me because he was too busy to get me out of there. There I realized that if they are able to humiliate a Jewish person like them, one can only imagine what they do to Palestinian teenagers in the occupied territories.
There are a few organizations in Israel that support such refusers: New Profile is a leading organization and movement of feminists inside Israel struggling to demilitarize the country and end the occupation of Palestine. The group was formed following the second intifada in 2000, when 500 Palestinian and Jewish citizens of Israel stood united on the Wadi Road, where only a few weeks prior Israeli soldiers killed a group of Palestinians. The group of feminists marched despite warnings from Israeli officials who claimed the area was dangerous. Not a single Hebrew or English-language media outlet covered the protest. Through 2006, the group organized at least a dozen marches where thousands of Israelis and Palestinians took to the streets to protest the occupation and militarized Israel. The media turned a blind eye to every march.
In Israel the most vocal critics of the occupation have been feminists. New Profile realizes that liberating women in a militarized Israeli society is directly connected to the liberation of all Palestinians. Thus women aspiring to refuse conscription turn to New Profile to gain the confidence to move forward with their decision. You can support and learn more about the group here.
Yesh Gvul was established in 1982 in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. According to their website, Yesh Gvul was created as a result of "growing numbers of soldiers [who] grasped that the campaign, with its bloodshed and havoc, was an act of naked and futile aggression in which they wanted no part." In 1982, 168 Israelis were jailed for refusing to invade Lebanon. The actual number of refusals was much greater, but the Israeli government hid these numbers out of fear of giving the resisters a platform that would inspire other Israelis to reject military service.
Yesh Gvul counsels soldiers who are struggling with the possibility of becoming a war resister. Those who do conscientiously object get moral and financial support. The group also holds vigils at the military prisons where the soldiers are held. On their Facebook page, they report on the often-muted stories of draft age Israeli men and women who reject service in the IDF.
Courage to Refuse is another Israeli organization that supports military resisters. The group was formed in 2002 after 51 soldiers and reserve officers drafted a letter that decried the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The letter was run in the Israeli daily Haaretz and would become known as "The Combatants Letter." By 2005, the number of signatories of "The Combatants Letter" had reached over 600. The founders of the group said they would always refuse to participate in any military action outside of the borders that existed prior to the 1967 Six-Day War. "We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people. We hereby declare that we shall continue serving in the Israel Defense Forces in any mission that serves Israel's defense. The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose - and we shall take no part in them."
Breaking the Silence, the organization that drafted the letter that Udi Segal signed, also supports Israeli military resisters. The members of this group served in the Israeli military since the start of the second intifada in 2000. Their mission is to explain the brutal conditions the Palestinians are living under in the occupied territories, conditions the soldiers have witnessed firsthand, to the Israeli public. They have over 100,000 followers on Facebook.
The US government subsidizes the Israeli military with more than $3 billon in aid each year. The occupation of Palestine and the recent massacres in Gaza would not be possible without US support. As a former member of the US Army Rangers, I can personally attest that the US military trains with and greatly admires Israeli soldiers. Israeli soldiers have gotten so good at door-to-door combat that the US military flies troops to Israel to learn from soldiers in the IDF.
We know that ending war is possible. The Vietnam War came to an end as a result of the anti-war movement at home and abroad, the resistance of the Vietnamese, and US soldiers refusing to fight. As we struggle to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine we look to the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement, and the resistance inside Palestine. What we need is large numbers of Israeli soldiers to put down their weapons the way US soldiers eventually did in Vietnam. This is why we should raise up and support the small minority of Israelis who do resist.
US soldiers who oppose occupation and colonialism, and stand for human rights and self-determination, should refuse to train with Israeli soldiers. There needs to be a broader realization that the occupation of Palestine in Israel is much the same as the US occupation of Afghanistan or Iraq. If we hope to stop these horrific massacres, endless occupations and the slow death of those living in occupied territories and countries, we must join together with Israeli soldiers who refuse to fight.
Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.     
 
 

Defend The Palestinian People!- No U.S. Aid To Israel!- Down With U.S. Imperialism- No U.S. Aid To Egypt!- End The Blockade Of Gaza!-All Zionist Troops And Settlers Out Of The West Bank And East Jerusalem!  

 

Defend The Palestinian People!- No U.S. Aid To Israel!- Down With U.S. Imperialism- No U.S. Aid To Egypt!- End The Blockade Of Gaza!-All Zionist Troops And Settlers Out Of The West Bank And East Jerusalem!  
*********
150,000 protest in London against Israel’s siege of Gaza
11 Aug 2014
( from the World Socialist Web Site - 11 August 2014 )
londgaza-bbc.jpg
Saturday saw the largest British demonstration to date against the Israeli military siege of Gaza. People from all over Britain joined the march from the BBC’s headquarters to Hyde Park. The media talked of “tens of thousands” of protestors, but the organisers’ estimate of 150,000 was closer to the mark.

The demonstration, called by eight organisations, including Stop the War Coalition and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), was part of a day of protests internationally against Israeli military attacks on Gaza. At least 50,000 protested in Cape Town, South Africa, while thousands marched in Paris, despite another ban imposed by the French authorities. Demonstrations were also held in Spain and Greece, across Australia, and in Bangalore, India. Protests were also held in the cities of Edinburgh, Manchester and the Irish capital Dublin.

The size of the London protest demonstrated the outrage felt by broad sections of the population at the horrific violence unleashed on Gaza. Protesters chanted, “Free Free Palestine,” and “Brick by brick, Wall by wall, Israeli apartheid has to fall.” There was widespread support for the protest along the route as well, with café staff providing protesters with glasses of water in the heat.

An Israeli embassy spokesman told the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) they “don’t have a problem” with the protest, but then identified the march as supporting terrorism. The spokesman stated they opposed “people expressing support for a terror organisation which is designated in the UK [Hamas] and which today is the key obstacle to the prosperity of Gaza.”

Despite a number of Jewish speakers at the rally, the media still tried to whip up fears of “anti-Semitism” in order to divide Arab and Jewish workers.

The speeches before and after the march revealed the bankrupt perspective of those leading the protests, who seek to corral the growing anger behind attempts to change UK governmental foreign policy through the dead-end of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign. While there was acknowledgement of the scale of war crimes committed by Israeli troops, and calls for an end to the selling of military equipment to Israel, much of the final rally was given to political manoeuvring by the major parties ahead of next year’s general election.

The protest assembled outside the BBC’s headquarters in Portland Place in order to draw attention to the broadcaster’s biased coverage in support of Israel and its discrediting of international protests.

Several speakers, predominantly trade union officials, addressed the crowd before the march, clearly setting out the agenda of the organisers. Speakers from the train drivers’ union ASLEF and Unite called for support for BDS.

Chris Nineham of Stop the War, a former leading member of the pseudo-left Socialist Workers Party (SWP), and Jean Butcher of Unison both pointed to the organisers’ main ambition. In their call for the protest Stop the War had said one of their main aims was the recall of parliament from its holiday. As Stop the War indicated last year in relation to the proposed bombardment of Syria, their intention is increasingly to act as advisers to the British ruling class on questions of foreign policy. Butcher insisted: “our own government” needs to “step up to the mark.”

For his part, Nineham said the developing crisis within the British government over support for Israel, including the resignation of one of the government’s leading figures, Baroness Warzi, would not have happened without the protest movement. Nineham made clear that pursuing this line required the exclusion of any mobilisation of the working class against war. This was a broad movement, he said; “the whole of civil society” demonstrating “people power.”

Lindsey German, convenor of the Stop the War Coalition and another former leading figure in the SWP, said, “We are calling for an end to the massacre and the recall of the UK parliament. Our government must be forced to end its support for Israel’s siege of Gaza.”

Her comments were echoed at the closing rally by Sarah Colbourne of the Public and Commercial Services Union, who spoke of the need to “send a message to our government that we’re disgusted.” They had received support, she said, from “people from every party,” citing support from Liberal Democrats and “even Conservative MPs.” The line was echoed by Labour MP Diane Abbott, who said the protest showed “British people of all colours and all political parties” standing in solidarity.

In the speeches there was only the occasional mention of the imperialist-backed war by the Ukraine government against the population in the east of that country, and the recent US bombing of Iraq. Israel’s onslaught against Gaza was treated by the speakers chiefly as a moral question. Liberal Democrats David Ward MP and life peer Baroness Jenny Tonge spoke, with Ward promoting BDS. Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams sent a statement in which he called on the Irish government to end its “shameful silence” on Palestine.

Leader of the Green Party Natalie Bennett called for ending arms exports to Israel and ending further military cooperation. “That,” she said “is achievable,” saying that Green MP Caroline Lucas had already called for it in Parliament. Bennett summed up the position of the organisers when she called simply for “pressure” on Prime Minister David Cameron.

In their call for the protest Stop the War had written enthusiastically of Labour Party leader Ed Miliband having come out “strongly critical” of Cameron, and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg “calling for a ceasefire.” The rally was attended by a number of Labour Party MPs—Abbott, Rushanara Ali, Yasmin Qureshi—who were given a platform to call for “pressure” on Cameron. Abbott spelled it out most clearly. Referring to Baroness Warsi’s resignation from Cameron’s cabinet last week, Abbott said the task was to “keep up the pressure until David Cameron takes a position that is morally defensible.”

This call for pressure on the British government as the solution was made under conditions, as the speakers themselves noted, of the hypocrisy of Cameron’s boast of having sent NHS medical teams to tend those wounded by arms exported under British government licence.

Many speakers drew parallels between the situation in Palestine and that under apartheid in South Africa. All of them treated the end of apartheid as a revolutionary victory rather than a tactical manoeuvre by a bourgeoisie trying to maintain its position within global capitalism. Labour supporter Owen Jones said that apartheid had seemed strong and asked “But did it fall?”

Apartheid was removed because it provided an obstacle to the South African ruling class, and threatened a social explosion that might lead towards moves to overthrow capitalism. Today the African National Congress itself is responsible for the policing and brutalisation of the South African working class. The mineworkers union, which collaborated in shooting dead striking miners at Marikana in 2012, belongs to the ANC-affiliated trade union body COSATU, which has been at the forefront of the BDS boycott campaign.

The boycott campaign is based on opposition to winning the Israeli working class to a struggle against the government and war. It obstructs and prevents efforts to build a unified struggle of Jewish and Arab workers against their common oppressors. The Israeli government can sustain its militarist outrages and unrelenting repression of Palestinians only because of the absence of a working class leadership armed with an internationalist and socialist program opposed to Zionism.

The aim of those promoting the BDS campaign is to further the “two-state solution” via the creation of an unviable mini-state that could serve only as a prison for the Palestinians.

The unity of the working class, both Arab and Jewish, was at the centre of the campaign by members and supporters of the Socialist Equality Party, who distributed thousands of copies of the World Socialist Web Site statement, The Slaughter in Gaza: A Warning to the International Working Class. SEP campaigners won a warm response for our call to build an international socialist movement to put an end to capitalism and war.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/11/lond-a11.html
Investigating Gaza War Crimes
12 Aug 2014
Gaza
Investigating Gaza War Crimes

by Stephen Lendman

On August 11, Human Rights Council (HRC) President Baudelaire Ndong Ella announced the formation of an "independent, international commission of inquiry" into war crimes committed during Israel's Operation Protective Edge.

International human rights law expert Professor William Schabas was appointed to chair a three-person panel. His special focus is genocide.

Other members include international law, criminal law, human rights and extradition law expert, Amal Alamuddin, and former UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Doudou Diene.

Note: According to AP, Alamuddin said she's unable to serve. Expect an alternate appointment to replace her.

The HRC "decided to establish the commission of inquiry at its twenty-first special session on 23 July 2014 to investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, in the context of the military operations conducted since 13 June 2014, whether before, during or after, to establish the facts and circumstances of such violations and of the crimes perpetrated and to identify those responsible, to make recommendations, in particular on accountability measures, all with a view to avoiding and ending impunity and ensuring that those responsible are held accountable, and on ways and means to protect civilians against any further assaults."

Schabas is a well-known Israeli critic. He praised the Goldstone Committee Operation Cast Lead report. More on it below.

Earlier, he called for putting Netanyahu and former Israeli president Shimon Peres in the dock at the International Criminal Court for committing high crimes too serious to ignore.

Israel failed to influence the commission of inquiry's composition. In response to the appointment of Schbas, Alamuddin, and Diene, it called the panel "biased, misconceived and destructive."

Defrocked and reinstated Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman called HRC a "terrorists' rights council." His spokesman Yigal Palmer added:

"If more evidence was needed to show this, the appointment of the commission’s chairman, whose opinions and positions against Israel are known to all, proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Israel cannot expect justice from such a body, and that the report has already been written and remains only to be signed."

In March 2015, the commission will submit its report. According to HRC President Ella, it's mission is also "to establish the facts and circumstances of (human rights) violations and of the crimes perpetrated and to identify those responsible, to make recommendations, in particular on accountability measures, all with a view to avoiding and ending impunity and ensuring that those responsible are held accountable, and on ways and means to protect civilians against any further assaults."

MSM scoundrels reported little or nothing about the commission's appointment and mission. The New York Times covered it in one long paragraph only with little context.

Pro-Israeli bias is longstanding MSM policy. An attempt to downplay the potential importance of the commission's investigation shows in failure to give it the attention it deserves.

Following Israel's 2008-09 Operation Cast Lead, the HRC appointed the Goldstone "fact-finding mission to investigate international human rights and humanitarian law violations related to the recent conflict in the Gaza Strip."

On September 15, 2009, the HRC released the commission's 575-page report, titled "Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict."

An accompanying press release said "there is evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.”

Examples included Palestinians shot while waving white flags, arbitrary arrests, extrajudicial assassinations and using Palestinians as human shields.

According to the commission:

"While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right of self defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole."

Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks were minor incidents compared to Israel's onslaught.

The Palestinian death toll exceeded 1,400. Thousands were injured.

Israeli aggression amounted to strictly prohibited collective punishment against a civilian population.

It lawlessly targeted residential neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, mosques, public buildings, factories and vital infrastructure.

It violated the principles of "distinction" between combatants and military targets v. civilians and non-military ones, as well as "proportionality" prohibiting disproportionate force likely to cause extensive damage and loss of life.

Commission findings included numerous examples of disproportionate Israeli attacks against civilians with lethal outcomes.

It called them war crimes for being unrelated to justifiable military objectives. It cited "a justice crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action."

It urged referral to the International Criminal Court for further action.

The Goldstone "report conclude(d) that the Israeli military operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population."

"The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy which has made the daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian population."

"Repeatedly, the Israel Defense Forces failed to adequately distinguish between combatants and civilians, as the laws of war strictly require."

"Pursuing justice in this case is essential because no state or armed group should be above the law."

Failure to do so “will have a deeply corrosive effect on international justice, and reveal an unacceptable hypocrisy."

"As a service to hundreds of civilians who needlessly died and for the equal application of international justice, the perpetrators of serious violations must be held to account."

On October 19, 2009, the 47-member HRC approved a resolution endorsing Israeli war crimes charges.

The vote was 25 in favor, six against (including Washington), 11 abstentions and five no-shows.

On September 21, 2010, an HRC statement said:

"It was clear to the Committee that the IDF had not distinguished between civilians and civilian objects and military targets."

"Both the loss of life and the damage to property were disproportionate to the harm suffered by Israel or any threatened harm. Israel's actions could not be justified as self-defense."

"The IDF was responsible for the crime of killing, wounding and terrorizing civilians (as well as) wonton(ly) destr(oying) property and that such destruction could not be justified on grounds of military necessity."

The HRC called IDF crimes so grave, "it was compelled to consider whether (genocide) had been committed." Its conclusion was that Israel "committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and, possibly genocide in the course of Operation Cast Lead."

This writer calls Operation Protective Edge Cast Lead on steroids. The 2008-09 war lasted 22 days - from December 27, 2008 until January 18, 2009.

Israel's current aggression began on July 8. It remains ongoing. Shaky ceasefires interrupted hostilities briefly. A current 72-hour one continues during talks in Cairo aimed at ending conflict conditions.

A previous three-day suspension of accomplished nothing. Both sides remain at impasse. Israel wants all its demands met unconditionally.

It offers virtually nothing in return except empty promises certain to be broken. On Tuesday, Reuters quoted an unnamed israeli official saying no progress was made during current talks.

"The gaps between the sides are big, and there is no progress in the negotiations," he said. Hamas had no comment.

According to Maan News, a partial draft on easing Gaza's siege was drafted. Terms include:

1. Letting Gazans fish up to 12 nautical miles from shore.

2. Increasing daily trucks with imported goods to 250.

3. Increasing the number of monthly permits for Gazans to pass through Erez crossing to 500.

4. Permitting money transfers from the West Bank to Gaza via the PA.

5. Opening the Rafah crossing to Egypt.

6. Freeing released prisoners in exchange for Gilad Shalit later rearrested.

7. According to the Israeli Ynet news site, letting construction materials enter Gaza "under close supervision."

8. Prohibiting construction of a seaport to facilitate imports and exports unless Hamas and other resistance groups agreed to demilitarize.

It's unclear how they'll react to this proposal. It's well short of lifting siege conditions and agreeing to other fundamental Palestinian demands.

It bears repeating what previous articles stressed. Israeli agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on.

Willful violations occur with disturbing regularity. Israel invents reasons to justify the unjustifiable. Whatever comes out of Cairo talks, expect the pattern to repeat this time. Expect long sought justice to be denied.

At the same time, Israel violated ceasefire conditions by using live fire against Palestinian fishermen off southern Gaza's coast. No injuries were reported.

On August 11, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights reported 2,008 Palestinians killed. They include 1,670 civilians (83%): 471 were children; 252 were women.

Another 8,150 Palestinians were wounded, many seriously. Thousands of houses were destroyed or damaged.

Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forcibly displaced. Israel bombed and shelled their homes and neighborhoods to rubble.

It remains unaccountable for crimes of war and against humanity amounting to genocide. Goldstone's Cast Lead report achieved nothing. Expect justice to be denied again this time.

With Western support and US Security Council veto power, Israel is free to commit high crimes against peace whenever it wishes with impunity.

It takes full advantage. Palestinian liberation remains an unfulfilled distant dream. Maybe some day. Not now.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour
The End of Iraq - And the Beginning of a New Dark Age -
12 Aug 2014
Mission accomplished.
Obama Iraq.jpg
by PATRICK COCKBURN



Iraq has disintegrated. Little is exchanged between its three great communities – Shia, Sunni and Kurd – except gunfire. The outside world hopes that a more inclusive government will change this but it is probably too late.


The main victor in the new war in Iraq is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) which wants to kill Shia rather than negotiate with them. Iraq is facing a civil war that could be as bloody as anything that we have seen in Syria and could go on for years.

The crucial date in this renewed conflict is 10 June, 2014 when Isis captured Iraq’s northern capital, Mosul, after three days’ fighting. The Iraqi government had an army with 350,000 soldiers on which $41.6bn (£25bn) had been spent in the three years from 2011, but this force melted away without significant resistance.

Discarded uniforms and equipment were found strewn along the roads leading to Kurdistan and safety. The flight was led by commanding officers, some of whom rapidly changed into civilian clothes as they abandoned their men. Given that Isis may have had as few as 1,300 fighters in its assault on Mosul this was one of the great military debacles in history.

Within two weeks those parts of northern and western Iraq outside Kurdish control were in the hands of Isis. By the end of the month the group had announced a caliphate straddling the Iraq-Syria border.

People in Baghdad are used to shocks after years of war, massacres, occupation and dictatorship, but when Mosul fell they could feel the ground shifting under their feet. Soon Isis fighters were only an hour’s drive north of a capital in which the streets, normally choked with traffic, grew quiet as people stayed at home because they thought it too dangerous to go out.

This was particularly true of Sunni districts such as al-Adhamiyah on the east bank of the Tigris River, where young men rightly believed that if they passed through a checkpoint they were likely to be arrested or worse. People watched television obsessively, nervously channel-hopping as they tried to tease out the truth from competing propaganda claims.

The sense of crisis was made worse by the main government channel broadcasting upbeat accounts of the latest victories, though the claims were seldom backed up by pictures. “Watch enough government television and pretty soon you would decide there is not a single member of Isis in the country,” said one observer.

The political geography of Iraq was changing before its people’s eyes and there were material signs of this everywhere. OR Book Going RougeBaghdadis cook on propane gas because the electricity supply is so unreliable but soon there was a chronic shortage of gas cylinders because they come from Kirkuk and the road from the north had been cut by Isis fighters. To hire a truck to come the 200 miles from the Kurdish capital Erbil to Baghdad now cost $10,000 for a single journey, compared to $500 a month earlier.

There were ominous signs that Iraqis feared a future filled with violence as weapons and ammunition soared in price. The cost of a bullet for an AK47 assault rifle quickly tripled to 3,000 Iraqi dinars, or about $2. Kalashnikovs were almost impossible to buy from arms dealers, though pistols could still be obtained at three times the price of the previous week. Suddenly, almost everybody had guns, including even Baghdad’s paunchy, white-shirted traffic police who began carrying sub-machine guns.

Many of the armed men who started appearing in the streets of Baghdad and other Shia cities were Shia militiamen, some from Asaib Ahl al-Haq, a splinter group from the movement of Shia populist and nationalist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. This organisation is partly controlled by the Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and, it is generally assumed, by the Iranians. It was a measure of the collapse of the state security forces and the national army that the government was relying on a sectarian militia to defend the capital.

Ironically, one of Maliki’s few achievements as prime minister had been to face down the Shia militias in 2008, but now he was encouraging them to return to the streets. Soon dead bodies were being dumped at night. They were stripped of their ID cards but were assumed to be Sunni victims of the militia death squads. Iraq seemed to be slipping over the edge into an abyss in which sectarian massacres and counter-massacres rivalled those during the sectarian civil war between Sunni and Shia in 2006-07.

The renewed sectarian violence was very visible. There was an appalling video of Iraqi military cadets being machine-gunned near Tikrit by a line of Isis gunmen as they stood in front of a shallow open grave. It reminded me of pictures of the SS murdering Jews in Russia and Poland during the Second World War.

Human rights organisations using satellite pictures said they estimated the number of dead to be 170 though it might have been many more. Shia who were from the Turkoman ethnic group living in villages south of Kirkuk were driven from their homes and between 15 and 25 of them were murdered. It may be that the Shia will react in kind, but so far the killings have largely been of Shia by Isis.

Isis described its military strategy as “moving like a serpent between the rocks”, in other words using its forces as shock troops to take easy targets but not getting dragged into prolonged fighting in which its fighters would be tied down and suffer heavy casualties. It picked off government garrisons in Sunni-majority districts, and in the places it captured it did not necessarily leave many of its militants behind but rather relied on local allies. Many in Baghdad and in governments across the world hoped that these allies of Isis – local tribes and local Sunni leaders – could be persuaded to split from Isis because of its violence and primeval social agenda.

In the refinery town of Baiji local people said that Isis had been going from house to house asking for the names of married and unmarried women, sometimes demanding to see ID cards, which in Iraq specify marital status. They explained they were doing this because their unmarried fighters wanted to have wives. No doubt there will be a negative reaction to this sort of activity from the local Sunni communities, but a movement that is well organised and prepared to kill any opponent will not be easy to challenge.

The rise of Isis and its military successes has led to short-sighted euphoria in Sunni countries. People congratulate themselves that it is no longer only the Shia who are on the offensive. But in practice Isis’s seizure of a leadership position in Syria and Iraq’s communities will most likely prove to be a disaster for them. Isis is being used as a vanguard movement that will not allow itself to be easily displaced and, like the fascists in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s, will seek to crush anybody who tries.

The Sunnis have ceded a commanding role to a movement that sees itself as divinely inspired and whose agenda involves endless and unwinnable wars against apostates and heretics. Iraq and Syria can be divided up, but they cannot be divided up cleanly and peacefully because too many minorities, like the million or more Sunni in Baghdad, are on the wrong side of any conceivable dividing line. At best, Syria and Iraq face years of intermittent civil war; at worst, the division of these countries will be like the partition of India in 1947 when massacre and fear of massacre established new demographic frontiers.

The fall of Mosul and the Isis-led Sunni revolt marks the end of a distinct period in Iraqi history that began with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein by the US and British invasion of March 2003. There was an attempt by the Iraqi opposition to the old regime and their foreign allies to create a new Iraq in which the three communities shared power in Baghdad. The experiment failed disastrously and it seems it will be impossible to resurrect it because the battle lines between Kurd, Sunni and Shia are now too stark and embittered.

The balance of power inside Iraq is changing. So too are the de facto frontiers of the state, with an expanded and increasingly independent Kurdistan – the Kurds having opportunistically used the crisis to secure territories they have always claimed – and the Iraq-Syrian border having ceased to exist. The impact of these events is being felt across the Middle East as governments take on board that Isis, an al-Qai’da-type group of the greatest ferocity and religious bigotry, has been able to claim the creation of a Sunni caliphate spanning much of Iraq and Syria.

This book focuses on several critical short- and long-term developments in the Middle East that are affecting or will soon affect the rest of the world. The most important of these is the resurgence of the al-Qa’ida-type movements that today rule a vast area in north and west Iraq and eastern and northern Syria. The area under their sway is several hundred times larger than any territory ever controlled by Osama bin Laden, the killing of whom in 2011 was supposed to be a major blow to world terrorism.

In fact, it is since bin Laden’s death that al-Qa’ida affiliates or clones have had their greatest successes, including the capture of Raqqa in the eastern part of Syria, the only provincial capital in that country to fall to the rebels, in March 2013. In January 2014, Isis took over Fallujah just 40 miles west of Baghdad, a city famously besieged and stormed by US marines 10 years earlier. Within a few months they had also captured Mosul and Tikrit.

The battle lines may continue to change, but the overall expansion of their power appears permanent. With their swift and multi-pronged assault across central and northern Iraq in June 2014, the Isis militants had superceded al-Qa’ida as the most powerful and effective jihadi group in the world.

These developments came as a shock to many in the West, including politicians and specialists whose view of what was happening often seemed outpaced by events. One reason for this was that it was too risky for journalists and outside observers to visit the areas where Isis was operating because of the extreme danger of being kidnapped or murdered. “Those who used to protect the foreign media can no longer protect themselves,” one intrepid correspondent told me, explaining why he would not be returning to rebel-held Syria.

The triumph of Isis in Iraq in 2013-14 came as a particular surprise because the western media had largely stopped reporting the country. This lack of coverage had been convenient for the US and other Western governments because it enabled them to play down the extent to which “the war on terror” had failed so catastrophically in the years since 9/11.

This failure is masked by deceptions and self-deceptions on the part of governments. Speaking at West Point on America’s role in the world on 28 May 28 2014, President Barack Obama said that the main threat to the United States no longer came from al-Qa’ida central but from “decentralised al-Qa’ida affiliates and extremists, many with agendas focused on the countries where they operate.” He added that “as the Syrian civil war spills across borders, the capacity of battle-hardened extremist groups to come after us only increases”.

This was true enough, but Obama’s solution to the danger was, as he put it, “to ramp up support for those in the Syrian opposition who offer the best alternative to terrorists.” By June he was asking Congress for $500m to train and equip “appropriately vetted” members of the Syrian opposition. It is here that self-deception reigns, because the Syrian military opposition is dominated by Isis and by Jabhat al-Nusra (JAN), the official al-Qa’ida representative, in addition to other extreme jihadi groups. In reality, there is no dividing wall between them and America’s supposedly moderate opposition allies.

An intelligence officer from a Middle East country neighbouring Syria told me that Isis members “say they are always pleased when sophisticated weapons are sent to anti-Assad groups of any kind because they can always get the arms off them by threats of force or cash payments.” Western support for the Syrian opposition may have failed to overthrow Assad, but it was successfully destabilising Iraq, as Iraqi politicians had long predicted.

The importance of Saudi Arabia in the rise and return of al-Qa’ida is often misunderstood and understated. Saudi Arabia is influential because its oil and vast wealth make it powerful in the Middle East and beyond. But it is not financial resources alone that make it such an important player. Another factor is its propagating of Wahhabism, the fundamentalist 18th-century version of Islam that imposes sharia law, relegates women to second-class citizens, and regards Shia and Sufi Muslims as heretics and apostates to be persecuted along with Christians and Jews.

This religious intolerance and political authoritarianism, which in its readiness to use violence has many similarities with European fascism in the 1930s, is getting worse rather than better. A Saudi who set up a liberal website on which clerics could be criticised was recently sentenced to a thousand lashes and seven years in prison.

. Critics of this new trend in Islam from elsewhere in the Muslim world do not survive long; they are forced to flee or murdered. Denouncing jihadi leaders in Kabul in 2003, an Afghan editor described them as “holy fascists”, who were misusing Islam as “an instrument to take over power”. Unsurprisingly, he was accused of insulting Islam and had to leave the country.

A striking development in the Islamic world in recent decades is the way in which Wahhabism is taking over mainstream Sunni Islam. In one country after another Saudi Arabia is putting up the money for the training of preachers and the building of mosques. A result of this is the spread of sectarian strife between Sunni and Shia. The latter find themselves targeted with unprecedented viciousness from Tunisia to Indonesia. Such sectarianism is not confined to country villages outside Aleppo or in the Punjab, it is poisoning relations between the two sects in every Islamic grouping. A Muslim friend in London told me: “Go through the address books of any Sunni or Shia in Britain and you will find very few names belonging to people outside their own community.”

The resurgence of al-Qa’ida-type groups is not a threat confined to Syria, Iraq, and their near neighbours. What is happening in these countries, combined with the increasing dominance of intolerant and exclusive Wahhabite beliefs within the worldwide Sunni community, means that all 1.6 billion Muslims, almost a quarter of the world’s people, will be increasingly affected. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that non-Muslim populations, including many in the West, will be untouched by the conflict. Today’s resurgent jihadism, which has shifted the political terrain in Iraq and Syria, is already having far-reaching effects on global politics with dire consequences for us all.


http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/11/the-end-of-iraq/