|
_______________________________________________________________________
NPK-info 14-09-2001 - Nederlands Palestina Komitee
/ www.palestina-komitee.nl
_______________________________________________________________________
Enkele berichten [uit vele] over de vier aanslagen d.d.
11-9-2001 in de USA
NPK/WL, 14-9-2001
_______________________________________________________________________
From: F r e e d o m, 13-9-2001
On the Bombings
Noam Chomsky
The terrorist attacks were major atrocities. In scale
they may not reach the
level of many others, for example, Clinton's bombing
of the Sudan with no
credible pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical
supplies
and killing unknown numbers of people (no one
knows, because the US blocked
an inquiry at the UN and no one cares to pursue it).
Not to speak of much
worse cases, which easily come to mind. But that this
was a horrendous crime
is not in doubt. The primary victims, as usual, were
working people:
janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc.
It is likely to prove to be a crushing blow to
Palestinians and other poor
and oppressed people. It is also likely to lead to
harsh security controls,
with many possible ramifications for undermining
civil liberties and
internal freedom.
The events reveal, dramatically, the
foolishness of the project of "missile
defense." As has been obvious all along, and
pointed out repeatedly by
strategic analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense
damage in the US,
including weapons of mass destruction, they are
highly unlikely to launch a
missile attack, thus guaranteeing their immediate
destruction. There are inn
umerable easier ways that are basically unstoppable.
But today's events
will, very likely, be exploited to increase the
pressure to develop these
systems and put them into place.
"Defense" is a thin cover for plans
for militarization of space, and with
good PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some
weight among a
frightened public.
In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist
right, those who hope to
use force to control their domains. That is even
putting aside the likely US
actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more
attacks like this one,
or worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous
than they appeared to be
before the latest atrocities.
As to how to react, we have a choice. We can
express justified horror; we
can seek to understand what may have led to the
crimes, which means making
an effort to enter the minds of the likely
perpetrators. If we
choose the latter course, we can do no better,
I think, than to listen to
the words of Robert Fisk, whose direct knowledge and
insight into affairs of
the region is unmatched after many years of
distinguished reporting.
Describing "The wickedness and awesome cruelty
of a crushed and humiliated
people," he writes that "this is not the
war of democracy versus terror that
the world will be asked to believe in the coming days.
It is also about
American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and
US helicopters firing
missiles into a Lebanese
ambulance in 1996 and American shells crashing into a
village called Qana
and about a Lebanese militia - paid and uniformed by
America's Israeli
ally - hacking and raping and murdering their way
through refugee
camps." And much more.
Again, we have a choice: we may try to
understand, or refuse to do so,
contributing to the likelihood that much worse lies
ahead.
_______________________________________________________________________
The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine
PRESS RELEASE
12 September 2001
The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine
Condemns Terror Attacks in U.S.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Heidi Shoup
Today, America woke up struggling to comprehend
yesterday's horrific events
and to understand what motivations lie behind such a
tragedy. We at the
Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine, like all
people committed to
justice and appalled by violence, condemn these
attacks and express our
heartfelt sympathy to the victims and their families
and loved ones.
The Center is keenly aware that under these
circumstances, it is essential
to exercise extreme caution and to be thoughtful in
our reactions and
responses. The media's selective use of images
of Palestinians in refugee
camps "celebrating" in the streets without
any contextual information
provides a misleading picture and encourages
anti-Arab and anti-Islamic
feelings-and actions. There is too little
awareness of the ongoing
suffering of the Palestinian people under Israeli
occupation in a context in
which many Palestinians view Israeli and U.S. policy
as inextricably linked.
Throughout the Middle East, Arabs-Muslims and
Christians-as well as Jews
share our collective sense of mourning. Offers
of sympathy and assistance
are pouring in from leaders across the Arab world.
Here at home, Arab and
Islamic organizations call upon their members to
donate blood and help in
rescue and relief efforts underway.
Arab and Muslim Americans face additional fears now,
remembering the
virulent anti-Arab/anti-Muslim behavior that erupted
following the Oklahoma
City bombing and the TWA Flight 800 crash, although
neither Arabs nor
Muslims were in any way part of these tragedies.
Terrorism is a threat not only to America and the
American way of life, but
to the peace, security, and well-being of all nations
on earth. To
decisively defeat terrorism in the world, however,
the U.S. should not
pursue this goal alone, but with full international
collaboration.
As the United States pursues its war on terrorism, we
must remember that
ignorance, hysteria, and vigilantism are also our
enemies.
The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine will
continue its efforts to
promote understanding of the impact of U.S. policy in
the Middle East and
provide thoughtful analysis of events and issues that
affect those who seek
peace, justice, and freedom for all peoples.
-30-
Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine / 2425-35
Virginia Avenue, NW /
Washington, DC 20037 / Tel: 202.338.1290 / Fax:
202.333.7742 /
_______________________________________________________________________
top
From F r e e d o m: 12-9-2001
Is the world's favourite hate figure to
blame?
Osama bin Laden
By Robert Fisk
12 September 2001
I can imagine how Osama bin Laden received the news
of the atrocities in the
United States. In all, I must have spent five hours
listening to him in
Sudan and then in the Afghan mountains, as he
described the inevitable
collapse of the US, just as he and his comrades in
the Afghan war helped to
destroy the Red Army.
He will have watched satellite television, he will
have sat in the corner of
his room, brushing his teeth as he always did, with a
mishwak stick,
thinking for up to a minute before speaking. He once
told me with pride how
his men had attacked the Americans in Somalia. He
acknowledged that he
personally knew two of the Saudis executed for
bombing an American military
base in Riyadh. Could he be behind the slaughter in
America?
If Mr bin Laden was really guilty of all the things
for which he has been
blamed, he would need an army of 10,000. And there is
something deeply
disturbing about the world's habit of turning to the
latest hate figure
whenever blood is shed. But when events of this
momentous scale take place,
there is a new legitimacy in casting one's eyes at
those who have constantly
threatened America.
Mr bin Laden had a kind of religious experience
during the Afghan war. A
Russian shell had fallen at his feet and, in the
seconds as he waited for it
to explode, he said he had a sudden feeling of
calmness. The shell never
exploded.
The US must leave the Gulf, he would say every 10
minutes. America must stop
all sanctions against the Iraqi people. America must
stop using Israel to
oppress Palestinians. He was not fighting an
anti-colonial war, but a
religious one. His supporters would gather round him
with the awe of men
listening to a messiah. And the words they listened
to were fearful in their
implications. American civilians would no more be
spared than military
targets. Yet I also remember one night when Mr bin
Laden saw a pile of
newspapers in my bag and seized them. By a sputtering
oil lamp, he read
them, clearly unaware of the world around him. Was
this really a man who
could damage America?
If the shadow of the Middle East falls over
yesterday's destruction, then
who else could produce such meticulously timed
assaults? The rag-tag
Palestinian groups that used to favour hijacking are
unlikely to be able to
produce a single suicide bomber. Hamas and Islamic
Jihad have neither the
capability nor the money that this assault needed.
Perhaps the groups that
moved close to the Lebanese Hizbollah in the 1980s,
before the organisation
became solely a resistance movement. The bombing of
the US Marines in 1983
needed precision, timing and infinite planning. But
Iran, which supported
these groups, is more involved in its internal
struggles. Iraq lies broken,
its agents more intent on torturing their own people
than striking at the
the US.
So the mountains of Afghanistan will be photographed
from satellite and
high-altitude aircraft in the coming days, Mr bin
Laden's old training camps
highlighted on the overhead projectors in the
Pentagon. But to what end? For
if this is a war it cannot be fought like other wars.
Indeed, can it be
fought at all without some costly military adventure
overseas? Or is that
what Mr bin Laden seeks above all else?
_______________________________________________________________________
top
From F r e e d o m: 13-9-2001
Another lone voice crying in the wilderness.
The political roots of the terror attack
on New York and Washington
World Socialist Web Site
By the Editorial Board
12 September 2001
The World Socialist Web Site unequivocally condemns
the terrorist
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Those responsible
for the hijacking of four commercial passenger
aircraft and their
conversion into flying bombs are guilty of mass
murder. Nothing of a
socially progressive character will be achieved on
the basis of such
an indiscriminate and callous destruction of human
life.
These acts of homicidal terrorism manifest a toxic
combination of
demoralized pessimism, religious and
ultra-nationalist obscurantism,
and, it must be added, political opportunism of the
vilest character.
Terrorist organizations-notwithstanding their
anti-American
rhetoric-base their tactics on the illusion that
random acts of
horrific violence will compel the US ruling class to
shift its
policies. Thus, in the final analysis, they hope to
make a deal with
Washington.
However it seeks to justify itself, the terrorist
method is
fundamentally reactionary. Far from dealing a
powerful blow against
imperialist militarism, terrorism plays into the
hands of those
elements within the US establishment who seize on
such events to
justify and legitimize the resort to war in pursuit
of the
geopolitical and economic interests of the ruling
elite. The murder
of innocent civilians enrages, disorients and
confuses the public. It
undermines the struggle for the international unity
of the working
class, and counteracts all efforts to educate the
American people on
the history and politics that form the background to
contemporary
events in the Middle East.
Nevertheless, our condemnation of Tuesday's terrorist
outrages does
not in the slightest imply any lessening of our
principled and
irreconcilable opposition to the policies of the US
government.
Anyone who wishes to understand the why and wherefore
of yesterday's
events must study the historical and political record
of the US in
the Middle East, especially over the last 30 years.
The unrelenting
efforts of American imperialism to secure its
domination over the oil
resources of the region, which has entailed, among
other things,
unstinting support for the Israeli state's oppression
of the
Palestinian people, has placed the United States in
violent
opposition to the legitimate and irrepressible
democratic, national
and social aspirations of the Arab masses.
In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday's events,
politicians,
editorialists and media pundits have declared over
and over that
Americans must recognize that the destruction of the
World Trade
Center means the United States is at war and must act
accordingly.
But the fact of the matter is that the US government
has been engaged
in direct warfare in the Middle East, in one form or
another, for the
better part of two decades.
Putting aside the massive material aid that it
provides for Israeli
military operations, the United States has been
bombing one or
another Middle Eastern country almost continuously
since 1983. US
bombers and/or battleships have attacked Lebanon,
Libya, Iraq, Iran,
the Sudan and Afghanistan. Without actually declaring
war, the United
States has conducted military operations against Iraq
for nearly 12
years. The ongoing daily bombings of Iraq are barely
mentioned in the
American media, which has made no attempt to
ascertain the total
number of Iraqis killed by US bombs since 1991.
Given this bloody record, why should anyone be
surprised that those
who have been targeted by the United States have
sought to strike
back?
The same media that is now screaming for blood has
routinely
applauded the use of violence against whatever
country or people are
deemed to be obstacles to US interests. Let us recall
the words of
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who had
this to say to the
Serbian people during the US bombing campaign in
1999: "It should be
lights out in Belgrade: every power grid, water pipe,
road and
war-related factory has to be hit.... [W]e will set
your country back
by pulverizing you. You want 1950? We can do 1950.
You want 1389? We
can do 1389."
The foreign policy of the US is a mixture of cynicism,
brutality and
irresponsibility. Washington has pursued a course
that has inflamed
the hatred of large sections of the world's
population, creating an
environment in which recruits can be found for bloody
terrorist
operations. In rare moments of candor, foreign policy
specialists
have acknowledged that the actions of the United
States provoke
hatred and the desire for retribution. During the
Balkan War, former
Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger stated:
"We've presented to
the rest of the world a vision of the bully on the
block who pushes a
button, people out there die, we don't pay anything
except the cost
of a missile ... that's going to haunt us in terms of
trying to deal
with the rest of the world in the years ahead."
This insight has not prevented the same Eagleburger
from declaring
Tuesday night that the United States should respond
to the
destruction of the World Trade Center by dropping
bombs immediately
on any country that might have been involved.
George W. Bush's address to the nation Tuesday
evening epitomized the
arrogance and blindness of the American ruling class.
Far from
America being "the brightest beacon for freedom
and opportunity in
the world," the US is seen by tens of millions
as the main enemy of
their human and democratic rights, and the main
source of their
oppression. The American ruling elite, in its
insolence and cynicism,
acts as if it can carry out its violent enterprises
around the world
without creating the political conditions for violent
acts of
retribution.
In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday's attacks, US
authorities and
the media are once again declaring that Osama bin
Laden is
responsible. This is possible, although, as always,
they present no
evidence to back up their claim.
But the charge that bin Laden is the culprit raises a
host of
troubling questions. Given the fact that the US has
declared this
individual to be the world's most deadly terrorist,
whose every move
is tracked with the aid of the most technologically
sophisticated and
massive intelligence apparatus, how could bin Laden
organize such an
elaborate attack without being detected? An attack,
moreover, against
the same New York skyscraper that was hit in 1993?
The devastating success of his assault would indicate
that, from the
standpoint of the American government, the crusade
against terrorism
has been far more a campaign of propaganda to justify
US military
violence around the world than a conscientious effort
to protect the
American people.
Moreover, both bin Laden and the Taliban mullahs,
whom the US accuses
of harboring him, were financed and armed by the
Reagan-Bush
administration to fight pro-Soviet regimes in
Afghanistan in the
1980s. If they are involved in Tuesday's operations,
then the
American CIA and political establishment are guilty
of having
nurtured the very forces that carried out the
bloodiest attack on
American civilians in US history.
The escalation of US militarism abroad will
inevitably be accompanied
by intensified attacks on democratic rights at home.
The first
victims of the war fever being whipped up are
Arab-Americans, who are
already being subjected to death threats and other
forms of
harassment as a result of the media hysteria.
The calls from both Republican and Democratic
politicians for a
declaration of war foreshadow a more general
crackdown on opponents
of American foreign policy. General Norman
Schwarzkopf, who commanded
American troops in the 1991 invasion of Iraq, spoke
for much of the
political and military elite when he declared on
television that the
war on alleged terrorist supporters should be
conducted inside as
well as outside the borders of the US.
It is the policies pursued by the United States,
driven by the
strategic and financial interests of the ruling
elite, which laid the
foundations for the nightmare that unfolded on
Tuesday. The actions
now being contemplated by the Bush
administration-indicated by the
president's threat to make "no distinction
between the terrorists who
committed these acts and those who harbor them"-will
only set the
stage for further catastrophes.
_______________________________________________________________________
top
BADIL Resource Center
For immediate release, 12-9-2001 (E/49/2001)
-------------------------------------------------------
With World Attention Focused on New York and
Washington:
ISRAEL STEPS UP ATTACK AGAINST THE PALESTINIAN
PEOPLE
With world wide public attention absorbed by the
devastating attack
against the New York World Trade Center and the
Pentagon building in
Washington DC; while shock and concern for the large
number of
innocent victims prevail; and, while numerous
questions concerning
circumstances and possible perpetrators of this
sophisticated and
horrific attack have yet to be answered, Israel's
political and
military establishment has taken advantage of the
opportunities
offered by the tragic event to engage in a
two-leveled campaign
against the Palestinian people.
ISRAELI MILTIARY ASSAULT:
Covered by the screen of smoke and dust of the
collapsing towers of
the World Trade Center, the Israeli occupation army
stepped up its
attack against the Palestinian city of Jenin and
Jenin refugee camp
in the northern West Bank. Israel launched the
military operation one
night before the 11 September attacks in the United
States. The
operation follows the pattern of partial and
temporary re-occupation
of Palestinian areas and targeted attacks on
Palestinian refugee
camps set by the earlier Israeli invasion into
Palestinian controlled
areas in the district of Bethlehem (Beit Jala and
Aida refugee camp,
August 28-30). It aims at maximum destruction of
infrastructure of
Palestinian resistance. Encouraged by the current
focus of
international attention on the attacks in New York
and Washington DC,
Israel proceeded, in the early morning hours of 12
September, to
expand its invasion to include the Palestinian
villages of Arrabeh,
Tamoun and Toubas in the wider Jenin district.
Reports about movement
of Israeli troups towards the city of Nablus followed
at noon. Fierce
fighting between the Israeli army and the Palestinian
resistance
continues until this moment and has so far resulted
in nine
Palestinian casualties (one of them a 14 year old
girl) and dozens of
injuries. Clear indications about timing and exact
mode of an
eventual Israeli redeployment in the area are not
available.
ISRAELI PUBLICITY CAMPAIGN:
Israel's military escalation on the ground is
accompanied by a
massive publicity campaign to de-legitimize the
Palestinian quest for
justice and the implementation of international law.
Riding on the
wave of worldwide shock and outrage over the massive
terror attack in
the United States, Israeli spokespersons have used
the opportunity to
emphasize that Israel's repression of the Palestinian
people must be
regarded as part and parcel of a concerted effort of
the "civilized
world" to erase terrorism rooted among the
millions of "evil" people
and countries around the globe, who refuse to accept
that their right
to self-determination and economic development - as
reaffirmed by the
recent World Conference Against Racism in Durban -
must be
sacrificed on the altar of US (and Israeli) economic
and political
interests. The impression that many Palestinians -
together with
millions of oppressed and impoverished in the world -
find it
difficult to mourn over the innocent victims in New
York and
Washington while US Apache helicopters and F-16s are
killing their
leaders and destroying their homes, is used to argue
the case for the
legitimacy of Israeli violations of all standards set
by
international human rights and humanitarian law.
While this Israeli response to the horrific events in
New York and
Washington is neither new nor surprising,
international media
coverage (e.g. CNN and BBC), which has served to
promote Israel's
distorted view of Mid-East affairs, must not be left
unchallenged.
The appearance of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud
Barak (BBC) and
current Israeli foreign minister Shimon Peres (CNN)
as so-called
"exerts" on terrorism provided Israel with
a free platform to
propagate the myth of Israel as the only "civilized"
and "democratic"
state in the Middle East alongside the stereotype of
the Palestinian
people as terrorists. Such stereotyping of the
Palestinian people,
which was further exacerbated by the selective use of
media images of
Palestinians "celebrating" in the streets
of the occupied territories
and in the refugee camps in Lebanon in the aftermath
of the terror
attacks in the United States coupled with the lack of
sufficient
contextual information, manifests itself as anti-Arab
discrimination
and Islamophobia as noted by the civil society
organizations at the
recent World Conference Against Racism in Durban.
Israeli officials,
moreover, used the event to "market" and
gain support for its policy
of "pre-emptive strikes," most notably the
policy of targeted
assassinations.
A successful worldwide campaign for justice,
democracy, and the end
of terror must enhance the rights of the millions of
poor and
oppressed - among them the Palestinian people.
Representatives of the
Israeli political and military establishment, whose
policies against
the Palestinian people have been persistently
condemned by
international human rights fora, cannot be partners
in this effort.
-------------------------------
BADIL Resource Center aims to provide a resource pool
of alternative,
critical and progressive information and analysis on
the
question of Palestinian refugees in our quest to
achieve a just and lasting
solution for exiled Palestinians based on the right
of return.
PO Box 728, Bethlehem, Palestine; tel/fax.
02-2747346; email:
info@badil.org; website: www.badil.org
_______________________________________________________________________
top
Broadsheets editorials on the
bombings 13 September
From F r e e d o m
The Times
1) The Leader: Still the enemy: The foes of democracy
must face a united
assault
Michael Gove
"Be warned: drawing a single tooth will not stop
a mad dog"
an article that discusses Saddam's links to Bin
Laden.
The Daily Telegraph
1) The Leader
This ends with : "The West needs to face the
fact that some conflicts cannot
be resolved amicably, only contained, or settled by
victory or defeat. Would
it not be right, for example, for America and Britain
to declare that they
will move their embassies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem,
as a sign that the
possibility of defeat does not exist?"
What finer recipe for protracting a conflict!
2) Two cultures by Terence Kealey
Zealotry has never been limited to Islam
Includes: "First, we should not forget that
religious zealotry has never
been limited to Islam. Many of the early Christians
of the Middle East were
as cruel, intolerant and fanatical as any Muslim
terrorist. " (Yet does not
mention Jewish extremism in this context.)
The Financial Times
1) Article by Javier Solana, EU Higher Rep.
2) Michael Ignatieff "Paying for security with
liberty"
Michael Ignatieff argues that vulnerability often
tempts strong nations to
take self-destructive measures and actions that lead
to injustice
"The most effective responses may not be the
instant vengeance of a cruise
missile but concerted international police work that
leads to arrest,
extradition, trials and imprisonment of the
perpetrators."
The Guardian
1) First leader: "Beating the terrorists Bush
should proceed with caution"
"The Islamic world - from some part of which the
attackers appear now to
have come - has been consumed for generations with a
massive sense of
injustice about the role of the United States in the
Middle East and in the
world more generally. Why else should some Arabs have
celebrated Tuesday's
carnage?"
2) The 2nd Leader: "Shoulder to shoulder
but support cannot be
unconditional"
"Yet Tuesday's attackers did not in fact target
democracy; they targeted
American power. There is a very important difference
between the two, and
the way in which the new international situation
evolves will hinge upon the
way in which American power, not democracy, responds.
"
3) This is Britain's moment: Whitehall officials have
long been sceptical of
the US's line on the Middle East. Now is the time to
say so openly
Richard Norton-Taylor
An excellent article analysing the failures of US
foreign Policy.
"Instead of simply cuddling up to the US, Blair
should seize the opportunity
to take the lead, with the EU, in the Middle East. It
would be good for the
region if Europe is supported by a chastened America;
disastrous if a
vengeful US continues to go its own way, with Blair
meekly tagging on."
4) James Rubin:
Getting it right: All options will be on the table,
including the use of
ground troops. And it is not retribution, it's
pre-emption
"I think it is seriously misguided to link
yesterday's attack to the
Palestinian/ Israeli conflict. People who don't
understand the distinctions
in the Islamic world tend to confuse the issues, but
there is one simple
fact to consider. Even when the Middle East talks
were at their most hopeful
and Palestinian leaders were optimistic about the
prospects for peace, Bin
Laden, driven by his own agenda over the US presence
in Saudi Arabia and a
warped view of American power, was plotting against
the US."
5) Rana Kabbani: "Terror has come home"
A similarly excellent analysis
"America's policies - and those of its allies -
have become a crippling
liability, for which American civilians are now
having to pay. It is only in
a correction of those policies that Americans might
once again acquire the
security that constitutes their expensive and
overriding obsession"
The Independent
1) Leader
This war needs to be won. But we must be sure of our
weapons and our enemies
2) 2nd Leader
Hold fire until we have seen Mr Bush's response
"As candid and loyal friends of the American
people, with a substantial
share of historical responsibility for the present
state of the Middle East,
Mr Blair must speak for the British in counselling
restraint and
understanding rather than revenge. "
3) Niall Ferguson: America should hit back and hit
hard
'The US can and should take decisive military action
against those rogue
regimes which harbour terrorism'
a war mongering article advocating tough action.
"this is the moment - and it will not last long
- when the US can and should
take decisive military action against those rogue
regimes which have for too
long harboured and financed terrorism. Top of the hit
list must be Saddam
Hussein, closely followed by the Taliban government
in Afghanistan. I should
be sorry if Colonel Gaddafi were to escape unscathed.
Chris Doyle
Council for the Advancement of Arab-British
Understanding
21 Collingham Road
London SW5 0NU
Tel: 020 7373 8414
Fax: 020 7835 2088
Mobile 07968 040 281
Please note my e-mail has changed to doylec@caabu.org
- the old e-mail will
work for the time being.
The contents of this message may contain personal
views which are not the
views of CAABU, unless specifically stated.
_______________________________________________________________________
|
|
|