Obama administration expands illegal surveillance of Americans

Obama administration expands illegal surveillance of Americans

By Tom Carter

March 26, 2012 Last Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder enacted guidelines that further expand the US government’s asserted powers to collect and store private information, without a warrant, concerning individuals who are not suspected of any crime. The guidelines constitute a further step by the Obama administration to expand and entrench unconstitutional spying operations on the American people by all levels of government that were spearheaded by the Bush administration. In the period since September 11, 2001, the US government has secretly compiled vast databases containing private information on the American public. These databases include telephone conversations, the contents of personal emails, visited web sites, Google searches, text messages, credit card transactions, mobile phone GPS location data, travel itineraries, Facebook activity, medical records, traffic tickets, surveillance camera footage and online purchases. The vast quantities of information that are being collected and stored by the US government far exceed what was gathered by the most infamous police states of the last century. Holder’s guidelines permit intelligence officials to secretly use these databases to profile and track Americans who have no connection to terrorism—alleged or otherwise—for up to five years. The previous guidelines, issued in 2008 by Bush administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey, were understood to limit the retention of such information to 180 days. According to an article Friday in the New York Times, the new guidelines are expected to result in increased collection and "data mining" of information on ordinary Americans by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). The Electronic Privacy Information Center issued a brief statement denouncing the guidelines: "The change represents a dramatic expansion of government surveillance and appears to violate the Privacy Act of 1974, which limits data exchanges across federal agencies and establishes legal rights for US citizens." The guidelines, which are couched in military, legal and intelligence jargon, were drafted in secret and not made available for public comment before they were enacted. In addition to Holder, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew G. Olsen and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr. signed the guidelines. The new guidelines must be understood as part of a vast escalation of domestic surveillance being undertaken by the Obama administration. According to a report last week in Wired magazine, the Obama administration is constructing a secret facility of unprecedented size in Bluffdale, Utah to store and process all of the information it is presently gathering about Americans. The new data center is conceived as a central hub that will link to National Security Agency (NSA) electronic eavesdropping facilities that are already operating around the country. "The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013," the report stated. "Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails―parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter,’" the article reported. The Wired report, titled "The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)," confirms that among the major sources for the surveillance databases are "secret electronic monitoring rooms in major US telecom facilities." The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 retroactively legalized the collusion, illegal when it was initiated under the Bush administration, between private telecommunications companies and government intelligence agencies in the warrantless government compilation of private information. The magazine reported one unnamed former intelligence official as saying, "Everybody’s a target; everybody with communication is a target." The secret compilation of these databases by the Bush and Obama administrations is entirely unconstitutional. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." It requires the police to obtain a warrant before conducting a search or seizure. "They violated the Constitution setting it up," William Binney, a senior NSA mathematician-turned-whistleblower, told Wired, referring to the warrantless surveillance initiated by the Bush administration and now being expanded by the Obama administration. "But they didn’t care. They were going to do it anyway, and they were going to crucify anyone who stood in the way." The pretext for this massive escalation of domestic spying is the so-called "war on terror." However, the US ruling class is primarily targeting not terrorism in the Middle East, but mounting opposition to its policies within the United States. This is the real reason for its attacks on the democratic rights of the population. They are the preparation for large-scale repression of political and social opposition. A report last week by AP journalist Frank Franklin II confirmed that "counterterrorism" units in the New York Police Department’s Intelligence Division have been carrying out extensive undercover monitoring of the meetings of liberal and protest groups. Detailed reports on meetings, including the identities of those present and future planned activities, have been generated and transmitted regularly to an "intelligence collection coordinator." According to one such briefing, an NYPD undercover agent traveled as far as New Orleans in April 2008 to spy on the activities of left-wing groups. The briefing the agent sent back included the names and backgrounds of speakers at meetings, the names of the organizations involved, the political issues discussed, and all of the sites of future rallies. Another NYPD undercover agent attended a white-water rafting Muslim religious retreat to spy on those in attendance. The informant, identified as OP#237, reported the details: "The group prayed at least four times a day, and much of the conversation was spent discussing Islam and was religious in nature." The designation "OP#237" suggests that hundreds of such undercover informants and spies are attending political meetings and gatherings from the NYPD alone. Also revealed last week were Department of Homeland Security (DHS) internal manuals for agents in the department’s Media Monitoring Capability program. The manuals were ordered released pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request. These manuals make clear that the agency has been closely monitoring political discussions and activity on social media sites such as Facebook. The manual identifies as "items of interest" warranting investigation any activity on social media sites concerning "policy directives, debates and implementations related to DHS." The escalation of domestic surveillance by the Obama administration is one aspect of the disintegration of American democracy. On December 31 of last year, Obama signed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which gives intelligence agencies and the military the power to abduct any person, anywhere in the world, including US citizens, and imprison him or her indefinitely in a facility such as the one located at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The NDAA was followed by Holder’s speech earlier this month asserting the power of the president to unilaterally assassinate US citizens without any kind of judicial process whatsoever. The pseudo-legal arguments advanced by the Obama administration in support of these measures exceed the most authoritarian presumptions of the Bush administration. These unprecedented attacks on democratic rights, in which the entire political establishment and both Democrats and Republicans are participating, must be understood as preemptive preparations by the political establishment to meet the coming social upheavals with police state measures.

The Judaisation of Jerusalem

The Judaisation of Jerusalem

Dr. Abdel Sattar Qassem

March 26, 2012 The Judaisation of Jerusalem has occupied a prominent place in the Arab and Muslim media recently, and is the focus of many statements made by officials and heads of state on the grounds that the city's future concerns those who care about Islamic and Christian holy sites there. Recent conferences in Doha and Beirut released statements confirming Jerusalem's Arab identity and the need to protect the holy places as well as cultural and historical monuments which characterise the city. While this powerful rhetoric in defence of Jerusalem was being uttered, Israeli bulldozers were creating new roads in the city and preparing the ground for the construction of more housing units for illegal Jewish settlers; Israel was proceeding apace with its Judaisation policy. We often hear from Arab leaders and the Arab media that there is a Zionist conspiracy for the Judaisation of Jerusalem; this is usually followed by harsh criticism of Zionism, and Israel and its supporters, without knowing the exact details of the plot. It is believed that there is a behind-the-scenes conspiracy, but Israel is not Judaising Jerusalem behind closed doors or in secret; Israel's moves are plain for all to see, with no need for long explanations. Israel confiscates Palestinian land and demolishes Palestinian homes in full view of the world and the media; the evidence has been available for many years in books, magazines, newspapers and television programmes. Plans for the Judaisation process for the city of Jerusalem go way back to 1918 when Britain's General Edmund Allenby summoned engineer William McLean to develop a plan for the city's re-organisation. In 1919, the British Mandate authorities and nascent Zionist movement asked Patrick Geddes to develop a masterplan for Jerusalem. Developments took place up until 1949 and again in 1967 until today. It is important to note that Israel's plans are published and can be viewed by the public, but it seems that the Arabs do not like to read and think that they will liberate Jerusalem through frequent speeches. Israel's plans regarding the old city and its surroundings are clear, and include the details of residential areas, streets, tourist attractions, public institutions, markets and parks, car parks, hotels, schools, arenas, etc. It is also clear with respect to residential areas for Arabs, and the direct vicinity of the old city including the old Muslim cemetery and Silwan. That is, they do not leave anything for the media to discover and reveal; there's nothing new that has not been disclosed in advance. Although the Israeli plans are published and detailed, Palestinian and Arab leaders are only provoked into "action" when the Israeli and Western Media talk about the implementation of new projects in the holy city. For example, it is clear that Israel drafted plans to demolish homes in Silwan a long time ago but Palestinian and Arab responses only appeared when the Israeli bulldozers did. This was also the case with Jabal Abu Ghneim (now known as the Har Homa illegal settlement), which is shown in Israeli drawings as a settlement/"neighbourhood of Jerusalem", but the Arab leaders only expressed concerns after Israel began preparing the ground to build housing units. The influence of the media in publicising Israel's Judaisation policy becomes clear when people see housing units being built in many of the settlements scattered across the occupied West Bank quietly and without any noise. These units do not raise any concerns among Arab or Palestinian leaders, or in the Arab and Palestinian media, even though they are clear to everyone and passersby can see them getting bigger day by day. This leads me to ask if such leaders would do or say anything at all if Israel implemented its plans with no media coverage. I think not. Arab and Palestinian leaders only take action to defend Jerusalem out of embarrassment and not through any motivation to save the city. If the opposite was true, would we only hear their outrage after Israeli projects begin? Since 1948, Arab action regarding East Jerusalem has focused on the following issues: a) Under Jordanian rule, the Jerusalem municipality developed two plans for the eastern sector of the city in 1962 and 1965, in which they identified residential and industrial areas but the city was taken over by Israel in 1967. b) Since 1967, Arabs have been submitting complaints to the UN against Israel in East Jerusalem, and a number of non-binding resolutions have been issued by the UN General Assembly and Security Council, which call upon Israel not to change the character of the holy city and to stop all procedures it's carrying out in this regard. Israel has ignored these and continued to implement its plans in full view of the world, and the Arabs still insist on going to the UN. For example, the Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, has expressed his intention to go the UN to have the Judaisation of Jerusalem stopped. c) Palestinian Arabs have tried to implement housing projects in East Jerusalem post-1967, such as the Nusseibeh project, but they have usually not proceeded because of Israel's actions and its assault on Palestinian housing. d) Arab efforts have focused largely on words of condemnation and denunciation of the Judaisation policy Israel has adopted, and to allocate some funds to support the people of Jerusalem. Some of these funds have already been distributed and invested in a proper manner. Alongside its Judaisation policy, Israel has worked on putting the Palestinians in an insecure position on the economic, housing and physical levels. Taxes have been imposed which are disproportionate to income levels, and the Palestinians are pressured economically to join the Israeli work force and become dependent on the occupation to earn a living. They are tying their children's economic future to Israel, which has prevented them from restoring their homes and imposed very strict rules on building permits, whether for adding rooms to existing buildings, or building new ones. Israel does not hesitate to demolish their homes, whether licensed since the Jordanian era, or unlicensed by the Jerusalem municipality, which carries out the state's Judaisation policy. Israel also went after people for political and security reasons, and arrested many under "administrative detention", tightening searches and creating an atmosphere of terror. Israel is interested in maintaining this uncertainty for the Palestinian population in the hope that they will leave voluntarily ("silent transfer"), and many have done so. They have been unable to bear the constant pressure, and have preferred to move to other parts of the occupied West Bank; others have moved overseas. At the same time, Israel is working to provide security for Jews in order to encourage them to live in Jerusalem, both East and West, and to stay there without any thoughts of leaving. Thus, it has worked consistently to provide work for all those of working age, and has provided them with housing in the illegal settlements on very easy financial terms. This issue is the precise point illustrating that the Israelis are going too far and the Arabs not far enough. Israel understands the importance of the security issue so it has made the Palestinians insecure and strengthened security for the Jews. The Palestinians, meanwhile, have been led to believe that they can relax under occupation and not put the Israelis under any kind of pressure to make most think twice before moving into East Jerusalem. Many Arabs thought that the solution to the problems of the people of Jerusalem was money but did not realise that cash can be drained into Israeli coffers through Tel Aviv's fiscal policies and taxes. Arab funds have helped the people of Jerusalem to a certain degree, but they've also boosted the Israeli treasury. It is important to strengthen the patriotic spirit of the people of Jerusalem by raising their sense of belonging and loyalty, and guiding individuals and groups towards economic resistance, the rejection of normalisation in very abnormal circumstances, and standing up to Judaisation. This does not mean that the people of Jerusalem are not patriotic, but that programmes promoting national consciousness should be put in place by the PLO and Palestinian factions; this would raise the sense of security among Palestinians, and reduce it for Israelis. Arab policies must be aimed against Israeli security policies. Unfortunately, the focus on money has led to financial corruption, harming the people of Jerusalem and their city's case. It is also regrettable that some leaders who are supposed to defend Jerusalem have already recognised Israel and normalised relations; they set a bad example of patriotism. Jerusalem cannot be saved by money alone; it needs the people. If they are patriotically, psychologically and ideologically sound, then funds will strengthen their position. But if they are incapable, then all the funds in the world will not help them; only people can keep a cause alive. It is no secret to most Palestinians that the goal of the Israelis, and those Arabs and Palestinians who collaborate with them, is to conquer Palestine and transform Palestinians into consumers without any real human existence. Due to the inability of the Arabs and Palestinians to confront Israel in a way that its leaders understand, it will continue the Judaisation of Jerusalem with total indifference to Arab conferences and statements. The President of the Palestinian Authority will have no option but to run to the United Nations and to urge Arabs to visit Jerusalem, with an Israeli permit to pray in Al-Aqsa Mosque under Israeli guns. When Israel refuses the permits and uses the guns, what worth then for a prayer in Al-Aqsa being rewarded so much more than in other mosques?

Iraq snapshot - March 23, 2012

Iraq snapshot - March 23, 2012

The Common Ills

Friday, March 23, 2012. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, Human Rights Watch calls for an investigation into whether or not someone was tortured to death, security sources say the targeting of Emo youths in Iraq is back on after the Arab Summit and that this time the ones targeted will be Iraqi girls and young women, even with the GAO pointing to problems the Pentagon denies there are any, and more.     There is a success story in Iraq. You'd think the White House desperate for someone to paint the illegal war as a success would have seized upon it but, even though Jane Arraf reported on it for Al Jazeera last weekend, the White House and other Operation Happy Talkers somehow missed it. This is a transcript to Arraf's video report:   Jane Arraf: It's a small step pronouncing a word but for parents and children, it speaks volumes. Without this institute, some of these children wouldn't even be making eye contact. Eleven years ago, there were no schools for autistic children, so one of the parents started her own. Nibras Sadoun was doing field research in special education when she adopted an autistic child rejected by his mother.     Nibras Sadoun: There are a lot of obstacles in the country and there were huge needs as well. So we tried to pull together the efforts of the founders, specialists and parents to establish a solid base that can serve this segment of society.     Jane Arraf: The Al Rahman Institute, named after her son, has since grown into six centers around the country -- all without Iraqi government funding. The latest just opened in Baghdad. Iraq's education ministry doesn't have any programs for autistic children. It considers them slow learners. Here in the middle of Baghdad, this is a safe place for children, a refuge. But there are only a few dozen children who have been lucky enough to come here and hundreds on the waiting list. Autism is so widely misunderstood here that a lot of children like this spend their entire lives locked up at home. Mariam has been here for a year. She's five-and-a-half but, before she came, she couldn't say "Mama" or ask for water. Her father says her progress is basic. But having somewhere to bring her during the day is a lifesaver.     Nizer Mustapha Hussein:She's a very active child and she plays with everything. Thank God, we found this place. Her mother can't cope with her at home because she can't control her.     Jane Arraf: The children have varying degrees of autism, a lot have other neurolgical or developmental problems as well. Autistic children have trouble communicating or interacting with others. At school, they teach them basic skills. Their biggest problem is lack of qualified staff. Dealing with autistic children takes training and dedication and the determination to find a place for children who don't easily fit in the world around them.     A small number of autistic children and their families can say their lives have improved. Of course, this improvement did not result from any US military project or US State Dept project and didn't result from Prime Minister and All Around Thug Nouri al-Maliki sliding over any dollars from the billions he sits on. As is so often the case with autism around the world, improvements came as a result of families of those effected doing more than their part.     The Autism Support Network highlights a report Lara Logan did for CBS News in 2008 on autism in Iraq. In the report, Logan observes, "The problem for autistic children in Iraq is that almost nothing is known about this condition. Incredibly, the only doctor who did treat it, who founded this center in the name of his own autistic son, has fled the country. He left behind these social workers who try their best to help but even they haven't been paid in four months." Click here for the CBS report with text and video. However, do not e-mail me and say, "C.I., you're wrong about the report. It aired on February 11, 2009." I have no idea what the problem with CBS and dates is this week. We noted Nancy Pelosi's "off the table" 2006 interview on 60 Minutes earlier this week and didn't link to 60 Minutes. Why? You click on that 2006 60 Minutes report and you've got a 2009 date. I didn't want the e-mails. That interview was well covered in real time (we linked to the World Can't Wait commentary the day after the interview aired). Autism is not usually well covered. So we're linking to CBS. But it aired in 2008. If you doubt it, click here, it's the video at YouTube, uploaded by CBS News on August 10, 2008. If you need further convincing, drop back to the August 12, 2008 snapshot when we first noted Lara Logan's report. Silence on the improvement for the small number of autistic children able to attend one of the six centers may have also been ignored by the White House due to the fact that the rate of autism in Iraq may be influenced by the various chemicals and weapons and pollutants and toxins the US goverment introduced via many methods of delivery (including burn pits). Last week, Cindy Sheehan wrote about being in Stockholm with the Iraq Solidarity Group to observe the anniversary of the invasion and speaking with an Iraqi doctor who went over a number of stastics:     Two million dead during the sanction years; 1.5 milliion dead after 2003; incidences of leukemia in children in Fallujah and Basra skyrocketing by a factor of ten times normal; clean water and electricity are still in short supply; and the US occupiers do not work for the people of Iraq. [. . .] Of course we know that the US used depleted uranium coated weapons in Iraq and the region is now poisoned by the radioactive waste from DU for 4.5 billion years --- that is one of the reasons that incidences of leukemia are on the rise. One woman who does activism to ban all nuclear weapons, including DU, said that now in Iraq, a woman's first question after giving birth is not: "Is it a boy or a girl," but, "Is it normal?"       No wonder the White House decided to skip the topic of Iraqi children. For more coverage of the damage to the environment and its effects on the Iraqi people, you can refer to:     Nov-04-2011: Birth Defects Reveal Weapons-Grade Enriched Uranium Used in Fallujah, Iraq - Tim King Salem-News.com     "Normal" doesn't begin to describe the ongoing political crisis in Iraq or Nouri's attempts to have Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi arrested (he claims al-Hashemi is a terrorist) which are seen as part of the same political crisis and part of Nouri's attempt to lash out at political rivals. (Tareq al-Hashemi is a member of Iraqiya which came in first in the March 2010 elections while Nouri's State of Law came in second.) al-Hashemi was in the KRG when Nouri issued the warrant and he has remained in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region as a guest of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and KRG President Massoud Barzani. The KRG has not assisted Nouri in his witch hunt and Nouri has responded by ordering the arrests of people working for al-Hashmi. Amer Sarbut Zeidan al-Batawi was one such pe     Wednesday, Tareq al-Hashemi charged that his bodyguard had been tortured to death. We covered these issue in yesterday's snapshot. Today Human Rights Watch is calling for an investigation into the death:     (Beirut) – Iraqi authorities should order a criminal investigation into allegations that security forces tortured to death a bodyguard of Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, Human Rights Watch said today. Iraqi authorities released Amir Sarbut Zaidan al-Batawi's body to his family on March 20, 2012, about three months after arresting him for terrorism. His family told Human Rights Watch that his body displayed signs of torture, including in several sensitive areas. Photographs taken by the family and seen by Human Rights Watch show what appear to be a burn mark and wounds on various parts of his body. "The statements we heard and photos we saw indicate that Iraqi security officers may have tortured Amir Sarbut Zaidan al-Batawi to death while he was in their custody," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "It's essential for the Iraqi government to investigate his death and report publicly what they find." The family said that al-Batawi's death certificate listed no cause of death. They said that before his arrest, the 33-year-old married father of three was in excellent health. "I could barely recognize him," a close relative told Human Rights Watch on March 22. "There were horrible marks and signs of torture all over his body. He had lost about 17 kilos [37.5 pounds] from the day they arrested him." Iraqi authorities have denied the torture allegations. On March 22, Lt. Gen. Hassan al-Baydhani, chief of staff of Baghdad's security command center and a judicial spokesman, said al-Batawi died of kidney failure and other conditions after refusing treatment. When asked by reporters about the photographic evidence that al-Batawi had been tortured, Baydhani replied, "It is easy for Photoshop to show anything," referring to a digital photo-editing software. As the United States was pulling its last remaining troops from Iraq in December 2011, Iraqi authorities issued an arrest warrant for al-Hashemi on charges he was running death squads. Al-Hashemi has taken refuge in Iraqi Kurdistan and refused to return to Baghdad, saying he cannot receive a fair trial. Kurdistan Regional Government authorities have so far declined to hand him over. An unknown number of other members of al- Hashemi's security and office staff have been arrested since late December and are also in custody, including two women. On March 22, al-Hashemi told Human Rights Watch, "I have made repeated requests to the government to find out who else in my staff has been arrested and where they are being held, but they have not responded." Human Rights Watch called on the Iraqi government to release the names of all those detained and the charges against them, and to ensure that they have access to lawyers and medical care.     Today Al Mada reports that security sources are stating that young Iraqi women and girls are about to be targeted by the militias in part of the ongoing attacks on Iraqi youths thought to be Emo and/or gay. One source stated that the militias have pulled back and 'softened' their approach recently but only due to the fact that the Arab League Summit is approaching. To avoid embarrassing Nouri, they militia's basically about to take a vacation and plans to return immediately after the summit at which point they will "hunt down girls" and security sources are also stating that some security forces may be assisting the militias in these upcoming actions. If you're new to this topic, Scott Lang's column for the Guardian provides a strong overview of what's taking place:     A new killing campaign is convulsing Iraq. The express targets are "emos", short for "emotional": a western-derived identity, teenagers adopting a pose of vulnerability, along with tight clothes and skewed hairdos and body piercing. Starting last year, mosques and the media both began raising the alarm about youthful immorality, calling the emos deviants and devil worshippers. In early February, somebody began killing people. The net was wide, definitions inexact. Men who seemed effeminate, girls with tattoos or peculiar jewellery, boys with long hair, could all be swept up. The killers like to smash their victims' heads with concrete blocks. There is no way to tell how many have died: estimates range from a few dozen to more than 100. Nor is it clear who is responsible. Many of the killings happened in east Baghdad, stronghold of Shia militias such as Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi army and Asaib Ahl al-Haq (the League of the Righteous). Neither, though, has claimed responsibility. Iraq's brutal interior ministry issued two statements in February. The first announced official approval to "eliminate" the "satanists". The second, on 29 February, proclaimed a "campaign" to start with a crackdown on stores selling emo fashion. The loaded language suggests, at a minimum, that the ministry incited violence. It's highly possible that some police, in a force riddled with militia members, participated in the murders. It's logical to compare this to the militia campaign against homosexual conduct in 2009, which I documented for Human Rights Watch. Hundreds of men lost their lives then. Gay-identified men have been caught up in these killings as well, and Baghdad's LGBT community is rife with fear. Yet there are differences. The current killings target women as well as men, and children are the preferred victims. It's not quite true to say, as some press reports have suggested, that "emo" is just a synonym for "gay" in Iraq. Rather, immorality, western influence, decadence and blasphemy have come together in a loosely defined, poorly aligned complex of associations: and emo fashion and "sexual perversion" are part of the mix.     Turning to 'security' in 'free' Iraq.  Thank goodness foreign troops are out is the public pose of Nouri.  But it appears that privately he's attempting to get foreign military back into Iraq.  The Sun Daily notes, "Defence Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi today said Malaysia is prepared to sen[d] a special peacekeeping team on a humanitarian mission to Iraq if the costs of operation were to be sponsored by other countries." The Defense Minister is quoted stating, "There's a request for Malaysia to sen[d] a team to Iraq and one particular country has also agreed to bear the costs of operation, but since the country has yet to keep its promise, we cannot send the team to Iraq." Meanwhile Reuters notes a Kirkuk prison break that has 19 prisoners on the loose. Still on security news, KUNA reports, "All necessary security precautions have been taken in preparation for upcoming Arab summit due to be hosted by Baghdad in the end of this month, the Iraqi Ministry of Interior announced on Friday." The Arab League Summit is set to take place next week in Baghdad. Alsumaria TV notes the announcement as well and -- a press release from the Ministry of Interior -- and that the release claims that terrorists are attempting to create an atmosphere of hysteria. An atmosphere of hysteria? Like Nouri's comments reported by Al Rafidayn that Tuesday's attacks was carried out by terrorist including security officers inside the Iraqi security forces? Citing an unnamed security source, Al Mada reports that Nouri has ordered the closure of at least one bridge and that Baghdad barrier walls are going back up. It's already been reported that Baghdad's about to impose a seven-day 'holiday' and that Bahgdad International Airport will be closed to commercial flights. Salam Faraj and Abdul Jabbar (AFP) observe, "The Iraqi capital's already gnarling traffic has all but ground to a halt, and the government has declared a week of holidays on the days surrounding the March 27-29 summit to encourage people to stay at home." Iraq's a country already plagued with high unemployment and rocketing inflation. Now Faraj and Jabbar report that the prices in Baghdad markets are soaring due to transportation issues as a result of the barriers and checkpoints that have been going up. On the topic of violence, Charles Tripp (Open Democracy) offers: Violence in Iraq has now become a central part of the practice of power, both by the government and by certain non-governmental agencies, some of them bitterly opposed to, but others enmeshed in the webs of government practice. For the government of Iraq under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the ever unfinished project of re-establishing the power and thus, he hopes, the authority of the central state has often taken a violent form. This has been clear ever since the campaigns in 2008 that saw a reconstituted, if not always very effective, Iraqi army reconquer a number of Iraq's provinces, with campaigns in the south in Basra, the east of Baghdad, the north in Mosul and the north-east in Diyala. At the time and in the context of the country's emergence from a bloody civil war, these campaigns were strongly supported by the US and others who saw this precisely as a token of the 'resolve' and the 'seriousness' of the fragile Iraqi government. The fact that al-Maliki had attached to his personal command perhaps the most effective and ruthless of the units of the reconstituted Iraqi armed forces, the Baghdad Brigade, was believed to assist the state-creating project. Equally, the close and some might say politically unhealthy interest that al-Maliki took in officers' careers, promotions and transfers within the Iraqi armed forces through his own Office of the Commander in Chief was regarded as merely fitting if he wanted 'to get the job done'. The problem, as many Iraqis began to discover, lay in what else was coming into being as a consequence. In public, the military presence was meant to symbolise al-Maliki's grip on power and his capacity to restore order, as his coalition 'The State of Law' promised. It was highly visible and clearly aimed at demonstrating both that the withdrawal of the US forces in 2010/2011 would not leave Iraq defenceless, and that the government was in full control. The effect, however, in the words of one Iraqi was that 'we live as under an army of occupation'. Given the continuing threat of violence from insurgents of one kind and another, this may have been reassuring for some. However, it also seemed to bring with it the idea that any kind of open or public opposition could and should be met with force. Most notoriously, this was evident in the ferocious response in 2011 to any Iraqis who dared to demonstrate during 2011 in the spirit of the 'Arab Spring'. Thus, whether in Tahrir Square in Baghdad, or in Basra, Mosul or in the Kurdish region in Sulaimaniyya, peaceful protestors were killed, abused and beaten up on the orders of authorities for which violence has become the default response to opposition. And the political crisis continues in 'free' Iraq. Salah Nasrawi (Al-Ahram Weekly) notes the various elements of the crisis beginning with Nouri's second term as prime minister and then emphasizes the speech KRG President Massoud Barzani gave this week (Tuesday): Barzani also said that Baghdad had asked the Kurdish administration to let Al-Hashemi leave Iraq in order to avoid being put on trial, something which amounted to accusing Al-Maliki's government of hypocrisy. "Our response was that we do not work as [people] smugglers and we won't do it," Barzani told a gathering of his Kurdistan Democratic Party in Erbil, the Kurdish provincial capital, last Thursday. Barzani also lambasted the Baghdad government over other long-running disputes, such as oil and power-sharing with the central government. He renewed criticisms of Al-Maliki's authoritarian style of government and of his alleged attempts to marginalise the Kurds and Sunnis. "Some in Baghdad believe they are the rulers of Iraq and want to work unilaterally," he said. "They are losers who have failed to give Iraq anything, unlike what we have done for our people in Kurdistan, and they want us to be like them," Barzani said, echoing criticisms by many Iraqis that al-Maliki's government has failed to bring security and restore basic services to Iraq some seven years after assuming power. Press TV adds:     Speaking in the region's capital of Arbil on Tuesday, Barzani said the partnership that had built the national unity government in the country is now completely non-existent and has become meaningless. Barzani stated that if the political deadlocks remained the KRG parliament would declare independence for the Kurdish region. He also said that the oil-rich Kirkuk had to be incorporated into a future independent Kurdistan. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki kept his job only with Kurdish support after his party fell short of a majority in the 2010 parliamentary elections. Covering Barzani and Nouri's conflict, Turkish Weekly emphasizes one section of Barzani's speech: "There is an attempt to establish a one million-strong army whose loyalty is only to a single person," Barzani said in the speech in Arbil. He claimed that al-Maliki and the government were "waiting to get F-16 combat planes to examine its chances again with the Kurdish peshmerga [fighters]," referring to a government order for 36 warplanes from the United States. "Where in the world can the same person be the prime minister, the chief of staff of the armed forces, the minister of defense, the minister of interior, the chief of intelligence and the head of the national security council?" he asked.     Jasim Alsabawi (Rudaw) notes attacks on Barzani from various members of Nouri's circle.   "We strongly disagree with [Mr. Allawi's] characterization of our relationship with the government of Iraq and the role we have played to keep the Iraqi political process on track." Who said that?  Head liar for the State Dept, Victoria Nuland and Ben Birnbaum (Washington Times) quotes her latest lies as he reports on Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi: Mr. Allawi headed the Sunni-dominated Iraqiya bloc in Iraq's 2010 elections. The bloc won two more seats than Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law alliance, but Mr. al-Maliki was able to form a government under a 2011 power-sharing deal. That deal, which gave several ministries to Iraqiya, was supposed to have given Mr. Allawi control of a new strategic policy council, but the former premier declined the post when Mr. al-Maliki refused to cede it much authority despite what he called U.S. guarantees. "The policymakers promised to support this, but ultimately and unfortunately, none of this has happened, and the United States forgot about this power-sharing completely," Mr. Allawi said. "I think the United States deliberately is taking Iraq out of the screen because there is a gross failure in Iraq."       Monday and Tuesday, we noted that various left and 'left' programs and magazines were ignoring the 9th anniversary (Monday was the anniversary). An e-mail came in about Uprising Radio. Despite the fact that its segment aired on Wednesday and despite Sonali Kohlhatkar's embarrassing stab in the back of Aghan women to show her love for Barack Obama (we addressed this community wide in 2009 including in an all woman roundtable featuring all women who do community sites as well as Gina and Krista who started and do the first community newletter the gina & krista roundrobin), I did attempt to listen. While I'm sure Ann Wright had something of value to say and would guess that Kevin Zeese did as well, I can't stomach Sonali's garbage. I can't stomach her ignorance, I can't stomach her 'hugs for empire' and I can't stomach her damn cowardly soul.  For example, to say that 100,000 Iraqis have died in the Iraq War was probably 'brave' prior to the October 2006 publication of Lancet Study which found over a million had died. To say it today on a left outlet, on Pacifica Radio, is to be a damn liar. I'm not in the mood for her garbage. We've fought this fight before, we shouldn't have to fight it again. (For those late to the party, United for Peace & Justice, when it was still pretending to care about ending wars, was pimping lower numbers after the study was published by the Lancet. Elaine and I called it out repeatedly -- and not just here -- and Elaine laid down the damn law -- offline -- and got UFPJ to change the number. I'm not in the mood to refight battles that were already won because Sonali wants to be the cheap trash of empire. Her show gets pulled from the permalinks tonight when I'm by a computer. -- I dictate the snapshots over the phone. And anyone with UPFJ who wants to play and pretend that Elaine didn't force UPFJ to change their numbers should know that I'm more than happy to make private e-mails public on this topic. Elaine did it, she deserved applause for it in real time and she never said a word -- she did do a post at her site noting the number was changed but never noting all she had done -- online and especially offline -- to force that change.) The US Goverment of Accountability Office wrote to Congressional Committees:       According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service in Indianapolis (DFA-IN), fiscal year 2010 active Army military payroll totaled $46.1 billion. For years, we and others have reported continuing deficiencies with Department of the Army military paryoll processes and controls. In November 2003, we reported that weaknesses in processes and controls resulted in over -- and underpayments to mobilized Army National Guard personnel. In April 2006, we reported that pay problems rooted in complex, cumbersome processes used to pay Army soldiers from initial mobilization through active duty deployment to demobilization resulted in military debt to battle-injured soldiers. In June 2009, we reported that the Army did not have effective controls for processing and accounting for military personnel federal payroll taxes because of weaknesses in its procedures and controls for assuring accurate and timely documentation of transactions. In July 2011, the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General reported that the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) made potentially invalid active duty military payroll payments of $4.2 million from January 2005 through December 2009 for the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force. These reported continuing deficiencies in Army payroll processes and controls have called into question the exten to which the Army's military payroll transactions are valid and accurate and whether the Army's military payroll as a whole is auditable. The Army's military pay is material to all of the Army's financial statements and comprises about 20 percent of the Army's $233.8 billion in reported fiscal year 2010 net outlays. Accordingly, Army active duty military payroll is significant to both Army and DOD efforts to meet DOD's 2014 Statement of Budgetary Resources and audit readiness goal.         That's from the cover letter to the GAO's report, released yesterday, entitled [PDF format warning] "DOD FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT: The Army Faces Significant Challenges in Achieving Audit Readiness for Its Military Pay." These issues were the subject of a joint-hearing yesterday of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Organization, Efficiency and Financial Management (Chair is US House Rep Todd Platts) and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Federal Financial Management Committee (Chair is Senator Thomas Carper). Appearing before the two Subcommittees were the Army Reserve's LTC Kirk Zecchini, the GAO's Asif Khan, the Army's Director of Accountability and Audit Readiness James Watkins, the Army's Director of Technology and Business Architecture Integration Jeanne Brooks and Aaron Gillison, the Deputy Director of Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Indianapolis.   Yesterday's snapshot covered LTC Kirk Zecchini's testimony which included being stationed in Afghanistan and going without a month-and-a-half's pay because of some auditing error and how he does have a family to support and had to dip into savings to cover that period of time (not to mention the stress this causes -- he noted that these sort of periods of no pay are so common you can't walk through the dining halls without hearing someone discussing how it has just happened to them). We're going to briefly note the an exchange from the second panel which really sums up the entire second panel.       US House Rep Gerry Connolly: I guess one of the things I would just say to the panel is, it seems to me, progress achieved notwithstanding, we need to move from sort of the administrative clutter to the human level. No soldier on the ground in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else serving in uniform ought to -- on top of everything else -- be worried about whether the spouse and kids back home can pay the bills. That ought to be our goal, bottom line. 'That part, we got your back. Don't worry about anything but the mission, we've got the rest of it.' And it's very difficult to hear testimony as we did this morning from LTC Zecchini that in the middle of Afghanistan, on the warfront, he's worrying about trying to pay the bills back home and so's his spouse, so are the kids. That's a very human concern, a very legitimate one. We may never get to perfection. It's a big, complex system with lots of change orders. Bigger than any private sector enterprise. I understand. But that ought to be our goal. It's a human goal. We need to be seized with a mission. This isn't about numbers. This is about men and women and their lives. And I just -- I say that as somebody who's managed a big enterprise. If that's our mentality, we will fix this problem. And I commend it to you. I know that you are committed but we need to redouble that commitment so that we never have that kind of testimony again and LTC Zecchni and his colleagues never have to worry about that again. Mr. Watkins, in your outstanding testimony, you indicated that you were pretty confident we were going to meet the deadlines we've set four ourselves to finally have a certifiable audit like most federal agencies. The Pentagon's not like most federal agencies so we understand the complications. On a scale of 1 to 10, how confident are you that we will in fact meet that deadline finally?     James Watkins: Representative Connelly, I'm very confident. I'd rate it about 8.     US House Rep Gerry Connelly: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Kahn, your testimony, if I understood you correctly was the GAO found appreciable progress had been made on the fronts we're talking about. Is that correct? Asif Kahn: Some progress has been made but there's a lot more work that needs to be done to meet the 2014 deadline.     US House Rep Gerry Connelly: That's on the audit?     Asif Kahn: Correct.     US House Rep Gerry Connelly: What about on the issue of accurate payroll?     Asif Kahn: That continues to be a problem.     US House Rep Gerry Connelly: Statistically how much of a problem is it from the GAO's point of view? The Chairman [Platts] was talking about 250 but obviously the problem has to be bigger than that, given the size of our armed forces. Asif Kahn: Well let me just pick up from where you left. Our sample of 250 was a statistical sample. That means the results could be generalized or extrapolated over --     US House Rep Gerry Connelly: And if we extrapolate, what would we say?     Asif Kahn: We could not say anything on the accuracy or the validity of Army's active-duty pay for Fiscal Year 2010.   US House Rep Gerry Connelly: But are there metrics we can -- I mean, if we don't have some metrics for these folks to measure against and to gauge progress than it remains anecdotal. Based on that statistical sample, what percentage of active-duty military do we feel suffer from mistakes in their payroll.     Asif Kahn: I mean that -- based on that, that will be very difficult to say because -- I mean getting two payroll records out of 250 doesn't really say much.     US House Rep Gerry Connelly explained that without some sort of basic estimate, it was impossible to know if this is a problem that's improving or if it's getting worse. His goal is to reduce it to zero. But he explained he has no idea where the problem stood without some basic numbers that the Congress could work with. Chair Todd Platts echoed him on that and also noted without a basic number they not only can't estimate how many people are being effected by this (not receiving pay in a timely fashion) but they also can't estimate how much "time and effort and money" it's taking the government to correct these problems when they arise.     Chair Thomas Carper followed by asking for some general reactions from the second panel. Khan was very clear about the problems. The Pentagon witnesses, by contrast, were optimistic and things were great, and, oh, we have figures, we do, we do, we do, we do. But Kahn was then asked what he thought about the responses and he was very clear that there was no documentation at present -- despite what Pentagon witnesses were saying. Kahn explained that the problem remains, "This is a real problem. The length of time it took to provide the documentation? It's not really going to enable an auditor to stay there and to give a valid audit opinion in a timely fashion. And the other one is the issue of supporting documentation. Regardless of the robustness of the system, the auditor will need access to the supporting documentation, the underlying records of the information which is maintained in the system. So those are the two points that need to be recognized. One is the timeliness and the other is the accuracy and the validty of the information in the system."     Chair Thomas Carper: I think in responding to the GAO's work, the Army's official letter to the GAO said -- and I'm going to quote it, "We appreciate your confirmation that no significant issues were identified in your review of the miltiary pay accounts for the Army." That's part of what it said. "We appreciate your confirmation that no significant issues were identified in your review of the military pay accounts for the Army." I think based on what we've heard from you and some from the Colonel [], it just seems like a bit of an odd comment based on your testimony. Do you believe, as the Army stated, that your audit showed no significant issues?     Asif Kahn: Our report has been very clear in highlighting the deficiencies in the Army's processes and systems. The deficiencies in the processes and systems really increase the risk of inaccurate payments -- just like I'd mentioned before. So that along with the timeliness -- with the timeliness of which information is presented, those are very significant issues -- both towards the accuracy and the validity of the information in the system and also to be able to get ready for an audit whether it's 2014 or 2017. So the issues tha we've highlighted, they're very significant.     And that is the second panel.  The auditors point to problems, the Pentagon thanks them for saying hello.  The Pentagon is in denial about the problems.  To even themselves?  Who knows but they obviously wanted to play dumb in public.  As long as they continue to do that, look for this to drag on forever and for more and more service members to suffer with wrongful pay and no pay.

Crying Wolf is Israel’s Best Defense

Crying Wolf is Israel’s Best Defense

By Joharah Baker

March 26, 2012 Listening to the rabid statements coming out of Israel’s leaders over this past week has pointed to something border lining on the comical. Israel is paranoid and comes across sometimes as a little bit pathetic. Of course, in the international arena, Israel’s tirades are taken as 'defensive’ and the fact that the United States backs Israel at just about every turn stifles any real criticisms of its approach. But objectively speaking, Israel is ridiculous in just how much it attacks, not militarily this time, but through its never ending war of words. Take for example, the recent Human Rights Council resolution to form a fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people" passed last week. Israel began ranting about how the HRC was hypocritical and biased and had an "automatic majority" against Israel. Obviously predicting what Israel would try to do, the decision also called on Israel "not to obstruct the process of investigation and to cooperate fully with the mission." Of course this is exactly what happened. Israel says it would refuse to cooperate with the mission, calling the Council "preposterous." The United States was the only country that voted against the proposal. But instead of the United States bashing the council and its resolution, why doesn’t it ask why Israel is so hell-bent on not cooperating with its probe? If Israel is so confident that it has done no wrong, it should not be worried about anything. And if the United States claims it is opposed to settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories, then why doesn’t it allow the mission to come to Palestine and see for itself? Because, it is no different than the Goldstone Report on Israel’s 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza in which 1,400 were Palestinians killed. Much like many of the oppressive regimes in the region that are being slapped with sanctions and even military intervention, Israel will fight the world tooth and nail defending its actions but won’t allow anyone in to see for themselves if there is any truth to the "preposterous" claims being made. The Human Rights’ Council is not the only example, though. Israeli officials were on EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton like a bad rash last week when she dared include the children of Gaza among others in reference to the horrible shooting at a school in Toulouse France, which claimed the lives of three Jewish children. "Israel is the most moral country in the world and despite the fact that it has to fight terrorists who operate from within civilian populations, the IDF makes every effort possible not to harm that population," said its foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman. Prime Minister Netanyahu also criticized Ashton and asked for an apology. "What makes me angry is the comparison between the premeditated slaughter of children to the defensive surgical activities of the [Israel Defense Forces] aimed at hitting terrorists who use children as shields," he said. What no one asked was – even if this were completely true – and we Palestinians were these horrible terrorist monsters who tie our children to rocket launchers, isn’t it still tragic what happens to these kids? Who said the life of one child is more valuable than another? Ashton was only speaking about children and young people killed "in all sorts of circumstances"; aren’t Gaza’s children worthy of this sympathy too? The fact of the matter is that with Israel, "the best offense is a defense" and so it attacks at every possible opportunity. Thankfully, when the fact-finding mission does come to Palestine (on condition that Israel allows it to enter) it will not need Israel’s cooperation. All it needs are eyes, ears and a sense of justice to see just how unjust Israel’s settlement policy really is. Israel attacks, not out of self-defense most of the time, but as a way of silencing any voices of truth about its nature. What better way to fend off criticism than to constantly cry wolf and play the innocent victim in a sea of murderous terrorists? It has worked for them this long, so why would Israel stop now? Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.

A family’s nightmare: Beaten and kidnapped by illegal settlers near Qadumim as Israeli military facilitates the crime

A family’s nightmare: Beaten and kidnapped by illegal settlers near Qadumim as Israeli military facilitates the crime

 

by Jonas Weber

March 25, 2012 | International Solidarity Movement, West Bank Samer and his two children  A family of four was kidnapped by settlers on Thursday afternoon while having a picnic close by an outpost near Qadumim. When soldiers arrived at the scene they chased away the relatives of the kidnapped family with tear gas and rubber coated steel bullets alongside settlers throwing stones. It was around 4.30 pm on Thursday that the El Seddi family, who were eating almonds on their families land in the outskirts of Jit, east of Nablus, was kidnapped by a gang of settlers. The settlers approached the family on four wheelers in a group of about ten young men with their shirts wrapped around their heads to conceal their faces. The family was dragged down the valley by the settlers who were armed with big sticks, and forcing the mother to say to their children that "this land does not belong to us." The youngest of the children, only 2 years old, took no notice of this and blatantly told the settlers what he thought of them in response. The father, Samer received many blows during the descent into the valley, and the day after his face was swollen and patched up. The little three-year old girl also sustained wounds on her legs, and the mother says that she was constantly being pushed around and taunted by the settlers while carrying her children. After about half an hour Samer’s father Ibrahim and two of his brothers became worried for the family and went to look for them. As they climbed a hilltop adjacent to the settlement they saw how the family was being dragged up the hill towards the settlement. " They have an old dried out water well by the outpost, we think their plan was to throw the family in there," said Ibrahim Jamil Khader, who hides a black eye behind a pair of big shades. When the settlers realized they had been discovered they momentarily released the family who started running towards their relatives on the adjacent hill. Right behind them 25-30 settlers followed. When the family reached the top of the hill adjacent to the settlement, Israeli soldiers had arrived at the scene. It soon became obvious however that they had not come to apprehend the kidnappers. Instead Samer’s father and brothers had to stall the soldiers and settlers while the family made their way back towards the village. "As I was talking to the soldiers one of the settlers jumped out  in front of them and punched me in the face. I asked the soldiers why isn’t he here to care about our lives and he answered that 'We can’t fight these people, they are dogs.’" The three men were chased off by the soldiers shooting tear gas and rubber coated steel bullets as well as the settlers who threw stones. There have been problems with the settlers before but something like this has never happened. "No one was prepared for this, says Ibrahim. The children are mentally exhausted, and we are afraid that they will be traumatized by this." The military has a different view on what happened that day. "The official story is that the family was lost in the hills and that the settlers helped them find their way back. They are so full of lies," says Ibrahim. Jonas Weber is a volunteer with International Solidarity Movement (name has been changed).

Israel’s Exploitation Highlighted on Water Day

Israel’s Exploitation Highlighted on Water Day

Elena Viola for the Alternative Information Center (AIC)

Ein Al Ariq spring, next to Qaryut village (Nablus). Following its takeover by Eli settlers the spring was renamed as "Ein Hagvura" (Photo: OCHA) March 25, 2012 In the wake of World Water Day, both local and international organisations have issued reports and organised demonstrations to raise attention to the exploitation and demolition of water resources by Israeli settlers to the detriment of Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). 22 March is a day meant to engage global public opinion on the issue of "the importance of freshwater and the sustainable management of fresh water resources". As a report by the Emergency Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (EWASH) emphasises, it must be clear that Palestinians in the OPT have access to only 10 per cent of all available water, while the occupying Israeli power controls the remaining 90 per cent. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) issued a report on how Israeli settlers dispossess Palestinians of water springs. Additionally, a demonstration under the slogan Thirsting for Justice, organised by several local and international groups including the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI), the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Centre (JLAC) and the Society of St. Yves, amongst others, was held outside the Israeli High Court of Justice in Jerusalem. In its survey conducted throughout 2011, OCHA estimates that the number of water springs located in the vicinity of West Bank Israeli settlements and therefore, completely or partially seized by settler action, amounts to 56. Up to 30 of them are under full settler control, while the remaining 26 are at constant risk of being taken over. According to this same report, in 2009 "the overall water yield of springs was only half the equivalent figure six years earlier" due to "the poor rainfall and Israel’s over-extraction (i.e. extraction in excess of the estimated replenishment potential) of water from wells located both in the West Bank and in Israel." This means that appropriation of natural springs by Israeli settlers has possibly a more unsettling impact on the Palestinians’ livelihood today than in the past. If "springs remain the single largest source of water for irrigation in the West Bank and an important coping mechanism for communities not connected to a water network to meet domestic and livelihood needs," the OCHA report adds, "the loss of access to them reduced the size of the farming land and subsequently the income of the affected farmers." Most of the springs under full Israeli control are rendered inaccessible to Palestinians because of threats and intimidation which often lead to acts of physical violence by the neighbouring settlers. The remaining natural resources have been 'protected’ from Palestinian usage either through the establishment of physical obstacles, such as a fence enhanced by electronic devices, or through complicated procedures of almost-impossible-to-obtain 'visitor' or 'permanent resident' permits. In addition, since 2010 the Society of St. Yves has provided legal representation in over 50 cases of demolition orders for water structures in Area C of the West Bank, where Israel has designated just one per cent of the land for Palestinian development. As the St. Yves' report says, "With such tight restrictions on Palestinian construction, the development of water and sanitation infrastructure is usually done without proper authorization. Many communities are at risk of losing their means for surviving, and face the fear of receiving demolition orders". In these latest regards, half of the water collection structures demolished since 2009 have occurred in the first half of 2011. Raffoul Rofa, Director of St. Yves, says that, "The right to water is a basic right guaranteed under international law. Where there is no water, there is no life, and without cisterns the Palestinian farmers cannot cultivate their lands thus causing them to abandon it." Nowadays, one of the major concerns of OCHA is represented by the 26 West Bank springs identified as being at risk of settler takeover. Although at the time of the survey Palestinians still had control of those springs located in Area B, the constant presence of armed settlers in the area has an intimidating effect that might discourage farmers' and residents' access in the future. In half of these cases, the aim to accomplish a full takeover of a spring is reinforced by the deployment of physical infrastructures by the settlers at the spring site. "This is part of a larger trend entailing the promotion of the tourism infrastructure in Israeli settlements," the report states. "It expands the scope of territorial control of settlements; it adds a source of employment and revenue for the settler population; and it contributes to the 'normalization’ of settlements in the eyes of large segments of Israeli society, as well as some foreign tourists." Israeli settlements - constructed since the 1967 occupation of East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and the Syrian Golan by the occupying Israeli power - are illegal under international law. Yet the methods enacted by Israeli settlers to gain control over Palestinian springs, such as trespass, intimidation, physical assault, theft of private property and construction without building permits, are also illegal under Israeli legislation. Furthermore, by demolishing rain collecting cisterns, Israel violates its legal obligations as an occupying power - under Article 54 of the Protocol 1 Addition to the Geneva Conventions (1977) and, in addition, breaches a joint declaration signed in 2001 between Palestinian and Israeli, who agreed to keep water infrastructure out of the cycle of violence for both parties. What OCHA on a global and Thirsting for Justice campaign on a local scale agree to is that "the continuous encroachment on Palestinian land for the purpose of a settlement expansion" and the "policies of water infrastructure demolitions" are parts of a strategy aimed to undermine the right of the Palestinian people to their self-determination.

New Report Shows Extent of Global Arms Complex

New Report Shows Extent of Global Arms Complex

By Amitabh Pal

March 25, 2012 There are few things as infuriating as the annual report by one of my favorite research organizations. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released on March 19 its yearly global arms report, with data showing that arms transfers for the past four years have increased by a quarter over the 2002-2006 period. Asia is leading the world in the wrong direction. "Asia and Oceania accounted for 44 per cent of global arms imports, followed by Europe (19 percent), the Middle East (17 percent), the Americas (11 percent) and Africa (9 percent)," the report says, adding that "India was the world’s largest recipient of arms, accounting for 10 per cent of global arms imports." A staff member of the group explained India’s motivation to CNN. "India procures arms in relation to its tense relationship with Pakistan and increasingly sees China as a potential threat," said Siemon Wezeman, a senior analyst with SIPRI. "It also wants to assert itself as a major regional or even global power." If India wants to compete with China, Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has a better suggestion. "Life expectancy at birth in China is 73.5 years; in India it is still 64.4 years. Infant mortality rate is fifty per thousand in India, compared with just seventeen in China, and the under-five mortality rate is sixty-six for Indians and nineteen for the Chinese," Sen wrote in The Hindu newspaper last year. "Almost half of our children are undernourished, compared with a very tiny proportion in China. Comparing ourselves with China in these really important matters would be a very good perspective, and they can both inspire us and give us illumination about what to do—and what not to do." Alas, instead of taking Sen’s sage advice, India is instead driven by delusions of global grandeur and is embarking on a whopping $200 billion defense modernization drive over the next decade. Then there are the arms merchants that shamelessly profit by peddling these instruments of death. Here, the revelations of another recent SIPRI analysis, this one released on February 27, are also quite depressing. "Sales of arms and military services by the largest arms-producing companies—the SIPRI Top 100—continued to increase in 2010 to reach $411.1 billion," says the report (though the rate of increase slowed as compared to 2009). U.S.-based weapons manufacturers occupy pride of place. "Sales by the forty-four U.S.-based companies accounted for over 60 percent of all arms sales by the Top 100 arms-producing companies in 2010," the analysis says. Should we be proud that the United States still makes something or should we be embarrassed that one of the few things it knows how to manufacture is so destructive? The report also points out how consolidated this industry is. "The global arms industry continues to be highly concentrated, with the top ten arms-producing companies accounting for 56 percent, or $230 billion, of total Top 100 arms sales," the report says. While companies in most realms of the economy have suffered, the weapons behemoths continue to flourish. "The data for 2010 demonstrates, once again, the major players’ ability to continue selling arms and military services despite the financial crises currently affecting other industries," says Susan Jackson of SIPRI. Dominating the list are giants such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman. (Lockheed Martin itself had $35 billion in arms sales in 2010!) The question is: What can be done about this? Many years ago, economist John Kenneth Galbraith had the suggestion that the U.S. weapons industry be nationalized, with the logic that the dynamics of the arms bazaar anyway made a mockery of the whole idea of a free market. Fighting Bob La Follette had the same idea. It’s time to consider it once again. Source

U.S. Congress supports additional funding for Israel's Iron Dome systems

U.S. Congress supports additional funding for Israel's Iron Dome systems

By Natasha Mozgovaya

March 25, 2012 The Iron Dome Support Act (IDSA), which authorizes the President to provide Israel assistance to procure additional Iron Dome defense systems, wins bipartisan support. The Iron Dome missile defense system has proven its effectiveness, as it successfully intercepted nearly 60 rockets fired from within the Gaza Strip last week. U.S. Congressmen were also impressed by the performance, and Rep. Howard L. Berman, (D-Valley Village) - the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee - introduced the Iron Dome Support Act (IDSA) authorizing the President to provide assistance if requested by the Israeli government to procure additional Iron Dome anti-missile defense systems. During the 2011 budget year, Congress approved 205 million dollars in funding for Iron Dome. Congressman Berman said: "When Palestinian terrorists launched their latest round of missile attacks on innocent Israelis, the Iron Dome anti-missile system saved innocent lives and prevented an escalation of hostilities and a full-blown crisis." He added that "Israel must have the ability to defend itself from rocket and missile attacks, and the United States will continue to stand by our strong ally if called upon in times of need." The Iron Dome Support Act is still in initial stages of the legislation process. However, it has already won support from both parties. Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,(R-FL) was one of the initial supporters of the bill, along with four other congressmen from both parties. Israel is currently planning to set up a fourth Iron Dome system. Israel's Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren wrote in an opinion piece on the Politico website that "at least ten Iron Dome systems will be necessary in order to defend the whole country – for Israel, and for America as well, an investment in Iron Dome is an investment in diplomacy that helps create a conditions for peace." Meanwhile, the House Foreign Affairs Committee has questioned continued funding for the Palestinian Authority, contrary to the position of the Obama administration. The administration believes that it is in Palestinian, Israeli, and American interests to continue funding the Palestinian Authority in order to stabilize the West Bank, and to improve the situation in Gaza.