domingo, 25 de junho de 2017

Israel vs Palestine : No Rights to the Occupied

 American lawyer is suing the University of California for anti-semitism. It is the same person who last year denied the existence of Palestinians...
Jewish voice for Peace fights back
Noam Chomsky: anti-zionism is not anti-semitism


 On June 11, 2017, the Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu called for the dismantling of the UN agency that aids millions of Palestinian refugees, accusing it of stoking anti-Israeli sentiments and perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem. 
Netanyahu, after a meeting with the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, in Jerusalem, said, "It is time the UNRWA be dismantled and merged with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees". 
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA | United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine ) was established by the UN General Assembly in 1949 after hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes in the war that followed Israel's creation.
Since its establishment, the UNRWA has provided education, healthcare, and social services to those meeting its definition of "Palestine refugees".
The organisation defines a Palestine refugee as someone whose place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948 and who lost his/her home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. UNRWA also provides basic services to Palestinians who became displaced as a result of the 1967 Arab-Israeli Conflict.
Today, the UNRWA aids more than five million registered Palestinian refugees in lebaon, Syria, Jordan, the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.
Netanyahu wants to dismantle the UNRWA because the agency allows Palestinian refugee men to transmit their refugee status from one generation to another. This transmission of refugee status keeps the right of return for Palestinian refugees alive - it ensures that their hopes for returning to their ancestral homeland do not perish with the death of the original 1948 refugees. 
Israel has accused the UNRWA of "perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem" by allowing Palestinian refugees to transmit their refugee status to future generations. This accusation aims to shift our attention away from the fact that Israel is solely responsible for perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem by denying the refugees the right to return to their homes.
If the UNRWA is dismantled and merged with the UNHCR, Palestinian refugees scattered all over the Middle East will effectively lose all hope of returning to their homeland. Since the possibility of repatriation is effectively being blocked by Israel, the UNHCR will either integrate them in host countries or resettle them in a third country.
Furthermore, if the UNRWA is dismantled, Palestinian refugees registered with the agency will no longer be excluded from the scope of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and Stateless Persons, which calls upon contracting states to facilitate the assimilation and naturalisation of refugees.
This exclusion clause was added to the convention by Arab states who wanted to make sure that the principle of naturalisation within the 1951 Convention did not affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees. But if the UNRWA is dismantled, Palestinian refugees will automatically lose their exclusive status. 
Arab countries hosting UNRWA camps are not parties to the 1951 Convention, but they still can be affected by this text. Without the UNRWA, Palestinian refugees will fall under the UNHCR mandate which bases its work on the 1951 Convention. This means that Arab countries hosting Palestinian refugees will find themselves under pressure to either integrate Palestinian refugees or agree to their resettlement in a third country. And Palestinian refugees who could not be integrated or resettled will find themselves facing a legal limbo.
If the UNRWA merges with the UNHCR, Palestinian refugees and their descendants will either be integrated or resettled and as a result will no longer be recognised as refugees and lose all hope for repatriation. This is what Netanyahu wants - ending the Palestinian refugee problem by dissolving their refugee status and alongside their right to return to their homeland. 
The UNRWA receives its mandate from the UN General Assembly and the assembly members have long been supporting of the agency. But UNRWA's current mandate ends on June 30, 2017, and Netanyahu will try his best to influence the next UN General Assembly vote on the future of the agency.
The UNRWA should continue to exist until a just and fair solution for the Palestinian refugee problem materialises. When members of the UN General Assembly are voting on UNRWA's mandate, we hope that they will remember the words of the UN Security Council Mediator, Folke Bernadotte, who in 1948 noted that "No settlement can be just and complete … if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes."
Bernadotte was assassinated by a Zionist group in 1948 for defending the right of return for Palestinian refugees. The innocent victims he died defending continue to suffer a grave injustice by not being able to return to their homes. In the middle of this injustice, the UNRWA is the only UN agency that can continue to protect and serve Palestinian refugees without stripping them of their right of return. Therefore, saving the UNRWA means saving Palestinian refugees.

Israel has displaced almost 66 per cent, nearly 957,000, of the Palestinian people who lived in historic Palestine during the 1948 Nakba, a new report has revealed.
Published on World Refugee Day, the study by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) stated that nearly 5.9 million people are registered as refugees with UNRWA, the UN relief agency tasked with dealing with Palestine refugee affairs, 17 per cent live in the West Bank and 24.5 per cent in the Gaza Strip.
As many as 39.1 per cent of Palestinian refugees live in Jordan, 8.8 per cent in Lebanon and 10.6 per cent live in Syria.
In an interview with Quds Press, Ahmad Hanoun, director of the Refugee Department in the Palestine Liberation Organisation, said that resolving the refugee issue by ensuring that they return to their abandoned homes in 1948 is “the key to stability in the entire region and the basis of any future political solution to end the conflict”.
Hanoun said the world marks World Refugee Day as the Palestinian refugees at home and in the diaspora live under difficult conditions which are exacerbated by the intensification of regional crises in the Arab region and the Israeli restrictions on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Thousands of Palestinian workers wueue at this Israeli military checkpoint before dawn each dayn Bethlehem, to go to school, to work, to see a doctor, etc. 

Resistance is not terrorism. It is a human right
East Jerusalem is occupied by Israel. It is also illegally annexed. It is also illegally separated from the rest of the West Bank by an illegal wall. In Jerusalem, Israel boasts of 220,000 illegal Jewish settlers settled on land confiscated from 300,000 Palestinian residents who are now landless. It boasts of 50,000 illegally displaced Palestinian Arabs and 685 illegally demolished Palestinian homes that have rendered 2,500 Palestinian Arabs homeless [see sources for this this information here]. All of this is legalized through Israel’s jurisprudence, but never legitimized as its fundamental human rights violations are enshrined in military occupation law.
Although the US and Israel both reject the concept of state terrorism (i.e. acts of violence practiced by official state agencies), the above description of Israel’s policies and actions in East Jerusalem should be regarded as terrorist activities. Israel’s violent activities are premeditated, political in nature, and aimed at civilians – i.e., all the factors generally accepted to constitute elements of terrorism.
The nature of Israel’s violence in Jerusalem (as well as in the other occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) is highlighted by the extrajudicial and brutal erasure of Palestinians who exercise their internationally recognized right to resist as described by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24 of 29 November 1978: 
Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle; Israel has a long history of extrajudicial killing of Palestinians in and outside Palestine and also a history of trying to prevent reporters from exposing its policy of extra-judicial killing. As Palestinian resistance increases, so does the proliferation of Israel’s extrajudicial killings: Human Rights Watch has documented numerous statements since October 2015, by senior Israeli politicians, including the police minister and defense minister, calling on police and soldiers to shoot to kill suspected attackers, irrespective of whether lethal force is actually strictly necessary to protect life. (Israel/Palestine: Some Officials Backing ‘Shoot-to-Kill’)
So, what to make of the incidents that took place on June 16, 2017, in which three Palestinian young men reportedly conducted two attacks on Israeli police in Jerusalem?
Two Palestinians were shot dead after opening fire at and trying to stab a group of Israeli police officers on Friday night, police said. At the other, a Palestinian fatally stabbed a border policewoman before being shot dead by police…. The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the stabbing but the militant Palestinian organisation Hamas and the People’s Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) said the three attackers and were their own members…. Palestinian media named the attackers as Adel Ankush, 18, from a village near Ramallah, Bra’a Salah, 18, from the same village, and Amar Bedui, 31 from Hebron.
Since September 2015, Palestinian assailants have killed 42 Israelis, two visiting Americans and a British student, mainly in stabbing, shooting and vehicular attacks. In that time, about 250 Palestinians were killed by Israeli fire. Israel identified most of them as attackers.
Israel blames the violence on incitement by Palestinian political and religious leaders compounded by social media sites that glorify violence and encourage attacks.
Palestinians say it stems from anger over decades of Israeli rule in territory they claim for their state. (Israeli police officer stabbed to death in Jerusalem attack)
The excerpt from The Guardian above lays out all the dimensions of the tragedy, but in the wrong order.
The reference to the Islamic State is in the subheading of the article, “Three Palestinians armed with knives and a home-made gun launched two attacks and were shot dead in attack claimed by Islamic State”, but the refutation of it is buried inside the story. The Israeli side of the report is up front, the Palestinian side is literally in the last line of the report. The three young men involved are said to have “entered Jerusalem from the West Bank,” as if occupied and illegally annexed East Jerusalem is not part of the West Bank and as if the village of these young men, Deir Abu Mash’al (Dayr Abu-Mashal/Meshal), northwest of Ramallah does not share the same confiscation of land by Israel and Jewish settlement ringing it as does East Jerusalem.
Here is a little bit of information from the village profile online that will connect the dots for you: The Israeli government confiscated hundreds of dunums of lands in Deir Abu Mash‟al to open Israeli bypass road no. 465. This road is constructed and open to connect the Israeli settlements surrounding the village with each other. The real threat of bypass roads lies in the buffer zone formed by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) along these roads, extending to approximately 75 m on the roads‟ sides.” (Deir Abu Mash’al (Dayr Abu-Mashal/Meshal), Ramallah gov.)
In all justice, we should be condemning the instigators of the violence in Jerusalem, the brutal oppression and erasure of Palestinians meant to ensure the “Jewish character”, i.e., the “right” of Israel to exist as a Jewish state on stolen land. We should do what the United Nations General Assembly has already done (Resolution A/RES/33/24): “Strongly condemns all Governments which do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of peoples under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people.”



. Jonathan Cook: How Israel gains from Egypt-Saudi Red Sea islands deal 
. Alternet: New Report Exposes Direct Israeli Support for Al Qaeda-Allied Forces  in S
. Middle East Monitor: 'We cannot bear the repeated Nakba anymore',  says Abou Omar, a Palestinian refugee who lived in Yarmouk camp in Syria before the war broke and thousands of Palestinian refugees were slaughtered.
. The Independent: Government acted unlawfully by restricting 'ethical' boycotts of Israel 
. Human Rights Watch: Israeli Forces Kill Gaza Fisherman at Sea 
.
Palestinian artist Steve Sabella has dedicated his practice to investigating “why I felt alienated where I should belong,” namely, the city of Jerusalem where he was born.
 


BRASIL - DIRETAS, JÁ!

 

  Jornalistas Livres (@j_livres) | Twitter

.


Postado por às Nenhum comentário:
Marcadores: , , ,

domingo, 18 de junho de 2017

Reality check on The price of the War on Terror

Antes de entrar no artigo principal, eis uma atualização da situação surreal em que a Arábia Saudita e seus cúmplices extremistas puseram o Qatar. E o custo humano dos caprichos de um principezinho venal, autoritário e medíocre.
A ligação entre Araábia Saudita é antiga e conhecida, mas agora a cumplicidade de Riad com Tel Aviv também já é explícita. Por outro lado,
Cedo a palavra aos colegas da Al Jazeera que estão no olho do furacão.
Inside Story: What's the human cost of the Gulf row against Qatar?
Counting the material cost of the Qatar-Gulf crisis

No mês passado, o Physicians for Social Responsibility (PFR), baseada em Washington, nos EUA, divulgou um estudo importante que revela que o número de mortes diretas nos 10 anos da "guerra contra o Terror" desde os ataques das torres gêmes em NYC no dia 09 de setembro de 2001 vai de 1,3 milhões a 2 milhões.
O relatório de 97 páginas do grupo de médicos nobilizados é o primeiro a avaliar o número de vítimas civis de intervenções na "luta contra o terrorismo" liderada pelos EUA no Iraque, Afeganistão e Paquistão.
O relatório do PSR é de autoria de uma equipe interdisciplinar de especialistas da saúde pública. Mas apesar da autoridade indiscutível dos analistas, passou em branco na grande mídia.
Deve ser porque faz uma revisão crítica das estimaativas anteriores das vítimas da "guerra ao terror" e é critica abertamente a principal fonte de informação da grande mídia neste assunto, que é o Iraq Body Count (IBC). Este estima em 110.000 o número de mortos no Iraque, mas o PSR detetou 'erros' metodológicos crassos. 
Por exemplo, apesar de 40.000 cadáveres terem sido enterrados em Najaf, o IBC aotou apenas 1.354 mortes na cidade no mesmo período. Esse é só um exemplinho da defasagem entre os relatórios do IBC e o número real, que é sempre imensa, como neste caso.
Essa defasagem se apresenta também nos bombardeios de EUA e aliados. O IBC registrou apenas três ataques aéreos em um período em 2005 em que estes haviam aumentado de 25 para 120. 
A PSR conclui que o número mais provável de mortes civis no Iraque desde 2003 até esta data seja de 1 milhão. E adiciona pelo menos 220.000 mortos no Afeganistão e 80.000 no Paquistão, em consequência direta ou indireta da guerra liderada pelos EUA, o que nos leva a um total mínimo de 1,3 milhões e máximo, de 2 milhões.
E o PSR limita sua análise a pós-2001, enquanto que a "guerra ao terror" já se estendia a políticas intervencionistas anteriores no Iraque e no Afeganistão. Há também uma escassez de dados sobre o Afeganistão que indica uma subestimação das contas. Sem contar o fato de não mencionar nada da Líbia, da Síria e do Yemen, países em que os EUA intervêm indiretamente através da Arábia Saudita. 
Ora, a guerra no Iraque não começou em 2003, mas em 1991 com a primeira guerra do Golfo e as sanções econômicas que seguiram.
Um estudo anterior do PSR determinou que as mortes no Iraque causadas pelo impato direto e indireto da guerra do Golfo se eleva a 200.000 iraquianos, a maioria civis. E a guerra no Iraque continuou em forma econômica através de sanções draconianas, sob o pretexto de Saddam Hussein negar autorização a inspeção de suas "armas de destruição em massa". Itens proibidos no Iraque incluíam produtos de vida quotidiana indispensáveis. O que eleva o número de mortos  a 1.7 milhões de civis iraquianos.
No Afeganistão, a estimativa do PSR de baixas globais também é bastante acanhada. Seis meses após os atentados de 2001, o número de mortes diretas atingia cerca de 8.000 afegãos e indiretas, 50.000. 
No total, o total de mortes devido ao impacto direto e indireto de intervenção estadunidense desde o início da década de noventa até agora poderia ser de 3 milhões.
Tais cifras podem ser elevadas demais, mas nunca se saberá com certeza. Os EUA e a Inglaterra silêncio total, pois se recusam a controlar o número de mortes civis de suas operações militares - são uma inconveniência irrelevante.
Devido à grave falta de dados no Iraque, quase completa inexistência de registros no Afeganistão e a indiferença dos governos ocidentais de mortes de civis que não sejam as próprias, nos atentados terroristas em seu território, é quase impossível determinar a verdadeira extensão da perda de vidas que eles causam.
Falando em terrorismo de estado, três dos senadores democratas que se juntaram aos republicanos para ajudar no voto da venda de US $ 510 milhões em mísseis  de precisão para a Arábia Saudita, em uma votação de estreitas 53-47, receberam dezenas de milhares de dólares em "contribuições para campanha" da indústria de armamento, que irá colherá lucros imensos com o negócio recorde de US $ 110 bilhões que Trump fez com os patrocinadores de terrorismo que governam a Arábia Saudita.
O regime Saudita deve usar estas armas para continuar massacrando os yemenitas com o apoio dos EUA. O Yêmen já perdeu dezenas de milhares de vidas nesta guerra de sentido único que criou, segundo a ONU, uma das duas maiores crises humanitárias no mundo, além da de Faixa de Gaza.

Quanto ao Yêmen, que está sendo vítima de terror do país vizinho, além das milhares de mortes de civis, a catastrófica crise humanitária causada pelos bombardeamentos indiscriminados da Arábia Saudita - com armas fornecidas pelos EUA piora de hora em hora: a epidemia de cólera já ultrapassou cem mil casos, afetando principalmente crianças e idosos. Desde 7 de junho de 2017, 101,820 casos suspeitos de cólera foram detetados, ocasionando 791 mortes. Como sempre, os mais vulneráveis são crianças abaixo dos quinze anos de idade (46 por cento dos casos) e acima de 60 (33%).
O bombardeio inclemente saudita tem tido efeito catastrófico sobre a população, com o colapso do sistema de saúde. 14,5 milhões de pessoas já não têm acesso a saneamento básico ou fontes de água limpa, saúde - faz oito meses que o governo não paga salário dos duncionários do departamento de saneamento - e suprimentos médicos não estão entrando no país no ritmo necessário a salvar vidas.
Os sintomas do cólera aparecem entre 12 horas e 5 dias depois de beber água infetada. A maioria das pessoas infetadas com o Vibrio cholerae não desenvolvem nenhum sintoma, embora possa transmiti-lo. Os que desenvolvem sintomas têm diarreia aquosa grave seguida de morte em poucas horas, se a doença não for tratada.
O pior de todas estas mortes inúteis é que o tratamento é simples e eficaz. A maioria das pessoas reage à solução de reidratação Oral (SRO), em a forma de saquinho dissolvido em um litro de água. Pacientes podem precisar até de seis litros da solução no primeiro dia. Se os pacientes estão severamente desidratados e em estado de choque, podem precisar de fluidos intravenosos (7 litros de intravenosa mais SRO para um adulto de 70 kg).
Mas seria fácil erradicar o problema, se a Arábia Saudita não bloqueasse a entrada de medicamentos e mantimentos, cometendo um crime em massa indireto.
E querem fazer o mundo acreditar que é Doha o bandido e Riad o mocinho?
Por favor!
John Pilger: The War on terror - Truth and Lies


Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.
 The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, and yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the mainstream media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organization to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.
 The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.
The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.
For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.
Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.
And the war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime. An early PSR study found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians.
After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.
Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties is also very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.
Altogether, the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.
Such figures could well be too high, but one may never know for sure. US and UK armed forces, as a matter of policy, refuse to keep track of the civilian death toll of military operations - they are an irrelevant inconvenience.
Due to the severe lack of data in Iraq, almost complete non-existence of records in Afghanistan, and the indifference of Western governments to civilian deaths abroad, it is literally impossible to determine the true extent of loss of life, when it is not in their own territory.
ive Democratic senators joined hands with Republicans to push through the Trump administration’s sale of $510 million in precision-guided missiles to Saudi Arabia, in a narrow 53-47 vote.
By the way, three of the Democrats that helped the Republicans to vote in favor of Saudi Arabia arma sale, have received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the arms industry, which will be reaping an unprecedented windfall profit from Trump's record-breaking $110 billion weapons deal with the Saudi monarchy.
The Saudi regime will likely use these weapons to continue waging a brutal U.S.-backed war on Yemen, which began during the Obama administration, has led to the deaths of tens of thousands of people and created what the United Nations has repeatedly warned is the largest humanitarian crisis in the world, with the Gaza Ztrip.
Senators from both sides of the aisle proposed the bill S.J.Res.42 in late May to try to block this $510 million portion of the larger arms deal. Lawmakers voted on the legislation on June 13, and it was defeated with 47 votes for and 53 against.

As to Yemen, which is being victim of state terror, the catastrophic humanitarian crisis caused by the indiscriminate bombing by Saudi Arabian forces using weapons supplied by its Western masters has just worsened: the cholera epidemic has surpassed one hundred thousand cases, affecting mostly children and the elderly.
As of June 7 2017, there have been 101.820 suspected cases of cholera, occasioning 791 deaths, the most vulnerable being children under fifteen years of age (46 per cent of cases) and the over-60s (33%).
Saudi bombing of Yemen has had a catastrophic effect on the population, with the virtual collapse of the healthcare system. 14.5 million people no longer have regular access to basic sanitation or clean water sources, health and sanitation workers have been unpaid for eight months and medical supplies are not entering the country at a rate which meets needs.
The symptoms of cholera appear between 12 hours and 5 days after drinking infected water. The majority of people infected with Vibrio cholerae do not develop any symptoms at all although they can pass the infection on to others. Those who do develop symptoms develop severe watery diarrhea and death can follow within hours if the disease is not treated.
The worst part of all these unecessary deaths is that treatment is simple and effective and cholera is easily treatable. Most people react to an Oral Rehydration Solution (ORS), which comes in the form of a sachet dissolved in one liter of water. Patients can need up to six liters of the solution in the first day. If the patients are severely dehydrated and in shock, they may need intravenous fluids (7 liters of intravenous plus ORS for a 70 kilogram adult).
The only thing is that Saudi Arabia does not allow the entrance of the medicine. Which is indirect murder, at least.
And they want the world to believe that Doha is the vilain and Ryad is the good guy? 
Please!
John Pilger on World War III and Palestine (Eastern 2017)
 
Postado por às Nenhum comentário:
Marcadores: , ,

domingo, 11 de junho de 2017

USA, Israel & Golf States vs Qatar, Iran, and everybody else?

Antes de começar o artigo principal, Parabéns, Jeremy Corbyn!
Congratulations to Jeremy Corbyn!
Cedo a palavra a Owen Jones, do Guardian, e na video seguinte, a dois outros bons jornalistas britânicos. Enjoy! 
  
Video: UK's Hung Parliament—Conservatives Lose Majority

No absoluto, eu não simpatizo com o Qatar por causa de sua história ambigua de patrocínio de "rebeldes" suspeitos que semearam o caos na Síria.
Porém, no relativo, simpatizo muito. Considero o país do golfo mais próximo de meus valores democráticos, mais liberal socialmente, menos opressor das mulheres, mais solidário da Palestina, e sobretudo, Doha é a única cidade da região onde se sente um canal de comunicação realmente aberto entre o governo e a população. Portanto, simpatizo particularmente com estas qualidades de Doha que são justamente as que Arábia Saudita, Israel e os Estados Unidos abominam.
Sem contar a Al Jazeera. 
A Al Jazeera desbancou CNN, BBC, enfim, todas essas cadeis internacionais de propaganda Trump & May que fomentam a ignorância e formam falsas opiniões. A Al Jazeera dispõe dos maiores recursos materiais para viabilizar a qualidade e independência de informação que seus jornalistas nos fornecem todo dia com a liberdade editorial com a qual todo profissional competente e idealista sonha.
A Al Jazeera leva a verdade à telinha até em Israel e nos Etados Unidos e isso incomoda bastante Trump e Netanyahu que querem esconder os fatos e alimentar sua opinião pública apenas com hasbara - propaganda em hebraico.
Daí o complô contra o Qatar.
Daí a pressão sobre o Emir para que renegue o Hamas e negue o abrigo que dava à cúpula de refugiados palestinos.
A lei USA que ameaça sancionar o Qatar por seu apoio ao "Palestinian terror" foi patrocinada por 10 juristas que receberam US$1 milhão de lobistas comprometidos com Israel, Arábia Saudita e Emirados Árabes nos últimos 18 meses. O projeto de lei fora introduzido na Câmara de deputados dos EUA no dia 25 de maio, mas só foi divulgado depois de Arábia Saudita, Egito e União dos Estados Árabes (UAE) incluírem o Qatar em uma "terror list" que continha 59 pessoas e 12 instituições "blacklisted", citando o Palestinian International Terrorism Support Prevention Act of 2017. Ao mesmo tempo, cortaram relações diplomáticas com Doha simultaneamente, enumerando uma lista exaustiva de sanções que incluem transferência de tecnologia, armamento, empréstimo, que totalizam US$10 milhões..
A maquinação é tão grosseira que parece inacreditável que seja manchete de jornais sem uma nota irônica. Mas o pior é que muita gente acredita no que lê na grande mídia sem buscar informar-se alhures para ver onde está o leão invisível.
Esta armadilha está sendo montada por lobbis sionistas e saudi-egípcias há algum tempo. A novidade é  eles terem exposto sua aliança publicamente. A base religioso-ideológica do Hamas é a ala liberal da Irmandade Muçulmana. Daí a mudança de Khaled Meeshal de Damasco para Doha quando a ala rebelde da Irmandade pegou em armas contra Bashar el-Assad. 

I like Doha’s willingness to host a veritable who’s who of international players and adversaries, as so much the Switzerland of the region, stands alone. In no other regional state do we see such an institutional effort to keep open channels of communication and, at times, negotiation around complex issues replete with risk for hosts and guests alike. After all, when these channels close, civilians die and refugees flee by the millions only to become stateless… and vulnerable for generations to come.  It is the nature of today’s political warfare by proxy.
Indeed, Doha has long been home to the political leadership of Hamas, a resistance movement seen throughout the region, and much of the world, not as a terrorist group but rather a national liberation movement. Doha has also developed increasing ties to Iran as a result of a mutual security agreement signed in 2010. . . and a joint economic venture involving natural gas.
In other ways, Qatar has proven itself light years ahead of its contemporaries. Rich with integrated universities, controversial academics, human rights groups and foundations, its efforts to rebuild ravaged communities throughout the region have been second to none. While many have mourned the repeated destruction of Gaza by Israel, few have opened their hearts and pockets to its rebuilding. Qatar has done so time and time again… working with Hamas in that effort.
Ultimately, the measure of any society’s wealth is its vision for the future.  Here, too, Qatar’s outlook is bright. Its young walk with great pride and dignity as they pursue an opportunity to learn who it is they wish to become and, then, set off to chase that dream unencumbered by the rigidity of family or tradition.
For many in the West, the Middle East and Gulf has always been a mystery… one wrapped in a blanket of great trepidation fueled by ignorance and uncertainty.  From the comfort and safety of our homes, we see painful mayhem throughout the region yet fail to fully understand it is driven largely by two burning, but connected, issues of the day… sectarian tension between Arab States and Iran and the seventh unbroken decade of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians at the hands of Israel.
Today, with a convenient shout throughout the halls of Washington & Israel and their Arab proxies, can be heard the echo of Qatar as the state funder of terrorism. Though it flies in the face of the reality of decades of efforts and evidence to the contrary, the claim draws traction from those rogue states that seek to build a united front on behalf of dangerous supremacists that stoke the fires of opposition to Iran.
One can but wonder what might happen if Qatar ceases its long term efforts to build détente with Iran and abandons its commitment to the resistance in Palestine. History, ever a portent of what is to come, will not leave this question unanswered.
There are provocative, if not dangerous, crossroads in history which can easily take us down either smart or dim-witted paths. I suspect the recent break in relations with Qatar announced by KSA, UAE and Egypt . . .  and with the full blessing, if not lead, of the White House and Israel… will prove to be one such weighty moment.
It was Saudi Arabia, along with Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain that insisted that Qatar was the destabilising influence in the region. (They themselves are naturally innocent of that.)  All land, air and sea traffic shall be halted with the state, while diplomatic missions shall be removed.  Qatari citizens shall also be given their marching orders, having to leave within 14 days.
Disagreements between Doha and Riyadh are far from new. Being eager practitioners of censorship and media control, Riyadh has shown little time for such bold media efforts as Al-Jazeera. Bristling at what it has deemed negative coverage, officials in Riyadh have repeatedly insisted that Qatar be rebuked for backing its own horses in the Islamist struggle, much of this borne by the rumblings of the Arab Spring.
The Islamic Brotherhood is top of that list, and what is not surprising by looking at the list of states intent on strangling Qatar is that they have taken a dim view about the populist aspirations of the Muslim Brotherhood.
In Egypt, an elected head of state from the organisation was deposed in a coup that re-established the primacy of the military.  Qatar’s backing of Mohamed Morsi’s short stint at the helm was well and truly noted. In a measure of placation, Qatar closed down Al Jazeera Mubashir Misr, its twenty-four hour news channel in Cairo.
Since then, spats have grown in number.  Ambassadors have been sporadically recalled.  In September 2002, Saudi Arabia did so over what it regarded as unfavourable coverage of a Saudi plan which entailed normalising ties with Israel in exchange for a peace deal with the Palestinians.
More recently, Qatar’s efforts to secure the release of a group of falconers, among them members of the royal family, captured by a Teheran-backed Shia group in Iraq, drew attention from Abu Dhabi and Riyadh. The intended ransom could well have run into a billion dollars
The isolating move has trigged obvious consequences.  Qatar has become a place of strategic importance for various powers.  The US, for one, has its largest airbase in the Middle East located in the state - one wonders if it has not become a Trojan Horse. 
On the other hand, the move of the golf states against Qatar goes beyond political alienation.
Qatar’s flag carrier, Qatar Airways, has had to re-route flights over Turkey, Iran and Oman, given the forced closure of airspace to their planes.  On Tuesday, 70 flights were grounded. Other airline carriers were delighted by the move, given the relentless rise and appropriation of key routes of travel from Europe to Asia and Australasia by the Middle Eastern carriers. The gesture of isolating Qatar is looking, at best, one of economic self-harm, affecting such carriers as Bahrain’s Gulf Air, Dubai’s Emirates, Saudi Arabia’s Saudia and Abu Dhabi’s Etihad Airways.
The demands for resolving this monumental tiff are bound to be even steeper than they were in 2014, when they alienated Qatar for a few weeks.  Sultan Sooud Al-Qassemi makes his own hazard at a set of guesses, and it involves a conventional, authoritarian ploy: muzzle media coverage, entailing the “shuttering of the Al Jazeera TV Network before any mediation can take place” (Newsweek, Jun 5).
That will just be the beginning. The main course will feature the expulsion of Hamas figures and affiliates, along with such undesirables as Islamist writer Yasser Al-Za’atra and Azmi Bishara. For dessert, the Egyptians will wish for a cessation of any pro-Morsi coverage, while the entire collective will push for shackles to be placed on charitable organisations. 
Such demands are what is conventionally called unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of another state, but the despots of the Gulf are bound to miss that irony.  What Qatar is accused of will not only be matched but surpassed. Worst of all, The USA, Israel, Egypt and Saoudi Arabia might succeed on shuting up Al Jazeera. The most reliable source of information and investigative journalism may be taken away from us. Tel Aviv has not digested the report on the Israeli Lobby in the United Kingdom and wants its revenge, badly. Blog 11/01/2017 

PS. During Donnald Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia, the sides signed the largest arms sales contract in America's history worth $109.7 billion. What will Saudi Arabia get for this money?
First of all, the Saudis will have the most powerful army in the Middle East. The country is a longtime partner of the United States and  continues to strengthen its army, as well as its positions in the region with Washington's support. 
According to Defense News, Riyadh will purchase THAAD anti-missile systems at a price tag of $13.5 billion. In addition, it will purchase not only conventional aircraft and helicopters, but also refueling and reconnaissance aircraft. For example, for three KC-130J aerial tankers and twenty C-130J transporters, Saudi Arabia will pay 5.8 billion dollars. The construction of a series of coastal corvettes will cost a little more (how many of them is going to be built remains unknown). 
The Saudi authorities plan to invest 4.5 billion dollars in purchasing high-precision aviation ammunition and JDAM munition. The Royal Air Force of Saudi Arabia is said to receive about 104,000 of such munitions. Almost $ 6.7 billion will be spent on the purchase and maintenance of Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems.
At least 18 billion is planned to be spent on the development and implementation of the command and control system, the provision of communication lines and creation of inter-service interaction complexes.
However, almost two thirds of those contracts remain in the form of so-called memorandums of intent, that is, an agreements in theory. Trump personally negotiated the deals during his visit to Saudi Arabia. And the diplomatic crisis - the boycott of Qatar - broke out in the region soon after his departure.

Eu tenho a impressão que o mundo em geral, e Austrália, Europa e América em particular, incluindo a parte que nos cabe, quando olham para os países árabes e para o Oriente Médio em particular, enxergam mal, veem tudo através de um véu que varia entre fino e espesso dependendo do olhar e da posição em que o australiano, europeu e americano se coloca para espiar com temor ou desprezo mais do que para olhar com interesse despreconceituoso. 
Hoje eu queria falar sobre a derrota vitoriosa de Jeremy Corbyn, o único político que conheço idôneo, mas o que está acontecendo hoje nos países árabes do golfo é um precedente histórico que pode ter consequências dificilmente remediáveis e podem levar a conflitos que afetarão todos nós, inclusive os que fazem de conta que esses países ficam longe demais para chegar em nosso belo litoral.
A dominação da Arábia Saudita em cumplicidade com Israel e os Estados Unidos é o problema internacional mais grave da atualidade e deveria ser encarado com seriedade em vez de virar simples mancetes de jornais que levam a pensar que não passa de uma rixa entre príncipes árabes.
Primeiro, esta rixa não é entre prícipes e sim entre países. A Arábia Saudita, em 2013, já tinha interferido na política interna qatari forçando o emir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani a abdicar em favor do filho, Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, ocupante atual do trono em Doha.
Há anos que a tensão entre a Arábia Saudita e seu minúsculo vizinho é paupável. Hoje, os gataris temem até uma invasão militar patrocinada pela Casa Branca com o apoio e o incentivo de Tel Aviv.
Tamim apelou para outro vizinho maior do que ele e Erdogan acabou de mobilizar tropas em direção do Qatar para proteger o país da invasão. 
Logo após a abdicação forçada de Hamad, Tamim, mais esperto do que o pai, entendeu que a bola da vez poderia ser ele em poucos anos e autorizou a Turquia a construir uma base militar em seu território logo depois de tomar posse. A cooperação militar entre Ankara e Doha começou em 2007, mas foi aumentando concomitantemente ao crescimento da ameaça de Ryad. Em 2014 começou a construção da base, em março de 2015 os dois países assinaram um tratado de cooperação que unia os dois países a "inimigos comuns", sem nomear nenhum, e o embaixador da Turquia em Doha, anunciou para quem quisesse ouvir que seu país manteria cerca de 3.000 soldados na base. Até o ano passado, a quantidade era inferior, mas desde a semana passada,  outras centenas foram postas na estrada e mais devem chegar.
Nesse ínterim, um número considerável de soldados das Tropas Iraquianas de Mobilização Popular foram movidos em direção da fronteira entre Iraque e Arábia Saudita porque Bagdá sabe, melhor do que ninguém, que as acusações da Arábia Saudita de que o Qatar financia o terrorismo foram feitas para tampar o sol com a peneira, já que é Ryad que vem semeando furacões para colher tempestades que a transformem NA capital árabe incontornável. Mesmo sendo a que mais infringe as leis internacionais, os direitos humanos e a moral.
No pior cenário, ou seja, que a Arábia Saudita passe da hasbara (propaganda em hebraico) aprendida com Netanyahu ao ato.
Por que uma união entre esses dois países que parecem ser culturalmente distantes?
Porque em ambos a Irmandade Muçulmana predomina em versão light e sentem que estão sendo isolados cada vez mais pelas ambições sauditas regionais e sua relação doentia e insana com Washington e Tel Aviv.
Primeiro foi o golpe de estado que derrubou em 2013 Mohammed Morsi, presidente eleito do Egito após a destituição de Hosni Moubarak no levante popular que ficou conhecido como a Primavera Árabe (que no final das contas não levloou nem democracia nem prosperidade aos jovens revolucionários).
No ano seguinte foi a operação militar israelense Protective Edge contra o Hamas, a derrota dos aliados de Qatar e Turquia na Líbia e o isolamento gradual da Irmandade Muçulmana na Síria.
Nesse ínterim, a Arábia Saudita estreitava seus laços com o general Sissi, ditador egípcio, e seus alidos na Líbia e na Síria.
A morte do idoso monarca da Arábia Saudita em 2015 e a ascensão ao trono do novo rei Salman  cuja primeira medida foi inventar uma guerra conra o Yêmen, o país mais pobre da região. A agressão militar não foi contra o país mais pobre da região e sim uma mensagem macabra a Turquia, Qatar e Irã. Tudo isso abençoado pelo governo de Barack Obama.
A mesma coisa com sua intervenção material em favor dos "rebeldes" sírios.
Porém, nem Obama nem Salman contavam com o componente Putin. 
Moscou enxerga os leões invisíveis e viu que essa aliança saudi & estadunidense & israelense favorizava os grupos terroristas direta e indiretamente e que mais cedo do que tarde eles chegariam às suas fronteiras e seria tarde demais para contê-los. E o que fez o Tzar? Resolveu aniquilar o perigo enquanto estava perto de sua base militar e não de suas cidades. E fez isso com o apoio de quem? De Teerã e do Hizbollah, e mais tarde, de Ankara. 
Erdogan demorou a entrar na dança moscovita. Mas quando se deu conta que apostara no cavalo errado indispondo-se com Moscou, aproveitou os laços que criara com Doha por precisar de seu petróleo para pedir que Salman intermediasse sua reaproximação do Kremlin.   
Pronto, outra aliança foi formada, a vitória no Yêmen se mostrou ilusória, Bashar el-Assad foi se reforçando com a ajuda do Tzar em vez de ser enxotado pelo Estado Islâmico e o Al-Qaeda que seus inimidos patrocinavam e a sorte que o rei Salman forjara com a ajuda de Tel Aviv e Washington virou azar e começou a custar cara demais. A economia do país declinou perigosamente, sem perturbar o padrão de vida bilionário dos príncipes e princesas, mas atingindo as classes populares, grandemente majoritárias. A situação periclitou ao ponto de Ryad conjeturar uma reestruturação da indústria petroleira e Salman e seu herdeiro viraram motivo de jacota nas outras capitais árabes petroleiras.
Enquanto a Turquia e o Qatar se aproximavam de Moscou, a Arábia Saudita ia pedir bença à Casa Branca fabricando com Barack Obama uma pseudo aliança Saudi-Otan contra o Irã e a Irmandade Muçulmana, que era de fato  a Tuquia e o Qatar, que foi se reforçando até chegar à apoteótica tentativa de isolar o Qatar e de demonizar o Irã. 
Por duas razões interligadas. 
A primeira é o medo dos sauditas da perspectiva da teoria islâmica iraniana próxima da democracia (com eleições e jurisprudência) e que rejeita as ditaduras hereditárias que predominam nos países árabes e em Ryad. O regime iraniano é um exemplo de uma democracia alternativa, não secular e sim religiosa, mas com um governo para o povo eleito pelo povo. A Irmandade Muçulmana também é anti-monáquica. Daí o medo do Qatar, que é o país mais liberal do golfo e cujo emir consegue conciliar sua monarquia com uma ideologia islâmica mais liberal da Irmandade. Portanto, tanto o Irã quanto o Qatar ameaçam a sobreviência das ditaduras monárquicas linha dura.
A partir desta linha comum chegamos à segunda razão da hasbara saudita, que é a aproximação do Qatar com o Irã. Os dois países compartilham a maior reserva de gás natural do mundo, 9.700 km². E como diz o ministro das relações exterioress iraniano Jawad Zarif, "Não há como mudar a Georgrafia" em relação aos recursos naturais e à sua aproximação com o Qatar. Proximidade que só ficou clara no ano passado quando juntos mediaram cessar-fogos em várias cidades sírias, evitando mais derramamento de sangue. O que foi muito bom para a Síria, mas não para a Arábia Saudita e para Israel, que querem extinguir totalmente o país. Aliás estes dois enxeridos perigosos começaram a arquitetar a substituição de Morsi pelo general Sissi quando o presidente do Egito foi a Téerã - o primeiro líder egípcio a fazer essa visita.
Barack Obama, por ignorância regional, mundial ou simplesmente por pragmatismo imediato irresponsável ou por pressão de Israel, já tinha facilitado a megalomanização saudita. Preparou a cama e Trump deitou nela junto com Netanyahu e em sua viagem à Arábia Saudita impôs as condições de Washington e Tel Aviv a seu apoio incondicional a seu regime ditatorial-terrorista: Livre-se do Qatar e do Irã para nós e suas finanças vão prosperar assim como seu regime ditatorial.
E de repente, a maior ameaça mundial deixou de ser o Daesh/ISIS/Estado Islâmico & Al-Qaeda que formam terroristas e sim um paizinho, o Qatar, sozinho, sendo que sabe-se que Ryad e Doha financiaram grupos como o Jaish al-Islam e o Estado Islâmico durante anos.
Mas Donald Trump, enfeitiçado pela obsseção saudi-epípcio-israelense de isolamento do Irã, entendeu que para atingir este último, tinha de sacrificar o Qatar, mesmo este país alojando uma das  inúmeras bases militares estadunidenses na região.
O atentado terrorista do Estado Islâmico ao Parlamento iraniano em Terrã é significativo. Primeiro, o local - assembleia legislativa eleita por sufrágio universal e estandarte de um sistema democrático. O segundo é a ameaça explícita aos aiatolás que o Irã não está ao abrigo de Bagdadi (líder do Daesh) e das potências regionais e a ocidental para quem a segurança internacional é menos importante do que os desejos de Israel.
 Inside Story: What's behind the diplomatic breakdown in the Gulf?
 
 

 
PALESTINA
Since militarily occupying the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, during the June 1967 War, Israel has: 
. Destroyed more than 48,000 Palestinian homes and other structures, including agricultural buildings and places of business, because they were built without permission from Israel’s occupying army, which is nearly impossible for Palestinians to obtain. 
. Imprisoned more than 800,000 Palestinians using a military court system that human rights organizations have condemned as falling far short of the minimum standards required for a fair trial. 
. Built approximately 125 official settlements on occupied Palestinian land in violation of international law and official US policy, and more than 100 so-called “outposts,” built with tacit approval from Israeli authorities even though they violate Israeli law. These settlements separate Palestinian population centers from one another and the outside world and sever East Jerusalem from the rest of the occupied West Bank, making the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the occupied territories all but impossible. 
. Implanted approximated 650,000 illegal settlers, many of them violent, heavily-armed religious fanatics, onto occupied Palestinian land, including approximately 350,000 in the West Bank and 300,000 in East Jerusalem. 
. Built a wall on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice, separating Palestinians from their farmland, schools, places of business, and family and friends. 
. Imposed a permit and checkpoint system severely restricting the movement of Palestinians within the occupied territories and to and from the outside world, making ordinary life difficult for Palestinians and strangling the Palestinian economy. ( According to the UN, in 2016 there were 572 Israeli checkpoints and other obstacles to Palestinian movement in the occupied West Bank, with more than 100 more in the city of Hebron alone.) 
. Imposed a cruel and illegal siege and naval blockade on occupied Gaza, starting in 2006, which amounts to collective punishment of the 1.8 million Palestinians living there. 
. Revoked the residency rights of approximately 250,000 Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, and more than 14,000 Palestinian residents of Jerusalem.

 






What really happened in 1967?

 

  Jornalistas Livres (@j_livres) | Twitter


Em Paris, Henrique Meirelles é tratado do que é: Golpista!

Postado por às Nenhum comentário:
Marcadores: , , ,
Assinar: Postagens (Atom)