May you never...

He died today.
Too soon, too soon.
This is the saddest news.

John Martyn.
Thank you for the music.

The BBC leaves me stunned

Simply gobsmacked!

The BBC has refused to broadcast a national humanitarian appeal for Gaza, leaving aid agencies with a potential shortfall of millions of pounds in donations.

The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), an umbrella organisation for 13 aid charities, launched its appealtoday saying the devastation in Gaza was "so huge that British aid agencies were compelled to act".

But the BBC made a rare breach of an agreement dating back to 1963 when it announced it would not give free airtime to the appeal. Other broadcasters then followed suit. Previously, broadcasters have agreed on the video and script to be used with the DEC, with each station choosing a presenter to front the appeal, shown after primetime news bulletins.

The BBC said it was not the first time broadcasters had refused to show a DEC appeal.

The corporation said it had been concerned about the difficulties of getting aid through to victims in a volatile situation. The BBC, which has faced criticism in the past over alleged bias in its coverage of the Middle East, said it did not want to risk public confidence in its impartiality.

source

What on earth does this have to do with impartiality??!!
Gaza has been devatstated. Many are homeless, without shelter, without medical care, without electricity, without food, without. They need.

Impartiality
Wha.... huh..... ???
(insert sound of jaw hitting the ground)

It must be the most discriminatory, racist thing I have seen in many years.

European freedom of speech

Yesterday, the Netherlands made headlines with the Amsterdam court verdict that Geert Wilders, a rightwing Dutch MP, has to face trial for hate speech.

This is the truth - we do not have real freedom of speech in Europe, in many countries there are hate speech laws. Considering our recent collective past however, that is not so surprising. I consider this a useful tool that should be very sparingly and judiciously used. In this instance, it would have been better to engage in spirited public debate instead of prosecution in a court of law. In my opinion, this does not warrant prosecution.

Today my attention was caught by a blog cataloguing a far more grievous freedom of speech issues, in one of our new EU countries, Latvia, in November 2008 (I expect it's ongoing still).

I find it shocking. Shocking that this is one of the EU and NATO member countries (since 2004), one who also has a voice in how the rest of Europe is governed.
(In my opinion, in a mad dash to expand, far too many countries were granted admission far too quickly. This only serves to strengthen my opinion. )

This is also a freedom of speech issue but while the first -which I hesitantly approve of- is intended to prevent hate crimes, the second seems to be designed mainly for repression.

I could go through the EU countries one at a time and find similar issues.
The right of free speech is still a far too rare jewel in Europe, no matter what treaties we sign. Looking at the actions of the EU towards Ireland, France and the Netherlands of late (the latter two with enthusiastic co-operation of their leaders) regarding the European Constitution Treaty, I would say we are moving back towards more repressive times, and not enlightenment, prosperity and freedom.

Irak oorlog: nee, het gaat niet weg

Ze kunnen niet gewoon blijven weigeren om antwoord te geven!

De ambtelijke top van het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken heeft in 2003 een kritisch juridisch advies over de politieke steun aan de Irak-oorlog weggehouden bij de minister.

In een geheim memorandum van 29 april 2003 stelt de Directie Juridische Zaken (DJZ) van het departement dat de juridische onderbouwing van het standpunt van het toenmalige kabinet-Balkenende „zowel materieel als procedureel tekort” schiet (punt 16 in memorandum). De juristen schatten zelfs in „dat Nederland een eventuele procedure voor het Internationaal Gerechtshof hierover zou verliezen” (punt 9).

De toenmalige secretaris-generaal (SG) van het departement, Frank Majoor (tegenwoordig permanent vertegenwoordiger bij de Verenigde Naties), besloot de notitie niet door te sturen aan minister De Hoop Scheffer (CDA), aan wie deze gericht was. „Goed opbergen in de archieven voor het nageslacht, de discussie is hiermee voor dit moment gesloten!”, werd op het memo geschreven.

De juristen reageerden met de opmerking: „Het audite et alteram partem (hoor en wederhoor, red.) geldt hier kennelijk niet.” Het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken (BZ) wil niet ingaan op de vraag waarom de SG het memo niet doorstuurde en of De Hoop Scheffer destijds wellicht mondeling kennis heeft genomen van de inhoud van het memorandum.
bron

Het wordt tijd dat hier volledige openheid over komt.

Komende weken wordt duidelijk of de Eerste Kamer een onderzoek start naar de besluitvorming rond de Irak-oorlog. Het kabinet beantwoordde onlangs tientallen vragen uit de senaat, maar een meerderheid beoordeelde het resultaat als onbevredigend.

Een mooi Engels woord: accountability. Tot nu toe een groot tekort hieraan bij ons regering.
Balkenende denkt dat als hij lang genoeg nee blijft zeggen, dat wij hier genoegen mee nemen.

Niet, dus.
Een parlementaire enquête is het enige dat duidelijkheid zal verschaffen.
Het is hoog tijd!

Israeli military out of control?

Israeli tanks thrust deep inside Gaza City last night as ferocious fighting raged in dense residential areas with terrified families fleeing along streets echoing with gunfire, although many others were trapped in their homes.

Israeli shelling set fire to the UN headquarters, a hospital, a school and a building used by the media...
source

Sharon Lock, an Australian from the International Solidarity Movement, was working as an ambulance driver for the Palestinian Red Crescent when its Al-Quds Hospital in Gaza City came under Israeli attack yesterday.

"One shell landed outside the building about 10 yards from the incubators for new babies. We were putting fires out with buckets of water. The shrapnel seems to burn for a long time and it starts fires if it is not put out. We were just dealing with that when we heard shooting from the front steps of the hospital and my colleague Mohammed came to me covered with blood. 'Israelis are shooting at people who are leaving their houses,' he said. What happened was that a father and mother and two daughters had left their home, one of the daughters had gone missing and the other was shot. The bullet went through one cheek and out the other. As the father was coming up the steps he fell, shot as well. They didn't know where the other daughter was. Mohammed and I decided to go out and find her. We found her hiding in a house. I would say she was about nine. She was very frightened."
source

Israeli forces hit a Red Crescent hospital Thursday, and more than 100 staff members and patients were trapped as a blaze engulfed the administration building.
source

Another strike hit several high-rise buildings, including one that houses the Reuters news offices.

Reuters had given the Israeli military the location of its office before the fighting broke out last month. On Thursday, as the Israeli forces moved in, Reuters staff members said, they called the Israeli military to remind it where they were.

Two minutes after the call, a shell hit the office, the Reuters staff said.

The Associated Press reported that gunfire struck its office in a separate building.
source

I could go on for quite a while. Schools, hospitals, ambulances, various aid personnel, civilians old and young and in between, aid convoys, residential buildings, and so on.

What's happening, is an atrocity.
No modern military should ever act like that.

Looking at this clip, I wondered if most of them think this way. If most of them have this attitude.


Do they think that they are eradicating subhumans, vermin?
(sound familiar? it should)

For a country which claims a moral military...

From today, if I want to visit the USA

I, Dutch citizen, have to ask permission first, online, before I'll be allowed on the plane.
(warning, clicking on the link could invite the American Homeland Security to snoop all over your ass)

Really.
I hope the new guy turns all this shit back because there is no way I'll jump through all these hoops just to visit a country.
Imagine. One of the questions ask whether you've ever done/planned terrorist activities.
For sure, you will say yes if you are coming over to blow up some shit.
Sure...

Just another paper mountain that gives a false sense of security.

Bombing of Gaza a war crime

These academics and law professionals certainly think so and clearly say so in this open letter.

January 11, 2009
Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is not self-defence – it’s a war crime

ISRAEL has sought to justify its military attacks on Gaza by stating that it amounts to an act of “self-defence” as recognised by Article 51, United Nations Charter. We categorically reject this contention.

The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence. Under international law self-defence is an act of last resort and is subject to the customary rules of proportionality and necessity.

The killing of almost 800 Palestinians, mostly civilians, and more than 3,000 injuries, accompanied by the destruction of schools, mosques, houses, UN compounds and government buildings, which Israel has a responsibility to protect under the Fourth Geneva Convention, is not commensurate to the deaths caused by Hamas rocket fire.

For 18 months Israel had imposed an unlawful blockade on the coastal strip that brought Gazan society to the brink of collapse. In the three years after Israel’s redeployment from Gaza, 11 Israelis were killed by rocket fire. And yet in 2005-8, according to the UN, the Israeli army killed about 1,250 Palestinians in Gaza, including 222 children. Throughout this time the Gaza Strip remained occupied territory under international law because Israel maintained effective control over it.

Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence, not least because its assault on Gaza was unnecessary. Israel could have agreed to renew the truce with Hamas. Instead it killed 225 Palestinians on the first day of its attack. As things stand, its invasion and bombardment of Gaza amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5m inhabitants contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. In addition, the blockade of humanitarian relief, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, and preventing access to basic necessities such as food and fuel, are prima facie war crimes.

We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes. Israel has a right to take reasonable and proportionate means to protect its civilian population from such attacks. However, the manner and scale of its operations in Gaza amount to an act of aggression and is contrary to international law, notwithstanding the rocket attacks by Hamas.

Ian Brownlie QC, Blackstone Chambers

Mark Muller QC, Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales

Michael Mansfield QC and Joel Bennathan QC, Tooks Chambers

Sir Geoffrey Bindman, University College, London

Professor Richard Falk, Princeton University

Professor M Cherif Bassiouni, DePaul University, Chicago

Professor Christine Chinkin, LSE

Professor John B Quigley, Ohio State University

Professor Iain Scobbie and Victor Kattan, School of Oriental and African Studies

Professor Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva

Professor Said Mahmoudi, Stockholm University

Professor Max du Plessis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban

Professor Bill Bowring, Birkbeck College

Professor Joshua Castellino, Middlesex University

Professor Thomas Skouteris and Professor Michael Kagan, American University of Cairo

Professor Javaid Rehman, Brunel University

Daniel Machover, Chairman, Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights

Dr Phoebe Okawa, Queen Mary University

John Strawson, University of East London

Dr Nisrine Abiad, British Institute of International and Comparative Law

Dr Michael Kearney, University of York

Dr Shane Darcy, National University of Ireland, Galway

Dr Michelle Burgis, University of St Andrews

Dr Niaz Shah, University of Hull

Liz Davies, Chair, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyer

Prof Michael Lynk, The University of Western Ontario

Steve Kamlish QC and Michael Topolski QC, Tooks Chambers

source

Okay then, who has the bell and who will bind it to the cat's tail...???
Easier said than done. Call it what you like, it happens and has happened and will happen again and every time, unopposed. But at least some are saying it out loud.

(defence instead of defense: it's not a typo, it's the British spelling of the word)