Aid blackmail in Palestine

Aid blackmail in Palestine - Opinion - Al Jazeera English
Excerpt:

Once again, Palestinians are being punished for daring to exercise a choice.

It happened before in 2006, when they took part in what was deemed to be the wrong kind of democracy and picked the wrong (Hamas) government. That mistaken execution of free will caused the international community to close its funding tap - cutting Palestinian aid and salaries.

Now, there are penalties for taking another 'wrong' turn, despite repeated threats and warnings: US congress is blocking US $200 million intended for the Palestinian Authority (PA), which persisted with its UN statehood bid in the face of US disapproval.

Few things typify international complicity in stalling Palestinian aspirations like this on/off money switch. The current cut in cash will affect health and social projects - but not, it is said, the PA's security commitments (coordinated with Israel). In other words, the pinch is designed to cause Palestinian suffering - but is calibrated so as not to upset Israeli concerns, or totally derail the stagnating status quo. ...

You're not defending our freedoms

An Open Letter to the Troops: You’re Not Defending Our Freedoms: Information Clearing House: ICH
Stephen Harper, Conservatives and Liberals : you should take heed of this letter too. The situation in Afghanistan with Canadian troops is also pointless, is not defending our freedoms, and jeopardizes the safety of Canadians all over the world.

US Congress to Palestinians - You do not exist

Congress to Palestinians: Drop dead - Opinion - Al Jazeera English
by MJ Rosenberg, Senior Foreign Policy Fellow at Media Matters Action Network.

If anyone had any doubt about whether the Palestinians would declare a state in September, they can't have them now.

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu delivered a speech to
Congress that essentially was a series of insults to Palestinians and
every insult was met by applause and standing ovations.

In fact, Netanyahu's appearance itself was an insult.

In the entire history of the United States, only four foreign leaders have addressed joint sessions of Congress more than once.

Prime
Minister Winston Churchill, America's great ally, addressed Congress
three times during World War II. President Nelson Mandela was honored
for destroying apartheid and freeing South Africa. Prime Minister
Yitzhak Rabin was recognised for opening negotiations with the
Palestinian people.

And now Netanyahu. For what?

In his
entire term in office he has done nothing but reject every request by
the United States that he take some action (like freezing settlements)
to promote Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In the history of Israel,
there has been no prime minister as hardline on Palestinian rights and
as indifferent to the wishes of the United States as Netanyahu.

So why was he invited to address a rare joint session?

He
was invited because the new Republican leadership of the House of
Representatives wanted to demonstrate, loudly and clearly, that Congress
will not support President Barak Obama in the event that he tries to
achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

And that is exactly
what the Netanyahu appearance today did demonstrate. The prime minister
unambiguously stated that he had no intention of making peace with the
Palestinians.

He began by saying that, in point of fact, there is
no occupation, stating, that "in Judea and Samaria [the term Israeli
right-wingers use for the West Bank], Israelis are not foreign
occupiers" but the native inhabitants. (He cited Abraham and Isaiah from
the Bible!)

He said he might consider giving up some of that
land but not an inch of Jerusalem. Additionally, he said that Israel
would retain most settlements and insist on a military presence in the
Jordan Valley (thereby ensuring the any State of Palestine would be
locked in on both sides by Israel).

He said that Israel would
never negotiate with a Palestinian government that included Hamas,
whether democratically elected or not. He declared that not a single
Palestinian would be allowed to return to Israel; not even a symbolic
return would be acceptable to him.

There is little reason to
elaborate. Netanyahu today essentially returned to the policies that
Israel pursued before Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat agreed on mutual
recognition and the joint pursuit of peace.

And the worst part
is not the appalling things Netanyahu said, but how Congress received
them. Even Netanyahu's declaration that there is no Israeli occupation
was met with thunderous applause with the Democrats joining the
Republicans in ecstatic support. Every Netanyahu statement, no matter
how extreme, was met with cheers.

Netanyahu was also applauded
wildly when he invoked Palestinian terrorism over and over again, even
seeming to lump his former "partner," President Mahmoud Abbas with
people who "educate their children to hate, [who] continue to name
public squares after terrorists. And worst of all continue to perpetuate
the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of
Palestinian refugees."

His bottom line, which Congress fully
bought, was that all Palestinians are terrorists who haven't earned a
state. And probably never will.

Congress cheered and cheered and when Netanyahu was finished, they climbed over each other to touch the hem of his garment.

It
was as if Congress thought that no Palestinians or other Arabs (or
Muslims) would be watching. It was as if it believes that it can shout
its lungs out for Netanyahu (and thereby secure those campaign
contributions from AIPAC), without any consequences to US policy and
national interests in the Arab world.

But Congress is wrong. The
message it sent to the Middle East today, to the whole world, in fact,
was that Palestinians cannot count on the United States to ever play the
role of "honest broker" between Israel and the Palestinians. Even if
President Obama was inclined to, Congress would stop him. And AIPAC,
using the leverage its campaign contributions gives it, would hold
Obama's feet to the fire too. As far as Congress is concerned,
Palestinians do not exist. They have no rights, to a state least of
all. 

And that is why Palestinians have no choice but to
unilaterally declare a state in the fall. They cannot count on America.
As David Ben Gurion understood when he went to the General Assembly to
achieve recognition of Israel, a small, powerless people must take its
destiny into its own hands.

The good news is that, although
Congress is in Netanyahu's pocket, the Obama administration isn't.
Netanyahu insulted the President at the White House last Thursday and
then again in the halls of Congress by eliciting support for policies
Obama rejects. And the administration is furious.

That means that
although Palestinians can and should ignore Congress, the White House
and State Department are still in play. Yes, they will both go along
with Netanyahu, but, probably, without much enthusiasm.

And they
can send a signal to our allies that although the United States cannot
openly oppose Bibi's policies because of Congress - and AIPAC's control
of it - the allies can. The Palestinians should not give up on Obama or
on Secretary of State Clinton either who cannot abide Netanyahu and made
sure she was out of the country to escape being present for his speech.


And so we can look forward to a unilateral declaration of
statehood in September. The Israelis who refuse to negotiate with
stateless Palestinians will have no choice but to negotiate
with the state whose land it is occupying. And those negotiations,
state to state, may produce peace and the "two states for two peoples"
that most Palestinians and Israelis aspire to. In any case, it's the
only hope.

Palestinians should thank Prime Minister Netanyahu
and, even more, the United states Congress for making their choice so
much easier. Together they helped create the Palestinian state today.
And that is a very good thing.

As for Americans, we should be deeply ashamed of our Congress. It has been sold to the highest bidder.

When Pro-Life is not Pro Life

The right's mirror-image view of life - Opinion - Al Jazeera English
This article applies to the Conservatives in Canada too:

Excerpt:

Yesterday, I pulled up to a drive-through ATM, and sitting in front
of me in the line was a car with a license plate that simply stated,
"Choose Life". 

Who can argue with that? I support life, don't you?

The problem, of course, is the relationship between that phrase and
the US right wing. You know, the ones who are petrified of everything
from black presidents to black helicopters to Black Sabbath. 

Yes, they piously claim to be "pro-life", but it is a simple
platitude, for - to paraphrase Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride - I
do not think that word means what they think it means. 

To those not steeped in US politics, being pro-life might seem like
it means what one would expect - to oppose policies and endeavours that
duly result in a loss of human life. But, in the US political arena, it
means something quite different. Generally, it is a way of telling
everyone that it's your business to give a woman her marching orders -
that she must eventually carry a three-day-old embryo to term, even if
it's the result of rape or incest. 

Or its corollary, that you're some kind of Nietzschean Superman for
ensuring that 91-year-old patients in terrible pain due to pancreatic
cancer must stick a tube in any empty orifice to force themselves to
stay alive and suffer, even against their own wishes.

The sad reality is that, to be pro-life in the US today, which is to
be conservative in almost all cases, is to love thy enemy by supporting
illegal wars - or just plain stupid ones - that kill hundreds of
thousands of innocents, cutting health-care benefits and nutrition
programs for children and the poor, and turning the other cheek … of the
person you're torturing.

Click the top link to read the whole article.

Lax labour laws in the US turning it into a sweatshop for European manufacturers

Olive: America, the world’s sweatshop - thestar.com
And similar anti-worker/anti-union movements (promoted by corporations and conservative governments) are happening here too in Canada.

Excerpt:

Sweden’s Ikea was revealed in April to be operating a manufacturing
plant in Danville, Va., that is a toxic brew of charges of racial
discrimination, routine worker maltreatment, and brutally successful
efforts to bust union-organizing drives.

Sodexo, which operates the cafeteria
at this newspaper and my Mom’s nursing home, has threatened and fired
workers who tried to unionize, as HRW found from studying official
decisions by U.S. labour-law authorities, along with worker interviews
and employee court testimony.

At its newish California chain of
grocery outlets, U.K. supermarket giant Tesco has muzzled workers trying
to discuss organizing a union. The Netherlands-based Gamma Holding has
hired permanent replacement workers to put strikers out of a job — in
contravention of international labour standards, but not of U.S. law.

And Deutsche Bank turns out to be one
of LosAngeles’s biggest slumlords. After foreclosing on some 2,000 L.A.
homes, Deutsche Bank continued collecting rent while allowing the
premises to rot and become gang-infested to such an extent that dead
bodies are not infrequently found there. “Nothing, in other words, that
would be allowed to happen . . . in Frankfurt, the neat-as-a-pin German
city that is home to Deutsche Bank,” Meyerson writes.

The hypocrisy here stinks to the
heavens. In Europe, minimum wages average $19 an hour. Governments
mandate five-week paid vacations. Norway just introduced paid paternity leave.
And most European multinationals not only are unionized, but union reps
fall just short of a majority on many European corporate boards.

Many top European firms have joined “the race to the bottom” in employee costs.

But China is no longer the
“off-shoring” jurisdiction of choice. With annual wage gains now
averaging 15 per cent to 20 per cent, combined with stagnant wages in
North America, China will lose its labour-cost advantage over North
America in just four years time, according to a report this month by the
Boston Consulting Group.

From Hamburg to Lyon to Stockholm,
the question is why aren’t we serving the North American market from
lower-cost facilities there? Which means that “guilt-free shopping” will
soon mean avoiding “Made in USA” labels on products made by workers
denied a decent living wage.

The Euro-exploiters are especially
drawn to the U.S. South, which for three decades have lured employers
with so-called “right to work” laws. That’s an Orwellian term for
government-sanctioned hostility to workers’ rights, including the right
to organize.

In small-town Virginia, Ikea gets
away with paying workers to make the components of its trademark
bookcases just $8 an hour, and granting only 12 paid vacation days.

In North American culture, jobs are
dispensable. In Peoria, Ill., Caterpillar laid off 25,000 workers on one
day in 2009. Try that in France or Italy and you’re inviting a national
general strike.

U.S. officialdom has for years
hectored other nations to upgrade their labour-rights standards. But as
the HRW report shows, the issue is retrograde U.S. labour standards.

The irony here is that employee
denigration does not work. German manufacturing pay averages 50 per cent
higher than that of the U.S. Yet Germany enjoys a massive trade
surplus. And America suffers a ruinous trade deficit, for all its
disdain of European-style full-employment practices.

My local Staples manager complains he
can’t keep employees “because we don’t pay much. I can’t blame them for
leaving.” High turnover hikes training costs and annoys customers
dealing with staff who lack product knowledge.

This a social-justice issue, no
mistake. But really it’s the hard-headed business strategy of a Henry
Ford, who paid above-average wages to spur consumption.

It’s the reason today that Costco,
with its outsized employee benefits, outperforms Wal-Mart. (Costco
shares have increased 133 per cent over the past decade, to Wal-Mart’s
measly gain of just 6 per cent.)

And it’s among the reasons that
Eaton’s is dead. In the midst of the 1985 strike at that Canadian
retailer, I asked then-CEO Fredrik Eaton why his family chose to break a
nascent union, rather than deal respectfully with employees on the
picket lines who had me almost in tears describing their loyalty to the
then 116-year-old firm.

“People here have no need of unions,”
said the fourth-generation Eaton owner-CEO, who declined to elaborate.
Fourteen years later Eaton’s filed for bankruptcy.

I’m not saying maltreated employees
were the chief factor in the demise of Eaton’s. But the casual regard
for employee relations at Eaton’s was indicative of management’s
ineptitude generally.

When you’re next at Ikea, ask the
workers serving you — a surly lot, I’ve always found — what the pay is
like before imagining that you are engaged in “guilt-free shopping.”

Right-Wing Political Violence: More Terror, Less Coverage

Right-Wing Political Violence: More Terror, Less Coverage | Common Dreams
Excerpt:
On the morning of January 17 in Spokane, Washington, city workers found a backpack with a bomb that was set to go off along the route of the Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade. An FBI official (Spokane Spokesman Review, 1/19/11) called the bomb “a viable device that was very lethal and had the potential to inflict multiple casualties.” Another official told the Associated Press (1/19/11), “They haven’t seen anything like this in this country.… This was the worst device, and most intentional device, I’ve ever seen.”

On March 9, Kevin Harpham, a white supremacist with past links to the neo-Nazi National Alliance, was arrested and charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and possessing an improvised explosive device. The device contained shrapnel dipped in rat poison, which can enhance bleeding (Hate Watch blog, 3/10/11), and was set on a park bench where its impact would be directed toward marchers.

The Spokane bomb plot received sparse coverage compared to that lavished on a far less dangerous plot attempted in Manhattan’s Times Square just a few months earlier. On May 1, 2010, a poorly made bomb incorporating Fourth of July firecrackers and nonexplosive fertilizer (Washington Post, 5/4/10) was allegedly set by Muslim-American Faisal Shahzad, who was reportedly outraged by civilian deaths from U.S. airstrikes (New York Times, 6/23/10). The device smoked, drawing the attention of a man who alerted police, but failed to go off.

However, network news shows considered the Times Square dud 14 times more newsworthy than the far more sophisticated Spokane bomb. According to the Nexis news media database, in the 10 weeks following the respective acts of terrorism, the Times Square story received 49 mentions on network evening news programs to the Spokane story’s three. (ABC World News didn’t mention the Spokane bomb a single time.)

Likewise, as Salon blogger Justin Elliott pointed out (2/19/11), the very real Spokane bomb plot received one-third the coverage given a November 2010 FBI sting operation in Portland, Oregon, that used a fake bomb, provided by an undercover agent, to ensnare a Somali-born Muslim teenager. On the scant coverage of the Spokane story, Elliot concluded, “The incident does not fit into the reigning narrative of Muslim terrorism.”

That narrative is fundamental to understanding the skewed coverage of domestic terrorism. For instance, on the eve of congressional hearings on domestic Muslim extremism, chaired by Rep. Peter King (R.-N.Y.), a Wall Street Journal editorial (3/11/11) attempted to justify the bigoted proceedings by misrepresenting a RAND Corporation study as finding that Muslims are responsible for virtually all U.S. domestic terrorism. What the 2010 RAND study actually found (FAIR Blog, 3/16/11) was that the vast majority of “homegrown” terrorist attackers—those of all ideologies who successfully carry out an attack—were not Muslims: Of the “83 terrorist attacks in the United States between 9/11 and the end of 2009, only three…were clearly connected with the jihadist cause.”

Running his own interference for King’s hearings, Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly (O’Reilly Factor, 3/8/11) responded to domestic terrorism expert Mark Potok’s statement that “our biggest domestic terror threat…pretty clearly comes from the radical right in this country,” by exclaiming: “Are you kidding me? The radical right? The last terror act assigned to them was the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995.”

To make his claim, O’Reilly had to overlook many right-wing domestic terrorist attacks that have happened since Oklahoma City, including two that appear to have been partly inspired by his Fox News colleague Glenn Beck, and one in which O’Reilly himself has been accused of whipping up hatred.

In reality, there have been dozens of violent domestic attacks perpetrated by right-wing extremists in the U.S. in recent years. On the Crooks and Liars blog (1/21/11), right-watcher David Neiwert keeps a running list of domestic terror attacks by rightist and anti-government extremists. Since August 2008 alone, Niewert’s list includes two dozen such attacks.

The American And Canadian RIGHT Are Taking Us To A Place We Shouldn't Be

Buckdog: The American And Canadian RIGHT Are Taking Us To A Place We Shouldn't Be
Excerpt: - by Dan Gardner, Ottawa Citizen:
"--- A Few Questions We Wouldn't Be Asking In A Sane World---
On Wednesday, in response to a question from the opposition, a minister of the Crown stood in the House of Commons and assured the honourable members that neither he nor the Prime Minister of Canada advocates the murder of Julian Assange.

Which is nice, I suppose. But it's also troubling.

How is it possible that in this most civilized of nations, in 2010, a member of Parliament felt the need to raise the matter? And while we're asking rhetorical questions that would not need to be asked in a sane world, how is it possible that the Republican party has so completely embraced aggression and brutality that almost all its leading figures feel the near-drowning of suspects is a valid interrogation technique and imprisonment without charge or trial is a legitimate practice that should be expanded?

Why is it that most people in the United States and elsewhere are not disturbed in the slightest that, despite abundant evidence, American officials who apparently committed heinous crimes in the war on terror will not be investigated and held to account, while WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who apparently did nothing illegal this week, is hunted to the ends of the Earth? And how in hell is it possible that when a former president of the United States of America admits he authorized the commission of torture -- which is to say, he admits he committed a major crime -- the international media and political classes express not a fraction of the anger they are now directing at the man who leaked the secrets of that president's administration?

I marvel at that paragraph. It would have been inconceivable even 10 years ago. Murder treated as a legitimate option in political discourse? Torture as acceptable government policy? No, impossible. A decade ago, it would have been satire too crude to be funny.

And yet, here we are. The question in the Commons Wednesday was prompted by the televised comments of Tom Flanagan, political scientist and former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. "I think Assange should be assassinated, actually," Flanagan said Tuesday.

This was the hard-right id laid bare.
...
Read the link for the full post.

Let's help child soldiers in Africa, but we will torture and incarcerate our own child soldiers

From Congo to Guantanamo: Omar Khadr, the invisible child soldier | rabble.ca

Excerpt:

Of course this is great! But what about other child soldiers like
Omar Khadr, can't he be rehabilitated and sent to school as well? Or is
the child soldier status only reserved for those war-ravaged countries
where Americans have interests in keeping things safe and stable?

Unfortunately, according to the U.S. and Canadian governments, the
answer to my question seems to be an outrageous "No." Indeed, the
following sad fact has now been recorded by history: Omar Khadr is the
first convicted child soldier since World War II. His conviction came at
an end of a shameful military trial where not a single basic principle
of transparency and justice was followed and where the torture and abuse
Khadr endured was simply brushed away.

US Military Judge ≠ Reason

US Judge OKs confession extracted by threatening suspect with rape | Raw Story

In one of the first military commissions held under the Obama
administration, a US military judge has ruled that confessions obtained
by threatening the subject with rape are admissible in court.

The
case involves Omar Ahmed Khadr, a citizen of Canada who was apprehended
in Afghanistan when he was 15 years old and has remained in Guantanamo
Bay for the last seven years awaiting trial for terrorism and war
crimes.

...

Where do they get these judges?

G8 Roundup

G8 leaders criticise Gaza blockade - Americas - Al Jazeera English
The leaders of the G8 Summit decided on the following:
- The would like to see Israel ease the blockade of Gaza
- They would like the Afghan government to make progress within 5 years of looking after it's own internal security, and for a reduction of corruption and drug production and trafficking, and an improvement to human rights and basic services
- They would like Iran to hold a transparent dialogue over its nuclear enrichment program
- Noted the efforts of Turkey and Brazil to broker a deal with Iran over its nuclear program
- Condemned the attack on the attack on the South Korean vessel, the Cheonan, which was allegedly perpetrated by North Korea
- They agreed that economic global recovery is still fragile
- They pledged $5 billion in aid over 5 years to reduce deaths among mothers and newborn children in Africa (5 years ago, the pledge was to increase this aid up to $50 billion by 2010)

G20:
Will focus mainly on economic issues, either to cut or spend to economic recovery.
The USA supports continued stimulus. European countries are leaning towards cutting.

The Israeli flotilla attack: victimhood, aggression and tribalism

The Israeli flotilla attack: victimhood, aggression and tribalism - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
Glenn Greenwald writes an excellent analysis of the attack and of the bigger picture.

Excerpt regarding victim-hood, aggression and tribalism:

What this really underscores is that the mentality driving both
Israel and the U.S. is quite similar, which is why those two countries
find such common cause, even when the rest of the world recoils in
revulsion.  One of the more amazing developments in the flotilla
aftermath is how a claim that initially appeared too self-evidently
ludicrous to be invoked by anyone -- Israel was the victim here and
was acting against the ship in self-defense --has actually become
the central premise in
Israeli and (especially) American
discourse about the attack (and as always, there is far more criticism of
Israeli actions in Israel than in the U.S.). 

How could anyone with the slightest intellectual honesty claim that
Israel and its Navy were the victims of a boat which Jon Stewart said
last night looked like "P Diddy's St. Bart's vacation yacht"; or
that armed Israeli commandos were the victims of unarmed civilian
passengers; or, more generally, that a nuclear-armed Israel with the
most powerful military by far in the Middle East and the world's
greatest superpower acting as Protector is the persecuted victim of a
wretched, deprived, imprisoned, stateless population devastated by 40
years of brutal Israeli occupation and, just a year ago, an unbelievably
destructive invasion and bombing campaign?  The casting of "victim" and
"aggressor" is blatantly reversed with such claims -- which is exactly
the central premise that has been driving, and continues to drive, U.S.
foreign policy as well.  In Imperial Ambitions, Noam Chomsky --
talking about America's post-9/11 policies -- described the central
mental deception that is at the heart of all nations which dominate
others with force (and if you're one of those people who hear "Noam
Chomsky" and shut your mind, pretend that this comes from "John Smith"):

In one of his many speeches, to U.S. troops in Vietnam, [Lyndon]
Johnson said plaintively, "There are three billion people in the world
and we have only two hundred million of them.  We are outnumbered
fifteen to one.  If might did make right they would sweep over
the United States and take what we have.  We have what they want."  That
is a constant refrain of imperialism.  You have your jackboot
on someone's neck and they're about to destroy you.

The same is true with any form of oppression.  And it's
psychologically understandable.  If you're crushing and destroying
someone, you have to have a reason for it, and it can't be, "I'm a
murderous monster."  It has to be self-defense.  "I'm protecting myself
against them.  Look what they're doing to me."  Oppression gets
psychologically inverted; the oppressor is the victim who is defending
himself.

Thus, nuclear-armed Israel is bullied and victimized by starving
Gazans with stones.   The Israel Navy is threatened by a flotilla filled
with wheelchairs and medicine.  And the greatest superpower the Earth
has ever known faces a grave and existential threat from a handful of
religious fanatics hiding in caves.  An American condemnation of Israel,
as welcomed as it would have been, would be an act of senseless
insincerity, because the two countries (along with many others) operate
with this same "we-are-the-victim" mindset.

* * * * *



A prime cause of this inversion is the distortion in perception
brought about by rank tribalism.  Those whose worldview is shaped by
their identification as members of a particular religious,
nationalistic, or ethnic group invariably over-value the wrongs done to
them and greatly under-value the wrongs their group perpetrates.  Those
whose world view is shaped by tribalism are typically plagued by an
extreme persecution complex (the
whole world is against us!!!; everyone
who criticizes us is hateful and biased!!!).
...
 It's just far more significant -- and far more destructive -- when the
groups convincing themselves that they are the Weak and Bullied Victims
are actually the strongest forces by far on the planet, with the
greatest amount of weaponry and aggression, who have been finding
justifications for so long for their slaughtering of civilians that, as
Israeli Amos Oz suggested
this week about his country, there are virtually no limits left on
the naked aggression that will be justified.

The aftermath of the Israeli attack on the aid flotilla - Links & Posts part two

Latest News
The ship MV Rachel Corrie is on its way to Gaza bringing more aid supplies. It was supposed to be part of the original flotilla, but it was delayed. It is currently waiting for another ship in the Mediterranean, and it expects to reach Gaza sometime before Monday.
The MV Rachel Corrie is carrying aid activists from Ireland, Malaysia, Scotland and England, including former United Nations assistant secretary-general and advisory panel member of the Perdana Global Peace Organization Denis Halliday and Nobel laureate Mairead Maguire.

The Irish Prime Minister has said that Israel will face serious consequences if any harm comes to the Irish citizens on board.
The Israeli ambassador to Ireland has said that Israel does not expect any confrontation or violence when the MV Rachel Corrie reaches the exclusion zone.
However:
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177134
Israel will use more aggressive force in the future to prevent ships from breaking the sea blockade on the Gaza Strip, a top Navy commander told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.
"We boarded the ship and were attacked as if it was a war," the officer said. "That will mean that we will have to come prepared in the future as if it was a war."

Hmmm. But, the Israeli forces attacked the flotilla in international waters. They shot and killed people on the ships before they were ever on board, and then they shot and killed more once they boarded (according to witnesses on the ships). What the Israeli forces did constitutes a war crime and an act of war.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-backs-us-opposition-to-un-led-flotilla-inquiry/article1588895/
The USA and Canada are against an impartial UN investigation of the attack, and prefer that Israel run the investigation.


Links/Posts
Turkey will never forgive Israel
... Nine people - eight Turks and a US national of Turkish origin- were killed in Monday's pre-dawn raid on the Mavi Mamara, which was carrying aid to Gaza in a bid to break Israel's strangling blockade of the territory. ...
... Al Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal, who reported from the ship during the raid, confirmed that live ammunition had been used by Israeli commandos as they stormed the ship.

He said that he witnessed some of the killings, and confirmed that at least "one person was shot through the top of the head from [the helicopter] above."
Activists killed

Elshayyal was on the top deck when the ship was attacked and said that within a few minutes of seeing the Israeli helicopters, there were shots being fired from above.

"The first shots [coming from Israeli boats at sea] were tear gas, sound grenades and rubber coated steel bullets," said Eshayyal.

"Live shots came five minutes after that. There was definitely live fire from the air and from the sea as well."

He confirmed that some passengers took apart some of the ship's railings to defend themselves as they saw the Israeli soldiers approaching.

"After the shooting and the first deaths, people put up white flags and signs in English and Hebrew," he said.

"An Israeli [on the ship] asked the soldiers to take away the injured, but they did not and the injured died on the ship." ...


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0603/breaking24.html
... an Indonesian doctor was shot in the stomach as he helped a wounded Israeli soldier.

"As the clash was going on upstairs on the deck, we were taking care of Israelis downstairs, as we gave them water, we were informed that our friends died there," Mr Yildirim said.

"We told the Indonesian doctor to take the soldier back. He took his patient back, and as he was going back, they shot him 5 times in the stomach." He added soldiers had herded activists on deck and a helicopter had sprayed them with water to subdue them.

It Was Pure Hell
A 2-man Malaysian news crew that was on board the MV Mavi Marmara recounts the attack.

We are all with the MV Rachel Corrie
... We are all watching Israel, we are all watching the MV Rachel Corrie, a vessel constructed in Germany in 1967 and owned by the Irish arm of the Free Gaza Movement. The MV Rachel Corrie is carrying medical equipment, wheelchairs, school supplies and cement. ...

City aid worker seized in massacre "badly beaten"
AN EDINBURGH activist seized by Israel in the Gaza aid massacre was today reported to have been badly beaten. ...

World enraged with Israel's attack on Peace Flotilla

MV Rachel Corrie heading for Gaza - With the full support of the Irish Government

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0603/breaking60.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0603/breaking3.html

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=289291

http://www.examiner.com/x-17122-SF-Muslim-Examiner~y2010m6d3-The-MV-Rachel-Corrie-carries-foreward-the-Freedom-Flotilla-Movement

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2010/06/01/evidence-belies-israeli-claim

The Silent Jewish Majority
... the majority of Jews remain silent about the "controversial" policies Israel carries out in their name as a self-declared "state of the Jewish people" ...

Children behind Israeli bars

Can the MV Rachel Corrie heal the wounds left in the wake of the USS Liberty?

IDF murder of Rachel Corrie Remembered

Canada backs U.S. opposition to UN-led flotilla inquiry

Why am I not surprised? - Peace, order and good government, eh?
from the Globe & Mail:

Canada is backing the U.S. position that Israel can lead
the investigation into the bloody raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla.

The United Nations Security Council issued a statement, watered down
by U.S. objections, that calls for a credible, impartial investigation
into the incident. But the Obama administration said later the
investigation should be led by Israel.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper dodged questions in the Commons on
whether he supports the Security Council resolution, but a senior
government official said in diplomatic circles, Canada is backing the
idea Israel should lead the investigation

Okay, for all those who think that having the Israeli's, the ones who carried out a planned night-time commando raid on a humanitarian aid flotilla - a raid that had been planned by the Benjamin Netanyahu (Prime Minister of Israel) and his cabinet for a week - is a better idea than having an independent UN investigation, here is a scenario for you:
If that is a good idea, how about letting the Iranian government carry out their own investigation as to whether they are creating nuclear weapons or just facilities to supply nuclear energy? The scale is much different, but the reliability of the investigative results would be the same.
Of course if only the Israeli's investigate their raid (or if they are controlling the investigation) then they will say they did no wrong.
Get with reality Harper! You too Obama!

Peace to be negotiated in Afghanistan

The Afghan government and allied forces have finally concluded that the only way to end the war will be go negotiate. Taliban leaders have already met with UN representatives.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/afghanmission/article/757498--allies-okay-road-map-out-of-afghanistan?bn=1

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/afghan-endgame-from-victory-to-compromise/article1448361/

Jack Layton was ahead of the Pack

Everyone agrees with Taliban Jack now

http://www.surphace.com/search/?q=sphereit:http://queerthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/01/jack-layton-was-ahead-of-pack.html/

US Health Reform a great idea, but the legislation is seriously flawed

Kucinich: Health reform legislation ‘a bailout for insurance companies’ | Raw Story
...
Under the revised public option, "Pelosi and her team have proposed a plan that would not make payments for care based on Medicare rates ..." CBS News's John Nichols noted. "Rather, under the Pelosi plan, the rates be tied to those of the big insurance companies. That's a big, big victory for the insurance industry, as it will undermine the ability of the public option to compete -- and to create pressure for reduced costs."
...
"I think we need the support of the American people to say, look, you need that state single-payer amendment in the bill to make it credible," the congressman said. "I mean, what are people giving up already? They're being mandated to buy private insurance. If you read the bill, the people are going to end up paying -- the insurance companies can raise rates 25 percent right off the bat, if you read the bill."
...
Schultz called the bill a "sellout" to insurers because the bill only allows 11 million people into a limited government-run health insurance option, and includes a mandate for Americans to buy private policies.
...

Interview with Kim Ives and Edwidge Danticat in Haiti

Haiti Devastated by Largest Earthquake in 200 Years, Thousands Feared Dead
Haiti has been devastated by a massive 7.0-magnitude earthquake, the largest to strike the Caribbean nation in more than two centuries. Buildings have collapsed. Fires rage in the streets. The extent of the disaster is still unknown, but there are fears thousands of people may have died and tens of thousands homeless. We get the latest on Haiti, a country rocked by natural as well as political crises. We speak with journalist Kim Ives of Haiti Liberté and Haitian American novelist Edwidge Danticat, her family at the epicenter of the quake.
... Read the interview at the link above.

This interview includes some background on the political crisis in Haiti that involves the USA, France and Canada.

UN demands compensation for war crimes in Gaza

globeandmail.com: UN demands compensation for Israeli strikes in Gaza

This is a good first step. But, unfortunately, with the US supporting Israel's genocide of Palestine, the UN will always be toothless against Israel.

Interviews with US congressmen regarding Gaza

kucinich.us - Al Jazeera interviews Congressman Kucinich on Gaza

Point - US arms are supplied to Israel for defence purposes only - not for invasions. Israel is breaking contract rules with the USA regarding its use of the supplied arms

Point - Israel broke the ceasefire agreement by bombing Gaza on Nov. 4th. Hamas only starting firing rockets in retaliation AFTER Israel broke the ceasefire.

Point - the majority of US congress put the onus on Hamas to stop firing rockets and to recognize Israel's right to exist as a nation, and see Israel as doing nothing wrong in it's bombing and killing of hundreds of innocent civilians (which is a war crime - targeting civilians) and do not ask Israel to recognize Palestine as a nation (or to stop invading and besieging Palestine).

Israel: "the region's bully"

Al Jazeera English - Focus - Israel's failure to learn < read me

Already we see tensions increasing in the region. Damascus has pulled out of third-party talks with Tel Aviv and Arab anger has been mounting not just at Israel, and not just at America, but also at their own regimes which have collaborated with Washington.

Some Israelis have started to realise their government's flawed approach. While 81 per cent of Israelis support the military campaign, a poll has showed only 39 per cent believe it will succeed in removing Hamas or reducing violence.

An editorial in Haaretz, an Israeli daily, even went so far as to label Israel "the region's bully".

Barack Obama, the US president-elect, remains silent as Israel kills Palestinians with impunity. In his silence he expresses his complicity.

A better American vote selection quiz

Glassbooth - Quiz to help you choose best 2008 presidential candidate

This one includes other presidential candidates besides McCain and Obama.