Doc's Talk: When the Arab media reports the truth: What people in Gaza Say

Monday, October 04, 2010

When the Arab media reports the truth: What people in Gaza Say

Thanks to Barry Rubin

Mitchell Prothero

Under the gun: how the people of Gaza feel about Hamas

This is the entrance to the Gaza Strip: a 250-metre long causeway of exposed concrete slabs about five metres wide, surrounded by barbed wire, CCTV cameras and motion sensors, and closely monitored by remote-controlled machine guns mounted on the huge concrete walls that mark the border around the Erez Crossing Terminal. This awful corniche, a fitting introduction to the physical and social isolation inside Gaza, traverses a deep buffer zone that separates the Israeli military and border police at Erez from the Hamas border guards, who maintain their own checkpoint 500 metres away.

It's difficult to coordinate along a border when neither side recognises the other's right to exist - but determining exactly who gets to make the harrowing walk between the two checkpoints is as close as these two belligerents come to cooperation. The area leading up to the Israeli fence is filled with huge piles of shattered concrete, twisted rebar, broken metal door and window frames - the remains of warehouses, factories and Palestinian Authority customs offices built in a more optimistic era and long since flattened by dozens of Israeli incursions. What was once a sign of a developing peace has now been turned into a wasteland of rubble, guarded on one side by Islamic radicals and on the other by deadly machine guns operated by teenaged conscripts in a far-off control room. But what looks like rubble to most of the world remains precious in Gaza: the Israelis haven't allowed rebuilding supplies like concrete and steel into the strip for several years.

Some of Gaza's poorest residents support their families by sneaking past the Hamas checkpoint near the border, at the risk of being arrested - or shot and killed by Israel's robot machine guns - to gather up broken concrete they can sell to their homeless neighbours. It would be hard to find a better metaphor for life in Gaza than this walkway at Erez: a scorching hot concrete slab that's hard to enter and harder to leave, littered with rubble and jammed uncomfortably between Israel and Hamas. Despite a long and proud history of resilience, the people of Gaza - who have endured for decades against their own leaders, against Israel's policy of collective punishment, and against the apathy of the international community - appear today to have given up any hope that life will return even to the semblance of normalcy enjoyed by their still-occupied cousins in the West Bank. United Nations statistics on the economic and social conditions inside Gaza are bleak: more than half the working population is unemployed; the vast majority of those who do draw paycheques are employees of the deposed Fatah-backed government in Ramallah. They are paid, in other words, not to go to work - in the eyes of the Palestinian Authority, showing up to work at a Gaza ministry is tantamount to treason. Hamas, for its part, can barely afford to pay its own employees, so it has little capacity to reward the PA civil servants willing to cross the virtual picket line and report for duty.

If the humiliation of chronic unemployment, or being paid to not work, isn't enough, with a widespread travel ban on Palestinians except in rare medical cases requiring Israeli help, no one ever gets to leave this tiny patch of sand along the sea. And with meager wages supplemented by humanitarian rations, people aren't starving. Instead they seem to be losing any sense of hope and increasingly, according to social workers, smugglers and even the police, turning in massive numbers to cheap narcotic tablets smuggled through tunnels from Egypt. A sense of lethargy and hopelessness now pervades almost every aspect of life here.

The road to Gaza's present misery began, as many things do, with an election. In 2006, Palestinian voters rejected the corruption, nepotism and incompetence of the long-ruling Fatah Party and elected Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement - surprising no one except the US State Department, which had brushed aside Israeli concerns that Hamas would prevail in a fair election. The Hamas election campaign had two planks. The first was opposition to corruption. In Gaza, discontent was focused on the gangster rule of the local Fatah strongman, Mohammed Dahlan, which by 2006 had turned Gaza into an unstable collection of competing resistance groups, security services, police forces and clan militias. Foreign journalists and aid workers were regularly being kidnapped, huge sums of money kept disappearing into the coffers of the Palestinian Authority (and, presumably, into the pockets of its officials in Ramallah) and the overall sense was that the opportunity offered by the Israeli withdrawal in 2005 was being lost amid internal strife and large scale theft.

The second, which attracted less attention from voters at the time, was continuing resistance to Israel and a rejection of the peace process that began with the 1993 Oslo Accords. Putting an end to corruption and nepotism while mounting an effective military resistance to Israel was an ambitious agenda, to say the least: few other Arab regimes have managed to accomplish even one of these goals. But Hamas has shown little inclination to publicly abandon either of these ambitions, and reconciling these two directions - good governance and military resistance - has proven to be a challenge Hamas is ill-prepared to surmount. In the four years since the Hamas election victory, the people of Gaza have suffered through a series of crises. First, the international community refused to recognise the results of the election it had imposed, sparking an 18-month-long power struggle that pitted factions loyal to Dahlan and Mahmoud Abbas against Hamas, and which came to an end only in the summer of 2007, when Hamas dealt Dahlan and Fatah a decisive defeat and took full and unquestioned control of Gaza. Adding to the misery, in a 2006 joint operation with two other smaller militant groups, Hamas kidnapped Gilad Shalit, a corporal in the Israel Defense Forces, from just outside the security fence, leading to a major military invasion and a backbreaking embargo of virtually all consumer goods and travel in or out of Gaza by its residents. These draconian measures, along with continued military action by both sides, led to a campaign where Hamas and its allies fired thousands of homemade rockets into southern Israel, finally provoking another large- scale invasion, Operation Cast Lead, in December 2008, which killed more than 1,200 people and further degraded Gaza's already crumbling infrastructure. Since then, the Palestinian government has been split: Hamas rules Gaza, while the international community and Israel ignore them, preferring to deal instead with the Palestinian Authority headed by Abbas in the West Bank. But the campaign to weaken Hamas's grip on Gaza - which has employed economic deprivation and military force - has done little to hurt Hamas, and its political opponents inside Gaza say the Islamic Resistance Movement treats them no better than the Israelis once did.

Mkhaimer Abu Sada worked as a Fatah political official in Gaza before Hamas took power in 2007. While most of his comrades fled the territory in fear - either into Egypt or, with Israeli help, via the Erez Crossing - Abu Sada had enough friends on the Hamas side to remain, and today he's one of the few independent political analysts left in Gaza City. As we sat over coffee on a sweltering evening as much of the city lay dark after the only working electrical plant ran out of fuel in an three-way Israel/Fatah/Hamas billing dispute, he explained that the campaign to weaken Hamas has done just the opposite. "Oh, they are in total control of the situation in Gaza," he said. "In 2006, when they started taking over, their fighters numbered between five and six thousand men. Now they have at least 25,000 paid employees of their ministries acting as police, security and intelligence services with another 10,000 members of the Izzedine al Qassam Brigades [the Hamas military wing]." "The Americans, Israelis and Fatah simply cannot accept this simple fact: that for now there is absolutely no way anyone can beat Hamas," Abu Sada said. "And the more they try, the more they isolate the people of Gaza, the stronger the militants and Islamic movements get." But despite solidifying its control over large sections of the official government and economy, which Hamas controls by maintaining strict management of the hundreds of tunnels that import goods and weapons to Gaza in defiance of the Israeli embargo, the group has seen its support among the Palestinians collapse even as its control tightens. "We are under occupation," said Abu Mohammed, a secular businessman with close family ties to the old Fatah security services. "After the takeover, people thought it might get better if the religious guys were in charge of the money, that security would improve and corruption would end. But they're just as corrupt: If you're not in Hamas, you get nothing. If anyone does anything, they are arrested, tortured or killed. Just like with the Israelis. Except the Jews always give you a lawyer."

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk