A.LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER

     *    Wikileaks comes to the Murdoch bosom

• Fatah keen for occupier to murder Hamas
• Here’s to a return to Saddam days!
• Wikileaks reveals Israel rather liked idea of Hamas taking Gaza
• How to spend 40 years morally corrupting a society
• Are journalists leaders or followers over war?
• Murdoch paper echoes Washington line over Wikileaks
• An Australian call for war crimes to be investigated in Sri Lanka
• Australians back Wikileaks all the way
• Assange is The Outsider

Wikileaks comes to the Murdoch bosom Posted: 20 Dec 2010 04:06 PM PST From David Leigh, Guardian’s investigation’s editor: The #guardian published too many leaks for #Assange ‘s liking, it seems. So now he’s signed up “exclusively” with#Murdoch‘s Times. Gosh.

Fatah keen for occupier to murder Hamas Posted: 20 Dec 2010 03:03 PM PST What do you call Palestinians who urge Israel to bomb fellow Palestinians? Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas wanted unprecedented help from Israel in attacking Hamas during the clashes just prior to the militant group’s bloody coup of the Gaza Strip, according to a classified cable leaked by WikiLeaks on Monday. In a cable dated June 13, 2007, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Richard Jones wrote that Shin Bet security chief Yuval Diskin had told him in a meeting that Abbas’ Fatah movement was “desperate, disorganized and demoralized” over the situation in the Gaza Strip. The cable was released as the violent clashes between Fatah and Hamas were underway; three days after the meeting between Jones and Diskin on June 9, Hamas began seizing control of the coastal territory and within five days had displaced the Palestinian Authority government there. Israel has “established a very good working relationship” with Abbas’ forces, Diskin told Jones in their meeting. As Hamas was overrunning Gaza, Diskin said, some desperate Fatah leaders even wanted Israel to attack Hamas.

Here’s to a return to Saddam days! Posted: 20 Dec 2010 02:27 PM PST This is what the US has brought Iraqis? Dozens of Iraqi writers and poets took to the streets of Baghdad Friday to protest at the closure of social clubs that serve alcohol in the capital, arguing that it harkened back to Saddam-era repression. Holding up placards with the phrases “Freedom first” and “Baghdad will not be Kandahar,” they staged a demonstration near the Iraqi Writers’ Union (IWU) building in al-Wattanabi in the city centre. “We don’t need a Khomeini state or a Taliban state in Iraq,” said IWU chief Fadhel Samer, referring to Iranian revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the Afghan Islamist group respectively. “What is happening to personal freedoms in this country is akin to what happened during the dictatorship. … It reminds us of the practices of the old regime.” The protests were sparked by the closure of a cafe near the IWU building where writers and intellectuals often gathered to smoke sheesha water pipes and drink alcohol. Baghdad provincial authorities argue that they are only enforcing a decree, issued during dictator Saddam Hussein’s religious campaigns of the 1990s, which said no restaurants or hotels could serve alcohol.

Wikileaks reveals Israel rather liked idea of Hamas taking Gaza Posted: 20 Dec 2010 05:34 AM PST The Jerusalem Post has the story but misses the lead: In another cable released Monday, it was revealed that during a 2007 June 12 meeting with US Ambassador to Israel Richard H. Jones, then-head of Military Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin said that Gaza was “number four” on his list of threats, preceded by Iran, Syria, and Hizbullah in that order. The actual cable is more revealing, outlining the ideal Zionist position; demonise and isolate Palestinians in the name of gathering global support. How’s the love for Israel coming along? Although not necessarily reflecting a GOI consensus view, Yadlin said Israel would be “happy” if Hamas took over Gaza because the IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state. He dismissed the significance of an Iranian role in a Hamas-controlled Gaza “as long as they don’t have a port.”

How to spend 40 years morally corrupting a society Posted: 20 Dec 2010 05:23 AM PST The banality of Israel’s evil occupation is laid bare with startling descriptions in the new book by Israeli group Breaking the Silence. Former IDF soldiers recount the daily beatings, humiliation, violence and degradation handed out to Palestinians. It’s routine. It’s normalised. And it’s backed by most Western powers: Testimony 48: “In reality you are just abusing the population”  Unit: Field Intelligence; location: South Hebron Hills; year: 2005-2008 What operations did you do in South Mount Hebron? It’s the same operations, lookout activity. Sometimes we would… the brigade would try to play with us. We would go on missions of… we would join some infantry company or organize some kind of team, they would go into a house, just do whatever… as a demonstration of presence. In order to draw… it’s a mission which has a kind of logic, but in reality you are just abusing the population. You arrive… the idea is like this: The infantry team takes control of some house; and we take one under cover so no one will know. The Same House? No. The house across from it. Meaning the same street. One here, one here. They make noise and chaos so there will be a protest. They really burned tires there on the house. The Soldiers? No, the Palestinians, because they took control of the house as a protest, meaning they put up flags, made noise, stun grenades. That was their mission. What time was this? It was during the day. We came at night and all the action was during the day. At dawn? Yes. The idea was that maybe some armed man would come to the area and then we’ll succeed in taking him down, because we are there secretly, because we are at a different corner. In reality an armed man didn’t come, fine, OK, and their house was destroyed. Tires were burned on the house. An innocent house, just a house on the map, that the Shin Bet checked and there wasn’t any… that it’s really innocent population… that’s what they check. They are innocent, so you enter their house? Yes and we destroyed the house. The windows were broken, they threw stones into the house. That’s it, an entire house was destroyed. Where was the family? I think they threw them out Where was this? It was in Yatta. So do you, like, understand? The thought at the beginning, when you sit with a map with the brigade commander, then it seems very nice… ‘you take control of this house with a demonstration of presence, you’ll be hidden, and an armed man will come and everything will be fine and dandy.’ But in the field you destroyed the house of a family and left, that’s it. And it happened every day, all the time. It’s not an unordinary activity? It is an activity that the infantrymen do. Did you do it more than once or twice? Yes, yes. It was routine? Yes, But that was more unique because it was in the heart of Yatta and we did it secretly.

Are journalists leaders or followers over war? Posted: 20 Dec 2010 04:55 AM PST Lesson number one; never trust the corporate press to accurately report our illegal wars. The latest figures from the US media are depressing and reflect the unhealthy tendency to base coverage of war zones around Washington’s dictates. Obama says the Iraq war is winding down (even though the occupation continues) so we better move to the new battlefield, Afghanistan. Like sheep: A recent headline atop New York magazine repeated a question asked by dozens of opinion writers this year — and last year, and the year before — “Why Are We in Afghanistan?” The questions reflect the complex nature of the Afghan war, and of the news coverage. The grueling war there, where a day rarely goes by without an allied casualty, is like a faint heartbeat, accounting for just 4 percent of the nation’s news coverage in major outlets through early December, according to a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, an arm of the Pew Research Center. That is down slightly from last year, when the war accounted for 5 percent. “It’s never passed the threshold to be a big story week in, week out for Americans,” said Mark Jurkowitz, the associate director of the project. One senior foreign correspondent for television, when told of the 4 percent coverage figure, said he was impressed — given the relatively small contingent of foreign journalists in Afghanistan. … The study started in 2007. In that year, Afghanistan — which was a relatively low-grade conflict at the time, with many fewer allied causalities — accounted for only 1 percent of the nation’s news coverage. The same held true in 2008. The coverage picked up markedly at the end of 2009, when Mr. Obama conducted a lengthy review of Afghanistan strategy, but still added up to only 5 percent for the year. Four or 5 percent “may be the baseline, at least for now, no matter what the strategic stakes are, or even as U.S. involvement ratchets up,” Mr. Jurkowitz said. This year, Mr. Jurkowitz estimated, roughly half of the coverage of Afghanistan actually emanated from the war zone. That suggests that “without a major Washington policy debate or strategy review ongoing, that Afghanistan remains a story that gets modest coverage,” he said. … At the same time, there are antiwar voices who say the news media has been “compliant” with regard to Afghanistan — the word that Joe Scarborough used on Friday on his MSNBC program, “Morning Joe.” He asked Richard N. Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, “For years, we have had journalists wringing their hands and editorialists lashing out at the profession for not asking the tough questions leading up to Iraq. Ten years from now, won’t we be saying the same thing about Afghanistan?” Mr. Haass said he feared that Mr. Scarborough was right. “I think history’s going to be brutal on the questions that haven’t been asked.” Or, alternatively, the answers that haven’t been heard.

Murdoch paper echoes Washington line over Wikileaks Posted: 20 Dec 2010 04:09 AM PST “Journalism” Murdoch style with the headline, “Life’s a Breach, Julian” in the New York Post: Apparently, the public doesn’t have the right to know everything. The lawyer for WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange whined yesterday that his client is being treated unfairly because a Swedish police report detailing his rape charges was leaked to British newspaper. “It is with great concern that I hear about this because it puts Julian and his defense in a bad position,” Britain’s Sunday Times quoted Bjorn Hurtig as saying. The stunning display of chutzpah came as Vice President Joe Biden said WikiLeaks acts like a “high-tech terrorist” and has made it harder to conduct the nation’s business.

An Australian call for war crimes to be investigated in Sri Lanka Posted: 19 Dec 2010 09:29 PM PST Australian Lawyers for Human Rights yesterday released the following statement: “The panel of experts appointed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, to advise him on accountability issues for the events in Sri Lanka during the period of civil war should recommend that the United Nations set up a properly resourced, independent and transparent inquiry into possible war crimes”, the President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (“ALHR”), Stephen Keim, said today. “The inquiry should address actions by the Sri Lankan government and its authorities and the actions of the defeated Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (“LTTE”). The inquiry should have the power to recommend criminal prosecution for war crimes and crimes against humanity before a properly constituted and fairly run criminal tribunal” ALHR, last week, forwarded a submission to the Panel of Experts. The submission draws upon the work of respected non-government organisations (“NGOs”) such as the International Crisis Group; Amnesty International; and Human Rights Watch. The submission argues that there is ample credible evidence available pointing to the commission of crimes such as the deliberate targeting of civilian populations and humanitarian workers and the killing of captives to justify setting up a properly resourced inquiry. The submission argues that the inquiry should be set up despite the likelihood that no cooperation will be forthcoming from the Sri Lankan government. “Evidence has already been gathered by non-government organisations in Sri Lanka and in Australia as well in other countries without cooperation from the Sri Lankan government at this point”, said Mr. Keim. “A properly resourced international inquiry would be able to receive the evidence that has been gathered and continue the process.” “The Australian government should support the setting up of an inquiry”, said Mr. Keim. “The government should also assist by carrying out its own investigations. Up to this time, Australia seems to have shown greater concern about collaborating with the Sri Lankan authorities to deter asylum seekers attempting to travel to Australia. However, since many asylum seekers and persons already granted asylum are from the areas where conflict was carried out, they are people who can potentially assist any future international inquiry.” “It is an important part of the Nuremberg heritage that we all carry that those responsible for serious war crimes are made accountable”, said Mr. Keim. The other important aspect of that heritage is that any court or tribunal which hears allegations of war crimes be conducted fairly and with all necessary procedural safeguards. The obvious candidate to hear any recommended prosecutions is the International Criminal Court. Since Sri Lanka is not a party to the Rome Statute, it would be necessary for the Security Council to make a referral. A well conducted inquiry would support the case for such a referral to be made,” said Mr. Keim.

Australians back Wikileaks all the way Posted: 19 Dec 2010 09:12 PM PST It looks like many Australians believe in greater transparency in global dealings. Governments and corporate journalists, are you listening? Most Australians support the release of the WikiLeaks cables, say that Julian Assange should receive legal support, and are critical of the federal government’s rhetoric on the issue, new polling reveals. And support for Assange and the diplomatic document leaks is largely uniform across party lines, with Labor and Coalition voters approving the right of WikiLeaks to release the highly sensitive information. A weekly online poll from Essential Research found more than half of voters approve of the release of the cables (33% approve; 20% strongly approve), compared to a quarter who expressed concern (14% disapprove; 11% strongly). Support for WikiLeaks was, not surprisingly, highest among Greens voters (80% total approval) but still strong across party lines — 55% of Labor voters approve in total compared to 51% of Liberal/National supporters. Disapproval ratings were the same (30% in total) across both sides of politics.

Assange is The Outsider Posted: 19 Dec 2010 09:04 PM PST   Thank you.