The Spirit of the Internet Weekly

Click here for opinions from prior weeks.

[Note: The following news and opinions primarily came from email sent by our friends. Thank you Sirius and all the others who have forwarded these messages to us. Due to the large volume of email we are receiving, we can only post a sampling here, but we thank everyone for sending stories like this. We read them all and post what we can as time permits.]

US university sacks Palestinian (Julian Borger, The Guardian, January 15, 2002)
“A Palestinian professor about to sacked by the University of South Florida on security grounds after expressing anti-Israel views on a television talk-show is fighting his dismissal, calling it an assault on academic freedom. . . . Sami al-Arian, a computer science professor at USF for 16 years, described Israel as a source of terrorism in the Middle East. . . He subsequently received death threats, and some of the university's sponsors threatened to withdraw their support. He was suspended three days after the television appearance, and informed of his dismissal in December.”

US doesn't have the right to decide who is or isn't a PoW (Michael Byers, The Guardian, January 14, 2002)
“Chained, manacled, hooded, even sedated, their beards shorn off against their will, they are being flown around the world to Guantanamo Bay, a century-old military outpost seized during the Spanish-American war and subsequently leased from Cuba by the US. There, they are being kept in tiny chain-link outdoor cages, without mosquito repellent, where (their captors assure us) they are likely to be rained upon. . . . The Pentagon clearly intends to prosecute at least some of the detainees in special military commissions having looser rules of evidence and a lower burden of proof than regular military or civilian courts. . . . The Geneva convention also makes it clear that it isn't for Rumsfeld to decide whether the detainees are ordinary criminal suspects rather than PoWs. Anyone detained in the course of an armed conflict is presumed to be a PoW until a competent court or tribunal determines otherwise. The record shows that those who negotiated the convention were intent on making it impossible for the determination to be made by any single person. . . . Even if the detainees were not PoWs, they remain human beings with human rights. Hooding, even temporarily, constitutes a violation of the 1984 convention against torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Apart from causing unnecessary mental anguish, it prevents a detainee from identifying anyone causing them harm.”

Day 100: another raid in the bombing war without end (Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, January 15, 2002)
“Here, in the mountains of Zhawar, there is only war. US warplanes are destroying, day after day, one of the last redoubts of the Taliban. Overnight, the bombing was so heavy the windows shook in Khost, a town 22 miles from America's latest theatre of war. . . . Fifteen people were killed two days ago in Shudiaki village, says Noorz Ali, rattling down the dried-up river bed in a pick-up truck piled with a wheelbarrow, a brass basin, and four baby goats - the pitiable sum of his belongings as he joins the exodus for the safety of the plains. . . . In the hills around Zhawar, it's a difficult proposition. The men sent their women and children down to Khost several days ago, but stayed to guard their herds. At night, they sleep in bunkers above their mud and chaff houses. By day, they squat beneath the parched acacia trees that provide what little cover there is on these barren mountains. . . . ‘What can we do? Where can we go?’ asked Khalil Jan, a shepherd squatting by the road. . . . ‘Everyday, the Americans are dropping bombs. Last night there were six and this morning there were five. We are very afraid of the bombs, and we are very angry at the Americans. There is no reason for this. The camps are empty, but still the Americans are dropping their bombs.’ ”

Israel sends in its death squads and more bulldozers (Phil Reeves, The Independent, 15 January 2002)
“Yesterday's demolitions were committed, as is usually the case, on the official pretext that the homes were built without permits, which are routinely denied to Palestinians wanting to build in east Jerusalem, occupied by Israeli in 1967 and later illegally annexed. It was part of Israel's long-term strategy of limiting the number of Arabs in the city, who make up about 30 per cent of the 600,000 population. . . . Israel refused to confirm that its forces assassinated Mr Karmi, 28, a leader of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, a paramilitary group affiliated with the mainstream Fatah organisation. But it had all the hallmarks. He was high on Israel's wanted list, and had openly boasted of killing Israelis. . . . The Israeli government issued a statement saying he was responsible for numerous attacks, including the murder of two Tel Aviv restaurateurs last year. The army has tried to kill him before: in September, he narrowly escaped when Israeli helicopters fired missiles at his car, killing two fellow guerrillas. . . . His killing blew another hole in Mr Arafat's ceasefire order, issued a month ago. An al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades statement said last night: ‘The hoax of the so-called ceasefire is cancelled, cancelled, cancelled.’ ”

US jittery at symbolic meetings of grieving families (Kim Sengupta, The Independent, 15 January 2002)
“The meeting is seen by the grieving Americans as a step towards building something good out of profoundly shattering events. But they also bring with them a message of reconciliation that has provoked apprehension inthe State Department and among US diplomats in Afghanistan. . . . The four American visitors will spend eight days in Afghanistan, not just meeting families but also learning about the devastation that has befallen this poorest of poor nations. . . . The visitors will represent families who suffered in the different attacks on 11 September. Derrill Bodley, a 56-year-old professor of music, lost his daughter Deora on United Airlines flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania. Deora's stepsister Eva Rupp will accompany him. Rita Lasar, 70, a retired businesswoman, lost her brother Abe Zelmanowitz in the attack on the World Trade Centre. Kelly Campbell, 29, who co- ordinated environmental campaigns, lost her brother-in-law Craig Amundson in the Pentagon attack. . . . Ms Campbell is making the trip on behalf of Craig's widow, Amber Amundson, who is at home looking after their two small children. Mr Amundson had a distinguished career in the US army, but he liked to say that his job was to maintain the peace rather than wage war. His widow said: ‘I have heard angry rhetoric by some Americans, including many of our nation's leaders who advise a heavy dose of revenge and punishment. To those leaders, I would like to make clear that my family and I take no comfort in your words of rage. If you choose to respond to this incomprehensible brutality by perpetuating violence against other innocent human beings, you may not do so in the name of justice for my husband.’ ”

Healing After Terror (Michael Lerner, Tikkun Magazine)
“While we were still grieving and consoling the mourners, the Bush administration and a host of right-wing ideologues had managed to manipulate Americans' legitimate outrage and channeled it into a revival of the deepest held belief of the conservative worldview: that the world is mostly a dangerous place and that our lives must be based around protecting ourselves from threatening ‘others.’ In this case, terrorism provides a perfect base for this worldview—it can come from anywhere, we don't really know who the enemy is, and so everyone can be suspect and everyone can be a target of our fear-induced rage. With this as a guiding principle, television network news has obediently complied with requests to censor the statements that might reveal the thinking of the enemy, and liberal Democrats have jumped to show their patriotism by voting for wild escalations in defense spending and for laws that limit Constitutional freedoms. . . . But while this is happening at the top, there are millions of people around the world who have remained in a new state of openness, humble in the face of death and destruction, willing to open our hearts to others and recognize that the real need of the moment is for a fundamental rethinking of the way we are running our world. . . . But intervention could have happened in a very different way: the United States could have given its evidence against Bin Laden to the UN Security Council and announced a willingness to wait six weeks to allow that world body. to issue an indictment and to assemble an international police force to arrest these criminals and bring them before an international tribunal. In so doing, we would at least have validated a notion that was supposed to have been established 2,500 years ago: That the family of the victim of violence doesn't act on its own as avengers of the violence, but instead goes to a larger community, presents its evidence, allows the other side to defend itself, and then accepts the judgment of the larger community. . . . It's not that Americans are willfully deceiving themselves. Most Americans have never ever heard a serious presentation of our history and our current role in the world. Our media has induced a societal amnesia so that no one remembers the way our power was used to murder three million Vietnamese in the name of democratic values. No one remembers that our CIA participated in the violent overthrow of the democratically elected regimes in Iran and Chile, or that our military trained and supplied military elites who tortured their own populations in Argentina, Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti, and dozens of other countries. Most Americans have no idea about any of this, and that's why they are so perplexed.”

Is ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’ and Pax Americana Compatible? You Decide (Andreas Toupadakis, Media Monitors Network, January 2, 2002)
“Why do we have to apologize every time we try to find and understand the causes of the 9/11 evil acts? Why do we have to repeat that we do not of course approve of terrorism every time we search to answer the most important question 'Why did it happen?' The mainstream media are devoting their time almost exclusively to how it happened and who did it. But the Americans are just like any other people, they do have common sense, and now they have started to ask the question, ‘Why did it happen?’ . . . The ruling class of the US uses Chinese people to manufacture goods at an unprecedented rate because of higher profits. Who cares if there are millions of Americans who have to have three to four jobs in order to make ends meet and without any medical insurance or other benefits? The stores of America are full of products made in China. Thus the ruling class of the US is happy with this arrangement. But why then would it call China an enemy and demonize it and try to encircle it militarily, thus taking the risk of a global war in trying to do so? The answer is simple. If China produces cheaply and is affordable to the Americans, it is also affordable to anyone else on the planet. Thus China is displacing Western markets and taking new ones in Africa, Asia and even Europe. That is a great threat to the G8, with US as the leader. The ruling classes of the G8 are not just satisfied with inexpensive Chinese labor for products they consume themselves; they also want to control and maintain a monopoly around the world. The West, in its thirst for power, would even risk global chaos to accomplish it. . . . Our problem today is that we preach freedom but we use double standards: freedom on our soil at home but extortion towards our neighbors. You take over our markets and we will bomb you so we can take them back. With such a foreign policy, will we be surprised to see a bloody world at any moment?”

Mindless and mistaken, America's Afghan policy lacks coherence (The Guardian, January 11, 2002)
“The Bush administration's claim to be pursuing a coherent policy in post-Taliban Afghanistan becomes less credible with each passing day. . . . One entirely predictable consequence of this unguided thrashing-about was the murderous December 29 attack on Qalaye Niazi village that vapourised a wedding party somehow mistaken for top al-Qaida desperados. The UN says that 62 civilians died that night; other estimates run as high as 107. Having initially denied any error, the Pentagon now promises an investigation. . . . On the political and diplomatic front, the puzzle that is Washington's policy grows more complex and contradictory. Tiring of admitting he has no idea where Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar are, the Pentagon's spokesman, Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem, says the US has decided to stop ‘chasing shadows’. But even George Bush knows that victory will never be complete with Bin Laden and his top thugs still unaccounted for. . . . Thus one day sees the US saying it will extend the hunt into Pakistan, the next that Somalia or Yemen may be in the cross-hairs. Iraq, apparently, is off the hook for now. But then up jumps Mr Bush with a new hunch: Iran. ‘We hope they wouldn't allow al-Qaida murderers to hide in their country,’ he said yesterday, implying that is exactly what the US believes Iran is doing. Meanwhile, loath to risk an extended US ground presence in Afghanistan and overly reliant on pay-as-you-hunt proxy forces, Washington is forced to look on as warlords cut private deals, carve up the country and, as happened this week, allow three wanted Taliban ministers to walk free in Kandahar.”

For NPR, Violence Is Calm if It’s Violence Against Palestinians (FAIR, January 10, 2002)
“Before the January 9 gun battle on the Gaza Strip, National Public Radio (NPR) had for weeks been telling its listeners that Israel/Palestine was in a period of ‘relative quiet.’ . . . What Gradstein didn’t mention-- and what someone who relied on NPR for their Middle Eastern news would have little idea of -- was that this has been in no way a period of calm for Palestinians. In fact, in the three-week period that Gradstein referred to, at least 26 Palestinians were killed by occupation forces-- more than one a day. . . . The unequal treatment of Israeli and Palestinian deaths is a long-standing pattern at NPR; a FAIR study of six months of the network’s coverage (Extra!, 11-12/01) found that 81 percent of Israeli conflict-related deaths were reported, but only 34 percent of Palestinian deaths. Strikingly, NPR was even less likely to report the deaths of Palestinian minors killed; only 20 percent of these deaths were reported, as compared to 89 percent of Israeli minors’ deaths. While NPR was more likely to cover Israeli civilian deaths than those of Israeli security personnel (84 percent vs. 69 percent), the reverse was true with Palestinians (20 percent vs. 72 percent). . . . ACTION: Please contact the NPR’s ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin to ask for an end to NPR’s double standard in reporting on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and for equal treatment of all victims of violence, regardless of ethnicity or nationality.”

[For the names and ages of Palestinian’s murdered by Israel between December 13^th and January 6^th, see Ali Abunimah’s letter to NPR at http://www.abunimah.org/nprletters/020108calm.html ]

Boys' tortured death shocks Palestinians (Ahmad Sub Laban, Media Monitors Network, January 11, 2002)
“Examination of the bodies showed that Mohammed Luban had been brutally tortured on all parts of his body, in particular the head, which suffered from wounds and breaks. No brain was inside the cavity, said Hasanein, nor were there eyes in the sockets. Only the outer skin of the face was left. There were also long deep gashes on Luban’s extremities, most likely the doing of a sharp instrument such as a knife or axe. . . . Hasanein says that the boy died from the knife wounds, despite having been shot first. The doctor also said Luban was beaten before he was killed. The other boys’ showed similar signs of torture, with broken bones and long deep gashes apparent on their bodies. . . . The Israeli army was busy saying that the boys had attempted to attack a military outpost with automatic machineguns and explosives. Darawna charged that if this were true, Israel would have handed the bodies over to the Palestinians immediately. . . . Head of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza Raji Sourani calls this ‘a new kind of Israeli crime for the record.’ He says that by all standards of legal and human rights, this was an unlawful killing of children. ‘What we found out after seeing the bodies was that one of them was severely disfigured; most likely a tank rolled over it. The other bodies were also badly disfigured.’ ”

New US envoy to Kabul lobbied for Taliban oil rights (Kim Sengupta and Andrew Gumbel, The Independent, 10 January 2002)
“Zalmay Khalilzad, who was born in Afghanistan, has arrived in Kabul amid much publicity. As the representative of the country that put the new government in power, he has a highly influential position. . . . But in 1997, as a paid adviser to the oil multinational Unocal, he took part in talks with Taliban officials regarding the possibility of building highly lucrative gas and oil pipelines. He had drawn up a risk analysis report for the project that would have exploited the natural reserves of the region, estimated to be the world's second largest after the Persian Gulf. . . . But Mr Khalilzad defended them [the Taliban] in The Washington Post. ‘The Taliban do not practice the anti-US style of fundamentalism practised by Iran,’ he wrote. ‘We should ... be willing to offer recognition and humanitarian assistance and to promote international economic reconstruction. It is time for the United States to re-engage.’ . . . Without such ‘re-engagement’, it would not have been possible for Unocal to pursue its goal to build a gas pipeline from the landlocked former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan, with a possible extension to India. . . . His many critics point out that he has been wrong as often as he has been right – going back to the 1980s when, as a state department official in the Reagan administration, he argued vociferously in favour of providing surface-to-air missiles and other sophisticated weaponry to the very mujahedin groups that later gave birth to the Taliban.”

Return to Opinions

[Home] [World Events] [Take Charge] [Links] [Hagerty Home Page] [About Us] [Store] [Search] [Site Map]
[What's New]