Israel’s actions are criminal
Dear editor,
The Concordian ran a news segment in its last issue highlighting the “history leading to the current conflict” in Gaza. Here are some fundamental background issues that were missing from the report, but are nonetheless crucial to putting the current waves of violence into context:
Nearly half of the Palestinian population was forcibly expelled in 1948 at gunpoint and under a reign of terror. The expelled Palestinians continue to this day to live in refugee camps under miserable conditions in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN resolution 194.
Israeli historian Benny Morris describes the occupation of the West Bank as being “founded on brute force, repression and fear, collaboration and treachery, beatings, torture chambers and daily intimidation, humiliation and manipulation, along with stealing of valuable land and resources.” This occupation is a manifestation of Israeli’s consistent policy of expansion over security, as it continues to contemptuously dismiss UN resolutions and World Court decisions.
In fact, Israel and the United States stand alone in rejecting any settlement according to UN resolutions.
The occupation took an uglier turn when Israel imposed a severe blockade over Gaza, effectively turning it into “the largest prison on Earth,” according to Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem.
Other UN officials have condemned Israel for its disregard: “Such a flurry of denunciations by normally cautious UN officials has not occurred on a global level since the heyday of South African apartheid,” according to UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk.
It is within this context that Israel broke the truce on Nov. 4 by killing six Palestinian militants, after which Hamas replied by firing home-made rockets (both actions illegal and condemnable under international law).
Israel’s disregard for basic human rights is a result of having had full impunity. The crucial fact that Israel is guilty under international law in all major issues. The violence therefore continues, and will continue as long as it serves elite interests in Israel and the United States.
“This was something that was planned long ahead,” Israeli UN ambassador Dan Gillerman told the Guardian on Jan. 4, 2009. “I was recruited by the foreign minister to co-ordinate Israel’s efforts and I have never seen all parts of a very complex machinery . . . being effective in sending out the message,” he added.
Amidst clouds of propaganda magnified by indoctrinated ideologues, it is ever more urgent for everyone now to look at the record and leave rhetoric and propaganda aside. That is the way to stop the madness.
Mohammed Alshamrani
ENCS, Concordia
————————————-
This is the bloodiest assault on Palestinians…
Dear Editor,
After reading Conor Lynch’s opinion piece about the attacks on Gaza in the last issue, one cannot help but wonder if anything is happening at all, apart from rocket fire from Gaza into Israel. The reality of the situation goes far beyond anything described in the piece, without even mentioning the thousands of Palestinians who have been murdered by the Israeli war machine since its colonial project began in 1947-1948. The death of innocent civilians of any nationality/race/beliefs is wrong, whether it be Palestinians, Israelis, Arabs, Jews et al. This is exactly what the author of last week’s piece does, ignoring the deaths of huge numbers of innocent civilians and diverting the public’s attention to some absurd fairy-tale about a siege of Israel. This tactic is despicable and could arguably be considered extremely biased at the least, and racist at the most.
The current death toll of Palestinians due to Israel’s massive air and ground assault of Gaza is nearing 800, increasing by the minute. This is the bloodiest assault on Palestinian civilians since the ethnic cleansing of much of Palestine in 1947-1948 by Zionist militias and terror gangs. I do not denigrate or belittle the murders of at least five Israeli civilians by rocket fire in the most recent hostilities; no one should engage in devaluing the loss of life on either side. Logic, morality and common sense will lead most to obvious conclusions about the validity of Israel’s basis for the assault, claiming to be going after Hamas militants. No militants where present in the two UN schools that were shelled by the Israelis. There were definitely no militants in the house Israeli soldiers corralled Palestinian women and children into and then shelled shortly after yesterday.
Do not forget, before this latest Israeli attack against the Palestinian people, Gaza was blockaded for over two years by the Israeli government by land, sea and air. All but the barest vital supplies were cut off from the over 1.5 million men, women and children of Gaza by Israel. All of this following the much lauded “disengagement”; which was really just a change in the racist tactics of the Israeli regime.
What shall we say to children who face having to watch parents die and vice versa on a daily basis? The international community and the general public need to inform themselves on the subject and understand the situation is very different on both sides of the playing field. The death tolls show the truth as to just how much violence is involved in Israel and Palestine. This so called “hunt for militants,” resulting in the murder of massive amounts of civilians, shows the Israeli government is not free and democratic, but in actuality abides by no law other than its own ideology of holding its “Jewish character” at a higher value than the lives of non-Jews.
We should not stand by while these war crimes take place, and indeed, massive protests and condemnation from the international community against Israel’s assault have taken place across the globe. People are beginning to open their eyes and see the truth of what is happening in Gaza.
Yasmine Hassan
—————————————
Obvious bias in reporting on Gaza
Dear editor,
As I read Conor Lynch’s “news” piece “History leading up to the current conflict,” I couldn’t help but feel his version of history was not only misleading, but that it was missing some of the most important elements related to the conflict itself.
Where, after Lynch states, “Israel seized the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula,” does he mention the subsequent UN Resolution 242, which states Israel must evacuate from the territories it won during the Six-Day War in 1967?
Where, after Lynch states, “the Camp David Accords collapsed in 2000 over the thorny issue of Jerusalem” and led to the Second Intifada, does he mention it was former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s ill-advised and knowingly-controversial visit to the Dome of the Rock, surrounded by IDF forces, that caused tensions to boil over?
Where, after Lynch states, “Israel decided to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza strip in 2005, bulldozing its settlements,” does he mention how Israeli forces then focused their energies to bulldoze homes and businesses in the West Bank instead?
Where, after Lynch states, “on Dec. 19, Hamas unilaterally withdrew from the ceasefire,” does he mention it was actually Israel who broke the truce, killing six Palestinians during a raid into the Gaza town of Deir al-Balah on Nov. 4, 2008?
Nowhere. Lynch fails to include all these important points, instead making most of the violence appear to be caused solely by some mysterious Arab desire to kill all Israelis for merely being there. How could that be “objective news”?
It all made sense though after I turned to page 19 and read Lynch’s once-again misinformed opinion piece in which he blindly supports Israel’s recent murderous incursion into the Gaza Strip. But let’s not get into that.
I’m disheartened by how The Concordian allowed Lynch to write the “history,” when it knew his obvious bias towards the situation. How is that journalistically responsible?
One of the editors should have at least monitored his version of the history for fairness, balance and accuracy, if not disallowed him from writing it altogether. Or, placed his history alongside his opinion piece; they are equally incomplete truths, after all.
The Concordian dropped the ball on this one. You ignored the basic objective characteristic of news, which was something I always praised your newspaper for upholding. Things change, I guess.
Jillian Kestler-D’Amours
Journalism student
