KL War Crimes Commission Hears Guantanamo Atrocities

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 30 (Bernama) -- A British Muslim detained for three years at the controversial Guantanamo Bay prison manned by the United States, revealed that the youngest detainee he knew of was a nine-year-old boy who was also tortured like the rest.

Ruhal Ahmed's story was among more accounts of atrocities committed against the detainees at Guantanamo, told before an open commission hearing which began today on the sidelines of an international conference to criminalise war.

The testimonies before the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission Hearings will be submitted to a tribunal in conjunction with the Criminalise War Conference and War Crimes Tribunal 2009 spearheaded by former Malaysian prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.



Dr Mahathir, an outspoken war critic, had said that the tribunal's decision would be forwarded to the United Nations for further action.

Malaysian lawyer Zainur Zakaria headed the six-member panel today that heard the heart-wrenching experiences of seven who spoke of almost daily physical and emotional torture by the US army over alleged ties to Al-Qaeda or the Taliban movement.

Ruhal, now 27, was detained in 2001 after he and three Pakistani Britons, Asif Iqbal, Shafiq Rasul and a friend, Monir, travelled to Pakistan for a wedding.



In a surge of idealism, they decided to see the situation in Afghanistan which was being bombed by the American forces in retaliation for the Sept 11 attacks.

"Once there, with the loss of Monir in the war chaos, we were captured by the Northern Alliance fighters, and were later handed over to the American forces who transported us to the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay," he said.

"I was interrogated hundreds of times by the FBI, CIA and even MI-5, beaten, and subjected to continuous torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution," he recalled.

Hands and feet chained into a foetal position on the floor, they were accused of making a video of Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan.

The three now known in the media as the "Tipton Three", were released in 2004 without being charged after they were forced to sign a paper to admit their involvement in making the video.



Another British Muslim, Moazzam Begg, 41, said moved by the plight of the Afghan people under the conservative Taliban regime, he went to Kabul with his wife and three young children in mid-2001 to start a school for basic education and provide water pumps.

They fled to Islamabad in Pakistan when the allied forces attacked Afghanistan in October that year, and he was arrested in January 2002 by Pakistani police and the CIA, and held in a windowless cellar at the Bagram air base for nearly a year.

"The United States government considered me an enemy combatant, and claimed that I had trained at al-Qaeda terrorist camps in Afghanistan.

I was not charged with any crime nor allowed to consult any legal counsel during that time," said Moazzam who was one of nine British Muslims held there.

In January 2005, he was released with three others, also without any charges produced against them.



Rape and abuse of women and children by US troops were almost a daily affair over at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, said Iraqi-born Jameela Abbas Hameedi.

Jameelah, 54, was arrested in the Iraqi capital in January 2004 with her entire family, allegedly for supporting and funding forces against the US invasion.

"The US army even beat me with tubes and a plastic chair until it broke.

A plastic shard entered my leg and caused a bad infection. I had to undergo surgery but without any anaesthetic given," said Jameelah who was also stripped to her underwear in the "black room" of the prison and bashed against a wall.

Her only daughter and nephew were beaten and tortured naked for six months until Jameelah admitted that she supported the resistance.

She also witnessed other abuses like sleep deprivation, forced stress positions, forced nudity, the use of dogs to scare and bite prisoners, death threats and sexual abuse.

Jameelah and her family were freed in July 2004 without any charges brought against them.

-- BERNAMA

Gitmo was hell on earth

IN 2001, a Sudanese journalist was about to cross the border into Afghanistan when he was arrested by the United States military in Pakistan and detained as an “enemy combatant” in Guantanamo Bay.
Sami Al Hajj was the only journalist ever held at the notorious prison for seven years and was never charged.
Currently, the 40-year-old heads the newly-formed public liberties and human rights department of the Al-Jazeera television network.

At the Criminalise War Conference and War Crimes Tribunal 2009, he shared the trauma and torture he underwent, stripped naked and fed with a tube while locked up in Guantanamo.
“I was arrested without any mercy, the US army suspected me to be a journalist who wanted to interview
Osama bin Laden. They did not bother to hear the truth,” said Sami, adding that detainees from all over the world, including Bosnia and Indonesia, were brought to Guantanamo.

The detainees were not allowed to contact their families, neither were they told why they were held.
“The worst part is, we did not know the time for Ramadan fasting, prayer or festive celebration, including Hari Raya,” said Sami, who was a cameramen-turned-journalist.
He said the US army also had no respect for other religions, adding that its personnel stepped on the Quran and threw the holy book into the toilet bowl.

“If the detainees were sick or injured, they were not sent for any medical treatment but were left behind until the injury became serious and some of them got their legs cut from the ankle,” said Sami.
He said the media had to play their role and deliver fair stories, especially on Guantanamo and the war to let the public know the real situation.

Sami served as cameraman for Al-Jazeera since 2000, before he was promoted to journalist.
“Through this conference, I hope Malaysia can set a platform to find a solution to combat war, and educate
the public and the media. I do hope Tun Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) can help to voice out at the international
level to stop war,” he said.
The four-day conference was launched yesterday by former prime minister Dr Mahathir, who is also the Perdana Global Peace Organisation chairman


Bernama
Friday, October 30th, 2009 06:08:00

Dr M champions anti-war movement

War is a crime and it is not fair to take away the life and security of innocent people in another country in the interest of security in your own country.” Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
WHY is it that the murder of one man is considered a criminal act whereas the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people commited in wars, is not considered so?

That was the question posed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad yesterday during a press conference to highlight the upcoming War Criminal Conference and Exhibition at Putra World Trade Centre from Oct 28 – 31.
The conference, joint ly organised by Perdana Global Peace Organisation (PGPO) and Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW), aims to expose the atrocities and injustices of war - in hopes that people will realise that war is not a solution, but a crime.

This is a matter close to the heart of the former Prime Minister, who has lived through the Japanese Occupation and seen the ugliness of war for himself. He recalled being horrified by the case of a British soldier who was bayoneted to death by Japanese soldiers and kicked into the Kedah river.

Citing the abolishment of slavery as an example, Dr Mahathir, keynote speaker at the conference, expressed belief that war can be eradicated one day even if it takes years to accomplish.

“Just because I cannot see the result does not mean I must stop trying. I would like to make people realise war is about killing and wounding a lot of people. With every one person killed, probably four others are critically wounded, losing limbs and ending up crippled for the rest of their lives.”
He said it was not fair to take away the the life and security of innocent people in another country in the interest of security in your own country.

“We hope this message will be carried throughout this country and internationally. We have built up a network around the world in our efforts to make war a crime.”
Until such a time, Dr Mahathir said: “We are not civilised. If we think killing people is the way to solve problems, then we are not civilised.”

In condemning the war on Iraq, Dr Mahathir stressed that he was not trying to attack the Western powers — but Western powers seem to be breaking the peace in the interest of their own security.
He stressed that people who deliberately go to war should be regarded as criminals and be taken to court.
More often than not, he said, if such people were taken to court - it would be in a court set up by the ‘winners’ to punish the ‘losers. He pointed out this was not just - as the victor may not be the righteous but often the country with more power, technology and money.
Dr Mahathir also said war was an excuse for certain countries to sustain its weapons development industry in a “military industrial complex” which has become a monster.

The conference has an impressive lineup of speakers and will feature testimonies from several Iraqi torture
victims so that their stories can be heard. It will also feature an exhibition to show the brutality and inhumanity of war.
“It may take years but we need to make a start.” Dr Mahathir said this was where the media, NGOs and the
internet could spread the message and create awareness.

When asked what he sees as an alternative to war Dr Mahathir cited former US president Richard Nixon’s ‘Ping Pong diplomacy’ — where matters are resolved through negotiations.
He said money saved from stopping weapons production could be channelled to better use — such as HIV
research or the eradication of poverty.


Malay Mail
Darshini Kandasamy
Friday, October 23rd, 2009 08:07:00

Commission and tribunal to hear Iraq war crimes

KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 27. 2009): A commission and tribunal will convene on Friday and Saturday to hear the testimonies of two Guantanamo Bay detainees in an effort to bring Iraq war perpetrators to justice.

They will hear the experiences of a Sudanese reporter and a Briton who were detained without trial in Guantanamo Bay.
The commission and tribunal will be held at Putra World Trade Centre.

War Criminal Conference and Exhibition keynote speaker and former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said today the commission will also deliberate on the affidavits of other Iraq war victims that have been submitted to the commission.
"International institutions and the courts established by the United Nations charter have done nothing in dealing with war crimes," he told reporters.

"Even the powerful nations like the United States and the United Kingdom have done nothing."
Mahathir said the commission will seek a detailed account of the experiences and will adjourn to consider the evidence.
Once it reaches a consensus that there are cases to be heard by the tribunal, the plaintiffs will elucidate their experiences again to the tribunal.

The tribunal will decide on the same day whether certain individuals should be charged with the crimes.
"Having decided that, we have to give two months for the people to be informed and after the minimum two-month period, the tribunal will decide when the trial will be held," Mahathir said.

He said Malaysian lawyers will represent the prosecution in the tribunal.
The members of the commission and tribunal are international and local personalities but he did not name them.
Asked the laws that will be used to prosecute those found to commit war crimes, he said the tribunal will utilise international laws such as those practised by the United Nations.

"We are going to use the same law to point out to them that if you will not use the law against these criminals, then we are going to do it," he said.
Although the tribunal cannot arrest and imprison the indifviduals as they would be tried in absentia, Mahathir said there are other ways to enforce the sentence.
"We can campaign against these people to not be accepted in any society or country," he said.
"Beyond this, we want to encourage democratic countries to try and ensure that candidates for the legislative council will be those that are anti-war supporters."

The commission and the tribunal are an extension of the War Criminal Conference and Exhibition, organised by the Perdana Global Peace organisation and Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War.
The conference and exhibition, which are being held from tomorrow to Saturday at Dewan Merdeka, Putra World Trade Centre, hope to create awareness among the public that war is a crime.

Meena L. Ramadas , Sun Daily

Ostracise war architects, says Tun Mahathir

Sin Chew Jit Poh

2009-10-28 18:15
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 28 (Bernama) -- Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today urged the international community to ostracise those who create war as a way to punish them.

"These people who have created war and killed so many people should be regarded as criminals, the people should not associate with them and should avoid them. Countries should take the same step," he told reporters after delivering a keynote address at the "Criminalise War Conference and War Crimes Tribunal 2009" here.
He said as an example, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who visited Sabah on August, should not be allowed to come to Malaysia because he could also be regarded a war criminal.

"We know he was in Sabah for holiday but he was actually invited to give a talk on justice, what does he know about justice? It is disgraceful that we should allow such a person to come to Malaysia and to talk about justice, it is ridiculous," he said.
Dr Mahathir had called Blair a war criminal for his role in supporting the United States in the invasion of Iraq.
The outspoken Dr Mahathir, who is also chairman of the Perdana Global Peace Organisation, said people including the leaders who launched wars should to be held accountable for the deaths and destruction resulting from their decision.
"It does not matter whether the aggressors win or not, they must be regarded as guilty and their leaders must be tried and punished, punished severely. Only this would deter the aggressive from resorting to war," he said
When asked on why he focused on the U.S as the main target, Dr Mahathir said the country was the major player in launching the war in Iraq.

"In Iraq, the Americans are the principal players, they are the ones who are arresting people and detaining them for years and years, torturing them," he said. Dr Mahathir said the media can play a big role in making people realise that war was a crime and to tell the truth about war and killings.

"But the international media will not do so because for them, war is interesting. The war is nice because you can have a lots of picture, even can become a brave reporter to go into the war zone.
"War is much more interesting to the media, but I hope good sense will prevail in the media especially the eastern media not the western media," he said.

Earlier in his speech, Mahathir said the quest for the most powerful weapon should really be over as war should no longer be an option in the settlement of disputes between nations.

"Unfortunately, these great nuclear powers are still developing, testing and producing more nuclear weapons. They talk of safe nuclear bombs, of small nuclear bombs and tactical nuclear bombs.

"Already they are using depleted uranium in their bombs and missiles which are causing diseases like cancer to spread among hundreds of thousands who had survived their attacks," he said.


MySinchew 2009.10.28

REFLECTING ON THE LAW

A tribunal of conscience

REFLECTING ON THE LAW
By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI

Regardless of size or power, no country or national leader is exempt
from international humanitarian law.

ON Saturday Oct 31, the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (KLWCT) heard
the opening arguments from the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission
(KLWCC) about war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Commission submitted on many grave issues of international law of
war and of humanitarian law, arising out of the invasion of
Afgha nistan in 2001 and the conquest of Iraq in 2003 by the United
States and its allies.

There are well documented allegations that the invading armies used
banned weapons of mass destruction, bombed civilian areas and
committed mass murders. There were kidnappings, torture, racial and
religious profiling and many other acts of savagery and lawlessness
that satisfy the legal definitions of war crimes, genocide and crimes
against humanity.

Furthermore, in a show of invincibility and impunity, then US
President George W. Bush, by a White House Memorandum of Feb 7, 2002
exempted his nation from the binding provisions of the much-venerated
Geneva Conventions, excluding (suspected) al-Qaeda and Taliban
detainees from the Conventions’ protection.

The carnage in Afghanistan and Iraq continues but the Western world
largely remains silent. Inter national institutions like the UN
Security Council, the World Court and the International Criminal Court
(ICC) look the other way.

It is in this context that in 2005, the KL-based Perdana Global Peace
Forum hosted a number of international consultations bringing together
legal luminaries from around the world. This resulted in the launching
of the Kuala Lumpur Declaration to Criminalise War.

A War Crimes Commission was appointed to investigate allegations of
brutality and to gather evidence. A War Crimes Court was set up.

The Commission took two-and-a-half years to trace and interview
victims, gather evidence and research the law. Last Saturday, when the
Commission submitted its case to the seven-judge Tribunal, two
preliminary issues came up for adjudication.

First, does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the cases? Second,
can a head of state or government unilaterally exempt itself from any
international treaty or convention (such as the Geneva Conventions)
duly ratified by the state without first abrogating the relevant
treaty or convention?

On both issues the Tribunal gave unanimous opinions. The Tribunal held
that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate on war crimes in Iraq because
of the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal. Its
proceedings were also inspired by previous precedents of People’s
Tribunals, e.g. the Sir Bertrand Russell Tribunal in relation to US
War Crimes in Vietnam, the Tokyo Tribunal on Afghanistan and the
Turkish Tribunal in relation to Iraq.

The KL proceedings are inspired by the noble principle that wherever
there is a right there must be a remedy. The families of the 650,000
innocents slaughtered in Iraq in the last five years, the thousands
more who had been tortured and the millions more who have been
displaced have no remedy in national or international courts.

Their country is still under brutal occupation and it is inconceivable
that any Iraqi court will prosecute members of the occupation force
for war crimes. US courts have no jurisdiction in Iraq and some US
judges have even feigned helplessness in relation to torture and
unlawful detentions in US-controlled concentration camps in Guantanamo
Bay.

The ICC has been approached with 240 complaints. Its chief prosecutor,
a European, has most amazingly ruled that the complaints do not have
“sufficient gravity” to merit prosecution!

The Rome Statute that created the ICC has a number of flaws that
prevent the horrendous war crimes, the genocide, the crimes against
humanity and the crime of aggression from being prosecuted.

First, the United States did not ratify the Rome Statute. As such, US
politicians and generals are largely exempt from the jurisdiction of
the ICC.

British and Australian citizens belong to a ratifying state, and as
such are subject to the ICC’s jurisdiction but are being shielded by
the ICC prosecutor because in his opinion their crimes of complicity
lack sufficient gravity!

Second, for a crime to be prosecuted before the ICC, it must be
committed on the territories of a member state of the ICC. Iraq and
Afghanistan are not parties to the ICC Treaty and the bestialities
committed there are, therefore, exempt from the ICC’s jurisdiction.

Third, the UN Security Council has the power to refer a non-signatory
to the ICC (as it did for Darfur). But due to its geopolitical, racial
and religious bias, the UNSC will not refer US, British, Polish,
Italian or Australian citizens to the ICC.

Fourth, the ICC can investigate a case only if national courts fail or
are unable to investigate a case. In the United States and Britain,
only low-level soldiers have been prosecuted. The fact that the orders
came right from the top is being ignored by the international legal
system.

The Tribunal was also unanimous in holding that over the last 50
years, international humanitarian law has developed to the point that
no head of state or nation can unilaterally renounce it.

If there is a treaty, it is binding. Even if a nation is not a
signatory to a treaty or claims to revoke it, it is still bound by a
higher customary international law that is universal and that cannot
be disowned.

National sovereignty is no more the absolutist concept it was in the
Middle Ages. Today, sovereignty is a shield against foreign
aggression.

It cannot be used as a sword against one’s own people or the people of
other nations. No nation can legislate to legalise wars, conquer
territories, enslave populations or commit genocide, torture or crimes
against humanity.

In the case of former president Bush there was an additional factor:
in the United States, treaties are part of the law of the land.

The US president has no authority to abrogate the law of his country.
Therefore, Bush’s memorandum exempting the United States from the
binding rules of the Geneva Convention had no force in law.

The Tribunal held that in relation to crimes against humanitarian law,
the status of a head of state does not constitute a defence. Nor is it
a defence to submit that one was acting under the orders of a
superior; this is the law since the Nuremberg Trials.

The lifting of immunity and the principle of individual criminal
respon sibility are now embodied in a plethora of international laws
and decisions. These include the UN General Assembly Resolution 95(1)
of Dec 11, 1946; Article 13 of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the
Peace and Security of Mankind (1991); UN Document No. S/25704 (1993);
and Article 27 of the Rome Statute. The Tribunal has just begun its
work. The road ahead is long and painful.

What is important is that there is a Malaysian initiative to remind
the world that some rules of civilised behaviour bind all nations of
the world, big and small. No nation of the world, no matter how
powerful, can exempt its officials from the long arm of international
humanitarian law.

SPEECH BY TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD - Criminalise War Conference - 28th October 2009

SPEECH BY TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD AT THE CRIMINALISE WAR CONFERENCE AND WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL 2009 AT PUTRA WORLD TRADE CENTER, KUALA LUMPUR ON WEDNESDAY, 28 OCTOBER 2009

WAR AND CRIME


1. As one of the convenors of this conference on the Criminalisation of War, I must express my appreciation for the number of people who have shown enough interest to attend it.

2. I hope and pray that we can take yet another step towards a war-free world, toward making war no longer a solution for disputes between nations, by making it into a crime instead, making those who resort to aggressive war as criminals who must be punished for the crime of the mass killing of people, which is what war is about. If the killing of one person is murder, a crime deserving of the most severe punishment, why must we regard the mass killing of people as legitimate and proper? There is something wrong in a creed that regards the killing of one person as different from the killing of people in their thousands and millions of people. The thousands and millions are made up of single individuals in the final analysis. The mass killing in war cannot be regarded as anything other than the mass murder of individuals who make up the masses. Since individuals are being killed, the fact that the individuals are killed together doesn’t alter the fact that individuals are killed and therefore the killing must still be regarded as the killing of individuals which constitutes murder. And those responsible for the murder of these individuals must therefore be murderers and must be regarded as criminals and punished accordingly.

3. But the vast majority in this so-called modern civilization of ours still distinguish between the killing of an individual and the killings of millions of individuals in the situation called war.

4. One very intelligent individual when asked to join the movement to make war a crime, replied that we have had war for 7000 years and therefore we must accept wars. It is mind-boggling that there can be intelligent people who believe that since something had been done for 7000 years, then it should continue to be done.

5. There must be a lot of things which we have been doing for thousands years which we don’t believe should be done now. Abuse of human rights in its various forms are now not acceptable. Discrimination against women, child labour, public execution, the gibbets, torture, slavery etc etc are no longer acceptable now.

6. It is admitted that there are places where some of these practices are still carried out but generally the civilized world rejects them even if they had been common for thousands of years of their history.

7. So why cannot we reject war? Why cannot we make war a crime, a dastardly crime deserving of the most severe punishment.

8. Because we do not regard war as a crime, the mass killings have not stopped. In the 1st and 2nd World Wars 70 million people were killed. But the world today accepts this with equanimity. They were wars, so the killings were justified.

9. And today we are still seeing people being killed in wars, as the great military powers resort to it to resolve any problem, big and small which they may have with other countries, especially those which are no match for them.

10. 7000 years ago the number of people killed in any war must be very small. This is because the capacity to kill was limited. The weapons would be wooden clubs or sharpened sticks.

11. Then the more “civilized” began to invent new weapons. From stick to stone to ever harder metals. Knives, swords were invented. Sharp edges or points made killing much easier.

12. Bows and arrows followed, extending the reach of the weapons of war. The Chinese invented gun-power but not for killing. Mostly the explosives were for chasing imaginary devils and dragons, which threaten to swallow the moon.

13. The Europeans came across the gun-powder and immediately thought that it could be used in war for throwing projectiles a longer distance than the catapult or bows and arrows.

14. From then on the search for ways to hurl weapons further and further has never stopped. Apart from that the killing power of the missiles had been enhanced continually.

15. Now we can literally throw, shoot or rocket the most destructive weapons right round the globe and beyond. We now have the capacity to literally blow up this whole planet and every living soul on it.

16. The search for the most powerful weapon should really be over. Everyone should now know that a war can actually exterminate the whole of humanity, including the very people who use the nuclear weapons. Using it would amount to mass suicide. Both the victors and their victims would perish. War would therefore be totally counter productive.

17. Imagine a nuclear war with bombs and nuclear warheads being hurled at each other. If there are survivors, radiation would kill them all.

18. Truly war should no longer be an option in the settlement of disputes between nations.

19. But the fact is that the powerful nations of the world were not affected by the devastations in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Mostly they see nuclear weapons as deterrents against attacks against themselves. Far from outlawing nuclear weapons as they did with poison gas, they began developing ever more powerful nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

20. As a result the United States and Soviet Union, France and Britain rushed to acquire the knowledge and the capacities to produce nuclear weapons. During the Cold War years the United States and USSR built up huge arsenals of nuclear warheads. Between them there are more than 20,000 nuclear warheads sufficient to destroy the whole world many times over. China, France and Britain also have huge arsenals of nuclear weapons.

21. Germany and Japan are not allowed to posses nuclear weapons. But Israel, India and Pakistan have nuclear capabilities.

22. There seems to be some basis for the idea of nuclear deterrents. Although the United States appeared ready to use nuclear weapons during the Cuban crisis, in the end it decided to compromise by removing its nuclear missiles in Turkey which was obviously threatening Russia.

23. It was fortunate that both the leaders of these two nuclear powers came to their senses in time. Otherwise the world would have been devastated by nuclear weapons in the arsenals of these two countries.

24. We cannot afford to have this kind of brinkmanship. We cannot live in fear of one or two persons destroying this world and its 6 ½ billion people. We cannot allow our civilization to be terminated by some crazy President.

25. A nuclear deterrent is just too risky and too very dangerous. Maybe it was this thought that prompted the idea of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

26. But all these international resolutions were non-starters because the big nuclear powers blatantly ignored them. As a result we see other countries developing their own nuclear weapons. There is much ado about these countries having nuclear weapons. These countries would be mad to use the few primitive nuclear weapons that they have. Should they do so the powerful nuclear countries would wipe out these countries from the surface of this earth?

27. The real danger is still from the rich and powerful nuclear powers. It is they who must reduce and finally eliminate their nuclear weapons if they want to have the moral ground to enforce the non-proliferation treaty.

28. Unfortunately these great nuclear powers are still developing, testing and producing more nuclear weapons. They talk of safe nuclear bombs, of small nuclear bombs and tactical nuclear bombs. Already they are using depleted uranium in their bombs and missiles which are causing diseases like cancer to spread among hundreds of thousands who had survived their attacks.

29. But they are not stopping there. They have developed bombs to penetrate deep into the ground so that bomb shelters buried deep in the ground would provide no protection.

30. New weapons are being developed as the industrialists see profits in the research and developments of weapons. In this their military has cooperated and played a big role as they would be the only organisation to need and use the new weapons.

31. The industrialists not only produce sophisticated new weapons but they invariably follow up with the defences against the weapons they have developed. Nations, rich and poor have been forced to buy and equip their armed forces with these offensive and defensive weapons or systems.

32. After this the industrialists would come up with a new weapon that could penetrate the defence system they had sold previously.

33. Should the country refuse to buy these the producers would hint at offering the weapons to the potential enemy of the country. Fearing the enemy would posses the weapon, which could penetrate its defence, the country would be forced to acquire the new weapon.

34. Then the industrialist would come up with a new defence system against the weapon they had just sold. Again the buyer would be forced to buy this defence system.

35. And so this would go on endlessly. The industrialist would wax rich even if the weapons would not be used. This is not my imagination. It is happening now even to Malaysia. We have to buy expensive aircrafts and submarines although we don’t expect to go to war with anyone. And we have to upgrade them every now and then.

36. The weapons merchants would try to create an arms race between neighbouring countries or rival countries in order to be able to sell the arms that they produce. The arms race would create fear and tension between countries, yet fearing mutual destruction few of these countries would go to war with each other. Not being used the expenditure on arms would be wasted. The urge to try out these weapons in real life situation would be irresistible. And so proxy wars and wars against weaker nations would be started.

37. But the countries of the world never learn. They would upgrade their weaponry continuously even though they know they have very seldom any use for the weapons.

38. Along the way the industrialists and the military have developed a symbiotic relation. Always desirous of becoming more and more powerful, the military would build a case for the need to develop new weapons against the possibility of attacks by potential enemies whose weapon might be superior.

39. Unable to recoup the money spent the industrialist marketed their weapons to the world. They work hand-in-hand with their Governments, the military, the banks and the media. Together they and their sales talk would be irresistible.

40. The weapons trade has developed and grown until it has become a big part of world trade. The effect of this trade is to impoverish countries which have to continually upgrade their weaponry at considerable cost and the arms race which invariably follows as neighbouring countries compete in upgrading their weaponry.

41. The weapons producing countries are still spending trillions of dollars conceiving, inventing, developing, testing and producing weapons. This is being done at the behest of the military, but often the defence industries would come up with frightening scenarios which could be handled by their latest multimillion dollar weapons. It is not the defence of their countries which they care about. It is the money to be made.

42. Any new scientific discoveries would be thoroughly studied for use in weapons. Thus firecrackers, noxious gases, bacteria, chemicals, metal alloys, new metals, lasers, radio waves, electrical and electronic devices, composite material, carbon fibres, and just about anything would be examined, analysed, studied, tested for applications in weapons, to make the killing of people more efficient.

43. Almost without exception some application would be found for use in killing people. Radio control toy cars and model aeroplanes have now evolved into remotely controlled, unmanned aircrafts, land and sea vehicles to deliver bombs and other explosives and even biological and chemical weapons without risking the lives of the attackers.

44. The technology for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) which could carry cameras and radio transmitters has now been applied to full-size military aircrafts. The pilot would be on the ground facing their numerous consoles, monitoring and controlling the aircrafts by radio, programming their flight and releasing their murderous cargo of bombs or firing their rockets. The pilots are not exposed to any danger by the bombs and rockets they fire from hundreds and thousands of miles away. Without the risk of being killed the urge to war and kill is enhanced.

45. The pilot of Enola Gay had to fly his plane thousands of miles to be over Hiroshima city in order to drop his beloved Little Boy to kill 100,000 people and destroy the whole city. He ran the risk of being attacked by enemy fighters and being shot down and killed.

46. The modern pilot can now fly the more sophisticated radio controlled bombers from his base in his country to drop the atomic bomb precisely over the target city. 100,000 people or even a million people would be killed and the whole city totally destroyed, just as was done by the pilot of Enola Gay. And all this can now be done between games of cards or watching a football match over a glass of beer. The pilot risks nothing at all yet the men, women, children, the aged, the sick and the disabled would all be killed and many thousands more wounded, losing their arms and legs, having their abdomen ripped open and their guts spilling on the ground.

47. Hospitals, schools, markets, shopping complexes and buildings of all kinds would be pulverised. Fires would start and a fire-storm would suck up all the oxygen, suffocating the survivors.

48. Even if no nuclear material is used, the power of modern explosives and the size of the mega bombs – each weighing more than 15 tons would do enough damage to devastate whole cities.

49. There would be nowhere to hide. The new bombs and rockets have the ability to pierce through earth and concrete to great depths before exploding so that those in bomb shelters would no longer be safe, be protected from the new weapons.

50. Noxious gases and radiation would kill rescuers, and would be blown for hundreds of miles, killing and spreading diseases of all kinds.

51. The great military powers have all these destructive weapons and delivery systems. They know that they don’t need huge armies to launch their attacks. All they need is a few men manning the consoles and they can literally wipe out hundreds of thousands or millions even of people, devastate whole countries and render them no longer habitable.

52. They have this capacity, they have this power. But they are still researching, developing, testing and producing more and more lethal weapons, gleefully predicting their use in future wars. They cannot conceive of a world at peace.

53. They believe that only they can be trusted with these weapons. The world need not fear them. They are reasonable people, caring people whose respect for human lives cannot be questioned. But are they?

54. They may not use the nuclear weapons and other WMD in their possession yet. But knowing that they have and knowing that no one would dare to attack them, they have shown their willingness to provoke weaker nations and to attack them with their so-called conventional but no less destructive weapons.

55. They claim their use of the power to kill people indiscriminately as making the world safe for democracy. They seem to think that only they as democrats have a right to live, to be safe and secure. It is right and proper to make those who are not democratic unsafe and insecure. It is proper to kill other people in order to promote democracy.

56. They fail to appreciate that the people who are not democratic are also people, are human beings whose right to live are no less than those who are democratic. The people who would be killed are innocent of any crimes against the democratic people, even if their leaders may be dictators. To deprive them of their rights to life must constitute as heinous a crime as the deprivation of the rights to life of innocent democrats.

57. Human rights is not for democratic people only. Every human life is sacred; every person has a right to live. Those who say that only democrats have a right to live in security are no less authoritarian than the dictators the democrats condemn. In fact in many cases authoritarian leaders or rulers have given their people a better life than some democrats whose countries have been made unstable and insecure because of the weaknesses and uncertainties of the democratic systems.

58. What I am saying is sacrilege of course. But if we look at recent events we would not fail to notice that it is the democratic countries which have been quick to use violence, who have violated international laws and shown disregard for the very human rights they so strongly advocated. It is they who resort to wars, to killing people to achieve their national agenda. Truly they are hypocrites.

59. Irrespective of whether the warmongers are democrats or not, we must regard war as a crime. No matter how just may the cause be, wars of aggression must still be regarded as crimes, crimes on a grand scale for that is what war means.

60. I am aware that in struggling to make war a crime we are calling for a radical change in the human mindset and value system. War had been with us since prehistoric times. Whenever human communities came into conflict with each other, they would resort to what we call “war” to resolve their conflicts i.e. they would kill each other so that one of the other of them would be defeated or cease to exist.

61. The primitive people of the past knew no other way but to kill and exterminate the opponents.

62. But today we claim to be no longer primitive. We claim to be civilise. We look upon killing as a heinous crime. We want every country to uphold human rights and the Rule of Law.

63. Besides today the population of the world is ten or more times bigger than the primitive populations of just a few centuries ago. Modern wars kill vast numbers of people. In the two World Wars 70 million people were killed. The number of seriously wounded and maimed for life is countless. And the devastation wrought is beyond imagination as whole cities were wiped out.

64. In the wars of the past, battles were fought on battle fields. The people killed were largely soldiers who had been trained to kill and were equipped to defend themselves.

65. Today everyone, combatants and non-combatants, male or female, the old, the young, the children and the new born, the sick and the incapacitated – all of them would be killed and wounded. They have no means to defend themselves.

66. They may not seek shelter underground even because diabolical new bombs have been designed to penetrate deep into the earth, to pierce concrete and to explode and to destroy the shelter and all in it.

67. Besides killing everyone, the whole country would be devastated, reduced to rubble. Water pipes, barrage and dams, power lines, and power generating plants would all be destroyed.

68. Those who survive the bombs and the missiles would have no food and water, no electricity, no toilets and no shelter of any kind. Disease would spread to decimate more of the survivors.

69. Truly modern war is total war sparing nothing and no one. Our capacities for killing and destroying have passed the limit that the world and its population can bear. We are now capable of wiping out the whole human race and render this planet uninhabitable.

70. Even if the war is limited i.e. confined to a pair of countries or region, it would still be inhuman as in most instances the aggressors would have such superior capacities to kill and destroy that gross injustice would be done. The weaker countries would not be able to defend themselves. Frequently they would be the only one to suffer while the aggressors continue to live in peace and security.

71. And when the war ends with victory for the powerful, only the vanquished would be blamed and punished. The victors would demand reparations although the vanquished had suffered more.

72. There is a need, to uphold justice, a need for the people including the leaders who launch the wars to be made accountable for the death and destruction resulting from their decision, their instruction and their command. It does not matter whether the aggressors win or not. They must be regarded as guilty and their leaders must be tried and punished, punished severely. Only this would deter the aggressive from resorting to war.

73. The United Nations was set up by the victors of 60 years ago and they still control and direct the Untied Nations today. Even the courts are under the control of the victors, in particular the veto powers.

74. For so long as the United Nations and its agencies are under the direction of the victors of 60 years ago, we cannot expect fairness and justice from them for the crimes of killing people in wars.

75. We can only expect fairness and justice if the agencies, in particular the Security Council and the international courts are made up of truly neutral people with no stake in the matters being decided. In particular the courts must be free and independent and must hear all complaints by both the victors and the vanquished without fear or favour.

76. Because we are not going to see such an independent court in the foreseeable future PGPO (the Perdana Global Peace Organization) has taken the initiative to set up a tribunal. We may be accused of being biased but we find reluctance on the part of neutralists to participate in our initiative. There is evidence that even those who are neutral fear retaliation by the powerful.

77. Since we cannot wait for the neutralists the tribunal we have set up is made up of judges who have been trusted to be impartial, fair and just. They will act in accordance with the rules and regulations which have been drawn up and be subjected to international laws as well as natural justice.

78. If the accused persons fail to present themselves then they may appoint counsel to represent them or failing that we will appoint counsels for them.

79. The proceedings of the courts will, as far as possible follow the usual court procedures under the British Common Law System.

80. The Commissioners will determine whether there is a case to be heard. Only if they find that there is will they submit their findings to the Tribunal. Then the victims or their proxies and representatives will present their cases.

81. The rest is up to the tribunal.

82. We may not be able to carry out the sentence passed by the Tribunal. But we hope Governments and NGO’s world wide will take note and try to make the punishment meaningful at least by ostracising the guilty ones.

83. We seek moral force as physical force will not be available to us. But the important thing is to make people everywhere appreciate the horrors of war and the criminal who without fear of any retribution have so carelessly issued orders for hundreds of thousands of innocent people to be killed, many to be tortured and for whole countries to be devastated.

84. We believe that eventually the peoples of the world will come to accept that war is a crime and will condemn the warmongers and regard them as criminals. And when this happens we may see the world becoming a more peaceful place.

85. That is our hope. It will take time for the mindset of the denizens of this planet to change with regard to the nature of war.

86. We may not see this happen in our lifetime, at least for most of us.

87. But the fact that we are not likely to see it in our lifetime must not stop us from this noble struggle. As Confucius said, a journey of thousand miles begins with the fist step. Without taking the first step the journey will never be made at all.

88. What we are doing is to take that first step.

89. God willing other steps will follow. Man must come to their senses some day. It will be a journey worth starting even if it takes a thousand years.

90. May God give us strength to struggle to eliminate the killing of people in the quest for solutions to human conflicts.

91. May Allah help us make war a crime, the worse crime that the human race can be guilty of.

PRESS RELEASE BY PERDANA GLOBAL PEACE ORGANISATION (PGPO)

Efforts to raise Fund for Gaza at this stage is with the specific intention of buying vessels to transport humanitarian aid to Gaza which is currently in a choke hold by the Tel Aviv regime’s illegal blockade.

The blockade has been imposed since 2006. Then in late 2008 through January this year, the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) broke the ceasefire and launched a military aggression on Gaza causing over 1400 deaths and massive destruction to homes and buildings.

Following immense international pressure and its inability to subjugate the valiant Palestinians, the Israeli Government ended the aggression.
However, the blockade continued and these resulted in a stranglehold on Gaza, depriving the devastated population of medicine, food and materials to rebuild their homes.

If the act of war by the IDF earlier this year saw lives of thousands of Palestinians, mostly civilians including children lost within the short period of time, this blockade is equally cruel if not worst.
The children, the sick and elderly are subjected to a slow but sure death.
The ongoing genocide of the people of Palestine in Gaza being committed silently by the Tel Aviv regime is largely ignored by the international community either due to their lack of awareness or not wanting to see the ugliness.

But a group of concerned people from the Free Gaza Movement was not about to let the injustices and cruelties by the Israeli Government inflicted on the people of Gaza go unnoticed.

Boarding small boats which they could barely afford to buy, the Free Gaza Movement embarked on its first trip to Gaza from Larnaca, Cyprus on August 2008 carrying much needed aid.

To the Free Gaza members, their efforts were not merely to provide aid to the people in Gaza but more than that, it was an act of defiance, a committed protest to break the illegal siege.

To them, the siege needs to be challenged and if enough people came forward, the siege will be broken.

And that is what the Palestinians want – their freedom and not charity.
Since their first trip, the Free Gaza Movement had launched seven other trips and the last two was aggressively challenged by the Israeli authorities.

The sixth trip which had US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney was rammed by the Israeli Navy while en route to Gaza on December 2008.
Recently on June 2009, McKinney together with Nobel Laureatte Mairead Macguire were on board the eighth trip when their vessel was stopped by the Israeli forces in international waters while again en route to Gaza to send aid and supply.

Together with other members of Free Gaza, McKinney and Macguire were taken to an Israeli prison before being deported.

KLFCW & PGPO chairman Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who met Free Gaza leader Huwaida Arraf in Kuala Lumpur in early July was convinced that Malaysians should assist in the breaking of the siege on Gaza.

Dr Mahathir then went to Larnaca, Cyprus on July 16 to see for himself how the Free Gaza Movement had operated from the port and what kind of vessels they had in order to carry out their future trips to Gaza.

It was then decided that Dr Mahathir and PGPO will take up the efforts to raise funds to help purchase a 300-500 tonnes cargo ship to be used to transport aid to Gaza.

There is an urgency in raising the funds to enable the pruchase of the vessels. Winter is drawing near and the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza will worsen.

Dr Mahathir is hoping that the PGPO and the people of Malaysia will be able to raise enough funds to launch the vessels before winter hits the already depressed population.

Today marks the launching of the Fund for Gaza and all proceeds will be utilised towards purchasing the vessels and humanitarian aid for the Palestinians.

August 12, 2009


>>>

Feel free to donate:
Account Name: KLFCW (Gaza Fund)
Number: 5123 3430 6634
Bank : Maybank

Maybank Berhad
SECTION 14, PJ SSC
18A, Jalan 14/14,
46100 Petaling Jaya
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Malaysia

Swift Code: MBBEMYKL

or Send your cheque/Bank Draft/Money Order/Postal Order to:

Suite 2-4, Level 2, Tower Block Menara Milenium,
Jalan Damanlela Pusat Bandar Damansara,
50490 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.
Fax: +603 2094 2992
Email: info@criminalisewar.org

All donations are tax-exempt under S.44 Of The Income Tax Act 1967. Ref LHDN 01/35/42/51/179-6.6183 Government Gazette: 11643 Dated 30.08.2007

An Appeal to Free Gaza - A Profile of Courage - The Free Gaza Movement

- By Christopher and Matthias Chang (20/7/09)

Death creeps on you unexpectedly, sometimes like a thief in the night, sometimes it leaves a calling card, telling us that it is only weeks or months that we have left to make our arrangements and sometimes, it emerges as a savage disease that ravages your body.

The shock and pain lingers on and tried as hard as we can to feint composure and normality, the dark loneliness overwhelms us and we cry out in anger and in anguish - Why? Why now? Why in this way?

To love someone for so long and to see life slipping away is an unbearable burden. It is unfair. It is just not right. We turn back the pages of a life once shared. And it seems like only yesterday that the first word we learned to cherish, would forever linger in our lips – “mummy”.

We remind ourselves to be strong … there are just too many things to be said and yet cannot be said. We are lost for words. And as tears well in our eyes, we are consoled that at the very least, we have our time to say our goodbyes and to seek forgiveness. The final hour is yet to come.

But there are others who are less fortunate and we must not let our own grief and pain to cast a shadow over their plight and suffering – a lingering pain and anguish that seems never to go away, even after fifty long years.

We speak of death and crimes committed against the heroic Palestinian people.

The smell of blood, shed in vain lingers in the air everyday in Palestine.

A bullet splits the skull and a mother is left carrying a dead child in her arms.

An explosion flattens a tenement block but the mangled bodies of women and children beneath steel and rubble are mere statistics.

Homes, schools, hospitals and places of worship are destroyed with impunity with the latest weaponry supplied by the US to Israel but the world turns a blind eye to the atrocities. War Crimes Tribunals are quick to be established against third world tyrants but US and Israeli war criminals are beyond the reach of international law.

For over two years, the Palestinians in Gaza were starved of basic food and other necessities by a cruel and inhumane blockade imposed by Israel and tacitly supported by the US, the European Union and neighbouring countries of the Middle East.

Their cries for help and justice were rebuffed by the international community but the courage of two NGOs – Viva Palestina and The Free Gaza Movement have put to shame the double standards and hypocrisy of several leading member countries of the United Nations. Defying the brutal Israeli regime, the two organizations broke the siege and blockade of Gaza. But more need to be done, for the blockade of Gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe.

Viva Palestina succeeded in bringing two convoy of lorries laden with supplies through the Rafah Crossing, while the Free Gaza Movement since August 2008 and using only small boats and against all odds broke the sea blockade repeatedly.

Although the first five voyages successfully reached Gaza, the only international boats to do so since 1967, the last three attempts have been violently stopped by the Israeli military.

On one occasion their boat, Dignity was rammed by Israeli naval vessels and just recently on June 30, 2009 another boat, The Spirit of Humanity was illegally commandeered in international waters and the volunteers were forcefully arrested by Israeli commandos and incarcerated in prison for six days (some longer) for the alleged offence of intruding into Israel illegally!

Those unlawfully imprisoned included Nobel Laureate Mairead Maguire and former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. The cargo of medical supplies and children toys were confiscated.

Undeterred by these brutal actions of the Israeli military, the members of The Free Gaza Movement are determined to continue in their efforts to break the illegal siege of Gaza by sailing unarmed boats with human rights workers, journalists and parliamentarians, as well as much needed humanitarian and reconstruction supplies.

The courage and determination of the members of The Free Gaza Movement led by its chairperson, Huwaida Shapiro is exceptional and the only protection they have is the spotlight of world conscience and your unstinting support.

Last week, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and members of the Perdana Global Peace Organisation and the Kuala Lumpur Foundation To Criminalise War met with this incredible team of volunteers and pledge to assist them in their endeavours.

Their number one priority is to get more boats to break the siege of Gaza.

Without boats, supplies cannot get into Gaza.

Each boat costs €200,000 to €300,000 and they need to have at least 5 boats by yesterday.

Winter is coming soon and the Palestinians in Gaza need shelter, food and clothing. Time is of the essence.

We therefore appeal to all Malaysians to come forward to help the Palestinians.

You can help by:

1) Donating generously to acquire the boats to bring supplies to Gaza;

2) Be a volunteer to help the Free Gaza Movement;

3) Disseminate this appeal to as many people as possible;

4) To lobby your Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen and women to support this noble endeavour;

5) More importantly, to lobby the Malaysian Government, specifically the Prime Minister to finance the purchase of at the minimum one boat.


For further enquiries and clarification, contact the following:

Dr. Zulaiha Ismail at +6019-3843913

Mr. Ram Karthigasu at +6012-2270159

SPEECH BY TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD AT THE FORUM ON GAZA GENOCIDE: SOLUTION FOR PALESTINE LONDON ON 31 MARCH 2009

SPEECH BY
TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
AT
THE FORUM ON GAZA GENOCIDE:
SOLUTION FOR PALESTINE
LONDON
ON 31 MARCH 2009
---------------------




PREAMBLE


1. As co-host I would like to welcome everyone to this forum on the Gaza Genocide and the possible solution to the Palestinian problem. This is a forum on the rights of all Palestinians regardless of political affiliations. The internal politics of the Palestinian people is for them alone to resolve. Their humanitarian rights are the concern of the whole human race.

2. I know that many forums have been held recently and more will be held in the future concerning the injustice to and the sufferings of the Palestinian people under the brutal Israeli armed attacks and occupation over the last sixty years.

3. The recent wanton slaughter of innocent men, women and children in Gaza by Israel’s military, supported principally by the United States, Britain and the European Union is another sordid example of the brutality of the strong against the weak and illustrates also the double standards, hypocrisy and the failure by the international community to condemn the crimes committed by the most powerful military power in the Middle-East against the long suffering defenceless Palestinians.

4. Since the holocaust no one can criticise Israel without being labelled “anti-semite” or “anti-Jew”. To avoid such an accusation, I would like to invite you to consider an independent evaluation of the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding before us by a Jew.

5. I refer to the statements of the U.N. special rapporteur for human rights in occupied Palestinian territory, former Princeton University law professor Richard Falk, who is a Jew.

6. He has unreservedly called the devastation of Gaza "a crime against humanity" and "a flagrant and massive violation of international humanitarian law as laid down in Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention." He has even called for "the International Criminal Court to investigate the situation, and determine whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders responsible for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law."

7. While also condemning the actions of Hamas, Prof. Falk said that it cannot be cited as a justification for Israel’s “imposition of a collective punishment of a life-and-health threatening character on the people of Gaza, and should not distract the U.N. or international society from discharging their fundamental moral and legal duty to render protection to the Palestinian people. A recent study reports that 46 percent of all Gazan children suffer from acute anemia. There are reports that the sonic booms associated with Israeli over-flights have caused widespread deafness, especially among children. Gazan children need thousands of hearing aids. Malnutrition is extremely high in a number of different dimensions and affects 75 percent of Gazans. There are widespread mental disorders, especially among young people without the will to live. Over 50 percent of Gazan children under the age of 12 have been found to have no will to live."

8. This independent observation by a Jew should be enough to arouse our conscience, at the minimum to demand that all the relevant parties responsible for this despicable acts must be made accountable and brought before a special tribunal to answer for war crimes charges.

9. If the words of Mr Falk a Jew and a United Nations rapporteur are not enough, let me quote a report by AFP, headed “Israeli soldiers describe wanton killings of civilians”.

10. Datelined Jerusalem: the report said Israeli soldiers have described wanton killings of Palestinian civilians and destruction of property during the deadly 22-day Gaza Offensive, according to a journal published yesterday.

11. One soldier described the case of an Israeli sharpshooter who killed a Palestinian mother and her two children who had left their home on a path the troops had declared off limits, according to the journal of the Yitzhak Rabin pre-military academy.

12. The publication which quoted graduates of the colleges military preparation course, also cited the case of an elderly Palestinian woman killed as she was walking 100 meters from her home.

13. Soldiers also spoke of civilians being abused, acts of vandalism, of destruction of homes. – AFP.

14. There can be no more doubt of the brutality of the Israeli military in Gaza.

15. It is therefore most appropriate that this forum in London should deal with the injustice against the Palestinians which has its origins in Britain.

THE BALFOUR DECLARATION

16. We have short memories, and over the years the original perpetrators of this cruel injustice have been forgotten.

17. It is time that we revisit the history relating to the founding of Israel in 1948.

18. But before I do so may I remind everyone of the fundamental tenets of the English Common Law which says that: “Justice Must Not Only Be Done, It Must Be Seen To Be Done.”

19. How often has this been quoted and preached especially here in Britain. But has it always been upheld?

20. The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which followed World War II, called the waging of aggressive war and I quote, "essentially an evil thing... to initiate a war of aggression... is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

21. For centuries, Jews were much maligned in Europe and were persecuted viciously but strangely they had always found comfort and safe havens in Muslim countries.

22. Even Shakespeare caricatured the Jews in The Merchant of Venice in which Shylock, the vengeful money-lender came to be accepted as representative of the Jewish character. There is no such stories in the Muslim world.

23. But Shakespeare’s countrymen eventually decided to accept the Jews to the point when a Jew became the Prime Minister of England. The turnaround was complete when in 1917, the then British Foreign Secretary, Arthur James Balfour wrote the following letter to Lord Rothschild:

Foreign Office
November 2nd 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild:

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:

His majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours,
Arthur James Balfour (Emphasis added)

24. This infamous letter is now more commonly referred to as the Balfour Declaration.

25. From this Declaration, several facts are not and cannot be disputed as they have been expressly admitted by the then British Cabinet:

1) The entire land was known and recognised as Palestine;
2) There was already in existence in Palestine, non-Jewish communities. In fact they made up the majority;
3) It was the British Cabinet that approved the concept of a “national home” for the Jewish people and not the non-Jewish communities in Palestine who were not consulted;
4) Notwithstanding that Jews have been living in other countries, and have accrued political status and rights, the British Government deemed it fit and unilaterally decided that a Jewish national homeland be established in Palestine;
5) The letter was not addressed to a Head of State or a government but a representative of a mere organisation, the Zionist Federation.

26. I have stated earlier that Jews have been persecuted by the Europeans for centuries. Injustice had been inflicted upon the Jewish people.

27. But can such injustice be compensated by another injustice inflicted on another community, a community which had historically provided asylum for the persecuted Jews?

28. It does not look like Justice is being done.

29. On the contrary, Injustice has been done and worse still has been done blatantly in full view of the world. Equally blatantly the injustice is forcefully upheld, and insisted upon by the very people, the British, who had talked so much about justice and fair play.

30. In simple language, Palestine was stolen from the “non-Jewish communities” in Palestine and given to the minority Jewish community exclusively, to assuage the conscience of the Europeans. Despite British promise of the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities, these people were violently expelled from Palestine and forced to live in exile for the last 60 years with no right of return.

31. Can we accept that this is the way for the Europeans to atone for their sins against the Jewish people?

32. The concept of mandated territory was proposed by the victors in the First World War. The understanding was that when the time came for the mandate to end, the original people of the territory would regain their land. There was no provision for the holders of this mandate to do just what they like to the territory concerned.

33. But it was the British who proposed that the mandated territory of Palestine be established as a national home of the Jewish people and not to the people indigenous to the territory.

34. It was an ill-thought out decision for the British Government must know that taking other people’s land to give to other people is wrong, very wrong. They must know it would lead to violence. They must know that even when they occupied their colonial territories, they had been forced to give them up to the indigenous people.

35. Palestine was not a piece of real estate owned by Lord Balfour or the British Government, to be given away at their whims and fancy!

36. There is no legal basis whatsoever, be it in English Common Law or the existing international laws for this act.

37. It was expropriation without parallel in history! What would the British people think if Surrey in England were to be offered by France or America as a homeland for the Jews, the Kurds or the Tamils of Sri Lanka and the people of Surrey be expelled.

38. Chaim Weizman, was very clear as to the objective of the Zionist Federation. He said and I quote:

39. “By a Jewish National Home, I mean the creation of such conditions that as a country is developed, we can pour in a considerable number of immigrants and finally establish such a society in Palestine that Palestine shall be Jewish as England is English, or America, American.”
(Emphasis Added)

40. In fact, it is very obvious that the establishment of Israel is nothing short of seizing native land from the native people in order to give to the aliens in all but name. This has been admitted by David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel who said, I quote


41. “There is no chance of an understanding with the Arabs unless we first reach an understanding with the English, by which we will become the preponderant force in Palestine. What can drive the Arabs to a mutual understanding with us? Facts … only after we manage to establish a great Jewish fact in this country. Only then will the precondition for discussion be met.”

42. Obviously a Jewish fact did not exist before. There was only a Jewish minority. They had to artificially create this fact.

43. Israel Zangwill, a prominent Zionist was more blunt in expressing the intentions of the Zionist Federation. He said and I quote:

44. “We must be prepared either to drive out by sword the Arab tribes in possession as our fathers land or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedans and accustomed for centuries to despise us…”

45. “If we wish to give a country to a people without a country, it is utter foolishness to allow it to be a country of two peoples. This can only cause trouble. The Jews will suffer and so will their neighbours. One of the two: a different place must be found either for the Jews or for their neighbours.” (Emphasis Added)

46. You may want to remind yourself that as a country with one people (Jews) the trouble that it has caused is horrendous. Ever since the country with one people was created there has been endless violence, conflicts and wars including the destruction of the World Trade Centre in New York and the acts of terrorism.

47. Lest I am accused of spreading the perception that all Jews hold the above views, let me say that there are many Jews who have condemned Zionism and the creation of Israel. In a letter dated September 21, 2003 to President George W. Bush, Torah True Jews Inc. wrote:

48. “… the ideology of Zionism is in utter opposition to our religion. We have been enjoined to be scrupulously loyal to the countries we reside in, and never seek to undertake to establish independent sovereignty in the Holy Land or anywhere throughout the world” unquote.

49. I urge the leaders of the Muslim community to acquaint itself with such forthright leaders of the Jewish community.

50. It would be remiss of me, not to mention the courageous work of Rabbi Cohen who has been spreading a similar message for and on behalf of Neturei Karta.
51. I would like to quote Rabbi Cohen’s speech given on the occasion of the Conference – “The Palestinian People’s Right of Return to their Homeland”, in Beirut, Lebanon from the 23rd to 25th February 2005.

52. Rabbi Cohen said, “I bring you today a short simple message from Orthodox Jewry. Zionism and Judaism are total opposites, incompatible and diametrically opposed. Zionists can in no way represent Jewry. Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism. It is in the light of this statement that I wish to put over to you today the Orthodox Jewish approach to the question of the 'Right of Return for the Palestinians'.

53. “Firstly, what is an orthodox Jew? An Orthodox Jew is a Jew who endeavours to live his life completely in accordance with the Jewish religion. The Jewish Religion absolutely forbids Zionism both on grounds of religious belief and on grounds of Jewish Religious values of humanitarianism as I hope to explain. This of course has a tremendous impact on the subject of this conference namely 'The Palestinian People's Right of Return’.

54. Rabbi Cohen continued, “Even if you see and hear on the media what appears to be Orthodox Jews supporting Zionism, rest assured, as I will explain, their approach is an aberration and a distortion of Judaism, an absolute departure from the teaching that has been handed down to us through the generations.

55. “Zionism has the ideal, and has always had the ideal, of imposing - let's face it - a 'sectarian' State over the heads of the Palestinians, the indigenous population. This has resulted in a terrible confrontation; a confrontation which has cost many lives both Palestinian and Jewish with no end in sight unless there is a very radical change.”

56. When I read these words of Rabbi Cohen, my faith in humanity in ensuring that Justice for the Palestinians will not only be done, but will be seen to be done, is reinforced.

57. There is indeed hope for the future.

58. There is hope for the Jews and the Palestinians to live in peace in the Holy Land, as indeed they had done for centuries before the creation of Israel.

59. There is hope that the three Abrahamic Faiths will co-exist in peace, so that the message of our one true God will bring joy and blessings not only for the present generation but to our children and their children too.

60. This surely must be the Justice that we should strive for.

61. The Jews and the Arabs are great people who have contributed much to humanity and civilisation. And both have suffered so much from colonialism and persecution through the ages.

62. Yet, today we see merciless wars being waged and wanton destruction inflicted on both sides.

63. The fog of wars has blurred our vision and our ability to grasp the fundamental truth that only in peace, will we find justice.

64. There cannot be justice when men, women and children are massacred with impunity, massacred legitimately.

65. There cannot be justice, when mothers and children are starving.

66. There cannot be justice, when children are denied their basic right to education and to realise their fullest potential.

67. There cannot be justice when there is no hope for a better future.

68. The Preamble to the UNESCO constitution states:

69. “… wars begin in the minds of human beings, it is in the minds of human beings that the defenses for peace should be built.”

70. But, instead of building defences, society has allowed and tolerated the young, our children, to be brainwashed for war, and more often than not, in the name of democracy and freedom.

71. The barbaric invasion of Iraq was grounded on the so-called irrefutable intelligence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and he was ready to unleash wanton destruction within 45 minutes and devastate Britain as alleged by the then Prime Minister Tony Blair and asserted in the “sexed-up intelligence dossier” headlined in leading British Tabloids and the BBC.

72. When the lie was exposed, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair justified further killings because tyrants needed to be overthrown for democracy and freedom to prevail!

73. Hamas was elected as the government for Palestine in place of Fatah in a fair and free election, but such an exercise in democracy cannot be tolerated because in the eyes of the United States, Britain, the European Union and Israel, an independent and sovereign government would not serve the interests of occupying powers.

74. The Palestinians in Gaza must therefore be collectively punished for committing the ultimate crime as defined by the Zionists and their allies – to elect a government of their choice and not that of Zionist Israel!

75. The punishment was massive and prolonged, starting with the blockade and deliberate starvation of the entire population of Gaza. When the war criminals felt sufficiently confident that the Palestinians would no longer be able to resist, they launched a bloody invasion to terrorise the people of Gaza into submission.

76. But the heroic Palestinians, uniting as one, put paid to these evil plans and persevered in defending themselves. There was no surrender despite the killings of their women and children.

77. The fate of the Gazan struck at the hearts of decent people everywhere and many risked their lives to go the aid of the Palestinians.

78. I am proud to have with us this morning in London, the Rt Hon Cynthia Mckinney, former member of the US Congress and lately, Presidential Candidate for the Green Party who together with the founders and members of the Free Gaza Movement braved stormy seas and Israeli gunboats to bring food and aid to the starving Gazans.

79. In one of these efforts, in which Cynthia was a participant, Israeli gunboats rammed her boat, knowing full well that she and her friends were on a humanitarian mission to save lives. She survived this ordeal and no doubt, later in the morning she will tell us her trials and tribulations in overcoming this ordeal.

80. Ladies and gentlemen, we must salute this courageous and indomitable lady fighter for justice and freedom.

81. A few weeks ago, another courageous man took up the challenge and led a convoy of over one hundred trucks to bring aid to Gaza and broke through the Rafah Checkpoint. The convoy traveled overland from UK to Gaza, a distance of over 20,000 kilometers.

82. He exemplifies the best qualities of the British.

83. In 2005, he joined us in Malaysia to launch the Kuala Lumpur Declaration to Criminalise War. He spoke with passion against war and crimes against humanity.

84. I missed his presence today, as he could not be with us.
Ladies and Gentlemen, please join me in saluting the Hon. George Galloway. He is now banned from entering Canada.

85. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Rt. Hon. Tony Benn for joining us today. He has been and continues to be a staunch advocate for peace and justice for the Palestinians.

86. But we must look beyond such courageous efforts to help bring lasting peace to the Holy Land of Palestine.

THE LONDON DECLARATION FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE IN PALESTINE

87. Where and how do we begin?

88. Revisiting the Balfour Declaration is as good a beginning as any.

89. For it was in 1917, in London that this atrocious injustice was first conceived and therefore it is only right and proper that the Balfour Declaration be replaced with another declaration of intent here in London to be called - The London Declaration for Peace and Justice in Palestine.

90. The British people must atone for this injustice and the horrors that followed by ensuring that the British Parliament unanimously adopt such a declaration of intent and ensure that the international community implements its basic principles.

91. The detractors will say that such a proposal will never see the light of day.

92. But, I am convinced that there are enough men of goodwill here and elsewhere to ensure that it will.
93. For the last 60 years, we have been talking and debating about the crime, but not identifying the principal party that committed the crime.

94. If justice must be done and seen to be done, at the very least, the British Parliament, representing the entire British people must confront this injustice, as the Germans and Germany since World War II were made to confront the injustice and crimes committed against the Jews.

95. There cannot be double standard, nor can there be justice if the victors are allowed to lay down the law.

96. For too long have the British escaped the censure that they deserve.

97. Tony Blair has been appointed the Peace Envoy for the Quartet. When a known warmonger who told lies is appointed Envoy of Peace, it is cynicism at its worse.

98. Any effort to establish peace in Palestine must, if we are sincere, begin with the abrogation of the Balfour Declaration.

99. Just as Holocaust Memorials have been erected in Germany, America and other countries to remind present and future generations of the injustice committed against the Jews, the ultimate and lasting memorial to the injustice inflicted on the Palestinians must be the total rejection of the Balfour Declaration. The British people and their Parliament must do this.

100. As William Wilberforce did with the slave trade, so must the members of the British Parliament redeem their honour by abrogating the Balfour Declaration.

101. There can be no peace without admission of guilt and contrition by the culprit. Then, and then only will there be atonement for the grievous wrong which has wreaked havoc and death in the Middle East and elsewhere over the past 60 years.

102. Any British effort to promote peace in the Holy Land will ring hollow when its leaders have not owned up to the betrayal of the Palestinians.

103. Rightly, the Palestinians should be demanding retribution. But they are not.

104. They are only seeking justice.

105. If we are asked for a precedent, I need look no further than the courageous reconciliation that was fostered in what was once White Supremacist South Africa!

106. For generations, it was unthinkable and even a taboo to consider that the Africans were capable of governing themselves and to live in peace with their white fellow citizens.

107. Every rationale and excuse was given to justify the Apartheid regime and the inevitable injustice.

108. But the far-sighted leaders of South Africa, especially the courageous Nelson Mandela and de Clerk, banished hatred and vengeance from their hearts, so that reconciliation and human decency could prevail, and today black and white live, work and play together.

109. We meet here in London where the decision was made which we now know is wrong, a decision that had plunged the Middle East and indeed the world into 60 years of war, of senseless killings and material destruction, of the tragedy of 9/11, the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and of Gaza.

110. We can help redeem all this if our meeting can come up with a proposal for a solution to the Palestinian tragedy. We cannot bring back the dead but we can prevent more deaths. And we can do this if we resolve here and now to bring the two parties together to discuss and to negotiate so as to return to the status quo ante, i.e. the recreation of a state where Arabs and Jews can live together in peace and at least relative harmony.

111. I propose this because this was the solution for my own country, Malaysia, where the Malays agreed to share their country with the Chinese and Indians whose forebears migrated to our shores and decided to settle down there. They retain their ethnicity but they are all Malaysians.

112. It will be a difficult task for Jews and Arabs but God willing they will triumph in the end.

113. I thank you all for your presence.

114. Let our enlightenment and understanding be not in vain.



****

REMARKS BY DR. RAIS YATIM FOREIGN MINISTER OF MALAYSIA AT THE GAZA GENOCIDE FORUM & EXHIBITION - LONDON

THE GAZA GENOCIDE: THE WORLD COMMUNITY MUST ACT

WELCOME TO THE GAZA GENOCIDE FORUM

On behalf of the organizers I wish to express appreciation for this opportunity in addressing such a significant gathering – a gathering of noble and caring people for a noble and caring cause. What was conceived and developed for the past two months in Kuala Lumpur has now turned to reality – that is to have a roadshow forum on the Gaza killings here in London where the world meets. This forum and exhibition on the genocide in Gaza is a collaboration between the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalize War (KLFCW) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malaysia.

Our aim is to prick the world’s conscience on the Gaza catastrophe and sustain international awareness and cooperation in achieving lasting peace while continuing to effect our collective synergy in humanitarian aid. We aim to raise the awareness of the British and European public of the genocide in Gaza and to explore possible solutions for the plight of the Palestinians. Simultaneously we galvanize efforts towards making Israel pay for its acts of killing and maiming civilians in Gaza besides causing destruction to civilian and public amenities. The world has witnessed the killing and the destruction of property and life’s sustenance in Gaza only to be idled by non-intervention and non-action by the free world for crimes perpetrated and for deeds inhuman.

Further, we aim to bring Israel to justice for all of its human rights violations. We are here to ponder on the call for justice vis-à-vis the violations that more than equate crimes against humanity. And on the larger plane, we are here also to campaign that war be deemed to be an international crime.

Further, we aim to bring Israel to justice for all of its human rights violations. We are here to ponder on the call for justice vis-à-vis the violations that more than equate crimes against humanity. And on the larger plane, we are here also to campaign that war be deemed to be an international crime.

Excellencies Ladies and Gentlemen
I hope the figure 1,380 means something to you. For a good number of people that figure means nothing more than a hint of news that spell death in Gaza. To us in Malaysia it means something devastating, something that is brutal and murderous. The figure 1,380 is the number of innocent human beings killed through the process of choice and design by the soldiers of Israel between December 2008 and February this year. That is the number killed by Israel soldiers. Of the 1,380, 33.3% represent women and children. More than 100 are still missing perhaps beneath the heaps of debris and concrete slabs. Or they could be the ones who were rendered disintegrated by powerful American-made weapons. 16 Palestinian medical personnel were killed and 25 injured while performing their duties. Israel reportedly suffered 13 deaths on account of Hamas rocket shots.

Admittedly no radio or TV stations, or newspapers ignored the news about the Gaza annihilation. For a while the whole world was somewhat ablaze about Gaza being attacked and the ensuing destruction and deaths. The question that propped up was how justified were the Zionist attacks inclusive of the aerial and artillery onslaughts on homes, hospitals, UN premises and schools? The general Western media are well poised to a denial syndrome. They depict and maintain that the excessive Israel attacks on the innocent people of Gaza were justified under the name of self preservation. If this be so, then there must be something
wrong with our sense of justice.

Fair-minded witnesses began to describe the incessant attacks on the civilians of Gaza by Israel as “unjustified“ and “disproportionate” while Israel maintained its innocence by countering that the attacks were mere safeguards and not disproportionate vis-à-vis the security of homeland Israel. With almost 1,400 dead in Gaza pursuant to the multi-angle and multi-façade attacks, how does one justify the onslaught?

We reeled back with sadness when we first learnt that the United Nations, the Security Council in particular, was seen to be such a lame entity even in the wake of devastations and deaths inflicted by a neighboring state. The Security Council failed to effect ceasefire and total stoppage of the attacks despite the high-sounding SC Resolution 1860 which was passed on 8 January 2009 with the United States abstaining. The special session of the UNGA that ensued also did not manage to bring solution to the catastrophe. This is the case of a regime killing their immediate neighbour with intent of annihilation without any sense of quid pro quo. What resulted has been an act of genocide. This is what the figure 1,380 stands for.

Realizing that the SC Resolution was insufficient, Malaysia on January 12th initiated a special session of its Parliament to condemn the Israeli attack on Gaza and called for a lasting peace process. Finally, at the instance of Malaysia, Brazil and a few other concerned states petitioned the United Nations to recognize the then endemic human sufferings in Gaza both in` terms of loss of life as well as of property and life sustenance facilities. Not only are the UN Resolutions empty and hollow-sounding, Security Council leaders were also exposing a certain degree of ignorance in respect of the human suffering.

Those ‘unjustified and ‘disproportionate’ attacks by Israel were in reality a testing political ground for the aspirant Israeli prime minister and his cohorts in Tel Aviv on the eve of the Israeli national election. In a way it was a political ploy and show off. It was a ploy to gain political mileage which perhaps was more gainful for Olmert than for Livny; and so it was acceptable to the Zionist regime to attack and violate all known tenets of international law and human rights.

Gaza also became the testing ground of lethal weaponry including the devastating white phosphorous that was strewn and scattered from the sky down to innocent school children and civilians. Among the photographs that you see here at the forum hall are victims of that destructive powder chemical. Rightly, that human-defacing chemical ought to be the substantive matter before the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and
Use of Chemical Weapons and Malaysia is seeking support so as to float the issue at the earliest available opportunity.

Various save-Gaza ativities have been held including the interacting mechanism introduced by the Obama administration. Whilst we appreciate the concern and the slight shift of US foreign policy in respect of Iran, the Middle East and Palestine, we expect more from Mr Obama in terms of lasting solutions to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Palestinians have suffered more than their fair share of human calamity ever since the British-initiated Partition in 1948. Palestinians have been dispossessed of their homeland.

American-aided attacks on its people and possessions have embittered their humanity and coarsened their faith while awaiting for a fair solution. Even within the Hamas-Fatah political misfit, the distrust for the American style in solving the conflict is evident even at long range sights. But if American or European-initiated solution package becomes more just and fair then the world could be convinced of attaining true peace and harmony.

Excellencies Ladies and Gentlemen
Many a road-map for peace have turned into detours of war and killing. At the same time Israel continues to receive armaments from the United States which in turn were used as weapons of mass destruction against the Palestinians. Truly, without such entrenched facility nothing by way of real damage could have happened.

It is now clear that the United Nations initiatives, including the failed 10th Emergency Assembly and the 8th January 2009 Security Council Resolution 1850 have been rendered to be of no effect in terms of making Israel pay for its disproportionate attacks on the people of Gaza. The US specially appointed envoy to the Israel-Palestine peace process too has not proven any positive outcome.

Even the earlier UNSC Resolution such as Resolution 242 and 446 are now mere scrap papers because they have not been observed. Resolution 242 prohibits the taking by force of territories and Resolution 446 determines the illegality of Israel’s settlements on Palestinian territories. Under Resolution 465 deplores Israel’s settlements and bars member states from assisting Israel in that respect. The SC makes resolutions but it has not put in place mechanisms to oversee that they be executed. Thus Israel is now violating the 4th Geneva
Convention. Clearly the UNGA has also vitiated its duty in not making the SC accountable for its lackadaisical disposition in respect of its own resolutions affecting Palestinian rights. Clearly too, there is much to be done within the UN’s own housekeeping mechanism. Somehow the SC is seen to be more powerful than the UNGA itself.

The unprecedented calamities scourged by the Zionist regime has been treated as no more than an event that should be put aside and be forgotten. And no country has thus far initiated any forward move to make Israel accountable for its acts of aggression that spews disaster and deaths in Gaza.

Malaysia had last January resolved by way of parliamentary resolutions that Israel, inter alia, ought to be made accountable for its gross human rights violation pursuant to the Gaza attacks; that it be made answerable for its international criminal law violations and that Israel’s act of genocide be meted out by a special tribunal something that could be done under Article 22 of the UN Charter; that Israel be made accountable for all its international law and human rights violations.

Understandably critics could easily regard the action taken by Malaysia as an isolated move in the vast complicated international arena of UN politics. Even our friends in the Arab League could do no more than whimper through its various deliberations. Excellencies ladies and gentlemen in light of these developments we hope that you will appreciate Malaysia’s small contribution towards making the international community to be more reactive and prompt in its treatment of what is just and fair in the name of positive humanity.

If there be nothing else, Malaysia and like-minded States move that an Israeli War Crimes Tribunal be formed under the UN Charter; that an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel (ICTI) be organized along the lines of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) established by the Security Council. The establishment of ICTI should provide some small degree of justice to the victims of Israel War Crimes against humanity and genocide against the people of Palestine, just as the ICTY had done in the Balkans.

In the interim, we would implore that the Human Rights Commission in Geneva continue to besiege the human rights violations committed by Israel during and after its Gaza attacks. Cutting of water supply, bombing of houses of worship, blatant murders of women and children – these and many more call for true tenacity and pursuit of human justice and fairness.

It has to be said again that belling the cat is always a problem especially during these days of outrageous veto powers at the UNSC. How wil the veto powers react to such a proposition is almost a known outcome bearing in mind previous dispositions of the big powers. But to try and to go on trying we must, even though this is the kind of injustice that small and defense-deficient countries have to face and bear as they inch towards the so-called purview of international justice of the United Nations.

While we move our sights from poster to poster, from photograph to photograph in respect of the Gaza slaughter, let us set free our thoughts on the next set of action to be taken. This is indeed the moment of truth for concerted action in the name of humanity. In previous events, the international community donated money and material each time Palestine was severely mauled by Israel. They attacked and destroyed. We helped and rebuilt. They again attacked and destroyed and we continued to give and rebuild.

Israel presupposes that there is very little that the international community could do in terms of punitive or retributive measures. It knows for sure that the American government shall always shield them, at least from the operatives of the Security Council. Israel also knows that for so long as the SC is controlled under the veto system, nothing much could be done by way of sanction and execution. Now we may say enough is enough. But which authority will actually translate those words into the preventive? The UN can’t even station a peace mission yet on the Israel-Palestinian border areas let alone be in the position to enforce previous resolutions in the name of world peace and co-existence.

It is in this context that the act of war must be re-looked at both from the viewpoint of human rights as well as universal justice. We drag a person to court to be prosecuted for his act of having killed someone. We use the maxim mens rea in determining his murderous intent. But we simply allow a neighbouring state to marauder thousands with guns, air strikers, chemicals and tanks. Then we say since that is an act of war then it’s ok. This is convoluted logic and any language that says that war is acceptable must necessarily be a concoction of the biggest wrong.

Excellencies Ladies and gentlemen
We thank you for your presence and commitment. I thank Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and his gracious wife Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah, two indefatigable icons who jointly and severally endeavour with the goodwill and cooperation of others to make war a crime through the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW). Our thanks also go to the eminent speakers, ambassadors,
officials and samaritan workers who gladly lend their services to make this forum and exhibition a success.

Thank you.

THE FORUM ON GAZA GENOCIDE: SOLUTION FOR PALESTINE LONDONON 31 MARCH 2009 - REPORT BY CYNTHIA MCKINNEY

What an impressive Conference put on by the Government of Malaysia and the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW). Absolutely incredible. And the audience was packed with information. I will definitely make a more detailed report later and include the information learned at this Conference in my next economics report, too, on the state of our economy and common sense solutions as I promised you.

The Malaysian Foreign Minister, Dr. Rais Yatim, spoke passionately this morning about the need for accountability in the face of war crimes. And so too, did the founder of the KLFCW, Tun Dr. Mahathir. Dr. Mahathir spoke of the long history of Zionism, starting with the Balfour Declaration, and explained that we were in London because there had been a request from a British citizen in Malaysia attending our Forum for Palestine there, to take this information to the source of the problem--England. Dr. Mahathir recommended that we remember the Balfour Declaration and all the events leading up to the creation of the state of Israel for a better understanding of the challenges we face on our road to peace.

Dr. Mahathir knows a lot about what's happening in our economy, too. Remember, he faced down George Soros and the currency speculators and was vilified (by them) for keeping Malaysia out of their snares. Today, Malaysia has a public Central Bank and a national system of public banks. Needless to say, the ringgit is doing just fine. Malaysia is strong to take a stand today because Dr. Mahathir took the unpopular stand yesterday--unpopular that is, with the monied interests of the world. More on that, later.

After our tea break (of course, we were in London), Lauren Booth, PressTV reporter who was trapped in Gaza for one month, reported on her experiences with individual life stories of how life is made unbearable by the Israelis as they deny health care and education to Palestinian women and children. Lauren is also a Free Gaza Movement success story as she was on one of the boats that successfully challenged the Israeli seige. Unlike me, she made it into Gaza and received a hero's welcome. She was also with George Galloway as he successfully entered Gaza City by land in a convoy of over 100 vehicles.

Then I spoke. My comments are included at the end of this report.

Former M.P. Tony Benn delivered wonderful historical context and gave us hope for the future. All day, for some reason, speakers kept calling him Tony Blair, instead of Benn. It was quite funny, since I think Blair is Lauren Booth's brother-in-law and was pretty much reviled roundly by everyone in the audience. At one point, Benn leaned over to me and asked wryly, "You think I can win the Nobel Peace Prize?" And at that point, I remembered that I was the sole vote against honoring him for his support of the "Global War on Terror."

And Rabbi Aharon Cohen of Naturei Karta explained to us what their perspective is on Israel. Paraphrasing, Rabbi Cohen said that Zionism is the root of the problem and until Zionism is addressed, there will continue to be a problem. Even in the panel discussion, he brought us back to the problem of Zionism, itself. He made it clear that Zionism is not Judaism. His remarks were particularly educational since I had never had the opportunity to dialog with member of Naturei Karta before. He also gave the significance of the name that means, protectors of the city. For when the Zionists came to the land, Jews and non-Jews lived together in harmony. But the Zionists came to steal the land from the non-Jews and the Jews joined with the non-Jews to protect the City, thus, Naturei Karta--protectors of the City. I will defintely read more about them.

Finally, Sir Gerald Bernard Kaufman basically said that Israel, by its actions, is becoming indefensible. He said this: "The Israeli electorate have proven themselves incorrigible," noting that only 3% of Israelis voted for peace in Israel's last election. He has said as much on the Floor of the House of Commons, and a tape was played at the Conference of him saying it. He talked about his hate mail. Well, I think we could go toe-to-toe on the hate mail. Only, in the mail he receives, they call him a self-hating Jew.

Finally, there was a panel discussion where the audience asked questions of the speakers. And just before people left the room, I was able to make an announcement. When the gentleman showed me his blackberry, I was sure he was joking. That he was playing some kind of cruel joke on me. That is was a hoax. Because all the night before and in my remarks, as you will see, I touted the judges of Spain and their courage as one of our hopes for justice in the legal arena. And when I didn't believe him, he showed his blackberry to me and I could see that it was a real news item: Spain had agreed to investigate Bush and his cronies for war crimes. Hallelujah!! What a wonderful end to a wonderful Conference. What a wonderful way to welcome the G20 into town!!!!


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Cynthia McKinney
Forum for Palestine
London/March 31, 2009

Not too long ago, I received an invitation to participate in the Malaysia Peace Organization's effort to Criminalize War and establish a tribunal to try the heads of state who violated the peace and led their countries into war and occupation.

When I was in Kuala Lumpur, I had the opportunity to meet one of my heroes, Tun Dr. Mahathir, who stood up against the very same individuals who are today wreaking havoc on the U.S. economy in a feeding frenzy on the imperial carcass. As a result, Malaysia became an outpost of resistance in Asia. Dr. Mahathir's bold action was the first time I came to know Malaysia, and that was by way of the news reports. And when I had the opportunity to travel there for the purpose of fashioning a world without war, I dubbed Kuala Lumpur the world capital of peace. Thank you, Malaysia, for showing the world, along with Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, and others, that national dignity is possible.

For dignity depends on peace, and peace depends on justice, and justice depends on truth. So, our charge today is to help the world attain dignity.

At that 2007 Kuala Lumpur peace conference, I met victims of war crimes, torture, and crimes against humanity, all made possible because of U.S. policy and U.S. taxpayers. It was an emotional Conference for me, because I came face to face with the scars borne by victims of war.

The next year, I spent International Human Rights Day 2008 in Havana, Cuba with family members of victims of U.S. aggression against that fiercely independent island country. And while I was there, over and over and over again I heard the word "dignity." And how there is dignity in resistance.

I can't help but remember that it was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who, forty years ago, said that the United States was the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. Sadly, violence sponsored by the U.S. directly or indirectly has only intensified.

And because I stand in London right now, where tens of thousands of people are about to take to the streets in protest of war and occupation, I must not omit the roles that London and Europe have played in promoting this worldwide violence.

The world is rising up against the lies that we've been told. People are reclaiming their dignity. Against the greed, corruption, and theft that have been committed in our name, with our tax dollars. In the streets, you will hear the word dignity.

That's what the U.S. civil rights movement was all about. And its spirit of resistance to injustice shaped my childhood experiences. I saw what is possible when people stand up.

On the night before his murder, Dr. King said that he was proud to be alive at the end of the 20th Century when people were rising up saying, "We want to be free."

Today, we are rising up and saying that we want to be free from hatred, division, oppression, and war.

I admire those stood up on the national stage, and I've tried to do my part to take a stand, too.

Thus, in 1991, as a Member of the Georgia Legislature, when President George Herbert Walker Bush bombed Baghdad, I asked the Speaker of the House if I could speak on a point of Personal Privilege to explain my opposition to Operation Desert Storm. My colleagues stood up and walked out on me during my remarks.

And then, when I decided to run for the United States Congress, I knew that the foundation of all U.S. policy—whether domestic or foreign--had to be: respect for human rights.

So, when the marginalized and dispossessed of the world came to me, I did my best to help them.

There was no room in my view for policies promoting nuclear weapons, NATO expansion, or discrimination against any person, group, or country. I voted against every Pentagon budget that came before Congress.

I introduced legislation to stop the transfer of U.S. weapons to regimes that did not respect human rights and to eliminate the use of depleted uranium.

I spoke out against President Clinton's sanctions against Iraq, and President George W. Bush's war against and occupation of Iraq.

I represented the Congressional Black Caucus at the Durban World Conference Against Racism, despite intense pressure to not attend in order to avoid a discussion of Zionism.

I worked with a team of internationally-respected lawyers to prosecute Sharon, Barak, and Netanyahu for war crimes as well as those responsible for incitement of genocide in Gujurat, India.

I even turned down a politician's dream: fame, fortune, and re-election if I would just get arrested in front of the Sudan Embassy and let a famous Zionist lawyer bail me out of jail.

Underlying it all was my belief that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ought to have universal application. Afterall, it was Dr. King who reminded us that justice is indivisible: injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

But when the subject was justice for Palestine, while I stood my ground, the political resolve underneath me dissolved beneath my feet.

When the pro-Israel Lobby targeted me for defeat, even lifelong family friends abandoned me and those I thought stood for principle, shrank in utter fear.

For all the talk about justice, the principles underlying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights melted away when the topic was Palestine. Or any other project of the pro-Israel Lobby. Like Durban, Sudan, Rwanda, Congo, or protecting their interests in Blood Diamonds. Unfortunately for me, all the issues I had taken on with great enthusiasm pitted me for the people, but against the interests of the powerful pro-Israel Lobby.

And then, they decided in 2002 that I had to go.

That came after I questioned the Bush Administration's version of what happened on September 11, 2001. The pro-Israel lobby activated its operatives inside both the Republican and Democratic Parties, and I lost my campaign for re-election to Congress.

Even though, two years later, in 2004, I ran again and regained my seat, I still wore a target on my forehead. And again, pro-Israel, pro-war Democrats and Republicans joined to oust me from Congress in 2006, when I was the only Democratic Member of Congress to lose reelection. The significance of the 2006 election was this:

The very first bill to fund the war came up for a vote and passed with exactly the number of votes required. Had I been there to cast my no vote, the bill would have failed. It became clear to me that the "War Party" inside the United States, that consists of pro-war elements inside both the Democratic and Republican parties, do a darn good job of making sure they control enough Congressional votes to keep our country at war.

So, after leaving Congress in January of 2007, I declared my independence from every bomb dropped, every child killed, and every veteran maimed as a part of the U.S. war machine.

In 2008, the Green Party, the largest of the small parties in the U.S., nominated me to lead their ticket and I ran for President.

And now, I'm trying to launch "Dignity," a movement for peace and justice inside the United States as a counter to the war party.

So, the day after Israel began bombing Gaza, the co-founder of the Free Gaza Movement asked me to travel the next day to Gaza with some doctors and deliver 3 tons of medical supplies. It didn't take me 5 minutes to say yes.

And so began my voyage aboard the pleasure boat, Dignity, that was rammed in international waters by an Israeli warship and that almost cost me my life.

Onboard the Dignity was Sami El-Hajj—the Al Jazeera reporter from Sudan who, while covering the U.S. military operation in Afghanistan, was captured and became known as prisoner 345 in Guantanamo for six years. Once again, I came face to face with a victim of U.S. war policy, against Afghanistan and also against his home country of Sudan. I apologized to him.

Dr. David Halpin is here. Stand up Dr. Halpin. He was onboard the Dignity with me and is the one who told me to prepare myself mentally to die after the Israelis attacked us. He also noticed that I had my life jacket on upside down and helped me put it on right side up after we had been rammed.

It is clear that those who favor war use every trick in the book to rob us of our human dignity. And then, feeling powerless, we allow them to do to us what they want.

But effective resistance requires that perpetrators of crime, especially torture, genocide, war crimes, and crimes against the peace, be brought to justice.

It's a shame that I have to even say that. But currently, we have a situation in which the killer of one might go to jail, but the killer of one hundred thousand is invited to peace talks. It seems that in this upside down world, the more one kills, the more impunity one acquires. But true justice requires the absence of impunity.

And that's what brings us here today. We want to criminalize war. Many people's tribunals have been initiated precisely because of the lack of justice in the politicized courts of the United States, and increasingly, in the world Courts. Those with political power have been able to seize these courts and manipulate them to favor injustice.

This includes the conduct of the International Criminal Court, which to date, has not engendered hope. In his piece entitled "White Collar War Crimes, Black African Fall Guys," investigative journalist Keith Snow writes:

"First note that the ICC can now be viewed as a tool of hegemonic U.S. foreign policy, where the weapons deployed by the U.S. and its allies include the accusations of, and indictments for, human rights violations, war crimes and crimes against humanity. To understand this, we can ask why no white man has yet been charged with these or other offenses at the ICC, which now holds five black African warlords and seeks to incarcerate and bring to trial another black man, also an Arab, Omar Bashir. Why hasn't George W. Bush been indicted? Or what about Donald Rumsfeld? Dick Cheney? Henry Kissinger? Ehud Olmert? Tony Blair?"

The sad fact is that the International Criminal Court has become terribly politicized, as has the entire international justice apparatus. The ICC has issued indictments, for the first time in history, against a sitting head of state. Meanwhile, according to Snow, an Israeli weapons dealer, also a reputed Mossad operative, is revealed to be shipping weapons into Sudan with Pentagon support.

And Belgium changed its law rather than prosecute Ariel Sharon for war crimes. The double standard cries out to us.

One country in the West, however, increasingly stands out as a place where justice can be found—and that is Spain. With its landmark indictment of Pinochet and its current consideration of Israeli war crimes in Lebanon and U.S. torture in Guantanamo, we increasingly look to the Spanish Courts with hope. It was the Spanish courts that returned indictments against Rwandan soldiers for genocide even as the world coddles U.S. proxy Rwanda and its leader, Paul Kagame.

Now, why is curbing impunity important? Just this week Israel and the US admitted that Israel murdered approximately 800 refugees as Israel attacked Sudan in January and February using unmanned killer drones.

Israel unleashed death squads to commit targeted assassinations all over the world.

To save the Palestinians from Israel, is to save the rest of us from Israeli abuse, and of course, saves the Israelis from themselves. Even Israeli soldiers are telling the sad truth about Gaza. Doctors tell us that Gaza was a weapons testing laboratory. The world is rightly outraged about Israeli Operation Cast Lead. And of the Sudan operation, of which we are only just now learning, Olmert is reported to have said: "There is no place where Israel cannot operate. There is no such place."

Now, I've been questioned about my passion because I'm not Arab; I'm not Muslim; why do I care so much about justice in Palestine?

My answer is this: I struggle every day for the human rights and dignity of blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Muslims, Arabs, the poor and others discriminated against in America.

I learned from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who broke with his friends in the civil rights movement because they did not want to alienate themselves from President Johnson by criticizing the Vietnam War. Dr. King decided that conscience compelled him to speak out against the war even if it meant losing his friends. Even if it meant losing his life. And when asked about it, Dr. King said that he had fought segregation too long to segregate his moral concerns.

The people of the world want war criminals held accountable. Bolivia wants to hold Israeli leaders accountable for their crimes in Gaza. The International Criminal Court says it is investigating whether Israel committed war crimes in Gaza. Now is the time for us to stand firm.

That's why I support the Malaysia Peace Organization, the Brussels Tribunal, the Hurricane Katrina Tribunal, and other efforts to hold national leadership accountable for their actions. And I specifically support Malaysia's efforts to criminalize war.

Because of what happened to our Dignity boat while in international waters, the Free Gaza Movement wants to bring Israel to justice for its war crime against us.

I applaud George Galloway's success in entering Gaza by land. The Free Gaza Movement will try again by sea.

I paid the ultimate political price for standing by the idea that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ought to have universal application. You can rest assured that I will do all I can to promote dignity, a vision of peace that relies on truth and justice for all of us.

Thank you.

Speech By Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at The Forum for Palestine in Kuala Lumpur

SPEECH BY
TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
AT THE FORUM FOR PALESTINE
AT CROWNE PLAZA MUTIARA, KUALA LUMPUR
FEBRUARY 5, 2009
-----------------------





1. Thank you for your presence at this forum on Palestine. I think it is important that we remind ourselves briefly of the background of this tragic country.

2. When after the Second World War, the Europeans had to give up their empires; they left behind time bombs, which regularly exploded, making the development of the ex-colonies fraught with danger and obstacles. Nearly all the newly independent states emerging from European colonisation have not been stable, nor been able to develop themselves, giving the impression that these ex-colonies are unable to manage independence. Many even think that they should remain as colonies.

3. Of the ex-colonies which have to manage the continuously exploding time bombs, none is worse than the mandated territory of Palestine.

4. Britain, which was given the mandate for Palestine had no right to carve the state in order to create the state of Israel. It is shameful that Britain should succumb to the terrorism of the Haganah and the Irgun and Zionist pressures and reneged on the conditions of the mandate. It was a totally irresponsible and dishonorable act unworthy of a country that talks so much about honour and integrity.

5. The Arab Palestinian not only lost much of their land but they were driven out of the portion given to the Jews. Their land was expropriated with no compensation and many were massacred at Deir Yassin, al-Dawayina, Eilaboun, Jish, Ramle and Laydda.

6. Since 1948, the Palestinians had to live as refugees in refugee camps under terrible conditions. Their children grew without proper schooling knowing only poverty and squalor.

7. One would have thought that the imperialists who had wronged the Palestinian Arabs would at least help them reclaim their rights in the state that is now called Israel. But instead we find Britain and the United States in particular giving military aid to the Israelis even when they openly seize more Palestinian land and set up Jewish settlements on land that is not apportioned to them.

8. There are some who blame the Palestinians for what they term as terrorism. I have no liking for irresponsible acts which result in the killing of people, innocent civilians whether Jews or Muslims. In fact I am against war i.e. the killing of people as a way of solving conflicts. But when the Arabs mounted a conventional war against Israel to regain Palestinian land, what did the British and the Americans, the people responsible for the outbreak of fighting between Jews and Muslims do? They provided Israel with military support so that the Arab states of Jordan, Syria and Egypt were defeated.

9. Unable to get any more help from the Arab nations, with no sympathy from other nations, the Palestinians finally had to fight an unevenly matched struggle against the overwhelmingly powerful armed might of Israel. Perhaps they should know that they could not win against Israel backed by American forces. But this is their land unlawfully occupied by the Israelis and even if they have to fight alone against their powerful oppressors, they have to do so. After abortive attempts to dislodge the Israelis, without the weapons to match those of the Israeli military, they had no choice but to resort to methods which must be physically very painful and terrifying to them. It is not something people would like to do – tying explosives to your body and blowing yourself up. But desperate people have to resort to desperate ways. And suicide bombings became their main weapon.

10. If they cannot do this what can they do when the Israelis expanded their territory, building roads on Palestinian land, which the Palestinians were barred from using, building high walls to break-up Palestinian families and their villages.

11. I went to Palestine and was shocked to find that entry into Palestine is controlled by Israelis armed with machine guns. Their checkpoints deliberately delayed my entry into Palestine by more than two hours so that I could not visit the village of Jenin where Israel had destroyed houses while their occupants were still inside, where the whole village was reduced to rubble by Israeli guns and bombs. I could not go to Jerusalem because the Israelis declared that it was unsafe, as if they cared for me. And everywhere I saw Israeli settlements guarded by armed militia while the Arabs were forced to build huts and live in them with their animals to prevent seizure of their land by Israelis for their settlements.

12. I was shocked that the Palestinians were not even allowed to call the remaining land that had formed the state of Palestine after the UN carved up a part of it to give to the Jews, the State of Palestine.

13. The Israelis insisted and the international community appeared to acquiesce that there is no State of Palestine, only a Palestinian Authority. Yet the United Nations when it agreed to create a state of Israel on Palestinian land referred to the partition as creating two separate states of Israel and Palestine. How come today there is no Palestine?

14. At any time Israeli tanks could enter Palestinian towns as if land under the control of what is called the Palestinian Authority is actually under Israeli rule. When I was there Israeli armored cars actually drove through Ramallah. I was told Israeli tanks had surrounded the building where Arafat was forced to seek shelter and Israel’s guns kept up a continuous bombardment of the buildings.

15. The Americans and the British insisted that the Palestinians hold elections to determine who should be the Palestinian Authority. The contest was between Fatah and Hamas. Hamas won hands down.

16. The least the British and the Americans could do was to accept the result of the elections. But these backers of Israel rejected the results of the election because they do not like Hamas.

17. If other countries reject the results of elections these so-called democrats would condemn them. But we now see the great proponents of democracy themselves rejecting the results of the democratic process.

18. But perhaps this is to be expected. America and Britain which had previously condemned detention without trial are now detaining people without trial and without even the benefit of the law. And the American Congress went so far as to make torture of prisoners legal.

19. In the meanwhile the Palestinians have been subjected to condemnation for defending as best they could but the Western Press played up the futile retaliation by the Palestinians as terrorism. That the Israelis attack, kill, destroy and arrest Palestinians thus terrifying them does not make them terrorists.

20. In a recent newspaper report in Malaysia, we are told that the Israelis blasted a car in which a terrorist was traveling. We know the Israelis are technologically advanced. But how could they know which car was carrying a Palestinian “terrorist”. Every time a car or a home is blasted by the Israelis we are told by our own papers that there were terrorists in the car or the house. Can we trust the Jewish controlled Western wire service and media to tell the truth?

21. What we do know for a fact is that schools, including a UN school and hospitals have been blasted by Israeli guns and the victims are plainly children and ordinary people. How come they fail to recognise that they were targeting children when their guns and tanks were so close?

22. Hamas may have fired rockets into Israel. But it was not without provocation. The Israelis had blockaded Gaza under the excuse that arms may be smuggled into the strip. Why is it so wrong for the Palestinians to get some pitiably inadequate weaponry when the US supplies guns, rockets, bombs, tanks and warplanes to the Israelis with which to blast Palestinian towns out of existence, with which to kill children?

23. The peculiar thinking of the Western backers of Israel was also demonstrated during the Serbian ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina when the West did not allow the Bosnians to be supplied with weapons because they will cause more deaths in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It would seem that they wanted to see only the Bosnians killed. The Serbs were to be saved. Yet they talk of Serb brutalities. It would seem that Muslim lives were always expandable.

24. This is also the case with Palestine. The Palestinians must not be supplied with weapons so that they would be totally defenseless in the face of Israeli attacks, so that the Palestinians would be killed, so that the Israeli killers would be saved, so that the Israeli killers would be able to kill with impunity.

25. The same thinking also resulted in allowing Israel to have nuclear weapons while those against Israel are castigated and prevented from having similar weapons or any defensive capability. Sanctions are applied against them even when Israel is being supplied with more brutish weapons like cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells and bombs.

26. War is inhuman and war should be made a crime. People should stop killing people to settle their conflicts. But far worse than the killing in war is the murder of people who have been deliberately deprived of the means to defend themselves, to save their lives.

27. What kind of people are these great powers whose idea of fairness is to literally tie up the hands of the opponents so that their thugs can beat them to a pulp.

28. This is what we are seeing in Gaza. Yes the Gazans may have rockets but the scale of the so-called retaliation by Israel is beyond what can be considered as retaliation. It is nothing less than deliberate genocide worthy of primitive people. And yet the Israelis claim they are the most intelligent people with the greatest number of Nobel Laureates and scientific achievements. The greatness of a people cannot be measured by cerebral brilliance alone. Heartless people and bully are not great. They will go down in history as inhuman brutes. And those who support them must be considered equally brutish.

29. Some apologists for Israel claim that the Palestinians have rejected peace, have been deliberately provocative. But what is the peace that is offered the Palestinians?

30. It consists of being subservient to the Israelis and the Americans. It consists of rejecting their duly elected Government. It consists of giving up land that has been occupied by Israelis during peace as well as through one-sided wars. It means accepting Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, and denial of the Right of Return of the Arab refugees.

31. The peace that is offered by America and the West is the peace for a subservient Israeli colony, where the Palestinian may not even call their land Palestine, where Israeli forces have full liberty to do what they like in the land of the Palestinians.

32. Israeli brutality is unprecedented and shameless. The world knows that Israeli forces attack, kill and maim innocent children, women, the sick and the infirm. They deliberately starve their would be victims and deny them medical aid and fuel for power so as to weaken them before they attacked. And they attack with forces and weapons out of all proportions to the strength or military capability of their victims. And they do all these knowing that the mighty forces of the United States will be right behind them, ready to support their brutal acts.

33. The Americans and the Israelis are forever demanding that the Palestinians stop their terror attacks before there could be peace talks. Why should the Palestinians do that when the Israelis still occupy their land and enforce their rule on Palestinian land, keeping thousands of Palestinians as prisoners and in every way threaten the lives of the Palestinians?

34. If the Palestinians must cease their ineffective attempts to defend themselves, the Israelis must evacuate Palestinian land and allow the return of Palestinian refugees. Then only would it be right to demand that Palestinians do nothing to retaliate against Israeli aggression. Then only could peace negotiations begin.

35. The world must insist on these. The war will not stop otherwise. Today not even the mightiest military power can conquer countries. The authorities or the Governments of the countries concerned may surrender but the people will not. They will continue to fight by whatever means possible until their country is fully liberated.

36. We saw this in Vietnam, in Somalia, in Afghanistan, in Iraq. The only war the US won was in tiny Grenada. Shock and awe will get the military powers nowhere. When people are determined to get back their land they will continue to fight until they achieve their honorable objective.

37. The big powers must realise this. Your weapons of mass destruction your sophistication in inventing new killing machines will avail you of nothing. A hundred years ago you may conquer and colonise. But not any more. You cannot crush the spirit of the people and the love of their land. They will fight if it takes a thousand years.

38. If there is to be peace in this world, if it is going to be freed from acts of terror by irregulars and regulars, stop thinking that force and the killing of people will solve the conflicts between people.

39. If the world is to see peace in Palestine and the Middle-East and indeed the whole world, take no sides in the Palestinian conflict. Only justice based on historical facts will put an end to the Palestinian issue peacefully. Until then the world will continue to see endless violence and war in the Middle-East and Palestine.

40. The onus is on the big powers which created Israel, the time bomb par excellence, which will not stop exploding in the face of the world until justice is done.

41. This is not a religious war. The Jews have been living in Muslim land for centuries. In fact they seek refuge in Muslim land from the oppressions and pogroms of the Europeans. But if the Jews reward their Arab hosts by seizing their land then they and their European invaders will have to pay the price.

42. The tragedy of Gaza will be repeated again and again. But those who think that the Palestinian will be cowed into submission are mistaken. For every Gazan killed many will replace them.

43. War will solve nothing for the militarists. Only justice through peaceful negotiation will.

The UN General Assembly: A wasted wimp?

By Tunku Sofiah Jewa


1.I am grateful to Marlene Newesri who, in response to my assertion that the UN General Assembly is "no toothless tiger," replied:

“I wish I could believe that the UN General Assembly is "no toothless tiger," but I see it more as a wasted wimp. Is it possible to count all the resolutions that Israel has defied over the course of 60 years? As far as I'm concerned, Israel should be thrown out of the United Nations for its defiance of all these resolutions since the UN partitioned Palestine. Going even further than that, Resolution 181 should be dissolved. The United Nations admitted Israel as a "peace-loving state" in 1949 after it had assassinated Count Bernadotte in 1948, who was a peace mediator for the UN, and expelled the majority of the Palestinian Arab population in 1948. Peace-loving indeed! If the General Assembly is the ultimate organ of the United Nations, then the UN desperately needs an emergency organ transplant ASAP as this organ does not function properly."

2. The crux of the sentiments in my three earlier postings is that I am in full agreement with the views expressed by Professor Francis Boyle in 2002 (at www.counterpunch.org/boyle0606.html) that an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel (ICTI) can be established by the United Nations General Assembly under Article 22 of the UN Charter.

3. I had (among others) cited the expulsion by the General Assembly, of the Nationalist Chinese representatives from both the UN Security Council and the General Assembly in the 1970s to prove the point, as a Malaysian don had put it, that the UN General Assembly can be as powerful as it chooses to be.

4. On 7th January 2009, the Malaysian Parliament unanimously adopted as one of its resolutions for consideration at the recently concluded Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly, a Prof Boyle-inspired proposal for the setting up of “an International Criminal Tribunal for Palestine to investigate and prosecute suspected Israeli war criminals involved in the brutal and aggressive acts on the Palestinian people”.

5. And without much ado, the Malaysian UN Representative at that Special Session simply did just that when he called upon fellow delegates to adopt a resolution that would lead to, among other things, the establishment of a tribunal to investigate and prosecute those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

6. As we now all know, the Resolution that was ultimately approved by the General Assembly mentioned nothing about Boyle’s Article 22 proposal. And what an opportunity lost, it was.

7. “The United Nations”, Judge Phillip Jessup once said, “is only as good as the members of that organisation make it.”

8. While I still maintain my earlier assertion that the General Assembly as a body is no toothless tiger, I do take cognisance of Jessup’s perception of the UN, and on that score, I must concede that the current membership of the UN (when compared to those in the 1970s) can sadly be considered a wasted wimp!

FORUM FOR PALESTINE

The KLFCW is hosting the above Forum (see poster) on THURSDAY 5th FEBRUARY 2009 at the CROWNE PLAZA MUTIARA HOTEL, KUALA LUMPUR. Time: 9.00am – 5.00pm

All proceeds of the event (Registration Fee: RM50.00 payable at venue entrance) would be donated to war victims of the Israeli invasion of Gaza.

Speakers:

SPECIAL ADDRESS
- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad

CHALLENGING ISRAELS’S BLOCKADE
- Cynthia McKinney, US Presidential Candidate and Former Congresswoman (Will Tell Her Experience How The Israeli Navy Rammed Her Boat)

THE HIDDEN AGENDA BEHIND THE GAZA GENOCIDE
- Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

THE UNYIELDING SPIRIT OF PALESTINIAN RESISTANCE
- Matthias Chang

Indicting Israel for War Crimes
- Prof. Gurdial Singh Nijar

Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal
- Prof. Salleh Buang

Please help us by circulating the above attachment to as many of your contacts as possible

Do also remind your contacts to visit the Foundation's website at www.criminalisewar.com please.

Call for enquiries: 019 384 3913, 019 227 0159

THE JEWS’ PSYCHIC, THE UNITED STATES’ BLASPHEMY AND THE PALESTINIANS’ MISERIES

By Musa Bin Ismail

The carnage in Gaza by the Jewish military is history repeating itself too often. History witnessed that ever since 1948, the Jews have concocted “every plausible legitimate justifications” as the raison d’etre every time they flew their fighter jets over and rolled their armoured tanks into Palestine’s territories. On hindsight, it is so irresistible not to suggest that the Jews are launching a systematic assault of slaying the Palestinians with a Grand Plan of decimating the Palestinians and wiping them out from every patch of Palestine’s motherland. Believe me the Jews are firmly resolute over seizing the entire Palestine territory for themselves and they will not trade even an inch of land to the Palestinians.

The present concessions of the West Bank and Gaza strip to the Palestinians are mere transient political measures with a view to pull the wool over the international community’s eyes into believing that they (the Jews) are complying with the wishes and determination of the international community. The Gospel truth is they are not complying and neither do they intend to. If we discern closely, the Jews’ insensate arrogance speaks louder than any of the United Nations Resolutions all these years. Behind the back of the international community the Jews are, by the day, encroaching upon and seizing the Palestinians’ land in the West Bank under various “legal” pretext and such “sinister land snatching” is tacitly condoned by the United States. If the United States plays a just, sincere and trustworthy role as a responsible world citizen with lofty morality in the United Nations the Jews would not dare spill even a pint of the Palestinians’ blood. On the contrary the United States openly abetted the Jews by viciously arming them with the latest and devastating modern weaponry that could rout an entire civilization with ease. It reminds us vividly too how the various tribes of the Red Indians in America were
butchered and their motherland seized to become the United States of America to-day. The American Indians were merely defending their forefather’s land just as the Palestinians are doing now. But if beautiful feathered-birds flock together it would equally be natural that heavy-breathing murderers would group and aid each others too.

Over Gaza the Jews forced upon the Palestinians unbearable physical and mental excesses which would drive any sane person into traumatic insanity and to extract retaliation. Driven by deep hatred the Jews treated the entire Gaza as concentration camps. When the Palestinians retaliate, the Jews under the banner of protecting their country react in a monstrous rage by mounting large-scale military offensive against the Palestinians by raining rockets indiscriminately all over Gaza causing untold miseries – deaths, trauma, physical damage and destruction. Under pretext of defending, the Jewish military turned Gaza into a killing field – a fiery cauldron. This shrouded game-plan would continue until the day the entire Palestine motherland would become a complete Jewish territory of the illegal, terrorist state of Israel, and the Palestinians turned into a displaced people like the Kurds who are now being eternally punished by the “Twentieth-Century Crusaders” as a belated avenge over the crushing defeat of the “Earlier Crusaders” at the hands of the magnificent Saladin the Kurd and his formidable God-fearing army.

To understand the Jews’ hatred against the Palestinians we need to delve into the history of the Jews and take a hard look at their dangerous psycho-egocentrism. The Jewish psychic that they are “the chosen people of God” is the bitter source of the miseries afflicting the entire World ever since the time the Jewish God,Yahweh, chose the Jews to be His chosen people. To the Jews all the non-Jews over the world including Bush, Obama, Gordon Brown and the entire Americans, Europeans and the Asian are “non-human” and “inferior souls” whom they termed as Gentiles. These Gentiles could be cheated, deprived of their property and be killed without pricking the conscience of any Jew. A dangerous physic indeed! Don’t you remember Shylock in the “Merchant of Venice”?.

The Jews had never kept their promises to the Gentiles. Why should they? As any resolution, promise, treaty, contract, mutual agreement with the Gentiles is not binding upon the Jews as the Jews are ordained higher souls than the Gentiles. Indeed, the United Nations kept a high volume of the Jews’ non-compliances and violations of the United Nations’ Resolutions. The United States did not lift a finger to require the Jews to faithfully comply with the UN Resolutions as it is open secret that the United States (forgetting that they are Gentiles too) is beholden to the Jews and like a faithfully domesticated dog the United States would waste no time to bow meekly and unashamedly to any demands of the supposed master, the Jews. As an analogy, if the United States is a horse, the Jews are the rough riders who hold the reins tightly on one hand and wield a threatening whip on the other. The United States’ mouth is perpetually muzzled when it comes to the Jews’ folly. For instance, while Gaza writhed under the pang of death the United States’ President, his advisers and the members of the Senate and Congress looked the other way (sipping wine perhaps) watching Obama clasping his wife for a waltz of the century. Where is the humane feeling in them or are they merely over-grown homo sapiens without any moral fibre.

On the economic table, a sizeable portion of the entire resources of the United States have been abused and deftly channeled by the Jews for the sole purpose of providing “security, well-being and survival of the Jews in Israel” instead of such resources being used for the development of the common good of the majority non - Jew Americans who are the majority of the citizens. The non-Jew American citizens are too weak and lacking the political will to break this Jewish Spell over the White House and the Congress, and from the current political scenario it appears that the entire American citizens would be bound and locked under this Spell for a long, long years ahead – the entire world could only watch with sadness the horror that the majority of the American citizens are living a life servile to the God’s Chosen people just like a donkey faithfully carrying the back-breaking loads of his Masters. Truly this is indeed the finest slavery of the present century, unseen but real. In the years to come it is this Jewish Spell that would cause the collapse of the United States of America just like the fall of the Holy Roman Empire when it turned unholy.

This leads us to a heavenly and graceful observation on the Eight Wonder of the World – that is, how could a Christian nation (the United States with its official national motto “IN GOD WE TRUST”) be so beholden to and nakedly surrendered its national soul to a Nation of Jews who had in biblical times, out of ill-will and hate, harassed, rejected, rebuked, ridiculed, condemned and finally murdered Jesus Christ, a Son God of the Christendom as a criminal and in the confusion of history deceitfully pointed a finger to Rome as the culprits responsible for the murder. In whatever circumstances, the United States has blasphemed. They care not when in the Bible Jesus branded the Jews “…a wicked,godless generation…,” [Matthew 13:39]. Jesus too emphatically reminded the Christians that the Jews are murderers of prophets of God “…the city that murders the prophets and stones the messengers…” (Luke 13:34). In Matthew 23:33 Jesus called the Jews “…You snakes, you vipers’ brood, how can you escape being condemned to hell?]”. Despite the Master’s strong reminders and repeated cautions the United States choose to blatantly ignore the Master’s pearls of wisdom and in arrogant defiance thereof continue their abrasive unmitigated hate campaign in cohort with the Jews against the Palestinians and the Muslim world.

Jesus would certainly be weeping in profound sadness in High Heaven watching the Christians of the United States abetting the Jews butchering the Muslims in Gaza as Jesus knew perfectly well that unlike the Jews who rejected Jesus as a prophet of God, the Palestinians in Gaza and the entire Muslim world venerated Jesus and recognized him as one of the mightiest prophets of God. The Muslims further believe that Jesus was born miraculously by the blessed virgin Mary as a sign of the Word of God and that Jesus would bring forth peace and love throughout the world right into the vault of Heaven, not violent aggression, heinous crimes against humanity and genocide as had been committed by the Jews ever since the United States armed them (Jews) to the teeth.

In the name of Jesus Christ and the peace-loving faithful Christians of the entire Christendom, the United States should seriously reconsider its silver-spoon policies towards Israel and the Jews before it is too late. Have a heart, do not sacrifice the Christian majority’s love (the Gentile Americans) in preference for the murderers few (the Jews). As it is now, in the eyes of the Muslim world, the United States’ hands are seen as being deeply splashed and stained with the blood of the Palestinians’ children, women and the elderly who believed in Jesus as a prophet of God. In afterlife what answer could they (the American Christians) furnish to their Lord Jesus Christ?....And doubt not, Jesus is waiting for an answer….now sitting at the right hand of God.

The Special Session of the UN General Assembly: A ripe moment to implement Professor Boyle’s Article 22 Tribunal.

By Tunku Sofiah Jewa

1. True to form and when it matters most, the UN General Assembly, roughshod Israeli’s objections and proceeded with its emergency session to discuss Israeli’s invasion of Gaza.

2. As I had written earlier, let me now repeat it. The UN General Assembly is no toothless tiger!

3. In my previous posting entitled “Stealing a march at the United Nations” several persons had taken me to task for what I had written specifically in paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of my article.

4. One good friend wrote: “The issue is that according to the Israeli delegate, the UN Charter forbids the GA from deliberating on matters relating to war when the Security has been convened for that purpose. THIS IS UTTER RUBBISH AND A COMPLETE MISREADING OF THE RELEVANT PROVISION OF THE UN CHARTER ALTERNATIVELY, IT IS A NARROW interpretation of the particular provision. The GA is the ultimate organ of the UN. The authority of the security council can be said to be a delegated authority. Over the years the colonial and imperial powers have abused this provision and or misinterpret this provision to prevent the GA from exercising its authority. This even so when the Security Council has failed to discharge its responsibilities therein.”

5. In support of the views of my good friend, a former colleague added “I agree.I think we have to go a step further and say that the GA is legally justified (so law does matter often) to bypass the Security Council and decide to collectively intervene by armed force to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe. If nothing else the threat after a decision to do so will send a salutary signal to the 'chosen ones' who act with impunity - and usher in a new int'l law jurisprudence to check those who mass-murder at will.”

6. A prominent university don also supported my good friend’s view:“I agree absolutely with your views on paras 7, 8 and 10.The GA is the most democratic institution of the UN. It can be as powerful as it chooses to be”.

7. I cannot but agree more with the sentiments expressed above.

8. In my book, “The Third World and International Law”, with a Foreword written by Tun Dr. Mahathir, my views on International Law and that of the United Nations are certainly not at variance with those expressed by my above good friends.

9. This is what I wrote in my para 10:

“ What irks some of my colleagues is the concluding paragraph of Resolution 1860 which states that the Security Council “decides to remain seized of the matter” and it would seem, therefore, that no Special Meeting on the Gaza invasion could now be convened by the General Assembly to debate the issue”. (Emphasis added)


10. Bearing in mind that laws are always subject to interpretations, it was to allay the fears of “my colleagues” that motivated me to write as I did and also by making references to landmark instances when the UN General Assembly indeed acted completely on its own.

11. In the article, my primary concern was to drive home to those at the General Assembly the urgency of implementing Professor Francis Boyle’s International Criminal Tribunal under Article 22 of the UN Charter.

12. If, by the impugned paragraphs 7, 8 and 10, I had given the impression that I am in agreement with the objections subsequently raised by the Israeli delegate at the beginning of the current proceedings of the UN General Assembly Special meeting, then I am sorry.

13. There is in fact nothing novel in the substance of the Israeli objection. Israel had in fact raised a similar objection during the Application for Advisory Opinion by the UN General Assembly on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory before the ICJ in 2003.

14. On the question of jurisdition,the ICJ noted that under Article 24 of the Charter,the Security Council “ has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security” and that both the Security Council and the General Assembly initially interpreted and applied Article 12 to the effect that the Assembly could not make a recommendation on a question concerning the maintenance of international peace and security while the matter remained on the Council’s agenda.

15. However, the Court seemed to suggest that such practice no longer prevailed. The Court accepted the interpretation of that text given by the United Nations Legal Counsel and of an increasing tendency over time for the General Assembly and the Security Council to deal in parallel with the same matter concerning the maintenance of international peace and security.

16. As I write this response to my three good friends, the Special Meeting of the UN General Assembly is still in session and it is gratifying to note that Prof Boyle’s suggestion is one of the resolutions that is being tabled by Malaysia.

17. That heinous crimes against international law have been committed by the Israelis upon the Palestinians cannot be denied.

18. “Crimes against international law”, cites a passage from the Nuremberg trials, “are committed by men, not entities and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced.”

19. Hopefully, steps towards establishing a tribunal to put to trial suspected Israeli war criminals would see the light of day before the current special session of the UN General Assembly ends shortly.

Stop buying US weapons, Dr M urges govt

KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad urged the Government to stop purchasing arms and weapons from the United States, Israel’s main backer and supporter.

The former prime minister said the people should persuade the government to do so while local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) should also play their part by asking their counterparts in other countries to do likewise.

He said such a decision, which he described as “a small thing to the United States,” would not affect the world’s only superpower immediately but over time, it would feel the pinch.

“I think the biggest purchase directly from the United States, is from our government which is planning to buy a new aircraft.

“If they buy from the United States directly, they (the government) would provide cash to the Americans to manufacture arms for Israel to kill Palestinians,” he added.

Dr Mahathir was speaking to reporters after launching the Save Palestinians Campaign organised by the Coalition of Malaysian NGOs. -- Bernama

The Star

Stealing a march at the United Nations

By Tunku Sofiah Jewa

1. Malaysians must be truly proud of their parliamentarians yesterday.

2. Mindful of the provision of, among others, Article 2 paragraph 3 of the United Nations Charter which stipulates that “all members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered”, our parliamentarians from both sides of the political divide put aside their political differences and articulated their disgust of the Israeli invasion of Gaza.

3. Echoing a 2002-plea made by noted U.S. Prof. Francis Boyle after the Israelis committed the Jenin massacre, the Malaysian Parliament unanimously passed, inter alia, the following resolution:

• To urge the United Nations General Assembly to immediately establish an International Criminal Tribunal for Palestine to investigate and prosecute suspected Israeli war criminals involved in the brutal and aggressive acts on the Palestinian people.

4. Israel’s wanton invasion of the Gaza Strip began in the morning of 27 December 2008.

5. Twelve days later, at the request of Member States, the Office of the President of the General Assembly issued notices to all its 192 members that an “Emergency Special Meeting of the General Assembly on the illegal Israeli actions in occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied Palestinian Territory will be held at 5.30 pm on 8 January 2009 at the UN Headquarters to consider the ongoing humanitarian situation in the occupied Palestine Territory”.

6. The UN General Assembly is one of the five principal organs of the United Nations.(The Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Secretariat and the International Court of Justice constitute the other four.)

7. The UN Charter provides the General Assembly with certain specific functions including the power to:
• Discuss any question relating to international peace and security and make recommendations on it, except, as provided under Articles 12 and 24 of the Charter, where a dispute or situation is currently being discussed by the Security Council.

8. Clearly stealing a march, the Security Council met a day before the scheduled Special Meeting of the General Assembly, and after an hour-long debate adopted Resolution 1860 (2009).

9. There is no doubt that Security Council Resolution 1860 falls far short of the expectations of Hamas, the legitimate governing body of Gaza. Although the resolution calls for an 'immediate and continuous' ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and a 'total withdrawal' of Israeli troops subsequently from the Palestinian territory, the Resolution was silent on humanitarian aid and avoided condemning Israel as the aggressor in the invasion.

10. What irks some of my colleagues is the concluding paragraph of Resolution 1860 which states that the Security Council “decides to remain seized of the matter” and it would seem, therefore, that no Special Meeting on the Gaza invasion could now be convened by the General Assembly to debate the issue.

11. That may be so, but Prof Boyle’s Article 22 proposal (referred to in my earlier posting) and the resolution of the Malaysian Parliament is about the setting up of “an International Criminal Tribunal for Palestine to investigate and prosecute suspected Israeli war criminals involved in the brutal and aggressive acts on the Palestinian people”, and such acts need not necessarily be confined to those that are being committed in Gaza.

12. Despite perceptions to the contrary, the United Nations General Assembly is no toothless tiger.

13. The establishment of International Criminal Tribunals is not the sole prerogative of the UN Security Council. Whilst ad hoc tribunals concerning former Yugoslavia and Rwanda were created through UN Security Council resolutions, the more permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) was in fact initiated by a resolution from the UN General Assembly. (Alas, the ICC has no jurisdiction over US or Israeli citizens because their countries are not parties to the Rome Treaty which set up the Court)

14. And if one recalls way back in the 1970s, despite China’s veto power in the Security Council, it was a resolution of the UN General Assembly that ousted representatives from Nationalist China (now Taiwan) from sitting in both the Security Council and the General Assembly in favour of those from the Peoples’ Republic of China.

15. If legislatures in and around ASEAN, the OIC and the Arab League, for a start, follow the laudable steps initiated by our Malaysian Parliament, it will not be long before we see suspected Israeli war criminals appearing before another UN-sponsored international criminal tribunal.

War must be made illegal - Our Founder & Chairman was advocating this since 2003