LI ALLIANCE ON GAZA
Churches for Middle East Peace
Israel Peace Sign-on
Jew's prayer for the children of Gaza
By Rabbi Bradley Burston, Ha'aretz, January 7, 2009
If there has ever been a time for prayer, this is that time.
has ever been a place forsaken, Gaza is that place.
who is the creator of all children, hear our prayer this accursed day. God whom we call Blessed, turn your face to these,
the children of Gaza, that they may know your blessings, and your shelter, that they may know light and warmth, where there
is now only blackness and smoke, and a cold which cuts and clenches the skin.
Almighty who makes exceptions, which we call miracles, make an exception
of the children of Gaza. Shield them from us and from their own. Spare them. Heal them. Let them stand in safety. Deliver
them from hunger and horror and fury and grief. Deliver them from us, and from their own. Restore to them their stolen childhoods, their birthright, which is a taste of heaven.
Remind us, O Lord, of the child Ishmael, who is the father of all the children of Gaza.
How the child Ishmael was without water and left for dead in the wilderness of Beer-Sheba, so robbed of all hope, that his
own mother could not bear to watch his life drain away.
Lord, the God of our kinsman Ishmael, who heard his cry and sent His angel to comfort his mother Hagar.
Lord, who was with Ishmael that day, and all the days after.
Be that God, the All-Merciful, who
opened Hagar's eyes that day, and showed her the well of water, that she could give the boy Ishmael to drink, and save
whose name we call Elohim, who gives life, who knows the value and the fragility of every life, send these children your angels.
Save them, the children of this place, Gaza the most beautiful, and Gaza the damned.
In this day, when the trepidation and rage and mourning that is called war, seizes our
hearts and patches them in scars, we call to you, the Lord whose name is Peace:
children, and keep them from harm. Turn Your face toward them,
O Lord. Show them, as if for the first time, light and kindness, and overwhelming graciousness.
Look up at them, O Lord. Let them see your face.
as if for the first time, grant them peace.
Jews, Muslims, Christians Agree on
statement by leaders of the three Abrahamic communities in Boston was issued yesterday and was published in the Boston Globe
by a columnist who writes on religion.
Its thoughtfulness and the breadth and stature of its signers are
extraordinary – representing the best version of our religious traditions and communities.
in your own community, religious leaders are well on the way to adopting your own statement on the Gaza-Israel war and publicizing
it, wonderful! --
If however you don't have such a statement ready, the existence of this
one could be a great help. In that case, we strongly recommend
that in your own community, you take this statement with its list of well-known signers to your own congregation for
discussion and signing, and to interfaith leaders where you are. Then go to the local media and ask them to do a major news
story about the statement's adoption in your locale.
There are three benefits of this work: It could change
the policies of the US and perhaps the Israeli and Palestinian governments; it could hearten those Palestinians and Israelis
who are struggling for peace; and it could build the crucial long-needed, long-lasting networks of Abrahamic intercommunal
work for peace and other deep values of our traditions — social justice and healing of the wounded earth God gave us,
which we share.
With blessings of shalom, salaam, peace
AN INTERFAITH DECLARATION FOR PEACE
and leaders of the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian communities in Greater Boston --- all having deep and symbolic ties to the
land and peoples of the Middle East --- are anguished by the events unfolding in Israel and Gaza. Recognizing the legitimate
needs of all peoples, including all those living in the Middle East, for dignity, peace, safety and security –- regardless
of religion, race, or national origin -- we issue this joint statement with the hope and belief that our interfaith voices
will be heard clearly, above the din of war.
As guiding principles,
the long, complex, and painful history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
•We acknowledge the wide
range of deeply-held beliefs, and intensely-felt narratives on all sides
•We acknowledge that all sides
are capable of assigning blame to others, and asserting justification for their cause
•We observe that
violence by any side begets more violence, hatred, and retaliation
•We deplore any invocation of religion
as a justification for violence against others, or the deprivation of the rights of others
any use of inflammatory rhetoric that demonizes the other and is intended, or is likely, to promote hatred and disrespect
•We believe the conflict can be resolved only through a political and diplomatic solution and not a military
In the face of many competing narratives, we recognize that the overriding common need of the peoples
of the region is the prompt implementation of a just and lasting peace. Toward that end, and particularly in response to the
•We call upon the United States and the international community immediately
to intercede to help reestablish a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, toward the goal of a permanent cessation of hostilities
•We call upon Hamas immediately to end all rocket attacks on Israel, and upon Israel immediately
to end its military campaign in Gaza
•We call for an immediate end to all strikes on civilian centers
and citizens, both Israeli and Palestinian
•We call for lifting of the blockade on Gaza as to all non-military
goods, for an immediate and significant increase in humanitarian aid to address the needs of the people of Gaza, and for all
parties involved to join in taking responsibility to address those human needs
•We call on all parties
involved in the conflict to work sincerely and vigorously toward a just and lasting peace that addresses and promotes the
national aspirations of both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples
•We call on President-elect
Obama to make clear that as President he will urgently assert US leadership to achieve a comprehensive diplomatic resolution
of the Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflicts
Through this joint statement we affirm our commitment
to engage with one another, even, and especially, during times of great stress. We also affirm our common humanity and our
common belief –-- as Jews, Muslims and Christians --- that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must cease, that there is
no military or violent solution, that all human life is valued, and that all parties must cooperate to make the peace –--
a just and lasting peace desperately needed and deserved by all the peoples of the region."
[Institutions are listed for identification only.]
Salwa Abd-Allah, (executive council, Muslim
American Society of Boston (MAS Boston), Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC))
Tariq Ali (president, Harvard
Hossam Al Jabri (president, MAS Boston-ISBCC; trustee, Interreligious Center for Public Life (ICPL))
Rev. Jim Antal (president, Massachusetts conference of the United Church of Christ)
Dr. Abdul Cader Asmal (past president,
Islamic Council of New England and Islamic Center of Boston/Wayland; trustee, ICPL)
Rabbi Albert S. Axelrad (chair, Center
for Spiritual Life, Emerson College; Hillel director emeritus, Brandeis University)
Diane Balser (executive director,
Brit Tzedek v'Shalom)
Dorothy C. Buck (director, Badaliya)
Rev. Nick Carter (president, Andover Newton Theological
Dris Djermoun (president, Islamic Center of Boston)
Diana L. Eck (professor of comparative religion, Harvard
Imam Talal Eid (founder, Islamic Institute of Boston; chaplain, Brandeis University)
Elkerm (board chairman, Islamic Center of Greater Worcester)
Rev. Terasa G. Cooley (district executive, Massachusetts
Bay District of Unitarian Universalist Churches)
Mercedes S. Evans (Committee on Contemporary Spiritual & Public
Concerns, St. Paul Catholic Church/Cambridge)
Imam Abdullah Faruuq (Mosque for the Praising of Allah/Boston)
Felsen (president, Boston Workmen's Circle)
Lisa Gallatin (executive director, Boston Workmen's Circle)
Gemici (president, MIT Muslim Students Association)
Rabbi David Gordis (president emeritus, Hebrew College; founding
director, the National Center for Jewish Policy Studies)
Rabbi Arthur Green (rector, Hebrew College's Rabbinical
Rev. Raymond G. Helmick (instructor in conflict resolution, Boston College)
Arnold Hiatt (philanthropist;
former chairman, Stride Rite Corporation)
Rev. Jack Johnson (executive director, Massachusetts Council of Churches)
M. Bilal Kaleem (executive director, MAS Boston-ISBCC)
Anwar Kazmi (executive council, MAS Boston-ISBCC)
Kern (executive director, Cooperative Metropolitan Ministries)
Nabeel Khudairi (past president, Islamic Council of New
Idit Klein (executive director, Keshet)
Margie Klein (co-director, Moishe/Kavod House)
(Muslim chaplain, Simmons College)
Geoffrey Lewis (attorney; former president of the Jewish Community Relations Council
of Greater Boston)
Imam Taalib Mahdee (Masjid Al-Quran/Boston)
Rev. Bert Marshall (New England director,
Church World Service)
Jerome D. Maryon (president, Committee on Contemporary Spiritual & Public Concerns, St. Paul
Michael J. Moran (Pax Christi Massachusetts)
Sister Jane Morrissey (Pax Christi Massachusetts)
Merrie Najimy (president, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee of Massachusetts)
Imam Khalid Nasr (Islamic Center
of New England/Quincy)
Imam Basyouni Nehela (Islamic Society of Boston/Cambridge)
Rashid Noor (president, Islamic
Center of New England/Quincy)
Rabbi Sara Paasche-Orlow (director of religious and chaplaincy services; Hebrew SeniorLife)
Rabbi Barbara Penzner (Temple Hillel B'nai Torah/West Roxbury)
Rev. Rodney L. Petersen (executive director, Boston
Dr. Asif Rizvi (president-elect, Islamic Council of New England)
Rabbi Victor Reinstein (Nehar
Shalom Community Synagogue/Jamaica Plain)
Rev. Anne Robertson (executive director, Massachusetts Bible Society)
Salimi (president, Boston University Muslim Students Association)
Robert M. Sarly (trustee, ICPL)
Rev. Mikel E.
Satcher (pastor, Trinity Baptist Church/Arlington)
Adam Seligman (professor of religion, Boston University)
Sanford Seltzer (chair, ICPL)
Enid Shapiro (trustee, ICPL)
Bishop M. Thomas Shaw (Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts)
Alan Solomont (philanthropist; chairman, Solomont Bailis Ventures)
Rabbi Toba Spitzer (Congregation Dorshei Tzedek/Newton)
Rev. John K. Stendahl (pastor, Lutheran Church of the Newtons)
Sidney Topol (philanthropist; former chairman, Scientific
Rabbi Andrew Vogel (Temple Sinai/Brookline)
Bishop Peter D. Weaver (New England conference of the United
January 07, 2009 4:24 PM
Subject: Media and the war on Gaza
1) Media coverage: NY Times article
2) Media coverage: FAIR report
3) Amira Hass on the collapse of the
4) The Times of London on Israel's use of white phosphorus shells
As the death toll approaches
700, the Israeli military continues to defy an Israeli Supreme Court ruling that foreign correspondents must be allowed into
Gaza. As the New York Times reports (first piece below), foreign journalists are barred from seeing the scenes of carnage
inside Gaza, while being given full access to Israeli government propaganda as well as guided tours of sites where Palestinian
missiles have fallen.
The success of the Israeli government's concerted efforts to monopolize the narrative
are apparent - the media watchdog group, FAIR, has issued a report criticizing coverage of the fighting (second piece below)
and in particular the tendency of the press to blame the conflict on missile attacks by Hamas, often even while citing facts
that put into question this deceptive chronology.
There is a lot that Israel does not want the world to
see in Gaza. Amira Hass (third piece below) reports that the Gaza infrastructure is near collapse, about half the population
does not have access to water or electricity, and raw sewage running in the streets. Civilian casualty reports (and
a quarter to a third of casualties are reportedly civilian) would be much higher if they included the figures from this ongoing
humanitarian crisis, people who are just as much the victims of Israeli policy decisions and wanton disregard (this would
be a charitable interpretation) for human life as are the victims of F-16s. As the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs reports, "the civilian population of Gaza continu[es] to bear the brunt of the violence." Phyllis
Bennis gives a superb account of the international legal situation: http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=3064
And finally there is Israel's use of white phosphorus shells,
a decision that the Times of London (last piece below) somewhat delicately calls "controversial". In fact,
as the article points out, white phosphorus causes severe burns and it is banned as a weapon of war in civilian areas by international
law. Given that Israel is firing in and around even UN schools and clinics, the civilians packed into Gaza have nowhere
else to go. But the foreign media is locked out just as the Palestinian civilians are locked in.
January 7, 2009
Israel Puts Media Clamp on Gaza
JERUSALEM - Three times in recent days, a small group of foreign correspondents was told to appear at the
border crossing to Gaza. The reporters were to be permitted in to cover firsthand the Israeli war on Hamas in keeping with
a Supreme Court ruling against the two-month-old Israeli ban on foreign journalists entering Gaza.
Each time, they
were turned back on security grounds, even as relief workers and other foreign citizens were permitted to cross the border.
On Tuesday the reporters were told to not even bother going to the border.
And so for an 11th day of Israel's
war in Gaza, the several hundred journalists here to cover it waited in clusters away from direct contact with any fighting
or Palestinian suffering, but with full access to Israeli political and military commentators eager to show them around southern
Israel, where Hamas rockets have been terrorizing civilians. A slew of private groups financed mostly by Americans are helping
guide the press around Israel.
Like all wars, this one is partly about public relations. But unlike any war in
Israel's history, in this one the government is seeking to entirely control the message and narrative for reasons both
of politics and military strategy.
"This is the result of what happened in the 2006 Lebanon war against Hezbollah,"
said Nachman Shai, a former army spokesman who is writing a doctoral dissertation on Israel's public diplomacy. "Then,
the media were everywhere. Their cameras and tapes picked up discussions between commanders. People talked on live television.
It helped the enemy and confused and destabilized the home front. Today, Israel is trying to control the information much
The government-commissioned investigation into the war with Hezbollah reported that the army
had found that when reporters were allowed on the battlefield in Lebanon, they got in the way of military operations by posing
risks and asking questions.
Maj. Avital Leibovich, an army spokeswoman, said, "If a journalist gets injured
or killed, then it is Central Command's responsibility." She said the government was trying to protect Israel from
rocket fire and "not deal with the media."
Beyond such tactical considerations, there is a political
one. Daniel Seaman, director of Israel's Government Press Office, said, "Any journalist who enters Gaza becomes a
fig leaf and front for the Hamas terror organization, and I see no reason why we should help that."
reporters deny that their work in Gaza has been subject to Hamas censorship or control. Unable to send foreign reporters into
Gaza, the international news media have relied on Palestinian journalists based there for coverage.
But it seems
that many Israelis accept Mr. Seaman's assessment and shed no tears over the restrictions, despite repeated protests by
the Foreign Press Association of Israel, including on Tuesday.
A headline in Tuesday's issue of Yediot Aharonot,
the country's largest selling daily newspaper, expressed well the popular view of the issue. Over a news article describing
the generally negative coverage so far, especially in the European media, an intentional misspelling of a Hebrew word turned
the headline "World Media" into "World Liars."
This attitude has been helped by supportive
Israeli news media whose articles have been filled with "feelings of self-righteousness and a sense of catharsis following
what was felt to be undue restraint in the face of attacks by the enemy," according to a study of the first days of media
coverage of the war by a liberal but nonpartisan group called Keshev, the Center for the Protection of Democracy in Israel.
The Foreign Press Association has been fighting for weeks to get its members into Gaza, first appealing to senior
government officials and ultimately taking its case to the country's highest court. Last week the justices worked out
an arrangement with the organization whereby small groups would be permitted into Gaza when it was deemed safe enough for
the crossings to be opened for other reasons.
So far, every time the border has been opened, journalists have not
been permitted to go in.
On Tuesday, the press association released a statement saying, "The unprecedented
denial of access to Gaza for the world's media amounts to a severe violation of press freedom and puts the state of Israel
in the company of a handful of regimes around the world which regularly keep journalists from doing their jobs."
At the same time that reporters have been given less access to Gaza, the government has created a new structure for shaping
its public message, ensuring that spokesmen of the major government branches meet daily to make sure all are singing from
the same sheet.
"We are trying to coordinate everything that has to do with the image and content of what
we are doing and to make sure that whoever goes on the air, whether a minister or professor or ex-ambassador, knows what he
is saying," said Aviv Shir-On, deputy director general for media in the Foreign Ministry. "We have talking points
and we try to disseminate our ideas and message."
Israelis say the war is being reduced on television screens
around the world to a simplistic story: an American-backed country with awesome military machine fighting a third-world guerrilla
force leading to a handful of Israelis dead versus 600 Gazans dead.
Israelis and their supporters think that such
quick descriptions fail to explain the vital context of what has been happening - years of terrorist rocket fire on civilians
have gone largely unanswered, and a message had to be sent to Israel's enemies that this would go on no longer, they say.
The issue of proportionality, they add, is a false construct because comparing death tolls offers no help in measuring justice
There are other ways to construe the context of this conflict, of course. But no matter what, Israel's
diplomats know that if journalists are given a choice between covering death and covering context, death wins. So in a war
that they consider necessary but poorly understood, they have decided to keep the news media far away from the death.
John Ging, an Irishman who directs operations in Gaza for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, entered Gaza
on Monday as journalists were kept out. He told Palestinian reporters in Gaza that the policy was a problem.
the truth to get out, journalists have to get in," he said
The Blame Game in Gaza
actions to fault only Hamas
The Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip that began in
late December have reportedly killed over 500 Palestinians, many of them civilians and children. As is often the case, U.S.
corporate media's presentation of the events leading up to this dramatic escalation in violence have laid the blame for
the violence mostly with Hamas, whose rocket attacks on Israel are often cited as the cause for the current Israeli attacks.
In many media discussions about the events that led to the fighting, emphasis is placed on Hamas' decision
in late December to allow a cease-fire agreement with Israel to expire, or the group's failure to adequately suppress
rocket attacks into Israel during the cease-fire.
A USA Today timeline (1/5/09) explained, "In November,
the truce frays as Hamas rockets continue to land in Israel, which closes several border crossings and kills militants building
tunnels Hamas was using to smuggle weapons and other goods into Gaza." On NBC Nightly News (12/27/08), Martin Fletcher
explained that "a six-month truce ended this week and Palestinians fired rockets into Israel, as many as 60 a day. Israeli
leaders said enough is enough."
A Washington Post editorial (12/28/08) announced that Hamas "invited
the conflict by ending a six-month-old ceasefire," while Post columnist Richard Cohen (1/6/09) was much blunter: "It
took no genius to see the imminence of war. It takes real stupidity to blame it on Israel."
Morning News (12/30/08) agreed emphatically in an editorial titled, "Blood on Hamas' Hands": "The pictures
of the civilian victims of Israeli airstrikes-- especially children-- are heart-rending. But let's keep straight whose
fault this tragedy is: Hamas, the fanatical Islamists who rule Gaza and who have used the land as a launching pad for firing
rockets into Israel."
The New York Times' December 28 lead declared, "The Israeli Air Force
on Saturday launched a massive attack on Hamas targets throughout Gaza in retaliation for the recent heavy rocket fire from
the area." The next day, Times reporter Stephen Farrell asked (12/29/08), "Why did Hamas end its six-month cease-fire
on December 19?" He argued that the "rejectionist credo" of Hamas made this step all but inevitable.
These accounts fail on several grounds. For starters, the cease-fire agreement from June through mid-December was
credited by many for ratcheting down the violence-- rocket fire into Israel dropped significantly and claimed no Israeli lives
during the truce. (Prior to that, rocket and mortar attacks since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in late 2005 had killed
10 Israelis-- theisraelproject.org.) After the cease-fire expired, rocket attacks increased, though no Israelis were killed
until after the Israeli attacks were launched; four have been killed since then (Agence France-Presse, 1/6/09).
Interestingly, as the truce expired, the New York Times published an article (12/19/08) that began with a typical corporate
media formulation-- Palestinians are attacking, Israel is retaliating-- before noting that Hamas was "largely successful"
in curtailing rocket fire into Israel: "Hamas imposed its will and even imprisoned some of those who were firing rockets.
Israeli and United Nations figures show that while more than 300 rockets were fired into Israel in May, 10 to 20 were fired
in July, depending on who was counting and whether mortar rounds were included. In August, 10 to 30 were fired, and in September,
5 to 10."
The Times article, by Ethan Bronner, noted that what Hamas expected in return from the Israelis
never arrived: But the goods shipments, while up some 25 to 30 percent and including a mix of more items, never began to approach
what Hamas thought it was going to get: a return to the 500 to 600 truckloads delivered daily before the closing, including
appliances, construction materials and other goods essential for life beyond mere survival. Instead, the number of trucks
increased to around 90 from around 70.
Bronner also added that "Israeli forces continued to attack Hamas and
other militants in the West Bank, prompting Palestinian militants in Gaza to fire rockets," which produced Hamas response
attacks. The Times continued: While this back-and-forth did not topple the agreement, Israel's decision in early November
to destroy a tunnel Hamas had been digging near the border drove the cycle of violence to a much higher level. Israel says
the tunnel could have been dug only for the purpose of trying to seize a soldier, like Cpl. Gilad Shalit, the Israeli held
by Hamas for the past two and a half years. Israel's attack on the tunnel killed six Hamas militants, and each side has
stepped up attacks since.
This straightforward recitation of events is rarely heard in much of the rest of the
media coverage of the violence in Gaza-- including in the Times, since Israel began its full-scale assault. But for many consumers
of U.S. media, history is made irrelevant; a Time magazine piece (1/12/09) began:
Two sounds dominate the
lives of Israelis living near Gaza: the wail of a siren and, 25 seconds later, the whistling screech of an incoming rocket
fired by the Palestinian militant group Hamas. That gives Israeli families just enough time to dive for cover-even as they
pray the rocket will miss.
At 11:30 a.m. on December 27, a new sound filled the azure Mediterranean sky:
the rolling boom of Israeli bombs and missiles slamming into Gaza.
Israeli airstrikes in Gaza are anything
but "new," but presenting them as such--and pairing that presentation with an Israeli family sheltered against an
incoming Hamas rocket--gives a wildly misleading impression of a conflict where the deaths and suffering are overwhelmingly
on the Palestinian side.
Officials warn: Gaza infrastructures near breaking point
Between 600,000 and 700,000 Gazans have no water,
some of them going on a week.
About one million have no electricity, raw sewage is running in the streets in some
places and various localities, especially in the northern Gaza Strip, face the threat of sewer backups.
cannot easily get out to make repairs, due to the shelling and poor conditions of roads. The mobile and land-line phone networks
in the Strip have been seriously damaged from both air strikes and the power shortages. Increasingly, Gazans have no way to
contact relatives, local authorities or aid and emergency services, heightening their sense of panic and isolation.
That is the picture of the Gazan infrastructure that emerges from the reports of residents and of the Deputy Director of
the Coastal Municipalities Water Utility, Maher Najjar, and Maxwell Gaylard, UN Humanitarian Coordinator. Judging by the number
of wells that are inoperable or operating at very low capacity, Najjar estimates that between 40 and 50 percent of Gazans
do not have access to water.
Every day, air raids cause additional damage to the water system, and the number
of complaints to the water utility increases hourly. Yesterday, for example, the pipe supplying water to the village of Umm
al-Nasr, in the Rafah area, was damaged, suspending the supply of water to its 10,000 residents.
A pipe that provides
water to about 30,000 people in the central Strip was also damaged by Israeli air strikes. According to statements by Gaza
residents to Haaretz, as well as an affidavit submitted by Najjar to Gisha-Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, people are
running out of potable water in their homes and are unable to reach public faucets to obtain additional supplies because of
the Israeli offensive.
The homes of about one million Gazans have been without electricity for between five and
seven days straight, due to a combination of war-related infrastructure damage and shortages of diesel oil for power plants.
Gaza's water and sewage pumps run on electricity. When there is not enough electricity, they run on standby
generators, which are powered by diesel fuel. If the supply of fuel is not renewed to these generators within two days, the
remaining 25 operating fresh-water pumps in Gaza City and the rest of the Strip will stop pumping. In Rafah, for example,
70 percent of residents could be without water within two days.
Spare parts, such as tubing, pipes, and air and
water filters, are in short supply because Israel has prohibited their entry into the Strip since during the cease-fire.
The Red Cross yesterday was negotiating with the Israel Defense Forces over the transfer of about 20,000 liters of
diesel fuel that arrived at the Erez border terminal yesterday. The drivers are afraid of being hit by IDF fire, in addition
to the dangers of negotiating Gaza's poor roads.
Out of the 37 sewer pumping stations in the Gaza Strip, 32
are operating only partially because of the lack of electricity, while the remaining five are not operating at all.
A pumping station in Beit Lahiya stopped operating after its generator was damaged by the IDF operation, and as a result
sewage is collecting in the street. Four pumping stations in Gaza City have run out of diesel for the backup generators and
the sewage from three of them is flowing into the sea, while runoff from the fourth is flooding nearby farmland. If the fuel
supply to the remaining pumps is not renewed within a few days the sewage will be flowing into the streets as well.
In Beit Hanun, sewage has flowed in the streets for six days since a pipe carrying it to the treatment plant was damaged.
As of yesterday, efforts to coordinate the dispatch of technicians with the IDF have failed.
The sewage levels
in the giant wastewater treatment plant in the northern Strip (which was to have been emptied out over a month ago to prevent
flooding) are steadily increasing, posing a danger to the 10,000 people living nearby.
Israel rains fire on Gaza with phosphorus shells
Sheera Frenkel in Jerusalem and Michael Evans, Defence
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5447590.eceIsrael is believed to be using controversial white phosphorus shells
to screen its assault on the heavily populated Gaza Strip yesterday. The weapon, used by British and US forces in Iraq, can
cause horrific burns but is not illegal if used as a smokescreen.
As the Israeli army stormed to the edges of
Gaza City and the Palestinian death toll topped 500, the tell-tale shells could be seen spreading tentacles of thick white
smoke to cover the troops' advance. "These explosions are fantastic looking, and produce a great deal of smoke that
blinds the enemy so that our forces can move in," said one Israeli security expert. Burning blobs of phosphorus would
cause severe injuries to anyone caught beneath them and force would-be snipers or operators of remote-controlled booby traps
to take cover. Israel admitted using white phosphorus during its 2006 war with Lebanon.
The use of the weapon
in the Gaza Strip, one of the world's mostly densely population areas, is likely to ignite yet more controversy over Israel's
offensive, in which more than 2,300 Palestinians have been wounded.
The Geneva Treaty of 1980 stipulates that
white phosphorus should not be used as a weapon of war in civilian areas, but there is no blanket ban under international
law on its use as a smokescreen or for illumination. However, Charles Heyman, a military expert and former major in the British
Army, said: "If white phosphorus was deliberately fired at a crowd of people someone would end up in The Hague. White
phosphorus is also a terror weapon. The descending blobs of phosphorus will burn when in contact with skin."
The Israeli military last night denied using phosphorus, but refused to say what had been deployed. "Israel uses munitions
that are allowed for under international law," said Captain Ishai David, spokesman for the Israel Defence Forces. "We
are pressing ahead with the second stage of operations, entering troops in the Gaza Strip to seize areas from which rockets
are being launched into Israel."
The civilian toll in the first 24 hours of the ground offensive - launched
after a week of bombardment from air, land and sea- was at least 64 dead. Among those killed were five members of a family
who died when an Israeli tank shell hit their car and a paramedic who died when a tank blasted his ambulance. Doctors at Gaza
City's main hospital said many women and children were among the dead and wounded.
The Israeli army also suffered
its first fatality of the offensive when one of its soldiers was killed by mortar fire. More than 30 soldiers were wounded
by mortars, mines and sniper fire.
Israel has brushed aside calls for a ceasefire to allow humanitarian aid into
the besieged territory, where medical supplies are running short.
With increasingly angry anti-Israeli protests
spreading around the world, Gordon Brown described the violence in Gaza as "a dangerous moment".
phosphorus: the smoke-screen chemical that can burn to the bone
-- White phosphorus bursts into a deep-yellow
flame when it is exposed to oxygen, producing a thick white smoke
-- It is used as a smokescreen or for incendiary
devices, but can also be deployed as an anti-personnel flame compound capable of causing potentially fatal burns
-- Phosphorus burns are almost always second or third-degree because the particles do not stop burning on contact with skin
until they have entirely disappeared - it is not unknown for them to reach the bone
-- Geneva conventions ban
the use of phosphorus as an offensive weapon against civilians, but its use as a smokescreen is not prohibited by international
-- Israel previously used white phosphorus during its war with Lebanon in 2006
-- It has been
used frequently by British and US forces in recent wars, notably during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Its use was criticised
-- White phosphorus has the slang name "Willy Pete", which dates from the First World War. It
was commonly used in the Vietnam era
Jewish Peace News editors:
Sarah Anne Minkin
Jewish Peace News archive
and blog: http://jewishpeacenews.blogspot.com------------
Jewish Peace News sends its news clippings only to subscribers. To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or manage your subscription, go to http://www.jewishpeacenews.net