US voters oppose move to allow open gays in US armed forces- latest poll results

(Social Justice South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

For our source quotes, analysis, and additional information, please see:

SACNS Quote Analysis:

US voters oppose open gays in US armed forces- latest poll THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 2010

Contrary to polls, by homosexual special interests supporting organisations, a conservative group, opposing homosexual special interests in this case has conducted a poll- this time focused on persons who plan to vote in the upcoming elections (presumably those to replace representatives later in this year)- the results were the opposite of prior polls which did not focus on professed planned voters. Respondents, the conservative pollsters claimed- opposed prioritizing lifting the American ban on homosexuals in the military.

A network of major opponents to a homosexual special interests effort by US President Barack Obama, and Michael D. Palm Center, to legalize service by homosexuals in the US military has conducted a poll of 1000 respondents who claimed they planned to vote in November elections: which could see an end to Democrat majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The Military Culture Coalition, said that: potential voters nearly unanimously felt that overturning the 1992 law, should not be a focus for the American Congress. Over 50% thought US President Barack Obama was putting political games ahead of principle.

On 9th July 2010, Reuters reported on objections, that those in a group most forcefully pushing the repeal have had, to surveying troops, as to whether they would react negatively, to open homosexuals in the military, calling any survey biased. Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military is the name the Michael D. Palm Center, once went by: this group is the one which opposes surveys of troops, and is often quoted by secular services.

Section 654, Title 10, is the law in question for repeal. A 2006 poll by those promoting the repeal, found similar results to the current one, with 69% neutral or opposed to homosexuals openly serving in the US military.

Contrary to media reports- "Don't ask don't tell" does not ban open homosexuals, but rather all homosexuals from military service in the United States. However, the system "don't ask don't tell" removed mandatory questions on soldiers' sexual attractions from questionnaires they were compelled to fill out. Whether the system is actually enforced by the Obama administration has come into question, after it emerged that the alleged wikileaks leak- who revealed thousands of US military secrets about war efforts in active war zones- had for a long time served as an open homosexual, and homosexual special interests activist in the US military.

For more information on the history of the debate involving the law which "Don't Ask Don't Tell" relates to, please view our archive article:

Bias in Reuters? :Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters SATURDAY, JULY 10, 2010







South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Just like Fort Hood: Wikileaks alleged traitor signs were all there

(Catholic Watchdog South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Like the Islamist special interest cause activist soldiers who detonated bombs against US troops in the mid-east, or the Fort Hood shooter; with the wikileaks fiasco for the US military, the signs were all there:

The alleged leak was reportedly a homosexual (colloquial: gay) special interests activist, who aired publicly, his breaking of US law, in pursuit of his special interests: as a homosexual in the military; and publicly made known his increasingly malcontent style opinions.

"The Wikileaks story is all about revelations. But very few news stories covering that controversy have covered the fuller story. What don’t they want to reveal?

The UK Telegraph shows the clues were there. Right upfront, the Telegraph notes that the prime suspect in the leaks, Pfc Bradley Manning, ‘raged against the US Army and society at large in the days before he allegedly downloaded thousands of secret military documents.’ The logical question ‘what did they know and when did they know it?’ applies.

The Pentagon, which is investigating the source of the leak, is expected to study Mr Manning’s background to ascertain if they missed any warnings when he applied to join the US Army. The postings on his Facebook page are also likely to form part of the inquiry.

That’s more than British understatement. It’s the assumption that information well known in Mr. Manning’s world and publicly available to anyone of interest is finally going to figure into an investigation that should have started many months ago and might have prevented the damage.

Mr Manning, who is openly homosexual, began his gloomy postings on January 12, saying: “Bradley Manning didn’t want this fight. Too much to lose, too fast.”

At the beginning of May, when he was serving at a US military base near Baghdad, he changed his status to: “Bradley Manning is now left with the sinking feeling that he doesn’t have anything left.”

Then he was left by his boyfriend, the article notes, and Manning was “livid.”

His tagline on his personal page reads: “Take me for who I am, or face the consequences!” …

Pictures on Mr Manning’s Facebook page include photos of him on school trips during his time in Wales and at a gay rights rally, where he is holding up a placard demanding equality on “the battlefield”."

InForum Blog by Sheila Liaugminas (Catholic; Independent; American; Conservative)

08 / 08 | August / 2010

Sheila goes on to note how the alleged de jure traitor became more and more frustrated. She also notes, that just like in the case of the Islamist special interests activist who shot up Fort Hood, the whistle blower in this case, had been open in his opposition to the US military, and openly in this case displayed allegedly: conduct which in US law was illegal. "Don't ask don't tell"- simply did away with questions of sexuality in recruitment surveys- required of troops: it did not decriminalize homosexuality in the military. However, no matter the amounts of awards she has won, Sheila misses a point: it was not simply a laxity of enforcement as regards open disobedience against the military via don't ask don't tell defiance.

The US military, like other institutions has vastly neglected the internet. Further, the Fort Hood case, makes it clear: very little at all is enforced by the very lax US military.

For America and its allies: the Wikileaks leak was a terrible scorpion sting against the Achilles Tendon, a tragedy, which aided the rest of the world: in accusations against America for a seemingly dirty war: not that less read media sources weren't reporting on such a war in any case.

The problem with such alleged radicals as this individual- lies not in their sexual orientation: which here is circumstantial, specific to this case, but in their alleged preparedness to destroy structures designed to save lives. The bigger problem, is that once again the US system never caught this individual. This is a problem for America, which has increasingly become more desperate as Obama leads war efforts into ever larger troop deployments.

Then again, this is only a problem for America and its allies: and the man if a traitor: is a traitor against America's military: after all: President Obama: said Wikileaks put American lives at risk: they likely also saved many non-American lives.

And transparency is no absolute virtue.

"Homosexuality" can also be a sign of past trauma- or of identity crises: the second of which may well have been why a soldier would allegedly betray their country for the sake of whatever cause. His alleged treachery against America, has certainly given the rest of the world much to speak of. It may cost American lives, but that is not so much a concern as how America appears to be fighting the war, it would be quite apt for a United Nations investigation to be launched now, as happened against North Korea, when they allegedly shot at a South Korean ship. Accusations of a trigger happy US army, which allegedly carries out many abuses: are certainly noteworthy, if accurate. Treachery is an internal matter for America, what the United States does with their alleged traitors is their business- so long as it is justly handled: this should not detract from the importance of any such accusations, especially if well documented.

What is noteworthy, is that once again, it has been shown: how lax and incompetent US intelligence appears to be. This is no less important than the fact that a basic outline of their war strategy has now been revealed, along with information that America's Islamist special interest cause enemies can now download for free.





South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Wikileaks and the US intelligence quagmire

(Social Justice South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais



View Larger Map


"Summary

25th July 2010 5:00 PM EST WikiLeaks has released a document set called the Afghan War Diary, an extraordinary compendium of over 91,000 reports covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010.

The reports, while written by soldiers and intelligence officers, and mainly describing lethal military actions involving the United States military, also include intelligence information, reports of meetings with political figures, and related detail.

The document collection is available on a dedicated webpage.

The reports cover most units from the US Army with the exception of most US Special Forces' activities. The reports do not generally cover top secret operations or European and other ISAF Forces operations.

We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from the total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits.

The data is provided in HTML (web), CSV (comma-separated value) and SQL (database) formats, and also was rendered into KML (Keyhole Markup Language) mapping data that can be used with Google Earth. Please note that the checksums will change."

Wikileaks (a clandestine organization which is known for its use of advanced technological and legal techniques in order to leak top secret government documents to the general public)

26 / 07 | July / 2010

Wikileaks, a site which many journalists wished they worked for, and many others: especially world governments: fear, has done it again. Someone within the US government has downloaded thousands of classified files, which they uploaded to the whistle blower organization: the bane of intelligence and counter-intelligence everywhere.

The site revealed allegedly from the intelligence documents of the US government that US special forces have allegedly been ordered to kill or capture suspected Taliban heads with no form of trial, that Pakistani intelligence has allegedly helped the Taliban in planning their attacks on the coalition efforts, and that over 100 Afghani civilians have allegedly accidentally been shot by US troops' mistakes. PR coups by the coalition claiming that they are ultra-cautious, firing warnings before shooting, and even purposely missing, have thus been called into question. US President Barack Obama, has understandably attempted to call into question Wikileak's ethics, the same man had in the past, amidst controversy asked US citizens to forward him any emails they received seemingly of those with questioning or critical views against him a while ago.

The US is allegedly concerned over US lives due to the wikileaks leak, not seemingly mentioning non-coalition lives. Prior Pakistani intelligence chief, Lieutenant General Hamid Gul (Inter-Services Intelligence [ISI]), says accusations against him are false. Pakistan is internationally known for human rights abuses and other alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

Up to 91 000 (Ninety-one Thousand) documents were leaked by the transparency activists at Wikileaks. Starting in 2004 to about 2010.

Many journalists find the service indispensable, and believe it vital to protecting democracy, other subscribe to its services.

Important quotes:

"The United States has condemned as "irresponsible" the leak of 90,000 military records, saying publication could threaten national security.

The documents released by the Wikileaks website include details of killings of Afghan civilians unreported until now.

Three news organisations had advance access to the records, which also show Nato concerns that Pakistan and Iran are helping the Taliban in Afghanistan."

BBC World News (Secular; Governmental; United Kingdom/British)

26 / 07 | July / 2010

"The papers contain specific claims that Pakistani intelligence helped the Taliban plan attacks on NATO, United Nations and Indian targets.

One refers to an alleged meeting between insurgents and the former Pakistani intelligence chief, Lieutenant General Hamid Gul.

He says the allegations are false."

Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Governmental; Australian; Secular)

27 / 07 | July / 2010

Barack Obama, has vastly escalated the US war on Al Qaeda, and others, from the much smaller wars fought by an anti-"terror" crusading George W. Bush. Guantanamo Bay, is still open for business, and America, has increasingly been continuing associations with shifty regimes. The Afghan regime is one which has fronted a strong belief is a need for legally enforced marital rape, and which has allowed the arrest of those who convert away from Islam. A report by French Propaganda station: France 24, shows Afghan soldiers being used as human de-mining tools, being made to walk in front of vehicles, to detonate IEDs, it also alleges massive corruption, and shows an Afghan army hardly capable of putting on its own helmet, never mind fighting a war, and one where many desert having completed training, going to who knows which forces or armies around which could use their skills. It is thought the Taliban will regain Afghanistan the moment the international troops leave the area. Wikileaks has called the leak a hero for their actions.

Wikileaks claim they do not verify sources, but documents. They have purposely created a system they claim to make whistle-blowers untraceable even to themselves.

Many have viewed the leak here:

http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010




South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Bias in Reuters? :Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters

(Social Justice South Africa)

Analytical Article by Marc Aupiais

Article summary: looks into either an error or a misrepresentation by a Reuters article, as well as into the arguments surrounding a US policy and the law that policy stifles.

Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters

So goes a headline in a Reuters (British; Independent; Secular) piece on the controversial repeal of the policy of don't ask don't tell, or so they inaccurately claim to start. Don't ask don't tell won't be repealed: all it entailed was taking questions on a trooper's sexuality from questionnaires, without lifting the ban on homosexuals in the military: creating the de facto position, that homosexuals who wanted to serve would keep quiet and other troops would not ask if they were that. Pretty much the same as if our army were to get rid of the question of how old a trooper was.

The more concerning issue lies here, to quote their article:

"The Palm Center, a research institute of the University of California, Santa Barbara, was one of the groups critical of the overall polling approach by the Pentagon.

"Why would you ask those questions unless you thought there was something potentially wrong with (that group)?" asked Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin. "You would never have a survey asking: Would you share a shower with a Catholic soldier?""

09 / 07 | July / 2010

It makes it seem as though the man and centre quoted have no specific agenda, not so if one researches his history and the centre's history (interestingly they call it the Palm Center, and not the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military [CSSMM] by which it was often referred to as in the past, before it decided on a name change it seems),

"WASHINGTON, D.C., June 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A pro-homosexual group known as Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (CSSMM), a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, claims to have unearthed a current Pentagon document that lists homosexuality as a psychological disorder."

LifesiteNews (Catholic; Independent; Canadian; Read in and trusted in the Vatican) 20 / 06 | June / 2006

The Palm Center is more than simply an activist group, even liberal media such as CNN see it as much more:

"The Palm Center, which circulated the statement calling for the repeal of the "don't ask-don't tell" policy, is looking to President-elect Barack Obama to address the controversial issue of gays in the"

CNN (Activist; Left leaning; American; Independent; Secular) 17 / 12 | November / 2008

In other words, the very group with instituted the call for a change of policy is being quoted like an independent objective source which disagrees.

NRO National Review Online's conservative think tank further notes how the Palm Center has been an active proponent of doing away with the law, without military input why they would possibly oppose any survey:

"Someone needs to break this news to the Michael D. Palm Center, an activist group based at the University of California–Santa Barbara that used to call itself the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military. On Monday the Palm Center issued a pretentious and legally absurd report claiming that President Obama can indeed snap his fingers with an executive order suspending enforcement of the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military. That law, Section 654, Title 10, differs from Bill Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” administrative policy because it states that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in uniform.

Even Pennsylvania Democrat Joe Sestak, co-sponsor of a House bill (H.R. 1283) to repeal the 1993 law, recently told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Obama should not try to get around Congress on a matter such as this. “We are a nation of laws,” said Sestak, “and in the last administration we saw executive actions that seemed to bend if not break those laws.”

The Palm Center’s desperation strategy seemed to be reflected during last Sunday’s ABC News program “This Week.” Host George Stephanopoulos aggressively questioned Pres. Barack Obama’s national security adviser, James Jones, on the issue of homosexuals in the military. Acknowledging congressional and military resistance to Obama’s position on the issue, Stephanopoulos suggested that the president should try to circumvent the law by suspending enforcement.

The question reflected the Palm Center’s latest polemic, which encourages the president to stop enforcing the law, rendering it essentially meaningless. Using contrived arguments, the Palm Center gay-studies scholars unconvincingly tried to justify unilateral non-enforcement of the law. The document advocates an interpretation based on the rarely used authority that underlies presidential “stop-loss” orders that sometimes are issued to keep troops in the field during a military or national emergency."

National Review Online (American; Independent; Secular; Conservative)analytical editorial on 14 / 05 | May / 2009

The current poll seems to be addressing concerning results in the past which say that there may be a mass exodus of American troops if homosexual troops are allowed to serve de jure in the US military:

"The 2008 Military Times Poll asked a new question that produced jaw-dropping results: “If the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is overturned and gays are allowed to serve openly, how would you respond?” The article emphasized that 71% of respondents said they would continue to serve. But almost 10% said “I would not re-enlist or extend my service,” and 14% said “I would consider not re-enlisting or extending my service.” Only 6% expressed “No Opinion.” Before voting to repeal the law, Section 654, Title 10, members of Congress, and President-elect Barack Obama, ought to do the math.

[...]

The December 2006 news release announcing the often-quoted Zogby Poll on this subject, which was paid for by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (now called the Michael D. Palm Center), blatantly spun the story by omitting mention of responses to the key question asked — Should homosexuals serve openly in the military? The 26% of Zogby respondents who favored repeal of the law could not compete with the combined 69% of people who said that they were opposed or neutral on that question. This was hardly a mandate for radical cultural change in the military."

National Review Online (American; Independent; Secular; Conservative)analytical editorial on 02 / 01 | January / 2009

Christian Science Monitor, an American secular service which supports lifting of the ban says:

"“Is that where we as a country want to be? I think not,” says Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which is lobbying for a repeal to the "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) ban.

More than 25 countries specifically allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military, including all original NATO signatories except the US and Turkey.

Some 16 countries – including Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen – bar open homosexuals from serving in the military. Across Africa, 37 countries declare homosexuality outright illegal – inside the military or out. Last week, two civilian men in Malawi were convicted and sentenced to serve 14 years in prison for homosexuality.

[...]

Already, US service members serve alongside gays and lesbians. The Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, has estimated that some 66,000 gay and lesbian troops serve (pdf download) in the US forces today. And Britain, a key ally in Iraq and Afghanistan, has allowed homosexuals to openly serve in its military for a decade.

Canada and Australia lifted their bans in 1992, followed by Israel in 1993, and South Africa in 1998. The lift on bans did not result in a mass “coming out,” the Palm Center found, nor were there instances of increased harassment of or by gay people.

When Britain looked to repeal its ban, its military initially considered DADT. But they found it was a “disaster,” which “hadn’t worked,” was “unworkable” and was “hypocritical,” according to the Palm Center’s report, "Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer."

Instead, the British military based its regulations on the Australian model, which simply ban public displays of affection, harassment and inappropriate relationships – regardless of whether the couple was gay or straight. In 2002, the British Ministry of Defense reconfirmed that “there has been no discernible impact on operational effectiveness” as a result of ending the gay ban and that “no further review of the Armed Forces policy on homosexuality” was necessary.


[...]

Concern that the repeal of DADT will reduce the number of volunteers is unfounded, according to Dr. Nathaniel Frank, primary author of the Palm Center Report. In Britain and Canada, roughly two-thirds of the military said it would refuse to serve with open gays, but in reality no more than three people in each country actually resigned, according to the report. [Although it is not resignations which are referred to in American polls but people who refuse to re-enlist]"

28 / 05 | May / 2010

Of course in the cases noted, the countries involved are ones where homosexuals enjoy special political or legal protections, as compared to the vastly polarised United States, and what seemed to be cited as working was a more general ban on relationships in the military, and troops it seems were still too scared to "come out" the Palm Center, once again cited as pushing for the reform, claims. If there is real tolerance in the military structures of these countries, and homosexuals are not intimidated into silence, why would they not "come out", many of the inside concerns related more to unit cohesion in combat than to people resigning. The concern is over lives possibly lost, due to the position homosexuals in a military face. I might note, South Africa is not, and since Apartheid, has not been an ally of America, South Africa is a member of the non-aligned movement and is much more closely linked to China and Cuba, than it is to America. In fact, it is one of the few countries which periodically stands up to America, and 4 of 5 South Africans oppose all homosexual acts, meaning that even if gays were to serve in an organization as dangerous as the underpaid under resourced SANDF, they would be very unlikely to "come out", for fear of reprisals. Once again a fact checking error. Though yes, homosexuals, and HIV/AIDS sufferers are both allowed in the SANDF.

As the US's Catholic Bishop of the Armed Forces opposes the repeal of the ban, our service has determined to research into this issue. I personally am unsure of my own position on this issue, as is our service. However, what I personally do best, and what our service is known for is our fact checking ability, and I thought it important to note this bias, the quoting of a particular source as though a differing opinion, as yet not noting that it is in fact an activist organization, this is done both by Reuters, and by the Christian Science monitor, which take the views of the Palm center as though they were fact on face value. The British Army also has a policy of not shooting to kill where possible, simply because an organization says it has been successful with a strategy does not mean it has been. The questions the US military are asking are exactly the applicable ones. The note of "would you shower with a Catholic" equates sexual preference to religion. Interestingly the biggest opponents to homosexuals openly in the US military are in the Catholic church and hierarchy.

As I noted before, our service has no viewpoint on this matter. We do however affirm the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the norms of marriage set out in Canon law vis-a-vis the theological delict of the recognition of homosexual unions, and the theological delict of homosexual acts, and of endorsing these. I do however think it highly possible, that those who choose to discriminate against homosexuals on duty whether for fear of harassment by them, or due to a general dislike or other reasons, may well choose other methods of discouraging their service in the US military, or of practising their dislike, due to the very different nature of American society. If this law is repealed, it is also almost certain to be used to further the means of Islamist organizations which already have had great success in recruiting militia in their war against America and other western powers, notably due to the sexual mistreatment of prisoners. As this is happening, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which I noted oppose the lifting of the law prior Don't Ask Don't Tell's policy, has banned all people who currently experience strong homosexual urges, from US seminaries, in accordance with Vatican norms on the matter. I think the reason Republicans and the US Catholic hierarchy so opposes the lifting of the ban, lies in the polarisation of America, a tug of war which is beyond reason, whether or not it would be reasonable in the specific US situation for homosexuals to serve in the military.

This move, as with the Obama administration's choice to change "Freedom of Religion" for less tolerant "Freedom of Worship", since an unstable man of what in America is the minority Islamic faith, shot up Fort Hood, as with many other moves the US has made while ignoring conscientious objectors and religious voices in recent times: will certainly be noted by America's enemies, allies and neutrals throughout the world. If bible verses on rifles and bullets were feared to cost American lives, then there may be a very real concern that these moves may even further fuel the fire of America's enemies.

It is however vital that the US military does not ask its questions vaguely. It also is a matter of concern that Reuters did not note exactly who they were quoting. Further, religion is very different than sexual preference, and even more different than acts of a sexual nature. While I strongly oppose America's wars in the Middle East and elsewhere, if it were my country, I would be asking about the mortality statistics and injury statistics in countries which lifted their bans, especially among those suspected by other soldiers of homosexuality, as well as whether Islamist extremists gained more recruits. The first right of any human being gay or straight is the right to life.








South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Subscribe to our articles via email: Subscribe to South African Catholic Add your email to our system to: subscribe to: "South African Catholic News Service"'s dispatches: via email

Email:

View Archives

Fort Hood Obama's 9/11: as US State ignored all the signs...

(Social Justice South Africa; c.f. Sky News (British ; Independent; Secular) 14 / 11 | November / 2009; National Review Online (Secular; Independent; American; Right Leaning) 10 / 11 | November / 2009 ; Reuters (Secular ; Independent; British) 14 / 11 | November / 2009; Bloomberg (American; Secular; independent; More Left Leaning) 12 / 11 | November / 2009; CBS (Secular; Independent; American; More Left Leaning) 13 / 11 | November / 2009 ; 14 / 11 | November / 2009 ; The Telegraph (British; Independent; Secular) 14 / 11 | November / 2009; Fox News (Independent; American; Secular; More Right Leaning) 13 / 11 | November / 2009; 14 / 11 | November 2009; InForum Blog by Sheila Liaugminas (Catholic; Independent; American) 14 / 11 | November / 2009; 14 / 11 | November / 2009; LifeNews.Com (We know nothing of this service, it was quoted by Inforum Blog) 13 / 11 | November / 2009; Washington Post (Secular; Independent ; American; Has been accused of Bias in the Past) 12 / 11 | November / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

It now appears, from media reports, that the Fort Hood massacre, allegedly conducted by thirty-nine (39) year old Major Nidal M. Hasam, has all the downfalls of US intelligence that 9/11 made famous.

The alleged killer, a psychiatrist, has reportedly served the US (United States of America) military for over 12 years, with service pre-dating 9/11, and America’s subsequent "War on Terror". According to the media, he is alleged to have conducted many flag raising activities, from claiming non-Muslims should be tortured and graphically killed: to his fellow military health professionals, to talking with a radical Imam- via emails reportedly seen as harmless, by intelligence officials, to reportedly partaking in the transfer of money between the US and Pakistan, a country in an open civil war with the Taliban and with Al Qaeda. The alleged killer further is said to have not wanted to be deployed to Iraq, where he was planned to be deployed, when he allegedly committed the massacre.

According to CBS (CBS (Secular; Independent; American; More Left Leaning) 14 / 11 | November / 2009), a joint counter-terrorism taskforce under the not so watchful eye of the American FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) had known since December 2008, of between 10 and 20 emails between the alleged Fort Hood shooter, and a radical Jihadist Imam, an imam who the Washington Post identifies as Anwar al-Aulaqi, a US citizen living in Yemen, who encouraged Muslims to kill American troops in the theatres of conflict it is involved in in the Middle East.

The Washington Post adds that it was not one, but two intelligence task teams who were alerted to this, with a member of one of these, thinking the emails nothing more than research, which the army psychiatrist, now known for allegations that he conducted the Fort Hood killings, had been encouraged to conduct.

The alleged killer of 14 people, including a pregnant woman and her unborn child, was known to have sympathies with those fighting against America in Iraq, allegedly requesting unsuccessfully, that not only he, but all Muslims be freed from serving in the American military, as conscientious objectors.

Although his military lawyer would not comment to the Washington Post about any formal request:

His aunt even claimed that Hassam consulted a lawyer in desperation to be discharged, something the Washington Post seems to give some credibility to: via its article: in its quoting of an unnamed defence official, who claimed that Hassam’s training had cost the US military money, and therefore that it was unlikely he would be released from duty.

The alleged killer: Hassam, further gave a PowerPoint presentation, according to the National Review (National Review Online (Secular; Independent; American; Right Leaning) 10 / 11 | November / 2009 ), seemingly in 2007 still, in which he defended suicide bombing, and went through a list of tortures, which should be performed on all non-Muslims ("non-believers"), obviously culminating in the death of these non-Muslims. The presentation was reportedly to his fellow military medical staff, who did not report their fellow practitioner for this incidence.

Between Forty-Two (42) and Forty-Three (43) people had been injured at Fort Hood, while Twelve (12) soldiers, including pregnant woman: Francheska Velez, and one civilian, and one unborn child were killed, possibly as a result of the consistent ignoring of symptoms, the alleged killer, an army psychiatrist... consistently displayed over the years. Hassam has been charged with Thirteen (13) charges of premeditated murder in a military tribunal, but seemingly has not been charged additionally under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, or for the injuries caused the other victims. Additional charges still may be made, although what they would be is not clear. It is not clear whether the death penalty will be asked for.

The US Military's Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where Hassam worked, knew all about Major Nidal M. Hasam's (39 years of age) complete preoccupation with Islam, and with war. Their solution was to order him to attend a university lecture series, on terrorism, the Middle East and Islam, according to the Washington Post (Washington Post (Secular; Independent ; American; Has been accused of Bias in the Past) 12 / 11 | November / 2009) who quote an unnamed relative of a staff member there. He further is said to have addressed physicians there, still back in 2007, claiming that Muslim soldiers must be released as conscientious objectors, rather than be made to fight other Muslims. It is noted in media, that he did not see the American wars as against Al Qaeda, or the Taliban, but against Muslims, an interesting view to be ignored.

The Washington Post, adds, that an unnamed military official, denies that Hassam ever formally asked to leave the military, despite Hassam's aunt alleging that he asked to do so. Hassam, apparently, had become unproductive, and obsessed with the position of what he allegedly perceived as Muslims, who found their beliefs contrary to their duties as American soldiers. The US military, and intelligence, ignored his opinions. In fact, he was reportedly promoted from Captain, to Major.

Republican Representative Michael McCaul, of the state of Texas, a member of the House Homeland Security Intelligence Subcommittee, has claimed, as quoted by Fox News (Fox News (Independent; American; Secular; More Right Leaning) 13 / 11 | November / 2009): that Hassam further had made communications with someone or some group in Pakistan, where the government is in an open civil war, with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The Congressman, further claims that there were wire transfers between Hassam and a group or person in Pakistan. The Representative reportedly claims that he does not presently know how many monetary accounts were involved, or which way money was wired.

Fort Hood, according to SkyNews, is America’s largest military base. While giving assurances over a White House, and military investigation into the massacre, US President Barak Obama, has asked that Congress delay investigating the killing, claiming that it would be too political in its investigation. The attack has all the markings of at least one similar attack which was conducted on the ground in the Middle East, during earlier years of America’s wars. It has yet to be labelled a terrorist attack, or an act of war, or treason.

The Alleged Fort Hood Killer, who is currently recovering in Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, a hospital in Texas, having regained consciousness earlier this week: is allegedly paralysed from the waist down.

Southern Philippines: elderly Irish Missionary kidnapped, rebels suspected!

(See What We See News and Archive; c.f. AsiaNews (Catholic; Independent; Asian) 13 / 10 | October / 2009; SkyNews (British / United Kingdom Based; Independent; Secular) 12 / 10 | October / 2009; 13 / 10 | October / 2009; BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] (Secular; Governmental; British / (UK) United Kingdom) 12 / 10 | October / 2009)

[English; Afrikaans; français]


Article by Marc Aupiais

The Police in the largely Catholic Philippines, have announced the kidnapping of what SkyNews calls a 79 year old (turning 80 years old in December- but whom BBC says is 78 years old) Irish Roman Catholic Missionary, reportedly by Islamic separatist militants. Fr Michael Sinnott, was kidnapped on the evening (19h30 Local Time) of Sunday the 11th of October, by the six (6) gunmen who forced him from his home's private garden, near Pagadian City, on the island of Mindanao, in the Zamboanga del Sur Province, according to the Police Commissioner, Angelo Sumlao.

Fr Sinnott was taken away in a minivan or pickup truck, a vehicle which was later found to be burnt, after being abandoned by the hostage takers. They then allegedly fled in a small boat, likely a speed boat, according to eyewitness reports.

Major General Ben Dolorfino, claims that the priest has since (on Monday) been spotted by what is known to be a militant stronghold in the area of Lanao del Sur. Military personnel were not immediately dispatched to rescue the priest, who had- prior the kidnapping- been caring for children with hearing disabilities. Colleagues fear he will not survive the ordeal, due to his heart condition. He had a heart by-pass a few years ago.

The police suspect the Al Quaeda sympathetic group: Abi Sayyaf of the kidnapping, another suspect being the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). The MILF however, has denied involvement and offered to try find the priest. The priest belongs to the Columban missionaries. Abi Sayyaf, founded in 1990, is one of the smallest, and most violent of the separatist rebel groups. According to the BBC, it is blamed for a recent bomb attack, an attack on a ferry- in which about one hundred human beings, died.

The Philippine government has long been in a bitter civil war, with separatist militants, who desire to create an independent Islamic state in the South of the Country. The area where the priest was stationed was not one of the safest in the Philippines. Kidnappings by rebels are common in areas of the country.

Archbishop Mgr Emmanuel Cabajar, of Pagadian, warned against speculation that the Islamic militants were responsible for the kidnapping.

According to the BBC,

"The Philippines director of the Columban missionaries, Father Pat O'Donoghue, said Father Michael was "robust for his age" but had undergone a heart bypass operation four years ago.

"The concern that I would have is that if he does not have his medication this would be very serious thing for him, especially given the shock," Father Pat told the PA news agency.

"It must be a very shocking thing to find yourself bundled into a car and taken away.""

(BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] (Secular; Governmental; British / (UK) United Kingdom) 12 / 10 | October / 2009)

It is uncertain whether or not this priest in particular was targeted, or if he was targeted as a priest or not, it is though likely the kidnapping is for ransom.

Israel keeps her word: unilateral ceasefire, which Hamas has vowed to ignore

(Social Justice South Africa; Scripturelink Voters Guide; c.f. (thanks to a dear friend) CBSNEWS (Secular; Independent; American) 17 / Jan / 2009; c.f. BBC World News (Reliable; Secular; British; Government) 18 / Jan 2009; Archive 15 / Jan / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Israel said it was all about missiles, and considering the more cautious governance, of the ruling political forces, this seemed believable, and appears to be the case. Israel, has declared it would, and seems to have: unilaterally withdrawn offenses on the Gaza Strip, it plans to retain troops for ten more days, however, it will not launch fresh offenses, even as it has vowed that troops will defend themselves if and when Hamas believes it can attack. Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement), which the BBC suspects, could be funded by Iran, along with fellow terrorists: Hezbolla in their suspected funders: has itself, as Hamas, vowed to continue fighting, even as Israel has stopped offenses, resulting in a quite night, after about three weeks of fighting.

Israeli troops, remain, so that they and Egypt, can arrange security, to prevent Hamas from smuggling in weapons, to restart offenses. After the Unilateral Ceasefire, Hamas, which still has the destruction of Israel, which they do not recognize as a state: as their goal: still wanted bloodshed. At least one missile was launched against Israel after the truce went into effect, according to CBS, quoting a source called "Bergers".

1200 Palestinians have died in this conflict, as well as at least ten Israelis. What a child and woman is in this conflict is hard to determine. Being under the age of 18 makes one a child: but in Islamist conflicts, women have been suicide bombers, and perhaps could be militants, and children have become militants.

Facilities, and resources of many humanitarian, or relief groups, have been casualty to air-strikes in this conflict, and the UN is worried about the state of hospitals. Israel was accused of disproportionate force in protecting her borders, but countered that their civilians were being hit.

A probable reason for Israeli speed, and proportions; is that the Bush administration is set to leave soon: even with a proportionate response, it is much less likely, that Israel would get away with defending their borders under the Democrat Obama, who in this issue, said, via advisors: he would not cause two authorities, but who has spoken up on almost everything else. It seemed an odd statement to make. Barak Hussein Obama: voted to euthanise abortion survivors, and wants to get rid of parental consent for abortion. He has not, during the fighting: commented on the deathly situation in the Gaza Strip.

This entire conflict, could probably, have been done, and likely would have been done in a smaller, more civilized manner: if Israel knew it could rely on international support, as it protected its borders. Humanitarian casualties, and the entire situation, would probably have been low key in such a situation, whereby those currently in power in Israel, had previously been extremely soft, even to the point of endangering their political future: on the Gaza Strip situation. They only launched offenses: after a period of daily attacks on civilians.

This is not to justify the offensive; it is however to state what appears to be fact: Israel thought this proportion of force was utterly necessary. Considering stances of those in power in Israel, previous stances before this conflict: should they have believed there was an easier, less collateral spewed manner to protect Israel, they likely would have taken it. Before the counterstrike was launched, Israel, had already given up hope of international solutions. Also, efforts by the international community, as we, and any astute analyst would have predicted, and as we did predict: were not the ones to end this conflict: as we predicted, it was ended purely at the whims of Israel, as would be obvious.

As long as the world shows such blatant bias in judging conflicts, rather than realizing the root cause of these, and realizing who started what: civilian casualties will remain high in situations such as this one. If no-one else will look after Israel, Israel will: the problem is, the manner in which they now can: in that a smaller attack would have had as much backlash, and no attack, would mean allowing terrorism against their innocent civilians.

Blame for collateral damage: must be placed equally on Israel, and on Hamas: and on every biased voice which misrepresented this conflict. Refusal to reason by Hamas, and outright provocation, cannot be ignored. The Hague should be consulted on this issue. From all appearances, it appears as though the Israeli hand seemed almost forced: forced by fear of reprisals when Bush left, and by political pressure, by their own women and children, and rabbits, and dogs, and boys and men: and even an infant: by those facing daily terror attacks: in a war between hateful extremists, and civilians: in which a military chose to intervene.

Before the world says "Never Again", and then forgets they have: one must look at the core of the issue: the reason this tragedy has occurred: lies squarely on the arms of the international community: on the international hatred and bias: so evident (Archive 15 / Jan / 2009) in France recently: which had, when this situation was minor: completely ignored the plight of Israel: so that Israel did, as they always had: and put on a display, which cost, in this case, in a way: 1200 or more or less lives.

Paris, France; EU; Europe; Eurasia: Catholics stand up for their Jewish compatriots

(Catholic Watchdog South Africa; c.f. Reuters (Secular; British; Independent) 13 / 01 / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

French Catholics, and Muslims, and Jewish people, with the backing of French President Nikolas Sarkozy, have stood up, asking for calm, and order: due to firebombings, and other negatives backlash effects, of the latest Israeli offense on the Gaza Strip. Some groups blame the violence, on racism already present, in which: Rabbi's already, often could not go out on the streets, wearing their uniforms: and say, that this recent violence, has only been, basically a cover and excuse, to attack one's compatriots. Recently, a Jewish Rabbi, in Italy, use a publication, of the recently infamous Jesuits, in order to attack the papacy. The Pope postponed the canonization of a previous pope 9World War II pope), until further evidence of his innocence, can be released from archives; and has been the target of attacks from supporters of a major Israeli party. Statements, not endorsed, and seemingly apposed by the papacy, by a Cardinal Cardinal Renato Martino: of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (Vatican City;Europe / Israel: Pope and Cardinal on "Concentration Camp" Statement of official 09 / Jan / 2009), about The Gaza Strip, being like a Concentration camp, have ignited the anger of some Jews, the ame Cardinal, later, also attacked hamas terrorist attacks: the acts of firing Rockets: into Israel. The Pope, in contrast, has condemned to violence on both sides, and prayed for peace.

Since Vatican II, and during the Second World War, Catholics: have done allot to protect the Human Rights, of those who are Jewish, along with protection of many other minority groups' rights, throughout the world. Recently, the Vatican apposed the Sterilization of Gypsies in Europe, and the bishops in Northern Ireland, have condemned the violence done by the terrorist grouping : IRA, in Northern Ireland. Racism, is considered the sin of Superstition, in Catholic beliefs, and wrong.

This stance against the persecution of Jewish people in France, in a sort of "Collective Punishment", is against wrong, and wrongs which are rightly apposed. While Israel, has as a state been accused of extremely disproportionate force, in response to the unjustifiable terrorist attacks on Israel, by terrorist grouping Hamas (Acronym for: "Islamic Resistance Movement"): those supporting the rights of the Jewish people, or else supporting their war efforts, throughout the world: in counter-marches: have been seemingly remarkably well behaved. Almost every march in support of the terrorist grouping Hamas: or at least, a large proportion of such, has either involved the burning of flags, or else violence, or violence after the fact.

Canada, was recently, one of the only, of about thirty states, on a certain council, to vote against condemning Israel: European states abstained from such vote, and America called that council biased.

Catholic stances against the conflict in the Gaza Strip, so far as the official stances go: have always been careful to condemn the violence, but not ignore the situation, whereby it was started by Terrorist attacks on Israel, and whereby Israeli counterstrikes have also caused massive collateral damage. Condemning one side, without the other: can result in backlash against more innocents, as has happened in France, and likely elsewhere.

Some time ago, France saw violent riots, by Muslim immigrants, which saw car burning, it is not unexpected, that an immigrant population, which did such: would also; take to firebombing French civilians. The result of condemnations, such as those by the South African government: focussed only on Israel: is only further violence. Even if the ANC, communist affiliated, South African Government, much like the Socialist Spanish Governments's: Spanish Socialists has condemned largely one-sided-ly; this does not mean that this sprouting of violence is due to them: but it certainly has something to do with the choice of some people to make similar statements.

Notably absent in these appeals, is the "Union of French Islamic Organisations (UOIF)", which has called for further protests against Israel. Militants also, regularly in Strasbourg, where a mayor joined calls for calm: hold protests.

In Italy, a group of Islamic Protesters, recently stopped in front of a Catholic Cathedral, and then a train station, bowing down to pray. This caused anger in the more conservative sections of the Italian parliament, with claims: that if Catholics were to pray the rosary in front of Mecca: they'd "be" shot for such an act.

Jewish groups: in different countries, have complained of a rise in antisemitism: probably largely caused by a one sided; out of context portrayal of the conflict: by many people. Just as in the bible: words carry life and death: by words, rockets were launched into Israel, by indisputable terrorists, and by the same part of the body, Israel returned fire. By words, also: horrid, and unjustifiable attacks on those of Jewish descent, are being carried out. It is not only the Catholic Church, and religious leaders, and France: and others, who should be condemning this. Other nations, also: should be taking a stand: the Hatred, maintaining this war, which is the cause, according to pope Benedict XVI: cannot be viewed as purely within the walls of Gaza, and Israel. This hatred is international, and seen, or fed in every statement, which is disproportionate on this situation.

Vatican City;Europe / Israel: Pope and Cardinal on "Concentration Camp" Statement of official

(Social Justice South Africa ; c.f. Reuters (British; Secular; Independent) 08 / Jan / 2009 ; BBC World News (British; Government; Secular) 08 / Jan / 2008 )

Article by Marc Aupiais

In a small proof: that one must be very careful in choice of words: statements; comparing the Gaza Strip, to a "Concentration Camp": because of the fact civilians are unable to move out: due to conflict, and politics: have caused massive insult.

Cardinal Renato Martino: of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace; has caused Jewish people to say: the comparison: is not fitting; that a concentration camp is worse. The Cardinal later stated; that he also condemned Hamas; and related his statement to the walls: but those who had been in a concentration camp: were not impressed. Pope Benedict; in his state of the world address: again emphasized a need to condemn violence. The Majority of those in the Catholic church are neutral on the matter, with a few officials, and organizations breaking ranks. Israel called the statements by the Cardinal Renato Martino: president of the Ponitical Council for Justice and Peace: Hamas propaganda.

Iran has been accused of possibly funding the wars of Hamas and Hezbolla, by the BBC, in an article on rocket attacks from Lebanon into Israel. France and Egypt, have both been working at a peace deal: in which they had a near miss previously: with Israel accepting conditionally a peace deal, which they did not adhere to, when Hamas (initials for "Islamic Resistance Movement" in the Arabic dialect): rejected these: wanting open borders.

This latest battleground situation: started with seemingly unprovoked rocket-fire by Hamas militants, into Israel: after a 6-month truce. A number of people, including an infant, and a number of buildings, including one for child-care: on the Israeli side: have been hit. Hamas, has in turn: since been hit in outposts throughout the densely populated: Gaza strip: wherein certain sources believe there is a massive humanitarian situation: caused partly by Collateral Damage: on Israel's part, which they claim is because militants purposely fire from civilian areas.

UN (United Nations) officials on the ground: deny accusations by Israel, and by a Canadian newspaper: that there were militants in the area around a UN school. The UN, recently suspended aid in to the Gaza Strip: since an incident where Israeli troops were accused by the UN of shooting at some of their aid workers. We are unsure, what allegedly provoked the alleged attack.

Meanwhile: amongst calls by the ANC's "King maker" allies: COSATU; and by protesters who marched on Parliament yesterday: to call for sanctions against Israel: a Jewish association: has lamented the anti-Jewish sentiment, they believe they are experiencing: in South Africa: and have reminded the seemingly pro-Hamas: ANC controlled: South African government: who it is who started the attack in the first place. Racism, Bigotry, and hate speech, are not uncommon in South Africa; despite constitutional clauses against these. It is more than just possible: that those with a hatred for Jewish culture, beliefs, and people: have been misusing this situation: for their own unconstitutional means.

Often, support for one side of the other, springs from hatred of a culture, or religion, often based on, what many would consider: misleadingly superstitious religious beliefs. I personally, have even seen some who hope there will never be peace in the Middle East: believing that it will warrant the end of the world. These same people often believe the Catholic church to be evil... and many other things: but it is simply more proof, of how biased many viewing the conflict are.

The point is, that because of the location of this battle, and the players in it: and propaganda due to it: there is a harsh situation, whereby those who harbor hatred of one or other group: chose to air it, and those attempting to stop it: need to be careful of how they phrase the situation.

The alleged connection with Iran, is actually quite credible, according to the BBC: who say that Iran makes very little effort in denying accusations from Israel: especially , as credible as the connection between DRC rebels, and the Rwandan authorities: also noted by BBC. Who noted Rwandan troops operating in the conflict area, and these troops: have also been noted as apparently shooting down a UN helicopter in the African nation. Iran itself, desire the destruction of Israel. According to the BBC: they do not want a deal: which prevents smuggling of Iranian weaponry into Palestine.

A possible reason for the way in which Hamas is responding to this situation: could well be tied with the Iranian government. Iran, has no benefit from peace in th Gaza Strip.

Israeli-Vatican tensions have been heightened since the Cardinal Renato Martino: of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, used what can only be a metaphor to concentration camps.

Pope Benedict XVI, has not taken sides: but laments the violence, and civilian casualties. He still has done so: after the statements were made: according to Reuters; making it seem that these were the personal; views of the person who said them: and not the view of the Vatican: who are more concerned with collateral damage, and sustainability of peace: than with who is guilty of what offense: at least: at the moment; such, it appears from the outside: is the case.

Gaza Strip Situation, Middle East: Lebanon Factor: Hezbolla may have entered the fray: at least 3 missiles, maybe five: launched against Northern Isra

(Social Justice South Africa; Scripturelink Voters guide; C.f. BBC World News (Secular; British; Government) 08 / Jan / 2009; CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07 / Jan / 2009; CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07/01/2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

BBC World News is reporting that the Israeli and Lebanese authorities confirm the launching of three missiles from southern Lebanon, into Northern Israel: creating a situation: where Israel is now being attacked from both sides: complicating the war: as Egypt, and France, are still attempting a ceasefire between Hamas, and Israel. While three are confirmed, some reports, are said to put it at five, according to the BBC.

The attacks (BBC World News (Secular; British; Government) 08 / Jan / 2009) wounded two Israelis, and shell-shocked others. They follow a rise in anti-Israeli rhetoric, by Hezbolla, and 60 Israeli air-strikes on Hamas in the Gaza Strip, as well as renewed Israeli interest in a ceasefire.

The Previous war between Israel, and Hezbolla: happened on the back of a conflict between Israel, and Hamas: according to BBC World News. Hezbolla, recently became a major threat to Lebanon again, threatening civil war, over objections to spy networks they had amassed.

Hezbolla, like Hamas: is an obstacle to democracy: in the country in which they are based. Both have as a final goal: the annihilation of Israel, and the destruction of her people. Both: have gained what they have: via brute force, and propaganda. Neither group: is a state: both are known terrorist groupings: whose methods almost always involve the actions of terror tactics, and brute force, or calls for violence, and or propaganda: or political maneuvering, or the like.

Meanwhile the president of Indonesia (according to CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07 / Jan / 2009), has called the Israel-Hamas conflict: not religious, but political: a move by a largely (about 88%) Muslim nation, which is a statement, and move of aid, or rather: benefit, and advantage: to Israel: who have been made to face protests by Muslims, which have dotted, or cross-hashed across many nations within the the Global Scene: Canadian versions of such protests, were met by pro-Israeli Protests, meaning that those protesting, represented the two different sides independently: however: protests in the Islamic world have largely been anti-Israeli. This move by Indonesia, which is another move by an Islamic nation: saying that the conflict is political: also is of aid to any peace process, as Israel, whatever their methods, are attempting to protect their sovereignty, something which is endangered by protests and condemnation: which: if aimed only at Israel: further complicate the entire situation.

A new, tougher stance; by Israel's previously more moderate government: may have been shown recently: whether or not the Lebanon missiles were launched by Hamas, or Hamas sympathizers, or by Hezbolla, seems unclear. Further attacks, by terrorists, on the sovereignty of Israel: could result in an even worse situation, within the region as a whole. The humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is said to be severe: either caused by efforts, at propaganda: for the world: by Hamas, or by bombings, lack of water, and supplies, and the situation around deaths, and bombings: or by both.

Israel, recently accepted a peace agreement, which Hamas rejected: because Hamas desired open borders. However, since this attack, Hamas has become increasingly open to negotiations: something not apparent in a long time. Condemnations of Israel, out of highly partisan, and politically motivated: pro-Hamas nations, and notably out of South Africa: have done nothing to improve the situation much, rather: diplomacy: is credited with every advance gained for the people of Palestine: with Israel claiming: they will listen to their friends: a hinting that nations which distort the situation as purely their fault: will not be heard.

A reported: high level "Vatican" delegation to the Area, according to Catholic World News: is a myth: the only visit currently, by high level church representation, was already scheduled: and is thought not to be anything in addition. In fact, they say: this is an annual trip (CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07/01/2009), and nothing more.

Pope Benedict XVI: extremely Worried About Gaza Conflict: doing what can be done to set up peace

(Social Justice South Africa; c.f. IHT (Article quoted is AP; which like IHT; is secular; and independent) 06/01/2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

According to the Associated Press: Benedict XVI: is extremely worried about the Gaza conflict, and is encouraging what he can: to bring about peace: between the State of Israel, and Terrorist occupiers of Gaza: Hamas. Benedict XVI: wants the situation to return to negotiations: believing the conflict; which re-emerged, with hundreds of terror attacks by Hamas against Israel; and the Israeli response at a later date: as rockets continue to be launched against Israel, and Israel has launched air, then ground strikes: to be maintained by hatred.

At least 3 Israeli civilians have been killed, we previously reported 4 were killed, but this was either an assumption, or contradicts a dispatch we heard in Sky news. 3 Israeli combatants have also died in friendly fire, according to a report we heard, another two, according to Sky news: are casualties.

A Palestinian, who gave a report for BBC world news, approached a man: dressed like a doctor: saying "you are foreign", and asking his opinion, the man said that most casualties were civilians. Until international journalists are let in, including BBC's top brass: no clear, reliable picture of circumstances can begin to emerge.

Hamas had not been part of recent negotiations: and had seized the Gaza strip, by military might, from the Palestinian "Authority", and recently began launching terrorist attacks at Israeli civilians. Israel has been accused of a disproportionate response. Hamas has also: purposely operated from areas with large populations... and has aimed most attacks: at Israeli civilians: recently hitting a childcare facility.

Israel is letting aid into the Gaza Strip, but faces accusations that it is not enough, or not reaching sites. Israel claims that it is for their safety, that they are keeping international Journalists away. In Iraq, these were often kidnapped, and held hostage, and killed, however: it is not clear that this is the reason: that these are being kept out.

Pope Benedict XVI: believes that both parties need to return to talks: unlike South Africa: who has notably taken the side of the Terrorist Grouping Hamas: or seems to have: from media reports. South Africa is known for their friendships with tyrants, dictators, and terrorist factions. In the UN security council, it had increasingly blocked certain efforts against certain groupings, and also attempts such in the General Assembly of the United Nations. It has also been accused of keeping Robert Mugabe in Power, in neighboring Zimbabwe. South Africa is in the control, of the Communist affiliated ANC, itself: once listed as a terrorist group: in American systems.

South Africa: COSATU's ANC allies obey their "Kingmakers": and blame the violence on Israel

(Scriptrelink Voter's Guide; c.f. IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 04/01/2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Whenever leaders of the socialist affiliated COSATU trade union: noted for their statements against the ten commandments, and calls for genocide inside South Africa: by their leader: whenever these make statements: usually, the ANC, like a puppet, or lapdog, follows suite. South Africa: has called for Israel to withdraw without any conditions whatsoever, further, it has blamed the violence, squarely on Israeli soldiers: ignoring the originally hundreds of rockets daily: before the counter-offensive, and dozens currently: being launched at Israeli civilians, by Hamas: a group which took the Gaza strip from the Palestinian government: by force alone, and has repeatedly called for these terror attacks to continue, also saying they will bomb Israel with suicide bombers.


This despite thirty rockets launched by Terrorist group Hamas, into Israel, today: one hitting a childcare facility. South Africa's government has refused to act on Zimbabwe for 7 years, causing thousands, if not millions of deaths, yet the communist affiliated South African government, which itself has not objected much at all: to calls for genocide, and voter intimidation, by the Ruling ANC's members, nor has seen fit to prevent massive human rights abuses in Zimbabwe: has suddenly decided, that Israel, has no right to a peace deal, which will insure its safety, against Hamas, a group: which took the Gaza strip by force recently, and which is causing problems in the Palestinian government: with terror tactics, and forced empowerment: similar to that used for years, by Hezbolla, on Lebanon.

This is not to say, that Israel, is not causing huge collateral damage, it is not to justify their war: but it is simply another example of South Africa's version of democracy, which affords dictators, and War criminals, Terrorists, and human rights abusers: certain treatment, and other nations, a different sort of treatment.

What is sorely missing from this condemnation, is any call for Hamas to withdraw from dozens of missile strikes aimed at Israeli civilians: it is this sort of illogical: partisan diplomacy: which has allowed the Middle East situation, like the Zimbabwean one: to continue. It is simply more evidence of the double standards, by which the South African government views the world. We have yet to see the ANC condemn their followers for violent act, or statement after violent act or statement, nor have we yet to see very many of their politicians adequately punished for breaking the laws of South Africa.

While South Africa has seen fit to ask the United Nations (UN), to condemn Israeli violence: it must be noted, the press report we have read, not once mentions the fact, that this new violence was solely launched by the hundreds of rockets launched into Israel daily at the time. While we do not agree with Israeli methods, we certainly cannot possibly see: how it is that South Africa could possibly purely blame this on the Jewish nation.

If there is to be peace in the Middle East, partisan interference, by countries, like South Africa: must start to lose its power. This entire situation must be treated, by the United Nations: as exactly what it is: a war, between a political movement, which took power by force, and which has been launching missiles at another nation: from the area it has ceased, purposely firing from highly populated areas: with no regard for life: against civilians; and a nation, ruled by a government: which had advanced more than most: towards peace in this situation.

If Israel must withdraw: then the International Community, must ensure the safety of her free citizens. International troops must be deployed: to treat violations of the peace, in the same manner: as they have in any other warring region. As it is, unfair statements: will do nothing but continue to isolate Israel: meaning that they will feel they have to sort this situation out alone: and ignore the International Community.

So far, we have not seen a statement capable of ensuring Israel: that it is worth listening to. If this situation is to be resolved: both sides must be forced to halt attacks: shouting against Israel: while ignoring the consistent breaches of International Law: by their opponents, is hardly of benefit to the situation: South Africa's own "Quiet Diplomacy" with Zimbabwe: is based on some vague principle, of being "Neutral", even as the MDC, has periodically accused it of being utterly partisan.