Showing posts with label IDF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IDF. Show all posts

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Palestinian Village Under Siege Following Settler Killings by Mel Frykberg -- Antiwar.com

Palestinian Village Under Siege Following Settler Killings

by Mel Frykberg, March 16, 2011

AWARTA, West Bank – Food supplies are running low, ambulances have been detained for hours at checkpoints, and hundreds of young men have been held, interrogated, and beaten up, some requiring hospitalization, in the Palestinian village of Awarta in the northern West Bank. The village has been under continuous curfew for four days.

“Please, please come quickly. Dozens of masked Israeli settlers have entered our village, and they are attacking people and our homes. We don’t have enough food to eat. Now the soldiers are returning and are breaking into our home again. I can’t talk anymore,” Mahmoud (whose surname will remain anonymous for his own protection) told IPS in a hasty telephone conversation.

“Several days ago I was beaten up badly and had to be hospitalized. The soldiers also beat my sister and my uncle. They broke furniture and windows and cut power cables as they ransacked cupboards and upturned the contents of drawers.

“About 300 of the village’s young men were blindfolded, handcuffed, arrested, and taken for interrogation at the local school, where they were beaten,” added Mahmoud.

Homes have been ransacked and their contents destroyed and vandalized as the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) searches for the killers of an Israeli settler family who lived in the illegal Israeli settlement of Itamar, which has been built on Palestinian land and borders the village of Awarta.

Five members of the Fogel family, two parents and three children, including a 4-year-old boy and a 3-month-old baby, were stabbed to death by assailants who managed to penetrate the illegal settlement’s elaborate security system.

Entrances to Awarta have been closed off and a heavy military presence has saturated the area as the IDF re-mans roadblocks that were evacuated several months ago following increased security coordination between Palestinian and Israeli security forces. IDF flying checkpoints have also been set up and Palestinian motorists and pedestrians delayed as their IDs are examined.

The IDF has declared the village and the surrounding area a closed military zone and said anybody, including media and foreign activists, caught in the area will be arrested. The Israeli police have declared a news blackout on the case, and IPS has been unable to enter the village.

In addition to the 300 young men taken in for interrogation, Thai laborers working in Itamar have also been rounded up for questioning. However, according to the Israelis the attack is most likely to have been perpetrated by Palestinian militants for nationalistic purposes.

The savagery and brutality of the killings have shocked Palestinians, including fighters from the various resistance groups, and angered Israelis. There appears to be consensus on the moral heinousness of the act.

But while the attack on Israeli innocents, albeit members of a fanatical settler movement residing illegally on Palestinian land, has saturated local and international media outlets, there is a lot more to the story of Awarta and the suffering and brutality its inhabitants have endured at the hands of the settlers and Israeli soldiers.

Last year, IPS visited the village after two young, unarmed men were gunned down by Israeli soldiers at close range in a hail of bullets in late March as they collected metal aggregates that they hoped to sell at the local market to help pay for their education.

Autopsies on the bodies of cousins Salah Qawariq, 18, and Muhammad Qawariq, 19, concluded they had been shot at close range. Some of the bullets entered their shoulders and exited through their lower backs in line with being shot from above while seated or kneeling on the ground.

IPS accompanied the grieving families and villagers to the site of the execution. Despite IDF claims to have investigated the shootings, dozens of empty bullet cartridges, a saline solution kit, and other related paraphernalia lay on the ground undisturbed.

Israeli soldiers initially claimed self-defense after they alleged they were attacked but subsequently changed their story several times. An official investigation by the IDF stated that the deaths were unnecessary and could have been avoided if the situation had been handled differently.

While the IDF officially took responsibility for the killings, rumors surfaced about the possibility of a settler militia from Itamar being responsible. After the deaths a settler website mentioned that the first person to “find the bodies” was an extremist settler from Itamar. However, when news of this began to circulate in the media the website hastily withdrew the claims.

Awarta’s and surrounding villagers have been subjected to settler abuse and attacks on a regular basis and with increasing frequency during the last few months as settlers carry out their “price-tag” policy.

Every time an illegal settler outpost is razed by the IDF, the settlers carry out revenge attacks on Palestinians and their property. These attacks have included arson attacks on mosques, cutting down and burning agricultural fields, killing livestock, and attacking homes, people, and property.

Ironically and perversely, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has used the attack to announce the construction of 500 new settlement homes in the West Bank despite international condemnation.

Some have argued that the Israeli government is using the attack to divert increasing international criticism away from its recalcitrant stance on peace talks by portraying itself once again as the victim.

The settlers, who have always argued in favor of unlimited West Bank construction for ideological reasons and what they see as “security,” have wasted no time in erecting a new settlement outpost on Awarta land.

(Inter Press Service)

Read more by Mel Frykberg

http://original.antiwar.com/frykberg/2011/03/15/palestinian-village-under-siege/

Posted via email from Whistleblower

Goldstone Recants, Gaza Dies by Philip Giraldi -- Antiwar.com

Goldstone Recants, Gaza Dies

by Philip Giraldi, April 14, 2011

The United States has long been on the receiving end of Israeli misbehavior.  Israel invades Lebanon or Gaza, the US vetoes UN Security Council resolutions condemning civilian deaths and destruction of infrastructure, and Washington winds up taking the blame for condoning Tel Aviv’s recklessness.  Repeat that twenty times and it is no surprise that most of the world regards the United States as the enabler of Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians.  Osama bin Laden has repeatedly cited American support of Israeli repression as one of his reasons for attacking the United States.  Opinion polls taken in Muslim countries, where footage of Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians is nightly fare on television, demonstrate sharp declines in the numbers of those who regard the US favorably.  And the repeated application of the get out of jail free card to Israel has produced an insufferable arrogance in Israeli leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu, confident that the American dog will let itself be wagged by the Israeli tail whenever necessary. It invites more of the same, whether it is building more settlements, killing civilians in Gaza, or intercepting humanitarian missions on the high seas.

Not being held accountable ever has led to recklessness on the part of the Israelis and has further diminished America’s international reputation as it is increasingly seen as complicit in various outrages and even war crimes.  In the Cast Lead invasion of Gaza in December 2008 Israel was able to unleash an enormous and sophisticated US-provided military arsenal against a largely helpless civilian population within which a small number of genuine Hamas militants concealed themselves.  It was probably Israel’s most audacious defiance of international norms of behavior and the fact that it has escaped consequence-free suggests that history will soon repeat itself in the form of another assault on Hamas which will undoubtedly bring in its wake a large number of civilian casualties and further destruction of schools, hospitals, homes, and businesses. 

This time Judge Richard Goldstone, who was commissioned by the United Nations to head a group of four jurists asked to write a report on Cast Lead, has to be seen as an enabler of any possible future conflict.  Let us assume for a moment that Goldstone, who was under tremendous pressure from international Jewry, was actually sincere in his recent recantation regarding Israeli war crimes in Gaza.  His first report for the United Nations asserted that Israel and Hamas had both been guilty of war crimes, but that the devastation produced by Israel far exceeded anything accomplished by Hamas.  Israeli crimes included destroying clearly identified schools, hospitals, and United Nations food warehouses.  White phosphorous artillery shells were used against civilian targets, generally regarded as completely unacceptable by most of the world’s militaries.  It was collective punishment time with Israel’s Deputy Defense Minister declaring "The Palestinians are going to bring upon themselves a Holocaust." 

The UN report details how civilians were shot down when trying to surrender to advancing Israeli soldiers.  Mostly civilians died, possibly as many as 1,000, including at least 300 children.  The Goldstone report concluded that Israel had initiated a "deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate, and terrorize a civilian population." It also called for the behavior of both Israel and Hamas to be thoroughly investigated in both Gaza and Israel and that the issue of possible war crimes be referred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague for adjudication.  But as the Goldstone report must first be referred to the court by the UN Security Council, a veto by the US to halt the proceedings is more-or-less a given.

In the more than two years since Cast Lead neither Israel nor Hamas has seriously investigated any aspects of it, and several independent reviews have concluded that Israel, which basically lets its army investigate itself, is institutionally incapable of an objective inquiry.  The Israeli Defense Forces officer who oversaw the killing of 29 members of one Palestinian family has not been charged or even investigated.  One soldier received a seven-month prison sentence for stealing a credit card while another who used a Palestinian child as a shield received a three-month suspended sentence.

Now Goldstone would have one believe that it is his modified viewpoint that Israel did not deliberately target the civilians, the only issue that he is seeking to "reconsider" in the 575 page report.  That presumably means that there is no order on paper in his possession indicating that to be the intention.  And since Goldstone has had no access to any official Israeli sources of information as Tel Aviv did not cooperate in the inquiry, even that conclusion can presumably be challenged.  One has to suspect that Goldstone has bowed to pressure, possibly including Israel’s recent creation of a branch of military intelligence that has been tasked with seeking out and confronting individuals and groups suspected of "delegitimizing" Israel abroad.  That knock on the door might be a magazine salesman or it might be a friendly IDF representative with a warning.

Israel has been increasing the pressure on Gaza over the past month and many believe that the reprieve provided by Goldstone will give the green light to another major incursion.  Prime Minister Netanyahu has threatened to use all necessary force to stop the missiles being fired into Israel from Gaza, while other government officials and military sources suggest that another invasion of Gaza is being planned, possibly for next month.  The Gazan authorities have declared a cease-fire, which apparently is holding from their side, but Israeli artillery barrages have continued.  The tit-for-tat between Hamas in Gaza and Israel began, in fact, with the Israeli targeted killing of five Palestinians in Gaza between April 1st and 5th.  Hamas retaliated on the 7th by firing mortars into Israel and Israel responded immediately with artillery that killed five Palestinians.  Over the weekend, Israel killed thirteen more Gazans with artillery and rocket strikes.  When Israel kills civilians, they are invariably described as terrorists.

If Israel unleashes its military on Gaza many Arab civilians will die and it is the United States that again will ultimately pay the piper.  Congress will immediately support Israel, claiming that it has the right to defend itself and the mainstream media will also be on board.  Even if the White House knows it is Israel that is cranking up the fighting, it too will quickly cave in and make itself available to stop any contrary resolution in the UN Security Council.  American prestige in the Middle East will be mired in the single digits and the ability of Washington to act effectively in any country in the region if a vital interest seriously is threatened will be nullified.   Judge Richard Goldstone might feel that he has mended fences with his coreligionists, but he has a lot to answer for among those who believe that truth and accountability truly matter.

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/04/13/goldstone-recants-gaza-dies/

Posted via email from Whistleblower

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Israeli Hackers Vow to Defend

Israeli Hackers Vow to Defend

Carmen J. Gentile Email 11.15.00

A group of self-described ethical hackers are taking the reins of the Israelis' Web networks into their own hands in the Middle East's cyberwar.

Known as the Israeli Internet Underground, the coalition of anonymous online activists from various Israeli technology companies has set up a website to disseminate information concerning the ongoing battle in cyberspace.

According to the IIU mantra, they are "dedicated to the Israeli spirit and united to protect Israel on the Internet against any kind of attacks from malicious hacking groups."

The site claims to provide a comprehensive list of sites that were hacked by Arab attackers since the cyberwar went into full swing on Oct. 6.

Listed are over 40 Israeli sites that have been defaced and vandalized by various hacking groups. The number coincides with estimates provided by officials at iDefense, an international private intelligence outfit in Washington that is monitoring the ongoing war.

IIU also provides a list of Israeli sites that they believe run services with commonly known security holes like BIND NXT overflow, IIS 4 holes and FTP format string bugs.

Examples of defacements by Arab hackers such as the one perpetrated on the homepage of Jerusalembooks.com, one of the largest Jewish booksellers on the Web, serve as a warning to those Israeli sites with suspect security.

The Jerusalembooks.com text and graphics were recently replaced with the word "Palestine" in flaming letters and with text asking Israelis if the torah teaches them to kill innocent kids and rape women. The site is currently under construction due to the attack.

Taking credit for the attack is the group GForce Pakistan, a well-known activist group that has joined forces with Palestinians and other Arab hackers in fighting the cyberwar against Israeli interests.

Working alongside the group is the highly skilled Arab hacker named dodi. On November 3, dodi defaced an Israeli site and stated he could shut down the Israeli ISP NetVision, host of almost 70 percent of the country's Internet traffic.

Though petty defacements and racial slurs have been the norm on both sides of the battle, Arab hackers like dodi have promised to kick the war into high gear in the coming days, implementing what they refer to as phases three and four of their "cyber-jihad."

The Muslim extremist group UNITY, with ties to Hezbollah, laid out a four-part plan for destroying the Israeli Internet infrastructure at the onset of the cyberwar. Phase four culminates in blitzing attacks on e-commerce sites, "causing millions of dollars of losses in transactions."

IIU said there is already evidence of phase-four attacks, such as the destruction of business sites with e-commerce capabilities, which they believe caused a recent 8 percent dip in the Israeli stock exchange.


"The current onslaught of cyber attacks against Israel's key websites is perhaps the most extensive, coordinated malicious hacking effort in history," said Peggy Weigle, president and CEO of Sanctum Inc., a security firm based in Santa Clara and founded by two Israelis.

"ISPs and e-businesses must recognize the need to install protection that goes beyond firewalls to provide real security against application-level assaults."

In order to thwart future attacks, IIU has created what they call the "SODA project" (sod is Hebrew for secret). The stated goal of the project is "to inform and provide solutions wherever we can and therefore protect our sites against political cyber vandalism." It lists those websites with security vulnerabilities, making them susceptible to future attacks by Islamic groups.

The SODA project formed an alliance with the Internet security firm 2XS Ltd., which is linked to the site and agreed to provide security advice for casualties of the cyberwar. Though 2XS Ltd. does not accept responsibility for IIU actions, company CTO Ehud Tenebaum founded the group back in 1996, when he went by the name "Analyzer."

According to Tenebaum, on Nov. 3, IIU contacted 2XS Ltd. to share their idea of creating a site for publishing vulnerability alerts. "I liked the idea and took it to our management," said Tenebaum.

Another link on the SODA project is the Internet security information forum SecurityFocus.com, a resource guide to online security links and services based in San Mateo, California. Technical editor for SecurityFocus.com, Ryan Russell, said the site is not taking any sides in the Middle Eastern war, though he believes that the attackers seem to have the upper hand.

"Typically, the odds are heavily in the attackers' favor -- the attacker can launch attacks against any number of sites for little to no cost," said Russell. "They only need to find one vulnerable victim to succeed, perhaps after checking thousands of potential victims."

Since both Arabs and Israelis are launching volley after volley against the others' sites, Russell believes that neither faction gets to play the victim in this war. "The victims ends up being citizens and businesses in the affected area," he said. "Unfortunately, I guess that's not uncommon in that part of the world."

Posted via email from Whistleblower

The Art Of Retweeting | B2C Marketing Insider

The Art Of Retweeting

I’m not one of those people who likes to go around saying, “This is the way I do it so this is how you should do it. Otherwise you’ll smell funny for 7 years.” Rather, I like to give my opinion, and if you want to debate the issue you are more than welcome.

Given that, I firmly believe that a lot of Twitterers need a retweeting intervention.

What on earth is retweeting?

OK, let me back up a moment and give a really quick background of what I’m talking about, just in case you are new to Twitter or aren’t on Twitter at all (in which case this post probably doesn’t hold a lot of interest for you, so thanks for making it this far!). So when you’re on Twitter and you see a tweet someone has made, you have 3 options. You can reply, which means you are talking to them. You can “favorite” the tweet, which is kind of like bookmarking it (this is for your use, but anyone can see your favorites). The third option is that you can “retweet” the tweet. This means that if you really like what the person is saying, you can click “retweet” so that another person’s tweet actually becomes yours. It’s like a Twitter version of quotation marks. This allows you to tell all of your followers, “Hey guys, check this funny/smart/sad/moving tweet.”

The One Click Method Versus The Cumbersome Method

If you do “retweeting” the way Twitter wants you to do it, it’s really easy. You just click “Retweet.” It’s like the “like” button on Facebook. Click click click. A lot of people, I think, view retweeting as a method of interaction, promotion, and/or engagement, so they retweet a lot and don’t have to do a whole lot more. So, someone’s profile could end up looking like this:

 

This is what you see a lot in profiles. Retweet after retweet. Sometimes it’s not even articles that people retweet. Sometimes you’ll see a profile where the person is retweeting other people retweeting them.

Is this methodology *wrong*? I can’t really say that. But here’s the thing. If your last 20 posts consist mostly of your own tweets and retweets that are simple echoings of what other people are saying, are you truly interacting with others? If you look at the tweets that the person above retweeted, most are about business and Social Media, and then one is about pigging out at Christmas. Why is that there? Did they think it was funny? It definitely doesn’t seem to fit in with other things. Why are they retweeting the other things there? Are these blog posts that are controversial? Are they really well written? I have no idea. For all I know, this account could belong to a spam bot that just retweets things every few minutes.

This brings me to the “cumbersome” method of retweeting. It involves adding a bit of a comment before or after what you’re posting that not only shows that you actually read or engaged with what you’re retweeting, but it also reveals something about you to your followers.

This can’t be done so far as I know with a simple click. The method I use is to copy a person’s tweet, leave my comment, put an RT @username and then paste their comment in. So it would look like this:

Now this retweet was a bit complex because I wasn’t the first person to see this fantastic post. @Kikolani saw it, my friend @pushingsocial then saw it from her stream, and I saw it from his. Instead of leaving a longer comment myself, I let @bbrian017 know that I thought it was a great post and that I saw it thanks to two people I respect a great deal. That’s a lot to say in a retweet – it lets the person I’m retweeting as well as my followers know a lot of information – about what I share, who I take recommendations from, and more.

When retweeting goes a bit over the top

Friday was one of the days that I was away more than usual from my Twitter and blogging world. When I checked on things late in the day, I saw that there were quite a few mentions of my name. In looking at things a bit more, I realized that the following had happened.

Someone did a “Follow Friday” post listing me and about 7 other people

Then, about 3-4 of the other folks retweeted the original #ff post (a couple did add a “TY” at the beginning)

I think 1 or 2 people then retweeted THOSE posts

This is where the easy access to retweeting becomes a bit of a hazard. Ask yourself, before you hit retweet, whether your followers really need to see this tweet. Actually, that’s probably good advice regardless of what you’re tweeting, but in any case, will your followers truly benefit from seeing lots of retweets of your follow Friday mentions? If someone says something nice about you, do you need to retweet that?

Here’s something I have learned on Twitter. If you say something to someone and people want to see the other side of the conversation, they can visit that other person’s profile and look. With that in mind, 99% of the time, I will not retweet a nice thing someone says about me. Rather, I’ll simply and genuinely say, “Thank you very much!” The only time I stray away from this is if someone does a blog post that mentions me, because I want to help them drive traffic to their site in that case. Even then, though, I don’t do the one-click retweet method. I usually write my own tweet and then put a link to their post in.

Another disadvantage to one-click retweeting

One other quick point I’d point out for those of you who are fans of metrics. When you tweet out a link, you are able to track how many people click that link most of the time. For example, I use bit.ly, and I can see how much traction those links get. If you simply retweet someone else’s tweet, you’re not getting your own trackable link. You’re just sending their link out.

Retweeting is a gift

I like to think of retweeting as a gift – it’s a way of telling someone that what they said was so great that you want to share it with all of your followers. You want to give up some of your platform to someone else. If you retweet people all of the time, it becomes less of a gift and more of a “ho hum” activity. No one will really feel special if you retweet them because you seem to retweet everybody. In my own case, I prefer to retweet by not really “retweting,” but rather by promoting. If someone does a great blog post, I’ll explain why I recommend reading it and then tweet a link out rather than just retweeting their own post about it. Again, this shows them that I took the time to read it and offer thoughts about it, and it also gives my followers more insight into why the heck I’m posting this information for them. Everybody wins.

How are you retweeting?

Does any of this resonate with you? How do you handle retweets right now? If you tend to hit the “retweet” button a lot, give the “cumbersome” method a try, and let me know how it works for you. And of course, as always, if you have any questions, just let me know!

I will eventually follow up with an article about the ethics and the science of retweeting!

Posted via email from Whistleblower

Is It OK To Fake Your Tweets? | B2C Marketing Insider

Is It OK To Fake Your Tweets?

The other day a prominent Twitter celebrity was kind enough to re-tweet one of my blog posts.  It was not Kim Kardashian.  At least that time.  Any way, because of his power and influence, my link was promptly re-tweeted by 12 of his followers.  Wow, that’s influence right?

Only problem is, in that period of time, my server was down. None of them could have possibly read my blog post.

Welcome to the world of fake tweeting.

How often does this happen?

I’m guessing more than we could possibly realize.  How many people are either tweeting without reading … or not even tweeting themselves at all?

Tweeting — The Industry

I recently was asked by a well-known business professional to help them get started on Twitter.  The person had been flailing about and frustrated, simply broadcasting news about their business and products.  It was mind-numbing.

After a couple of hours of training and re-setting her social media mindset, her tweets were transformed and the engagement was much more successful. Then suddenly the whole thing flopped again. She went back to broadcasting mindless self-serving tweets. I scolded the person and asked what happened. “Oh I went on vacation and turned my tweeting over to the ad agency.”

This is happening everywhere. Fake tweeting for people has become a cottage industry. I think it’s safe to say that a high percentage of tweets are disconnected from real people, broadcasting links that were never read and are little more than the results of automated programs.

Again, it’s impossible to have data on this, but based on my experience, I think the problem is also growing exponentially.

And maybe I contribute to the issue, too.  I do “blind tweet” under one circumstance: If somebody I know well and trust completely asks me to tweet a link as a favor, the link is time-sensitive, and I simply don’t have time to read it first. So yes, in a way, I’m part of the problem.

Does anybody care?

Or is it a problem at all?  Isn’t there a place on Twitter for everybody?  Who made the “rules” any way?

Don’t you always have the option to un-follow people who are obviously not engaging as themselves?  Are we simply being close-minded and elitist by claiming that Twitter is all about “the conversation” and “authenticity?”  Do you tweet without reading? Fake your tweets?

I have my own views, but I’d like to hear your take on it.  The comment section is yours …

Oh, and if you’d like to read about my stormy relationship with Kim Kardashian, click for the scoop! : )

Mark Schaefer is a marketing consultant, author and college educator who blogs at {grow}. You can also follow him on Twitter: @markwschaefer.

HELL NO.

Posted via email from Whistleblower