Thursday, November 5, 2009

Mumbai terror attacks: And then they came for the Jews - TIMES OF LONDON



Times Online

From 
November 1, 2009


Mumbai terror attacks: And then they came for the Jews

Last November, more than 150 people were killed by terrorists in Mumbai. One target was a centre run by this young Jewish couple, who were murdered and perhaps tortured; miraculously, their toddler son escaped. We went back to Mumbai to find out what really happened that night

Commandos on the roof of Nariman House during the siege in November last year
(Pedro Ugarte/AFP/Getty Images)
Commandos on the roof of Nariman House during the siege in November last year
IMAGE :1 of 7
It is a sticky monsoon day in Mumbai, and Rabbi Avraham Berkowitz walks through the shell of Nariman House. Today, the ruined five-storey structure is testament to the ferocity of the terrorists’ incursion and their battle with Indian commandos. It seems impossible that anyone could have come out alive. All its window frames are empty. The lift is slumped at the bottom of its shaft, and giant, jagged chunks of the internal stairway and handrail are missing. At one point, a section of wall many metres high is gone, and the stairs would be open to the sky if not for a plastic draping. Some rooms appear almost untouched; in others, the walls are pulverised, the splatter-marks of gunfire everywhere.
Berkowitz is an American charged with recreating the Mumbai outpost of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, a Hasidic outreach and educational organisation that sends emissaries around the world. “We are in deep shock,” says Berkowitz, 33. “They have left a gaping hole in our community.” The questions the Lubavitch movement faces are being asked of thousands of other people in the city: what to take from tragedy, how to heal, how to go forward. But even as the organisation looks to the future, uncertainty lingers over what took place during those 48 hours last November. During the siege, six foreigners were murdered inside Nariman House and three Indians were killed on the surrounding streets. Four people from inside the house survived. The building was run by Lubavitch, and was part of a larger attack on hotels and public buildings across Mumbai that resulted in the deaths of at least 166 people. But for the terrorists themselves, Nariman House was different. It was the only Jewish target, and the terrorists would be told by their handlers in Pakistan that the lives of Jews were worth 50 times those of non-Jews. The organisers had sought it out with care. Most Mumbaikars knew of the Taj Mahal hotel. Few were aware of the small Jewish centre tucked away on a backstreet.Strangely, considering Nariman House’s central place in the attacks, the events of the siege are a mystery. The full story of what happened, of how the siege began, of the hostages who escaped, and of the baby who was rescued, has never been told.
The storage room in which Sandra Samuel and Zakir Hussain were hiding from the gunmen measured 3.5 metres by 3 metres. It was lined with shelves, two windows looked out onto grubby lanes and courtyards, and there was a stainless-steel refrigerator. A banal scene, really, but it was a sanctuary. For around three hours, Sandra, 44, a plainly dressed and dedicated nanny, and Zakir, 22, a diminutive cook with delicate, almost feminine features who called himself Jackie, had been wedged behind the fridge. “I called the police, I called our security guard,” says Jackie. “I thought this was the end for me.” There was little indication of what the men upstairs were doing with the American rabbi, his wife and son, Moshe, who was almost two, and their guests. “Nobody was speaking, there was just the moving of tables, shaking noises, bumps, things being pushed against the wall, things grinding,” says Sandra. It was approaching 1am on Thursday, November 27, 2008.
In an adjacent building, a British woman, Anna, was crouching in the hall of her apartment with her Indian husband. Anna, 41, is a thoughtful, dark-haired teacher; she didn’t want to give her real name because, in light of what happened in her adopted city, she fears becoming a target. All their windows — about 21 panes — had shattered from a blast after the gunshots and explosions had started at Nariman House at 9.45pm the previous night. So they waited on the floor for hours in the darkness, calling and receiving calls from worried relatives and friends, unsure of what was going on next door, even though Nariman House was only a few steps away. Curiously, the thing that struck Anna was the silence. It was as though the city beyond had ceased to exist. No car horns, no chatter from the street, none of the normal hum of a sprawling tropical metropolis. That night there was nothing except for gunshots, and they issued from Nariman House infrequently.
At around 1am there was one unforgettable sound that Sandra, Jackie and Anna would all hear. It came from Nariman House. Anna was crouching. Jackie and Sandra were hiding. And then, very clearly, a woman screamed. From that moment on, there could be little doubt about what was taking place there. “She screamed as a gunshot rang out,” says Anna. “Then there was a real sobbing. She was crying with that kind of… like she was terrified. That kind of crying.”
The central figures in this story are Gavriel and Rivka Holtzberg, emissaries of the Lubavitch movement who arrived in Mumbai in 2003. They offered local and visiting Jews a free place to eat, sleep, and pray. Gabi, as he was known, was an Israeli-born New Yorker, a strapping man with a wispy reddish beard. Educated in yeshivas (traditional Jewish schools), he saw Mumbai as a chance to build something — a beacon of Judaism — and to fulfil God’s will. Rivka, usually called Rivki, was 28, and grew up in the northern Israeli town of Afula. In some senses, her role was traditional, and included cooking and making a welcoming home. To acquaintances, the couple seemed to complement each other. Gabi, 29, was formal where Rivki was relaxed. “She was more loose, she wore trendy glasses. She was more playful. He was serious,” says Hillary Lewin, an American student and sometime house guest.
Illness afflicted the Holtzberg family. Their first child, Menachem Mendel, was diagnosed with Tay-Sachs, a genetic disorder, and died in 2006, aged two. Another son, Dov Ber, also had the disease, and was to die at four years old in December 2008, a month after his parents. Amid all this, the Holtzbergs had their youngest child, Moshe, and to them he was a blessing. He did not have Tay-Sachs, and Rivki called him her malach, her angel. Everyone on their street seemed to know him. Rita Sushil Merchant, a neighbour, recalls that Moshe would stand in his window and happily shout to her the new English words he had learnt. Before the attack, he was up to “banana” and “balloon”. What’s more, Rivki was five months pregnant, another reason to be thankful.
Sandra, a Catholic Mumbaikar who previously worked as a private cook and a masseuse, started with the Holtzbergs in 2003. Jackie, a Muslim from Assam, was hired as a cook in 2006 after meeting Gabi at a sports club where he worked. Since the siege, The Sunday Times has learnt, suspicions have arisen that he may have been implicated.
According to Sandra and Jackie, Wednesday, November 26, 2008 was a day like many others at Nariman House. Rivki was very happy. “That was normal,” says Jackie. “She was always very happy.” Gavriel koshered some chickens for guests and other Jews in India, something he did often. In the evening, he exchanged a few words with Sandra about Moshe. “You know, Sandra, I love this baby so much,” she recalls him saying.
The Holtzbergs had guests for dinner. Among them were the American rabbis Benzion Kruman, 28, and Leibish Teitelbaum, 37. There were also two women: an Israeli grandmother, Yocheved Orpaz, 62, and Norma Shvarzblat Rabinovich, 50, from Mexico. Kruman, Teitelbaum, Orpaz and Rabinovich would not leave Nariman House alive. Another Israeli visitor, David Bialka, 52, a diamond trader from Netanya, was more fortunate. Unbeknown to the occupants of Nariman House, at around 8.30pm on Wednesday, a dinghy landed at a local jetty. It contained 10 men from Pakistan. Splitting into small groups, they fanned out across the city, some leaving bombs in taxis on the way. Each man carried an AK-47, a pistol, 8 to 12 grenades, and was in constant phone contact with handlers in Pakistan. Two of them, identified as Babar Imran of Multan and Nasir of Faisalabad — little else is known about them — walked a few streets to the only Jewish target. Their handlers would emphasise to them the importance of killing Jews.
The first sign that anything unusual was taking place at Nariman House varies, depending on who you ask. On the first floor, Jackie and Sandra were putting leftovers in the fridge. Perhaps Gabi and the other rabbis were studying; the visiting women from Mexico and Israel may have been using the internet. Suddenly, in the dining-room doorway that leads to the staircase, a man with a gun appeared. “He was thin, light-skinned, tall. Almost like a common Indian,” says Jackie. “A long face, short hair. I only had a very short glance, so I couldn’t see the expression on his face.” In Sandra’s head, the events are much more confused. “I don’t know how it happened. It was all of a sudden, like a shot…” As the man raised his gun to fire, Sandra and Jackie ducked. The bullet missed them and thudded into a pillar. Somehow there was a delay, the man did not shoot again, and Jackie had time to close the door. He and Sandra ran to the row of windows that faced the street and looked out. A crowd was gathering. Motioning down to a TV repairman whose shop faced Nariman House, they asked where their building’s security guard was. The guard had left for dinner, said the repairman. Sandra and Jackie told him to call the police, and might have said more except that the agitated mass of people began throwing rocks at them. There had been gunshots from Nariman House onto the street, and they were angry. The servants retreated to the storeroom, and as they did, a terrorist lobbed a grenade at one of the doors on their floor. “He didn’t come and check on us,” says Jackie. “He must have thought we were dead.”
In a bathroom on the fourth floor, Bialka, the Israeli diamond trader, was taking a shower. He had been in Mumbai on business, and was due to fly home a few hours later. The atmosphere at Nariman House that evening, he says, was congenial. He had studied the Torah after dinner, and then went upstairs to freshen up before his journey. Bialka is too traumatised by what happened next to speak about it — he currently sees a therapist twice a week, and has been unable to return to work — but his wife retells his story. As he stepped out of the shower, there were bangs and the sound of glass breaking. “He thought that it was fireworks,” his wife relates. “When he heard gunshots, he realised something was very wrong.” He threw on trousers and a shirt and opened the bathroom window. “Luckily, it didn’t have any bars on it,” his wife says. The street was 10 metres below. Clutching drainpipes and balancing on air-conditioning units, Bialka half-climbed, half-slid four storeys to the ground. As he ran from Nariman House, locals seized him. Assuming he was a terrorist, “they lynched him and broke several of his bones”.
Word began to spread throughout the city about what was taking place. Gabi made what was perhaps his last telephone call, to a security officer at the Israeli consulate. “He said, ‘Something has happened in Chabad house,’” says Orna Sagiv, the consul general. “‘There’s a terror attack. Come and help us.’” The call was interrupted, however, and they were not able to re-establish contact. Two officials headed for the building. As the terrorists continued to shoot from Nariman House, the crowd retreated. A few were unlucky: Harish Gohil, a 25-year-old call-centre employee, and Salim and Maria Hararwala, 62 and 55, were shot.
Few developments gave cause for optimism. At 10.45pm, an hour after the terrorists entered the Jewish centre, a bomb they had left at a local petrol station exploded. The scream heard by Anna, the Englishwoman, came at around 1am. “At that point, my blood ran cold,” Anna says. In Nariman House itself, it appears that some of the hostages were killed immediately after the terrorists’ arrival, although this would not be known until the end of the siege. Rivki and Gabi seemed to have survived for a few hours after the terrorists arrived, according to Sandra. She says it was Rivki who screamed. Soon after, she heard Rivki shout “Gabi, Gabi, stop, stop”. “What she wanted him to stop, I don’t know,” Sandra says; she suggested that Gabi had been fighting the terrorists. In the morning, there was a burst of hope. A Lubavitch leader in America, Rabbi Abraham Shemtov, had been repeatedly calling Gabi’s phone. At 10.30am, someone — an Urdu speaker — answered. Lubavitch tracked down an interpreter called PV Viswanath, a New York economics professor from Mumbai. Viswanath rang back.
“Several times we asked how the rabbi was,” Viswanath recalls. “He said, ‘They’re fine.’ And then he said, ‘We haven’t even hit him.’” Over the course of four or five calls with the professor, the terrorist asked to speak to an Indian government official. Strangely, he spoke with little emotion. There were no vitriolic comments against Israel or the West. Eventually Shemtov found someone, but could not patch him into the call. They were unable to contact the terrorist again.
While the terrorists focused on the phone conversations with Lubavitch, there was a lull in the gunfire. In the storeroom, Sandra and Jackie suddenly heard Moshe crying upstairs. Sandra’s reaction was instinctive. “I heard him cry, I ran towards him, that’s it,” she says. “I wasn’t frightened. If I was frightened I would have run away.” It is not known who brought Moshe down from his fifth-floor room, or why Babar Imran and Nasir did not shoot him. A sense of humanity may have prevailed. Sandra found him wandering amid the bodies of his parents and the two visiting rabbis. “They were unconscious, not dead,” she insists. “There was no blood on the scene, not one scratch on the bodies. It was like they were sleeping. Rabbi Gabi had a little bit of blood on his leg.” It is possible Sandra did not fully take in the scene, because there was certainly blood on Moshe’s clothing. Grabbing the baby, she and Jackie fled.
At dawn, a helicopter dropped Indian commandos onto the roof. For hours, rockets and bullets slammed into Nariman House as commandos closed in on the terrorists from the roof and the ground floor. Onlookers were stunned at the intensity of the battle. It continued until Friday evening, when the terrorists were killed by commandos. Their bodies were riddled with bullets; Nasir’s arm was charred. A team of volunteers at Zaka, an emergency-response group, had arrived from Israel on Friday with Rivki’s parents, and now they and others moved into the building to recover the bodies. As the Jewish Sabbath started, the siege of Nariman House was over. The rumours began shortly afterwards. Some in Mumbai heard that the hostages had been tortured, their bodies mutilated. There was speculation that the terrorists had taken mind-altering drugs before committing appalling acts, perhaps even sexually abusing the women. Few know what actually happened. The situation was complicated by the fact that no autopsies were performed on the bodies, in accordance with Jewish law.
Three days after I arrived in Mumbai, I tracked down a man who was one of the first people into Nariman House after the siege ended. It was the first time he has spoken to a journalist, and he asked me not to reveal his identity as he feared upsetting the families of the deceased. He allowed me to say that he has medical training. One windy evening, he seemed to want to talk, as if he were carrying a great burden. So we drove to a promenade ringed by skyscrapers and sat in the darkness as he told his story.
He had waited outside Nariman House as the commandos battled their way in on Friday, he said. He was optimistic; when Sandra escaped on Thursday morning, she had stated that the hostages looked unconscious rather than dead. But what he found appeared different. “They were tortured very badly,” he told me, speaking sombrely and matter-of-factly. He was greatly affected by what he saw, and says of the attack’s organisers: “I want to kill them.” All the hostages had been shot, he said. Some had multiple bullet wounds. But there was more. Two of the rabbis had broken bones. The skull of one of the victims had caved in, as sometimes happens when somebody is shot in the head at close range with a rifle, except the man had not been shot in the head. The two female visitors, Orpaz and Rabinovich, were found bound with telephone cord and lying next to each other on a fourth-floor bed. One of the hostages had bruising all over her body, which the man, who is not a pathologist, said was consistent with being hit by a blunt object. There was a large cut on her thigh. And one of her eyes was out of its orbit and lying on her cheek.
It sounded so extreme, so hard to believe, that the man said in a quiet voice: “I can show you photographs.” So we drove through deserted night-time streets to his home, where he opened a folder on his laptop entitled “Nariman House”. Inside were pictures, presumably taken by the Mumbai police, of the terrorists and four of the hostages: Gabi, Teitelbaum, and the two visiting women. He did not have photos of Rivki or Kruman. The pictures are overwhelming, an almost unbearable tableau of blood and contorted bodies. Nariman House is in disarray, the furniture overturned, bullet holes everywhere. It was not hard to believe that the hostages met a horrific, drawn-out end. Based on the images and eyewitness reports, it becomes clear that most did not die in the first hail of bullets as the terrorists entered the building, as has been reported. They may have fought back. Survivors would hear Rivki through the first night, and Gabi appears to have died some time after being shot in the leg, as there is a tourniquet around his thigh. The most brutal injuries suggest torture, but the organisations that might have conclusive answers, such as Zaka, the Israeli emergency-response group, decline to comment.
I showed the images to Vincent Di Maio, a noted US pathologist. He saw in them something hinting at another controversial rumour: that hostages had been alive when commandos stormed Nariman House, but were killed by crossfire. This was the conclusion of volunteers from Zaka. One volunteer leaked the finding to the Israeli press, sparking an angry reaction from the Israeli government, which said the claims were unfounded and could harm Israeli-Indian relations.
According to Di Maio, one of the female hostages was almost certainly fired on after she died. Bullet wounds to the arm and shoulder of one of the visiting women were inflicted postmortem: “Note no bleeding and visible yellow fat,” he says. It is unclear who shot her. Perhaps it was the terrorists. Perhaps it was crossfire when the commandos stormed the house. If it was crossfire, then the accidental shooting of live hostages does not seem too distant a possibility.
One more question remains: how did the terrorists and their handlers apparently know the layout of Nariman House, and the schedule of its inhabitants, so well? Suspicion has fallen on Jackie, the Muslim cook. Since the siege, he says he has had about 100 interviews with police and officials, including Israelis. Solomon Sopher, a leader of the Mumbai Jewish community, says he thinks Jackie is suspected not of direct collusion with terrorists, but perhaps of unwittingly revealing information to scouts who struck up a friendship with him. Jackie denies this, and it is probable that if there were evidence against him, he would have been charged.
I met him by a rain-swept train station in the north of Mumbai. He now lives with Sandra’s son, and works at a falafel firm. When he speaks warmly of the Holtzbergs, he seems genuine. He has pictures of Moshe and Dov Ber, the child who died of Tay-Sachs, on his phone. He carries around a photo of Gabi. “This is my rabbi,” he says.
Moshe, almost three now, seems to have adjusted. He lives in Israel with Rivki’s parents and Sandra. When I call, I hear Sandra and Moshe laughing in the background. Has what has happened scarred him? Moshe, Sandra says, is “like a normal kid”. Meanwhile, Damyanti Gohil, the mother of the call-centre worker who was shot from Nariman House, says that before the siege she would sit out, watch the building’s sparkling lights, and listen to the melodies of prayers and songs. The Holtzbergs had parties and it all seemed lovely. Now it aches so much for her to see the house through her kitchen window that she has blocked it with bricks and cement. Pinned to the cement is a photo of her son, Harish, and his wristwatch. Sitting outside her flat one evening, Gohil pulls her sari over her eyes as she starts to cry. “Something should be done with that building,” she says. “It should be pulled down.” The windows of Nariman House are dark, and the exterior panels gleam a ghostly white in the moonlight.
Surprisingly, considering the grim history, dozens of Lubavitch couples have applied to replace the Holtzbergs in Mumbai. “The light has to shine again from Chabad house,” Berkowitz says. So far, nearly $1m has been pledged for a new centre. Recently Berkowitz led five visitors, all western Jews who knew the Holtzbergs, up the crumbling staircase at Nariman House. Amid the devastation, traces of the Holtzbergs linger, as if they were there only yesterday. Two bottles of medication remain in one of the fridges. On the top floor, in Moshe’s room, a painted Hebrew alphabet scrolls along a wall, and by the door are pencil marks where Rivki recorded Moshe’s height. In the Holtzberg’s bedroom stands a rack containing Gabi’s and Rivki’s shoes; their smart leather ones for synagogue, his trainers, her easy shoes for around town. They have been left here in accordance with Jewish tradition, Berkowitz explains.
It is Tisha B’Av, a Jewish day of mourning for the destruction of two Jerusalem temples about 2,000 years ago. On the roof, Berkowitz sits and begins to recite a traditional prayer. “They attacked us and besieged us, our enemies,” he half-sings, the city spread out beneath him. “They made impure what was pure. There is no comfort.” The visitors look at the ground or into the distance. “Hashem,” he says, using one of the Jewish names for God, “return us. We will repent and you will return us. May you reinstate the glorious days of old.”


Martin K wrote:
Jayil,

how can you claim the Quran is not antisemitic?
It is true that Moses and Abraham are mentioned, but it is also true that the Quran claims that the jews misbehaved, distrusted Moses, and forged the Tora. Basically: They just got it all wrong. The same goes for the Christians.
And it is also true that the Quran wants Jews and Christians killed or subdued and let them feel subdued:
Quran 9:29. "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
A quote from the Hadith (Mohammed's life retold by muslim scholars):
Sahih Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176: Narrated by 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.'" Sahih Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177: Narrated by Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
I do not know what to add to this.
November 5, 2009 7:56 AM GMT
Peter Sachs wrote:
Our mind tells us what the problem is and our heart tells us what to do. Those who are responsible for terror want to destroy the good things we received from God. We all have one God and those who respect and love him will always maintain the love. We got the bible from GOD and no terrorist will ever be able to distinguish our love.
November 4, 2009 5:20 PM GMT
Laurence Tenney wrote:
Jayil,

There is the Islam of the Holy Qur'an alone; there is the Islam of the Qur'an and the Hadith; and there is the Islam of the Qur'an, the Hadith along with cultural add-ons [subjugation of women, female sexual mutilation, "hono(u)r killings {none exclusive to Islam, I concede, but certainly widely practiced within the Islamic world}, et cetera ad nauseam] from sources completely outside of any mention in any Holy Writ whatsoever, Islamic or otherwise.

Unfortunately, Islam as practiced today seems mostly to be of the last variety.
November 2, 2009 10:19 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
MA B,

It is ludicrous to say that Islam or the Qur’an is anti-Semitic, because the Prophet himself was Semitic.
How could the Qur’an be considered anti-Semitic when the name of Moses is mentioned many more times than the name of Muhammed? The Quran describes the original Torah revealed to Moses as giving light and guidance, and demands the respecting of the rights of all people, including Jews.
It is incumbent on Muslims to believe in the original revelation sent to Prophets Moses and Jesus (pbut). The criticism in the Qur’an is aimed at distortions and sinful acts of Jews, Christians as well as some Muslims.
It is true that in parts of the Muslim world, one can find anti-Semitic views. These have nothing to do with the Qur'an and are a distortion of Qur’anic principles. Political problems often take a religious hue, and like every community, fanatics exist among Muslims too.
Through the better part of the history of Islamic civilization, Muslims understood that their faith required that they treat people of all religions with respect. Christians and Jews lived in peace and security within the Ottoman Empire. In Muslim Spain, Muslims and Jews co-operated in creating a glorious civilization, whose light shone over Europe during the Middle Ages. None of this would have been possible, if the Qur’an, the fountainhead of Islamic teachings, preached hostility towards people of other faiths...
November 1, 2009 9:04 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
MA B wrote:
"Will you accept that they carried out their crimes in the name of Islam?"

No, there crimes have nothing to do with Islam but everything to do with politics. I bet the guys who did Mumbai cant even read or speak Arabic.
November 1, 2009 8:52 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
MA B wrote:
"The real question is why Antisemitism features so prominently into more extreme Islamic ideologies"

Thats why they're called "extremists" duh!

"Jayil? Will you, for once, simply accept that the perpetrators of the Mumbai massacres are criminals?"

Not only criminals, they're terrorists.
November 1, 2009 8:48 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
Paul Bond wrote:
"They indiscriminately massacre women and children, so "The war on psychopaths" would be more specific."

They are killing the Muslims who support Western invasion (War On Terror). Those who dont join the insurgents and help puppet governments. Not that I support this evil practice.
November 1, 2009 8:43 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
Paul Bond wrote:
"They marry 12 year olds, so "The war on paedophiles" would be more specific."

Out of all the Islamic countries only a few extremist countries such as Afghanistan have this Law and even then 99.9% of people dont practice it, the rest of the countries have age limits 17/18 and above. Check wikipedia.
November 1, 2009 8:40 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
Paul Bond,

You're just another uneducated nutter.

nutter wrote:
"They treat women as if they are the personal property of men, so "The war on rapists" would be more specific."

Q) Guess who was the worlds first person to embrace Islam?

A) Khadija, a woman.
November 1, 2009 8:31 PM GMT
Richard Hitchings wrote:
The Zionist state has no problems with continuing to wage war against Palestinians .. each settlement they create each little piece more of palestine they steal... each palestinian person the kill wound or jail.. is just part of the greater war to extend the Zionist state.. ( Clinton is happy to accept Israel extend its borders even as she "Seeks Piece")

Is it any wonder that there are people in the world who would happily resist and not necessarily in any gentlemanly way.. Not only the US and their allies but the Zionist state and those who seek to extend the status quo in the Zionist Favour.
November 1, 2009 7:42 PM GMT

Paul Bond wrote:
The war on terror is too vague, the allies should be more specific and describe the actual terror these people perpetrate.

They marry 12 year olds, so "The war on paedophiles" would be more specific.

They indiscriminately massacre women and children, so "The war on psychopaths" would be more specific.

They treat women as if they are the personal property of men, so "The war on rapists" would be more specific.

Only when people realise what these people really stand for, will they stand against them. Hearts and minds should be what the soldiers are aiming for.
November 1, 2009 3:49 PM GMT
MA B wrote:
The question is, Jayil, how that can be your only response after reading such a horrific story? The real question is why Antisemitism features so prominently into more extreme Islamic ideologies that purportedly seek national aspirations (re: Palestinian independence)? In the end, such ideologues are nothing more than trumped-up thugs and any attempt to understand their behaviour only leads to one conclusion, they know nothing more than violence and if it were not for Islam, they would find another ideology of hate and violence. Far from being 'Shaheed' they need to be regarded - explicitly by the international Islamic community - as criminals: violating the laws of Islam and states. Are you willing to make such a proclaimation Jayil? Will you, for once, simply accept that the perpetrators of the Mumbai massacres are criminals? Will you accept that they carried out their crimes in the name of Islam?
November 1, 2009 12:50 PM GMT
MA B wrote:
The question is, Jayil, how that can be your only response after reading such a horrific story? The real question is why Antisemitism features so prominently into more extreme Islamic ideologies that purportedly seek national aspirations (re: Palestinian independence)? In the end, such ideologues are nothing more than trumped-up thugs and any attempt to understand their behaviour only leads to one conclusion, they know nothing more than violence and if it were not for Islam, they would find another ideology of hate and violence. Far from being 'Shaheed' they need to be regarded - explicitly by the international Islamic community - as criminals: violating the laws of Islam and states. Are you willing to make such a proclaimation Jayil? Will you, for once, simply accept that the perpetrators of the Mumbai massacres are criminals? Will you accept that they carried out their crimes in the name of Islam?
November 1, 2009 12:49 PM GMT
shimon b wrote:
No doubt - Religion of peace !
November 1, 2009 12:24 PM GMT
jayil london wrote:
The terrorist attack in Mumbai was so bad it nearly dragged India into Afghanistan to fight Americas "War On Terror"... well it wouldnt only be Americas war anymore.
October 31, 2009 10:47 PM GMT

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

‘Who is to define a terrorist?’ - By Bella Jaisinghani - TNN - The Times of India, Mumbai



http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW&GZ=T


The Times of India

Updated: Thursday, 05 November, 2009 11:37:04am

‘Who is to define a terrorist?’


Bella Jaisinghani | TNN 


Mumbai: “The Taliban is not the enemy of the US. The only reason US soldiers are being killed by the Taliban in Afghanistan is because the Americans are in that country.’’ Words that caused heads to turn at an Islamic conference in the city which had invited a former detainee of Guantanamo Bay as Wednesday’s main speaker. 

    Straightaway, James Yusuf Yee drew an interested crowd of listeners, some sympathetic, most curious. The New Jersey-born cleric had been held at the infamous Guantanamo Bay detention centre in Cuba for purported links with the Al-Qaeda even as he served as a chaplain with the US military.
 
    Charged with serious offences that include sedition, espionage and aiding the enemy, as well as minor ones like storing pornographic material on his official computer, Yee was held in Gitmo where he served for 76 days in 2003.
However, a year later, the US government dropped court martial charges and granted him an honourable discharge from service. 

    Since his release, the 40-year-old Chinese-American convert has written a book and become a sought-after speaker at international conferences, the lat
est being a ten-day peace meet organised by Zakir Naik’s Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) at the Somaiya Grounds in Sion. Naik and his brother Mohammed flanked Yee as he freely expressed his feelings about the country of his birth without fear of retribution upon his return. 

    Even as he declared his pride in being American, his discourse was peppered with sardonic references to the “demonisation of Muslims’’ in that 
country and the “so-called war on terror that uses Islam as a weapon’’. “Who is to decide the definition of a terrorist?’’ Yee added. “Civil society must grant every person who is accused of terrorism the right to a full trial in a criminal court.’’ 

    As his defence assumed combative tones, he was asked to comment on the rights of victims of terrorism. “Well, there are bereaved families in America who feel that Gitmo detainees should be severely punished. But equally several others have forgiven them because they do not want others to experience a similar loss. At any rate, I do not think a single prisoner of Guantanamo Bay is actually involved in the 9/11 attacks,’’ Yee said. 

    Inevitably, a point was raised about President Obama’s premature Nobel being a direct result of his famous Reconciliation-with-Islam speech. Admitting that he had campaigned for Obama’s nomination over that of Hillary Clinton, then proudly recalling that he was present at the presidential inauguration, Yee went on to express disappointment with his former hero. “Obama has failed to come good on his word to close Guantanamo down,’’ he said, even though the closure is due in January 2010.


MAKING A POINT: Former US army chaplain James Yusuf Yee

Jonathan Cook - A British Freelance Journalist - based in Nazareth - writes first hand account of the real face of Israel


Jonathan Cook - A British Freelance Journalist - based in Nazareth - writes first hand account of the real face of Israel








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Cook

Jonathan Cook

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jonathan Cook
JCook.jpg
Born1965
Buckinghamshire, England
EducationSouthampton University (B. A., 1987)
Cardiff University (Post-graduate diploma, 1989)
School of Oriental and African Studies, London University (M. A., 2000)
OccupationFreelance writer
EthnicityBritish
Official website
Jonathan Cook (born 1965) is a British independent freelance journalist and writer based inNazareth, Israel.[1] He has written about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a number of newspapers, and is the author of three books, Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish and Democratic State (2006), Israel and the Clash of Civilizations: Iraq, Iran and the plan to remake the Middle East (2008), and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (2008).

Contents

 [show]

[edit]Background

Cook was born, educated and raised in Buckinghamshire, England.[2] He received a BA Honours in Philosophy and Politics from Southampton University in 1987, a postgraduate diploma in journalism from Cardiff University in 1989, and a Masters degree in Middle Eastern studies from the School of Oriental and African Studies in 2000.[3]

[edit]Career

Cook was a reporter and editor with regional newspapers 1988-94, a freelance sub-editor with several national newspapers 1994-96, and a staff member[citation needed] of The Guardian andThe Observer 1996-2001.
Since September 2001, he has been a freelance writer based in Nazareth, Israel, covering theMiddle East, and publishing his articles in The Guardian, The International Herald Tribune, Le Monde Diplomatique, and Al-Ahram Weekly, among others.[4] In February 2004 he founded the Nazareth Press Agency.[3] Cook has said he is the first foreign correspondent to be based in Nazareth,[5] and as such has a perspective unavailable to Western journalists based in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv in Israel, or Ramallah in the West Bank.
In an article in The Guardian, Cook wrote that there was, "a relentless campaign to target, discredit and silence critics of Israel."[2]

[edit]Works

Cook's Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish and Democratic State was published in 2006. The book argues that Israel's recent treatment of its own Palestinian citizens, a group also known as Israeli Arabs, has exposed the contradiction between the state's Jewish anddemocratic claims.
In 2008, Cook published Israel and the Clash of Civilizations: Iraq, Iran and the plan to remake the Middle East[6] That same year,Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair was also published.[7] This book is broken into two parts. The first half is an essay that seeks to trace the overarching principle guiding Israeli policies in the conflict. Cook's thesis in the essay, as identified by reviewer Gabriel Ash in Electronic Intifada, is that, "the goal of Israeli policy is to make Palestine and the Palestinians disappear for good."[8] The second half of the book consists of a selection of articles Cook has published over the last six years in various media outlets.[8]

[edit]Written works

[edit]Books

[edit]Journals

[edit]Newsletters

[edit]Newspapers

[edit]References

  1. ^ Masalha 2005, p. viii
  2. ^ a b ""Disappearing Palestine" by British journalist". TimeTurk. November 18, 2008. Retrieved 2009-10-25.
  3. ^ a b Jonathan Cook, Jkcook.net,Short Biography
  4. ^ Catastrophe remembered: Palestine, Israel and the internal refugees, p. viii.
  5. ^ Cook, Jonathan. "Jonathan Cook website". Jonathan Cook News Archive. Retrieved 2006-10-14.
  6. ^ Raymond Deane (11 February 2008). "Book review: "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations"". The Electronic Intifada. Retrieved 2009-08-31.
  7. ^ Pam Hardyment (May 18, 2009). "Disappearing Palestine, Israel's Experiments in Human Despair by Jonathan Cook". Retrieved 2009-08-31.
  8. ^ a b Gabriel Ash (February 12, 2009). "Book review: Un-erasing the erasure of Palestine". The Electronic Intifada. Retrieved 2009-08-31.
  9. ^ "(Review of) Catastrophe Remembered: Palestine, Israel, and the Internal Refugees". Journal of Refugee Studies 19 (2). 2006.

[edit]Bibliography

[edit]External links

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

U.S. to Pay $1.2 Million to 5 [Muslim]* Detainees Over Abuse Lawsuit - By Nina Bernstein - The New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/nyregion/03jail.html?_r=1

New York Times

U.S. to Pay $1.2 Million to 5 [Muslim]* Detainees Over Abuse Lawsuit


Published: November 2, 2009

The federal government is paying $1.2 million to settle the cases of five Muslim immigrants who sued over their detention and treatment in a Brooklyn jail after 9/11, when hundreds of noncitizens were rounded up and held for months before being cleared of links to terrorism and deported.


The five were part of a larger lawsuit, Turkmen v. Ashcroft, which will continue to press the argument that the roundups and physical abuse they say they suffered were unconstitutional.


The government admits no liability or fault under the terms of the settlements, filed late Monday in United States District Court in Brooklyn. Charles S. Miller, a spokesman for the Justice Department, said the government would not comment.
But Rachel Meeropol, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents the detainees, said the amount the government is willing to pay speaks volumes.


“I believe a settlement of this size is a deterrent to the United States from ever again rounding up innocent noncitizens based only on suspicion about their race and religion,” Ms. Meeropol said. “These were guys called terrorists and treated as terrorists, shoved against the blood-spattered picture of the American flag and told, you’re never getting out of here alive. And it’s a long way from that to where they are now.”


Yet in a telephone interview from Alexandria, Egypt, one of the five Muslims, Yasser Ebrahim, 37, said the settlement was a reluctant compromise for plaintiffs who had become increasingly frustrated by seven years of motions, cross-appeals and delays in the case. His payment — $356,250, of which he will receive $270,000 after legal expenses are subtracted — is the highest of the five because he was in maximum security detention the longest, for more than eight months without charges.


“Being held in that place for 249 days — $270,000 is not going to make up for that experience,” said Mr. Ebrahim, who had a Web site design business in Brooklyn before he and his younger brother, Hany Ibrahim, a deli worker, were arrested 19 days after 9/11 and held as “persons of interest” to terror investigators.


The plaintiffs said they were physically abused from the moment they arrived, chained and shackled, at the jail, the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where they were slammed face first into a wall where an American-flag T-shirt had been taped.


The daily experiences described in the lawsuit include escort teams that cursed them as terrorists and shoved them into walls whenever they were taken from their cells, twisted their wrists and fingers and stepped on their leg chains so they fell, their ankles bloody.


Several of the federal guards accused of abusing the detainees have since been disciplined, and some, including a captain, were criminally convicted in the beating of other inmates.


The Turkmen lawsuit, filed as a class action in 2002, was the first broad legal challenge to the policies and practices that swept hundreds of immigrants into the Metropolitan Detention Center and other jails on visa violations in the weeks after 9/11.


The roundups drew intense criticism, not only from immigrant rights advocates, but also from the inspector general of the Justice Department, who issued reports saying that the government had made little or no effort to distinguish between genuine suspects and Muslim immigrants with minor visa violations. The reports also documented widespread abuse at the Brooklyn jail.


In 2006, several of the plaintiffs, including Mr. Ebrahim and his brother, were allowed to return to New York to give depositions in their lawsuit against top government officials and detention guards, but on the condition that they be in the constant custody of federal marshals. Fearful but determined, Mr. Ebrahim said at the time, “I have faith in the system.”


Later that year, a federal judge in Brooklyn dismissed several of the lawsuit’s key claims, ruling that the government had wide latitude under immigration law to detain noncitizens on the basis of religion, race or national origin, and to hold them indefinitely without explanation. The judge, John Gleeson, allowed the lawsuit to continue on other claims, however, including the argument that the conditions of confinement were abusive and unconstitutional. Both sides appealed.


The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments in the case last February, has not issued a decision.


In May, in a lawsuit involving similar claims, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that a Pakistani Muslim who was arrested after the Sept. 11 attacks could not sue John Ashcroft, the former attorney general, and Robert S. Mueller III, the director of theFederal Bureau of Investigation, because he failed at a preliminary stage to allege a plausible link between the officials and the abuses he said he had suffered in the Brooklyn jail.


Legal advocates said that decision would make it very hard in the future to hold high government officials accountable for discriminatory practices. But it did not affect the federal tort claims of abuse by the Turkmen plaintiffs, Ms. Meeropol said. And because of the inspector general’s investigation, and information collected in discovery, she added, “the government faced a lot of liability for those claims.”


The plaintiffs whose claims were settled include another Egyptian living in Alexandria and two natives of Pakistan, one who now lives in France, and the other, a physician, in Toronto. Two other plaintiffs, Ibrahim Turkmen and Akhil Sachdeva, who had been held in the Passaic County Jail, remain in the suit.


An amended complaint filed on Monday adds five new plaintiffs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* As usual, NYTIMES skips naming Muslims in headlines, when it suits them. In the text, it is clearly mentioned, but in the headline, it is dropped. Why?
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai