McDonald’s and Starbucks have yesterday announced that they will be donating all profits from now until Sunday to Israeli war. Also, the producers of Adam Sandler’s new movie Bed Time Stories will be donating their profits to THE Zionist entity of Israel.Be informed, and let others know not to contribute and refuse to support these monsters that believe in killing innocent civilians.Boycott McDonald’s and Starbucks. Also don’t take your kids to see a movie that promotes violence by association.Together we can make a difference!

This Companies have track record of supporting Israeli

BOYCOTT LINKS:
Beans of War
http://courses.washington.edu/commedia/projects/418_dotcom/beans_of_war/index.html

Boycott Israel Campaign
http://www.mylinkspage.com/israel.html

Boycott Israeli Goods
http://www.boycottisraeligoods.org/

Boycott Israeli Goods Campaign
http://www.bigcampaign.org/

Boycott of Israel
http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/topic.php?tid=96

Boycott Starbucks
http://windowintopalestine.blogspot.com/2008/11/boycott-starbucks.html

Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions
http://www.bdsmovement.net/

British Committee for Universities in Palestine
http://www.bricup.org.uk/index.html

Cupe
http://cupe.on.ca/doc.php?subject_id=51&lang=en

Divestment Support Committee
http://www.divestmentsupport.org/

Hang up on Motorola
http://www.hanguponmotorola.org/

Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel
http://www.pacbi.org/

Palestinian Solidarity Campaign Boycott Israeli Goods
http://www.palestinecampaign.org/index11.asp

Large brochure/poster
http://fourthreichisrael.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/boycott-israel-brochure.jpg

BOYCOTT EVERYTHING ISRAEL
http://palestinefreevoice.blogspot.com/2009/02/boycott-israel.html

———————————————————————————————————————

IRIN News

Photo: Life Aid workers in Gaza unload new supplies. Several local NGOs in Gaza say Hamas has prevented aid groups from distributing emergency assistance after they refused to comply with Hamas regulations (file photo) GAZA CITY, 11 February 2009 (IRIN) - The Hamas government in Gaza has ordered international and local aid organisations providing emergency assistance to coordinate relief efforts with it. Several local NGOs in Gaza say Hamas has prevented aid groups from distributing emergency assistance after they refused to comply with Hamas regulations. "We received information that supplies brought in from abroad were being sold on the market," deputy minister of social affairs Sobhi Redtold IRIN, saying UNRWA (the Uwan N agency for Palestinian refugees) was bringing in supplies for non-UN institutions and donors. International aid agencies like Oxfam and CARE say the "logistics cluster" coordinated by the World Food Programme (WFP) is the only mechanism under which trucks are sent into Gaza. "We do help other UN agencies and other organisations deliver," UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness told IRIN by phone from Jerusalem. "We have asked UNRWA to supply paperwork for all trucks indicating the contents and who the truck is for," said Hamas deputy minister Redwan. UNRWA has half-complied, say Hamas officials. "As a matter of practicality we need to coordinate with authorities at all levels to make the deliveries possible," said spokesperson Gunness. Photo: UNRWA UNRWA, the largest distributor of aid in Gaza, has been asked by Hamas to "supply paperwork for all trucks indicating the contents and who the truck is for" Gaza’s social affairs ministry has asked all international and local NGOs to provide a list of beneficiaries on a CD to the ministry. "We want to make sure that aid is being distributed equitably," said Redwan. International organisations like Oxfam and CARE have not complied. "We have explained to Hamas that we will not disclose our beneficiaries out of accountability to our donors and our values of impartiality," Oxfam public relations officer Michael Bailey told IRIN by phone during a visit to Gaza this week. Oxfam and its local partners "are operating as they need to", said Bailey. Local NGOs accused of links with Fatah A local NGO in Beit Lahiya that agreed to speak to IRIN on condition of anonymity had planned to provide emergency assistance in rebuilding and repairing homes after the war. "After the war the Hamas authorities came to the headquarters of our association, summoned us to the police station and ordered us not to provide emergency assistance," said the director. "The Hamas authorities accused us of taking money from Fatah." Funded by the Swiss government, the NGO engages in advocacy work for women’s and children’s rights and sustainable development projects like raising domestic animals. It’s a political issue; Hamas NGOs are giving to Hamas and Fatah NGOs to Fatah. "NGOs contacted us and presented us [with] an official statement by the social affairs ministry asking local NGOs to coordinate with the ministry in providing aid and to disclose all information," deputy director of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) in Gaza, Jaber Wishah, told IRIN. "This is unacceptable; the work of aid institutions and NGOs must be independent." A local NGO in Jabalyia that specialises in social governance and civic engagement projects with an operating budget of US$200,000, mostly funded by USAID (the US Agency for International Development), also agreed to speak to IRIN on condition of anonymity. The NGO had an emergency relief operation from 29 December to 25 January distributing food kits and blankets to 8,000 beneficiaries in Jabalyia, and had planned to offer psycho-social support services. But "Hamas police came to the NGO and ordered us to stop working, without explanation," said the director. He feels he was targeted as a Fatah member. The Hamas authorities requested a list of beneficiaries, but if the NGO coordinated with the Hamas government, USAID would halt its funding, said the director. "It’s a political issue; Hamas NGOs are giving to Hamas and Fatah NGOs to Fatah," said Ibby al-Oul, board of directors member of a small local NGO, Asalah, which runs small business development projects. Asalah intends to provide adoption services for children orphaned during the war, but will not disclose information to the Hamas government, said al-Oul. es/ar/cb

Conn Hallinan, Foreign Policy In Focus

Photo Fady Awan Gaza City January 8 2009 PalestineFreeVoice Images Feb 11, 2009 Erik Fosse, a Norwegian cardiologist, worked in Gaza hospitals during the recent war."It was as if they had stepped on a mine," he says of certain Palestinian patients he treated. "But there was no shrapnel in the wound. Some had lost their legs. It looked as though they had been sliced off. I have been to war zones for 30 years, but I have never seen such injuries before." Dr. Fosse was describing the effects of a U.S. "focused lethality" weapon that minimizes explosive damage to structures while inflicting catastrophic wounds on its victims. But where did the Israelis get this weapon? And was their widespread use in the attack on Gaza a field test for a new generation of explosives? DIMEd to Death The specific weapon is called a Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME). In 2000, the U.S. Air Force teamed up with the University of California's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The weapon wraps high explosives with a tungsten alloy and other metals like cobalt, nickel, or iron in a carbon fiber/epoxy container. When the bomb explodes the container evaporates, and the tungsten turns into micro-shrapnel that is extremely lethal within a 13–foot radius. Tungsten is inert, so it doesn't react chemically with the explosive. While a non-inert metal like aluminum would increase the blast, tungsten actually contains the explosion to a limited area. Within the weapon's range, however, it's inordinately lethal. According to Norwegian doctor Mad Gilbert, the blast results in multiple amputations and "very severe fractures. The muscles are sort of split from the bones, hanging loose, and you also have quite severe burns." Most of those who survive the initial blast quickly succumb to septicemia and organ collapse. "Initially, everything seems in order…but it turns out on operation that dozens of miniature particles can be found in all their organs," says Dr. Jam Brommundt, a German doctor working in Kham Younis, a city in southern Gaza. "It seems to be some sort of explosive or shell that disperses tiny particles…that penetrate all organs, these miniature injuries, you are not able to attack them surgically." According to Brommundt, the particles cause multiple organ failures. If by some miracle victims resist those conditions, they are almost certain to develop rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), a particularly deadly cancer that deeply embeds itself into tissue and is almost impossible to treat. A 2005 U.S. Department of health study found that tungsten stimulated RMS cancers even in very low doses. All of the 92 rats tested developed the cancer. While DIMEs were originally designed to avoid "collateral" damage generated by standard high-explosive bombs, the weapon's lethality and profound long-term toxicity hardly seem like an improvement. It appears DIME weapons may have been used in the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, but not enough to alarm medical workers. But in Gaza, the ordinance was widely used. Al-Shifta alone has seen 100 to 150 victims of these attacks. Gaza as Test Dr. Gilbert told the Oslo Gardermoen, "there is a strong suspicion…that Gaza is now being used as a test laboratory for new weapons." DIME is a U.S. invention. Did the Israelis get the weapons from the United States, or did they design similar ones themselves? Given the close relations between the two militaries, it isn't unlikely that the U.S. Air Force supplied the weapons or, at least, the specifications on how to construct them. And since the United States has yet to use the device in a war, it would certainly benefit from seeing how these new "focused lethality" weapons worked under battlefield conditions. Marc Garlasco, Human Rights Watch's senior military advisor, says "it remains to be seen how Israel has acquired the technology, whether they purchased weapons from the United States under some agreement, or if they in fact licensed or developed their own type of munitions." DIME weapons aren't banned under the Geneva Conventions because they have never been officially tested. However, any weapon capable of inflicting such horrendous damage is normally barred from use, particularly in one of the most densely populated regions in the world. For one thing, no one knows how long the tungsten remains in the environment or how it could affect people who return to homes attacked by a DIME. University of Arizona cancer researcher Dr. Mark Witten, who investigates links between tungsten and leukemia, says that in his opinion "there needs to be much more research on the health effects of tungsten before the military increases its usage." Beyond DIMEs DIMEs weren't the only controversial weapons used in Gaza. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) also made generous use of white phosphorus, a chemical that burns with intense heat and inflicts terrible burns on victims. In its vapor form it also damages breathing passages. International law prohibits the weapon's use near population areas and requires that "all reasonable precautions" be taken to avoid civilians. Israel initially denied using the chemical. "The IDF acts only in accordance with what is permitted by international law and does not use white phosphorus," said Israel's Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi on January 13. But eyewitness accounts in Gaza and Israel soon forced the IDF to admit that they were, indeed, using the substance. On January 20, the IDF confessed to using phosphorus artillery shells as smokescreens, as well as 200 U.S.-made M825A1 phosphorus mortar shells on "Hamas fighters and rocket launching crews in northern Gaza." Three of those shells hit the UN Works and Relief Agency compound on January 15, igniting a fire that destroyed hundreds of tons of humanitarian supplies. A phosphorus shell also hit Al-Quds hospital in Gaza City. The Israelis say there were Hamas fighters near the two targets, a charge that witnesses adamantly deny. Donatella Rovera of Amnesty International said: "Such extensive use of this weapon in Gaza's densely-populated residential neighborhoods…and its toll on civilians is a war crime." Israel is also accused of using depleted uranium ammunition (DUA), which a UN sub-commission in 2002 found in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, the International Convention Against Torture, the Conventional Weapons Convention, and the Hague Conventions against the use of poison weapons. DUA isn't highly radioactive, but after exploding, some of it turns into a gas that can easily be inhaled. The dense shrapnel that survives also tends to bury itself deeply, leaching low-level radioactivity into water-tables. War Crimes? Other human-rights groups, including B'Tselem, Gisha, and Physicians for Human Rights, charge that the IDF intentionally targeted medical personal, killing over a dozen, including paramedics and ambulance drivers. The International Federation for Human Rights called on the UN Security Council to refer Israel to the International Criminal Court for possible war crimes. Although the Israelis dismiss the war-crimes charges, the fact that the Israeli cabinet held a special meeting on January 25 to discuss the issue suggests they're concerned about being charged with "disproportionate" use of force. The Geneva Conventions require belligerents to at "all times" distinguish between combatants and civilians and to avoid "disproportionate force" in seeking military gains. Hamas' use of unguided missiles fired at Israel would also be a war crime under the Conventions. "The one-sidedness of casualty figures is one measure of disproportion," says Richard Falk, the UN's human rights envoy for the occupied territories. A total of 14 Israelis have been killed in the fighting, three of them civilians killed by rockets, 11 of them soldiers, four of the latter by "friendly fire." Some 50 IDF soldiers were also wounded. In contrast, 1,330 Palestinians have died and 5,450 were injured, the overwhelming bulk of them civilians. "This kind of fighting constitutes a blatant violation of the laws of warfare, which we ask to be investigated by the Commission of War Crimes," a coalition of Israeli human rights groups and Amnesty International said in a joint statement. "The responsibility of the state of Israel is beyond doubt." Enter the Hague? Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann would coordinate the defense of any soldier or commander charged with a war crime. In any case, the United States would veto any effort by the UN Security Council to refer Israelis to the International Court at The Hague. But, as the Financial Times points out, "all countries have an obligation to search out those accused of 'grave' breaches of the rules of war and to put them on trial or extradite them to a country that will." That was the basis under which the British police arrested Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1998. "We're in a seismic shift in international law," Amnesty International legal advisor Christopher Hall told the Financial Times, who says Israel's foreign ministry is already examining the risk to Israelis who travel abroad. "It's like walking across the street against a red light," he says. "The risk may be low, but you're going to think twice before committing a crime or traveling if you have committed one." Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist

"Prior to the advent of polling, public opinion could often only be inferred from political behavior… The advent of polling transformed public opinion from a behavioral to an attitudinal phenomenon. Polls elicit, organize, and publicize opinion without requiring any action on the part of the opinion holder…. From the perspective of political elite, the obvious virtue of polls is that they make it possible to recognize and deal with popular attitudes… before they materialize in some unpleasant, disruptive, or threatening form of political action…. By converting opinion from a behavioral to an attitudinal phenomenon, polling is, in effect, also transforming public opinion into a less immediately threatening and dangerous phenomenon."

- Benjamin Ginzberg in his book,
The Captive Public: How Mass
Opinion Promotes State Power

-

Introduction

An opinion survey was conducted in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by the Center for Opinion Polls and Survey Studies at An-Najah National University during the first 2 days of February, 2009. The survey was conducted on a sample of 1,361 Palestinians who responded to a questionnaire. The results showed that 57 percent of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip believe that Hamas is stronger now than it was prior to the Israelis offensive in December and January, but there were many other queries in the questionnaire method that reveal a pro-Fatah and pro-Israel bias.

Hiyam Noir.Editor of PalestineFreeVoice and Les Blough, Editor of Axis of Logic, decided to examine the survey;

Volumes have been written on the subject of how polls and surveys should be conducted and on their many pitfalls and ways how they have been used to manipulate the public. In this analysis, we will limit ourselves to a few fundamentals that will help us understand the quality of the poll conducted by An-Najah University. The specific target of the survey were the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank Many are now asking who selected the sample, how was it carried out, how were the questions on the survey selected and who interpreted the results.

Purpose of the poll

Political polls are notorious for being used as manipulative tools and/or to provide the ruling class with information for their political strategies and campaigns.The An–Najah National University, Center for Opinion Polls and Survey Studies, does not even provide a motive of their objectives for conducting this survey. It only states that the poll "undertakes the current political realities" which includes :

· the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and its consequences,

· aids allocated for the rebuilding of the Strip,

· attempts towards achieving a Palestinian national reconciliation,

· attempts to restore truce between Israel and Hamas,

· the possibility of sending Arab and international troops to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

· in addition political affiliations and other issues."

None of the listed factors answers our two leading questions. Rather, this it speaks to the subject matter which the poll "undertakes". Our first question regarding the purpose and motivating force behind the poll is not answered. Was this poll meant to help Palestinians to understand their collective views for the purpose of achieving some sort of consensus? Or was the poll conducted for some nefarious purpose?

Funding for the poll

An-Najah is known for its support of Fatah, the preference of U.S. and Israel to rule Palestine - democratically-elected or not. Who were the specific people who decided to conduct the poll and in what manner would be designed? What was the specific funding source of the poll? An-Najah does not provide this information. They simply highlight the following words in their introduction: "The University sponsors all polls conducted by its Center". Who funds the university? The "Facts and Figures" section of the An-Najah website states that the university "relies on the in-kind philanthropic donations of its friends and alumni". They describe 3 types of funding: Unrestricted, Restricted and Permanent. The first two are of particular interest in the context of funding for this poll: http://www.najah.edu/index.php?page=833&lang=en

Unrestricted funds give the university the option of using the money for "special opportunities" and "emergency needs". Restricted funds allow the donor to specify the funds " for a specific function of your choice.This post-Gaza slaughter poll could have been funded by any person, political body or nation.

The 1.361 respondents were eligible voters, 18 years of age and older. An enclosed questionnaire was distributed on 861 persons from the West Bank and 500 persons from the Gaza Strip. 4.1% of the members of the sample refused to answer the questionnaire.

The pollsters report, "The sample was drawn randomly and the margin of error is about ±3%; still 4.1% of the members of the sample refused to answer the questionnaire."

General observations

The population the poll is meant to represent is neither, identified or described. The report on the poll does not provide any raw data. For example, the report does not say if the research is based on demographic and socio-economic patterns or stratified according to other variables such as faith (Muslim,Christian or other), gender, income levels, education, injuries or deaths from the war on Gaza, etc.

The poll was conducted exclusively along political lines during a state of complete turmoil and chaos in Gaza.

The poll included 500 people in Gaza and 861 in the West Bank. The West Bank is marked by corruption, internal division, occupation and collaboration with the Israelis under the Abbas/Fatah regime.

The poll was conducted just 22 days after the devastating Zionist attack on Gaza, ostensibly to remove Hamas, the democratically-elected government.

The populations targeted by the poll remain in deep shock and in grief following the 22 day bombardment, preceded by an 18 months Israeli siege.

The universally-accepted purpose of the siege and bombardment was to turn the people in Gaza against their elected government and to subject them to the Mahmoud Abbas regime, the U.S./Israeli choice for ruling Palestine.

9 Key questions about the survey

1. What was the actual intended purpose of the poll?

2. Who paid for the survey?

3. What was the process for selecting the sample?

4. How were the questions selected, worded and in what order were they asked?

5. Were the questionnaires received by mail or were they hand-delivered?

6. If hand-delivered, by students or survey staff, how were the students or staff selected?

7. What training did they receive?

8. Upon what scientific principles was the survey based?

9. Was any process evaluation or outcome evaluation conducted? Where is the raw data?

The population represented

The process of a research survey is often mysterious, particularly for those who do not understand how polls are constructed and carried out. Many Palestinians we have interviewed wonder how the 1361 respondents can truly represent 1.5 million Palestinians? Many people in Gaza who have seen the results are skeptical, to say the least. Their skepticism is healthy. Polls have long been used as a manipulative tool, so much so that polls are even conducted on the credibility of polls!

Selection and composition of survey questions

Questions for a poll are to be constructed scientifically and answers to those questions are to be interpreted scientifically. What is as important as the selection of questions to be asked is the way in which they are worded and the order in which they are asked.

The British Polling Council describes the problem:

"The polls might have asked different questions. Wording matters, especially on subjects where many people do not have strong views. It is always worth checking the exact wording when polls appear to differ. There might be an "order effect". One poll might ask a particular question "cold", at the beginning of a survey; another poll might ask the same question "warm", after a series of other questions on the same topic. Differences sometimes arise between the two sets of results, again when many people do not have strong views, and some people may give different answers depending on whether they are asked a question out of the blue or after being invited to consider some aspects of the issue first."

"Seeded questions" in "retro-polling" are known for influencing the respondent. In this case, a negative valence is applied on the question. For example, a question could be asked, "Why did you pick that absurd name?" - or "Do you support the conservatives or oppose helping children?"

The respondent has to either justify or defend his or her answer rather than simply giving an opinion. Moreover, the effects of this type of question can run even deeper, depending on the tone of voice and expression on the face of the interviewer if present when the questionnaire is delivered. Below, we provide 4 examples of questions that skew the result in the Al-Najah survey:

The very first question on the An-Najah survey asks about the cause of the Israeli bombardment and invasion of Gaza in December and January. The question is framed thus:

"Do you think that the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip was a reaction to the firing of rockets from the Strip?"

The problem with this question, in part, is the order in which it has been asked (i.e. first on the survey). This, being the first of question on the survey, sets the stage for the remaining 42 inquiries which are blatantly designed to favor Fatah and Israel. The first question could as easily been asked, "Do you think that Hamas rocket fire was a response to Israel's 18 month siege and missile strikes in the Gaza Strip?

Another question on the survey suggests a particular response:

"There are those who say that Hamas is belligerent towards Fateh activists in the Gaza Strip. Do you support or reject this allegation?"

The next example is so obscure, the response is negated:

"How do you assess media coverage of the war on the Gaza Strip?".

What media are people in war-torn Gaza watching? Are the Gazan's reading local Palestinian news papers, news coverage on Internet and New York Times or watching the TV channel's CNN and Aljazeera? In their shell-shocked condition, under continuing siege, without electricity, water, medical treatment, food as a result of hermetically closed border crossings, what media is available to them? How much time and energy do they have to watch the media while burying and grieving their dead, thousands suffering from untreated wounds, struggling to feed their families, the homeless finding shelter and suffering in fear.

A fourth example of this survey's questions assumes that the Palestinian resistance either broke the former truce agreement, which is not true, or it assumes the resistance will be the one to violate a current or future truce agreement. No questions in the survey express the Israelis violations of the truce agreement.

"Do you support military operations by Palestinian resistance factions after reaching a truce agreement?"

Design, execution and interpretation of polls

The sample: Selecting a sample that fairly represents a larger population is the fundamental basis for all survey research. Stratified random selection is the most widely accepted method for selecting a sample if it is to speak for a broader population. Otherwise, the sample cannot be held to represent the attitudes, opinions, or projected behavior of the population of which it is a part.

The fundamental goal of a survey is based on probabilities. The idea is that there is a high probability that the same results achieved through a sample would have been achieved if something on the order of 98% of the population had been surveyed personally.

Random Selection: The crucial element in reaching this goal is a fundamental principle called "equal probability of selection" (EPS). EPS assumes that if every member of a population has an equal probability of being selected in a sample, then that sample will be representative of the population. Thus, the goal in selecting samples is to allow every citizen an equal chance of falling into the sample. This random selection method precludes a rigging of the sample for a desired outcome.

Physical location: A population poll should select a place where all or most citizens are equally likely to be found. That would not be a market or a mall, a larger grocery store, an office building, workplace, a hotel or an event such as a sports game. A place where nearly all adults most likely is to be found, is in their home, so that said, reaching people at home should be the starting place for most population surveys.

Data collection: The standard method to conduct a survey until the mid-1980s, knocking on doors was considered to be a reliable method but the labor intensity of the surveys made this very difficult. The surveys were reported to be highly accurate, with average error of less than 3% points. The validity and reliability of even these surveys is mitigated by foibles such as the construction of the survey, interviewer bias, language difficulties and perception. By the end of the 1980s the vast majority of national surveys were conducted in telephone interviews. Telephone interviews are perhaps easier and less expensive to conduct but even less reliable than in-person interviews. Today, approximately 95% of all households have a telephone and almost every survey that recorded and reported is based on interviews conducted by telephone.

Stratified Sampling: The method of stratified random selection of a sample must first ensure that the respondents were selected randomly. Second, they must be randomly selected across different socio-economic strata, such as political affiliations, race, income, education, gender, employment, etc. In addition, obvious factors for stratification in this poll should include the impact of the war on Gaza on individual respondents (trauma, loss of a family member, loved one or personal injury). While the final question on the survey asked about the respondent's political affiliation, there is no evidence that respondents were selected for the sample based on their political preferences.

A stratified, randomly selected sample of 1,000 respondents could more accurately represent a population of millions than 1,000,000 respondents in a similar population who were not selected randomly and not stratified according to conditions like those described above. On the other hand, as a rule, the more people surveyed correctly - the higher the probability the sample represents the population. This rather obscure poll of 1361 Palestinians among 1.5 million, may or may not represent the views of the Palestinian people as a whole. However, it is reported to serve that very end.

When an organization does not reveal their funding source, their purpose, survey design (selection and wording of questions), their sampling techniques, method of contact and selection & training of interviewers, process and outcome evaluations and method of interpretation, the reported outcome is meaningless at best and a deliberate attempt at disinformation at worst.

Addenda

The following questions were asked on the survey questionnaire. Multiple-choice lists beneath some of the questions are not included. They can be viewed at the An-Nahah website:

1. Do you think that the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip was a reaction to the firing of rockets from the Strip?

2. Do you support military operations by Palestinian resistance factions after reaching a truce agreement?

3. Do you think that the PLO factions participated in the resistance during the war on Gaza?

4. Do you think that the war on Gaza strengthened Hamas in the West Bank?

5. What are your priorities at the present time?

6. Do you think that funds secured so far for rebuilding the Gaza Strip are enough?

7. In your opinion to whom raised funds to rebuild the Gaza Strip should be given?

8. Do you think that aids sent to Gaza are being distributed on a biased factional basis?

9. Do you think that aids in the Gaza Strip reach those who rightly deserve them?

10. Who in your opinion is best capable of rebuilding the Gaza Strip?

11. Do you think that the reaction of the Arab public measured up to the catastrophe in the Gaza Strip?

12. Do you think that the reaction of the Islamic public measured up to the catastrophe in the Gaza Strip?

13. Do you think that the reaction of the international public measured up to the catastrophe in the Gaza Strip?

14. After the war on Gaza, do you think that there is a genuine desire among all concerned parties to end the current Palestinian division?

15. After the war on Gaza, do you think that the Palestinian leaderships (Fateh, Hamas, Jihad, the Left ---etc.) are capable of ending the current Palestinian division?

16. In your opinion, who stands as an obstacle before a Palestinian dialogue?

17. After the war on Gaza, do you think that the Palestinian public is ready to lead a national reconciliation to a success?

18. Do you think that Fateh is concerned with a national reconciliation on the bases of the top national interests of the Palestinian people?

19. Do you think that Hamas is concerned with a national reconciliation on the bases of the top national interests of the Palestinian people?

20. Do you think that Fateh contributed to the widening of the Palestinian internal rift?

21. Do you think that Hamas contributed to the widening of the Palestinian internal rift?

22. Do you think that the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip increased the possibility of the separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank?

23. Do you think that the new US administration under Obama is serious in its endeavors to achieve peace in the Middle East?

24. Do you think that Hamas should accept a truce for one year and a half?

25. Do you think that the suggested truce will hold for long in the future?

26. Who is the biggest beneficiary from a truce between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip?

27. In your opinion, who emerged victorious in the last war on the Gaza Strip?

28. Do you support or reject the entrance of Arab forces to the Gaza Strip?

29. Do you support or reject the entrance of Arab forces to the West Bank?

30. Do you support or reject the entrance of international forces to the Gaza Strip?

31. Do you support or reject the entrance of international forces to the West Bank?

32. How do you assess media coverage of the war on the Gaza Strip?

33. Are you in favor of forming a transitional government for the purpose of preparing for and supervising new presidential and PLC elections?

34. If presidential elections are held in the present time, to whom from among the following do you give your vote?
If new PLC elections are conducted, whom do you vote for?

35. If new legislative elections were to be held today, which of the following would win?

36. Do you think that there are horizons for national reconciliation?

37. There are those who say that Hamas is belligerent towards Fateh activists in the Gaza Strip. Do you support or reject this allegation?

38. There are those who say that the Palestinian Authority arrests Hamas activists in the West Bank. Do you support or reject this allegation?

39. Are you worried about your life under the present circumstances?

40. Are you pessimistic or optimistic towards the general Palestinian situation at this stage?

41. Under the present circumstances, do you feel that you, your family and your properties are safe?

42. Which of the following political affiliations do you support?

These are the General Results of the survey, Opinion Poll no.37, as it has been interpreted and reported by An-Najah National University:

• 28.6 % of respondents considered the war waged on the Gaza Strip by Israel a reaction to the firing of rockets from the Strip; 69.1% rejected.
• 39.9% of respondents supported military operations by Palestinian resistance factions even after agreeing on a truce.
• 71.1% of respondents believed that the PLO factions participated in resistance during the war on Gaza.
• 57.7% of respondents believed that the war on Gaza strengthened Hamas movement inside the West Bank.
• The top priorities of respondents at the present time were as follows:
  
  - Achieving a national reconciliation 52.6%
  - Rebuilding Gaza 34%
  - Improving the economic conditions 12%
• 27.9% of respondents believed that the aids secured up to the present time are enough to rebuild the Gaza Strip.
• As to whom the funds for rebuilding the Gaza Strip should be given, 19.8% said that the Palestinian Authority should be in charge of these funds, 18.1% said Hamas, 22.3% said a national committee from all Palestinian factions, and 21.1% said the UNRWA should be in charge.
• 45.8% of respondents believed that the aids given to the Gaza Strip are being distributed with factional biases.
• 34.9% of respondents believed that aids to the Gaza Strip reach the people who deservedly need them.
• As for the best side which should be entrusted with rebuilding the Gaza Strip, 35.5% of respondents said it should be local companies, 20.6%said it should be Arab companies and 26.3% said it should be multinational companies.
• 67.4% of respondents considered the reaction of the Arab public to the war on the Gaza Strip measured up to the level of the catastrophe.
• 69.3% from among respondents considered the reaction of the Islamic public to the war on the Gaza Strip measured up to the level of the catastrophe.
• 63% of respondents considered the reaction of the International public to the war on the Gaza Strip measured up to the level of the catastrophe.
• 47.5% of respondents believed that after the war on Gaza there is a genuine desire among the concerned parties to end the current Palestinian division.
• 54.4% of respondents believed that after the war on Gaza, the Palestinian leaderships ( Fateh, Hamas, Jihad, the left---etc.) are capable of ending the current Palestinian division.
• 23.7% of respondents said that those who hinder the Palestinian dialogue are persons from Hamas and Fateh; 15.7 % said it is Hamas movement; 10.9% said it is Fateh movement.
• 60% of respondents believed that after the war on Gaza the Palestinian public is ready to support a national reconciliation.
• 54.4% of respondents believed that Fateh movement is concerned with a national reconciliation on the bases of the top national Palestinian interests.
• 48.6% of respondents believed that Hamas movement is concerned with a national reconciliation on the bases of the top national Palestinian interests.
• 48.9% of respondents believed that Fateh movement participated in widening the internal Palestinian rift.
• 62.8% of respondents believed that Hamas movement participated in widening the internal Palestinian rift.
• 56.9% of respondents believed that the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip increased the possibility of the separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank.
• 24% of respondents believed that the new American administration under Obama is serious in its endeavors to achieve peace in the Middle East.
• 64.3% of respondents saw that Hamas should accept a truce for a year and a half.
• 20% of respondents saw that the suggested truce will hold for long in the future.
• 34.1% of respondents believed that Israel is the main beneficiary from a truce between Israel and Hamas; 17.1% said the beneficiary is Hamas and 43% said that the beneficiary is the citizens of the Gaza Strip.
• 31.6% of respondents believed that Hamas emerged victorious from the last war; 13.4 % said the victorious side is Israel.
• 51.7% of respondents supported allowing Arab troops to enter the Gaza Strip.
• 26.7% of respondents supported allowing Arab troops to enter the West Bank.
• 66.3% of respondents supported allowing international troops to enter the Gaza Strip.
• 21% of respondents supported allowing international troops to enter the West Bank.
• 68.3% of respondents assessed media coverage of the war on Gaza as "good"
• 82% of respondents supported the formation of a transitional government whose aim will be to prepare for and supervise Presidential and PLC elections.
• 79% of respondents said that they will participate in the coming presidential elections. From among those who said they will participate, 31.9% said that they will give their votes to Fateh's candidate; 23.5% said they will give their votes to Hamas' candidate.
• 79.4% of respondents said that they will participate in the coming legislative elections. From among those who said they will participate, 31.4% said that they will give their votes to Fateh's candidates; 24.6% said they will give their votes to Hamas' candidates.
• If PLC elections are to be conducted, 29.7% of respondents expected the winning of Fateh movement; 33.3% expected the winning of Hamas.
• 51.9% of respondents believed that there are horizons for a Palestinian National reconciliation.
• 50.7% of respondents believed that Hamas movement assaults Fateh activists in the Gaza Strip.
• 48.8% of respondents believed that the Palestinian Authority arrests Hamas activists in the West Bank.
• 55% of respondents expressed fear for their lives under the present circumstances.
• 59.3% of respondents said that they are pessimistic of the general Palestinian situation at this stage.
• 53.9% of respondents said that they neither feel safe for themselves nor for their families and properties under the current circumstances.

* As for political affiliation respondents gave the following results: People's Party %1.0, Democratic Front %0.7, Islamic Jihad %3.2, Fateh 30.3%, Hamas 21.5%, Fida 0.1, Popular Front 3.7%, Palestinian National Initiative 0.9%, Independent nationalist 6.5%, Independent Islamist 3.0%, None of the above 28.8%, Others 0.3%

_________________________________________________________________

Alarmingly, Yavin represents a dwindling minority in a society that is drifting fast towards fascism.

February 5 2009

GAZA - The over three weeks long Israeli onslaught on Gaza have caused a massive devastation to public, as well as private buildings and housing units.An initial survey conducted by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), estimates that more than 14, 000 homes,68 governmental buildings and 31 Non- Govern mental Organizations (NGOs) have been totally or partially damaged. UNDP estimates that 600,000 tons of concrete rubble will need to be removed before restoration of Gaza can begin.

“This is a top priority,” said Jens Toyberg-Frandzen, UNDP Special Representative in the Occupied Palestinian territory. “The rubble is mixed with poisonous harmful materials and may include unexploded ordinances. It needs to be urgently removed to protect the lives of Palestinians in Gaza and to facilitate immediate access to basic humanitarian and social services.” The funding for the rubble removal was included in the United Nations Flash Appeal on Monday.The money is secured, UNDP will clear rubble, demolish and clean-up sites of damaged buildings, and identify and remove unexploded ordinances. The project will also generate 200,000 workdays for unemployed Gazans

The UN Flash Appeal also included a requests for urgent funds to allow the United Nations to restore basic social services and public utilities such aswaterhealth, education, food and emergency repairs of critical infrastructure UNDP funding needs a total of $49.3 million, more than half of which is allocated for rubble removal.Other projects focus on reviving the agriculture sector and the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the water reservoirs in the Gaza Strip.

Following the three weeks,looking beyond the emergency humanitarian assistance towards rebuilding the lives of the 1.4 million people in Gaza,United Nations in cooperation with national and international partners, also conducted a comprehensive assessment of damages and the recovery emergency need in Gaza.UNDP, in its capacity as facilitator of the UN and Partners Early Recovery work,is no coordinating the compilation and the analysis of all the data and information gathered.

“This assessment will set the basis for sustainable recovery, reconstruction and long-term development in Gaza,” said Mr. Toyberg-Frandzen. “The scope of work is immense and we have a responsibility to help the people of Gaza get back on the path of sustainable human development.”“Most of the data has been collected,” said Mr. Toyberg-Frandzen adding that the UN working close with Palestinian Authority on the West Bank to analyse the situation.The assessment will feed into the Gaza Early Recovery and Reconstruction Plan that will be presented by the Palestinian Authority at the Gaza donors’ conference to be hosted in Cairo on March 2.

The Israelis massive attacks from air, land and sea across Gaza has affected all aspects of lives and livelihood.The trauma from the devastation will strike Gaza for many years to come.The Israelis high-tech war machinery has killed over 1,314 people and more than 5,300 were injured.According to the Gaza Authority based Palestinian Ministry of Health, hospitals, medical clinics,schools, electric power, water and sanitation installations, agricultural and economic production were destroyed or seriously damaged.

UN say that Gaza is in need of immediate, multi-dimensional early recovery response focused on the restoration of access and movement,the reconstruction of basic services and infrastructure and the reduction of additional risks and vulnerabilities, as well as additional investments in livelihoods, shelter, governance systems, security and rule of law and environmental sustainability. In order for UN agencies to meet the formidable challenges, essential items must be allowed into Gaza, including construction materials, pipes, electrical wires and transformers, in addition to other key equipment and spare parts. Removing Israeli restrictions on the movement of people and goods into Gaza will help rebuild the lives and livelihoods of the Palestinians living in the area.

Photo Fady Adwan

The International Criminal Court is exploring ways to prosecute Israeli commanders over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The alleged crimes include the use of deadly white phosphorus in densely populated civilian areas, as revealed in an investigation by The Times last month. Israel initially denied using the controversial weapon, which causes horrific burns, but was forced later, in the face of mounting evidence, to admit to having deployed it.

When Palestinian groups petitioned the ICC this month, its prosecutor said that it was unable to take the case because it had no jurisdiction over Israel, a nonsignatory to the court. Now, however, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the ICC prosecutor, has told The Times that he is examining the case for Palestinian jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed in Gaza.

Palestinian groups have submitted arguments asserting that the Palestinian Authority is the de facto state in the territory where the crimes were allegedly committed.

“It is the territorial state that has to make a reference to the court. They are making an argument that the Palestinian Authority is, in reality, that state,” Mr Moreno-Ocampo told The Times at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Part of the Palestinian argument rests on the Israeli insistence that it has no responsibility for Gaza under international law since it withdrew from the territory in 2006. “They are quoting jurisprudence,” Mr Moreno-Ocampo said. “It’s very complicated. It’s a different kind of analysis I am doing. It may take a long time but I will make a decision according to law.”

Mr Moreno-Ocampo said that his examination of the case did not necessarily reflect a belief that war crimes had been committed in Gaza. Determining jurisdiction was a first step, he said, and only after it had been decided could he launch an investigation.

The prosecutor’s office has already received several files on alleged crimes from Palestinian groups and is awaiting further reports from the Arab League and Amnesty International containing evidence gathered in Gaza.

Under the Rome treaty that founded it, the ICC can investigate and prosecute allegations of the most serious war crimes only if the country responsible is unwilling or unable to do so through its national courts.

States that are party to the treaty can refer cases of crimes committed by their citizens or on their territory. Cases involving the citizens or territory of a country that has not signed up to the court can be referred by the United Nations Security Council – as in the case of Darfur. Ivory Coast set a precedent as the first nonstate party to accept the ICC’s jurisdiction over alleged war crimes on its territory. It signed the Rome treaty but never ratified it. In 2005 it lodged a declaration with the court accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction over crimes committed there since September 2002.

Palestinian lawyers argue that the Palestinian Authority should be allowed to refer the cases in Gaza on this same ad hoc basis – despite its lack of internationally recognised statehood.

The case has wide-reaching ramifications for the Palestinian case for statehood. If the court rejects the case, it will highlight the legal black hole that Palestinians find themselves in while they remain stateless. However, it also underlines some of Israel’s worst fears about a Palestinian state on its borders. A Palestinian state that ratified the Rome treaty would then be able to refer alleged Israeli war crimes to the court without the current legal wrangling. The case could also lead to snowballing international recognition of a Palestinian state by countries eager to see Israel prosecuted.

One avenue would be for Israel to agree to investigate its commanders and prosecute any crimes discovered. That would remove any case from the orbit of the international court. So far that appears unlikely, given Israel’s repeated denials of war crimes in Gaza.

The Israeli army has, however, launched an internal inquiry into whether white phosphorus was used in some cases in built-up areas, having eventually admitted that it did use the incendiary substance, which is not illegal as a battlefield smokescreen but is banned from being used in civilian areas. Camera footage from one such attack shows what appears to be white phosphorous raining down on a UN school in Beit Lahiya, where Red Crescent ambulances and their crews were stationed.

A coalition of Israeli human rights groups has urged the country’s attorney-general to open an independent investigation into allegations of war crimes by troops, urging that to do so could head off international court cases. The groups, including the antisettlement organisation B’Tselem, said that there had been reports of Israeli forces firing into civilian areas, denying medical aid to the wounded and preventing Palestinian ambulances from reaching them, and of firing at people carrying white flags.

Meanwhile, the UN is preparing an inquiry into the bombardment of a UN school in Jabaliya, in the northern Gaza Strip. Israeli forces fired artillery shells outside the school, which had been converted into a refugee shelter for Gazans fleeing their homes. At least 43 people were killed. Israel said that Palestinian militants had fired from the compound, which was denied by the UN.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/
world/middle_east/article5636069.ece