Selasa, 08 Agustus 2006

Jika Abeer adalah anak perempuanmu....(Lara Anak Perempuan Iraq)

Mereka minum arak...sambil merencanakan bagaimana cara menodai anak gadismu....

Mereka rampas kehormatan anak gadismu, bergiliran. Lalu mereka bunuh.

Apa kesempatan gadis seperti dia di hadapan 4/5 lelaki yang semuanya memegang senjata?

Ibu, ayah dan adiknya dibunuh di kamar sebelah, sedang dia harus berjuang mempertahankan kemuliannya sebagai wanita....

Bayangkan jika ia adalah anak perempuanmu....atau kamu....

Masih adakah senyum tersisa?

Soldiers 'hit golf balls before going out to kill family'

· US military court told of brutal attack in Iraq
· Evidence from colleague describes rape and murder

Ryan Lenz, Associated Press in Baghdad
Tuesday August 8, 2006
The Guardian

US soldiers, accused of raping and murdering a 14-year-old Iraqi girl, drank alcohol and hit golf balls before the attack. One of them grilled chicken wings afterwards, a criminal investigator told a US military hearing yesterday.

Benjamin Bierce interviewed one of the accused, Specialist James Barker who made a written statement in which he recorded graphic and brutal sexual details of the alleged assault on March 12.

Mr Bierce was testifying on the second day of the hearing to determine whether five soldiers must stand trial for the rape and killing of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, her parents and five-year-old sister in the town of Mahmudiya.

It is among the worst in a series of cases of alleged misconduct. Specialist Barker's signed statement was submitted in evidence. He is accused, along with Sergeant Paul Cortez, Private Jesse Spielman and Private Bryan Howard of rape and murder. Another soldier, Sergeant Anthony Yribe, is accused of failing to report the attack but is not alleged to have participated.

Former private, Steven Green, was discharged from the army for a "personality disorder" after the incident and was arrested in North Carolina in June on rape and murder charges. He has pleaded not guilty and is being held without bail.

Yesterday, Private Justin Watt testified that Private Howard told him, before the incident, that Private Green, Sergeant Cortez and Specialist Barker had planned to rape a girl, and Private Howard was to be the lookout. Another investigator, Michael Hood, told the hearing that he interviewed Private Spielman, who denied shooting or having sex with anyone. He was given a lie-detector test and passed.

According to Specialist Barker's statement, Private Green not only raped the girl but also shot her and her family after telling his comrades repeatedly he wanted to kill some Iraqis. Mr Bierce said that on the day of the attack, Specialist Barker, Sergeant Cortez, Private Spielman and Private Green had been playing cards and drinking Iraqi whisky mixed with an energy drink. They practised hitting golf balls, Specialist Barker's statement said.

Specialist Barker made it clear Private Green was very persistent about killing some Iraqis. At some point they decided to go to the house of the girl they had seen passing by their checkpoint. Specialist Barker also said that when they arrived at the house, the father and the girl were outside. Private Spielman grabbed the girl while Private Green seized her father and took them into the house.

Private Green took the father, mother and the younger sister into the bedroom, while the girl remained in the living room. Specialist Barker wrote that Sergeant Cortez pushed the girl to the floor, and tore off her underwear. Sergeant Cortez appeared to rape her, according to the statement. Specialist Barker then tried to rape the girl, Mr Bierce said. Suddenly, the group heard gunshots. Private Green came out of the bedroom holding an AK-47 rifle and declared: "They're all dead. I just killed them," the statement said.

Private Green put the gun down, then raped the girl while Sergeant Cortez held her down. Specialist Barker claims Private Green picked up the AK-47 and shot the girl once, paused, then shot her several more times. Specialist Barker said he got a lamp and poured kerosene on the girl. She was set on fire, but he does not say who did it. He does not say if Private Howard or Private Spielman took part in the rape. The statement says he grilled chicken wings back at their checkpoint.

The case has increased demands for changes to an agreement that exempts US soldiers from prosecution in Iraqi courts. Prime minister Nuri al-Maliki has demanded an independent investigation.


Fakta - Serangan Israel ke Lebanon telah direncanakn jauh hari


Mohon maaf kalo sudah baca:

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that "more than a year ago, a senior Israeli army officer began giving PowerPoint presentations, on an off-the-record basis, to US and other diplomats, journalists and thinktanks, setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail".

Penculikan dua serdadu Israel hanya alasan.

Tahun 2000 saja setiap hari Israel melanggar 'blue line' dengan menerbangkan pesawat militer ke atas Lebanon, yang merupakan breach of cease fire.

Hiszbullah retaliated dengan berbagai cara.

Apa yang dilakukan Israel sekarang senada dengan apa yang mereka lakukan di Palestina. Satu tentara diculik, pembangkit listrik dihancurkan menyebabkan ribuan sipil menderita.

Sementara itu, Israel pura-pura tidak tahu dengan ratusan tawanan perang  yang mereka sandera di penjara mereka, pura-pura lupa dengan fakta bahwa saat ini mereka berusaha membunuh kepala pemerintahan resmi Palestina. Termasuk mengirimkan zat kimia melalui parcel.

Soooo double standard!!

Mari boikot produk pro Israel! 

Israel responded to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah, right? Wrong

The assault on Lebanon was premeditated - the soldiers' capture simply provided the excuse. It was also unnecessary

George Monbiot
Tuesday August 8, 2006
The Guardian

Whatever we think of Israel's assault on Lebanon, all of us seem to agree about one fact: that it was a response, however disproportionate, to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah. I repeated this "fact" in my last column, when I wrote that "Hizbullah fired the first shots". This being so, the Israeli government's supporters ask peaceniks like me, what would you have done? It's an important question. But its premise, I have now discovered, is flawed.

Since Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000, there have been hundreds of violations of the "blue line" between the two countries. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil) reports that Israeli aircraft crossed the line "on an almost daily basis" between 2001 and 2003, and "persistently" until 2006. These incursions "caused great concern to the civilian population, particularly low-altitude flights that break the sound barrier over populated areas". On some occasions, Hizbullah tried to shoot them down with anti-aircraft guns.

In October 2000, the Israel Defence Forces shot at unarmed Palestinian demonstrators on the border, killing three and wounding 20. In response, Hizbullah crossed the line and kidnapped three Israeli soldiers. On several occasions, Hizbullah fired missiles and mortar rounds at IDF positions, and the IDF responded with heavy artillery and sometimes aerial bombardment. Incidents like this killed three Israelis and three Lebanese in 2003; one Israeli soldier and two Hizbullah fighters in 2005; and two Lebanese people and three Israeli soldiers in February 2006. Rockets were fired from Lebanon into Israel several times in 2004, 2005 and 2006, on some occasions by Hizbullah. But, the UN records, "none of the incidents resulted in a military escalation".

On May 26 this year, two officials of Islamic Jihad - Nidal and Mahmoud Majzoub - were killed by a car bomb in the Lebanese city of Sidon. This was widely assumed in Lebanon and Israel to be the work of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency. In June, a man named Mahmoud Rafeh confessed to the killings and admitted that he had been working for Mossad since 1994. Militants in southern Lebanon responded, on the day of the bombing, by launching eight rockets into Israel. One soldier was lightly wounded. There was a major bust-up on the border, during which one member of Hizbullah was killed and several wounded, and one Israeli soldier wounded. But while the border region "remained tense and volatile", Unifil says it was "generally quiet" until July 12.

There has been a heated debate on the internet about whether the two Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hizbullah that day were captured in Israel or in Lebanon, but it now seems pretty clear that they were seized in Israel. This is what the UN says, and even Hizbullah seems to have forgotten that they were supposed to have been found sneaking around the outskirts of the Lebanese village of Aita al-Shaab. Now it simply states that "the Islamic resistance captured two Israeli soldiers at the border with occupied Palestine". Three other Israeli soldiers were killed by the militants. There is also some dispute about when, on July 12, Hizbullah first fired its rockets; but Unifil makes it clear that the firing took place at the same time as the raid - 9am. Its purpose seems to have been to create a diversion. No one was hit.

But there is no serious debate about why the two soldiers were captured: Hizbullah was seeking to exchange them for the 15 prisoners of war taken by the Israelis during the occupation of Lebanon and (in breach of article 118 of the third Geneva convention) never released. It seems clear that if Israel had handed over the prisoners, it would - without the spillage of any more blood - have retrieved its men and reduced the likelihood of further kidnappings. But the Israeli government refused to negotiate. Instead - well, we all know what happened instead. Almost 1,000 Lebanese and 33 Israeli civilians have been killed so far, and a million Lebanese displaced from their homes.

On July 12, in other words, Hizbullah fired the first shots. But that act of aggression was simply one instance in a long sequence of small incursions and attacks over the past six years by both sides. So why was the Israeli response so different from all that preceded it? The answer is that it was not a reaction to the events of that day. The assault had been planned for months.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that "more than a year ago, a senior Israeli army officer began giving PowerPoint presentations, on an off-the-record basis, to US and other diplomats, journalists and thinktanks, setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail". The attack, he said, would last for three weeks. It would begin with bombing and culminate in a ground invasion. Gerald Steinberg, professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University, told the paper that "of all of Israel's wars since 1948, this was the one for which Israel was most prepared ... By 2004, the military campaign scheduled to last about three weeks that we're seeing now had already been blocked out and, in the last year or two, it's been simulated and rehearsed across the board".

A "senior Israeli official" told the Washington Post that the raid by Hizbullah provided Israel with a "unique moment" for wiping out the organisation. The New Statesman's editor, John Kampfner, says he was told by more than one official source that the US government knew in advance of Israel's intention to take military action in Lebanon. The Bush administration told the British government.

Israel's assault, then, was premeditated: it was simply waiting for an appropriate excuse. It was also unnecessary. It is true that Hizbullah had been building up munitions close to the border, as its current rocket attacks show. But so had Israel. Just as Israel could assert that it was seeking to deter incursions by Hizbullah, Hizbullah could claim - also with justification - that it was trying to deter incursions by Israel. The Lebanese army is certainly incapable of doing so. Yes, Hizbullah should have been pulled back from the Israeli border by the Lebanese government and disarmed. Yes, the raid and the rocket attack on July 12 were unjustified, stupid and provocative, like just about everything that has taken place around the border for the past six years. But the suggestion that Hizbullah could launch an invasion of Israel or that it constitutes an existential threat to the state is preposterous. Since the occupation ended, all its acts of war have been minor ones, and nearly all of them reactive.

So it is not hard to answer the question of what we would have done. First, stop recruiting enemies, by withdrawing from the occupied territories in Palestine and Syria. Second, stop provoking the armed groups in Lebanon with violations of the blue line - in particular the persistent flights across the border. Third, release the prisoners of war who remain unlawfully incarcerated in Israel. Fourth, continue to defend the border, while maintaining the diplomatic pressure on Lebanon to disarm Hizbullah (as anyone can see, this would be much more feasible if the occupations were to end). Here then is my challenge to the supporters of the Israeli government: do you dare to contend that this programme would have caused more death and destruction than the current adventure has done?

Kamis, 03 Agustus 2006

Chicken pilau rice

Yummy, enak kalau dimakan panas

beras 2 cup
onion 1 sedang, cut finely
all spice you have in store ( 1 sdt garam masala, i/s sdt jintan, 7 cloves -lupa nama indonesianya, 6 green cardamon, kayu manis seujung sdt, kunyit 1/4 sdt dsb)
Minyak untuk menumis.
Canned Tomatoes
Bawang putih 2, rajang halus
Chicken, potong cube 2X 2 cm, with/out tulang
Kentang, potong cube 1 X1 cm.

Tumis onion sampai coklat. Tambahkan garlic sampai harum.
Masukkan potato. Masak 5 menit.
Masukkan tomat kaleng. Aduk 5 menit. Masukkan semua bumbu + ayam+ garam. Masak sampai matang dan air habis.
Sementara itu cucui beras dan rendam dalam air panas.
Ketika air ayam tadi habis, tambahkan beras dan air panas. Air beras 2 x lipat tingginya daripada beras. Misal jika beras setinggi angka 2, maka air setinggi 4 -base on rice cooker pan.
Tutup panci.
Masak dengan api sedang.
Hidangkan panas dengan salad cucumber, iceberg dan carrot.
side dish : yoghurt + mint sauce + cucumber + lemon juice.

Little Monster belajar Iqra

Karena Wafa hampir tiga tahun dan dia sudah bisa diajak kosentrasi melihat huruf-huruf, tiga pekan lalu, kami mulai membuka buku iqra dengan serius.

Awalnya dia mau loncat ke bagian yang mirip 'ngajinya', alias iqra lanjut.

'Ngaji' Wafa = ambil Quran, buka halaman asal.

'Come on Mi, help Wafa.'

Umi lalu ngaji, Wafa mengikuti bunyinya. Kalau Umi turn the page, Wafa juga membalik lembar Qurannya.

Akhirnya dia mau belajar halaman pertama. A Ba.

Surprise juga, segtelah diulang dua hari, halaman pertama lulus.

Cuman ya gitu. Dia ngasal. Nggak urut atas ke bawah. Maunya loncat-loncat. Misal, kalo dia ketemu 'A', maka jarinya mencari 'A' yang lain.

'This 'A' again. This is 'A' too  dsb'.

Setelah halaman kedua. Agak bingung. Ba sama Ta kok mirip, he he he.


Umi menunjuk 'Ta'

Dengan nada menang, Wafa berkata, "This friend's of 'Ba'."

Umi tak henti ngakak.

Wafa manyun.

(Bibir mungil itu maju....tatap mata penasaran melihat Umi yang tertawa dengan air mata mengalir)


Storeis about Home (Arik)

Storeis about Home

I was at home, because my brother wants me to play foot ball mad.

And its mayby Easter.

I don't celebrit Christmas.

I celebrit Ead Adha.

I give money too Kashmir and indonesia.

I never ever speak in Bengali

the end

I am a Muslim (Tulisan Arik)

I am a Muslim


I pray and nagi (ngaji, maksudnya)

I listen to Allah

I help anybody get hurt (who is hurt, he meant, I think)

I never ever fite (fight)

I exercis and I don't smoke (don't know how he get this idea, though)

I never broke things

I don't say swear things

the end