Transcript
Of
Robert
Fisk
Speech
At
Concordia
University
In
Montreal
-
November
17,
2002
Montreal
Muslim
News
Network
(Transcribed
by
Ken
Hechtman)
Ladies
and
Gentlemen,
September
the
11th,
2001
did
not
change
the
world.
I
tell
my
colleagues,
"Please
stop
printing
and
broadcasting
those
words."
Over
and
over,
after
September
the
11th,
this
had
become
one
of
the
outstanding
dangerous
lies
which
we
journalists
have
been
propagating.
September
the
11th
may
give
President
George
W.
Bush
the
excuse
to
change
the
world
but
that
should
be
exposed
for
what
it
is:
a
manipulation
of
grief
and
fear
in
order
to
start
a
war
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
international
crimes
against
humanity
which
took
place
in
New
York,
Washington
and
Pennsylvania
just
over
a
year
ago.
A
war
against
a
country
--
yes,
led
by
a
monster
-
but
a
country
which
has
nothing
to
do
with
those
atrocities.
On
September
the
12th
this
year,
I
went
to
the
United
Nations
General
Assembly
to
have
a
look
at
Mr.
Bush.
You
know,
when
you
see
someone
on
television,
that
flat
image
gives
you
an
idea,
but
you
need
to
actually
see
the
man
in
the
flesh.
So
I
went
to
the
General
Assembly,
I
wasn't
very
far
away
from
Mr.
Bush.
I
watched
him
start
what
I
fear
is
an
American
attempt
to
reshape
the
Middle
East.
To
rewrite
the
history
of
a
region
which
is
white-hot
with
anger
at
the
United
States.
It
will,
I
suspect,
be
the
most
frightening
attempt
to
change
the
map
of
the
Middle
East,
since
Britain
and
France,
victors
over
the
Ottoman
Empire
divided
up
the
spoils
of
the
1914-18
war,
the
war
my
father
fought
in.
See
you
in
court,
Tony
By
George
Monbiot,
The
Guardian,
November
26,
2002
We
should
help
the
Iraqi
people
overthrow
Saddam,
but
not
by
flouting
international
law:
Parliament
might
have
been
denied
its
debate
and
the
cabinet
might
have
been
silenced,
but
there
are
other
means
of
holding
the
government
to
account.
If,
by
4pm
today,
his
lawyers
have
failed
to
agree
that
he
will
not
attack
Iraq
without
a
new
UN
resolution,
the
Campaign
for
Nuclear
Disarmament
will
take
the
prime
minister
to
court.
For
the
first
time
in
history,
the
British
government
may
be
forced
to
defend
the
legality
of
its
war
plans
in
front
of
a
judge.
The
case,
hatched
by
the
comedian
Mark
Thomas,
looks
straightforward.
The
UK
and
the
US
are
preparing
to
invade,
whether
or
not
they
receive
permission
from
the
UN.
Jack
Straw,
the
foreign
secretary,
has
stated
that
the
UK
will
"reserve
our
right
to
take
military
action,
if
that
is
required,
within
the
existing
body
of
UN
security
council
resolutions".
But
no
UN
resolution
grants
such
a
right.
Last
week,
Matrix
Chambers,
the
legal
practice
founded
by
the
prime
minister's
wife,
prepared
a
legal
opinion
for
CND.
Its
findings
were
unequivocal:
"The
UK
would
be
in
breach
of
international
law
if
it
were
to
use
force
against
Iraq...
without
a
further
security
council
resolution."
As
the
spinning
wheel
turns
By
Nathan
Guttman,
Ha'aretz,
November
26,
2002
Suzannne
Goldenberg,
the
British
Guardian's
correspondent
in
Israel
till
recently,
laughs
off
charges
by
the
Government
Press
Office
that
she
and
some
of
her
colleagues
received
instructions
from
the
Palestinian
Authority
and
that
she
was
removed
from
her
posting
here
due
to
demands
made
by
the
government.
She's
very
happy
at
her
new
posting
in
Washington,
thank
you
-
and
aside
from
some
obstacles
put
in
her
way
by
the
GPO,
she
described
Israel
as
a
heaven
for
foreign
correspondents,
because
everything
is
so
small
and
open.
"Increasingly,
Israelis
are
resistant
to
hearing
or
seeing
anything
that
challenges
their
version
of
events,
a
nationally
adopted
cant
that
basically
says:
"We
are
the
victims,
they
are
terrorists,
and
the
whole
world
is
against
us,"
Goldenberg
wrote
in
a
long
personal
essay
published
in
the
Guardian
after
having
left
Israel.
That
sentence
explains,
from
her
perspective,
what
she
went
through
as
a
European
reporter
covering
Israel
during
the
intifada:
from
attempts
to
strip
her
of
her
press
card
and
delays
entering
Israel
at
the
airport
to
explicit
accusations
that
GPO
chief
Danny
Seamen
made
against
her
after
she
left
the
country.
Report:
The
Meanings
of
Palestinian
Reform
Report:
The
Meanings
of
Palestinian
Reform
-
Acrobat
format
By
the
International
Crisis
Group,
November
12,
2002
"...the
reform
process
is
vulnerable,
an
amalgamation
of
competing
and
contradictory
agendas,
highly
susceptible
to
accusations
of
collusion
with
outside
forces;
that
it
cannot
(and
indeed
has
no
desire
to)
touch
Arafat
as
a
symbol;
that
Arafat
is
not
the
only
Palestinian
obstacle
to
genuine
Palestinian
reform;
that
Israeli
and
U.S.
involvement
in
the
process
over
the
past
several
months
has
been
counterproductive;
and
that
it
will
remain
above
and
beyond
all
dependent
on
progress
on
the
Israeli-Palestinian
political
front."
-
Since
U.S.
President
George
W.
Bush’s
24
June
2002
statement
on
the
Israeli-Palestinian
conflict,
Palestinian
reform
has
emerged
as
a
key
ingredient
in
Middle
East
diplomacy.
In
his
statement,
the
president
publicly
identified
“a
new
and
different
Palestinian
leadership”
and
“entirely
new
political
and
economic
institutions”
as
preconditions
for
the
establishment
of
a
Palestinian
state.
In
early
July,
the
Quartet
of
Middle
East
mediators
(the
European
Union,
Russian
Federation,
United
Nations,
and
United
States)
established
an
International
Task
Force
for
Palestinian
Reform
“to
develop
and
implement
a
comprehensive
reform
action
plan”
for
the
Palestinian
Authority
(PA).
The
September
2002
statement
by
the
Quartet
underscored
reform
of
Palestinian
political,
civil,
and
security
institutions
as
an
integral
component
of
peacemaking.
The
three
phase-implementation
roadmap,
a
U.S.
draft
of
which
was
presented
to
Israel
and
the
Palestinians
by
U.S.
Assistant
Secretary
of
State
William
Burns
in
October,
provided
details
on
this
reform
component.
Error-prone
Israel
Continues
to
Sell
the
Murder
of
Children
as
One
Big
Mistake
By
Eddie
Taylor,
Palestine
Chronicle,
November
25,
2002
NEW
YORK
(PC)
-
We
heard
the
“m”
word
again
this
weekend.
When
Jihad
al-Faqeh,
an
8-year-old
walking
back
from
school
in
Nablus,
was
struck
in
the
chest
by
an
IDF
bullet,
the
explanation
was
immediate.
No,
make
that
reflexive.
It
was,
the
army
spokesperson
said,
a
“mistake”.
As
we
have
seen
throughout
the
past
two
years,
it
is
a
word
that
trips
off
the
tongues
of
the
security
chiefs
as
readily
as
“self-defense”
or
“responding
to
hostile
fire.”
We’ve
almost
become
immune
to
the
many
“mistakes”
of
the
IDF.
The
West
is
even
comforted
by
the
notion.
Rita
Cosby,
one
of
Fox
News&#
