Israel already crossed own nuclear red line: Iran

Iran claims Israel has already overstepped the 'red line' outlined by Benjamin Netanyahu at the UN General Assembly (AFP/File, Don Emmert)

(AFP) – 27 minutes ago

TEHRAN — Israel has already breached its own red line set by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by acquiring "dozens of nuclear warheads," Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi said on Saturday.

"If having the atomic bomb is passing the red line, the Zionist regime, that possesses dozens of nuclear warheads and weapons of mass destruction, has passed the red line years ago, and it has to be stopped," he said, according to the ISNA news agency.

Vahidi was responding to a speech by Netanyahu to the UN General Assembly this week in which -- using a cartoon bomb diagramme -- the Israeli leader called for a "clear red line" to be applied to Iran's nuclear activities, which he charged are aimed at developing atomic weapons.

"Is the occupying and aggressor Zionist regime that possesses nuclear weapons more dangerous? Or an Iran that doesn't have nuclear weapons and which insists more than anybody on nuclear disarmament, and seeks only to have peaceful nuclear energy abiding by international rules," Vahidi asked.

Israel is the Middle East's sole, though undeclared, nuclear weapons state. Analysts estimate it has more than 200 nuclear warheads.

It is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency but has never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Iran insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful and rejects Israel's accusations of military intent.

Israel has had serious differences with Washington over how to respond to what it regards an "existential" threat from Tehran.

US intelligence agencies estimate that Iran has taken no decision to acquire a nuclear weapon but is merely seeking a so-called breakout capability to develop one in the future if it so decides.

It says there is more time for diplomacy and sanctions to work out.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved

Egypt’s Mursi Challenges Israel, Claims Arab Leadership

By Nicole Gaouette on September 26, 2012
Bloomberg News

Egypt’s President Mohamed Mursi staked a claim for his country’s renewed leadership of the Arab world by calling for changes in the international economic system and indirectly challenging Israel for possessing a nuclear arsenal.

“The will of the people, especially in our region, no longer tolerates the continued non-accession of any country to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the non-application of the safeguards regime to their nuclear facilities, especially if this is coupled with irresponsible policies or arbitrary threats,” Mursi told the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York today.

Israel, which is not a NPT signatory, has never acknowledged that it possesses nuclear weapons, although U.S. intelligence officials estimate that it has as many as 200 of them.

In recent months, Israel has warned that it may attack Iran’s nuclear facilities if it thinks the Tehran government is getting too close to developing a nuclear weapon. Iran, whose known uranium enrichment facilities are under international safeguards to prevent diversion for weapons, insists that its program is solely for civilian use.

Mursi went on to deliver a rebuke that seemed equally directed at the U.S. and President Barack Obama, who yesterday said the U.S. would do whatever it takes to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and warned that time isn’t unlimited for diplomacy to resolve the issues.

“The acceptance by the international community of the principle of pre-emptiveness or the attempt to legitimize it is in itself a serious matter, and must be firmly confronted to avoid the prevalence of the law of the jungle,” Mursi said.

The One-State Vision and Foundational Principles of a Republic in Historic Palestine

                                                            A State of ALL its Citizens

The One-State Vision and Foundational Principles of a Republic in Historic Palestine

Preamble

I. We, the undersigned, Palestinians and Israelis, believe that the historic land of Palestine should be shared by all those who now live in it and its natives who have been expelled or exiled from it since 1948, and their descendants, regardless of religion, ethnicity, national origin or current citizenship status. Cognisant of the great changes in the Middle East including the recent Arab uprisings, we conceive of our movement as part of the drive towards democracy, accountability, transparency, equality and economic and social justice in the region. We intend to build a model state in the region, rooted in equal citizenship, popular democracy and institutional justice.

II. We, Palestinians and Israelis, united and enriched in our diversity, fully recognise the historic injustices inflicted on the indigenous Palestinian population, including the ethnic cleansing of the 1948 Nakba; support all those who are working to build a democratic, pluralistic, secular state (based on the separation of religion and state), that encompasses all of historic Palestine (currently the political entities of the State of Israel and the post-1967 Israeli-occupied Palestinian Territories); and honour all those who suffered for justice, equality and freedom in our land.

III. We reject the tragic 1947 UN Partition Plan, dividing the country into two entities, and the terrible damage it has wrought on the country; this Resolution was used by the Zionist leadership as an excuse for the forced expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in the Nakba of 1948. Since then Israel has prevented the refugees from returning to their homes, and the international community has failed to enable their return.

IV. We recognise that for decades efforts to bring about a two-state solution based on a partition of the land of Palestine into a Palestinian entity in 22 percent of historic Palestine, and an Israeli one in 78 percent, have failed because they fell short of providing elementary justice. Based on a policy of separation, fragmentation and inequality, the two-state solution ignores the physical and political realities on the ground, and presumes a false symmetry of power and moral claims between an indigenous, colonised and occupied people on the one hand, and a colonising state and military occupier on the other. Indeed, ever since 1967, Israel has acted to make a two-state solution impossible by a range of illegal activities, chiefly the building of illegal settlements, confiscation of land, brutal repression of the Palestinian population, and the building of the Apartheid Wall. Moreover, Israel’s ongoing systematic discrimination against Palestinians, which includes practices such as forced transfer, settler-colonialism of the areas occupied in 1967, as well as in areas of Palestine after 1948, segregation, ghettoisation, and the separation wall (declared illegal by the International Court of Justice in 2004), denial of citizenship and basic human rights and freedoms, is consistent with the crime of Apartheid as defined by the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid; http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/cspca/cspca.html) and the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

V. Seeking and working for a better future of security, equality and justice and equal opportunity for all, we believe in popular, non-violent resistance and support the creation of a movement committed to the establishment of the future Republic of Palestine that can serve and meet the aspirations and hopes of all of its citizens. This will be achieved in conjunction with the international campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against the apartheid Israeli state, and has the potential to bring substantial pressure to bear on Israel and its supporters.

VI. Our new one-state movement brings together Palestinians and Israelis in partnership, supported by a global solidarity movement based on the principles and programme outlined below. We call on all those who cherish freedom, liberty, justice, equality, and democracy and reject racism and segregation to join us in building our movement. We believe this movement will change the face and future of the Middle East, and finally bring peace and security for the people in the Middle East, and for people around the world.

Founding Principles and Political Programme

We call for a Constitution for the Republic of Palestine based on the following principles:

1. Constitution and a Bill of Rights: The people of Palestine, Palestinians and Israelis, through their freely elected representatives, will adopt a Constitution and a Bill of Rights as the supreme law of the Republic of Palestine.

 2. Supremacy of Constitution: The Constitution will be the supreme law of the Republic, guaranteeing separation of powers (executive, legislative and judicial), and guaranteeing the rights of citizens vis-a-vis the state. The Constitution will be voted on by the citizens of the Republic of Palestine and adopted by a two-thirds majority, with constitutional amendments meeting the same requirements.

3. Bill of Rights and Citizens’ Charter: The Bill of Rights with its Citizens’ Charter will guarantee the rights and freedoms of all individuals in the state. Basic citizens’ rights include, among others, housing, health, education, employment, social and legal protection, freedom of movement, a ban on racial, religious and gender discrimination, and equal opportunity for all.

4. Truth and Reconciliation Commission: The Constitution will seek to redress the devastating effects of settler-colonial Zionism on the indigenous Palestinians, and other oppressed groups, such as Mizrahi Jews (“Arab Jews”), and to address the structural injustices, inequalities and divisions of the past. Inspired by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of post-apartheid South Africa, it will promote truth and reconciliation between all the diverse peoples of Palestine.

5.  Jerusalem/Al-Quds: The City of Jerusalem will be the Capital of the Republic of Palestine and will be one city, open to and equally shared by all.

6. The Right of Return: The implementation of the Right of Return and reparations for Palestinian refugees in accordance with UN Resolution 194 is a fundamental pillar of peace based on justice and the benchmark of human dignity, liberty and equality. Palestinian self-determination will be addressed through full democratic rights and equality in a unitary state. The Constitution will establish the legal and institutional frameworks for justice, reconciliation and integration of the Palestinian returnees.

7. Fundamental Universal Rights: The Republic of Palestine will be founded on the principles of human dignity, human rights, equality and equal rights, freedoms and equal opportunities; supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law, universal adult suffrage, parliamentary democracy, freedoms of expression, religion, language, movement, residence and assembly, regular elections, democratically structured institutions, a multi-party system of democratic, non-racist, non-sexist government and the fundamental rights and freedoms as articulated and enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and United Nations Covenants.

8. Equality and Citizenship: The Constitution will be founded on the principle that all people who live in historic Palestine as well as Palestinian refugees who realise their right of return will have equality of citizenship and equality of stake. Equal citizenship will have the result that the existing apartheid-based and discriminatory laws and demographic racism will be abrogated, together with the whole institutional system of Zionism. Our Constitution will ensure a state founded on the principles of equality of citizenship, equality between women and men and non-domination and equality in civil, political, social and cultural rights for all citizens and a fully integrated society based on democratic values, economic and social justice and fundamental human rights; lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law. All citizens will be equally entitled to the rights and benefits of citizenship; and equally subject to the duties and responsibilities of citizenship. All organs of the state, including the courts, police and administration of justice shall represent all the people of the land and shall defend, protect, and preserve the principles of equality and democracy. The laws of the state shall provide all citizens with equal access to security, housing, work, welfare, public lands, education, health care, leisure, cultural expression and all the basic requirements for living in dignity and freedom.

9. Cultural Diversity and Multiculturalism: The Constitution will recognise and celebrate the diversity of religion and culture of the new society, and the distinct linguistic and historical traditions of the country, consistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

10. Public Land: The public land of the state shall belong to all its citizens, who shall have equal access to it and benefits from its use. The owners of private property expropriated from Palestinian refugees, and Palestinian citizens of Israel and Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza shall be given the choice of the restoration of their property or reparations for themselves or their descendants. Consistent with the principles of the Constitution and  international law, the Jewish National Fund shall be disbanded and assets held by this entity or the Israel Land Authority returned to its rightful owners, and what is left will be held in common, or distributed thorough fair and agreed mechanisms.

11. Economic Justice and Affirmative Action: In the new state, economic and social justice requires addressing unfair distribution of resources that resulted from a long history of inequality and racism. Subject to universal equality under the law, remedial economic measures (including affirmative action) shall be undertaken to redress past injustices, remove segregation and allow equal opportunity. Such programmes would ensure social harmony and remove the possibility of maintaining unfair privileges by one group acquired through historical segregation and monopolies on use of land, water and others resources

12. Separation of Religion and State: The Constitution will establish a non-sectarian democratic state based on the principle of separation of religion and state, its governing institutions based on the principle of “one-person, one-vote”. There will be no specific privileges or privileged rights accorded to any ethnic or religious group or individual. Ethnic, religious, cultural or national minorities shall be protected by law, but not assigned any specific rights.

13. Religious Freedom and Religious Sites: The right to religious practice shall be guaranteed by the state. Religious institutions shall be voluntary, totally separate and independent from the state, and shall receive no financial support from it. All residents of the state shall be free to practice their religion and to worship at sacred sites without impediment or discrimination. The state shall ensure that all religions enjoy equal standing before the law, and that no religion impedes or has supremacy over the other.

14. Civil Marriage and Family Law: The civil law of the state shall reign supreme and shall be the ultimate reference in any disputes arising between citizens and between citizens and religious institutions. The state shall require the registration of all religious and civil marriages and civil unions under principles of law that are non-discriminatory as between marriage and civil partners, irrespective of gender, religion, ethnicity, or any other aspect of identity. The state will permit adjudication by religious authorities (including courts) of disputes between partners who agree to such adjudication. The state itself will be guided in matters of family law by the fundamental principles of equality under the Constitution. The state constitutional court shall be the final arbiter for all legal issues arising out of family law, marriages, divorces and inheritance.

15. United Nations Charter: The Constitution will promote the quality of life and welfare of all citizens and free the potential of each person; build a united and democratic Palestine able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the family of nations and as a member of the United Nations. The state shall uphold international law, and at all times seek the peaceful resolution of conflicts through negotiation and with regard to collective security in accordance with the United Nations Charter.

16. Official Languages: The Constitution shall recognise the distinct historical, linguistic and cultural traditions of Palestine. The official languages of the Republic will be Arabic, Hebrew and English. Recognising the status of the official languages of our people, the Republic must take practical and positive measures to advance the use of these languages and support a mutli-lingual educational system.

17. State Education: The state shall guarantee free primary and secondary education for all children. Schools and curricula shall teach pupils the historical heritage of their country and region, so that they may grasp, respect and appreciate the origins and historical experience of their fellow citizens, strongly reject racism and doctrines of segregation, honour human rights, protect human freedoms, and guard the peace, rights and security of all the people in the country and the world. Education and vocational training shall not be segregated in any way that impedes equal access of all citizens to employment and other opportunities to fulfil their talents and hopes.

18. Abolition of Capital Punishment and Outlaw of Torture: Within one year of the creation of the new state laws will be passed outlawing capital punishment and prohibiting torture in any form.

19. Immigration Policy: The state shall operate a transparent and non-discriminatory immigration policy, and provide a refuge for those seeking asylum from persecution, especially racial or ethnic persecution.
 
20. Nuclear-free Zone in the Middle East: The state shall seek and actively contribute to the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East that shall also be free of all weapons of mass destruction. Israel’s weapons of mass destruction, including but not limited to its arsenal of nuclear weapons, inherited by the Republic of Palestine shall be dismantled or destroyed under the auspices of the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) within one year of the creation of the new state. The state through its Constitution shall include and incorporate limitations on the state to engage in wars and conflicts outside its borders.

Drafting Committee (in individual capacity)

1.Dr Oren Ben-Dor, University of Southampton, Southampton
2.Prof. George Bisharat, UC Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco
3.Prof. Haim Bresheeth, University of East London, London
4.Dr Ghada Karmi, European Centre for Palestine Studies, Exeter University, Exeter
5.Mr Sami Jamil Jadallah, International business consultant, Fairfax, VA
6.Prof. Nur Masalha, SOAS, University of London, London
7.Prof. Mazin Qumsiyeh, University Bethlehem, Bethlehem

 One Democratic State gaining momentum - Bethlehem Declaration

A conference of those interested in pushing the program of a single democratic state in historic Palestine was held Saturday 1 September 2012 at the Bethlehem Peace Center. Activists from several cities, villages and refugee camps representing different backgrounds and experiences made this meeting a success and another step in the march toward freedom and justice. We reviewed previous achievements and developments, including those via writings, via several working groups on the ground, and via conferences held inside and outside Palestine. Other achievements were introduced including by anti-Zionist colleagues working for change in the areas of 1948. We also discussed the idea of a global conference to happen in one year and include all the parties working to achieve a one-state vision.

 Items approved:

* Participation in committees that have been proposed in the Munich conference: Legal Committee, Activities Committee, Committee for Documentation and Communication, Communication Committee, Youth Committee, and Finance Committee

* Creating two other committees: one to propose an internal structure for the work of the various committees and groups (ie. mechanisms of coordination) and the other to discuss the mechanisms of political action/frameworks.

* Working on a major website to interact and exchange news, experiences, documents, and views

* Strengthening youth work and make sure young men and women play key leading roles aof this movement

* Expanding awareness and information programs related to the concept of one state in all areas of historic Palestine and abroad

We formed a temporary follow-up committee and to encourage holding similar conferences and meetings in the all camps, villages and cities: Ghassan Olayan, Awni Mashni, Radi Jerai, Ahmed Taqatqa, Ali Jawhar, Mazin Qumsiyeh, Barak Cohen, Renen Raz, Tamar Aviyah (but now with formation of a follow-up committee in Ramallah, all these ommittees are flexible and will will be modiofied to reflect need and expand to other cities).

Those who want to participate in the working committees mentioned and/or wants help to create local working groups (in any part of the world), please write to us at onestate@palestinejn.org

Egypt’s New Leader Spells Out Terms for U.S.-Arab Ties

President Mohamed Morsi will travel to New York on Sunday for a United Nations meeting.

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and STEVEN ERLANGER
Published: September 22, 2012

CAIRO — On the eve of his first trip to the United States as Egypt’s new Islamist president, Mohamed Morsi said the United States needed to fundamentally change its approach to the Arab world, showing greater respect for its values and helping build a Palestinian state, if it hoped to overcome decades of pent-up anger.

 A former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Mr. Morsi sought in a 90-minute interview with The New York Times to introduce himself to the American public and to revise the terms of relations between his country and the United States after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, an autocratic but reliable ally.

He said it was up to Washington to repair relations with the Arab world and to revitalize the alliance with Egypt, long a cornerstone of regional stability.

If Washington is asking Egypt to honor its treaty with Israel, he said, Washington should also live up to its own Camp David commitment to Palestinian self-rule. He said the United States must respect the Arab world’s history and culture, even when that conflicts with Western values.

And he dismissed criticism from the White House that he did not move fast enough to condemn protesters who recently climbed over the United States Embassy wall and burned the American flag in anger over a video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad.

“We took our time” in responding to avoid an explosive backlash, he said, but then dealt “decisively” with the small, violent element among the demonstrators.

“We can never condone this kind of violence, but we need to deal with the situation wisely,” he said, noting that the embassy employees were never in danger.

Mr. Morsi, who will travel to New York on Sunday for a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, arrives at a delicate moment. He faces political pressure at home to prove his independence, but demands from the West for reassurance that Egypt under Islamist rule will remain a stable partner.

Mr. Morsi, 61, whose office was still adorned with nautical paintings that Mr. Mubarak left behind, said the United States should not expect Egypt to live by its rules.

“If you want to judge the performance of the Egyptian people by the standards of German or Chinese or American culture, then there is no room for judgment,” he said. “When the Egyptians decide something, probably it is not appropriate for the U.S. When the Americans decide something, this, of course, is not appropriate for Egypt.”

He suggested that Egypt would not be hostile to the West, but would not be as compliant as Mr. Mubarak either.

“Successive American administrations essentially purchased with American taxpayer money the dislike, if not the hatred, of the peoples of the region,” he said, by backing dictatorial governments over popular opposition and supporting Israel over the Palestinians.

He initially sought to meet with President Obama at the White House during his visit this week, but he received a cool reception, aides to both presidents said. Mindful of the complicated election-year politics of a visit with Egypt’s Islamist leader, Mr. Morsi dropped his request.

His silence in the immediate aftermath of the embassy protest elicited a tense telephone call from Mr. Obama, who also told a television interviewer that at that moment he did not consider Egypt an ally, if not an enemy either. When asked if he considered the United States an ally, Mr. Morsi answered in English, “That depends on your definition of ally,” smiling at his deliberate echo of Mr. Obama. But he said he envisioned the two nations as “real friends.”

Mr. Morsi spoke in an ornate palace that Mr. Mubarak inaugurated three decades ago, a world away from the Nile Delta farm where the new president grew up, or the prison cells where he had been confined by Mr. Mubarak for his role in the Brotherhood. Three months after his swearing-in, the most noticeable change to the presidential office was a plaque on his desk bearing the Koranic admonition, “Be conscious of a day on which you will return to God.”

A stocky figure with a trim beard and wire-rim glasses, he earned a doctorate in materials science at the University of Southern California in the early 1980s. He spoke with an easy confidence in his new authority, reveling in an approval rating he said was at 70 percent. When he grew animated, he slipped from Arabic into crisp English.

Little known at home or abroad until just a few months ago, he was the Brotherhood’s second choice as a presidential nominee after the first choice was disqualified. On the night of the election, the generals who had ruled since Mr. Mubarak’s ouster issued a decree keeping most presidential powers for themselves.

But last month Mr. Morsi confounded all expectations by prying full executive authority back from the generals. In the interview, when an interpreter suggested that the generals had “decided” to exit politics, Mr. Morsi quickly corrected him.

“No, no, it is not that they ‘decided’ to do it,” he interjected in English, determined to clarify that it was he who removed them. “This is the will of the Egyptian people through the elected president, right?

“The president of the Arab Republic of Egypt is the commander of the armed forces, full stop. Egypt now is a real civil state. It is not theocratic, it is not military. It is democratic, free, constitutional, lawful and modern.”

He added, “We are behaving according to the Egyptian people’s choice and will, nothing else — is it clear?”

He praised Mr. Obama for moving “decisively and quickly” to support the Arab Spring revolutions, and he said he believed that Americans supported “the right of the people of the region to enjoy the same freedoms that Americans have.”

Arabs and Americans have “a shared objective, each to live free in their own land, according to their customs and values, in a fair and democratic fashion,” he said, adding that he hoped for “a harmonious, peaceful coexistence.”

But he also argued that Americans “have a special responsibility” for the Palestinians because the United States had signed the 1978 Camp David accord. The agreement called for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the West Bank and Gaza to make way for full Palestinian self-rule.

“As long as peace and justice are not fulfilled for the Palestinians, then the treaty remains unfulfilled,” he said.

He made no apologies for his roots in the Brotherhood, the insular religious revival group that was Mr. Mubarak’s main opposition and now dominates Egyptian politics.

“I grew up with the Muslim Brotherhood,” he said. “I learned my principles in the Muslim Brotherhood. I learned how to love my country with the Muslim Brotherhood. I learned politics with the Brotherhood. I was a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

He left the group when he took office but remains a member of its political party. But he said he sees “absolutely no conflict” between his loyalty to the Brotherhood and his vows to govern on behalf of all, including members of the Christian minority or those with more secular views.

“I prove my independence by taking the correct acts for my country,” he said. “If I see something good from the Muslim Brotherhood, I will take it. If I see something better in the Wafd” — Egypt’s oldest liberal party — “I will take it.”

He repeatedly vowed to uphold equal citizenship rights of all Egyptians, regardless of religion, sex or class. But he stood by the religious arguments he once made as a Brotherhood leader that neither a woman nor a Christian would be a suitable president.

“We are talking about values, beliefs, cultures, history, reality,” he said. He said the Islamic position on presidential eligibility was a matter for Muslim scholars to decide, not him. But regardless of his own views or the Brotherhood’s, he said, civil law was another matter.

“I will not prevent a woman from being nominated as a candidate for the presidential campaign,” he said. “This is not in the Constitution. This is not in the law. But if you want to ask me if I will vote for her or not, that is something else, that is different.”

He was also eager to reminisce about his taste of American culture as a graduate student at the University of Southern California. “Go, Trojans!” he said, and he remembered learning about the world from Barbara Walters in the morning and Walter Cronkite at night. “And that’s the way it is!” Mr. Morsi said with a smile.

But he also displayed some ambivalence. He effused about his admiration for American work habits, punctuality and time management. But when an interpreter said that Mr. Morsi had “learned a lot” in the United States, he quickly interjected a qualifier in English: “Scientifically!”

He was troubled by the gangs and street of violence of Los Angeles, he said, and dismayed by the West’s looser sexual mores, mentioning couples living together out of wedlock and what he called “naked restaurants,” like Hooters.

“I don’t admire that,” he said. “But that is the society. They are living their way.”

Palestinians seek UN upgrade opposed by Israel, U.S.

                                    Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat last year. Photo by Daniel Bar-On

Request to become a non-member ‘observer state’ would give Palestinians the same UN rank as the Vatican, enhancing their legal rights, as talks with Israel have come to a halt.

By Reuters    | Sep.20, 2012 | 5:15 PM

The Palestinians will ask the United Nations to upgrade their status in the world body by year's end, enabling them to pursue Israel through the international courts, a senior Palestinian official said on Thursday.

The request to become a non-member "observer state" rather than just an "observer entity," would give the Palestinians the same UN rank as the Vatican, enhancing their legal rights at a time when peace negotiations with Israel have hit a wall.

Such a motion would only need majority backing in the 193-nation UN General Assembly, where the Palestinians can rely on substantial support and resolutions cannot be vetoed by Israel's most powerful ally, the United States.

"The day after (we get) non-member statehood, life will not be the same," said the veteran Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, speaking in his office in the West Bank city of Jericho.

"Yes, the occupation will continue, the settlements will continue, the crimes of the settlers may continue, but there will be consequences," he told reporters.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas sought full statehood recognition at the United Nations last year. This ambitious drive had to pass through the UN Security Council, but failed to gather enough votes in the face of fierce U.S. lobbying.

     Abbas will address the General Assembly on Sept. 27, after which his aides will consult other nations before presenting the watered-down request to become an observer state, claiming as Palestinian territory the lands that Israel seized in the 1967 war, with East Jerusalem as their capital.

Israel has annexed East Jerusalem and built 120 settlements across the occupied West Bank, with some 500,000 Israelis living beyond the so-called 1967 green line, originally an armistice line rather than the legal boundaries of a Palestinian state.

"After the UN vote ... Palestine will become a country under occupation. Israel will not be able to say that this is a disputed area," Erekat said. "The terms of reference for any negotiations will be about withdrawal, not over what the Israelis say is legal or not legal."

Going to court

Israel says Palestinians can gain independence only through direct negotiations, and has lobbied hard behind the scenes against their latest UN gambit, fearful of the consequences.

Face-to-face talks brokered by the United States collapsed in 2010 over the issue of continued settlement building.

As an observer state, Palestine could not only participate in assembly debates, but also join various U.N. agencies, such as the Law of the Sea Treaty and the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is based in the Hague.

The ICC rejected in April a Palestinian request to look into alleged crimes in the Palestinian Territories, because they were not full UN members. Erekat indicated that Palestinians would turn again to the ICC after the forthcoming assembly vote.
"Those who don't want to appear before the international tribunals must stop their crimes and it is time for them to become accountable," he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated in private he fears Palestinians might accuse his government of violating the Geneva Conventions' prohibition on forced displacement of populations by establishing settlements.
Looking to dissuade Abbas and head off a UN showdown, Israel has threatened to withhold tax revenues that are vital to the well-being of the cash-strapped Palestinian Authority.

The United States might also impose financial penalties, while some European nations are urging Palestinian caution.

"We have invested heavily in the Palestinian Authority and we do not want to see that investment jeopardized," said a European Union diplomat, suggesting that a number of European states might vote against the Palestinian UNresolution.
Some 120 countries have already granted the Palestinians the rank of a sovereign state, but Erekat said they hoped to win the votes of between 150 and 170 nations at the United Nations to hammer home U.S. and Israeli isolation on the issue.

However, the Palestinians are undecided whether to push for a vote ahead of the U.S. election in November - timing which might anger President Barack Obama - or just after.

"Whatever, it will happen well before the end of the year," Erekat told Reuters.

Palestinians condemn Mitt Romney comment that they have “no interest whatsoever” in peace

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, September 20, 9:51 AM

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Mitt Romney is undermining hopes for peace and democracy in the Middle East, a senior Palestinian official said Thursday in response to recent remarks to donors by the Republican presidential candidate that Palestinians have “no interest whatsoever” in peace.

Saeb Erekat, a top aide to President Mahmoud Abbas, rejected Romney’s claim.

 “No one stands to gain more from peace than the Palestinians, and no one stands to lose from the absence of peace like the Palestinians,” Erekat told reporters. Those who tolerated Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian territories, are “working against democracy and peace,” he added.

The Palestinian official called on leaders to “create hope and opportunities, not despair.” In an apparent swipe at Romney, he said, “anyone who says Arabs are not ready for democracy is a racist.”

Erekat spoke ahead of the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York at which Abbas is expected to present a plan to seek a “nonmember state” status for the Palestinians.

With peace talks with Israel stalled for the past four years, Palestinians have turned to the United Nations for international recognition of their sovereignty in areas Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war: the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem.

While U.N. recognition would be largely symbolic, the Palestinians believe it would send a powerful message to Israel and bolster their case in future negotiations over the territories. Israel insists a Palestinian state can only be formed through peace negotiations.

Last year, the Palestinians asked the U.N. Security Council to admit them as a full member state. They failed to receive enough votes, in part because the United States fiercely opposed their bid. Next week, they will seek the lesser status of “nonmember state” in the General Assembly, a much larger body dominated by developing countries sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

Erekat did not say when Palestinians would officially submit their application, but hinted it could be in late November, after the U.S. presidential elections.

He said he expects up to 170 countries to support the bid.

A video with Romney’s comments was posted on Tuesday on the website of the magazine Mother Jones. He was asked about the “Palestinian problem.”

“The Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace,” Romney said. “The pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish.”

The magazine said Romney made the remarks at a $50,000-a-plate fundraiser in Boca Raton, Florida, on May 17. The video was only made public this week.

In a news conference Monday, Romney said his comments were not “elegantly stated” and were spoken “off the cuff.”

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

Israeli forces strike alleged Palestinian tertrorisrtss(sic)

September 20, 2012

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- Israel Air Force aircraft fired on a car in southern Gaza that the military said was carrying two Palestinian terror operatives.

The men, both 33 and born in Rafah, were affiliated with the Defenders of al-Aqsa terror organization, a terrorist group sponsored by Hamas in the Gaza Strip, according to a statement from the Israel Defense Forces.

The operation was carried out jointly by the IDF and the Shin Bet security services.

One of the operatives, Anis Abu Mahmoud el-Anin, 33, was in the final stages of preparing to carry out a terror attack against Israeli civilians, according to the IDF. The other man killed was Ashraf Mahmoud Salah, who was also affiliated with the Popular Resistance Committees, and who was involved in the planning of a suicide attack in Israel, according to the IDF.

"The IDF will not tolerate any attempt by terrorist groups to harm Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers, and will continue to operate with strength and determination against those who use terror against the State of Israel," the statement said.

The Palestinian Ma'an news service reported that the men were members of the security forces of the Hamas government, and that they had been sent to the area to secure the border with Egypt.

You're in a car in Gaza and you see the above F-16 coming at you to kill you because you dare to resist Israeli occupation and oppression. Who is the terrorist here? Why does the world allow this to continue on without massive protests against Israel's crime against humanity, the 64 years of ethnic cleansing by Israeli Jewish racists with America's blessing in money and arms, like the F-16 pictured above..

U.S. suspends aid talks with Egypt over anti-American protests, report says

Official speaking to Washington Post say U.S. waiting to see 'how things materialize'; several officials say suspension is temporary move, not an overhaul of U.S. policy.

By Haaretz    | Sep.18, 2012 | 1:20 PM

An Egyptian protester standing amid a fog of tear gas prepares to throw stones towards policemen during a demonstration against a film mocking Islam in Cairo on September 14, 2012 Photo by AFP

The United States has put negotiations geared at renewed U.S. financial aid to Egypt on hold following anti-American rallies, which started in Cairo and spread across the Middle East, protesting the release of an anti-Islam movie, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

Protesters have breached the walls or compounds of several U.S.¬ diplomatic missions, including the consulate in Benghazi, Libya where the ambassador and three other Americans were killed, Cairo and Tunis since last week.

After last week's incidents, the State Department ordered all U.S. ¬embassies and consulates around the world to review their security postures. As a result, a number of missions decided to destroy classified material, a U.S. official said on Monday.

On Tuesday, U.S. officials speaking to the Washington Post said that talks between Washington and Cairo geared at providing Egypt with much-needed financial aid were put on hold in wake the protest wave, and were not due to renew before the upcoming U.S. presidential elections.

“Folks are going to wait and see how things materialize both with the protests and on Capitol Hill,” one congressional aide told the Washington Post.

Several American officials, however, indicated that any delay in aid was expected to be temporary, and that no significant change in U.S. policy in regard to Egypt was expected.

Speaking on aid discussions with Egypt in wake of recent events, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said that "the points that we are continuing to make are about the importance of maintaining security, vigilance, working together."

"That is moving well. And as you know, we are continuing to work with the Hill on the support that we think is important to support those very forces of moderation, change, democracy, openness in Egypt that are very important for defeating extremism of the kind that we saw," Nuland added.

Here's America's old stick and carrot routine that worked so well for decades with corrupt Egyptian leaders. We'll see if there's been any substantial change in Egypt's ability to say no to U.S. money, lot's of it, for those who play ball with Israel, America and the West's European colonial overseer of unruly Middle East Arabs.

Met Office model 'better at predicting extreme winters'

BBC News
 14 September 2012
Last updated at 04:47 ET


By Roger Harbinger
Environment analyst

UK weather forecasters can predict cold winter weather a season ahead with more confidence, according to analysis of a new computer model.

 

Writing in Environmental Research Letters, scientists say the model is better at simulating phenomena known as sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs).

These happen when the usual westerly winds at 10-50km altitude break down, causing cold weather on the surface.

Developers at the Met Office say it is an incremental advance for forecasts.

Seasonal forecasting is still in its relative infancy, but the report's authors from the Met Office say that improving their ability to represent SSWs is a help.

When the stratospheric westerlies break down, it generates a signal that typically burrows down to the Earth's surface over following weeks.

This hampers surface westerlies that bring mild air to northern Europe from the Atlantic and allows Europe to get blocked in a cold state.

'High-top' modelling

The model, known as GloSea4, simulates winds, humidity and temperatures from the Earth's surface to 80km (50 miles) high - beyond the stratosphere. Data points on the old low-top model were capped at 50km.

Adam Scaife, head of long-range forecasting at the Met Office, said: "SSWs happen every couple of winters and about 70% are associated with cold air over Europe.

"Raising the lid of the model has been an improvement in our ability to simulate them," he told BBC News.

Dr Scaife added that SSWs were still poorly understood but were linked to sudden increases in temperature of up to 50C (90F) over a few days in the stratosphere over the Arctic. The temperature changes cause winds to reverse their normal direction.

The high-top model was not available to the Met Office before the bitter winter of 2009/10, and they could not forecast sufficiently far ahead the arrival of the cold that resulted in the UK grinding to an unprepared halt in the snow and ice.

Retrospectively, using the high-top model with atmospheric data available from autumn 2009, the Met Office said that they could have seen the cold coming farther ahead if they had been able to use the new model.

Lead author Dr David Fereday said: "This is an advance for us because it means that in certain situations we can give better estimate of risk for government planning."

The high-top model was devised in time for the winter of 2010-2011.

Using its data, the Met Office forecast in autumn 2010 that there was a 40% chance of a cold start to the winter, with a 30% chance of a mild start, and a 30% chance of an average start.

The summary of the advice to government said: "There is an increased risk for a cold and wintry start to the winter season."

The probability of cold increased to 45% as November started.

And the heavens indeed despatched the UK a brutal blast of cold, plunging Wales into its lowest-ever recorded November temperature of −17.3C (0.9F) in Llysdinam.

No 'silver bullet'

This was clearly an advance in forecasting from the previous year. But it still was not sufficiently robust for the authorities.

Forecasting a 40% chance of a cold winter still meant a 60% chance of a mild or average start to winter.

An unverified blog at the time quoted a civil servant commenting: "The Met Office seasonal outlook for the period November to January is showing no clear signals for the winter."

The Met Office no longer publicly publishes a seasonal forecast for winter but their annual three-month rolling forecast for December to February will go to policymakers in November.

Met Office spokesman Dave Britton said: "We don't want to over-egg GloSea4 high-top. It's moving us one piece forward in the very complicated jigsaw behind the weather.

"It's not a silver bullet - for instance SSWs are not responsible for every episode of cold weather that we get - but it is an advance," he told BBC News.

Judah Cohen, director of seasonal forecasting at the US-based Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER), observed:" The research is potentially very important. Winter forecasting remains a difficult challenge and much work is needed to improve our forecast models.

"The Met Office have shown great creativity in exploring gaps in our knowledge and deficiencies in the models. But frankly, the bar for seasonal forecasting is set pretty low so any advance is very welcome."

Follow Roger Rabbit on Twitter: @RogerHarbinger

Iran foundation boosts reward for death of author Rushdie, after Prophet ‘insults’

By Associated Press, Updated: Sunday, September 16, 9:38 AM

TEHRAN, Iran — A semi-official religious foundation in Iran has increased a reward it had offered for the killing of British author Salman Rushdie to $3.3 million from $2.8 million, a newspaper reported, days after protests coursed through the Muslim world over alleged insults to the Prophet Muhammad.

Hardline Jomhoori Eslami daily and other newspapers reported on Sunday that the move appeared to be linked to protests over an amateurish anti-Islam film, which crowds in some 20 countries said drove them to defend their faith — in some cases by attacking American embassies.

The report said the 15 Khordad Foundation will pay the higher reward to whoever acts on the 1989 fatwa, or religious edict, issued by Iran’s late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, which called for the death of the author “The Satanic Verses” because the novel was considered blasphemous.

The paper said the decision to boost the original reward, offered in the 1990s, came from foundation head Ayatollah Hassan Saneii.

“As long as the exalted Imam Khomeini’s historical fatwa against apostate Rushdie is not carried out, it won’t be the last insult. If the fatwa had been carried out, later insults in the form of caricature, articles and films that have continued would have not happened,” the paper quoted Saneii as saying.

Iran’s hardliners say Khomeini’s fatwa is “irrevocable.”

In 1998, the Iranian government declared it would not support the fatwa, but at the same time the government said it could not rescind the edict, since under Islamic law, that could be done only by the person who issued it. Khomeini died in June 1989.

Khomeini’s fatwa sent Rushdie into hiding under police protection, but that didn’t stop him from writing more novels. In 1990, he published an apology and reiterated his respect for Islam.

Also on Sunday, thousands of clerics gathered in seminaries across Iran to protest the anti-Islamic movie, state TV reported.

Ahmad Khatami, an ally of the country’s top leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told a gathering in In the holy city of Qom, 130 kilometers south of the capital Tehran, that the United States and Israel were the “main suspects” in the case.

His remarks prompted “death to Israel and “down with the U.S.” chants by demonstrators.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

Because Middle East Muslims are under constant attack by U.S. and Israeli agents working together to keep the Middle East destabilized so that Israel remains "secure" to act as the West's colony to control the Middle East, it's hard to separate Muslim hatred for Western Crusaders and Islamic religious intolerance. But here the case has always been clear because the West isn't involved. It is Islamic religious intolerance that is the issue and sooner or later every non-Muslim community is going to have to address the way Islam uses terrorism to promote Muhammad's religion. Terrorism and religion are mutually exclusive in my Christian religious beliefs but Islam relies heavily on terrorism to keep Muslim believers in line with Muhammad's theology and as the world know now if it didn't before Muslims will use terrorism against anyone they chose to target because of Muslim intolerance of other people's beliefs. One day when the Crusaders have been driven out once again, Muslims will have to address the lack of religious and secular freedom that to be a Muslim requires as well as the Muslim use of terrorism to enforce Muhammad's belief system on others whether they like it or not. There are two Abrahamic religions now that confuse nationalism with religion: these are Judaism and Islam, both of which believe being a member is like being a citizen of a religious nation where loyalty to the nation is the paramount sign of belief instead of loyalty to good social rules inspired by a loving God. You can't serve two masters at the same time and do justice to both. You can't serve God and harm your fellow man and do justice to spiritual truth. A moral choice must be made who you are gonna serve..

Tent of Nations

NOTES FROM DAOUD - The political situation is tenser now; many people are waiting for what is going to happen at the end of this month. It is becoming a daily subject to talk about, although all political windows seem to be closed, and September is a bad month for the Palestinians.  But, still miracles might happen.  Our situation is becoming more critical after the confiscation of the hill west of the Tent of Nations.  Towers for electricity were installed, roads were built to connect the settlements together, and more houses are being built in those settlements. We have to expect the worst but still hope for the best.  By the end of this year, we will finish almost all projects that will help the Tent of Nations to be self-sustainable and to function even if it will be totally isolated from the city of Bethlehem.  All funds we received from our Friends of Tent of Nations North America were spent on developing the infrastructure as well as for the educational programs we are running - the women’s education center and the children’s summer camp.  In terms of infrastructure, with the funds we received from FOTONNA, we built cisterns for rain water collection, increasing the capacity of rain water storage from 200 cubic meters to 650 cubic meters.  We bought machines and equipment to help in cultivation and planting more fields to increase the land production which will help to bring the Tent of Nations within the coming years to be totally financially independent. The Tent of Nations farm started to produce crops, and our gift shop is full of products the farm is producing.  The products are sold to guest groups.  The wine press we received donated through FOTONNA helped us in doing the processing of the grapes much easier and more efficiently than ever before. A first-aid facility has been developed on the farm, and next week a medical student is coming to give our five long-term volunteers a first-aid course for two weeks.  Our maintenance workshop is still under development, and we hope to have it functioning very soon. We are hoping to install a small wind turbine still this year to help in producing power, especially in the winter months. We are expanding with more long-term volunteers staying at the Tent of Nations between six months and a year, plus all the others who are coming for a short time.  More electrical power is needed, and a small wind turbine for three KW will solve the problem.  Another upcoming project is a filter machine to re-use the gray water for irrigation. All those projects are making the Tent of Nations very soon self-sufficient, and it will help the project to keep going. In June we had the apricot harvest camp; volunteers helped in picking the apricots and apples.  We made jam, and now it is sold in our gift shop. We had a very busy but also a wonderful summer with the programs we offered.  The last two weeks of July we had the children’s summer camp.  Over 40 children participated from the Bethlehem area, including the three refugee camps.  Twelve international volunteers helped in offering creative workshops for kids including painting on stones, music, drama, story writing and others. In August we had the almond harvest camp, and in September the grape harvest camp. Regarding the women’s project, we had a break for three months during the school holiday, but even then Jihan had a couple of workshops during that time.  We will start the courses again next week. It is wonderful to see how the project is growing.  We thank God for all what we were able to achieve in a very difficult and unstable situation.  We thank you all for your support and solidarity. In the summer months, 1,912 people came to visit the Tent of Nations from different countries, including Israel.  We are happy to see more visitors coming to see and learn about our situation and also about our way of action. With Gratitude – Daoud Nassar

Why America and Israel are the greatest threats to peace

Noam Chomsky
Saturday, September 08, 2012

Imagine if Iran — or any other country — did a fraction of what American and Israel do at will.

September 04, 2012 “Information Clearing House” — It is not easy to escape from one’s skin, to see the world differently from the way it is presented to us day after day. But it is useful to try. Let’s take a few examples.

The war drums are beating ever more loudly over Iran. Imagine the situation to be reversed.Iran is carrying out a murderous and destructive low-level war against Israel with great-power participation. Its leaders announce that negotiations are going nowhere. Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspections, as Iran has done. Israel continues to defy the overwhelming international call for a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region. Throughout, Iran enjoys the support of its superpower patron.

Iranian leaders are therefore announcing their intention to bomb Israel, and prominent Iranian military analysts report that the attack may happen before the US elections.

Iran can use its powerful air force and new submarines sent by Germany, armed with nuclear missiles and stationed off the coast of Israel. Whatever the timetable, Iran is counting on its superpower backer to join if not lead the assault. US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta says that while we do not favour such an attack, as a sovereign country Iran will act in its best interests.

All unimaginable, of course, though it is actually happening, with the cast of characters reversed. True, analogies are never exact, and this one is unfair — to Iran.

Like its patron, Israel resorts to violence at will. It persists in illegal settlement in occupied territory, some annexed, all in brazen defiance of international law and the UN Security Council. It has repeatedly carried out brutal attacks against Lebanon and the imprisoned people of Gaza, killing tens of thousands without credible pretext.

Thirty years ago Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, an act that has recently been praised, avoiding the strong evidence, even from the US intelligence, that the bombing did not end Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons programme but rather initiated it. Bombing of Iran might have the same effect.

Iran too has carried out aggression — but during the past several hundred years, only under the US-backed regime of the Shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.

Iran engaged in nuclear development programmes under the Shah, with the strong support of official Washington. The Iranian government is brutal and repressive, as are Washington’s allies in the region. The most important ally, Saudi Arabia, is the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime, and spends enormous funds spreading its radical Wahhabist doctrines elsewhere. The gulf dictatorships, also favoured the US allies, have harshly repressed any popular effort to join the Arab Spring.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) — the governments of most of the world’s population — is now meeting in Teheran. The group has vigorously endorsed Iran’s right to enrich uranium, and some members — India, for example — adhere to the harsh US sanctions programme only partially and reluctantly.

The NAM delegates doubtless recognize the threat that dominates discussion in the West, lucidly articulated by Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the US Strategic Command: “It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East,” one nation should arm itself with nuclear weapons, which “inspires other nations to do so.”

Butler is not referring to Iran, but to Israel, which is regarded in the Arab countries and in Europe as posing the greatest threat to peace. In the Arab world, the United States is ranked second as a threat, while Iran, though disliked, is far less feared. Indeed in many polls majorities hold that the region would be more secure if Iran had nuclear weapons to balance the threats they perceive.

If Iran is indeed moving toward nuclear-weapons capability — this is still unknown to the US intelligence — that may be because it is “inspired to do so” by the US-Israeli threats, regularly issued in explicit violation of the UN Charter. Why then is Iran the greatest threat to world peace, as seen in official Western discourse? The primary reason is acknowledged by the US military and intelligence and their Israeli counterparts: Iran might deter the resort to force by the United States and Israel.

Furthermore Iran must be punished for its “successful defiance,” which was Washington’s charge against Cuba half a century ago, and still the driving force for the US assault against Cuba that continues despite international condemnation.

Other events featured on the front pages might also benefit from a different perspective. Suppose that Julian Assange had leaked Russian documents revealing important information that Moscow wanted to conceal from the public, and that circumstances were otherwise identical.

Sweden would not hesitate to pursue its sole announced concern, accepting the offer to interrogate Assange in London. It would declare that if Assange returned to Sweden (as he has agreed to do), he would not be extradited to Russia, where chances of a fair trial would be slight.

Sweden would be honoured for this principled stand. Assange would be praised for performing a public service — which, of course, would not obviate the need to take the accusations against him as seriously as in all such cases.

The most prominent news story of the day here is the US election. An appropriate perspective was provided by US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who held that “We may have democracy in this country, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.”

Guided by that insight, coverage of the election should focus on the impact of wealth on policy, extensively analysed in the recent study “Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America” by Martin Gilens. He found that the vast majority are “powerless to shape government policy” when their preferences diverge from the affluent, who pretty much get what they want when it matters to them.

Small wonder, then, that in a recent ranking of the 31 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of social justice, the United States placed 27th, despite its extraordinary advantages.

Or that rational treatment of issues tends to evaporate in the electoral campaign, in ways sometimes verging on comedy.

To take one case, Paul Krugman reports that the much-admired Big Thinker of the Republican Party, Paul Ryan, declares that he derives his ideas about the financial system from a character in a fantasy novel — “Atlas Shrugged” - who calls for the use of gold coins instead of paper currency.

It only remains to draw from a really distinguished writer, Jonathan Swift. In “Gulliver’s Travels,” his sages of Lagado carry all their goods with them in packs on their backs, and thus could use them for barter without the encumbrance of gold. Then the economy and democracy could truly flourish — and best of all, inequality would sharply decline, a gift to the spirit of Justice Brandeis.

Israeli Occupied Territory: the Democratic Convention:

Democrats change platform to add God, Jerusalem

By JOSH LEDERMAN, Associated Press – 16 minutes ago 

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Needled by Mitt Romney and other Republicans, Democrats hurriedly rewrote their convention platform Wednesday to add a mention of God and declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel after President Barack Obama intervened to order the changes.

The embarrassing reversal was compounded by chaos and uncertainty on the convention floor. Three times Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the convention chairman, called for a voice vote on the changes and each time the yes and no votes seemed to balance each other out. On the third attempt, Villaraigosa ruled the amendments were approved — triggering boos from many in the audience.
The episode exposed tensions on Israel within the party, put Democrats on the defensive and created a public relations spectacle as Obama arrived in the convention city to claim his party's nomination for a second term.

"There was no discussion. We didn't even see it coming. We were blindsided by it," said Noor Ul-Hasan, a Muslim delegate from Salt Lake City, who questioned whether the convention had enough of a quorum to even amend the platform.

"The majority spoke last night," said Angela Urrea, a delegate from Roy, Utah. "We shouldn't be declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel."

The language in the platform — a political document — does not affect actual U.S. policy toward Israel. The administration has long said that determining Jerusalem's status is an issue that should be decided in peace talks by Israelis and Palestinians.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, welcomed the support of Democrats and Republicans alike on Israel. "Together, these party platforms reflect strong bipartisan support for the US-Israel relationship," AIPAC said.

Obama intervened directly to get the language changed both on Jerusalem and to reinstate God in the platform, according to campaign officials who insisted on anonymity to describe behind-the-scenes party negotiations. They said Obama's reaction to the omission of God from the platform was to wonder why it was removed in the first place.

The revisions came as Obama struggles to win support from white working-class voters, many of whom have strong religious beliefs, and as Republicans try to woo Jewish voters and contributors away from the Democratic Party. Republicans claimed the platform omissions suggested Obama was weak in his defense of Israel and out of touch with mainstream Americans.

GOP officials argued that not taking a position on Jerusalem's status in the party platform raised questions about Obama's support for the Mideast ally. Romney said omitting God "suggests a party that is increasingly out of touch with the mainstream of the American people."extreme wing that Americans don't recognize," Romney said.

Added to the Democratic platform was a declaration that Jerusalem "is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."

That language was included in the platform four years ago when Obama ran for his first term, but was left out when Democrats on Tuesday approved their 2012 platform, which referred only to the nation's "unshakable commitment to Israel's security."

Also restored from the 2008 platform was language calling for a government that "gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations alike have said it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to settle Jerusalem's final status — a position reiterated earlier Wednesday by the White House. Both sides claim Jerusalem as their capital, and the city's status has long been among the thorniest issues in Mideast peace talks.

The U.S. has its embassy in Tel Aviv, although numerous Republicans — including Mitt Romney — have vowed to move the embassy to Jerusalem.

During his 2008 campaign, Obama referred to Jerusalem as Israel's capital in a speech to AIPAC. But as official policy, his administration has repeatedly maintained that Jerusalem's status is an issue that Israelis and Palestinians should decide in peace talks. The platform flub gave Republicans an opening to revive their attacks on Obama's support for Israel just as Democrats were hoping to bask in the glow of first lady Michelle Obama's Tuesday speech and gin up excitement for her husband, who will accept his party's nomination for a second term on Thursday.

But restoring the language did not placate Republicans, who used it to suggest that Obama's party is now more supportive than he is of the Jewish state.

"Now is the time for President Obama to state in unequivocal terms whether or not he believes Jerusalem is Israel's capital," said Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul.

Republicans declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel in the platform the party approved last week at its convention in Tampa, Fla. GOP platforms in 2004 and 2008 also called Jerusalem the capital.

Lederman reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Steve Peoples in Utah, Bradley Klapper in Washington, and Ken Thomas, Ben Feller and Matthew Daly in Charlotte contributed.

Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Obama lost my vote sometime ago as he and Hillary have become virtually puppets for the state of Israel which is involved in committing the long standing crime against humanity, the 64 years of military occupation and political repression of Palestinians by Israeli Jews. I think it's high time to call for impeachment of ALL U.S. government leaders not only in the White House but in Congress as well for breaking the Constitution's guarantee of Separation of Church and State with America's ungodly support of Israel, a Jewish state we are establishing with American money and military weaponry. Obama signed and pledge America to honor the U.N.'s Charter calling for the Right of Self-Determination for all indigenous populations and that includes Palestinians of Palestine. We signed this in 2010 and have been breaking this oath of America ever since. It's got to stop, folks. Those who recognized Israel as being the Crusader tool of oil hungry nations wanting Middle East oil must speak up and stop this Zionist madness. Please.

Tigers change behavior to live near people

 Tigers don't necessarily need huge dedicated reserves, say scientists, but can accommodate themselves to patterns of human activity by becoming more nocturnal.

BBC News
Posted on September 4, 2012 - 04:09
by Kate Taylor

Animals in and around Chitwan National Park in Nepal are taking the night shift, they say, to share the same roads and trails as their human neighbors.

Chitwan is home to about 121 tigers. People live on the park's borders, but venture into the forests on dirt roads and narrow footpaths for wood and grasses. The roads also are used by military patrols to thwart would-be poachers.

And an analysis of thousands of images snapped by motion-detecting camera traps over two seasons show that people and tigers are walking exactly the same paths, albeit at different times of day.

Tigers typically move around at all times of the day and night, monitoring their territory, mating and hunting. But in the study area, the team found a big shift toward nocturnal activity.

People in Nepal generally avoid the forests at night, and it seems the tigers are taking over where they leave off. Perhaps because of this, it tiger numbers appear to be holding steady despite an increase in human population size.

"If we operate under the traditional wisdom that tigers only can survive with space dedicated only for them, there would always be conflict," says Michigan State University PhD student Neil Carter.

"Tigers need to use the same space as people if they are to have a viable long-term future. What we're learning in Chitwan is that tigers seem to be adapting to make it work."

Since the start of the 20th century, the world's population of wild tigers has dropped by 97 percent to approximately 3,000 individuals, which are being pushed into ever-smaller spaces.

"There appears to be a middle ground where you might actually be able to protect the species at high densities and give people access to forest goods they need to live," says Carter. "If that's the case, then this can happen in other places, and the future of tigers is much brighter than it would be otherwise."

This is such good news! Some people may have wondered about my goal for the old Pacific Lumber Company land to reintroduce grizzly bears to their old habitat on the back areas of PL's 200,000 acres. Local Native Americans lived in peace with grizzly bears for thousands of years yet white people and civilization kills them off. Here is sign that a compromise can be reached between large dangerous animals and human civilization. We did it before and we can do it again. Even the animals agree.

Christians take 'beliefs' fight to European Court of Human Rights

BA worker Nadia Eweida was sent home after refusing to remove a necklace with a cross

BBC News
 4 September 2012
Last updated at 06:26 ET

Four British Christians who claim they lost their jobs as a result of discrimination against their beliefs are taking their cases to the European Court of Human Rights.

They include an airline worker stopped from wearing a cross and a counsellor who refused to deal with gay couples.

All four lost separate employment tribunals relating to their beliefs.

Secular critics have said any ruling in favour of the group could "seriously undermine" UK equality law.

A ruling is not expected from the European court for several weeks.

The cases involve British Airways check-in clerk Nadia Eweida, nurse Shirley Chaplin, relationship counsellor Gary McFarlane and registrar Lilian Ladele:

    Ms Eweida, a Pentecostal Christian from Twickenham, south-west London, was sent home by her employer British Airways in 2006 after refusing to remove a necklace with a cross
    Devon-based nurse Mrs Chaplin was moved to a desk job by Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust Hospital for similar reasons
    Mr McFarlane, a Bristol counsellor, was sacked by Relate after saying he had a conscientious objection to giving relationship advice to gay people
    Miss Ladele was disciplined after she refused to conduct same-sex civil partnership ceremonies in north London

Each individual had made a separate application to the court, but the cases are being heard together.

Court documents explain that Ms Eweida and Mrs Chaplin believe the UK law has "failed adequately to protect their right to manifest their religion" which is contrary to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

This article provides a right to freedom of religion, including to worship, teaching, practice and observe elements of their faith.

They also claim that previous tribunal rulings have breached Article 14 of the convention, which outlaws discrimination based on religion.

Miss Ladele also believes her right to an "effective remedy" was infringed, and Mr McFarlane claims his right to a fair trial and right to a private life in the UK were breached.
'Too narrow'

Earlier this year, the UK's equality watchdog, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said the UK tribunals had come to the correct conclusion in the cases of Miss Ladele and Mr McFarlane.

But it conceded the the courts "may not have given sufficient weight" to Article 9 of the European convention in the cases of Ms Eweida and Mrs Chaplin.

Andrew Marsh, campaign director at religious group Christian Concern, whose sister organisation Christian Legal Centre is supporting Mrs Chaplin and Mr McFarlane, told the BBC the four could have had their beliefs respected by their employers without adversely affecting the people they serve.

"The crucial question in these cases is this: could these four individuals have been reasonably accommodated and their Christian faith respected, without detriment or damage to the rights of others - and the answer to that question is clearly yes.

Each of them could have been reasonably accommodated without there ever being any danger of risk, significant risk to others or indeed of anyone who is entitled to a service being denied that service."

However, the National Secular Society - which campaigns against "religious privilege" - said a European court ruling in favour of the quartet would undermine UK equality law.

The society's director, Keith Porteous Wood, said the group was fighting the action: "We think that if it goes the wrong way it will cause a hierarchy of right, with religion at the top, and it's going to be bad news for employers and for gay people."

During Mrs Chaplin's case, the NHS trust said the necklace her cross was on had breached health and safety guidelines. She lost her discrimination case in 2010.

Meanwhile, Miss Eweida, who was suspended by British Airways for breaching its uniform code, also lost her case against discrimination in 2010.

The airline changed its policy in 2007 to allow staff to display a faith or charity symbol with the uniform.

Mr McFarlane, a Christian marriage guidance counsellor from Bristol, lost his 2010 court bid to challenge his sacking for saying he might not be able to give sex therapy to homosexuals.

And, also in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled against Miss Ladele, who was disciplined by Islington Council for refusing to conduct same-sex civil partnerships.

The court refused her bid to challenge an appeal tribunal which overturned a previous decision by an employment tribunal that the council had discriminated against her.

Here we have a different kettle of fish re religious freedom. The cross wearing issue seems straightforward discrimination against Christians as a religious group. The Christian refusal to deal with homosexuals is another matter altogether. In my first marriage I had a bad experience with a Christian marriage counselor who recommended divorce as the remedy of our troubled marriage because I was a hippie and these were the days when to be such was to offend Christian values. So I was no good as a husband because I smoked pot and ran a head shop.

Despite baby dying after getting herpes, Orthodox rabbis say they’ll defy law on ancient circumcision ritual

By KATE BRIQUELET
Last Updated: 8:38 AM, September 2, 2012

Two children are dead, more are injured — yet a group of ultra-Orthodox rabbis say they plan to defy a health order in the name of religious freedom.

Less than a year after a Brooklyn tot died following an ancient circumcision ritual, the rabbis say they will ignore a proposed law that would mandate parental-consent forms before performing the dangerous procedure.

Over the past decade, at least one other newborn died after contracting herpes from the rite, in which the rabbi draws blood from the penis with his mouth.

But ultra-Orthodox leaders are lashing out at the city’s “evil plans” ahead of the Board of Health’s vote next week.

About 200 rabbis signed a proclamation claiming the Health Department “printed and spread lies . . . in order to justify their evil decree.”

“It is clear to us, that there is not even an iota of blame or danger in this ancient and holy custom,” the letter states.

Most modern mohels — men trained to perform religious circumcisions, who are usually rabbis or doctors — remove blood from the baby’s wound using a sterile pipette.

But some Orthodox Jewish parents insist on an ancient “suction by mouth” ritual called metzitzah b’peh.

The city’s law would require mohels to distribute consent waivers, detailing the herpes risk, before the ritual.

Rabbi David Niederman, executive director of the United Jewish Organization of Williamsburg, said no one will comply with the law, even if it’s passed.

“For the government to force a rabbi who’s practicing a religious act to tell his congregants it’s dangerous is totally unacceptable,” Niederman told The Post.

“You’re forcing the mohel and the parent to sign a piece of paper that contradicts their religious convictions.”

Niederman said there’s no substantive evidence linking herpes and the religious ritual.

Michael Tobman, a political consultant working with several large Hasidic communities, said the waiver is no minimal imposition.

“It warns parents that the city suggests a link between the practice and serious health worries, [and] it would undoubtedly have a chilling impact,” he said.

“City government shouldn’t be doing that.”

At least 11 babies in the city have contracted the herpes simplex virus since 2000 — and two developed brain damage and two died, according to a Health Department investigation.

In July, an Orange County infant was hospitalized after contracting a deadly strain of the virus.

Earlier this year, prosecutors were investigating the September 2011 death of a Brooklyn newborn at Maimonides Hospital from Type 1 herpes.

A Health Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the rabbis’ proclamation but said, “It is important that parents know the risks associated with the practice.”

kbriquelet@nypost.com

Like Muslim women forced to wear hijabs covering up vital skin vitamin D absorbing capacity*, this is another Abrahamic religious ritual that hurts human beings, something God doesn't want but men seeking totalitarian control, do.  

*Vitamin D could help the body fight infections of deadly tuberculosis, according to doctors in London.

There's still no need to panic over Iranian nukes

By Shashank Joshi
The Telegraph
Last updated: September 4th, 2012

It’s that time again. A new report on Iran from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) means a new bout of panic. The Australian, deciding that the facts weren’t quite exciting enough, declared that: “Iran is stockpiling weapons grade uranium” (it’s not).  The New York Times, quivering with excitement, announced: “Iran is close to crossing what Israel has long said is its red line: the capability to produce nuclear weapons in a location invulnerable to Israeli attack”.

Iran is said to be on the brink of the “zone of immunity”, the point at which – according to Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak – “Iran’s accumulated know-how, raw materials, experience and equipment … will be such that an attack could not derail the nuclear project”.

The problem with this concept is that it doesn’t quite make sense.

First, what does “derail” mean? If it means terminate, then too late: Iran is in the zone already. As the top US military officer Martin Dempsey explained yesterday, an Israeli attack would “clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran's nuclear programme”. This is unsurprising, as Iran has the know-how to produce weapons in secret even if its known facilities were obliterated.

More importantly, what exactly is putting Iran further into this zone of immunity? Yes, its underground enrichment facility at Fordow is hardened, but there is vanishingly little evidence to suggest that it’s getting more impenetrable over time.

In fact, as the new IAEA report clarifies, it is primarily two things that are changing. First, Iran is enriching more uranium. In particular, its stockpile of uranium enriched to 20 percent – which is nine-tenths of the way to weapons-grade – has doubled since February. Second, Iran has doubled the number of its underground centrifuges since May. Even though it’s not using all of these, this still increases its enrichment capacity.

The concern, then, is this: Iran could “break out” by taking the uranium it has enriched so far, feeding it into this considerably expanded set of centrifuges, and produce weapons-grade uranium suitable for a bomb. And it could do so at an ever-quickening pace. But could it do all this before it was detected and bombed? Almost certainly not.

Iran is still using extremely old centrifuge designs, and – something that was missed in most reporting – has taken steps that actually put it further away from a bomb. Iran set aside over half of its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium for conversion to fuel plates used in its medical research reactor. In that form, the stuff is much harder to use for weapons purposes (and impossible to use quickly). Iran is left without enough for even one bomb. Yes, it will eventually make up this lost amount through more production – but that takes time, and its willingness to eat into this stockpile, a bargaining chip for Iran, is a positive step.

The upshot is that Iran – if it chose to do so at all – would take months, not weeks, to produce the weapons-grade uranium for a single bomb. And even if the breakout timeline did fall to weeks, this would still not eliminate the risk of getting caught by IAEA inspectors, foreign intelligence services, or both. In this sense, Iran is not about to leap into the zone of immunity.

Even if Iran did succeed in getting together enough weapons-grade uranium, it would take another year or so to actually put the whole thing together into a nuclear device. Putting that device onto a missile would take even longer. If it were to try any of this, it would almost certainly face a serious military campaign led by the United States, which could do far more damage than Israel.

All in all, the IAEA’s reports are crucial. They confirm that Iran hasn’t diverted any of its nuclear material. They remind us that the IAEA is worried about military nuclear activities. And they keep us informed about Iran’s swelling nuclear programme. It is this information that would be lost if Iran were to be bombed and IAEA inspectors inevitably expelled. But it is crucial that the IAEA’s findings be interpreted soberly and carefully, rather than with the continual undertone of panic that Israel has sought to instill over the summer.

Shashank Joshi is an Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). He is also a doctoral student of international relations at Harvard University’s Department of Government.

Desmond Tutu calls for Blair and Bush to be tried over Iraq

BBC News
 2 September 2012 Last updated at 05:43 ET

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has been a long time critic of the war in Iraq

Tony Blair and George W Bush should be taken to the International Criminal Court in The Hague over the Iraq war, Archbishop Desmond Tutu has said.

Writing in the UK's Observer newspaper, he accused the former leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction.

The Iraq military campaign had made the world more unstable "than any other conflict in history", he said.

Mr Blair responded by saying "this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say".

'Playground bullies'

Earlier this week, Archbishop Tutu, a veteran peace campaigner who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 in recognition of his campaign against apartheid, pulled out of a leadership summit in Johannesburg because he refused to share a platform with Mr Blair.

The former Archbishop of Cape Town said the US- and UK-led action launched against Saddam's regime in 2003 had brought about conditions for the civil war in Syria and a possible Middle East conflict involving Iran.

"The then leaders of the United States [Mr Bush] and Great Britain [Mr Blair] fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand - with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us," he said.

He added: "The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level."

    "To say that the fact that Saddam massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre”

Tony Blair

Archbishop Tutu said the death toll as a result of military action in Iraq since 2003 was grounds for Mr Blair and Mr Bush to be tried in The Hague.

But he said different standards appeared to be applied to Western leaders.

He said: "On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague."

In response to Sunday's article, Mr Blair issued a strongly worded defence of his decisions.

He said: "To repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence [on weapons of mass destruction] is completely wrong as every single independent analysis of the evidence has shown.
'Chemical weapons'

"And to say that the fact that Saddam massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre.

"We have just had the memorials both of the Halabja massacre, where thousands of people were murdered in one day by Saddam's use of chemical weapons, and that of the Iran-Iraq war where casualties numbered up to a million, including many killed by chemical weapons.

"In addition, his slaughter of his political opponents, the treatment of the Marsh Arabs and the systematic torture of his people make the case for removing him morally strong. But the basis of action was as stated at the time."

He added: "In short this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say. But surely in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.

"I would also point out that despite the problems, Iraq today has an economy three times or more in size, with child mortality rate cut by a third of what it was. And with investment hugely increased in places like Basra."

   "It's now almost certain that the war was illegal because it breached the United Nations Charter provisions.”

Sir Geoffrey Bindman Human Rights Lawyer

Human rights lawyer Sir Geoffrey Bindman told BBC Radio 4 the Iraq war was an illegal aggressive war.

He said a war crimes trial "should be and could be held on the basis a crime of aggression has been committed and the crime of aggression was starting the war.

"It's now almost certain that the war was illegal because it breached the UN Charter provisions which say that all member of the United Nations must refrain from the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."

Former Lord Chancellor Lord Charles Falconer said he disagreed with Desmond Tutu and Sir Bindman.

"The use of force is allowed among other reasons when the United Nations authorises it, and the United Nations authorised it by resolution 1441.

"The dispute between Geoffrey and myself would be whether or not resolution 1441 did or did not authorise war and we say that it did.

"Even that disagreement doesn't give rise to the possibility of war crimes, the world has very impressively over the last two decades come together and identified what they mean by war crimes; genocide, ethnic cleansing, torture and in a variety of ways brought people to trial for that"