McCain Urges End to Ban on Offshore Drilling
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/393637.aspx
CBNNews.com - ARLINGTON, Va. - Sen. John McCain said Monday the federal moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling should be lifted, and individual states given the right to pursue energy exploration in waters near their own coasts.
With gasoline prices rising and the United States chronically dependent on foreign oil, the Republican presidential contender said his proposal would "be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis."
McCain also suggested giving the states incentives, including a greater share of royalties paid by companies that drill for oil, as an incentive to permit exploration.
Asked how far offshore states should be given control of drilling rights, he said that was a matter for negotiation.
He offered no other details for his proposal, which he is expected to describe more fully on Tuesday in an energy speech.
McCain's presidential rival, Sen. Barack Obama, opposes an end to the moratorium, a spokesman said. Hari Sevugan said McCain's "plan to simply drill our way out of our energy crisis is the same misguided approach backed by President Bush that has failed our families for too long and only serves to benefit the big oil companies."
The current drilling moratorium is a perennial cause for controversy, pitting those who favor additional exploration on the one hand against environmentalists on the other.
The current ban on offshore drilling covers an estimated 80 percent of U.S. coastal waters. Given Democratic opposition in Congress to ending it, the Bush administration and congressional Republicans have been seeking the type of state option that McCain endorsed.
The GOP presidential candidate said a recent run-up in the price of oil was having an adverse effect on consumers.
"We've seen the impact of it in the form of food prices, in the form of gasoline, in the form of threats of inflation and indeed indications of inflation, and we must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil," he told reporters. McCain has sought to carve out something of a middle road on energy issues, parting company with many Republicans by opposing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, for example and calling for measures to reduce greenhouse gases.
The Senate last month rejected a GOP energy plan, 56-42, that included a provision similar to McCain's proposal. It would have allowed a state's governor to petition to have the federal moratorium lifted for waters off its coast. Republican senators argued there are some 14 billion barrels of recoverable oil available in waters now off limits. Also, the House has twice approved giving states the right to opt out of the federal ban, both when the GOP held the majority, but the proposal has never made it through the Senate.
McCain made his remarks before leaving the Washington area for a pair of fundraisers in Dallas.
Another fundraising event, originally set for the home of Clayton Williams in Midland, Texas was pulled from the schedule after news organizations pressed the McCain campaign about holding an event with the 1990 Texas GOP gubernatorial candidate who once joked that women should give in while being raped.
McCain sought to minimize the fallout, telling reporters that his aides had not known of the earlier comment when they scheduled the event
"We'll do it someplace else and I understand he's not attending. That's pretty much the sum of it all," he said.
He said he would hold another fundraising in the Midland area later this summer and Williams would not attend. Democrats have called on McCain to return more than $300,000 that Williams had raised for McCain from other individuals.
Bush Becoming a Catholic?
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/bush_catholic/2008/06/16/104851.html
President Bush may follow in the footsteps of his brother Jeb and convert to Catholicism, several European papers are reporting.
In the wake of the president’s visit to see Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican, Italian newspapers, citing Vatican sources, said Bush was open to the idea of converting to Catholicism.
The Italian newspaper Il Foglio referred to such talk about Bush’s possible conversion and stated that “anything is possible, especially for someone reborn like Bush.”
Noting that Tony Blair converted to Catholicism after leaving office as Britain’s prime minister last year, the paper also stated that “if anything happens, it will happen after he finishes his period as president, not before. It is similar to Blair’s case, but with different circumstances.”
President Bush welcomed Pope Benedict XVI warmly when he visited the U.S. in April. And Vatican watchers noted that Bush met privately with the pontiff in the private gardens of the Vatican last Friday — an unprecedented place for the Pope to meet a head of state. Typically, the Vatican gardens are used by the Pope for private reflection.
A Vatican spokesman said the Pope used the unusual locale to reciprocate for the “warmth” Bush showed when the two met in Washington.
Though the Catholic Church has criticized the U.S. war in Iraq, Bush has been an ardent supporter of pro-life issues; he has staunchly opposed stem-cell research; and he opposes gay marriage — all issues important for Rome.
Currently Bush belongs to a Methodist church in Texas and attends an Episcopal church in Washington, D.C.
A friend of Bush, Father George William Rutler — who converted to Catholicism in 1979 — told the Catholic News Agency that Bush “is not unaware of how evangelicalism, by comparison with Catholicism, may seem more limited both theologically and historically.”
Is It Really a '$3 Trillion War'?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,367259,00.html
What is the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? To many, the answer, at least from 2001 through 2007, is $473 billion — about a quarter of total defense expenditures over those years. It has averaged less than 1 percent of GDP.
$473 billion is probably an underestimate simply because the fighting has already lasted past 2007 and some wounded veterans will require long-term care. But how much more is it?
In a new book, The Three Trillion Dollar War, Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes argue that this emphasis on what the government has already spent dramatically understates the true cost of the war. At roughly six times the defense department’s numbers, their $3 trillion estimate has generated much news coverage and controversy.
Stiglitz, the former chairman of President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisors and Nobel Prize winner, told FOX News by telephone from Spain that his message has been getting a “very positive reaction” in Europe. Many are angry over how the Bush administration “misrepresented the facts that got us into the war.” Other countries that stayed out of the war are “very relieved that they hadn’t gotten involved” when they hear how large the costs of the war have been. He claims, “the British are very sorry for their complicity in selling the war.”
According to the authors, the normal reliance on total operational costs for the military leaves out many important costs. Among them are: the future costs of running the war ($669 billion), the future costs of taking care of wounded veterans ($630 billion), the loss of life for soldiers killed or injured ($337 billion), interest payments on loans to cover the federal deficit ($616 billion), and the increased cost of gasoline at the pump and its impact on the economy ($800 billion).
But what to count and how to value these various items is highly controversial. Even opponents of the war have expressed doubt over how Stiglitz and Bilmes have added up the numbers.
For example Richard Zerbe, Associate Dean at the University of Washington School of Public Affairs and president-elect for the International Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis, opposes the war, but is concerned that their analysis is “clearly double-counting the costs. It should be obvious.” He also has difficulties with the values attached to some of problems created by the war.
Regarding veterans who are disabled and unable to work, Zerbe says that it goes too far to attach the same loss to those soldiers as to soldiers who have died. He feels that the Stiglitz and Bilmes analysis has “too narrow a view of life, way too production orientated.” Zerbe argues that just because these disabled soldiers can’t work doesn’t mean that they place no value on living.
To get an idea of how large Stiglitz and Bilmes’s numbers are, compare them the Congressional Budget Office’s Matthew Goldberg, the Deputy Assistant Director for National Security, offered last October. Goldberg testified that the future medical care costs, disability compensation, and survivors’ benefits up to 2017 would likely range from $10 to $13 billion. (Since the Democrats control congress, they control the Congressional Budget Office.) But with these authors putting their estimate of total costs of veteran injuries at over $900 billion ($630 billion from taking care of the wounded and $273 billion from the harm done to wounded and injured soldiers), it is hard at first to believe that they are talking about the same thing.
Edgar Browing, one of the most cited public finance professors and the author of the forthcoming book “Stealing from Each Other: How the Welfare State Robs Americans of Money and Spirit,” is even more critical than Zerbe. He notes that, “$473 billion is the most defensible estimate of the cost of the war over the first five years. Everything beyond that is padded. They invent unrealistic scenarios, double count, and the like.”
One simple example involves Stiglitz and Bilmes counting both the expenditures on the war as well as the interest payments paid on the money borrowed to finance those expenditures. As far as the taxpayers are concerned, they care about what they have to pay. If the money is borrowed, you can’t count both the current expenditure and the future interest payments because taxpayers don’t have to pay directly now for the current expenditures. It is only when they pay off the interest that they will really pay the bill.
The same issue arises when they count both the salaries and benefits paid to the soldiers plus the costs of their medical care on the one hand — all part of the non-disputed operational costs — and also attaching additional value of life lost to those soldiers who have been killed or injured. Risky jobs such as being a police officer or stunt man require higher pay and benefits to compensate for the chance of being killed or injured. Indeed, it is this very premium that economists use to calculate the loss from police officers getting killed. Economists traditionally count either one of these costs that Stiglitz and Bilmes include, but not both at the same time.
Given their unorthodox method of counting costs, Stiglitz and Bilmes were asked whether any other economists used the same approach to evaluate these interest costs or values of life and injury, but they were unable to identify anyone. Bilmes responded by telling FOX News that “this book is not an academic paper. It is a book about the cost of the war.”
On oil prices, Stiglitz and Bilmes argue that “the longer [the war] has dragged on, the higher the prices have gone. This certainly suggests the war has something to do with the rising prices. On this almost all oil experts agree.” But, again, even those who oppose the war disagree with this claim. Peter Hartley, a professor at Rice University who specializes in energy economics, told FOX News that in fact the opposite was more nearly the case: “Almost all oil experts would disagree.”
Hartley said that the “increase in prices from the war is only temporary. You can only change prices by changes in supply or demand. The only supply and demand changes that they could point to from the war are some temporary changes from uncertainty.”
Al Harberger, an economics professor at UCLA and the current president of the International Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis, mentions another concern about the book. Interest rates enter into calculating the costs of the war not only in terms of interest payments on loans, as we have already discussed, but also how to put into current day dollars costs that may not be born for a decade from now.
Harberger argues that a too low interest rate makes it look like the future expenditures on the war look larger today than they really are. Higher interest rates mean that you don’t have to put aside as much money to pay for those future costs. In Stiglitz and Bilmes’s case, they use an interest rate below what it costs the government to borrow money. Harberger says that the opposite is true, the rate should be higher and you have to figure out what private investment you are giving up by loaning money to the government.
Surprisingly, Stiglitz and Bilmes’ book never mentions or responds to well-know responses from other academics who have criticized their earlier published claims. The most notable critics are Stephen Davis, Kevin Murphy and Robert Topel, professors at the University of Chicago. Even Davis, Murphy and Topel’s worst-case estimate of the costs of the war run up to $1 trillion in today’s dollars, with their most realistic estimates at less than half that amount.
Then there is the huge cost for the Iraqi people. Possibly the most controversial claim in the book involves their estimate that well over one million Iraqis will have died from the US invasion by the year 2010. Without any caution or hesitation, they rely on an extremely controversial study published in the medical journal, Lancet. Stiglitz and Bilmes took Lancet’s estimated 654,965 deaths from the American involvement in Iraq from March 2003 to July 2006 and assumed that Iraqis would continue dying at that the same yearly rate through March 2010. The Lancet number is over 10 times the number of Iraqi deaths claimed by the Iraqi and US governments.
Concerns have been raised about whether Iraqis surveyed were honest and provided accurate information or whether they may have given politically motivated answers to exaggerate “’crimes’ committed by the Americans.” Some survey experts have attacked the survey for not doing the most basic things to “prevent fabrication” of the data. For instance, there was no effort to trace death certificates to confirm claimed deaths. The survey was conducted and overseen by Riyadh Lafta, a child-health official in Saddam Hussein's ministry of health, whom some claim was biased. Others have questioned why the original surveyors' reports and the raw data have never been released to other researchers.
Still others expressed concern that the timing of the survey’s release immediately before the 2006 election was political motivated and that the funding for the survey by George Soros was only discovered long after the publicity for the results had subsided.
While acknowledging these objections to the survey conducted by Lafta, Bilmes told FOX News that their estimate of over one million civilian deaths was an underestimate of Iraqi causalities, 92 percent of which were supposedly killed by bullets, bombs, or U.S. air strikes. She said that the numbers showed that “the costs of the war far outweigh any possible gain.”
Perhaps what is most surprising about the extensive news coverage the book has received is that critical comments by other economists have received no coverage in the media. A search of news stories on “The Three Trillion Dollar War” did not show a single economist being quoted as disagreeing with their estimate of the cost of the war.
Professor Browning tried to put the costs of the war in some perspective: “[the war] is expensive, but it isn’t anywhere near as expensive as other programs that the government does. The war on poverty over the first five years of the war was over $3 Trillion.”
As Bilmes said, the media frenzy over their book has been “crazy.” That is not surprising, since three trillion dollars is a lot of money. Yet, serious objections to their estimates cut across the political spectrum. Others place the best cost of the war estimates at a sixth of what Stiglitz and Blimes claim.
Judge Alex Kozinski Must Resign
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07299.shtml
WASHINGTON, (christiansunite.com) -- Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, has admitted to the Los Angeles Times that a website he maintains contains sexually explicit pictures and videos. His severe lack of moral judgment demands that he either resign or, if he refuses, that Congress begin impeachment proceedings.
"Judge Kozinski's admission to maintaining a website with explicit and degrading pictures is enough to determine that he is morally incapable of providing objective judgment, especially over obscenity cases. Judge Kozinski must resign," said Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America. "If he refuses, Congress should begin impeachment proceedings against him. And the Department of Justice should immediately conduct an investigation against him."
Judge Kozinski is presiding over an obscenity trial that was to begin today against Ira Isaacs for distributing sexual fetish videos, featuring acts of bestiality and defecation. Yesterday the prosecutor requested a delay to look into "a potential conflict of interest concerning the court having a ... sexually explicit website with similar material to what is on trial here." Kozinski granted a 48-hour stay.
According to the Times, Kozinski's website includes images of masturbation, public sex, a transsexual strip tease, photos of women's private areas in tight clothing, naked women painted and posed as cows, a half-dressed man with a sexually-aroused farm animal, and a man performing fellatio on himself.
Several years ago, Judge Kozinski led an effort to remove filters that deny access to pornography from appeals court computers. He told the Times that he began saving sexually explicit materials on his website years ago and would pass items he found interesting or funny to others.
"For Judge Kozinski to remain not only as a judge but as the chief judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals would make a mockery of justice and of our justice system. If he has any respect for the judiciary, for the law, and for America he would remove himself from this honorable position," stated Wendy Wright.
Concerned Women for America opposes pornography through community activism, lobbying for legislation, regulations against obscenity and pressing for vigorous prosecution of obscenity laws. Judges who follow and uphold the laws in the courtroom and their personal lives are fundamental to a just and decent society.
Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.
National Leader Takes on Barnes and Noble Because His Eleven Year Old was Exposed to Gay Porn and They Knew This Sort of Thing was Happening
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07296.shtml
MEDIA ADVISORY, (christiansunite.com) -- On June 5th, my eleven year old son joined me in a visit to our local Barnes and Noble Bookstore in Collierville, TN. I was horrified at what my son saw. Open on a table was a very large, full-color, picture book displaying a man in full frontal nudity. The cover was two men kissing with the title GAY SEX.
This book was filled with full-color pictures of gay men doing what they do...Yes, it was that graphic.
The assistant manager told me that this was the second time that night this book had been laid open in the store. She also informed me that such books were regularly found in the men's room. I believe some homosexual or child predator was trolling and using the book to find a date or victim. The assistant manager told me a young boy had been sexually assaulted in the bathroom at this store and the man was never caught. She also said they had found a gun on the counter in the bathroom on another occasion.
After sharing these disturbing stories with me, the assistant manger walked me to where the book was normally kept. Was it behind a counter? No, it was on the top shelf of a bookcase that any 13 year old could reach. Welcome to the 21st Century where being gay is mainstream and celebrated as normal in a family bookstore. Click the link at the bottom of this article and listen to my national radio program to find out what I am going to do.
I returned to the Barnes and Noble the next day to document the placement of their pornographic books. I have three places where books that included pictures of either homosexual porn or heterosexual porn were placed throughout their bookshelves. One section of books was low enough that my five year old could have pulled them from the shelf.
Most states have a state law that requires this material to be out of the reach and site of minors. The sate law is TN is 39-17-911.
I am working with the American Family Association to have an e-mail go to 3 million people calling for a boycott of Barnes and Nobel until they put this garbage behind a counter or in a restricted area where children can not see it or have access to it.
This story has now gone nation wide through my national radio program, my 30 minute appearance on the Michael Reagan program (son of President Ronald Reagan) and through several national news outlets. I am booked on numerous national radio programs this week. It is really too bad for Barnes and Noble that this happened to my son because I will use what most fathers don't have at their disposal....a national audience and friends who have big radio programs, TV programs and huge e-mail alert systems. Be watching because this mad dad is going as far as he can with this.
I am fighting this not only for my son but for every parent and grandparent that joins me in being angry about Barnes and Noble's irresponsible, and I believe illegal, business practice.
A code enforcer where I live in Collierville, TN woke up my friend recently that is recovering from cancer to tell him his for sale sign was 11 feet, not 12 feet, from the curb. The code enforcers have made companies move a shrub a few feet to match their original landscape plan. Yet, no town code for a store to keep porn from a child.
As far as Barnes and Noble is concerned, welcome to the 21st Century where homosexuality is now mainstreamed into a family bookstore that has a huge children's department. Sadly the chances are greater in some states that I would get charged with a hate- crime for speaking out about this rather than the store being fined.
I have received lots of e-mails since taking this story national and the stories are rolling in of many similar sad, stories at other Barnes and Noble stores and other such family bookstores.
We are encouraging the public to sign our petition to Barnes and Noble executives which can be found at this website: www.worldviewweekend.com
Da Vinci Code Movie Banned From Filming in Church
http://www.newsmax.com/entertainment/italy_angels_and_demons/2008/06/16/104878.html
ROME -- Rome's diocese said Monday it has barred the producers of "Angels & Demons" from filming in two churches for the prequel to the "The Da Vinci Code," the popular book and film that angered many Catholic leaders.
Producers of the film, directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks, were turned down because the movie "does not conform to our views," said Monsignor Marco Fibbi, a spokesman for the diocese.
The crew had asked to film in the churches of Santa Maria del Popolo and Santa Maria della Vittoria, two architectural jewels in the heart of Rome that include paintings by Caravaggio, sculptures by Bernini and a chapel designed by Raphael.
Permission was denied in 2007, but the issue surfaced only now that filming is ongoing in Rome, Fibbi said. The Sony-produced film was put on hold during the Writers Guild of America strike that ended in February and is now scheduled for release in May 2009.
Fibbi's comments first were reported this week by the Italian entertainment magazine "TV Sorrisi e Canzoni." "It's a film that treats religious issues in a way that contrasts with common religious sentiment," Fibbi told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "We would be helping them create a work that might well be beautiful but that does not conform to our views."
Fibbi acknowledged that the controversy over writer Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" and its blockbuster movie version had weighed on the decision.
The story drew anger and prompted calls for boycotts by church leaders worldwide with the idea that Jesus married and fathered children and by depicting the conservative Catholic movement, Opus Dei, as a murderous cult.
"This is a prequel to 'The Da Vinci Code' and it's clear that the theme is similar," Fibbi said. He added that the ban would not stop the crew from filming the exterior of the churches.
Brown's "Angels and Demons" is a religious thriller combining an ancient secret brotherhood called the Illuminati, code-cracking, a papal conclave and a high-tech weapon threatening to destroy the Vatican.
It features Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon of "The Da Vinci Code" fame, played by Hanks in the movie.
Calls to Sony Pictures in London and Rome were not immediately returned Monday.
Dublin sees 'no obvious solution' to EU treaty rejection
http://euobserver.com/9/26329
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Europe will this week try and pick up the political pieces following Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, but the relatively high turnout at the ballot box, the wide margin and the jumble of reasons for the No vote mean an exit strategy will be hard to find.
For the moment other member states have insisted that ratification of the treaty continue, despite the 53.4 to 46.6 percent No vote on Thursday (12 June). But they have made it clear that they expect the Irish government to come the EU leaders summit later this week equipped with some answers.
The Slovenian EU presidency said it would ask Irish prime minister Brian Cowen "to explain the reasons for the rejection of the treaty by the Irish people" at the top-level meeting.
The European Commission almost made it clear that this is more Dublin's problem, rather than a strictly EU one.
A referendum is a "matter of national responsibility" said commission president Jose Manuel Barroso after the vote and pointed out that "our Irish friends always said it was a national campaign."
However Ireland has admitted it will be hard-pressed to come up an answer and asked Europe to not isolate it.
"We now have to sit down in a sense of solidarity and co-operation with all of the member states to see if we can find a way forward and the fact of the matter is there is no obvious solution before us here," said Irish prime minister Brian Cowen in an interview with state broadcaster RTE.
"I want Europe to provide some of the solutions as well as just suggesting that it is Ireland's problem alone, although Ireland has a position here that we have to try to deal with."
France and Germany have been careful to sing from the same hymn sheet, staving off a feeling of Europe in crisis and rushing out a joint statement to say ratification should continue in a bid to stop more eurosceptic countries such as Britain immediately calling off the process.
"The others must continue ratification...so that the Irish incident does not become a crisis," said French president Nicolas Sarkozy.
Scrambling for a solution
The next few days are likely to everyone "scrambling" for a legal solution to the quandary, an EU diplomat told EUobserver adding that there is no answer stored away in a "vault" somewhere.
Germany's foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said "[The question is whether] Ireland for a certain time can clear the way for an integration of the remaining 26 [member states]."
But all countries need to ratify the Lisbon Treaty for it to come into force. UK liberal MEP Andrew Duff and constitutional affairs expert said attempts to find some sort of legal half-way house are "nonsense."
"We are all trapped in the Treaty of Nice," he said, summing up the situation after the Irish No.
The most obvious way out – without resorting to renegotiating the treaty for which there is little political appetite - is another vote to see if the Irish say yes second time round, something already mooted by France's Europe minister
Jean-Pierre Jouyet told French radio that there was "no other solution" to the situation even if Dublin would have to wait quite a long time to have a second vote.
But it appears unlikely that the Irish government can take this route – something admitted by Conor Lenihan, a junior minister responsible for integration.
"I can't see a situation where we can put this matter again," he told RTE. "I think the result is deeply damaging to our position within Europe,'" while voting again would "create a double risk of creating even more damage.'"
A second vote?
Ireland has voted twice before. In 2001 it rejected the Nice Treaty before accepting it a year later. But the first rejection saw a low voter turnout and came after the government had done virtually no campaigning, being complacent about a Yes.
Thursday's vote saw a relatively good turnout (53% in comparison to 34.8% in the first Nice Treaty vote), based on the back of a strong effort by Dublin to secure a Yes. There appears also not to have been a clear reason for voting No, but rather a motley selection of grumbles, making it difficult to add a few provisos to the treaty to make it more palatable.
On top of that, the EU would leave itself exposed to charges that it is ignoring the will of the people if it pushes Dublin towards a second vote.
The victorious No-side which encompassed pro-business lobby group Libertas and Sinn Fein as well as military neutrality and anti-abortion groups believe the treaty can be renegotiated.
The pro-treaty side believe this is not possible and that Ireland has damaged its European interests.
"Things will never be quite the same again, no matter what deal is eventually patched up at European level. In simple terms, Ireland's position as the favoured child of the EU project can never be restored and we will have to live with the implications of that," said an opinion piece in the pro-Europe Irish Times.
Report: Sarkozy seeks warships for European fleet
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1411247.php/Report_Sarkozy_seeks_warships_for_European_fleet
Berlin - French President Nicolas Sarkozy has asked Britain to provide an aircraft carrier and Germany to lend frigates and supply ships to establish a European naval fleet, the news magazine Der Spiegel reported Saturday.
Sarkozy, who takes over the European Union presidency on July 1, had briefed German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a meeting Monday at Straubing, Germany about the fleet plan, the magazine said in its issue to hit the streets Monday.
Previous efforts to establish European Union defence units have mainly involved land forces.
Carrier groups are the most potent forces on the seas, since they can bombard distant land targets whereas a protected flagship is difficult or impossible to destroy using planes or submarines.
The flagship would be a British aircraft carrier, because France's carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, must dock frequently for repairs. Budget limits mean that Sarkozy cannot decide till 2012 on building a second French aircraft carrier or more nuclear submarines.
Spiegel said he also briefed Merkel on cost-cutting plans to reduce the French armed forces by about 35,000 to 220,000 men and to take the gendarmerie paramilitary police off the defence budget and onto the interior budget.
Israel wins significant EU upgrade
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212659748504&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Despite intense lobbying by Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, the European Union on Monday - in a sign of vastly improved European-Israeli relations over the last few years - agreed to a significant upgrade of relations.
The upgrade was announced in Luxembourg during the annual EU-Israel Association Council meeting, headed by foreign ministers, which conducts the bilateral relations between Israel and the EU. The announcement was made at a meeting attended by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and the ministers of the 27 EU states.
A statement put out by the foreign ministry said this agreement "will usher in a new era in Israeli-European relations."
Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayad last week sent a letter to the EU countries urging them not to upgrade ties unless Israel halted construction in east Jerusalem and the West Bank. Similar appeals in all the European capitals have been made over the last few weeks by Egyptian diplomatic officials as well.
Israeli diplomatic sources said that the Arab world was increasingly concerned by the growing friendship between Israel and many of the governments in Europe, including France under Nicolas Sarkozy, Britain under Gordon Brown, Germany under Angela Merkel and Italy under Silvio Berlusconi. In addition, the inclusion of eastern European countries into the EU such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic has vastly improved Israel's status in the EU.
Although there was some concern that the EU would link the upgrade to the situation on the ground in Israel and the Palestinian territories, the only hint of any linkage in a statement issued after the meeting by the EU was a clause that said "the process of developing a closer EU-Israeli partnership needs to be, and to be seen, in the context of the broad range of our common interests and objectives which notably include the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the implementation of the two-state solution."
Israel has said on numerous occasions that it is in favor, and is working toward, a two-state solution.
The process of upgrading ties began a year ago after the last Association meeting, where it was decided to examine areas in which cooperation between Israel and the EU could be enhanced.
Israel's efforts on the matter have been led by a team headed up by Senior Deputy Director General Yossi Gal, Deputy Director General for Europe Rafi Barak and Ambassador to the EU Ran Curiel.
Israeli-EU relations will be upgraded in three areas: increased diplomatic cooperation; Israel's participation in European plans and agencies; and examination of possible Israeli integration into the European single market.
The upgrade includes the following aspects:
# In the diplomatic sphere there will be an institutionalization of the diplomatic dialogue between the Israeli and EU leadership, by means of regular annual meetings at a senior level. In addition, there will be increased meetings between government ministers, senior officials and parliamentarians from both sides.
# Israel will join European agencies, programs and working groups. This will mean bringing the Israeli economy and society closer to European norms and standards, and increasing the competitiveness of Israeli companies in the European market, primarily in the field of high-tech, with the signing of an aviation agreement that will lower prices for both sides, and others.
# A joint working group will examine the areas in which Israel is capable of integrating into the European single market. This will lay the groundwork for an additional upgrading of relations in the future.
In the beginning…
http://www.stangoodenough.com/?p=145
Note: I am no theologian, not a qualified Bible teacher, not even a student of biblical studies (at least not since 10th Grade). Like millions of “ordinary” Christians, I imbibe Scripture because I believe it to be the inerrant Word of God; I read it repeatedly, receiving and absorbing it prayerfully into my mind because I want to learn all I can from it.
Layered like an onion, the Living Word has innumerable facets to uncover, explore and apply to increase our knowledge of God and our understanding of His relationship with us. Speaking into our daily circumstances often with breathtaking incisiveness, the Bible directs our steps as we live our individual and corporate lives.
As with the entire Bible, there is much to study and much to learn from every verse and in every chapter of Genesis. However, as the title of this study makes clear, “The Bible on Israel” is intended to specifically discover more about why and how the Land and Nation of Israel features in Scripture.
I aim to stay focused on this. The myriad other lessons we could learn as we progress through the Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament will not be touched on here.
GENESIS 1 & 2 - God’s “Dream”
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, out of nothing bringing into being this glowing jewel of a planet and sending it spinning in its setting of velvet black space with innumerable stars and multi-colored planets sprinkled around it, spread further than any eye can see.
After God made light and darkness, the atmosphere, the sea and the land, grass, herbs, trees and their fruit, lights in the heavens, sea creatures, birdlife, cattle, beasts and all “creeping” things, God made man and woman in His own likeness, gave them to one another, blessed them with the ability to procreate, placed them in a garden surrounded by rivers, and gave them dominion over all the earth.
Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. (Genesis 1:31)
This, then, was God’s idea, God’s concept, God’s dream: The creation of a beautiful world in the center of a stunning and immeasurable universe as a place of pleasure and joy for men and women made to reflect Him and freely fellowship with Him.
GENESIS 3 - The spoiler, and the Plan
God has an enemy - a mortal foe who lives solely to spoil and destroy everything that God made and called “good.” Disguised as a serpent, Satan slithered onto the scene to seduce man into sin and so steal his God-given dominion from him. Adam and Eve switched their allegiance from their Maker to the devil, and suffering and death came into the world.
God’s response was holy and just. It contained consequences, curses, punishment, and a plan. The consequences for Eve and Adam would be severe. Paradise was lost to them; they were banished from the Garden, an angel with flaming sword keeping them from being able to eat of the Tree of Life. Woman would bring forth children in pain and be ruled over by her husband; man would have to fight thorns and thistles in the now-accursed earth, feeding his family from bread earned in the sweat of his brow. All humanity would know sickness and death.
But there, right at the start, in the midst of His disappointment, anger and sorrow, even as He pronounced judgement, God had a plan. He revealed it in the curse spoken over the serpent:
“And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel.”
(Genesis 3:15)
So what, you may be wondering, does this have to do with Israel? After all, I did promise to stay focused.
It has everything to do with Israel. For, as I believe we shall see, God never gave up on His dream, not even for a second.
After being so sorely betrayed by the creatures He loves, and having His creation spoiled by the one who hates Him with every fiber of his being, God put into process a perfect plan to restore men and women in their relationship to Himself, and to restore all things back to the perfect unspoiled way in which He made it at the first.
Israel is the agent through which God destined this restoration and redemption to take place. The Land of Israel - God’s Holy Land (Zechariah 2:12) - was designated the stage upon which the main act in this drama would be played out. The People of Israel - God’s Chosen People (Deuteronomy 7:6) - were consecrated as the cast at the center of the play.
In this Land, through this nation, God’s plan is unfolding as He determined it should.
And in the end, when Israel has done everything it has been called to do, Creation will be remade as it was at the start, and God will again see that “it is very good.” As will we.
Interfaith Alliance Sends Christian Students to Israel
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07297.shtml
NEW YORK, (christiansunite.com) -- The 4th Annual Jerusalem Prayer Banquet, held May 15th in the Delegates Dining Room of the United Nations, brought together more than 500 Jewish and Christian business and spiritual leaders in support of Israel and the Israel Experience College Scholarship Program. The historic event was the first gathering of Christians and Jews in support of Israel ever to be held at the United Nations.
Rev. Robert Stearns opened the night reminding the guests of the significance of the fact this event was coinciding with the celebration of the 60th anniversary of the founding of the modern state of Israel. Sharing the reasons Christians stand with Israel, he received a rousing ovation when he declared, "we will never allow the sin of silence of the Church in the 1930's to be repeated again. Not on our watch!"
The evening was held in support of the Israel Experience College Scholarship Program, founded by Rev. Stearns in 2004, an interfaith alliance that assembles the best and brightest Christian leaders from college and university campuses across America and brings them to Israel for a four-week learning experience, cultivating in them a connection to the Jewish roots of their Christian faith and linking that to a connection to the Land and State of Israel.
Joining Rev. Stearns in addressing the group were Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, the Chief Rabbi of Efrat, Israel; Student Alumni of the Israel Experience College Scholarship Program; Consul General of Israel, Ambassador Asaf Shariv; and others.
For more information about the Israel Experience College Scholarship Program and the interfaith movement that supports its success, contact:
Rabbi Jeffrey Kahn, Director, Israel Experience
RabbiKahn@gmail.com 646-485-7325 (US) 052- 598-6929 (ISRAEL)
Michael Onifer, Director of Operations
Monifer@eagleswings.to 716-759-1058
'Exasperated' Rice: Building up J'lem impedes peace
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2488
United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice came to Jerusalem Sunday to tell Israel's government it needs to stop construction in its ancient capital because it makes the Arabs angry.
"Ongoing Israeli construction in areas the Palestinians want for their future state 'has the potential to harm the negotiations,'" Rice said according to The Jerusalem Post.
In a meeting with her Israeli counterpart, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, Rice said she is "very concerned that at a time when we need to build confidence between the parties, the continued building and the settlement activity has the potential to harm the negotiations going forward."
The Post said Rice "appeared more exasperated with the Israeli construction than she has in [the] past."
"Look, it's a problem, and it's a problem that we're going to address with the Israelis. "This is obviously a road map obligation that is not being met," she reportedly told journalists on her plane.
Both Rice and Livni were [appropriately - Ed. note] dressed in black as they stood in front of the press before going into their meeting.
It is Rice's sixth visit to Israel this year - pushing up her drop-in average to once-a-month, after making 11 stops in the previous year-and-a-half.
The Bush administration is understood to be increasingly desperate to secure some sort of Israeli-"Palestinian" agreement before the end of its term next January.
Creating a Palestinian state in the heart of the Jews' historical homeland is the ultimate aim of the US-sponsored "peace" process.
The Islamic-Arab world insists that Jerusalem, with its holiest parts, be the capital of that state.
Apart from the Jews, no other nation has ever had Jerusalem as its capital, and there has never been a State of Palestine.
According to the Jewish-Christian Bible, Jerusalem belongs to the Jewish people as the capital of their exclusive homeland, which includes all the territory the international community accuses Israel of "occupying" and wishes to see turned into a Palestinian state.
Since being miraculously restored to Jewish sovereignty in 1961 - after more than 2000 years of gentile control - Jerusalem has been modernized, massively expanded and beautified.
Psalm 102 states:
_Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Zion: for the time to favor her, yea, the set time, is come. For Thy servants take pleasure in her stones, and favor the dust thereof. So the heathen shall fear the name of the LORD, and all the kings of the earth thy glory. When the LORD shall build up Zion, He shall appear in his glory._ (verses 13 to 16)
Exclusive: PM Olmert willing to cede Shebaa Farms to UN custody ahead of Golan
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5352
DEBKAfile’s sources reveal that prime minister Ehud Olmert told US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice when they met in Jerusalem Sunday, June 15, that he was willing to evacuate Israeli troops and hand this strategic enclave on the Hermon slopes to United Nations custody as early as July. He has not brought the issue either before the full government or the security cabinet. Defense minister Ehud Barak and the IDF high command are against this step, just one more topic at sharp issue between Olmert and Barak.
Rice took the news to Beirut Monday at the end of her talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders. She informed Lebanese president Michel Sleiman and prime minister-designate Fouad Siniora: “The United States hopes for an early settlement to the Shebaa Farms issue.”
Israel’s withdrawal from the Shebaa Farms would expose its vital military positions on the northwestern slopes of Hermon to the Syrian 10th and 14th Divisions, elements of which are deployed in Lebanon close to the three-way border junction. Israeli military sources warn that handing it to the UN, namely the South Lebanese peacekeeping force, will extend the force’s lackadaisical control over South Lebanon to this strategic sector as well, granting Hizballah freedom of action in a fresh arena.
Our Middle East sources disclose that the Shebaa Farms tactic was initiated by French President Nicolas Sarkozy; he sold it to President George W. Bush when they met in Paris Saturday.
Sarkozy’s plan consists of five steps:
1. In the first week of July, Israel will announce it is ready to cede the enclave. The United States will then join France and Israel in issuing a statement indicating that Israel’s willingness to evacuate the Shebaa Farms is part of an evolving understanding intended to lead to its withdrawal from the Golan.
2. But first, two French emissaries, the president’s diplomatic adviser Jean-David Levit and his chef de bureau Claude Gueant, traveled to Damascus Sunday, June 15. They presented Israel’s offer to the Syrian president Bashar Assad as the first fruit of the indirect Syrian-Israeli peace talks mediated by Turkey.
The link between the Turkish and French initiatives surfaced Monday when Olmert’s two representatives to these talks flew to Paris from Istanbul to brief the president’s office on the just-ended session and plot the next moves.
3. Paris is keen on some sort of climax for the opening of the Conference of Mediterranean States in Paris on July 13. Sarkozy views the event as the crowning diplomatic achievement of his first year at the Elysee. He has invited Assad as his guest of honor at the Bastille Day parade the next day.
4. Sarkozy hopes that the signal honor he has conferred on Assad plus the Israeli concession will bring him and Olmert under the same roof for the conference opening. A brief encounter might even develop.
5. But Assad is playing hard ball. The two French officials failed to get him to say whether or not he will attend the Mediterranean conference, much less meet with Olmert. He says Israel’s promise to withdraw from the Shebaa Farms is not enough. He wants a fixed date in July or early August at latest before taking up Sarkozy’s invitation to the conference. As to meeting Olmert, that is not on Assad’s agenda.
The 12-square mile Shebaa Farms enclave lies just north of the Golan on the northwestern slope of the strategic Hermon range. It was captured by Israel in the Six Day War of 1967 from Syria as part of the Golan and as such was later recognized by the UN. Syria later said the Shebaa Farms were part of Lebanon, in order to provide the Lebanese Hizballah with a pretext to carry on attacking Israel and refusing to obey UN Security Council resolutions demanding the dismantling of its armed militia.
Syria - It's the Golan we want, not peace
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2490
The terrorist-supporting Damascus regime of Bashar el-Assad Saturday clarified its priorities for being willing to sit down and talk - albeit indirectly - with Israel.
It's not a state of peace and normalization Syria wants, said Syrian Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Faisal al-Mikdad. It's the Israeli Golan Heights.
And the Syrians are willing to go to war to grab them.
"[W]e will defend our [sic] land at any time."
In fact, the Golan Heights were part of the Ottoman province of Palestine that was originally set aside for the creation of a Jewish homeland.
Great Britain gave the plateau to the French Mandate of Syria and it was controlled by an independent Syria for just 20 years before the IDF took control of the land in 1967 – in response to Syrian aggression and terrorism.
Despite the fact that Israel has held the heights for more than twice as long as Syria, Damascus insists it is the rightful owner.
The Israelis "should know that the Golan Heights belong to us and that they should not be raising their children in the Golan, since this is not their place. They will not enjoy their lives there," al-Mikdad warned.
“Syria has several courses of action if Israel refuses to return" the heights, he added, ominously.
According to the Syrian, Israel is no longer the feared foe of 1967 and 1973, and Syria is not engaging the Jewish state "from a position of weakness.
"The victory achieved by the Lebanese resistance [Hizb'allah] in July 2006 changed everything in the region," he said.
Israel forces kill 5 terrorists, thwart another Palestinian bid to blow up Gaza border
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5351
Israeli forces shot dead 5 armed Palestinians carrying a powerful explosive device in before they reached the Gaza-Israeli border early Monday, June 16. While Hamas bargained over Gaza truce terms in Cairo, three Palestinians were sighted lugging a heavy bag near a border route patrolled by a Givati Brigade border detachment. The soldiers crossed the border and shot them dead and detonated the bomb in a controlled explosion.
In addition to the bomb, the gunmen carried side-arms and video cameras to record their planned multi-casualty cross-border attack. Two more armed Palestinians were killed later near the Sufa crossing.
For the second day running, Israeli residents from locations targeted by Hamas missiles and mortars are blocking roads to convoys bringing fuel and other commodities to the Gaza Strip. They are protesting the Israeli government’s failure to tackle the Palestinian offensive disrupting life in the western Negev. This traffic is routinely held up by Palestinian terrorist assaults on the border crossings.
Reports indicate Israel stalemated by Gaza terrorists
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2489
The Israel Defense Forces are universally respected as one of the most capable militaries in the world. They are certainly the most battle-tested, having been called on to fight almost one war per decade since the 1948 rebirth of the Jewish state.
Nonetheless, Israel's government under the leadership of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert Sunday appeared increasingly inclined to sign a ceasefire with Hamas, the terrorist thugs who so viciously seized control of the Israel-abandoned Gaza Strip last year, and who have inflicted terror, pain and death on Israeli civilians ever since.
Olmert, whose premiership was stained by the debacle of the Second Lebanon War - which he launched but failed to win against Hamas' Lebanese brothers-in-crime, the Hizb'allah - is reportedly scared to go head-to-head with the Gazan killers.
He "opted for talking with Hamas instead of ordering a full-scale counterterrorist offensive in Gaza because of fear of heavy casualties and a long-term operation, TIME magazine reported Sunday," according to Israel National News (INN).
The prime minister's military advisors had reportedly also persuaded him that even a large offensive would not necessarily put an end to the rocket fire from Gaza.
This sentiment was echoed in a column published on Ynetnews Sunday by Eitan Haber, formerly bureau chief to assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
Haber, a dyed-in-the-wool dove who among other things boasts having been the writer of most of Rabin's speeches, reiterated the politically-correct mantra that there is no military solution to the Gaza problem.
"Indeed, there is no arguing that the situation in Sderot and the Gaza region [where rockets fall daily on Israeli population centers] is intolerable, impossible, and cannot continue. It is also true that there isn’t, never was, and never will be another country in the world that would allow for even one day its sovereignty and its people to be targeted like that. It is also true that the IDF is capable of wiping Gaza off the face of this earth," writes Haber.
But, "we can occupy and flatten Gaza, and then what? ... Hundreds and maybe thousands of Palestinians will be killed, and then what?"
The Arabs will simply rebuild, he contends, and then "we'll again face the storm."
Israelis like Haber - similarly to liberals elsewhere in the West - simply refuse to countenance the right-thinking argument that the Arab side respects force. A massive, CONCLUSIVE and irrefutable military crushing of Hamas and of the Hizb'allah would win Israel far more than a breather.
And yet many believe that this way - which is so unacceptable to the left - holds the key to the breakthrough that will bring true peace to come to the Middle East.
An eruption of violence may well be inevitable, despite the "truce talks."
While negotiations toward a ceasefire continue, said INN, "both sides are preparing for war."
Iran Has Technology for a Nuclear Warhead to Fit Shehab-3 Missile
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1354
Some Western military and intelligence were shocked to learn that Iran had the blueprints for making a nuclear warhead that could fit onto its Shehab-3 missiles. The discovery was released by the former UN weapons inspector, David Albright, Sunday, June 16, ahead of the report on his investigation of the nuclear smuggling ring run by the father of the Pakistan nuclear bomb Abdul Qadeer Khan. He alleged that the nuclear blueprints passed to Libya, Iran and North Korea included “previously undisclosed designs for a compact warhead that could fit on Iran’s medium-range ballistic missiles.”
On May 22, Swiss President Pascal Couchepin, disclosed that, last December, the destruction had been ordered of a batch of 30,000 documents detailing construction plans for nuclear weapons, gas ultra-centrifuges to enrich weapons-grade uranium and guided missile delivery systems , evidence in a criminal case of a Swiss family of three engineers involved in the Khan ring.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s exclusive sources disclosed on May 30 that these nuclear blueprints were sold in underhand deals to those countries - and possibly also to al Qaeda - in the second half of the 1990s. Tehran has therefore had those designs for between 10 and 13 years.
This discovery makes nonsense of the supposedly definitive judgment in Western and Israel intelligence that Iran lacks the technology for building a nuclear missile delivery system. Because of these estimates, Western governments have been able to keep their sanctions-cum-diplomatic track with Iran rolling as though tomorrow would never come.
It is now evident that not only North Korea and Iran have known for some time how to build and deliver a nuclear warhead, but unknown recipients of A.Q. Khan’s merchandise, including terrorist organizations, may also command hazardous nuclear knowledge.
The three Swiss engineers, members of the Tinner family, are the father, Friedrich, whose ties with Khan went back decades, and his sons, Urs and Marco.
The Khan ring set up marketing headquarters in Dubai and Malaysia. The brothers have awaited trial for four years in a Swiss jail. Their father is out on bail and confined to Switzerland. The evidence against Urs Tinner, the hard disk he stole containing the incriminating nuclear documents, has now been destroyed by the Swiss authorities under the supervision of the UN nuclear watchdog.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military experts reported on May 30: If Urs Tinner, a small cog in the Khan network, was able to steal a hard drive containing a mass of the network’s nuclear secrets, three conclusions are inescapable:
1. That Khan did not retain an efficient security system for the data he was selling. Therefore, his system was full of holes and his confederates and agents, whether employed on the technical or marketing side of the business, were able to help themselves to documents, diagrams and other illicit nuclear materials that were put on sale and, perhaps, go into business on their own.
2. It is an open secret among the American and Western intelligence services involved in uncovering the Khan ring that large sections are still going strong out in Pakistan, the Far East and the Middle East through channels still unexposed. They are bound to assume that the documents destroyed by the Swiss government may exist in copies still in circulation.
3. Some of their holders may have hung onto them for the last four or five years and then destroyed them when the Khan ring was exposed, for fear of being linked to the trafficker. On the other hand, it is possible that some of A. Q. Khan’s agents and accomplices sold his nuclear plans and secrets to terrorists linked to al Qaeda.
Bush Says Iran Spurns New Offer on Uranium
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/world/middleeast/15iran.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
PARIS — President Bush accused Iran on Saturday of rejecting a new set of incentives to stop enriching uranium, only hours after the proposal received a cold shoulder when it was delivered by Western diplomats in Tehran.
“I am disappointed that the leaders rejected this generous offer out of hand,” Mr. Bush said during a joint news conference here with President Nicolas Sarkozy of France. “It is an indication to the Iranian people that their leadership is willing to isolate them further. Our view is we want the Iranian people to flourish and to benefit.”
Tehran did not formally reject the offer, meaning that it may be able, as Western officials fear, to play for time, saying that it is in an ongoing dialogue with the West while continuing to enrich uranium to secure the amounts necessary to build a nuclear bomb.
The response, in the waning days of Mr. Bush’s presidency, was far from warm. The new package was handed to the Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, by the European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana. Mr. Mottaki said that Iran’s response would depend on how the West responded to Iran’s May 13 proposal calling for international talks on all issues and improved international inspection of Iran’s nuclear facilities. But Iran’s proposal does not mention the key Western demand — that Iran stop enriching uranium.
But before Mr. Bush spoke, an Iranian government spokesman, Gholamhossein Elham, made it clear in Tehran that stopping enrichment was unacceptable. “If the package includes suspension it is not debatable at all.” Mr. Elham said. “Iran’s view is clear: any precondition is unacceptable.”
Both Mr. Bush and Mr. Sarkozy emphasized that current and future economic sanctions on the people of Iran were the fault of the Tehran government’s insistence on enriching uranium in violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions, and that the West should not be blamed for the economic pain.
The French and Americans presumed in advance that their new proposal of incentives — a negotiated gesture to Russia and China for their support of earlier Security Council sanctions — would be brushed aside by Tehran, officials and diplomats said, insisting on anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Mr. Bush has previously said that an Iranian nuclear weapon is “insupportable” and that all options, including military strikes, remain available.
But Mr. Bush and the Europeans who formally made the offer want to show that all efforts at dialogue are being taken, and they are hoping to ensure that ordinary Iranians can have access to the full text of the offer.
A copy of the two-part document was made available to The New York Times.
Mr. Sarkozy, who has strongly supported Washington on the Iran nuclear issue, used language harsher than Mr. Bush’s. An Iranian nuclear bomb would be “a menace unacceptable for the stability of the world,” Mr. Sarkozy said, appealing to the Iranians to show good faith, allow full international inspections and accept the offer of civilian nuclear power if they stopped their own enrichment program.
“Iran has the right like all countries in the world to have civil nuclear power and we are ready to help them,” he said. “If they have nothing to hide, they should show it.”
The offer to Iran by the world’s six major powers, including the United States, was a sweetened version of a rejected June 2006 offer. It promises “direct dialogue and contact” with Iran if it freezes crucial nuclear activities and “dialogue and cooperation on nonproliferation, regional security and stabilization issues.”
To show solidarity, Mr. Solana was accompanied on his trip to Iran by the political directors of the Foreign Ministries of France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China. Washington has no diplomatic relations with Iran and did not send a representative.
The United States has refused to negotiate directly with Iran until it suspends enrichment, but it has also promised a full regional dialogue with Iran, which would include Iraq, Syria and Middle East peace, if enrichment stops. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said of the Iranian government: “We would be willing to meet with them but not while they continue to inch toward nuclear weapons under the cover of talks.”
Should Iran accept it, the new proposal is based on a timetable for negotiations. Talks would start with a six-week mutual “freeze” period to establish the good will of both sides, according to the text.
The six world powers “will refrain from any new action in the Security Council,” while Iran “will refrain from any new nuclear activity, including the installation of any new centrifuges,” the fast-spinning machines that enrich uranium.
The timetable was first proposed to Iran in early May 2007, but its precise details had not previously been made public.
As before, the new proposal recognizes Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy. It pledges to support construction of modern light-water reactors, to arrange for the timely provision of enriched fuel and to cooperate in trade, energy, agriculture, the environment and civil aviation.
But with Russia and China reluctant to endorse harsher sanctions against Iran, and with oil prices at record levels, assuaging the pain of Iran’s damaged economy, Western officials are examining other punitive moves against Iran that could be taken by a “coalition of the willing” outside the United Nations.
Officials would not provide details, but analysts suggest those could include a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf or the refusal to supply Western-made technology required for Iran’s oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran’s oil production.
But even these measures would take months to negotiate and put in place.
In the meantime, Iran is thought to be waiting out the Bush administration, with a new president bound to spend months in a policy review of Iran that it hopes could produce a less conditioned dialogue than Mr. Bush has been willing to allow.
The offer and an accompanying letter signed by Mr. Solana and five foreign ministers, including Ms. Rice, mentioned no new punitive measures against Iran, but concentrates on incentives. The letter praises Iran as a great civilization, but warns that “Iran’s relationship with the international community has been overshadowed by growing tension and mistrust, since there remains a lack of confidence in Iran’s nuclear program.”
In Paris, Mr. Bush and Mr. Sarkozy both urged Syria to break with Iran and re-establish peaceful diplomatic relations with Lebanon’s government.
France has reached out to Syria, to invite it to a new Union of the Mediterranean that France intends to establish during its European Union presidency.
Mr. Bush was blunt, telling Syria to “stop fooling around with the Iranians and stop harboring terrorists” and to stop supporting radical Islamic groups like Hamas and Hezbollah that use violence to destabilize the peace process and Lebanon itself.
Mr. Sarkozy said that Syria was a Mediterranean country and that if France started “picking and choosing” whom to invite to the new union, very few would attend — another way for him to defend his invitation to Israel, which is causing problems for some Arab states.
EU nations agree on need for stronger sanctions to discourage Iran on nuclear weapons
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/06/16/europe/EU-GEN-EU-Iran-Sanctions.php
LUXEMBOURG: European Union nations agreed Monday on the need for a new round of sanctions to discourage Iran from developing nuclear weapons, targeting the country's oil and gas sectors in what would be the strongest punishment yet.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced earlier Monday at a London news conference with U.S. President George W. Bush that Britain will freeze the assets of Iran's largest bank, Bank Melli, and that the EU would target Iran's oil and gas sectors.
"Action will start today in a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas," Brown said. "We will take any necessary action so that Iran is aware of the choice it needs to make."
Brown said Britain was urging the EU to also impose the new sanctions because of Iran's refusal to halt the uranium enrichment that could be used for nuclear weaponry, and that Europe would agree to do so.
The EU has not yet announced stronger sanctions. But a spokeswoman for EU foreign affairs and security chief Javier Solana — who failed last weekend to win Iran's support for a package of incentives — said EU foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg on Monday were prepared to take formal action.
"It is clear they are ready to move further. We will definitely take a formal decision," Cristina Gallach said.
Gallach would not speculate on the timing of a final decision. But an EU diplomat said Tehran's refusal to accept the package Solana presented left the bloc with no choice but firm action in the run-up to an EU leaders' summit this week in Brussels.
The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, described Solana's fruitless trip to Tehran as a turning point that accelerated Europe's drive to tighten sanctions.
Sanctions targeting Iran's oil and gas industries could severely affect Iran's already fragile economy. High inflation and rampant unemployment have damaged its economy, which is heavily reliant on natural resources. More than 80 percent of Iran's revenues come from oil exports.
The sanctions also could have an impact on the already soaring global oil prices.
"While the sanctions are unspecified, a potential disruption in supply is what concerns the oil markets particularly with prices so close to all-time highs," said Linda Rafield, an analyst at Platts, the energy research arm of McGraw-Hill Cos.
First word of new sanctions on Monday came from Brown's London news conference. Later, Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, told reporters aboard Air Force One that an announcement was expected Monday from the Luxembourg meeting.
At their joint news conference, Bush and Brown both sent a strong message to Iran that it must end its pursuit of nuclear weapons or face a tougher international response.
"Britain will urge Europe — and Europe will agree — to take sanctions against Iran," Brown said.
Hadley and Brown's spokesman, Michael Ellam, both indicated that European nations had agreed in principle to target the Iranian bank, Bank Melli.
The United States last year accused Bank Melli of providing services to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
"There is agreement among all EU member states to freeze assets of Bank Melli," Ellam said.
The U.S. and some of its allies accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies that, saying its atomic program is aimed at using nuclear reactors to generate electricity.
The U.N. Security Council has imposed three sets of limited sanctions against Iran for refusing to halt uranium enrichment. The third round of U.N. sanctions passed in March introduced financial monitoring of Bank Melli and another bank with purported links to suspect Iranian nuclear activities, Bank Saderat.
Hadley said a new round of European sanctions would be a significant hardening of resolve against Tehran.
He said European foreign ministers are examining plans for sanctions on Iran's oil and gas sectors. The measures are complex, but "would be a major step forward," Hadley told reporters aboard Air Force One.
EU foreign ministers refused to comment on the timing of the tighter EU sanctions.
Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said the exact timing of the launch hinges on "how positive — or not — Iran's response will be to the economic incentives package."
Solana failed to win Tehran's support last weekend for a modified package of incentives aimed at getting Iran to suspend uranium enrichment.
He had presented a package of economic, technological and political incentives drawn up by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany. But Iran said it would not accept the package if it demands the suspension of uranium enrichment, government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham said in Tehran.
West keen to keep Iran channel open
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7455890.stm
They are not usually used to the limelight. In fact you might imagine them blinking as they emerge into the sunshine.
The political directors of the foreign policy departments of the great powers are the archetypal bureaucrats - more used to influencing policy behind closed doors, than appearing before the glare of television lights.
But in the stylish residence of the German ambassador to Iran, they took their place alongside the EU foreign policy envoy Javier Solana, in what was, not for the first time in Tehran, a rather bizarre news conference.
The aim was to demonstrate the unity of the international community, in the face of Iran's nuclear programme. In the event, it showed rather the opposite.
Mr Solana's mission was to bring a new package of incentives, designed to encourage Iran to suspend the enrichment of uranium - the process the West fears could be used to make a nuclear bomb.
Diplomatic optimism
But while he was in the process of delicately explaining his offer to various Iranian officials, US President George W Bush jumped the gun, and announced that Iran had already rejected the package "out of hand".
In fact, as Mr Solana quietly explained later on, Iran has agreed to take away the ideas and think about them.
It was more than just a misunderstanding on Mr Bush's part.
What was so striking was the difference in tone. President Bush was quick to condemn the Iranian government at the earliest opportunity.
Mr Solana came full of diplomatic optimism, with a mission to charm and persuade the Iranians of the merits of this proposal.
Not that anyone ever expected any miracles.
The package brought to Tehran by Mr Solana includes a series of proposals designed to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear programme.
There are economic incentives as well. All available to Iran if it suspends the enrichment of uranium.
Direct talks
Mr Bush was quite correct that the Iranian government spokesman did announce, just as the talks were beginning, that Iran was not willing to accept that condition.
It is something that Iranian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or one of his officials probably repeats almost every day of the year. So it was not exactly a surprise.
And that was not the only flaw in this initiative.
The countries represented alongside Mr Solana were Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. Nobody from the US.
Washington does not hold direct talks with Tehran. Yet if there is a solution to this crisis, surely relations between Iran and the United States are pivotal.
Is it really credible to believe, as this offer proposes, that the US would co-operate in helping to build a nuclear reactor in Iran, while the many other arguments between the two countries remain?
Would the US Congress really vote money for the project, while American generals complain of Iranian weapons being used against their troops in Iraq, and Israel complains of Iranian rockets being delivered to Hamas and Hezbollah?
Equally, for any deal to be attractive to Iran, it would surely have to include the lifting of American economic sanctions, much more important than the relatively light UN embargo.
A commitment from Washington that regime change is not an option, would also be crucial.
Presidential change
When I put that issue to Mr Solana, he insisted that the nuclear question was the key - solve that and everything else follows.
But under the previous Iranian president, uranium enrichment was indeed suspended. It did not even lead to the solution of the nuclear crisis, let alone anything else.
Mr Solana and his team are under no illusions of this. One reason, perhaps, why they left after barely 24 hours in the Iranian capital.
This is not a promising time for a diplomatic initiative. But they want to keep the channels open. Even if Mr Ahmadinejad is not persuadable, perhaps his critics might be more amenable.
After all, it is not just America that is gearing up for a presidential election.
Mr Ahmadinejad also faces a tough battle for re-election in a year's time as well. So there could soon be different presidents in both Washington and Tehran.
And for the many governments, very seriously concerned about even the possibility that Iran might get a nuclear bomb, for the moment no-one seems to have any better ideas about how to proceed.
House Church Leader Arrested in Iran
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07300.shtml
(christiansunite.com) - Eight policemen arrested a house church leader, Mohsen Namvar (44), in his home in Tehran on May 31, according to a June 9 report from Compass Direct. The officers confiscated a number of Namvar's personal belongings including his computer, printer, CDs, books and money. He was given no official explanation for the arrest, and his current location is unknown.
According to an Iranian pastor residing outside the country, Namvar had anticipated that police would come for him since hearing that he had been implicated during police interrogations of Christians in the city of Amol in April. He had been warned by a friend that authorities were keeping him under close watch. Namvar was previously held and tortured for baptizing Muslim converts to Christianity in the spring of 2007.
Pray for Namvar's release. Pray that he will act as a faithful witness for Christ during his detention (Matthew 5:14-16). Pray that his wife and children will rely on the Lord for comfort and strength.
For more information on the persecution facing Christians in Iran go to www.persecution.net/country/iran.htm.
Positive Signs Seen in Iraq
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/393626.aspx
CBNNews.com - BAGHDAD - Signs are emerging that Iraq has reached a turning point. Violence is down, armed extremists are in disarray, government confidence is rising and sectarian communities are gearing up for a battle at the polls rather than slaughter in the streets.
Those positive signs are attracting little attention in the United States, where the war-weary public is focused on the American presidential contest and skeptical of talk of success after so many years of unfounded optimism by the war's supporters.
Unquestionably, the security and political situation in Iraq is fragile. U.S. commanders warn repeatedly that security gains are reversible.
Still, Iraq is by almost any measure safer today than at any time in the past three years. Fears that the country will disintegrate have receded - though they have not disappeared.
The wave of sectarian massacres that pushed the country to the brink of all-out civil war in 2006 has calmed.
Shiite-Sunni reprisal killings still occur. But gangs of Sunni and Shiite death squads no longer roam the streets at night with impunity, seeking out victims from the rival religious community.
Last month, at least 532 Iraqi civilians and security troopers were killed, according to figures compiled by The Associated Press from Iraqi police and military reports.
Although the number remains high, May's total was down sharply from April's figure of 1,080 and was the lowest monthly figure this year, according to the AP count. By comparison, the AP count showed at least 1,920 Iraqis died in January 2007.
American deaths last month - 19 including four non-combat fatalities - were the lowest monthly tally of the war. In May 2007, 126 American service members died.
Many Sunni insurgents have stopped fighting and turned against al-Qaida in Iraq, which U.S. commanders say still remains a threat.
But those Sunni groups - loosely organized and still armed - could resume the fight if the Shiite-dominated national leadership fails to deliver on promises of economic help and a share of power. Critics believe U.S. support for such groups, known collectively as "awakening councils," could set the stage for future conflict.
In the meantime, Sunnis who once shunned politics are gearing up to contest provincial elections this fall.
Shiite militiamen are reeling after military setbacks in Basra and Baghdad's Sadr City districts this spring. But it's unclear whether militia chief Muqtada al-Sadr has given up violence entirely as his Shiite rivals seek to undermine his support among the majority Shiite community.
Despite the signs of progress, recent opinion surveys show that more than 60 percent of the American public opposes the war and believes it will end badly. Democrats lashed out at presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain for saying it was "not too important" when American troops leave Iraq.
Some analysts also question whether the limited political accommodation among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds can be sustained if America withdraws its forces quickly. Iran's interest in using Shiite extremists to stir up trouble is another question mark.
With so many uncertainties, many Iraqis themselves fear the relative calm won't last - even though monthly death tolls have been declining since the middle of last year.
"This relative calm is the calm before the storm," said Mohammed al-Sheikhli, director of the Transitional Justice Research Center in Baghdad. "The worst violence is not over because the calm may collapse any moment."
That may prove true. Most of the root causes of the war - notably the power struggle between Sunnis and Shiites- remain unresolved.
U.S. troops have managed to suppress the conflict in Baghdad, maintaining an uncertain calm behind massive networks of blast walls that separate rival communities.
Political progress has lagged far behind security gains, some of them made at the risk of sowing the seeds of future conflict.
Fear and mistrust lie just beneath the surface.
"My Shiite neighbors were very good. They told me to leave because the militias would kill me," said Firas Ahmed, 27, who fled Baghdad for the mostly Sunni city of Tikrit. "Despite the improvement in security in Baghdad, I cannot go back because I'm afraid the situation might deteriorate suddenly."
Reasons behind the decline in violence include the U.S. "surge" troop buildup of 2007, the Sunni revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq and a cease-fire called by al-Sadr last August.
When President Bush ordered the "surge," U.S. officials said the goal was to bring down the violence so that Iraqi Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish politicians could forge power-sharing agreements necessary for long-term stability.
The lack of substantial power-sharing agreements has often been cited as a failure of the surge strategy.
In recent weeks, however, the factious, Shiite-led Iraqi government has won a measure of public support by standing up to Shiite and Sunni gunmen - even if a list of other goals such as constitutional amendments and a new oil law remain unfulfilled.
A new sense of confidence has emerged after recent Iraqi-run military operations against Sunni extremists, including al-Qaida, in the northern city of Mosul and against Shiite militiamen in Basra and Baghdad.
At first, the Basra operation stumbled badly, with al-Sadr's militiamen fighting government troops to a standstill as their Shiite allies in Baghdad launched attacks against the U.S.-protected Green Zone. American and Iraqi troops rushed to Basra from as far as western Iraq after local army and police units failed to perform.
But a combination of military force and political pressure on al-Sadr produced a cease-fire, enabling Iraqi security forces to expand control of part of Baghdad and Basra that had been under militia domination for years.
Brimming with confidence, Iraqi forces are turning their attention to southern Maysan province, long believed a hub of a smuggling network bringing weapons from Iran to Shiite extremists in Iraq.
The newfound prestige could be short-lived, however, if the government does not move quickly to undermine support for the militants by improving public services and creating jobs - especially in areas recently freed from extremist control.
Many Iraqis are grumbling that they have yet to see the effects of the windfall in profits - estimated as high as $70 billion this year - that the country is expected to reap due to high world oil prices. Corruption and bureaucratic chaos are widely blamed for the problem.
"Services are very bad and they do not match the government's huge oil revenues," said Kadhim Shnati, 54, a retired accountant in the southern city of Nasiriyah. "Services are not only bad but getting worse. Increases in salaries are overtaken by rising prices."
Gas Prices Could Turn G-8 into G-9
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07298.shtml
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado, (christiansunite.com) -- Could high gas prices be a ploy to become a member of the G-8?
If you look at the membership of the G-8 -- the United States, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Canada -- only Russia is a major oil producing nation, and Russia does not export to the United States. So, in reality, the G-8 is getting together to solve a problem they have, but the solution is not necessarily within the G-8 itself...it is outside the G-8, which means major mediation and negotiation must be involved.
According to expert mediator Dr. Pat Boone, "Saudi Arabia is the major player, because they have the capacity to expand their output. Will Saudi Arabia be the next country to be invited into the G-8, making it into a G-9?"
"Even if Saudi Arabia does become a member of the G-8, it does not mean that Saudi Arabia's expanding their output would cause the price per barrel to come down -- just that petroleum would be more available. If you have a product that other countries need, nothing can keep you from continuing to raise the price, unless your country needs something other countries have, and they could raise the price on you in return. It's a form of our basic 'checks and balances' system.
"As the world becomes smaller and smaller with interdependence on products and purchasers, only that, our interdependence, will be the key to negotiating prices that everyone can live with if we want to stabilize our global economy."
Dr. Pat Boone is a Certified Mediator in Colorado Springs, Colorado, trained to see "the cause behind the symptom."
No comments:
Post a Comment