McCain, Obama and Clinton denounce Hamas; Abbas wants make nice with them
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2476
United States presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Hussein Obama and Obama's contender for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton this week all emphatically declared that as far as they are concerned, Washington should have nothing to do with the "Palestinian" group Hamas that controls the Gaza Strip.
Also Thursday Hamas used mortars to murder an Israeli kibbutz member in an attack specifically meant to kill civilians.
Despite this, "moderate" PLO chief terrorist and Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas - Israel's "peace partner" wants to make peace with the organization.
According to a report in The Jerusalem Post, Abbas on Thursday formed a committee of senior Palestinian officials to prepare for "national dialogue" with Hamas.
Abbas does reportedly hope to meet with Damascus-shielded Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in the coming days.
"In another sign that the two parties are headed toward reconciliation, Hamas and Fatah representatives are expected to hold talks in Dakkar this weekend under the auspices of the Senegalese government," said the Post.
Concerning Hamas, this is what AIPAC heard from the mouths of the aspirant American leaders.
McCain: The Palestinian Arabs "are badly served by the terrorist led group in charge of Gaza; this is a group that still refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist, refuses to denounce violence, and refuses to acknowledge prior peace commitments. They deliberately target Israeli civilians in an attempt to terrorize the Jewish population. They spread violence and hatred and with every new bombing they setback the cause of their own people. ... The peace process that places face in terrorists can never end in peace and we do no favors to the Palestinian people by conferring approval upon the terrorist syndicate that has seized power in Gaza."
Obama: "We must isolate Hamas unless and until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements. There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations."
Clinton: I am deeply concerned about the growing threat in Gaza. Hamas has built a military force equipped with sophisticated weapons from Iran. Hamas' campaign of terror has claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent Israelis. Its charter calls for the destruction of Israel. It has shown no commitment to peace or to renouncing violence. So we must be clear about how we feel about our next president negotiating directly with Hamas. Here's how I feel. Until Hamas renounces terrorism and recognizes Israel, negotiating with Hamas is unacceptable for the United States.
Back home, Gaza-based Hamas leaders applauded Abbas' reaching out to them, saying he was welcome to visit the Strip sooner rather than later.
McCain: Don't Call Me Bush
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/dont_call_me_bush/2008/06/05/101817.html
WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama is fond of using a four-letter word to describe John McCain: Bush.
Weary and wary of being linked so closely with the president, McCain says Obama is spreading a falsehood voters won't buy when he says McCain as president would deliver a third Bush term.
Oh, to be the president of the United States these days.
Time was, it wasn't so awful to be associated with the leader of the country.
But the political reality is that Bush's approval ratings are near record lows, which makes him an easy target. Or at least not a guy being sought out for bear hugs.
The White House likes to point out that Bush is not on the ticket. Yet he remains in the thick of it.
Consider McCain's speech as Obama clinched the Democratic nomination Tuesday night.
Predictably, he spoke about his differences with Obama. Pre-emptively, he outlined a history of differences with Bush to undermine Obama's line of attack.
"You will hear from my opponent's campaign in every speech, every interview, every press release that I'm running for President Bush's third term," McCain said. "You will hear every policy of the president described as the Bush-McCain policy. Why does Senator Obama believe it's so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he knows it's very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false."
In other words, America, I'm not Bush.
Yes, McCain said, he shares views with the president, particularly on national security. But he proudly listed a pattern of splitting with the president on energy and climate change, on spiraling spending and budget gimmicks, and on the administration's "mismanagement" of the war in Iraq.
It so happens that this distancing came exactly one week after Bush was with McCain, in McCain's home state of Arizona, raising money for him at a big-dollar fundraiser. Bush raised an estimated $3 million in private that night. His public appearance with McCain was so short it was measured in seconds.
Obama had Bush on his mind too on the historic night he clinched the Democratic Party's nomination.
The Illinois senator lumped McCain with Bush on the economy and on current war policy in Iraq. And he called McCain's claims of independence dubious.
"There are many words to describe John McCain's attempt to pass off his embrace of George Bush's policies as bipartisan and new," Obama said. "But 'change' is not one of them."
Bush administration officials expect such rhetoric from the Democrat in the race. Yet even when it comes from the Republican, the White House line is: No offense taken.
"Look, Senator McCain is different than President Bush. That's a fact. We understand that his campaign will reflect his policies and his vision for the future of the country," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said. "I think it's worth remembering that President Bush's father didn't exactly emulate President Reagan. Vice President Gore did not copy President Clinton. Even Hillary Clinton demonstrated differences from President Clinton _ and she's married to him."
Lieberman in Heated Talk With Obama
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Lieberman_obama_/2008/06/04/101876.html
The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reports that Democrats are in such a tizzy about Sen. Joseph Lieberman's support of John McCain — and his criticism of Sen. Barack Obama — they are threatening to take punitive action against him in the U.S. Senate.
Lieberman won re-election to the Senate as an independent in 2006, but still caucuses with the Democratic majority. Senate Democrats have allowed Lieberman to keep his seniority, as well as his chairmanship of the powerful Homeland Security committee.
But Roll Call suggests that could change.
The paper reported, "Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the caucus."
Lieberman also annoyed Obama backers Wednesday by participating in a McCain campaign conference call with reporters. On the call, Lieberman sharply criticized Obama's speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC.
"I appreciate many of the very good intentions to Israel and Israeli security that Senator Obama express today," Lieberman said. He added, "I thought in the speech there was a disconnect between things Senator Obama said today, particularly in regard to Iran, and things he has said or done earlier either in the campaign or the Senate."
The paper observed Lieberman and Obama on the Senate floor today, and suggested the pair engaged in some verbal jousting.
"Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation," Roll Call reported.
"While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating."
Analysis: Next president will shape the future of the Middle East
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212041480186&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
It is hard to imagine that had Al Gore been elected president, the US would have invaded Iraq. Similarly, the policy of Republican John McCain, if elected president, will in almost all certainty be different from the policy of Democrat Barack Obama should he enter the White House. These candidates' views about American foreign policy are significantly divergent, reflecting the difference between their respective parties.
Iran
McCain is convinced that an Iran with nuclear weapons constitutes an unacceptable risk. He believes it is a country that supports terror and interferes with American efforts in Iraq by arming and training Shi'ite militias. He has claimed that the US is facing "an evil man and a very dangerous regime," and that if Iran obtains nuclear weapons it will assume that since no country will want to confront it, it therefore has unlimited power.
In such a situation, it will be perceived as a threat to other countries in the Middle East that may in turn want to develop nuclear capacities of their own. McCain is among the senators behind the decision to define the Revolutionary Guards, the military arm of the Iranian regime, as a terror organization. He has criticized Ahmadinejad's declarations about the destruction of Israel and denial of the Holocaust, and argued that they expose the danger posed by a nuclear empowered Iran.
Nonetheless, McCain prefers a diplomatic solution to the problem, emphasizes the use of "aggressive" diplomacy, and supports the imposition of significant political and economic sanctions. If the Security Council does not impose substantial sanctions on Iran, as president he will likely try to muster the support of leading countries that will put this into effect, and will also aim to delegitimize the Iranian government. McCain does not explicitly mention replacing the Iranian government, but he talks about generating internal discussion in the country to demonstrate that the government does not represent public opinion, rather the aspirations of an extreme elite. He does not rule out the use of military force.
The US National Intelligence Estimate of December 2007, which determined that Iran apparently suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003, did not substantially change McCain's approach. He claims that Teheran still constitutes a threat due to its involvement in international terror and its support of "Hamas and Hizbullah, terror organizations bent on the destruction of Israel."
However, he identifies less urgency in the matter, and hopes that it may be possible to hold talks between the countries - but only after Iran suspends its nuclear activity, and without the US providing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a propaganda opportunity, especially if it does not receive anything in return.
Obama is more moderate on Iran than McCain, emphasizes the use of diplomacy, and is even planning direct talks with Iran (initially at low government level) without preconditions. On the other hand, he, too, does not rule out the military option, which would enjoy more extensive support if adopted only after the US has already proven that it has made every diplomatic effort.
Obama defines Iran as "a genuine threat to the United States and Israel," and Ahmadinejad's administration as "a threat to all of us." He, too, recognizes the dangerous implications of nuclear weapons in Iran's possession for regional stability.
Obama initiated a law designed to help US states withdraw investments by companies that trade with Iran. On the other hand, he did not support the decision that called for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to be defined as a terror organization, as he saw this as an overly belligerent approach that might provide the Bush administration with the basis for launching an attack on Iran.
Iraq
McCain supported launching the war in Iraq and subsequent US efforts to stabilize the country, despite criticizing the strategy as too weak until a decision was made in early 2007 to reinforce the troops. He believes that exiting Iraq now and even setting a timetable for the withdrawal would be tantamount to admitting defeat.
It would be "a mistake of colossal historical proportions" that would lead to catastrophic results for the Middle East: civil war in Iraq, a strengthening of Iran's standing, unsettlement of regional equilibrium, a strengthening of the Taliban and al-Qaida, and a greater threat to Israel. On the other hand, a US victory in Iraq means a functional country (even if with a flawed democracy) that cooperates with the United States in a long struggle against terror.
Obama has opposed the war in Iraq since it began (even before he was elected senator), and he mentions this record regularly. Obama believes that the US's security situation has deteriorated since 2003, as the invasion and occupation of Iraq have led to the strengthening of international terror, Iran, al-Qaida, Hizbullah, Hamas and the Taliban.
He blasts the financial price of the war as too high, damaging the US economy, increasing the US's monetary dependence on foreign capital, and in turn damaging national security. Obama promised that as president, he would start to withdraw American troops from Iraq immediately and continue over the following year and a half. At the end of the process a very small force would remain there to protect Americans in Iraq, train Iraqi security forces and carry out operations against al-Qaida.
Israel and the Palestinians
McCain is a veteran supporter of Israel. He believes that Israel is America's "natural ally in what is a titanic struggle against Islamic extremists," and that the "bond between the United States and Israel is not only strategic... but also moral."
McCain has promised that as president he will work to strengthen America's commitment to Israel's security, and will continue to provide it with arms and technology that will maintain its military supremacy in the region. He sees Hamas as a terror organization and an ally of Iran with which, until it recognizes Israel's existence, the US and Israel should not negotiate. He asserts that no sovereign state can accept repeated terror attacks on its territory and citizens, and thus he supports the action Israel takes against Hamas and other terror organizations in the Gaza Strip.
McCain has even said that Israel should not be pressed into any negotiations as long as terror exists. He favors talks with Abu Mazen, but cautions that the Palestinian Authority president's control is limited. Regarding a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, McCain declared that he does not believe Israel should return to the 1967 borders.
Since Obama was elected to the Senate and through his presidential campaign, he has also expressed his support for Israel in its struggle against terror. He defines Israel as "the US's strongest ally in the region, and the only democracy there"; he is committed to Israel's security, including by maintaining its military superiority; he sees Hamas as "a terror organization devoted to the idea of destroying the State of Israel," and therefore does not comprise a legitimate partner to negotiations until it changes its attitude. Obama supports a two-state solution and is "committed to making every effort to help Israel achieve peace," but will not force a settlement on it; he opposes a Palestinian right of return. Obama is the only candidate who has not expressed support for the security fence, which he described as "another example of the neglect of this administration in brokering peace."
Who, then, is "good for Israel"? That depends on the beholder. McCain would maintain Bush's line, probably without the religious, emotional and personal elements that made his strong support of Israel exaggerated among portions of American public opinion.
Obama, on the other hand, would likely inject a sense of urgency to the political process, and would display less patience over what is viewed as foot-dragging by Israel in implementing its commitments according to the road map (significant removal of army roadblocks, evacuation of outposts, freeze of settlement construction).
Those who believe that Israel requires a US administration that does not pressure it into following a path that it does not want to take, and is committed to stopping the Iranian danger through military means, if necessary, will prefer McCain over Obama. Those who feel that Israel needs a US administration that will impose a direction on it that it might otherwise not pursue, and that the danger of a nuclear empowered Iran does not necessitate the use of military force will prefer Obama over McCain. Nevertheless, there is a word of caution for members of the latter group. While Obama allows himself to express relatively balanced positions already at the election campaign stage, it is possible that after he is elected, his policy will reflect his original critical positions.
The future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict depends more on what happens between the sides than the extent and nature of the involvement of any US administration. On the other hand, the continued presence of the US in Iraq almost entirely depends on the next US administration. Indeed, a decision on the withdrawal of the American army is an individual decision by the president; Bush's success in withstanding the pressure of the Democratic majority in Congress proves this. The way in which the United States deals with the Iranian danger, through more effective diplomacy and/or implementing the military option, mainly depends on Washington. The president can also decide on his own to launch an aerial attack on Iran, as opposed to a land-based invasion. It seems, then, perhaps more than in other elections, that the particular Democrat or Republican who will enter the White House will to a large extent shape the future of the Middle East.
A Conflict the Next U.S. President Can't Ignore
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387125.aspx
CBNNews.com - JERUSALEM, Israel -Al Qaeda's number two leader is calling on Muslims to wage a holy war war over the Gaza Strip.
He says Muslims must break Israel's economic blockade of Gaza. It's another example of the turmoil in the Middle East that promises to command the next U.S. President's attention.
With Americans embroiled in a high stakes election, events in the Middle East have taken a back seat for both candidates and voters. But the turmoil there promises to command the next President's attention, long after the votes are counted in November.
Judging by the polls and the campaign rhetoric, it seems that at least half of America doesn't believe the nation is at war.
Nearly seven years ago, in the aftermath of 9/11, President Bush vowed to go after terrorists and the nations that sponsor them. However, in his latest state of the union speech, he didn't even name the enemy: radical Islamists.
While Iraq remains the top U.S. foreign policy issue, radical Islamists who see America as their enemy are on the move throughout the region.
In Iran, which may be about to go nuclear, the mullahs fund terrorists around the world.
In Lebanon, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah dominates the political scene, while its Syrian partners kill off the opposition.
Islamic State
Since the 2006 second Lebanon War, Hezbollah has more than rebuilt its arsenal of rockets aimed at Israel, America's closest Middle East ally.
In the Gaza Strip, Hamas has created its own Islamist mini state with smuggled weapons and upgraded rockets to threaten Israel on another front.
And the recent breach of the Gaza-Egyptian border could allow Hamas to strengthen its ties to the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt.
This campaign season, war-weary American voters may not want to hear about a prolonged conflict with the terrorists, and the candidates may not want to talk about it. But the next President will certainly have to deal with it.
Report: Ahmadinejad Tells Japan to ‘Prepare for a World Without the U.S.’
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363498,00.html
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Japan’s prime minister Thursday that the world will soon not include the United States, Iranian news agency IRNA reported.
"The U.S. domination is on the fall. Iran and Japan as two civilized and influential nations should get ready for a world minus the U.S.," Ahmadinejad told Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda on the sidelines of the U.N. food summit in Rome on Tuesday, IRNA reported.
The hard-line leader called for Japan’s cooperation in finding their historical and true status, IRNA reported.
"No body or power can wipe Iran off the world scene and Iranian nation of course can well manage its affairs under such an atmosphere," he said.
Also on Thursday, Iran accused the U.S. of pressuring the U.N.'s nuclear agency to base its latest investigation of Tehran's nuclear activities on fake evidence suggesting that Iran had a secret weapons program.
Ahmadinejad is currently at odds with Iran's new reformist parliament due to growing social and economic unrest.
In addition, the Iranian president is under fire worldwide for his comments on the destruction of Israel, his "suspicions" of the Sept. 11 terror attacks and his belief that homosexuals deserve to be executed, tortured or both.
Gates Ousts Air Force Leaders
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387613.aspx
CBNNews.com - WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates ousted the Air Force's top military and civilian leaders Thursday, holding them to account in a historic Pentagon shake-up after embarrassing nuclear mix-ups.
Gates announced at a news conference that he had accepted the resignations of Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne - a highly unusual double firing.
Gates said his decision was based mainly on the damning conclusions of an internal report on the mistaken shipment to Taiwan of four Air Force electrical fuses for ballistic missile warheads. And he linked the underlying causes of that slip-up to another startling incident: the flight last August of a B-52 bomber that was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.
The report drew the stunning conclusion that the Air Force's nuclear standards have been in a long decline, a "problem that has been identified but not effectively addressed for over a decade."
Gates said an internal investigation found a common theme in the B-52 and Taiwan incidents: "a decline in the Air Force's nuclear mission focus and performance" and a failure by Air Force leaders to respond effectively.
In a reflection of his concern about the state of nuclear security, Gates said he had asked a former defense secretary, James Schlesinger, to lead a task force that will recommend ways to ensure that the highest levels of accountability and control are maintained in Air Force handling of nuclear weapons.
In somber tones, Gates told reporters his decision to remove Wynne and Moseley was based on the findings of an investigation of the Taiwan debacle by Adm. Kirkland Donald. The admiral found a "lack of a critical self-assessment culture" in the Air Force, making it unlikely that weaknesses in the way critical materials such as nuclear weapons are handled could be corrected, Gates said.
Gates said Donald concluded that many of the problems that led to the B-52 and the Taiwan sale incidents "have been known or should have been known."
The Donald report is classified; Gates provided an oral summary.
"The Taiwan incident clearly was the trigger," Gates said when asked whether Moseley and Wynne would have retained their positions in the absence of the mistaken shipment of fuses. He also said that Donald found a "lack of effective Air Force leadership oversight" of its nuclear mission.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said President Bush knew about the resignations but that the White House had "not played any role" in the shake-up.
Early reaction from Capitol Hill was favorable to drastic action.
"Secretary Gates' focus on accountability is essential and had been absent from the office of the secretary of defense for too long," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "The safety and security of America' nuclear weapons must receive the highest priority, just as it must in other countries."
Gates said he would make recommendations to Bush shortly on a new Air Force chief of staff and civilian secretary. Gates has settled on candidates for both jobs but has not yet formally recommended them, one official said.
Gen. Duncan J. McNabb is the current Air Force vice chief of staff.
Moseley, who commanded coalition air forces during the initial invasion of Iraq in March 2003, became Air Force chief in September 2005; Wynne, a former General Dynamics executive, took office in November 2005.
Wynne is the second civilian chief of a military service to be forced out by Gates. In March 2007 the defense secretary pushed out Francis Harvey, the Army secretary, because Gates was dissatisfied with Harvey's handling of revelations of inadequate housing conditions and bureaucratic delays for troops recovering from war wounds at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
Wynne and Moseley issued their own written statements.
"As the Air Force's senior uniformed leader, I take full responsibility for events which have hurt the Air Force's reputation or raised a question of every airman's commitment to our core values," Moseley said.
Wynne said he "read with regret" the findings of the Donald report.
Congress Sends Farm Bill to Bush...Again
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387660.aspx
CBNNews.com - WASHINGTON - Congress on Thursday sent a $290 billion farm bill to President Bush for a second time in an effort to fix a printing error that has threatened the delivery of U.S. food aid abroad.
To ensure that the aid continues amid a global hunger crisis, Congress and Bush were planning to again pass, veto and enact the bill to provide farm subsidies, food stamps and other nutrition programs over the next five years.
The Senate passed the bill 77-15, two weeks after the discovery that 34 pages of the legislation extending those aid programs were missing from the parchment copy that Congress sent the White House. Bush vetoed that version and the House and Senate then enacted it with two-thirds majority votes overriding the veto.
All of it became law, except for the section dealing with international food aid. The House voted to pass the entire bill again, and Thursday's Senate action will send it to Bush for what the White House says will be a second veto.
Once that occurs, Congress plans to again override the veto. Then international food aid programs will join the rest of the package as law.
The White House is calling it "Farm Bill II: The Sequel."
"As we find in the movies, generally sequels aren't any better than the original," said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel, who confirmed that Bush will again veto the legislation "once they check to make sure it is complete this time."
Bush claims the legislation, which extends agriculture and nutrition programs, is too expensive and too generous with subsidies for farmers who are enjoying record-high prices and incomes. He opposed the legislation from the start and began threatening last July to veto it.
A bipartisan group of negotiators made small cuts to subsidies in an effort to appease the White House, but Bush said they weren't enough. Republicans in the House and Senate determined to get bigger subsidies for farmers and more food aid to the poor before November's election then abandoned the president in large numbers.
A Senate vote on the redo was delayed most of this week by objections from two of the bill's Republican opponents, Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina.
Administration officials said Wednesday that further delay in getting the international food aid into law could delay shipments of U.S. aid to developing countries with rising rates of starvation.
"If by this time next week we don't have a bill, then we are going to start to see real problems," said Stephen Driesler, deputy assistant administrator for legislative and public affairs for the U.S. Agency for International Development.
About two-thirds of the farm law pays for domestic nutrition programs such as food stamps, which will see increases of around $1 billion a year. About $40 billion is for farm subsidies, and almost $30 billion will go to farmers to idle their land and for other environmental programs.
The law enacted two weeks ago also:
-Increases subsidies for some crops and provide more dollars for growers of fresh fruits and vegetables.
-Extends and expands dairy programs.
-Increases loan rates for sugar producers.
-Cuts a per-gallon ethanol tax credit for refiners from 51 cents to 45 cents. The credit supports the blending of fuel with the corn-based additive. More money will go to cellulosic ethanol, made from plant matter.
-Requires that meats and other fresh foods carry labels with their country of origin.
Foreclosures Set Record Highs
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387418.aspx
CBNNews.com - WASHINGTON - Home foreclosures and late payments set records over the first three months of the year and are expected to keep rising, stark signs of the housing crisis' mounting damage to homeowners and the economy.
The latest snapshot of the mortgage market, released Thursday, showed that the proportion of mortgages that fell into foreclosure soared to 0.99 percent in the January-through-March period. That surpassed the previous high of 0.83 percent over the last three months in 2007.
Delinquent Payments Increase
The report by the Mortgage Bankers Association also found that more homeowners slipped behind on their monthly payments.
The delinquency rate jumped to 6.35 percent in the first quarter, compared with 5.82 percent for the three months earlier. Payments are considered delinquent if they are 30 or more days past due.
Both the rate of new foreclosures and late payments were the highest on record going back to 1979.
Jay Brinkmann, the association's vice president of research and economics, told The Associated Press that the slump in house prices was the biggest factor for rising foreclosures and late payments.
With prices expected to keep dropping, foreclosures and late payments "are going to continue to go up" in the months ahead, he said.
Homeowners with tarnished credit who have subprime adjustable-rate loans took the hardest hits. Foreclosures and late payments for these borrowers also swelled to all-time highs in the first quarter.
The percentage of subprime adjustable-rate mortgages that started the foreclosure process climbed to 6.35 percent. The rate was 5.29 percent in fourth quarter, the previous high. Late payments rose to 22.07 percent from 20.02 percent, the previous high.
The association's survey covers just over 45 million home loans.
More Problems Arise
More problems also cropped up with loans to more creditworthy borrowers.
The percentage of such loans falling into foreclosure was 0.54 percent, compared with 0.41 percent at the end of last year. Late payment rose to 3.71 percent, compared with 3.24 percent.
The numbers were higher for prime borrowers with adjustable rate mortgages. The proportion of those loans falling into foreclosures jumped to 1.55 percent from 1.06 percent. The delinquency rate rose to 6.78 percent, compared with 5.51 percent.
"The number one problem is the drop in home prices," Brinkmann said. Declining prices, especially in newer built areas, "are hurting people's ability to recover when they run into trouble - a divorce or loss of job," he said. "In other days, you could sell the home. But because home prices have fallen so much, in many of those cases, the homes are going into foreclosure."
California, Florida, Nevada and Arizona accounted for 89 percent of the total increase in new home foreclosures, he said. Those are places where prices have fallen sharply and there was a lot of home building, creating too much supply, Brinkmann said.
Deep Slump
After a five-year boom, the housing market fell into a deep slump two years ago. That dragged down sales, and prices with it. As the value of homes plummeted, many newer homeowners found themselves owing more on their mortgages than their homes were worth.
Homeowners with adjustable-rate mortgages were clobbered when their initially low rates reset to much higher ones. That made it difficult, if not impossible, to keep up with monthly mortgage payments.
As foreclosures and late payments climbed, financial companies took multibillion losses when their investments in mortgage-backed securities soured. A credit crisis erupted and spread, crimping other types of financing. The fallout plunged Wall Street in turmoil, disrupting the normal functioning of markets.
Brink of a Recession?
All those troubles have pushed the economy to the brink of a recession, if the country isn't already in one. Consumers and business have tightened their spending. Employers have cut more than a quarter-million jobs in the first four months of this year.
To bolster the economy, the Federal Reserve made aggressive interest rate cuts. That has helped homeowners facing rate resets on their adjustable-rate mortgages. But with inflation on the rise, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke this week sent his strongest signal yet that the central bank's rate-cutting campaign started that started in September is coming to an end.
Helping Homeowners
The Bush administration has taken steps to help distressed homeowners. It has urged lenders to freeze rates for some homeowners and encouraged lenders to rework mortgage terms so troubled borrowers can stay in their homes.
A congressional plan that includes a foreclosure prevention program has stalled as lawmakers figure out how to pay for it.
The government would back as much as $300 billion in new loans to help certain borrowers refinance into cheaper, fixed-rate loans. Mortgage holders would have to agree to take a substantial loss on the existing loans; borrowers would have to show they could afford the new mortgage and share future proceeds with the government.
The House passed its version last month. Senate leaders say they want to vote by July.
Groups representing builders and real estate agents want incentives, such as a $7,500 temporary tax credit for first-time home buyers, to support the market.
"Policies that stimulate home purchases in the immediate future can pay huge dividends and a temporary home buyer tax credit provides the most bang for the buck," Joe Robson, a home builder from Tulsa, Okla., said in prepared remarks at a House hearing.
Ralph Reed: Turning Beliefs into Votes
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387160.aspx
CBNNews.com - At the age of 33, Ralph Reed made the cover of Time Magazine. He was nationally renowned for his grass-roots organizing and political strategy. Thirteen years later, Reed continues to play an active role in national campaigns.
Political pundits became enanmoured with the concept of "values voters" in the 2004 election. However in the early 1990's, Reed had spotted their potential and had already figured out how to engage them politically.
Tour de Force
In 1989, Pat Robertson asked Reed, a former national leader of the College Republicans, to head the Christian Coalition. Reed explained his vision at the time. "If you can unite the pro-family Roman Catholic and the evangelicals at the ballot box you see victory from one end of the country to the other" he said.
Many credit Reed's political strategy as the key to helping Republicans take over Congress in 1994. In 1995, at perhaps the height of his power, Time Magazine again featured Reed on its cover with the title "The Right Hand of God."
Reed left the coalition in 1997, but has continued to be a prominent advisor to many national campaigns.
In 2006, he decided to run for the job of Georgia's lieutenant governor. But Reed's ties to lobbyist Jack Abramoff clouded his primary hopes and he lost to conservative state senator Casey Cagle.
Today, Reed is taking his political expertise to a new arena. He's the author of the newly published political thriller "Dark Horse."
Governor Forces 'Gay Marriage' Rulings of CA and MA Judges on the People of New York State
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07264.shtml
WASHINGTON, (christiansunite.com) -- The Alliance for Marriage called upon Congress to pass AFM's Marriage Protection Amendment in response to New York Governor David Patterson's stunning directive ordering New York State to recognize "same-sex marriages" performed in California, Massachusetts, and Canada.
"By executive fiat, New York has become the second state in two weeks to overturn both common sense and the Will of the People on the definition of marriage," said Matt Daniels, president and founder of the Alliance for Marriage. "Today's directive from Governor Patterson illustrates the need for the Marriage Protection Amendment drafted by AFM."
"The anti-democratic fallout of the California Supreme Court decision striking down marriage is not unexpected, and will only continue to crash down upon other states nationwide," said Daniels. "AFM has led the charge in Congress for federal protection of marriage as the only way to prevent the decisions of judges in California and elsewhere being forced on residents of other states."
"Most Americans - and most New Yorkers - want our laws to send a positive message to kids about marriage, family and their future. Today is a sad day for the people of New York who have lost the right to choose the course that is best for them, their families and their children," continued Daniels.
"Americans believe that gays and lesbians are free to live as they choose, but they don't believe they have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society," said Daniels. "But the common-sense definition of marriage - and the values of most Americans - cannot be protected apart from AFM's Marriage Protection Amendment."
The Alliance for Marriage is a non-partisan, multicultural coalition whose Board of Advisors includes Rev. Walter Fauntroy -- the former DC Delegate who organized the March on Washington for Martin Luther King Jr. -- as well as other civil rights and religious leaders, and national legal experts. www.afmusa.org
New York Governor Passes Over Citizens, Legislative Process in Latest Marriage Ruling
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07263.shtml
WASHINGTON, (christiansunite.com) -- A spokesperson for the Governor of New York has announced that same-sex marriages performed elsewhere will be recognized in New York in response to a New York state court ruling this year. The decision, Martinez v. County of Monroe, involved the case of a woman whose employer declined to offer benefits to her female partner even though she had been married abroad.
Gay marriage is not legal in New York and the recent ruling by the state's highest court said that same-sex marriages could only be legalized by the Legislature. Nonetheless, the ruling also said that nothing in New York law impeded the recognition of a same-sex marriage performed outside of New York.
Massachusetts, the only state to allow same-sex marriage, does not allow non-residents to marry. As a result, only California with its recent narrow court decision to legalize same-sex marriage could marry New York residents that sought such unions. However, even if California's court chooses to stay its decision for a time, same-sex marriages solemnized in Canada and other countries would be recognized in New York.
The Rev. James Tonkowich, IRD President, commented:
"Traditional marriage is being dealt yet another blow, and once again it is not coming from either the legislative process or through an initiative of the people. Rather, brazen judicial activism is telling the people what they should believe.
"It is absurd that not only will New York now be forced to recognize same-sex marriages from another state that it will not authorize itself, but it will also be forced to recognize such unions from other countries. This is a political cop-out that bypasses the will of the people in New York and the United States.
"The crisis over the definition of marriage is just another symptom of judicial activism run amok."
'Not One Shred of Evidence' That Tiller Party was Auction Prize
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07262.shtml
WICHITA, Kansas, (christiansunite.com) -- Operation Rescue has researched Gov. Kathleen Sebelius's claims that the April 9, 2007, dinner with late-term abortionist George R. Tiller and his abortion clinic staff was an auction prize to which she had no control over who would be the winner. OR has concluded that her claims are not supported by documentation.
"There is not one shred of evidence to support Gov. Sebelius's claims. Therefore, we stand by our statements that this was a special invitation event meant to honor Tiller and his abortion clinic staff at a time when there were open criminal investigations and serious concerns posed by the Legislature that Tiller had committed crimes," said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "We have no choice but to believe that Gov. Sebelius manufactured this story, just as her friends Planned Parenthood manufactured evidence in their criminal proceedings."
If Gov. Sebelius' story were to be true, the dinner prize that Tiller supposedly bid on would have been auctioned by the Greater Kansas City Women's Political Caucus in at the Torch Dinner in 2006, because their 2007 auction event was held in November, 2007, well after the Tiller party.
According to the Greater Kansas City Women's Political Caucus Political Action Committee expenditure reports on file with the Kansas Governmental Ethic Commission, auction receipts benefited the PAC, yet there is no evidence of any contribution from George Tiller, his wife, Jeanne, or his abortion clinic Women's Health Care Services in 2006 or 2007.
OR received a receipt that shows that the State of Kansas paid for the April 9, 2007, dinner with George Tiller.
Sebelius made statements in the media yesterday that because it was a political event, the costs were reimbursed by the GKC Women's Political Caucus.
However, there is no documented reimbursement from the GKC Women's Political Caucus to the State of Kansas for anything in either 2006 or 2007, according to their PAC reports, nor was any evidence of that reimbursement provided to Operation Rescue by the Governor's Office in response to their Open Records request for that information.
"There is absolutely no evidence beyond the word of Kathleen Sebelius that the Tiller party was the prize in an auctioned event, therefore, until such evidence is provided, we must conclude that Gov. Sebelius has lied about this event to cover up for her connections with Tiller," said Newman. "This is more that poor judgment. It is political corruption."
About Operation Rescue
Operation Rescue is one of the leading pro-life Christian activist organizations in the nation. Operation Rescue recently made headlines when it bought and closed an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas and has become the voice of the pro-life activist movement in America. Its activities are on the cutting edge of the abortion issue, taking direct action to restore legal personhood to the pre-born and stop abortion in obedience to biblical mandates.
Native Americans: A Forgotten People?
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/337439.aspx
CBNNews.com - CROW CREEK SIOUX RESERVATION, S.D. -- In a nation known for its wealth, there are pockets of intense poverty and despair that many Americans know nothing about.
These pockets do not exist in the inner city, but on remote reservations where Native Americans struggle to survive.
CBN News traveled to the Crow Creek Sioux reservation in South Dakota for a closer look at what some call America's forgotten people.
Defending Against Invaders
A fence of rusted barbed wire cutting across the open landscape is a symbol of a people continually dealing with invaders.
In centuries past, American Indians faced the invasion of other cultures that forced their removal from the fertile lands of their ancestors.
Promises were made by the invaders, which resulted in broken treaties. As a result, many Native American tribes were moved to reservations to isolate them, control them and to make them more "civilized" in the eyes of the conquerors.
The isolation still exists today.
Tribes continue to battle against destructive forces. Forces like poverty, substance abuse and suicide to name a few, continually strike this segment of the population to a greater degree than most other Americans.
High Suicide Rate
Norm Thompson is a member of the Crow Creek Sioux tribe who lives on the reservation.
"I thought I was all alone and I tried committing suicide," he told CBN News. "And the person that found me was my oldest daughter."
Addicted to drugs and alcohol, Thompson blames life on the reservation without the proper guidance for the desperate situation in which he found himself. Tragically, his story is all too common.
According to the Indian Health Service, the suicide rate for Native Americans is 60 percent higher than the general population. On the Crow Creek Sioux reservation, the suicide rate was at one time seven times higher than the national average.
Poverty and Despair
Like Thompson, Sandy Gabe was also an alcoholic. He says substance abuse is a big problem with many Native Americans using their government assistance checks to feed their habits, instead of their families.
"It's the first thing they do," he explained. "It's drugs and alcohol. Later on, maybe it's some groceries. Maybe they feed their kids. Their priorities are all wrong."
CBN News asked reservation resident Shane Crazy Bull what he had encountered and had seen among his fellow tribesmen. "Weed, chewing, drinking, meth," he replied.
So what is behind all this despair?
Experts say there are many factors, such as the historical mistreatment of Native Americans, including forced cultural changes. Living conditions on the reservations are the same as you would find in third world countries. Many of the people's homes do not have indoor plumbing and electricity.
CBN News examined the living conditions on the reservation. Many of the houses were in poor condition. When we first approached one home, you could see the broken glass in the windows, the makeshift plywood entryway, and the ground was littered with beer cans and other trash.
The U.S. Census Bureau reports about one of every four American Indians lives below the poverty level.
The Crow Creek Sioux reservation lies in Buffalo County. Its per capita income of just a little more than $5,000 a year makes it the poorest county in the country.
On some reservations, unemployment runs as high as 80 percent. Compare that statistic to less than five percent for the U.S. as a whole.
"The children and the adults all try to cope with what they have," reservation resident Gracie Pomani told CBN News. "It is hard out here, because a lot of them don't have the heat for their houses or the wood for their stoves."
A Manmade Tragedy?
So how could this happen to a people so revered in American history for their courage and self-sufficiency?
Many say this tragedy is manmade -- the result of a welfare state spiraling out of control where self-respect, hard work and hope have been replaced with handouts.
Rod Vaughn founded the Christian non-profit organization, Diamond Willow Ministries, to reach out to Native Americans on the Crow Creek Sioux reservation.
"To me it's a train wreck," he said. "When you have reliance on a federal government with a shrieking deficit for your health care, for your housing -- for everything, and you really don't have much of a political voice," he explained. "So when there's cuts, the cuts seem to be deeper here. It is a real critical situation."
Vaughn says people living on the reservation feel like the U.S. government has forgotten them.
"They do. May be not even so much forgotten, but that they just have been able to kind of push them off to the side," Vaughn said.
A Warrior Culture Continues
Still, in spite of the exclusion, American Indians are intensely loyal. Since the September 11 attacks on America, a record number have enlisted in the U.S. Army every year. They have also served at higher rates in the entire U.S. military than any other ethnic group.
"It's kind of like a warrior culture that's passed on to generations," Gabe said.
But sadly, Native Americans appear to be losing the battle at home.
Diamond Willow Ministries works to change that by helping with the physical needs like food and clothing and helping to break addictions, including the dependence on welfare, by sharing the love of Jesus Christ.
"Pray that the barriers, the generational sin, the darkness can be broken," Vaughn told CBN News. "Prayer is so powerful."
"All they have to do is reach out their hand like I did," Gabe said. "God took my hand and gave me something, and I'm glad of that."
It is the gift of a new life in Christ. A gift that can heal a shattered people and cause them to soar on eagle's wings with a new hope.
Soles4Souls(TM) Inc., the Shoe Charity, Opens New Warehouse in Tennessee
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07261.shtml
NASHVILLE, (christiansunite.com) -- Soles4Souls Inc., the international charity dedicated to providing free footwear to those in desperate need, announced today that it has opened another warehouse in Old Hickory, Tennessee (a suburb of Nashville), to give more options to its supporters on where to send shoe donations.
"As our charity expands, we need to give our supporters more options to keep the shipping costs down," said Wayne Elsey, Founder and CEO of Soles4Souls Inc. "Our new warehouse in Old Hickory, Tennessee, is the fourth Soles4Souls facility in the United States, and will serve donors in the Central and Upper Midwest regions of the country," he said.
Shoes donated to Soles4Souls are sorted, cleaned, and packaged in the warehouses before being shrinkwrapped and loaded onto pallets. From there, the shoes are sent to partner organizations in the United States and in over 60 countries around the world to help put shoes on the feet of needy people. The shoe charity, based in Nashville, has donated more than 3.2 million pairs of shoes to victims of natural disasters and those living in abject poverty since its inception in October 2006.
Soles4Souls also recently launched a new website to simplify its message and help draw more traffic that explains the charity's programs. "The website is a vital information tool and we wanted to clearly communicate our mission through videos, personalized stories, rich images and easy opportunities for everyone to get directly involved," said Elsey. "We have created an easy-to-use Participation Location tool that shows all the local drop-off points where our web visitors can go to donate their shoes," he said.
The Participation Location program works very well for retailers, explained Elsey, as stores who are participating benefit from the increased walk-in traffic and greater visibility in their community as a partner in charitable causes. Retailers interested in signing up for the program can find the sign-up forms on the charity's website, at www.giveshoes.org.
About Soles4Souls
Nashville-based Soles4Souls facilitates the donations of footwear, which are used to aid the hurting worldwide. Soles4Souls has donated more than 3 million pairs of shoes since its inception (one pair of shoes every 28 seconds). The charity was recently featured on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. Shoe companies, retailers, and individuals can donate both new and "gently worn" footwear. Soles4Souls is a 501(c)(3) recognized by the IRS; donating parties are eligible for tax advantages. For more information about Soles4Souls, please call (866) 521-SHOE, or visit www.giveshoes.org.
Web Site Offers to Send Post-Rapture E-Mails to Friends 'Left Behind'
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363471,00.html
A new Web site is offering a miraculous service — e-mails sent to loved ones left behind on Earth after you've been swept up to heaven in the Rapture.
YouveBeenLeftBehind.com promises to alert up to 62 people exactly six days after the event that, according to the Bible, signals the beginning of Armageddon, Wired magazine's Threat Level reports.
"You've Been Left Behind gives you one last opportunity to reach your lost family and friends for Christ," the site promoting the service says.
Final e-mails from vanished subscribers will be triggered when three of the site's five Christian staffers fail to log in for six days in a row.
The site, the brainchild of Mark Heard, charges $40 a year for the service, which also includes 150 megabytes of encrypted storage space, recommended for financial information, Threat Level reports.
"In the encrypted portion of your account you can give them access to your banking, brokerage, hidden valuables and powers of attorneys," the site says.
"There won't be any bodies, so probate court will take seven years to clear your assets to your next of kin. Seven years, of course, is all the time that will be left," it explains. "So, basically the Government of the Antichrist gets your stuff, unless you make it available in another way."
According to Christian theology, after the Rapture, Satan will rule a global government that will torment doubters with seven years of Tribulation.
Heard told Threat Level that he already has paying subscribers.
Greece's first gay weddings defy church, state
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/greeces.first.gay.weddings.defy.church.state/19293.htm
Greece's first gay weddings were held on Tuesday when two couples, abetted by a sympathetic local mayor, defied the threat of criminal charges and the wrath of the Orthodox Church to tie the knot on a tiny Aegean island.
One gay and one lesbian couple took advantage of the failure of Greek civil law to specify gender in matrimony and took vows at municipal offices on the southeast Aegean island of Tilos.
"We are very moved and happy that we found someone to make our dream come true," said Evangelia Vlami, one of the newlyweds and spokeswoman for Greece's Gay and Lesbian Community (OLKE). "I am proud to be the first Greek lesbian to get married".
A Greek Orthodox priest described their homosexuality as a curse and the mayor of a neighbouring island said the sight of same-sex couples would upset "good families" on their holidays.
Vlami told Reuters her wedding took place early in the morning and two gay men followed soon after. Details had been kept under wraps until all official documentation was signed for fear the ceremonies might have been disrupted.
The weddings were held only a few days after a senior Greek prosecutor said the mayor of Tilos would face criminal charges if he officiated; but the mayor, Tassos Aliferis, told Reuters he was determined to defend what he saw as basic human rights.
The Justice Ministry said the marriages were illegal, as laws referred only to heterosexual couples, and all involved would face charges.
"There is no legal framework allowing homosexual marriages in Greece," Justice Minister Sotiris Hatzigakis said in a statement. "Attempts to perform civil ceremonies among gay couples are illegal and such 'marriages' void".
CHURCH OPPOSITION
But OLKE said it hoped the weddings would help change attitudes towards homosexuals in Greece, which has long preferred to turn a blind eye to homosexuality rather than acknowledge gay rights.
"This is terrible," the mayor of the neighbouring island of Rhodes, Hatzis Hatziefthimiou, told Ant1 TV. "We have good families coming here for holidays, we can't have them coming to our beaches and seeing these kind of couples."
While many European Union countries have established legislation allowing gay marriage or "registered partnership" rights to same-sex couples, neither are allowed in Greece.
The Netherlands was the first EU country to offer full civil marriage rights to gay couples in 2001 and Belgium followed in 2003. Spain legalised gay marriage in 2005, despite fierce opposition from the Roman Catholic Church.
Tuesday's weddings drew immediate fire from the Orthodox church, which strongly opposes homosexuality.
"Homosexuality is a curse, a deadly sin, it goes against psychological and biological normality," Father Stylianos Karpathiou told state NET TV.
U.N. Summit: Corn on Table or in Tank?
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387186.aspx
CBNNews.com - WASHINGTON - Today a special U.N. summit convenes in Italy to decide just what can be done to stop the rapid increase in the price of food.
Should crops like corn be used for food - or fuel? The debate comes as prices have gone up 83 percent in the last three years.
An Uneasy Meeting of the Minds
Beyond agreeing on the need to combat the global food crisis, consensus at the food summit has not come easy.
With protests and riots over food shortages and price increases, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon is urging the world to boost food production by 50 percent over the next 20 years.
"This is a fight we cannot afford to lose. The enemy is hunger. Hunger degrades everything we have been fighting for in recent years and decades," Ban said.
But that's easier said than done, especially when it comes to identifying the cause of the problem.
Is the Biofuel Craze to Blame?
Critics quickly turned their focus on the use of biofuels like ethanol, arguing the rush to use alternative sources of energy has caused a shortage of food.
The U.S. defends its use of corn-based ethanol, insisting that the impact on price spikes is only between 2-3 percent.
But analysts say there are other factors too, including rising fuel costs, price speculation in the markets, and recent droughts and floods which cut back on the production of food- and made it more expensive.
Meanwhile, here in America, people are complaining about the food crisis as well: from price spikes on everything from milk, eggs and bread - to a rising demand at food banks.
Program directors for meals on wheels say they're seeing a sharp increase in the number of seniors applying for assistance.
"With the food going up like it is, a lot of our seniors are not eating food as they should. They're getting medicine. They're taking medicine with it," the Senior Center's Gail Adams said.
What the Fed Has to Say
Despite worry over the rising costs of commodities like food and oil, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke doubts that the country is in for a repeat of a 1970s-style inflation.
"Then as now, we were facing a serious oil price shock, sharply rising prices for food and other commodities and sub-par today's situation differs from that of 33 years ago, in large part because our economy and society have become much more flexible," Bernanke said.
The problem is, a growing number of Americans feel they don't have much financial flexibility when it comes to paying for today's increased cost of living.
Al-Qaeda Claims Danish Embassy Blast
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387065.aspx
CBNNews.com - ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Denmark shared video footage with Pakistani investigators of the suicide car bombing against its embassy Thursday, while an Internet posting purportedly by al-Qaeda claimed responsibility and threatened more attacks.
The statement, signed by an al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan, said Monday's attack in Islamabad was carried out to fulfill the promise of Osama bin Laden to exact revenge over the reprinting in Danish papers of a cartoon of Islam's Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
Bomb Kills Six
The attack killed six people, including a Danish citizen. It caused widespread destruction and demonstrated the vulnerability of the Pakistani capital to attack by Islamic terrorists.
The authenticity of the statement, which was posted on a Web site frequently used by Islamic terrorists, could not be independently verified. It was signed by al-Qaeda commander Mustafa Abu al-Yazeed and dated Tuesday.
Monday's Attack 'only the first drop of rain'
Al-Yazeed warned that if Denmark fails to apologize for the cartoons more attacks will follow and Monday's blast will "only be the first drop of rain."
The attack is but a "warning to this infidel nation and whoever follows its example." Denmark "published the insulting drawings" and later "refused to apologize for publishing them, instead they repeated their act," the posting said.
It said the bombing was carried out by an al-Qaeda martyr whose last will and testament will soon be made public and thanked Pakistani jihadists for helping prepare and execute the plot.
Demark Officials Suspected al-Qaeda
Denmark officials have already said they suspect al-Qaeda was behind the attack. Pakistani officials were not immediately available to comment on the purported al-Qaeda claim of responsibility.
Ben Venzke of IntelCenter, a US group that monitors al-Qaeda messages, said al-Qaeda could target embassies and diplomatic personnel, possibly in Pakistan, from other countries where the cartoons also were published.
Venzke said Norway, the US and all European Union member countries, including Denmark, were most at risk.
Suicide Bombings in Response to Muhammad Cartoons
In early 2006, a dozen Muhammad cartoons, originally published in a Danish newspaper, triggered fiery protests in Muslim countries when they were reprinted by a range of Western media, mostly in Europe.
The drawing showing Muhammad in a bomb-shaped turban appeared again in Danish newspapers February 13, after Danish police said they foiled an alleged plot to murder the cartoonist who drew it.
That has sparked more, mostly peaceful, protests by Muslims. Islamic law generally opposes any depiction of the prophet, even favorable, for fear it could lead to idolatry.
Monday's Attack Deadliest to Date
Monday's attack was the deadliest strike against Denmark since the publication of the cartoons. A 10-member Danish crisis management team is now in Pakistan to help probe the bombing and assess security for the Danish diplomatic mission in the leafy capital.
Spokeswoman Louise Brincker said the Danes have shared footage from a close circuit camera with Pakistani investigators, which shows the car used in the bombing arriving outside the embassy and exploding.
She said it is not possible to see the registration plates of the vehicle from the footage because of the camera angle.
Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller said Wednesday that the video also doesn't show who was inside the car.
Pakistani investigators have said the car was stolen and equipped with fake diplomatic plates to help gain access to the street, which is not barred to the general public but had high security.
'Major and Long-term Planning'
Denmark's Intelligence and Security Service said Wednesday that preliminary information about the car indicated "major and long-term planning."
Al-Qaeda is believed to have regrouped inside Pakistan's lawless border regions since the US-led invasion that ousted their Taliban hosts in Afghanistan in 2001.
Pakistan's newly elected government is negotiating peace deals with terrorists along the Afghan border in an attempt to curb Islamic extremist violence inside Pakistan, but U.S. officials in particular are worried this will give terrorists greater freedom to attack Afghanistan and the West.
Also on Thursday, Pakistani police raided a suspected terrorist hideout in the northwestern city of Nowshera, triggering a shootout that wounded one police driver and one militant.
Local police chief Akhtar Ali Shah said an unspecified number of gunmen later managed to flee when police halted fire to avoid civilian casualties.
Lisbon Treaty at the heart of reports on CFSP and ESDP
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/expert/infopress_page/030-30972-156-06-23-903-20080605IPR30971-04-06-2008-2008-true/default_en.htm
The impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and its European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) was at the core of two reports voted in the European Parliament on Thursday (5 June). While pointing to the increased effectiveness the new Treaty could give to the EU's foreign policy, the reports also pointed to the need for increased parliamentary scrutiny and democratic legitimacy of these policies.
The own-initiative report by Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (EPP-ED, PL) on the Council's 2006 Annual Report on CFSP points out that "the future office of High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission will derive its legitimacy directly from the European Parliament." It also stresses the need for "transparency and democratic input" into the process of setting up the planned European External Action Service (EEAS), and calls for a mechanism to be set up to provide confidential information to select Foreign Affairs Committee Members. Finally, it notes that "further efforts are needed in order to streamline the decision-making process as regards foreign policy with a view to overcoming the veto power and introducing qualified majority voting."
Energy security and the EU's neighbourhood high on the agenda
The report considers that "stability in the Western Balkans should be the top priority for the EU in 2008." It says the "dialogue with Serbia should be intensified" to take concrete steps, for example on visa liberalisation, and considers that the EU should "initiate appropriate processes in order to avoid Serbia's isolation." MEPs also said the "EULEX mission in Kosovo must safeguard the interests of national minorities," and voice their concern at the stalemate in transferring responsibilities from UNMIK to EULEX in Kosovo.
The report "is of the view that the importance of the foreign policy dimensions of energy security [...] will continue increasing," and calls for diversification of supply, increase in energy efficiency and EU solidarity, while also deploring "the uncoordinated signing of bilateral energy agreements by Member States." In addition, Members note that strengthening the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) should be a "main objective for 2008," especially in three key regional cooperation areas: the Mediterranean, the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea, the latter two of which should be "assured by finding new organisational structures for regional cooperation."
Russia and China
The House "considers the review in 2008 by the Union of its relations with Russia as very important," and asks Member States to "coordinate relations with the Russian Federation on the basis of the Union's common interests." The report recommends that "political and economic relations with China be deepened in 2008, on condition that substantial progress be made in the field of democracy and human rights, and that China heed the EU's grave concerns about its conduct in Tibet."
European Security Strategy and European Security and Defence Policy
Helmut Kuhne's (PES, DE) own-initiative report on the implementation of the European Security Strategy (ESS) and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) calls on the High Representative to "assess in a White Paper the progress made, and any shortcomings, in the implementation of the ESS since 2003," and to "include in that White Paper proposals for improving and complementing the ESS." The House adds that a future assessment of the ESS "has to be carried out with greater democratic accountability and therefore be made in close consultation" with the Parliament. Members also stressed the need to "have a European Parliament position available before an ESDP operation," to add democratic legitimacy to EU military operations.
Battle Groups, EUROCORPS, and a European Peace Corps
The report deplores the fact that partly due to "narrowly defined terms of deployment," the Battle Group concept has "not solved the force generation problem for concrete operations." It therefore calls for urgent clarification of the Battle Group concept. The House "proposes to place EUROCORPS as a standing force under EU command and invites all Member States to contribute to it." In addition, MEPs call on the Council and Commission to "establish an EU Civil Peace Corps for crisis management and conflict prevention." Finally, an idea to urge the Council to "examine options for the setting up of an integrated civil-military 'Human Security Response Force' to carry out human security operations" was voted down by a significant majority of MEPs (418-205-7).
Non-proliferation and weapons exports
The report reiterates the Parliament's long-standing position that it "finds it embarrassing that, despite the fact that the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports will celebrate its tenth anniversary in 2008, it is not yet legally binding, and uncontrolled arms exports from EU Member States seem to be continuing without much hindrance." Members also call for Europe to be made a "nuclear-weapon-free zone," and for a "global convention banning nuclear weapons." The House is also of the view that "the US plan to establish an anti-missile system in Europe at this time may hamper international disarmament efforts." With regard to the specific case of Iran, the report "reaffirms that the proliferation risks attaching to the Iranian nuclear programme remain a source of serious concern to the EU and the international community."
New Irish survey puts EU treaty opponents ahead
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080605/tpl-uk-eu-ireland-poll-43a8d4f.html
DUBLIN (Reuters) - Opponents of the European Union's reform treaty have overtaken the "Yes" camp for the first time ahead of Ireland's referendum on the pact next week, a new opinion poll showed on Thursday.
Ireland is the only state planning a referendum on the treaty meaning that a country accounting for less than 1 percent of the bloc's 490 million population could derail a pact designed to streamline the running of a fast-expanding EU.
A TNS/mrbi poll to be published in Friday's Irish Times showed 35 percent of people surveyed intend to vote "No" in the June 12 ballot, more than double the 17 percent seen in the newspaper's last survey three weeks ago.
The opinion poll, details of which appeared on the Irish Times Web site in advance of publication on Friday, showed those planning to vote in favour of the treaty stood at 30 percent, down from 35 percent in the previous poll.
The proportion of undecided voters was 28 percent while 7 percent said they would not vote, according to the survey of 1,000 voters conducted throughout Ireland.
Another opinion poll, conducted by Red C and published in the Sunday Business Post newspaper almost two weeks ago, had shown opponents of the treaty closing in, with support of 33 percent but still behind a "Yes" camp's 41 percent.
Ireland's three biggest political parties, congress of trade unions, farming lobby and business confederation all back the treaty but the government admits a lack of radical measures in the pact will make it hard to sell to voters.
They have resorted to appealing to the Irish people's largely pro-European instincts but they have also spent time rebutting the attacks by a loose but vocal "No" coalition rather than extolling the treaty's virtues.
Treaty opponents believe loopholes will mean Ireland loses control in areas such as tax, trade, abortion and military neutrality. The pro-treaty parties accuse them of scaremongering by exploiting emotive issues not affected by the treaty.
Call for Europe to double efforts in aid of ME peace process
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080605/local/call-for-europe-to-double-efforts-in-aid-of-me-peace-process
Palestine is ready for the historic peace process but it needs the help of the rest of the world for this to happen, Palestine's permanent observer to the United Nations insisted.
Referring to the 60th anniversary of the Palestinian exodus - called the Nakba - Riyad Mansour said this was the time for the peace process to come to fruition.
"If we do not exploit this historic moment, we will be giving a gift to extremists in our region who want to continue with war and destruction. If we delay it, we are going to kill more people, deepening wounds and resentment and then come back to the same conclusion that we have been discussing for the past years.
"There is no solution apart from allowing the Palestinian state to be born next to Israel," he told a press conference during the UN International Meeting On The Question Of Palestine at the Dolmen Hotel, Qawra.
"We are ready and we want to put an end to our tragedy by having peace and by allowing our state to be born."
Asked how far away he believed the peace process was, Mr Mansour replied: "It seems very dark, very complicated and very depressing but I don't think that it is very far away."
He said the fastest way to resolve the divisions among Palestinians would be by seeing results from the peace process, such as by freezing the settlements, dismantling posts, freeing prisoners, removing checkpoints from the West Bank and ending the siege in Gaza.
"Seeing positive results on these issues, which are obligations under the first phase of the roadmap, would help Palestine resolve its own internal situation in the fastest possible and democratic way. President (Mahmoud) Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayad are not magicians or miracle workers and if they cannot deliver the results of the peace process their people are not going to continue building hopes on abstract notions. Until this moment, our people support the peace process but this needs to deliver results. We cannot resolve our divisions unless people start seeing the peace process positively affecting their lives," he said.
He admitted that there was a lot of frustration given that, 60 years from the Nakba and 41 years since the occupation the peace process, had served very little for the Palestinians. But although experts were painting a gloomy picture, the Palestinians were "extremely stubborn and determined" not to give up their struggle.
"The fact that the settlements are swallowing one-third of the West Bank will not break our will or make us forget about having a Palestinian state. On the contrary, we are more stubborn than ever not to allow any obstacle to stand in the way of accomplishing peace based on justice, international law and the resolutions of the UN."
He called on European countries to double their efforts to have a successful peace process.
Mr Mansour reminded that the Palestinian and Israeli sides had started negotiations about final status issues following last November's conference in Annapolis.
The two-day meeting held in Malta, he said, brought together experts from around the world to brainstorm on how to deal with "thorny issues" like borders, settlements and refugees. This was important to create an atmosphere that would allow Palestinians and Israelis to reach the historic compromise. He said Malta was important because it was a bridge between European and Arab countries and between Europe and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The UN needed to continue fighting for justice for the Palestinian people and upholding international law.
Malta's permanent representative to the UN, Saviour Borg, said the Island was very active in issues relating to the question of Palestine, respecting the state of Israel but at the same time supporting activities to ensure that "hopefully in the near future we will have the state of Palestine".
Foreign Minister Tonio Borg on Tuesday stressed the importance that the state of Palestine "comes into being at the earliest opportunity".
Tony Blair returns to Parliament
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_re_eu/britain_blair
LONDON - Former Prime Minister Tony Blair said Thursday that U.S. President George W. Bush still has time to broker a peace deal in the Middle East.
Blair, who served as British leader for 10 years from 1997, is scheduled to give evidence on the Middle East peace process to the House of Commons International Development select committee. It is his first public appearance at Britain's Houses of Parliament since he stepped down in June.
Now the envoy to the Quartet of Middle East peacemakers, Blair insisted that Bush can help push through a peace deal before his term ends in January. That goal has drawn increasing skepticism, most recently from the lead Palestinian negotiator, who said Wednesday that it would take a miracle to achieve.
"I think the interesting thing about the American president is that he has got the power right up until the day he leaves," Blair told Britain's GMTV.
"If you remember the Northern Ireland peace process, it really finally came into being a month before I left. You can make this work at any time, provided you put enough energy and commitment into it."
Blair won rousing applause and even some tears from lawmakers as he made a final speech in the Commons chamber last June before handing over to successor Gordon Brown.
But he has been warned to expect few warm words from his ex-colleagues who sit on the committee, which has been critical of the Quartet's approach.
The Quartet — the U.S., Russia, the European Union and the United Nations — and the wider international community should engage with Hamas, the committee said in a report published last January.
Committee chairman Malcolm Bruce, an opposition Liberal Democrat lawmaker, said important questions on Blair's stance toward Hamas, humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip and freedom of movement in the West Bank will take precedence over renewing old acquaintances
"We want to be polite, but we don't want to be too matey," Bruce said. "We won't have time to waste on pleasantries."
The committee session will be the first occasion since his departure that Blair has spoken publicly at Parliament.
Blair's spokesman Matthew Doyle said the ex-leader returned for a private leaving party with Labour lawmakers last July and in April, to see the unveiling of his portrait.
Since Blair's departure, Brown has seen his opinion poll leads reversed, and his Labour Party suffered its worst showing in local elections in 40 years. He must call a national election by mid-2010.
"I said when I left I was going to be 100 percent supportive of Gordon and the government and that's what I continue to be, totally and completely, because I know it's a difficult job," Blair told GMTV.
But he acknowledged the global credit crisis and rising food and fuel prices had tested Brown.
"I'm sure he knew it was going to be tough, and it is tough — the difference between what I do now and what I did then, was that I can choose what to do ... when you're prime minister there's literally half a dozen things happen that you don't expect every day," he said.
Several Western aid agencies have expressed concerns about Blair's work as peace envoy, claiming he has done too little to address problems with access and free movement for Palestinians within the West Bank and Gaza. The removal of roadblocks, which Israel says are necessary for security, is a key Palestinian demand.
"Tony Blair's efforts have secured access for a number of truckloads of vital humanitarian supplies into Gaza. He now needs to find a new strategy working with all parties to deliver the opening of all crossing points," Jeremy Hobbs, executive director of Oxfam International said in a statement.
"This is essential if we are to avoid a worsening humanitarian crisis and the potential collapse of the Annapolis negotiations."
Israeli media: Obama will be 'a staunch ally'
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2474
US Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Hussein Obama was Thursday being promoted by the leftist Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz as "a staunch ally" who if made president of the United States would be "good for the Jews."
This after Obama delivered a stirring speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Convention in which he termed Israel's security "sacrosanct," supported Jerusalem as Israel's "undivided capital" and vowed to "do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
Obama clarifies united J'lem comment
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212659672984&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama did not rule out Palestinian sovereignty over parts of Jerusalem when he called for Israel's capital to remain "undivided," his campaign told The Jerusalem Post Thursday.
"Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the 7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy conference.
But a campaign adviser clarified Thursday that Obama believes "Jerusalem is a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the two parties" as part of "an agreement that they both can live with."
"Two principles should apply to any outcome," which the adviser gave as: "Jerusalem remains Israel's capital and it's not going to be divided by barbed wire and checkpoints as it was in 1948-1967."
He refused, however, to rule out other configurations, such as the city also serving as the capital of a Palestinian state or Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods.
"Beyond those principles, all other aspects are for the two parties to agree at final status negotiations," the Obama adviser said.
Many on the right of the political spectrum among America's Jews welcomed Obama's remarks at AIPAC, but the clarification of his position left several cold.
"The Orthodox Union is extremely disappointed in this revision of Senator Obama's important statement about Jerusalem," said Nathan Diament, director of public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations. He had sent out a release Wednesday applauding Obama's Jerusalem remarks in front of AIPAC.
"In the current context, everyone understands that saying 'Jerusalem... must remain undivided' means that the holy city must remain unified under Israeli rule, as it has been since 1967," Diament explained.
"If Senator Obama intended his remarks at AIPAC to be understood in this way, he said nothing that would reasonably lead to such a different interpretation."
Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America and another Jewish activist who had originally lauded Obama's statement, now called the candidate's words "troubling."
"It means he used the term inappropriately, possibly to mislead strong supporters of Israel that he supports something he doesn't really believe," Klein charged.
But congressman Robert Wexler, a Democrat from Florida with ties to the Jewish community and a long-time supporter of Obama, rejected the idea that the Illinois senator had been misleading with his comments.
"Everyone knows that Jerusalem is a final status issue. That is not a secret to anyone. Senator Obama says emphatically that should the Israelis and the Palestinians negotiate [an agreement], he will respect their conclusions and that he will not dictate a particular resolution."
And some groups were pleased by the clarification on Jerusalem provided by the campaign.
"There was reaction from some of our base who were taken aback by it and thought he was undermining the peace process," said Americans for Peace Now spokesman Ori Nir, who described his organization as "gratified" by the clarified position which seems to follow APN's policy that sovereignty of Jerusalem could be shared in a final peace settlement.
Obama has faced questions about his support for Israel from hawkish quarters of the Jewish community, and his campaign said the speech before AIPAC, following a town hall meeting at a Florida synagogue last month, were key elements in shoring up the Jewish vote, which generally goes to the Democrats.
"We think we've gotten a good reaction to the speech and we're pleased that we've gotten a good reaction," said the campaign adviser of the candidate's AIPAC address, which received multiple sustained standing ovations.
Palestinian factions though were particularly troubled by the original speech's original language on an undivided Jerusalem.
"This statement is totally rejected," said Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, whom a top aide described as "disappointed."
"The whole world knows that holy Jerusalem was occupied in 1967 and we will not accept a Palestinian state without having Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state," Abbas said.
The Obama campaign adviser said that whatever the international reaction, it was important for the Illinois senator to "make his positions clear."
"Our main audience is American voters at the moment. Other people want to know where he stands and it's important that they do know where he stands," he said.
Speaking generally about the speech, which also stressed the importance of a secure Israel and the need to isolate Hamas, Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters: "Obama's comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the US administration's foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, however, called Obama's address "moving," adding that he was also impressed by the speeches delivered at the same conference by Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, and presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain.
Olmert spoke to all three candidates by phone Thursday as he wrapped up a three-day visit to Washington.
Obama embraces Israel
http://www.stangoodenough.com/?p=141
“Hugging Israel” - Thus was headlined the front page top story in one of the Hebrew-language dailies cluttering the counter of the Arcaffe coffee shop on Jerusalem’s Hillel Street Thursday morning.
The words were splashed in large print over a three-quarter-page color photograph of euphoric US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama embracing his wife in front of applauding crowds.
Nor can there be any doubt that the energetic, silver-tongued, ramrod-straight young man made inroads into Israeli public opinion when he addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Convention in Washington DC Wednesday.
By comparison, his Republican rival, John McCain, was something of a damp squib when he spoke at the same event 48 hours before.
Obama wowed the six-thousand-plus-strong crowd – and Israelis who saw him on TV or the Net – as he hit button after button he just knew would resonate in the heart of the Jew.
On the Israel-US relationship and Israel’s security:
“I want you to know that today I’ll be speaking from my heart, and as a true friend of Israel. … Friends who share my strong commitment to make sure that the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever. … the bond between Israel and the United States is rooted in more than our shared national interests – it’s rooted in the shared values and shared stories of our people. And as President, I will work with you to ensure that it this bond strengthened. … We know that the establishment of Israel was just and necessary, rooted in centuries of struggle, and decades of patient work. But 60 years later, we know that we cannot relent, we cannot yield, and as President I will never compromise when it comes to Israel’s security. Not when there are still voices that deny the Holocaust. Not when there are terrorist groups and political leaders committed to Israel’s destruction. Not when there are maps across the Middle East that don’t even acknowledge Israel’s existence, and government-funded textbooks filled with hatred toward Jews. Not when there are rockets raining down on Sderot, and Israeli children have to take a deep breath and summon uncommon courage every time they board a bus or walk to school. … Let me be clear: Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. … There are those who would lay all of the problems of the Middle East at the doorstep of Israel and its supporters, as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the root of all trouble in the region. These voices blame the Middle East’s only democracy for the region’s extremism. They offer the false promise that abandoning a stalwart ally is somehow the path to strength. It is not, it never has been, and it never will be. Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security. That starts with ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat – from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As President, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade – investments to Israel’s security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world.”
On the Holocaust:
“When the Americans marched in, they discovered huge piles of dead bodies and starving survivors. General Eisenhower ordered Germans from the nearby town to tour the camp, so they could see what was being done in their name. He ordered American troops to tour the camp, so they could see the evil they were fighting against. He invited Congressmen and journalists to bear witness. And he ordered that photographs and films be made. Explaining his actions, Eisenhower said that he wanted to produce ‘first-hand evidence of these things, if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to propaganda.’ I saw some of those very images at Yad Vashem, and they never leave you. And those images just hint at the stories that survivors of the Shoah carried with them. Like Eisenhower, each of us bears witness to anyone and everyone who would deny these unspeakable crimes, or ever speak of repeating them. We must mean what we say when we speak the words: ‘never again.’
On the “peace process:”
“The long road to peace requires Palestinian partners committed to making the journey. We must isolate Hamas unless and until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements. There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations… The Palestinian people must understand that progress will not come through the false prophets of extremism or the corrupt use of foreign aid.”
On Jerusalem:
“Any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.”
On the arming of Hamas:
“Egypt must cut off the smuggling of weapons into Gaza.”
On Syria:
“Syria continues its support for terror and meddling in Lebanon. And Syria has taken dangerous steps in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, which is why Israeli action was justified to end that threat. … It is time for this reckless behavior to come to an end.”
On Israel’s prisoners of war, Gilad Schalit, Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser:
“We will not forget them and we will bring them home.”
And on Iran, to which Obama devoted the largest section of his speech:
“There is no greater threat to Israel – or to the peace and stability of the region – than Iran. … The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race, and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its President denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat. … We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran. I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That starts with aggressive, principled diplomacy without self-defeating preconditions, but with a clear-eyed understanding of our interests. We have no time to waste. We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. We have tried limited, piecemeal talks while we outsource the sustained work to our European allies. It is time for the United States to lead. … There will be careful preparation. We will open up lines of communication, build an agenda, coordinate closely with our allies, and evaluate the potential for progress. Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with men like Ahmadinejad just for the sake of talking. But as President of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at a time and place of my choosing – if, and only if – it can advance the interests of the United States. … Finally, let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel. Sometimes there are no alternatives to confrontation. But that only makes diplomacy more important. If we must use military force, we are more likely to succeed, and will have far greater support at home and abroad, if we have exhausted our diplomatic efforts.”
It is worth noting that Obama’s address at AIPAC was his very first public appearance since clinching the nomination over his arch-rival Hillary Clinton. Clearly foreign policy is going to play a large part in an Obama administration.
By comparison, US President George W. Bush entered the White House eight years ago determined to eschew foreign issues in favor of focusing on the domestic front.
But 9-11 sucked the still untried Bush and his unsuspecting country right into the Middle East.
While Bush’s primary efforts were directed at Afghanistan and Iraq, he was pulled inexorably into dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict until, in the last three years of his double term, he homed in on making healing this sore with his two-state solution the cherry he wanted to leave on top of his presidential record.
While Obama stressed that a US led by him would not pressure Israel – “We must never force Israel to the negotiating table…” - the hopeful Democrat emphasized that he is ready to dive right in:
“As President, I will work to help Israel achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security. And I won’t wait until the waning days of my presidency. I will take an active role, and make a personal commitment to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the start of my Administration.”
In an article that appeared in The Jerusalem Post Thursday, two Israelis from the Institute for National Security Studies analyzed the McCain and Obama speeches :
Research Fellow Roni Bart and Research Assistant Limor Simhoni concluded that “those who believe that Israel requires a US administration that does not pressure it into following a path that it does not want to take, and is committed to stopping the Iranian danger through military means, if necessary, will prefer McCain over Obama.”
Otherwise, “those who feel that Israel needs a US administration that will impose a direction on it that it might otherwise not pursue, and that the danger of a nuclear empowered Iran does not necessitate the use of military force will prefer Obama over McCain.”
Nevertheless, the analysts said, “there is a word of caution for members of the latter group. While Obama allows himself to express relatively balanced positions already at the election campaign stage, it is possible that after he is elected, his policy will reflect his original critical positions.”
Bart and Simhoni opined that what develops in the Israeli-”Palestinian” conflict “depends more on what happens between the sides than the extent and nature of the involvement of any US administration.
“On the other hand, the continued presence of the US in Iraq almost entirely depends on the next US administration.”
How the US will deal with the Iranian danger - through more effective diplomacy and/or implementing the military option – would mainly depend on Washington.
Concluded the writers: “It seems, then, perhaps more than in other elections, that the particular Democrat or Republican who will enter the White House will to a large extent shape the future of the Middle East.”
A personal note: In a Skype chat conversation yesterday I emotionally banged out the following:
“Well, I just listened to Obama - and I did not get sick, I got scared. Based on what I heard I would vote for him. He has an extra-ordinarily gilded tongue and a powerful, clear message. He was MUCH stronger than McCain on every level - and he will get the US Jews’ vote and Israel’s Jews will root for him. He will win the White House, and I fear he will bring a peace agreement into existence between Israel and the Arabs that will drag the US into the darkness of the valley of judgment. All of us who oppose him will be seen to be bigots, enemies of peace, enemies of America. This man, with Hillary at his right hand, is a leader whose time may have come. If so, God help America.”
For the record my interlocutor thought my “prediction” was “a bit thick.”
Time will tell.
Exclusive: Olmert comes out of White House talks empty-handed
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5323
The meeting between the Israeli prime minister and president George W. Bush lasted less than an hour. Ending Wednesday, June 4 without the usual joint communiqué, it was more a farewell between two leaders on their way out than a down-to-earth exchange. Olmert told reporters euphemistically after it was over: “I went in with more question marks than I came out with regarding ways and means, the pressures of time and the resolve required to deal with the [Iranian nuclear] problem.”
DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that the prime minister was informed ahead of his visit that the White House is expecting fresh intelligence on Iran’s nuclear activities and will await evaluations from US experts before making decisions on how to act in the matter. Our sources discount the impression conveyed by the prime minister’s office that he would present the president with Israel’s findings and conclusions. These exchanges are in fact taking place at quite a different level between American and Israeli intelligence chiefs.
It was clear to both the president and the prime minister that Bush’s hopes of an Israel-Palestinian peace accord being concluded before he leaves the White House would be disappointed.
In any case, Palestinian leaders are fuming over the Democratic candidate Barack Obama’s statement of support for Jerusalem as Israel’s eternal, undivided capital. Their high expectations of US pressure on Israel for major concessions in peace talks have been set back; all three presidential candidates are pursuing the Jewish vote with ringing support for Israel.
John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will talk to Olmert by telephone before he leaves. All three were too caught up in their climactic contest to find time to meet him.
Israeli settlements: Light in the darkness
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=66168
On Sunday, June 1, Israel announced plans to build over 800 homes in Jerusalem. And the international community proceeded to go ballistic.
"Our position on the settlements is that we don't believe that any more settlements should be built," said White House press secretary Dana Perino. "And we know that it exacerbates the tension when it comes to the negotiations with the Palestinians." U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon's office said that he was "deeply concerned" by Israel's plans. "The government of Israel's continued construction of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory is contrary to international law and to its commitments under the Road Map and the Annapolis Process," Ki-Moon's office stated.
What's the problem with Israel building homes in its capital city? The problem is that the homes will be built in two neighborhoods – Pisgat Zeev and Har Homa – which lie east of the so-called "Green Line," the pre-1967 Israeli border.
And the international community doesn't like that at all. According to the international community, Israel's decision to build constitutes a slap in the face to its Arab neighbors, particularly the Palestinian Arabs.
Here's the question: so what?
The world should be far less concerned about Israel's settlement policy than about the terroristic, fascistic nature of Israel's enemies. Supporters of the so-called two-state solution – in reality, a piecemeal attempt to dismantle the state of Israel by making its borders indefensible – assume a moral equivalence between Israel and her enemies. They argue against Israeli settlements as if Israel were America and its Arab neighbors Canada, as if the Arab-Israeli conflict were a simple border dispute. In reality, Israel shares Western values; its enemies share values with the mullahs. The Arab-Israeli conflict is a conflict between two contrasting worldviews: freedom and fascism.
Viewed in its starkest terms, the Arab-Israeli conflict may be accurately described as a war between darkness and light. Those who argue against Israeli settlements – outposts of light in a dark territory – argue for the continued victory of night. They argue for the dominance of the same terroristic population that elected Hamas. They argue for the appeasement of populations and leaderships who value murder at the expense of those who value life.
No standoff is possible between darkness and light. Where light fails, darkness engulfs. When Israel pulled its settlements from the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Arab population immediately destroyed all semblances of civilization – as they have wherever Israel has pulled out – then elected Hamas. Hezbollah reacted to the Gaza withdrawal by initiating a war against Israel in Lebanon.
Israel is a single candle in a pitch-black room. Its rays are the settlements. As the candle burns more brightly, so too does its rays. The free world's true interest lies not in a truce between the darkness and the candle – such a standoff means merely that the oxygen will eventually run out, extinguishing the flame – but in providing energy for the candle, allowing it to continue shining forth. That means recognizing the right of liberty to overtake tyranny. It means acknowledging that the supposed right to self-determination must take a back seat to civilized behavior. It means supporting the right of free peoples to spread freedom.
Gaza mortar kills Amnon Rosenberg, 51, from Kibbutz Nirim Thursday
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5325
Amnon Rosenberg, who is survived by a wife and three children, was killed by a shell fired from Gaza while at work in the kibbutz Nir-Lat factory Thursday, June 5. Four more Israeli civilians were injured in the attack, two seriously. Hamas and Jihad Islami attacks on the neighboring Israeli population have escalated again since the beginning of the week and casualties have mounted, including foreign farm workers from Thailand.
Hamas murders Jew
http://www.jnewswire.com/article/2473
The "Palestinian" terrorist group Hamas Thursday successfully fired a mortar shell at an Israeli kibbutz, killing a 51-year-old Jewish father of three and sending four other men to the hospital, one seriously wounded and the other moderately hurt by shrapnel.
According to residents of Kibbutz Nir Oz in the western Negev, there was no "red alert" warning before three shells slammed into and around a unprotected factory where Amnon Rosenberg and the other men were working.
After hearing two mortars detonate nearby the men had walked out of the factory and right into the third, factory workers told reporters.
Several bystanders had to be treated for shock.
Hamas claimed credit for the strike, declaring that it would continue to hit "settlement colonies around the Gaza Strip as a response to the nonstop aggression against our people."
Gaza's Palestinian Arabs have increased the number of their successful attacks in the past month.
On May 9 another kibbutznik was killed by a mortar shell, and three days later a 70-year-old Israeli woman had her life snuffed out by a Kassam.
Earlier this week five people were wounded in a rocket attack, while a Katyusha rocket - larger than the more frequently-fired Kassam - was also fired although it did not hurt anyone.
Wednesday saw a Palestinian Arab worker at the Nahal Oz fuel depot wounded by a rocket fired by his own people.
The Olmert government keeps promising that it will "soon" bring an end to the rocket and mortar terrorism, but has hitherto held back from re-entering Gaza en masse.
Iran Accuses US of Pressuring UN
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387419.aspx
CBNNews.com - VIENNA, Austria - Iran accused the United States on Thursday of pressuring the U.N.'s nuclear agency to base its latest investigation of Tehran's nuclear activities on fake evidence suggesting that Iran had a secret weapons program.
It also threatened to sue countries that pushed to have U.N. Security Council involvement in its nuclear program, a clear allusion to the United States and its key allies.
The U.S., France, Australia, Canada and Japan were using the nuclear issue to find an excuse for "their hidden agenda," including regime change and depriving Iran of science and technology, said Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, Iran's chief delegate to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Speaking at the closing session of the 35-nation IAEA board, he suggested the failed attempt to push Iran into concessions on its nuclear program and give up uranium enrichment was only one example of a series of bad foreign policy decisions by Washington.
The U.S. "has continuously miscalculated in dealing with world affairs," he said in comments to the closed meeting made available to media. "The dark record in our region clearly proves this assertion."
Since beginning its investigation last year into allegations of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program, the IAEA has asked in vain for substantive explanations for what seem to be draft plans to refit missiles with nuclear warheads; explosives tests that could be used to develop a nuclear detonator; military and civilian nuclear links; and a drawing showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads.
Iran remains defiant, saying the evidence from the U.S. and other board members purportedly backing the allegations was fabricated.
Soltanieh expanded on those charges Thursday, challenging IAEA statements that the investigation was based on intelligence and other information from 10 board member nations.
"Except for one document, all documents. have been provided to the agency by the U.S.," he said, adding that briefings on the alleged weapons activities were based on "fabricated" evidence "because of the pressures imposed by the U.S."
Iran is also under fire for defying three sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions and continuing to enrich uranium - which can generate both nuclear fuel and the fissile material for the core of nuclear warheads.
In a warning to the U.S. and other nations that pushed for Security Council involvement in Iran's nuclear file, Soltanieh said Tehran had "the right to resort to legal actions to seek redress against the sponsors of these unlawful actions."
Shunned in Rome, Ahmadinejad Bullies and Blusters
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363368,00.html
Score one for the Italians. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the thug par-excellence president of the ayatollahs’ regime in Iran, has been shunned by the Pope and the Prime Minister of Italy. In a humiliating rebuff which demonstrates Tehran’s pariah status abroad, both leaders refused to meet him in Rome, where he arrived on June 3, 2008 to attend the UN’s annual food summit.
Ahmadinejad tried to grab the headlines with another bombastic attack against the United States. In a bid to shift the public relations firestorm over his visit, he told reporters shortly before his departure for Italy that the “satanic powers” of the United States will be “uprooted” and that Israel is “about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene.”
He renewed his diatribe upon his arrival in Rome on Tuesday, saying that "Europeans have suffered the biggest damage from the Zionists and today the weight of this artificial regime, both political and economic, is on Europe's shoulders.”
One thing is sure: this Qods Force Commander-turned-president thrives on being the center of attention. Controversy is how he, in a depraved manner, infuses vigor into his increasingly lackluster power base. And that is why he is eager to make these high-profile visits to western countries, such as his annul presence at the UN General Assembly.
Like many demagogues, Ahmadinejad is crazy to grab headlines. He claimed he was bringing solutions to the global food problem. Iran, he says, “as an influential nation in the economy and agriculture, has clear solutions, programs and suggestions for the fair production and distribution of food supply in the world.” Never mind that his regime, despite being flush with unprecedented oil revenues, has failed economically and is directly responsible for widening poverty and hunger in Iran. “Iran can play a decisive role in today's world management.”
His visit was billed as a one-man diplomatic nightmare by the Italian media, and caused an uproar among human rights and political circles in Italy. Italy’s Foreign Ministry said a meeting between Ahmadinejad and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi would only happen if Ahmadinejad was prepared to retract his comments on Israel and his denial of the Holocaust, as well as ending his regime’s defiance of international demands relevant to Iran’s nuclear program.
Meanwhile media reports from Italy indicate that Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe and Ahmadinejad were excluded from the opening dinner at the UN summit hosted by Prime Minister Berlusconi and Ban Ki-moon, the U.N. Secretary-General.
This latest political humiliation for Tehran and its president comes on the heels of a damning report by the International Atomic Energy Agency released last week on Iran’s nuclear program, and more evidence of international terrorism. As always, Tehran’s outward belligerence is the flip side of its inward suppression; there were also new reports on human rights violations.
On Monday, even Mohamed El Baradei, the see-no-evil, hear no-evil head of the nuclear watchdog agency, had to complain to reporters about Tehran’s continued defiance of its commitments and three UN Security Council resolutions. He said that “Iran has not yet agreed to implement all the transparency measures required to clarify this cluster of allegations and questions," adding that “Iran has not provided the agency with all the access to documents and to individuals requested ... nor provided the substantive explanations required to support its statements.”
The composition of the new Parliament (Majlis) whose new speaker Ali Larijani, is a protégé of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and a former top commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, heralds a strengthening of Tehran’s hard line on the nuclear issue. In his first day on the new job, Larijani drew the regime’s nuclear “red line,” vowing the Majlis will never go along with any deals about enrichment suspension.
Adding to the mix, ABC News released an exclusive report last week that “Senior U.S. officials tell ABC News that in recent months there have been secret contacts between the Iranian government and the leadership of al Qaeda.”
Meanwhile executions continue unabated in Iran. On June 2, three young men, all under 18 at the time of the alleged crimes, were given death sentences. They will join at least 75 juveniles on death row, according to human rights organizations. The New York Times reported from Tehran that Iran’s judiciary has also sentenced to death a Kurdish teacher, Farzad Kamangar, and two other people for political reasons.
Emboldened by the West’s talk about an “updated” incentives package, already rejected by the regime’s Supreme Leader even before its content has been made public, Tehran remains undeterred and defiantly refuses to change its behavior.
The regime does, however, have an Achilles’ heel: its isolation from its own people, who desperately yearn for democratic change. Tehran is worried about the landmark ruling in early May by Britain’s Court of Appeal, ordering the UK government to promptly remove Iran’s main opposition, the People’s Mojahedin Organization (PMOI/MEK) from its blacklist of proscribed organizations. Tehran understands the wide-ranging political and diplomatic implications of this ruling in strengthening the movement for democratic change in Iran.
The UK government obeyed the court ruling and last week laid before Parliament an order for the revocation of the group’s designation.
The UK court ruling marks the end of an era, and Tehran is deeply concerned at the rising specter of ouster from within by the non-nuclear, secular, and democratic resistance movement.
Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/revealed-secret-plan-to-keep-iraq-under-us-control-840512.html
Bush wants 50 military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors
A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.
The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.
But the accord also threatens to provoke a political crisis in the US. President Bush wants to push it through by the end of next month so he can declare a military victory and claim his 2003 invasion has been vindicated. But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.
The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq – a victory that he says Mr Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal.
America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military "surge" began in January 2007. Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.
The precise nature of the American demands has been kept secret until now. The leaks are certain to generate an angry backlash in Iraq. "It is a terrible breach of our sovereignty," said one Iraqi politician, adding that if the security deal was signed it would delegitimise the government in Baghdad which will be seen as an American pawn.
The US has repeatedly denied it wants permanent bases in Iraq but one Iraqi source said: "This is just a tactical subterfuge." Washington also wants control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft and the right to pursue its "war on terror" in Iraq, giving it the authority to arrest anybody it wants and to launch military campaigns without consultation.
Mr Bush is determined to force the Iraqi government to sign the so-called "strategic alliance" without modifications, by the end of next month. But it is already being condemned by the Iranians and many Arabs as a continuing American attempt to dominate the region. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful and usually moderate Iranian leader, said yesterday that such a deal would create "a permanent occupation". He added: "The essence of this agreement is to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans."
Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is believed to be personally opposed to the terms of the new pact but feels his coalition government cannot stay in power without US backing.
The deal also risks exacerbating the proxy war being fought between Iran and the United States over who should be more influential in Iraq.
Although Iraqi ministers have said they will reject any agreement limiting Iraqi sovereignty, political observers in Baghdad suspect they will sign in the end and simply want to establish their credentials as defenders of Iraqi independence by a show of defiance now. The one Iraqi with the authority to stop deal is the majority Shia spiritual leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In 2003, he forced the US to agree to a referendum on the new Iraqi constitution and the election of a parliament. But he is said to believe that loss of US support would drastically weaken the Iraqi Shia, who won a majority in parliament in elections in 2005.
The US is adamantly against the new security agreement being put to a referendum in Iraq, suspecting that it would be voted down. The influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on his followers to demonstrate every Friday against the impending agreement on the grounds that it compromises Iraqi independence.
The Iraqi government wants to delay the actual signing of the agreement but the office of Vice-President Dick Cheney has been trying to force it through. The US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, has spent weeks trying to secure the accord.
The signature of a security agreement, and a parallel deal providing a legal basis for keeping US troops in Iraq, is unlikely to be accepted by most Iraqis. But the Kurds, who make up a fifth of the population, will probably favour a continuing American presence, as will Sunni Arab political leaders who want US forces to dilute the power of the Shia. The Sunni Arab community, which has broadly supported a guerrilla war against US occupation, is likely to be split.
Militant Islam Down Under
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/387411.aspx
CBNNews.com - MELBOURNE, Australia - Austraila, the land down under, could soon be known for something else.
Government research revealed last summer that young Muslims there were more at risk of being lured into militant Islam than any other western country.
When he was Prime Minister, John Howard took a combative stance against radical Islam and urged Aussies to remain vigilant-- vigilant against incendiary outbursts like Sheik Fez Mohammed, formerly of the Global Islamic Youth Center near Sydney.
"We want to have children and offer them as soldiers defending Islam," Mohammed said. "Teach them this: that there is nothing no more beloved to me than wanting to die as a mujahid."
That got Howard's attention as did others concerning the treatment of women.
The leading islamic cleric of Sydney -- the former grand mufti Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali suggested that an Australian rape victim deserved her attack because she left her home without covering her head. He said, "Uncovered meat is the problem."
Some Muslim community leaders expressed outrage at Hilali's remarks. But that didn't stop the Sheik from voicing contempt for Australians and their culture.
"The most dishonest and unjust people are Western people and the English in particular," al-Hilali said. "Listen to me - Anglo Saxons came to Australia in chains while we Muslims paid our way and came in freedom. We are more Australian than them!"
Pastor Danny Nalliah, of Catch the Fire Ministries, moved to Australia from the Middle East ten years ago.
"People leave their home countries because they think Australia is a better place to live in, and unfortunately what happens right now, people try to change this country to the place where they've come from," Nalliah said.
"I think the immigration policy needs to be tightened to find out, get people understanding that people who come here should adapt to the country and become part of Australia," he said.
The Australian government took steps to do just that. Last year it began requiring a 20 question test for people applying for citizenship. It remains to be seen if new Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will continue or expand the tougher immigration policy.
So why do some think some Muslim immigrants have difficulty assimilating into Australian society?
Pastor Daniel Scott, a Pakistani Immigrant and a lecturer on Islam and the Koran, says Islam prohibits them from embracing a non-Islamic culture
"Allah says in the Koran -- the Koran is the holy book of Muslim people. In Sura 3 verse 28, a Muslim shall not befriend a non-Muslim. Allah would cut them off from himself,' Scott said.
scott suggests that can lead to Islamic enclaves -- isolated neighborhoods and communities within a secular society. They become potential breeding grounds for Islamic extremism.
They're places where lessons of hatred and anti-Semitism for Muslim youth can flourish -- like these comments -- again, from Sheik Fez Mohammed:
"This creature will say oh Muslim, behind me is a Jew, come and kill him. They'll be oink, oink, all of them, every single one of them!"
Those remarks came of no surprise to Scott.
"Allah says in Koran, Sura 98 verse 6, it says people of the book -- that means Jews and Christians -- are shalobaraya -- the most most evil of all creatures," he said.
What do Muslims think of their treatment in Australian society?
At one of the largest mosques in the Melbourne area, we talked to one of the head imams. He wouldn't appear on camera, but off camera he told us the Muslims here are non-political."
"We do not get involved in politics here," he said. "Not at all."
But one young Muslim approached us to offer his opinion. He said he doesn't believe Muslims can speak openly in Australian society.
"You can get in trouble basically," he said
"Can you be arrested for that?" we asked.
"It depends on what you say and what you stand for, you know. A simple example, the war between Israel and Hizbollah," he said.
Our discussion was interrupted by a Mosque elder who took the young man inside for prayer.
"After prayer, go see the leaders of the mosque, not the followers because some people don't have as much knowledge as others," the mosque leader told us.
Perhaps leaders like Sheik Fez Mohammed, who has said, "The peak, the pinnacle, the crest, the highest point, the pivot, the summit of Islam is jihad!"
UN body told to address Philippine Government human rights abuses
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/un.body.told.to.address.philippine.government.human.rights.abuses/19284.htm
Philippine human rights activists have reiterated their call on the UN Human Rights Council to "keep pursuing our government to stop the extrajudicial killings and other human rights violations". The UN body is meeting in Geneva 2-18 June.
In an oral intervention before the UN body on Tuesday, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, the Asian Legal Resource Center, the World Council of Churches (WCC) and a Philippine NGO delegation commended and fully supported the findings presented by Phillip Alston, the UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.
Alston's report concluded that state security forces have been involved in many of the killings of left-wing activists, indigenous leaders, trade union and farmer leaders and civil society organisation members and that the military remains in a 'state of denial' over these killings.
The human rights advocates reported 13 victims of extrajudicial killings and two victims of enforced disappearances this year alone. Many more were abducted, according to the statement. Military abuses have reportedly displaced thousands of villagers in Mindanao, Samar, Quezon and Negros islands. The independent human rights watchdog Karapatan has registered over 800 victims of extrajudicial killings since 2001.
The problem will not be solved, the human rights advocates affirmed, "unless the counter-insurgency policy changes and the other recommendations made by the special rapporteur are seriously carried out".
The WCC's long-standing support of the human rights engagement of churches in the Philippines was reaffirmed during the WCC general secretary's visit to the country last November. Already during previous sessions of the UN Human Rights Council, the WCC had helped Philippine human rights advocates to make their voices heard.
Algerian Christian Faces Three Years in Prison for Carrying Bibles
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion07265.shtml
(christiansunite.com) - Habiba Kouider, an Algerian Christian, could soon be sentenced to three years in prison for carrying Bibles and other Christian books while traveling on a public bus from Tiaret to Oran, Algeria, according to a May 23 report from Compass Direct.
Habiba was first detained by police on March 29. The police freed her after detaining her for 24 hours, but ordered her to appear in court in the city of Tiaret on May 7. The court, however, delayed her case until May 20.
During the initial hearing, the public prosecutor accused her of practicing "non-Muslim worship without authorization" and demanded that the court sentence her to three years in prison. In the same hearing, the prosecutor also pressured Habiba to renounce Christ, promising "to drop the case if she reinstated Islam."
Pray for Habiba to remain strong in her faith in Christ regardless of the cost. Ask God to embolden Algerian Christians to continue sharing Christ's love and grace despite opposition from the authorities.
For more information on the persecution facing Algeria's Christians, go to www.persecution.net/country/algeria.htm.
UK and U.S. diplomats detained in Zimbabwe
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/uk.and.us.diplomats.detained.in.zimbabwe/19305.htm
Zimbabwean police detained U.S. and British diplomats for several hours on Thursday, slashing the tyres of their cars after they visited victims of political violence ahead of a presidential vote, the U.S. embassy said.
The U.S. ambassador blamed the attack on President Robert Mugabe's government, which it accuses of trying to intimidate opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai's supporters ahead of the June 27 run-off election.
"Now what they are trying to do is intimidate diplomats from travelling to the countryside to witness the violence being perpetrated against the population," U.S. Ambassador James McGee said in an interview on CNN.
The embassy said the diplomats were released after several hours.
Former colonial power Britain, human rights groups and Zimbabwe's opposition also accuse Mugabe of a campaign of violence to try to keep his 28-year hold on a power. Tsvangirai says 65 people have been killed.
Mugabe blames his opponents for the violence and sanctions imposed by Western countries for the collapse of the once prosperous economy. The opposition says he ruined Zimbabwe.
The attack on the diplomatic convoy took place in Bindura, 80 km (50 miles) north of Harare, the U.S. embassy said.
McGee said police stopped the vehicles at a roadblock and slashed the tyres. He said supporters of Mugabe threatened to set the vehicles ablaze unless the diplomats accompanied police to a nearby station.
"We do believe this is coming directly from the top," he said.
A British government spokesman said Zimbabwe's ambassador in London had been summoned to give an explanation.
Zimbabwe police were not available for comment.
Tsvangirai beat Mugabe in a March 29 presidential election but failed to win enough votes to avoid a second round. He was detained for nine hours on Wednesday but continued his campaign on Thursday.
OBSERVERS
South Africa said it planned to begin sending election observers to Zimbabwe this week as part of a larger mission sent by the Southern African Development Community, adding that it was essential that the election be fair and transparent.
Simba Makoni, the ruling party defector who came third in the first round called on Thursday for the run-off to be scrapped to prevent further bloodshed.
Makoni won over 8 percent and those who voted for him could be crucial in deciding the contest.
Makoni, who favours a national unity government, told reporters that Zimbabwe could not afford another election and it would not end the political crisis and economic collapse.
In an unusually harsh attack by an African leader, Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga branded Mugabe a dictator and said in Cape Town that Zimbabwe's run-off campaign was an embarrassment to the continent's efforts to promote democracy.
It is rare for African leaders to publicly attack Mugabe, who is still seen as a hero by millions on the continent for fighting to end British rule in Zimbabwe in 1980 and for supporting other anti-colonial struggles.
South African President Thabo Mbeki has been among those criticised for taking too soft a line on Mugabe's government, which has presided over an economic meltdown marked by inflation over 165,000 percent and chronic food shortages.
In an indicator of Zimbabwe's rapid economic decline, its dollar currency plunged to a new low of between 995 million and 1.45 billion to the greenback on Thursday from an average 700 million at the beginning of the week.
No comments:
Post a Comment