Israel Was Created By Terrorism

Israel Was Created By Terrorism 1 of 2

Israel Was Created By Terrorism - Part 2 of 2

UN statehood bid 'threatens Palestinian rights'

BETHLEHEM (Ma'an) -- The Palestinian team responsible for preparing the United Nations initiative in September has been given an independent legal opinion that warns of risks involved with its plan to join the UN.

An initiative to transfer the Palestinians' representation from the PLO to a state will terminate the legal status held by the PLO in the UN since 1975 that it is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, according to the document.

Crucially, there will no longer be an institution that can represent the inalienable rights of the entire Palestinian people in the UN and related international institutions, according to the brief.

Representation for the right to self-determination will be gravely affected, as it is a right of all Palestinians, both inside and outside the homeland, the opinion says. A change in status would severely disenfranchise the right of refugees to return to their homes and properties from which they were displaced.

The seven-page opinion, obtained by Ma'an, was submitted to the Palestinian side by Guy Goodwin-Gill, a professor of public international law at Oxford University and a member of the team that won the 2004 non-binding judgement by the International Court of Justice that the route of Israel's wall was illegal.

The Palestinian team, headed by Saeb Erekat, has been preparing an initiative to replace the PLO at the UN, substituting it with the State of Palestine as the representative of the Palestinian people.

An actual state cannot be created in September, as Israel's occupation continues, so the debate is focused on whether membership should be requested from the Security Council or if the General Assembly should be asked to grant recognition of a state as an "observer," a status that conveys less than full UN membership.

Yet, almost no considerations have been made in terms of the dramatic legal implications for Palestinian rights which this legal brief says will occur should the PLO lose its status.

The brief is to "flag the matters requiring attention" so that a substantial amount of people who have interests in, for example, the right of return, are not "accidentally disenfranchised."

First of all, the prospect of substituting the PLO with the State of Palestine raises "constitutional" problems in that they engage the Palestinian National Charter and the organization and entities which make up the PLO, according to the brief. Second is "the question of the 'capacity' of the State of Palestine effectively to take on the role and responsibilities of the PLO in the UN; and thirdly, the question of popular representation," the opinion says.

The Palestinian Authority, which was established by the PLO as a short-term, administrative entity, "has limited legislative and executive competence, limited territorial jurisdiction, and limited personal jurisdiction over Palestinians not present in the areas for which it has been accorded responsibility," the brief points out.

It notes that the PA "is a subsidiary body, competent only to exercise those powers conferred on it by the Palestinian National Council. By definition, it does not have the capacity to assume greater powers."

The PA cannot "dissolve" its parent body or establish itself independently of the PNC and the PLO, the report also says. Moreover, it is the PLO and the PNC which derive their legitimacy "from the fact that they represent all sectors of the displaced Palestinian people, no matter where they presently live or have refuge."

Particularly crucial are the potential implications for Palestinians in the Diaspora. The majority of Palestinians are refugees, and all of them are represented by the PLO through the PNC.

"They constitute more than half of the people of Palestine, and if they are 'disenfranchised' and lose their representation in the UN, it will not only prejudice their entitlement to equal representation ... but also their ability to vocalise their views, to participate in matters of national governance, including the formation and political identity of the State, and to exercise the right of return," the legal briefing says.

Karma Nabulsi, a former PLO representative and now a professor at Oxford University, says she is familiar with the document. Palestinian officials have also seen the legal opinion, she says.

"Without question, no Palestinian will accept losing such core rights for such a limited diplomatic initiative in September," she says. "First, we will not have liberated territory upon which to establish a State. But in losing the PLO as the sole legitimate representative at the UN, our people immediately lose their claims as refugees to be part of our official representation, recognized by the world.

"This is an urgent and critical issue for our whole people. We must ensure our representatives advance our rights in international forum, not weaken or endanger them. Of course now that the legal dangers have been raised so fully, I am confident the initiative will protect the status of the PLO as sole legitimate representative in the UN in order to advance the rights" of the Palestinian people.

Nabulsi says Goodwin-Gill opinion has defined and clarified the "red lines" in legal terms.

"The PLO is the representative of the people, not just a part of the people; the PLO is the architect and creator of the Palestinian Authority; that any change in who represents the people or a part of the people requires an expression of the popular will and international recognition," she explained.

"Neither the Palestinian Authority nor the PLO can alter the role and structure of the PLO without the agreement of the entire Palestinian people. In any case, the PLO and the Palestinian people were not aware that by losing the PLO as representative at the UN, it would create such legal dangers. Now they are."

She concluded: "Obviously, we need clarity from the PLO on this critical issue, and it is important that the Palestinian public everywhere, especially the refugees in the [Diaspora], are given concrete reassurances that representation of their core rights -- on both representation and right of return -- will remain untouched in September."

COMPLAINT OF THE MASJID

I want to know

WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN SO LONG?

I want to know

WHY YOU LEFT ME ALONE FOR SO LONG?

I want to know

WHAT HAS ATTRACTED YOU MORE THAN I?

Oh! Dear I want to b

WHY YOU COME TO ME ON FRIDAY'S ONLY?

I want to know

WHY YOU CAME UNTO ME IN RAMADAN ONLY?

I want to know

WHY YOU FILL ME UP ON EID DAY ONLY?

Oh! Please do tell me

For I really want to know

DO YOU STILL REMEMBER THAT

FOR YOUR MARRIAGE YOU CAME TO ME?

I want to know that

If you still remember that

The last place you will visit before

You go to your grave is me

Now Eid has come

You have all gone

And I still want to know

WHY YOU HAVE LEFT ME ALONE FOR SO LONG?

I want to know

Anonymous - Where's the humanity gone?

Israel deploys third rocket interceptor in south

JERUSALEM, Aug. 31 (Xinhua) -- The Israeli military Wednesday deployed a third battery of the Iron Dome missile defense system near the southern port city of Ashdod, cutting short the original timetable by just over a week, the Defense Ministry said in a press release.

The Israel Air Force has thus far positioned the first two batteries near the cities of Beersheba and Ashkelon since they were declared operational in late March.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak complimented the security establishment for making available a third battery one day prior to the start of the new school year on Thursday.

Barak said the additional battery was part of a national emergency plan he announced several weeks ago and a "tangible expression of the protection of Israel's citizens from rockets and missiles."

Iron Dome , a multi-million U.S. dollar short-range system designed to intercept projectiles in midair, successfully shot down eight rockets fired by Palestinian militants from the Gaza Strip into Israel in April, and has downed dozens of others in barrages over the last few weeks.

On Monday, during a visit to the headquarters of ELTA Systems, a local company that had developed the system's detection and tracking radar, Barak said a fourth battery is expected to be deployed by year's end, while another five would likely enter service within two years.

News of the third battery's deployment come against a rise in tensions along Israel's southern border with Gaza over the past two weeks, with increased rocket attacks from the coastal territory and tit-for-tat violence.

Israeli military planners assess that the full deployment of Iron Dome -- about 12 to 15 batteries which air force officials have said are needed in order to provide Israel with a comprehensive shield from rocket threats on several fronts -- would most likely take several years.

The system is slated for later deployment along the northern Lebanese border, where Israel estimates that Shiite group Hezbollah is currently stocking more than 40,000 rockets that are considered able to reach most parts of the Jewish state.

Special Report: Palestine-Israel Conflicts

US 'wasted $30bn on Afghanistan and Iraq' over decade

By Kim GhattasBBC News, Washington

Billions have been spent on contractors in Afghanistan, but US records are poor

Continue reading the main story

Taliban Conflict

• Remembering Omed Khpulwak
• US military chief takes Afghan heat
• Handover overshadowed
• Turbulent Kandahar

The US government has wasted $30bn (£18bn) in contracts in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade, according to a bi-partisan spending commission.

The commission on wartime contracting blamed an over-reliance on contractors, poor planning and fraud for the waste.

It had evidence of lax accountability and inadequate competition, it said.

Writing in the Washington Post, the report's authors warn that investments in the two countries could be wasted even after US involvement there ends.

Among the examples cited was a $40m prison for Iraq that the country did not want and was never completed.

US-funded projects in those two countries also risk going to waste because host governments are unable or unwilling to sustain them.

In one case, $300m was poured into a sophisticated power plant in Kabul which the Afghan government will not be able to run, and a programme worth $11.4bn of facilities for the Afghan national security forces is likely to be unsustainable.

The commission's report is due to be published on Wednesday but its authors, who include former government officials and lawmakers, have already published an opinion piece in the Washington Post, blaming both the government and contractors for the waste.

The article makes the obvious recommendation to be more rigorous when deciding whether a project should be contracted out but it also recommends cancelling or modifying projects that are not sustainable.

Beyond just a disservice to taxpayers, the report says that the waste fosters corruption in host countries and diminishes the standing and influence of the US.

Israel trains settlers to confront Palestinian protest

The Israeli army has said it is training Jewish settlers in the West Bank to repel violent protest.

The move comes ahead of anticipated protests by Palestinians when they make a bid for separate statehood at the United Nations in September.

The campaign for recognition is opposed by Israel and officials fear the bid could revive violence.

Settler officials denied a newspaper report that suggested settlers would be equipped with tear gas.

Haaretz said the military had been training settlement security chiefs and their teams and giving them tear gas and stun grenades.

In a written statement, the Israeli army said it was "devoting great efforts to training local forces and preparing them to deal with any possible scenario".

Stalled talks

Drills among dozens of civil defence teams have reportedly been stepped up and the Israeli military is being prepared for possible violent protests too.

According to Reuters, scenarios include protesters reaching the gates of settlements and possible confrontations.

Israel has long permitted settlers to carry weapons but Jewish settler groups have insisted any use of firearms would be for defensive purposes only.

"Certainly during a period of tension, with intelligence reports of possible threats, of course readiness crews are being trained," Danny Dayan, chairman of the settlers' Yesha Council told Reuters in a telephone interview.

He said that armed settlers operated under Israeli army orders to avoid killing civilians.

Palestinians and human rights groups say settlers have used weapons to attack Palestinians and that Israel has been lax in investigating such incidents.

The President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has said that September's debate on Palestinian statehood at the UN General Assembly will put pressure on Israel to negotiate a final peace deal, but Israel says it will have the opposite effect.

Direct talks between the Palestinians and Israelis are currently stalled over the Palestinian refusal to take part while the Israeli government continues to build settlements in the West Bank.

The settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967, and annexed East Jerusalem, a move not recognised by the international community.

More than 500,000 Jewish settlers live in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, among a Palestinian population of about 2.5 million.

Ministers plan emergency law to move terror suspects

By Dominic CascianiHome affairs correspondent

Control orders were introduced under the former Labour government in 2005

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• New controls for terror suspects
• How are terror suspects treated internationally?
• Counter-terror review explained

Ministers have revealed draft emergency measures to relocate terror suspects months after pledging to scrap a similar power known as control orders.

Ministers have published a draft bill to use relocation or other restrictions in exceptional circumstances.

The power to move a suspect to a new home was ditched folllowing a review by the coalition government.

Critics say the incoming Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (Tpims) are weak.

Tpims are the proposed replacement for control orders restrictions which are due to be scrapped at the end of the year. The measures are used against suspects who have not been charged with an offence.

Ministers say the new system is a better balance between monitoring suspects and allowing them reasonable liberties. The bill before Parliament removes the home secretary's power to forcibly relocate a suspect.

Each man who has been relocated will be allowed to return home once control orders are replaced in January 2012.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

We are scrapping the old control orders (system) and replacing it with something wholly different - it's time-limited, we are lifting house arrest, there won't be curfews in the old fashioned way, there won't be relocation orders”

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, on Tpims system in January

However, the Home Office's draft 'enhanced' bill, to be held in reserve, would reintroduce relocation in exceptional circumstances.

A draft bill of stronger measures was always likely because the coalition's review of counter-terrorism laws concluded that there may be exceptional circumstances when additional powers would be needed to control suspects.

Documents published by the Home Office describe exceptional circumstances as a moment when "we are facing a terrorist threat that cannot be managed by any other means."

Other restrictions

The draft bill, if enacted, would give the home secretary the power to control the finances of a suspect and ban them from using mobile phones or computers - current control order powers. Curfews could extend to 16 hours.

Ministers have faced pressure from the opposition and other critics who have highlighted the case of a controlee, known only as "CD", who will return to London once control orders lapse.

The man attended the same Lake District terrorism training camp as the 21/7 bombers - and was allegedly planning to acquire a firearm. The man has denied allegations of wrongdoing - but a judge has upheld the relocation order.

Continue reading the main story

RELOCATED: RECENT EXAMPLES

• From Sussex to Norfolk
• From London to Leicestershire, returned, then to Bristol
• From London to Gloucestershire
• From Sussex to Suffolk
• From London to Midlands

Labour MPs have been planning to try to reinsert the relocation power into the main Tpim bill next week. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper accused the coalition of incompetence and a political fudge.

"After pressure from the police, the intelligence services and the Opposition, the government has finally admitted there is a problem with their plans to weaken counter terror legislation and remove the ability to relocate very dangerous terror suspects. The trouble is they are refusing to solve it.

"They could easily change their plans in the Commons on Monday, but instead they have produced confused and impractical emergency legislation that won't work for the serious cases we already face."

Imran Khan, a solicitor who represents men on control orders, said: "I'm flabbergasted at this. A few months ago the government said it ws ok for people who had been relocated to go back to their homes. Now it's decided to bring internal exile back."

The Home Office said: "The Enhanced Tpim Bill provides powers for the home secretary to impose enhanced Tpim notices specifying more stringent restrictions than those available under the Tpim Bill, if approved by Parliament

"These include the power to relocate the individual without their consent to a different part of the country, geographical boundaries, and tighter restrictions on association and communications."