Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Sunday, July 3, 2016
Sunday, June 5, 2016
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Social Media Surveillance
The attacks in Paris and Beirut have all of us looking for answers. What can we do to stop this violence?
But while people around the world are grappling with that question, government officials are instead seizing the opportunity to renew their attacks on our most basic freedoms, even though they know it won’t make us safer from attacks.
Specifically, officials in the U.S. and Europe are pushing to ban strong encryption technology. (2) They want every type of Internet security to have a “backdoor” so that governments can access literally everything. Here’s the problem: weakening encryption will actually make us all less safe. Even if you trust governments to never abuse this system and only use it in the most extreme circumstances, once a backdoor exists, it can be used by anyone who can find it, including criminals, other governments, and yes, even terrorists. (3)
Fortunately, we’ve done a mountain of work over the last year educating the public and fighting this kind of misinformation, so more people than ever before know what’s really going on. Security experts agree that putting backdoors in encryption technology and letting the government collect even more of our personal information won’t prevent attacks like the ones we saw last week.
The battle lines are being drawn, but some powerful voices have been listening and are weighing in on the side of freedom and logic. The influential New York Times editorial board just came out swinging with the headline: “Mass surveillance is not the answer to fighting terrorism.” This is exactly the message leaders need to hear right now.
The details from Paris and Beirut are still emerging. The latest evidence suggests that the attackers were using totally unencrypted SMS messages. (4) The facts haven’t stopped politicians and pundits from demonizing encryption, but the reality is that it’s still not clear exactly how this happened, or how it could have been prevented.
What is clear is that now is not the time to make hasty decisions and rush to pass laws we’ve barely read. That path has failed us time and again. (5) Now is the time for informed, thoughtful, discussion about the causes of this violence and the real solutions to address it.
Weakening the encryption that protects our hospitals, power plants, airports, and personal information isn’t going to make us safer.
Collecting a giant haystack of data about hundreds of millions of innocent people is not going to stop the next attack.
We need real answers and solutions, not politicians scrambling spin this terrible situation to grab more power.
These decisions about encryption and mass surveillance will determine the type of world our children and our children’s children will live in. We shouldn’t let them be made for us by opportunistic politicians or violent attackers.
Yours for freedom and a better world,
~ Fight for the Future
~ Fight for the Future
P.S. Here’s a link directly to the New York Times editorial. Please share it widely! http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
P.P.S. This is probably the only time you’ll see us rallying behind an NYT editorial. Savor the strangeness.
1. New York Times editorial board. “Mass Surveillance is Not The Answer to Fighting Terrorism” http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
2. Huffington Post. “It’s Unclear if Paris Attackers Relied on Encryption. Lawmakers are Attacking it Anyway.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
3. The Guardian. “Academics criticize NSA and GCHQ for weakening online encryption.” http://www.theguardian.com/
4. Techdirt. “After endless demonization of encryption, police find Paris attackers coordinated via unencrypted SMS” https://www.techdirt.com/
5. The Intercept. “From Paris to Boston, Terrorists Were Already Known to Authorities.” https://theintercept.com/2015/
Sunday, September 7, 2014
Zionism
Treatment of Jews in the Arab World
- “Arabs cannot possibly be anti-Semitic as they are themselves Semites.”
- “Modern Arab nations are only anti-Israel and have never been anti-Jewish.”
- “Jews who lived in Islamic countries were well-treated by the Arabs.”
- “As ‘People of the Book,’ Jews and Christians are protected under Islamic law.”
- The Situation Today
Friday, August 22, 2014
Sunday, August 17, 2014
hate begets hate
7 august 2014
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
When Ahmed Owedat returned to his home 18 days after Israeli soldiers took it over in the middle of the night, he was greeted with an overpowering stench.
He picked through the wreckage of his possessions thrown from upstairs windows to find that the departing troops had left a number of messages. One came from piles of faeces on his tiled floors and in wastepaper baskets, and a plastic bottle filled with urine.
If that was not clear enough, the words "Fuck Hamas" had been carved into a concrete wall in the staircase. "Burn Gaza down" and "Good Arab = dead Arab" were engraved on a coffee table. The star of David was drawn in blue in a bedroom.
At the same time European Jews are wondering why there is a resurgence of anti-jewish sentiment and blame it on the bad hearts of their neighbors. In the space of just one week last month, according to Crif, the umbrella group for France's Jewish organisations, eight synagogues were attacked. One, in the Paris suburb of Sarcelles, was firebombed by a 400-strong mob. A kosher supermarket and pharmacy were smashed and looted; the crowd's chants and banners included "Death to Jews" and "Slit Jews' throats". That same weekend, in the Barbes neighbourhood of the capital, stone-throwing protesters burned Israeli flags: "Israhell", read one banner.
Roger Cukierman, president of France's Crif, said French Jews were "anguished" about an anti-Jewish backlash that goes far beyond even strongly felt political and humanitarian opposition to the current fighting: "They are not screaming 'Death to the Israelis' on the streets of Paris," Cukierman said last month. "They are screaming 'Death to Jews'." Crif's vice-president Yonathan Arfi said he "utterly rejected" the view that the latest increase in antisemitic incidents was down to events in Gaza. "They have laid bare something far more profound," he said. In other words, he refuses to take responsibility for Israeli actions.
The Netherlands' main antisemitism watchdog, Cidi, had more than 70 calls from alarmed Jewish citizens in one week last month; the average is normally three to five. An Amsterdam rabbi, Binjamin Jacobs, had his front door stoned, and two Jewish women were attacked – one beaten, the other the victim of arson – after they hung Israeli flags from their balconies.
I do not think that all Jews should be blamed for Zionism. But they cannot have it both ways, support Israel, just in case, and at the same time pretend that it is not their business.
Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love... Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding.
Martin Luther King
Sunday, August 10, 2014
shopping can kill
To inform people in boycotting Israeli products (made in Israel or made outside of Israel but directly or indirectly support Israel) send out an emails, tweets, share Facebook pages, post boycott information on forums and different blogs, send out text/SMS messages to people in your mobile phone book, call people and tell them.
Most consumers do not realize the extent of the penetration of Israeli goods in Europe, and in particular the UK market.
The purpose of this campaign is to draw awareness to this and to encourage people to join the boycott by starting with boycotting 'made in Israel' products.
Does the boycott work?
According to the Israeli Union of Industrialists, following the attack on Gaza, one in five Israeli exporters are having difficulty selling abroad due to the boycott. Yair Rotloi, chairman of the association's foreign-trade committee revealed:
"Twenty one percent of local exporters report that they are facing problems in selling Israeli goods because of an anti-Israel boycott, mainly from the UK and Scandinavian countries".
Friday, February 7, 2014
The End of Economy
Published on Feb 4, 2013
There will be no economic recovery. Prepare yourself accordingly.
Freedomain Radio is the largest and most popular philosophy show on the web - http://www.freedomainradio.com
Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/endeu
Freedomain Radio is the largest and most popular philosophy show on the web - http://www.freedomainradio.com
Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/endeu
Sunday, November 24, 2013
The anti-proliferation brigade
Uploaded on Jul 22, 2010
Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto has created a beautiful, undeniably scary time-lapse map of the 2053 nuclear explosions which have taken place between 1945 and 1998, beginning with the Manhattan Project's "Trinity" test near Los Alamos and concluding with Pakistan's nuclear tests in May of 1998. This leaves out North Korea's two alleged nuclear tests in this past decade (the legitimacy of both of which is not 100% clear).
Each nation gets a blip and a flashing dot on the map whenever they detonate a nuclear weapon, with a running tally kept on the top and bottom bars of the screen. Hashimoto, who began the project in 2003, says that he created it with the goal of showing"the fear and folly of nuclear weapons." It starts really slow — if you want to see real action, skip ahead to 1962 or so — but the buildup becomes overwhelming.
The exact number of nuclear weapons in global arsenals is not known.
With little exception, each of the nine countries with nuclear weapons
guards these numbers as closely held national secrets. What is known,
however, is that more than a decade and a half after the Cold War ended,
the world's combined stockpile of nuclear warheads remain at
unacceptably high levels.
Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris of the Federation of American Scientists are the leading experts in estimating the size of global nuclear weapons inventories. The table is a compilation of their estimates and analyses, with links to their full reports. These reports are published in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and discussed further at the FAS Strategic Security Blog.
As the authors of these estimates note, the above numbers may not add up due to rounding and uncertainty about the operational statuses and size of the total inventories. For a full analysis of how the authors arrived at their estimates, please view the provided links for the complete reports.
These huge stockpiles come at great financial cost to the countries that keep nuclear weapons. Even in the U.S., these costs area difficult to determine but, through careful analysis, Ploughshares Fund has released our best estimate of just how much nuclear weapons will cost the U.S. over the next ten years.
Updated November 4, 2013.
Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris of the Federation of American Scientists are the leading experts in estimating the size of global nuclear weapons inventories. The table is a compilation of their estimates and analyses, with links to their full reports. These reports are published in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and discussed further at the FAS Strategic Security Blog.
As the authors of these estimates note, the above numbers may not add up due to rounding and uncertainty about the operational statuses and size of the total inventories. For a full analysis of how the authors arrived at their estimates, please view the provided links for the complete reports.
These huge stockpiles come at great financial cost to the countries that keep nuclear weapons. Even in the U.S., these costs area difficult to determine but, through careful analysis, Ploughshares Fund has released our best estimate of just how much nuclear weapons will cost the U.S. over the next ten years.
Updated November 4, 2013.
NSA spying
20 November 2013
Between 2004 and 2007 the Labour government gave the US National Security Agency permission to use information on innocent British people collected in the process of spying on actual targets.
According to a top secret memo I have seen, from within the NSA and dated June 2007, Britain agreed the Americans could "unminimise" British landline numbers as early as 2004. That means they were not obliged to delete them, and could now use their systems to analyse them.
By 2004 the Americans had clear reasons to be concerned about UK citizens and terror. Shoe bomber Richard Reid was in a US jail; there were nine Brits in Guantanamo.
These two documents are the first proof in black and white that an agreement exists between Britain and the USA on the targeting of each other's citizens (on the assumption, not confirmed, that Britain gained the reciprocal right to use data collected on Americans in the 2007 agreement).
clean coal
Germany’s Renewable Energiewende: Pioneering Path or Troubled Turn?
This article will examine the challenges to Germany’s policy of nuclear abandonment. Though Germany has made extraordinary moves away from their nuclear program, a full move will be riddled with trials that other countries contemplating such a move could face as well. Germany’s success or failure will likely set the course for the future of renewable energy in Europe and abroad.
Sunday, November 17, 2013
War Business
Published on Feb 4, 2013
Written and spoken by Michael Rivero.
The written version is here: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTI...
Video by Zane Henry.
This video is in the public domain. The producers have waived their copyright to this video.
Listen to a post production conversation between the producers by clicking on this mp3: https://soundcloud.com/eonitao-state/...
Video by Zane Henry.
This video is in the public domain. The producers have waived their copyright to this video.
Listen to a post production conversation between the producers by clicking on this mp3: https://soundcloud.com/eonitao-state/...
Cora Currier writes for ProPublica via Juan Cole
The United States is loosening controls over military exports, in a shift that former U.S. officials and human rights advocates say could increase the flow of American-made military parts to the world’s conflicts and make it harder to enforce arms sanctions.
Come tomorrow, thousands of parts of military aircraft, such as propeller blades, brake pads and tires will be able to be sent to almost any country in the world, with minimal oversight – even to some countries subject to U.N. arms embargos. U.S. companies will also face fewer checks than in the past when selling some military aircraft to dozens of countries.
Critics, including some who’ve worked on enforcing arms export laws, say the changes could undermine efforts to prevent arms smuggling to Iran and others.
Brake pads may sound innocuous, but “the Iranians are constantly looking for spare parts for old U.S. jets,” said Steven Pelak, who recently left the Department of Justice after six years overseeing investigations and prosecutions of export violations.
“It’s going to be easier for these military items to flow, harder to get a heads-up on their movements, and, in theory, easier for a smuggling ring to move weapons,” said William Hartung, author of a recent report on the topic for the Center for International Policy.
In the current system, every manufacturer and exporter of military equipment has to register with the State Department and get a license for each planned export. U.S. officials scrutinize each proposed deal to make sure the receiving country isn’t violating human rights and to determine the risk of the shipment winding up with terrorists or another questionable group.
Under the new system, whole categories of equipment encompassing tens of thousands of items will move to the Commerce Department, where they will be under more “flexible” controls. Final rules have been issued for six of 19 categories of equipment and more will roll out in the coming months. Some military equipment, such as fighter jets, drones, and other systems and parts, will stay under the State Department’s tighter oversight.
Commerce will do interagency human rights reviews before allowing exports, but only as a matter of policy, whereas in the State Department it is required by law.
The switch from State to Commerce represents a big win for defense manufacturers, who have long lobbied in favor of relaxing U.S. export rules, which they say put a damper on international trade. Among the companies that recently lobbied on the issue: Lockheed, which manufactures C-130 transport planes, Textron, which makes Kiowa Warrior helicopters, and Honeywell, which outfits military choppers.
Overall, industry trade groups and big defense companies have spent roughly $170 million over the last three years lobbying on a variety of issues, including export control reform, a ProPublica analysis of disclosure forms shows.
The administration says in a factsheet that “spending time and resources protecting a specialty bolt diverts resources from protecting truly sensitive items,” and that the effort will allow them to build “higher fences around fewer items.” Commerce says it will beef up its enforcement wing to prevent illegal re-exports or shipments to banned entities. The military has also supported the relaxed controls, arguing that the changes will make it easier to arm foreign allies.
An interview with Commerce Department officials was canceled due to the government shutdown, and the State Department did not respond to questions.
The shift is part of a larger administration initiative to update the arms export process, which many acknowledge needed to be streamlined. But critics of the move to Commerce say that decision has been overly driven by the interests of defense manufacturers.
“They’ve cut through the fat, into the meat, and to the bone,” said Brittany Benowitz, who was defense adviser to former Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., and recently co-authored a paper on the pending changes.
“I think it’s fair to say that the views of the enforcement agencies and actors charged with carrying out the controls haven’t won the day,” said Pelak, the former Justice Department official.
Current controls haven’t prevented the U.S. from dominating arms exports up to now: In 2011, the U.S. concluded $66 billion in arms sales agreements, nearly 80 percent of the global market. The State Department denied just one percent of arms export licenses between 2008 and 2010.
At a recent hearing, a State Department official touted the economic benefits, saying the “defense industry is going to become even more competitive than they are already.”
Under the new policy, military helicopters, transport planes and other types of military equipment that typically need approval may be eligible for license-free export to 36 allied governments, including much of Europe, Argentina, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand.
According to Colby Goodman, an arms-control expert with the Open Society Policy Center, once an item is approved for that exemption, it’s not clear that there will be any ongoing, country-specific human rights review. (The State Department hasn’t yet responded to our request for comment on that point.)
Goodman is particularly concerned about Turkey, where in the last year authorities violently suppressed protests and “security forces committed unlawful killings,” according to the most recent State Department Human Rights report.
Under the new system, some military parts can now be sent license-free to any country besides China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan or Syria. Other parts that are deemed not “specially designed” for military use, while also initially banned from those countries, have even fewer restrictions on re-exports.
Spare parts are in high demand from sanctioned countries and groups, which need them to keep old equipment up and running, according to arms control researchers. Indonesia scrambled to keep its C-130s in the air after the U.S. blocked exports for human rights violations in the 1990s. In a report on trade in arms parts, Oxfam noted that by the time of the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, Muammar Qaddafi’s air combat fleet was in dire shape, referred to by one analyst as “the world’s largest military parking lot.” Goodman said Congolese militia members may be using aging arms that the U.S. sold decades ago to the former Zaire.
Pelak says the changes will make enforcement harder by getting rid of part of the paper trail as parts and munitions exit the U.S.: “When you take away that licensing record, you put the investigation overseas.” His office handled dozens of cases each year in which military items had been diverted to prohibited countries. The Government Accountability Office raised concerns last year about Commerce’s enforcement abilities as it takes control of exports that once went through the State Department.
The president is authorized – in fact, required – to revise the list of items under State Department control. But the massive shift to Commerce means that laws and regulations that were designed with the longstanding State Department system in place may now be up to presidential prerogative.
Vetting for human rights compliance is one such requirement. The Commerce Department said it will also continue to publicly report the sales of so-called “major defense equipment.”
Other laws may not get carried over, however. For example, if firearms are moved to Commerce, manufacturers may no longer have to notify Congress of foreign sales.
Several organizations, including the Center for International Policy, the Open Society Policy Center, and the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights, have called on the administration to hold off moving some military items from the State Department, and have asked Congress to apply State’s reporting requirements and restrictions to more of the military items and parts soon to be under Commerce control.
In one area, the administration does appear to have temporarily backed off – firearms and ammunition. Any decision to loosen exports for firearms could have conflicted with the president’s call for enhanced domestic gun control.
According to a memo obtained by the Wall Street Journal last spring, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security both opposed draft versions of revisions to the firearms category. (The Justice Department press office is out of operation due to the government shutdown, and the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment.) Shifting firearms was also likely to be a lightning rod for arms control groups. As the New York Times’ C.J. Chivers has documented, small arms trafficking has been the scourge of conflicts around the world.
Draft rules for firearms and ammunitions were ready in mid-2012, according to Lawrence Keane, general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade group for gun manufacturers. The Commerce Department even sent representatives to an industry export conference to preview manufacturers on the new system they might fall under.
But since the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., last December, no proposed rule has been published.
Keane thinks the connection is irrelevant. “This has nothing to do with domestic gun control legislation. We’re talking about exports,” he said. “Our products have not moved forward, and we’re disappointed by that.”
The defense industry has long pushed for a loosening of the U.S. export controls. Initial wish-lists were aimed at restructuring and speeding up the State Department system, where the wait for a license had sometimes stretched to months. The current focus on moving items to Commerce began under the Obama administration.
The aerospace industry has been particularly active, as new rules for aircraft are the first to take effect. Commercial satellites had been moved briefly to Commerce in the 1990s, but when U.S. space companies were caught giving technical data to China in 1998, Congress returned them to State control. Last year, satellite makers successfully lobbied Congress to lift satellite-specific rules that had kept them from being eligible for the reforms.
Newer industries want to cash in, too. Virgin Galactic wrote in a comment on a proposed rule that the “nascent but growing” space tourism industry was hindered by current rules. At a conference in 2011, the chief executive of Northrup Grumman warned of “the U.S. drone aircraft industry losing its dominance” if exports weren’t boosted. (Drones are regulated under missile technology controls, and are mostly unaffected by the current changes.)
Lauren Airey, of the National Association of Manufacturers, named two main objections to the current system. First off, fees: Any company that makes a product on the State Department list has to be registered whether or not they actually export, with yearly costs starting at $2,500. There’s no fee for the Commerce list.
Secondly, any equipment that contains a listed part gets “lifetime controls,” Airey said. If a buyer wants to resell something, even for scrap, they need U.S. approval. (For example, the U.S. is currently debating whether to let Turkey re-sell American attack helicopters to Pakistan.) Under Commerce, “there are still limitations, but they are more flexible,” Airey said.
Airey’s association (and other trade groups) makes the case that foreign competitors are “taking advantage of perceived and real issues in U.S. export controls to promote foreign parts and components – advertising themselves as State-Department-free.” Airey demurred when asked for an estimate on the amount of business lost: “It’s hard to put a number directly on how much export controls cause U.S. companies to be avoided.”
An Aerospace Industries Association executive noted at a panel this spring, “We really did not move the needle at all by complaining about the fact that we weren’t making as much money as we wanted to.”
But at a recent hearing of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, members of Congress highlighted economic impact.
“In my district in Rhode Island,” said David Cicilline, D-R.I., “as many of our defense companies are looking to expand their business, really, to respond to declines in defense domestic spending, international sales are becoming even more important and really critical…to the job growth in my state.”
William Keating, D-Mass., said that “with declining defense budgets, arms sales are even more critical to the defense industry in my state to maintain production lines and keep jobs.”
“That would not have been the response a decade ago,” said one staffer who works on the issue. “National security hawks would have been worried about defense items moving to the Commerce list. The environment on the Hill has dramatically changed.”
One concern came from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which believes that easing controls on military technology and software could actually lead to more outsourcing of production.
William Lowell, who spent a decade of his 30 years at the State Department directing defense trade controls, told ProPublica that the move represents a major shift in the U.S. attitude towards international arms trade. U.S. policy has long been aimed at “denying the entry of U.S. military articles of any type into the international gray arms market – for which small arms and military parts are the lifeblood,” Lowell wrote in comments opposing the new rules. “Commercial arms exports have never been considered normal commercial trade.”
Follow @coracurrier
U.N. Arms Trade Treaty...Not only would it violate Texans’ Second Amendment rights, including the right to self defense, it also raises U.S. sovereignty and national security concerns.On 2 April 2013, the General Assembly adopted the landmark Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), regulating the international trade in conventional arms, from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships. The treaty will foster peace and security by putting a stop to destabilizing arms flows to conflict regions. It will prevent human rights abusers and violators of the law of war from being supplied with arms. And it will help keep warlords, pirates, and gangs from acquiring these deadly tools.
Senator John Cornyn
Sunday, November 3, 2013
Anti-fracking protests over Romania
Published on Oct 19, 2013
Anti-fracking protesters from all
over Romania have been galvanized US energy giant Chevron's plan to
start drilling outside the village of Pungetsi. While the energy firm
has Bucharest's blessing, people have come together to take a stand
against the potential health and environmental risks of hydraulic
fracturing in the region.
The Pley Club
(Reuters) - The U.S. Secret Service said on Friday it is under investigation by the Department of Homeland Security over the loss of computer files on the Washington Metro system.
In 2008, a contract employee lost two computer tapes on the Metro while transporting them from one facility to another, Secret Service spokesman Edwin Donovan said. The investigation was first reported Friday morning by Fox News.
The Secret Service notified transit police and the Department of Homeland Security, but were unable to locate the tapes. The back up tapes were not marked or identified and were protected by many layers of security, Donovan said.
"It was a low risk for compromise," Donovan said.
Following the incident, the Secret Service put in place new procedures aimed at preventing a repeat.
"There has been no reported fraud associated with the loss of these tapes," Donovan said.
DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Secret Service is under scrutiny after about a dozen employees were accused of misconduct for bringing women, some of them prostitutes, back to their hotel rooms ahead of a visit by President Barack Obama to Cartagena, Colombia.
(Reporting By Mark Felsenthal; editing by Todd Eastham)
In 2008, a contract employee lost two computer tapes on the Metro while transporting them from one facility to another, Secret Service spokesman Edwin Donovan said. The investigation was first reported Friday morning by Fox News.
The Secret Service notified transit police and the Department of Homeland Security, but were unable to locate the tapes. The back up tapes were not marked or identified and were protected by many layers of security, Donovan said.
"It was a low risk for compromise," Donovan said.
Following the incident, the Secret Service put in place new procedures aimed at preventing a repeat.
"There has been no reported fraud associated with the loss of these tapes," Donovan said.
DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Secret Service is under scrutiny after about a dozen employees were accused of misconduct for bringing women, some of them prostitutes, back to their hotel rooms ahead of a visit by President Barack Obama to Cartagena, Colombia.
(Reporting By Mark Felsenthal; editing by Todd Eastham)
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Israel and the European Union
By Crispian Balmer
27 October 2013
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel and the European Union will drift apart if they cannot compromise on new EU guidelines covering Jewish settlement on occupied land that could damage research and trade ties, Israeli's deputy foreign minister said.
The two sides must overcome the dispute - focused on territory that Palestinians want for a state - before the end of November, when a multi-million dollar EU research program called Horizon 2020 is due to be finalized.
If there is no deal, Israel risks missing out on generous funding for its scientists. By the same token, Europe will lose Israeli-know how, Deputy Foreign Minister Ze'ev Elkin said.
"If we fail to resolve this problem, the future direction will be a kind of separation between Israel and the European Union," Elkin told Reuters in an interview.
"We are the start-up nation. It would be a big mistake for Europe to lose its relations with Israel," he said.
A senior EU official visited Israel this week, promising that the 28-nation bloc wanted to work closely with Israel and its burgeoning hi-tech economy, but all efforts so far to bridge their differences have failed.
Despite Israel's intimate diplomatic and military ties with the United States, its biggest economic partner by far is the European Union, which accounted for almost third of all exports and imports into the Jewish state last month.
Despite deep historical links, relations between Israel and Europe have grown more bumpy in recent years, with the EU increasingly vocal in its criticism of Jewish settlements, saying they imperil the chances of peace with the Palestinians.
Matters came to a head in July, when the EU's Executive Commission announced it would bar financial assistance to any Israeli organization operating in the West Bank from 2014.
The move finally put some teeth into EU opposition to settlements built on territory Israel seized in a 1967 war and which are now home to more than 500,000 Israelis. Palestinians want the land for part of a future independent state.
FURY
When the guidelines were unveiled, Israel furiously accused EU bureaucrats of lying about the scope of the measures. Surprised by the angry response, EU officials said Israel had failed to grasp European frustration over settlement expansion.
"This had been in the pipeline for months. The problem was that the Israelis did not originally understand the (bureaucratic) language, so felt exposed," said a senior European diplomat in Jerusalem, who declined to be named.
Israel has since toned down the criticism, but Elkin said the EU move was aimed at imposing new borders on Israel via trade sanctions rather than through on-going negotiations with the Palestinians. He also said that it meant the Europeans could dictate where Israeli money went in any joint ventures.
"As it stands, we cannot sign Horizon 2020. It would force us to discriminate (against) our own institutions," said the pro-settler Elkin, who, unlike Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, does not believe the Palestinians should have their own state.
Although it carries much less weight in the region than the United States, Europe has nonetheless managed to precipitate important diplomatic moves that were later followed by others.
In 1980, it recognized the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) when both Washington and Israel still considered it to be a terrorist group. It also pushed for an independent Palestine before the United States adopted the same position.
The EU has said it will not change the new guidelines, but is looking at ways for a flexible implementation of the rules.
"No progress has yet been made on reaching a common understanding," said an official involved in the talks.
The European Commissioner for Industry, Antonio Tajani, brought a delegation of more than 60 EU businessmen to Israel this week and sought to play down the dispute.
"There are problems, of course. But the message is, we want to work with Israel," he told Reuters in Tel Aviv.
Senior EU diplomat Pierre Vimont is due to visit Israel before the end of the month to discuss the impasse.
"The Europeans tell us not to worry, but of course we worry, we are Jewish," said an Israeli official involved in the discussions. "We want clear commitments on how this will be implemented, and we want it in writing."
(Additional reporting by Adrian Croft, Justyna Pawlak and Luke Baker in Brussels, editing by Mark Heinrich)
27 October 2013
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel and the European Union will drift apart if they cannot compromise on new EU guidelines covering Jewish settlement on occupied land that could damage research and trade ties, Israeli's deputy foreign minister said.
The two sides must overcome the dispute - focused on territory that Palestinians want for a state - before the end of November, when a multi-million dollar EU research program called Horizon 2020 is due to be finalized.
If there is no deal, Israel risks missing out on generous funding for its scientists. By the same token, Europe will lose Israeli-know how, Deputy Foreign Minister Ze'ev Elkin said.
"If we fail to resolve this problem, the future direction will be a kind of separation between Israel and the European Union," Elkin told Reuters in an interview.
"We are the start-up nation. It would be a big mistake for Europe to lose its relations with Israel," he said.
A senior EU official visited Israel this week, promising that the 28-nation bloc wanted to work closely with Israel and its burgeoning hi-tech economy, but all efforts so far to bridge their differences have failed.
Despite Israel's intimate diplomatic and military ties with the United States, its biggest economic partner by far is the European Union, which accounted for almost third of all exports and imports into the Jewish state last month.
Despite deep historical links, relations between Israel and Europe have grown more bumpy in recent years, with the EU increasingly vocal in its criticism of Jewish settlements, saying they imperil the chances of peace with the Palestinians.
Matters came to a head in July, when the EU's Executive Commission announced it would bar financial assistance to any Israeli organization operating in the West Bank from 2014.
The move finally put some teeth into EU opposition to settlements built on territory Israel seized in a 1967 war and which are now home to more than 500,000 Israelis. Palestinians want the land for part of a future independent state.
FURY
When the guidelines were unveiled, Israel furiously accused EU bureaucrats of lying about the scope of the measures. Surprised by the angry response, EU officials said Israel had failed to grasp European frustration over settlement expansion.
"This had been in the pipeline for months. The problem was that the Israelis did not originally understand the (bureaucratic) language, so felt exposed," said a senior European diplomat in Jerusalem, who declined to be named.
Israel has since toned down the criticism, but Elkin said the EU move was aimed at imposing new borders on Israel via trade sanctions rather than through on-going negotiations with the Palestinians. He also said that it meant the Europeans could dictate where Israeli money went in any joint ventures.
"As it stands, we cannot sign Horizon 2020. It would force us to discriminate (against) our own institutions," said the pro-settler Elkin, who, unlike Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, does not believe the Palestinians should have their own state.
Although it carries much less weight in the region than the United States, Europe has nonetheless managed to precipitate important diplomatic moves that were later followed by others.
In 1980, it recognized the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) when both Washington and Israel still considered it to be a terrorist group. It also pushed for an independent Palestine before the United States adopted the same position.
The EU has said it will not change the new guidelines, but is looking at ways for a flexible implementation of the rules.
"No progress has yet been made on reaching a common understanding," said an official involved in the talks.
The European Commissioner for Industry, Antonio Tajani, brought a delegation of more than 60 EU businessmen to Israel this week and sought to play down the dispute.
"There are problems, of course. But the message is, we want to work with Israel," he told Reuters in Tel Aviv.
Senior EU diplomat Pierre Vimont is due to visit Israel before the end of the month to discuss the impasse.
"The Europeans tell us not to worry, but of course we worry, we are Jewish," said an Israeli official involved in the discussions. "We want clear commitments on how this will be implemented, and we want it in writing."
(Additional reporting by Adrian Croft, Justyna Pawlak and Luke Baker in Brussels, editing by Mark Heinrich)
Published on Sep 20, 2013
The European diplomats, who were trying to deliver emergency aid to the residents of a demolished Palestinian village, were manhandled by Israeli troops and their truck was seized by the IDF. READ MORE: http://on.rt.com/riib3s
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Tar sands danger
By Kiley Kroh
on
October 15, 2013 at 9:35 am
Petroleum coke, a byproduct of tar sands refining, is building up along Chicago’s Calumet River and alarming residents, reported Midwest Energy News.
Petroleum coke is a high-carbon, high-sulfur byproduct of Canadian tar sands that are shipped from Alberta to the U.S. to be refined and is rapidly becoming a cause for concern in Chicago. “It’s growing by leaps and bounds,” Southeast Environmental Task Force member Tom Shepherd, told Midwest Energy News. “It’s coming at a breathtaking rate.”
The pet coke is owned by billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch whose operations drew similar outrage from residents and elected officials in Detroit earlier this year. In July, a large black cloud of pet coke dust was spotted over the Detroit River and caught on camera by residents across the border in Windsor. Members of the communities in close proximity to the piles were complaining of respiratory problems as the thick, black dust was blowing off the piles and into their apartments.
on
October 15, 2013 at 9:35 am Petroleum coke, a byproduct of tar sands refining, is building up along Chicago’s Calumet River and alarming residents, reported Midwest Energy News.
Petroleum coke is a high-carbon, high-sulfur byproduct of Canadian tar sands that are shipped from Alberta to the U.S. to be refined and is rapidly becoming a cause for concern in Chicago. “It’s growing by leaps and bounds,” Southeast Environmental Task Force member Tom Shepherd, told Midwest Energy News. “It’s coming at a breathtaking rate.”
The pet coke is owned by billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch whose operations drew similar outrage from residents and elected officials in Detroit earlier this year. In July, a large black cloud of pet coke dust was spotted over the Detroit River and caught on camera by residents across the border in Windsor. Members of the communities in close proximity to the piles were complaining of respiratory problems as the thick, black dust was blowing off the piles and into their apartments.
cyberwar against Iran
- Stuxnet worm hits Iranian centrifuges - from mid-2009 to late 2010
- Iran complains facilities hit by Stars malware - April 2011
- Duqu trojan hits Iran's computer systems - November 2011
- Flame virus targets computers in PCs across the Middle East, including Iran and Israel - June 2012
- Iran says Stuxnet worm returns - December 2012
Sunday, October 13, 2013
war in Afghanistan
KABUL | Sun Oct 13, 2013 6:38am EDT
(Reuters) - An Afghan man wearing an Afghan army uniform shot at U.S. soldiers in eastern Afghanistan, killing at least one serviceman on Sunday, local officials and the NATO-led coalition said.
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Mexican Drug War
Nov 22nd 2012, 16:34 by Economist.com
MEXICO’S murder rate has doubled over the past five years, to nearly 19 per 100,000 people per year. But what does that really mean? To give an idea of how safe or dangerous the country's various states are, we have compared their crime statistics with those of whole countries. Visitors can relax in Yucatán, the safest state, which has about the same murder rate as Finland. Tlaxcala, not far from Mexico City, is about as safe as the United States. At the other end of the spectrum Chihuahua, the most violent state, has a murder rate equivalent to El Salvador, one of the most violent countries in the world. Another way of looking at the data is to compare the gross totals. The state of San Luis Potosí, for instance, has seen as many murders in the past year as all of Spain, despite having a population of just 2.6m.
Mexican states compared with entire countries' body counts, murder rates and populations
MEXICO’S murder rate has doubled over the past five years, to nearly 19 per 100,000 people per year. But what does that really mean? To give an idea of how safe or dangerous the country's various states are, we have compared their crime statistics with those of whole countries. Visitors can relax in Yucatán, the safest state, which has about the same murder rate as Finland. Tlaxcala, not far from Mexico City, is about as safe as the United States. At the other end of the spectrum Chihuahua, the most violent state, has a murder rate equivalent to El Salvador, one of the most violent countries in the world. Another way of looking at the data is to compare the gross totals. The state of San Luis Potosí, for instance, has seen as many murders in the past year as all of Spain, despite having a population of just 2.6m.
Sunday, January 6, 2013
the WikiLeaks threat
By Mohammed Abbas and Alessandra Prentice | Reuters LONDON (Reuters) - Britain said on Thursday that any decision by Ecuador to give Julian Assange political asylum wouldn't change a thing and that it might still revoke the diplomatic status of Quito's embassy in London to allow the extradition of the WikiLeaks founder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)