Nicolas Sarkozy says France has too many foreigners

Comments (619)

Nicolas Sarkozy says the system for integrating immigrants is at risk of breaking down

Continue reading the main story

France votes

• Sarkozy's monumental task
• Dream start for Hollande
• 'Detoxifying' the National Front
• Francois Bayrou and self-belief

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said there are too many foreigners in France and the system for integrating them is "working worse and worse".

In a TV debate, Mr Sarkozy defended his plan to almost halve the number of new arrivals if re-elected next month.

Mr Sarkozy is trailing in the opinion polls behind the Socialist candidate Francois Hollande.

He is also competing for conservative voters with the far-right National Front party led by Marine le Pen.

The president said while immigration could be a boon for France, it needed to be controlled more tightly through tougher qualification rules for residency.

Mr Sarkozy, whose father was a Hungarian immigrant, also said he wanted to restrict some benefit payments to immigrants who had been in the country for 10 years.

Tough new rules

He has often made controversial comments on race and immigration issues, sharply dividing opinion in France.

In 2005, just before the Paris riots, he described young delinquents in the Paris suburbs as "racaille", meaning rabble.

He has said that if re-elected, he will reduce the number of immigrants to France from 180,000 a year to 100,000 and introduce tighter controls on access to welfare benefits.

As president, Mr Sarkozy has already pushed through tough new immigration rules, including the controversial deportation of Roma gypsies.

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Francois Fillon caused dismay among Muslim and Jewish groups by suggesting the religious slaughter of animals was out of date.

The controversy started when a TV documentary said last month that all the abattoirs in Paris region only produced halal meat.

So far the election campaign seems to have made relatively little impact on voters.

The latest opinion poll published on Tuesday by CSA showed the Socialist leader Francois Hollande widening his lead over President Sarkozy for the 22 April vote.

It also suggested that the Socialist leader would win decisively by 54% to 46% in a second round of voting on 6 May.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

"Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

What happened to those human values and why have they been replaced with xenophobia?

What happened to looking at a human for who they are, not by their culture or their skin color?

What happened to human dignity and preciousness?

Sarkozy has flushed it all down his french toilet. His people would do well to get rid of his racist french hiney.

Syria unrest: Opposition seeks arms pledge

Comments (306)

Unverified footage shows an apparent attack by opposition fighters on one of President Assad's tanks, as Bridget Kendall reports from Tunis

Continue reading the main story

Syria Crisis

• Syrians flee
• Tribute to Colvin
• Guide to opposition
• Civil war?

The main Syrian opposition group has asked for rebel fighters to be allowed to import weapons.

The plea came at a major international "Friends of Syria" conference being held in Tunisia to seek a breakthrough in the increasingly bitter conflict.

A declaration is expected later, calling on Syrian forces to declare a ceasefire and allow humanitarian access to the worst-hit areas.

Syrian state TV said the conference was a meeting of "symbols of colonialism".

Those attending, it said, were "historic enemies of the Arabs".

The US, Europe and Arab countries plan to challenge President Bashar al-Assad to provide humanitarian access within days, with the threat of fresh sanctions if he does not comply.

Around 70 nations, including the US, UK, France and Turkey, are attending the conference, organised by the Arab League.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

The Friends of Syria should not constrain individual countries from aiding the Syrian opposition by means of military advisers, training and provision of arms to defend themselves”

Syrian National Council

• China's stake in the Syria stand-off

But Russia and China, key allies of Syria which have blocked UN resolutions again Damascus, are not there.

A group of pro-Assad protesters forced their way into the grounds of the hotel where the conference is being held, Reuters news agency reported, but tight security prevented them getting into the building.

'Offensive measures'

The leading opposition group, the Syrian National Council, said countries should be allowed to supply arms if Damascus refused to bow to outside pressure.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

Jonathan Marcus BBC News, Tunis

Syrian opposition groups point to the disparity of force in this conflict - their Kalashnikovs against Syrian government artillery - and are calling for arms supplies to help them defend themselves against President Assad's forces.

For now, at least, Western governments believe that arms supplies would only further militarise the conflict, making a bad situation worse. But if the bloodshed continues then the pressure - at least covertly - to arm the opposition will grow.

I asked UK Foreign Secretary William Hague as he arrived at the conference to confront this question square on. Had the time come - I asked - to arm the Syrian opposition fighters? There was, he replied, a European Union arms embargo in place against Syria and Britain, he stressed, would abide by it.

There was of course an arms embargo in force in Libya but that didn't prevent Qatar, France and others supplying weaponry to Col Gaddafi's opponents. Even the US seems to be shifting its position slightly - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton implying that one way or another the opposition would get arms from somewhere. If the fighting continues this is going to become an ever more pressing question.

"If the regime fails to accept the terms of the political initiative outlined by the Arab League and end violence against citizens, the Friends of Syria should not constrain individual countries from aiding the Syrian opposition by means of military advisers, training and provision of arms to defend themselves."

The conference endorsed the council as a "credible" voice of opposition, while making clear it did not exclude other groups - thereby stopping short of declaring it a plausible government-in-waiting.

At least one other opposition group, the National Co-ordination Committee for Democratic Change (NCCDC), is boycotting the meeting, saying it excludes some voices and leaves open the idea of military intervention, AFP news agency reports.

Activists say more than 7,000 people have died in the 11-month uprising - more than 90 on Thursday alone - and concern is growing over the humanitarian situation, particularly in the besieged city of Homs.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) appealed this week for a pause in fighting to allow aid to be taken in, but said it had received no response from Damascus.

The ICRC said it was becoming "more and more concerned over humanitarian needs that are increasing by the hour".

Spokesman Hicham Hassan told Reuters news agency: "It is crucial that our initiative is met with a positive and concrete reaction urgently."

Journalists' appeal

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the conference the Syrian government had "ignored every warning, squandered every opportunity and broken every agreement".

"If the Assad regime refuses to allow this life-saving aid to reach civilians, it will have ever-more blood on its hands,'' she said in opening remarks.

Edith Bouvier: "I need an urgent operation"

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said "terrible crimes" were being committed in Homs.

"I think we have seen enough in the last few weeks to know that the Assad regime will go down in history as a criminal regime," he said.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said the conference needed to exert the maximum pressure on the Syrian government and also on Russia, but insisted there was no military option on the table and France could not envisage such an option without an international mandate.

The BBC's Jonathan Marcus in Tunis says the conference is a means of getting around Russia and China, which have faced Western and Arab criticism for vetoing a UN Security Council resolution condemning Syria and Mr Assad.

Moscow and Beijing have said they want to see an end to the violence but that such action amounts to forced regime change.

On the eve of the conference, the UN and Arab League appointed Kofi Annan as their envoy to Syria.

Mr Annan, a former UN secretary general who has acted as a diplomatic troubleshooter in several long-running conflicts, said he hoped to "help bring an end to the violence and human rights abuses, and promote a peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis".

Diplomats attending the conference say the UN will call for preparations to start an Arab/UN peacekeeping force for Syria, to assist with the political transition after the violence ends, the BBC's Kim Ghattas reports from Tunis.

The civilian police force would be deployed only in a "permissive" environment, under Chapter 6 of the UN charter.

Diplomats said the efforts were designed to show a political transition was inevitable and that President Assad's rule was coming to an end.

The conference comes two days after two journalists - American Sunday Times reporter Marie Colvin and French photographer Remi Ochlik - died during shelling in Homs.

Two journalists wounded in the same attack have made internet appeals for medical help. Frenchwoman Edith Bouvier is being treated by Syrian medics but needs surgery which they are unable to perform. Paul Conroy, who is British, also asked for outside help to bring him to safety.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

What happened to peaceful opposition like we were taught in America?

How can anyone support this type of aggressive activism?

It involves the deaths of hundreds of people; completely unjust.

A Reality Check on Teen Sex

A Reality Check on Teen Sex

Dana Goldstein on October 26, 2011 - 5:55pm ET

Even in liberal, cosmopolitan New York City, sex education is controversial—at least in the media.

Last week, the New York Post published a breathless article about the city’s new comprehensive sex ed curriculum, which will be rolled out this spring for middle and high-school students. According to the Post, some unspecified number of “parents” are feeling “furor” at the following “bawdy” homework assignments:

· High-school students go to stores and jot down condom brands, prices and features such as lubrication.

· Teens research a route from school to a clinic that provides birth control and STD tests, and write down its confidentiality policy.

· Kids ages 11 and 12 sort “risk cards” to rate the safety of various activities, including “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant,” mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral sex and anal sex.

Regarding this last assignment, an October 18 New York Times op-ed by two authors affiliated with the hard right American Principles Project borrowed the “parental rights” rhetoric of the Tea Party to claim that teaching seventh-graders that kissing and petting are less risky than oral sex or vaginal intercourse violates parents’ right to control what their children hear about “sensitive issues of morality.” Although the city plans to allow parents to opt their children out of lessons on how to use contraception, parents should be able to remove their kids from any part of the sex ed curriculum they choose, the authors argued.

The research consensus on sex ed is clear: the vast majority of abstinence-only programs, which tend to portray all premarital sexual activity as sinful and unhealthy, have no record of delaying sexual intercourse. The one abstinence program that does successfully delay sexual initiation has little in common with its peers; instead of portraying sex in a negative light, it focuses on teaching kids about sexually transmitted infections such as HIV and herpes. Meanwhile, students who receive comprehensive sex ed, which includes lessons on how to obtain and use contraception, are more likely to use protection when they do have sex, and less likely to become pregnant.

But the never-ending sex ed wars aren’t really about what “works” in terms of keeping kids healthy and preventing teen pregnancy. As sociologist Kristin Luker demonstrates in her excellent book When Sex Goes to School, a person’s position on sex ed is a proxy for a deeper set of questions: whether or not one supports the changes in gender and economic norms that have brought women into the workplace, delayed the average age at marriage and allowed couples to experience sex without the burden of pregnancy, through the use of hormonal birth control. “Abstinence-only education,” Luker writes, “rejects the core principle on which the harm-reduction model is based: that each individual should decide for himself or herself what is proper sexual behavior. Instead, it substitutes a single value for everyone, namely, no sex outside (heterosexual) marriage.”

The problem with this ideology is that it is based on a fantasy. Ninety-five percent of Americans have premarital sex, and the average age of sexual initiation is 16 for boys and 17 for girls. These numbers have remained remarkably consistent since the early 1960s. What has changed is the particular risks facing our inner-city youth. According to the Guttmacher Institute, since the 1980s, the number of urban, minority youth reporting sexual initiation before the age of 15 has increased. In one 2001 study, 31 percent of urban minority boys and 8 percent of urban minority girls reported having sex in seventh or eighth grade. By the end of tenth grade, a majority of both the girls and boys reported that they had sex.

It is exactly this population that the New York City sex ed curriculum was crafted to reach. And though teaching middle-schoolers about safe sex is eternally controversial, the evidence suggests that for a significant portion of our urban youth, seventh grade is actually too late to begin having these conversations, since they are already sexually active.

A sex ed curriculum based in reality acknowledges these risks and attempts to mitigate them. And since there’s no evidence at all that comprehensive sex-ed hastens children’s sexual initiation, there is little downside. After all, even the most progressive sex ed curriculum teaches kids that delaying sex is the only 100 percent effective method for preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

While I disagree with some of the statements made in this article, especially how our positions on sex ed are a bellweather for other social issues, I do think the data in this article is worth looking over, as is the discussion itself.

I was frankly a bit surprised to find out 95% of Americans have had premarital relations. I suppose since people are getting married less and less, this number had to rise higher and higher because of human nature and desire.

Moderate Islamic party claims election win in Tunisia

Comments (28)

The EU observer mission gave elections in Tunisia a clean bill of health

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Tunisia counts votes in key poll
• Tunisia: Broken dreams six months after revolution
• Q&A: Tunisia elections

Tunisia's moderate Islamist party, Ennahda, is claiming victory in the country's first democratic elections.

Official results are expected on Tuesday, but provisional results suggest that Ennahda will win most votes while falling short of a majority.

Its main rival, the secular centre-left PDP party, has admitted defeat.

International observers praised the conduct of Sunday's election as free and fair.

Former President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali was overthrown nine months ago after mass demonstrations - he had been in power for 23 years.

However, unlike its eastern neighbour Libya, Tunisia's transition from authoritarian rule has been largely peaceful.

'Greatest share'

Ennahda's leaders have pledged to create a multi-party, secular democracy, and not an Islamist state.

A spokeswoman for the party, Yusra Ghannouchi, said: "Tunisians have voted in fact for those parties that have been consistently part of the struggle for democracy and opposed to Ben Ali's dictatorship.

"At the forefront of those parties is Ennahda party, and we believe that, as expected, it has achieved the greatest share of the vote."

The official result is due to be announced on Tuesday.

Tunisians are electing a 217-seat assembly that will draft a constitution and appoint an interim president, who will choose the new government.

Electoral commission secretary-general Boubaker Bethabet said more than 90% of the 4.1 million registered citizens had voted.

No turnout figures were available for another 3.1 million unregistered people who also had the right to vote.

More than 100 parties had registered to participate in the elections, along with a number of independent candidates.

Hundreds of foreign election observers and thousands of local ones monitored the poll and will be watching the vote counting.

The US and EU have praised Tunisia on the peaceful election process, with President Barack Obama saying the vote was "an important step forward".

Former President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali was overthrown nine months ago after mass demonstrations - he had been in power for 23 years until he fled to Saudi Arabia on 14 January.

This is the first free election in Tunisia's history

Many voters emerged from polling stations holding up blue-stained index fingers - proud to show they had cast their ballots.

The mother of Mohamed Bouazizi, the young man whose self-immolation last December triggered the Tunisian revolt, told the Reuters news agency the election was a victory for dignity and freedom.

"Now I am happy that my son's death has given the chance to get beyond fear and injustice," Manoubia Bouazizi said. "I'm an optimist, I wish success for my country."

Campaigning in Tunisia was marked by concerns over splits between Islamists and secularists, party funding and voter apathy.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

Article should be titled, Moderate ISLAMIC party. Why the word Islamist is used... I have no idea. Islamist refers to radical. A moderate Radical is a contradiction.

The BBC really needs to stop sensationalizing it's writing, especially with touchy topics like religion.

Herman Cain & Michele Bachmann Refuse to Say Mitt Romney is Christian

Politics 101:

Create enough doubt to sway voters and shy yourself away from the problem so as not to become a target for the criticizers.

They make sure the question of Mormonism is alive in the voters mind by not answering the question directly, creating controversy.

Michael Moore Tonight at #OccupyWallStreet: "This Is a Historic Day" (Day 19, 10/5/11)

Michael's courage is hope for us all. He is our economic hero. He wants a fair society based on fair regulations, fair trade, and happiness for as many as possible.

What a disgrace to all officers and all our courageous heroes that risk their lives for the safety of their fellow citizen.

Vast shark sanctuary created in Pacific

By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News

The Marshall Islands initiative is the latest in a worldwide islands' movement to protect sharks

Related Stories

• Palau pioneers 'shark sanctuary'
• Many sharks 'facing extinction'
• Country profile: Marshall Islands

The Marshall Islands government has created the world's largest shark sanctuary, covering nearly two million sq km (750,000 sq miles) of ocean.

The Pacific republic will ban trade in shark products and commercial shark fishing throughout its waters.

Tourism, including diving, is a staple of the Marshall Islands archipelago, which is home to just 68,000 people.

Sharks and their near relatives such as rays are seriously threatened by issues such as habitat loss and fishing.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

The momentum for protecting these animals continues to spread across the globe”

Matt Rand Pew Environment Group

About a third of ocean-going sharks are on the internationally-recognised Red List of Threatened Species.

"In passing this [shark protection] bill, there is no greater statement we can make about the importance of sharks to our culture, environment and economy," said Senator Tony deBrum, who co-sponsored the bill through the Marshallese parliament.

"Ours may be a small island nation, but our waters are now the biggest place sharks are protected."

To put the sanctuary in context, it covers roughly the same area as Indonesia, Mexico or Saudi Arabia, and is about eight times bigger than the UK.

The move will extend the area of ocean in which sharks are protected from about 2.7 million sq km to 4.6 million sq km (1.0 to 1.8 million sq miles).

Global network

Under the bill, commercial shark fishing and any trade in shark products will be banned, and any of the fish accidentally caught must be released alive.

The sanctuary will swallow a huge chunk of the Pacific Ocean

Certain designs of fishing gear will be banned from Marshallese waters; and violators of all these measures face fines of up to £200,000.

The Marshallese government has worked on the plan with advisors from the Pew Environment Group, the US-based organisation that identified archipelago nations as providing big marine conservation "wins" because of the vast scale of their territorial waters.

"We salute the Republic of the Marshall Islands for enacting the strongest legislation to protect sharks that we have seen," said Matt Rand, Pew's director of global shark conservation.

"As leaders recognise the importance of healthy shark populations to our oceans, the momentum for protecting these animals continues to spread across the globe."

The Marshall Islands follows the lead taken by Palau two years ago, whose sanctuary was then the world's biggest. Other nations including the Bahamas have since followed suit.

Last week, a group of eight countries including Mexico, Honduras, the Maldives and Northern Mariana Islands signed a declaration announcing they would push for more shark protection across the world.

Because they grow and reproduce relatively slowly, sharks are especially vulnerable to factors such as accidental or targeted fishing.

Shark protection measures are also likely to help marine biodiversity overall, as they restrict the rights of fishing vessels and require greater scrutiny of landings.

However, with the Marshall Islands as with Palau and some other countries, there are questions over the capacity of authorities to monitor fully such huge expanses of ocean.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

For anyone unsure of the benefit of sharks and why we should protect them, I'll give small rundown as to why this sanctuary is beneficial.

Sharks limit other animals from eating away natural resources too quickly. The herbivores that sharks feed on eat the producers. The only protection producers have are the sharks that, as carnivores eating herbivores, keep the other animals in check and stop them from destroying the natural ecosystem, keeping the environment sustainable.

Think of a shark as a diet on a group of herbivores. That diet keeps the environment fit and healthy and sustains it, rather than allowing all the herbivores to destroy their environment and eat all the natural resources around them.

Sharks are very beneficial in this way and are crucial to the harmony of the ecosystems of our world. The majority of them also do not eat humans and are not aggressive towards humans.

Earthlike Planets May Be Less Common than We Think

By Michael D. Lemonick

A view of Earth's vast Pacific Ocean

NASA

Unless searchers who scan the cosmic airwaves pick up signals from extraterrestrials, the discovery for life on other planets will take a while, and it will take a series of incremental steps. Step one — making sure there are planets outside of our solar system in the first place — has long since been accomplished. Thanks to searches from the ground and, more recently, by the orbiting Kepler spacecraft, astronomers know that hundreds of planets, at the very least, orbit other stars, and almost certainly far more than that.

Step two — finding a world similar to Earth, in an orbit in which temperatures allow life-giving water to exist as a liquid — is all but inevitable given the large and growing planetary sample group. When that happens, scientists will move on as quickly as they can to step three: using powerful telescopes to look for chemicals in the planet's atmosphere that betray the presence of life. The problem is, there's one extra step — call it two-and-a-half — that few scientists had really thought about much. (See iconic images of Earth from space.)

Water is abundant all over the Milky Way. Our own Solar System is chock full of it, from Earth's ocean to the vastly greater amounts in the form of ice locked up in comets, moons and dwarf planets like Pluto. But that doesn't necessarily mean that all solar systems are like that. And a new paper published online suggests they may well not be.

The study, led by Princeton astrophysicist Nikku Madhusudhan, focuses on a star targeted by the ground-based Wide Area Planet Search, or WASP. Known as WASP-12, the star has a giant planet orbiting around it, dubbed, straightforwardly enough, WASP-12b. Last year, Madhusudhan discovered something odd about the planet: it has an unexpectedly large amount of carbon compared with, say, Jupiter, its closest analogue in our own solar system. Since carbon is a major building block of all life on Earth, a carbon-rich planet might well signal an entire carbon-rich solar system. That could certainly include an Earth-like planet with all the ingredients for life, and, quite plausibly, life itself.

But carbon isn't the only element in play; oxygen counts too. For a lot of technically mind-numbing reasons, it's not easy to measure carbon directly in a star or planet; instead astronomers measure the carbon-oxygen ratio and judge from there. The ratio in the star itself, Wasp 12, is about the same as in our sun. That should mean a similar balance in any planets circling the star, since the entire solar system formed from the same swirling mass of dust and gas. On WASP-12b, however, things are off-kilter, with the carbon far more plentiful relative to the oxygen. Since the planet couldn't go shopping for extra carbon elsewhere, the explanation must be that its carbon level isn't unusually high, but its oxygen level is unusually low. Where, Madhusudhan wondered, had all the oxygen gone? (See an illustrated history of Earth.)

The best guess, he and his co-authors believe, is that some other element is vacuuming it up, and the leading culprit is the carbon atoms themselves, which may have combined with oxygen to form carbon monoxide. You wouldn't need to capture all the oxygen this way to explain Wasp 12-b's low oxygen content — at least not at first. Instead, the investigators' models suggest, once the carbon starts snagging the oxygen, the process spins essentially out of control, stopping only when there's little or no oxygen left.

That discovery is fascinating stuff for planet scientists, but not necessarily for the rest of us. The implications of the finding, however, are less arcane than they seem. Carbon plus oxygen, slowly warmed in a star's habitable zone, ought to be a simple recipe for getting life started (provided there's hydrogen to mix with the oxygen to form water, of course). But the new findings introduce an x-factor into the mix: You also have to keep the carbon and oxygen from getting too cozy, lest there's no O left to create the hoped-for H₂O.

"Generally," says Madhusudhan, "we just assume that if a planet is in the habitable zone of its star, it could be capable of supporting life." Instead, he now realizes, you could just as easily get a planet dominated by methane and other nasty carbon-based substances.

If that process is far more common than the one that played out on Earth, the search for life — or at least, life as we know it — could be in vain. But it's not time to give up yet. "The only way to get a sense of how common this situation is," says Madhusudhan, "is to look at a lot of planets and find out how many of them are as carbon-rich." He and his collaborators are conducting a survey even now with the Hubble Space Telescope, trying to answer the question. It shouldn't be long before we have a better sense of how damp the Milky Way really is.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

Another great book on this topic is "The God Hypothesis: Discovering Design in Our Just Right Goldilocks Universe".

There are a number of factors besides just water that are needed to sustain life.

Even the size of the planet is important because Gravity, affected by the size of the planet, can make life impossible if the planet is too large and creating too much gravity.

Life is a delicate thing. Astronomers for the longest time seemed to have contested that theory with Biologists.

But do the studiers of life know more about it and it's origins or the explorers of space?

Life can occur but to make it do so is a daunting task. A task some say, is so daunting, it can only be done with a divine hand.

Western powers angered as Israel agrees settler homes

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Israel's move could be seen as provocative

Palestinian UN membership bid

• Q&A: Bid explained
• Israeli view
• Palestinian view
• End of new beginning?

Western powers have expressed dismay at Israeli plans to build 1,100 more homes on a settlement on Jerusalem's edge.

The US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the move "counter-productive" to peace talks while the EU said the plan should be "reversed".

The announcement comes days after Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas called for full UN membership for a Palestinian state.

The new houses are to be constructed Israel at Gilo, in East Jerusalem.

Almost 500,000 Jews live in settlements on occupied territory. The settlements are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

'Provocative'

US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians are deadlocked over the issue of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Mrs Clinton said Israel's move would damage attempts to resume direct negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.

Gilo is built on land captured by Israel in 1967

"We have long urged both sides to avoid any kind of action which could undermine trust, including, and perhaps most particularly, in Jerusalem, any action that could be viewed as provocative by either side," she said.

The European Union's Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton told the EU parliament that she heard "with deep regret" that Israeli settlement plans were continuing.

"This plan should be reversed. Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution and runs contrary to the Israeli-stated commitment to resume negotiations."

She said she would raise the issue with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when she next met him.

"He should stop announcing them and, more importantly, stop building them," she said, adding that it was wrong to get people to live in a place from which they may have to move from after any negotiated settlement is achieved.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague too urged Israel to revoke its decision.

"Settlement expansion is illegal under international law, corrodes trust and undermines the basic principle of land for peace," he said in a statement.

'Nice gift'

The plan for construction in Gilo includes the construction of small housing units, public buildings, a school and an industrial zone, according to the Ynet news website.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution ”

Catherine Ashton EU Foreign Policy Chief

"It's a nice gift for Rosh Hashanah [Jewish New Year]," Yair Gabay, a member of the Jerusalem planning committee, told Ynet.

The authorities have now approved the building of almost 3,000 homes in Gilo over the past two years.

The chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the decision represented a rejection of a proposal by the Quartet of Mid East negotiators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN - for new talks between the Palestinians and Israelis, expected to be made officially on Friday.

"With this, Israel is responding to the Quartet's statement with 1,100 'NOs'," he said.

On Monday, a divided UN Security Council met behind closed doors for its first discussion of last week's Palestinian application for full state membership of the UN.

The request needs the support of nine of the 15 members of the council, but the US has said it will veto the bid.

'Discriminatory demolitions'

Israel built the settlement at Gilo on land it captured in 1967. It later annexed the area to the Jerusalem municipality in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel says it does not consider areas within the Jerusalem municipality to be settlements.

Gilo lies across a narrow valley from the Palestinian village of Beit Jala. It became a target for militants during the second Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation in 2000.

Meanwhile, the UN rapporteurs on housing, water, sanitation and food rights said there had been a "dramatic increase" in the demolitions this year.

"The impact and discriminatory nature of these demolitions and evictions is completely unacceptable," they said in a statement.

"These actions by the Israeli authorities violate human rights and humanitarian law and must end immediately."

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

What is Palestine supposed to do when Israel keeps taking more and more of it's land?

It does a peaceful resolution of asking for U.N membership, so that it can negotiate with Israel on similar footing, and the U.S threatens a veto?

Facts on the ground. That's what Israel is trying to change. If it can get enough Israelis living on Palestinian land, it will change the facts on the ground and take more land than it deserves.

Palestinians have broken zero U.N resolutions. Israel has broken more than 50.

The U.S is not an even handed broker, and the veto and oppression of the Palestinian people is proof of that.

Actions speak louder than words.

Barack Obama 'will veto' Palestinian UN bid

President Obama says there can be "no short cut" to a lasting peace

Barack Obama has told Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas he will veto his bid for UN membership, as he tried to persuade him to drop the plans.

But Mahmoud Abbas vowed to press ahead during a meeting with the US president, the White House said afterwards.

Mr Obama had told the UN General Assembly a Palestinian state could only be achieved through talks with Israel.

But French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned a veto could spark another cycle of violence in the region.

Diplomatic efforts for Palestinian UN membership have intensified, with Mr Abbas preparing to submit a written application to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in New York on Friday.

Meanwhile, thousands of people have rallied in the West Bank in support of the move.

If Mr Ban approves the request, the Security Council would examine and vote on it. In order to pass, it would need the backing of nine out of 15 council members, with no vetoes from the permanent members.

'Badge of honour'

However, Mr Obama had indicated the US would use its veto, leaving Western diplomats trying to find ways to put off the voting process to buy more time.

And the US president made his position clear to both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Abbas during meetings late on Wednesday.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

Jeremy Bowen BBC Middle East editor, at the UN

The contradictions of American policy towards the Middle East have been on display.

In his speech, President Obama praised the way Arabs in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia had seized their freedom. But even with the prospect of the US vetoing the Palestinian UN bid, the Palestinians are claiming some victories - they've put the issue of their independence back on the international agenda.

The president's speech was as much about the politics of his own re-election bid next year as it was about the politics of making peace.

His leading Republican opponent has accused him of appeasing the Palestinians. Mr Obama said nothing today that Israel and its friends will not like.

That may well be good for the Israeli government. It isn't necessarily good for Middle East peace.

"We would have to oppose any action at the UN Security Council including, if necessary, vetoing," White House national security council spokesman Ben Rhodes said after Mr Obama met Mr Abbas, Reuters news agency reported.

Mr Netanyahu told reporters Mr Obama deserved a "badge of honour" for his defence of Israel.

However, senior Palestinian negotiator Nabil Shaath argued that Palestinian UN membership was "morally, legally and politically acceptable in every way".

French President Sarkozy urged a compromise, suggesting the General Assembly give the Palestinians enhanced status as a non-member state to allow a clear timeline for talks - a month to start negotiations, six months to deal with borders and security and a year to finalise a "definitive agreement".

A vote on enhanced status - enjoyed by others such as the Vatican - would not require a Security Council recommendation but a simple majority in the General Assembly, where no veto is possible.

Failed talks

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said any UN vote on the issue was in any case "several weeks" away.

Mr Obama had earlier told the General Assembly: "Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the UN.

"There is no short cut to the end of a conflict that has endured for decades.

Continue reading the main story

Palestinian UN Statehood Bid

• Palestinians currently have permanent observer entity status at the UN
• They are represented by the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO)
• Officials now want an upgrade so a state of Palestine has full member status at the UN
• They seek recognition on 1967 borders - in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza
• Enhanced observer member status could be an interim option

• Q&A: Palestinians' UN statehood plans

"Ultimately, it is Israelis and Palestinians - not us - who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and security; on refugees and Jerusalem."

Palestinians say their bid for statehood has been inspired by the Arab Spring, and is the result of years of failed peace talks.

In the West Bank on Wednesday, schools and government offices were shut to allow for demonstrations backing the UN membership bid in Ramallah, Bethlehem, Nablus and Hebron.

While UN recognition would have largely symbolic value, the Palestinians argue it would strengthen their hand in peace talks.

"The end of the Israeli occupation and a Palestinian state are the only path to peace," AFP quoted Mr Abbas' spokesman as saying after Mr Obama's speech.

Mediation attempt

"We will agree to return to the negotiations the minute that Israel agrees to end the settlements and the lines of 1967," added the spokesman, Nabil Abu Rudeina.

In his meeting with Mr Obama, Mr Netanyahu said direct negotiation was the only way to achieve a stable Middle East peace. The last round of talks broke down a year ago.

The "quartet" of US, European, Russian and UN mediators aims to give the two sides a year to reach a framework agreement, based on Mr Obama's vision of borders fashioned from Israel's pre-1967 boundary, with agreed land swaps.

Efforts are now reportedly under way to provide a basis for resumed peace negotiations, but work by mediators has yet to produce guidelines for the resumption of talks.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

2 questions for Barack Obama

1. Why are you denying Palestine U.N membership?

There is no fair or just answer to this question. I have checked every statement and website out there. The only answer is the obvious one; he is biased against Palestine and their people.

2. If this U.N membership bid is useless, why are you blocking it?

Barack Obama is simply another U.S President that oppresses the Palestinian people while the majority of the world have spoken up in defense.

120+ countries in the U.N already agree on 1967 lines, and an end to settlements in Palestinian occupied territories.

Obama is threatening America's future and inciting hatred in the middle east with this bold, cowardly, and ignorant move.

All polls show even the American people are in the majority as to how to bring peace, by recognizing legitimate U.N membership for Palestine and statehood.

I am once again validated in my decision not to vote for you in 2008. Once again I am happy that I did not live up to the hysteria, hype, and fame and instead analyzed you according to the merits of your previous positions and offices.

You have failed every test of analysis by me from the moment you hit the public's radar. You are not the honest, caring, compassionate, or fair reformer you claimed to be.

You are simply another politician that lied themselves into office. Congratulations and may your name be forever tainted with the blood of innocent victims that died due to your positions and policies.

Troy Davis execution: US Supreme Court decides

Amnesty International's Laura Moye: "Serious doubts about his guilt remain"

Death row inmate Troy Davis is awaiting the outcome of his final appeal to the US Supreme Court as he faces execution for the murder of a policeman.

The state of Georgia's top court earlier rejected an appeal by the 42-year-old, whose lethal injection was scheduled for 19:00 EST (23:00 GMT).

Seven out of nine witnesses recanted their testimony in the case. Protests and vigils have been held all week.

Davis' request for a polygraph test was denied by prison officials.

He was convicted in 1991 of killing Mark MacPhail, an off-duty police officer, but maintains he is innocent.

Ballistic 'flawed'

MacPhail was shot dead in July 1989 as he tried to help a homeless man who was being attacked in a Burger King car park.

Mark MacPhail was shot dead in 1989 as he tried to defend a homeless man

Prosecutors say Davis was beating the man with a gun after demanding a beer from him.

But no gun was ever found and no DNA evidence conclusively linked Davis to the murder.

On Wednesday morning, Davis' lawyers appealed to the county court responsible for Georgia's death row, but that was also rejected.

The legal team had argued that ballistic testing from the case was flawed.

The pardons board also dismissed an appeal to reconsider their decision on Monday to deny Davis clemency.

During what could be his last hours, Davis had not asked for a final meal and was spending time with family, friends and supporters.

'It has got to end'

Prosecutors say they have no doubts as to his guilt.

"He had all the chances in the world," Anneliese MacPhail, the mother of the murdered policeman, said in a phone interview with the Associated Press news agency.

"It has got to come to an end."

But Davis counts among his supporters Pope Benedict XVI and former US President Jimmy Carter, as well as US conservative figures like representative Bob Barr and former FBI director William Sessions.

Bianca Jagger says the evidence against Mr Davis is virtually non-existent

Spencer Lawton, the district attorney who secured the conviction, told the Associated Press news agency he was embarrassed that the execution had taken so long.

"What we have had is a manufactured appearance of doubt which has taken on the quality of legitimate doubt itself. And all of it is exquisitely unfair," he said.

Outside the prison in Jackson, Georgia - where Davis is to be executed - a crowd of about 200 people have gathered, chanting "They say death row; we say, hell no!"

Around 10 counter-demonstrators were also present, voicing support for the death penalty and for the family of MacPhail.

His sister Martina Correia told reporters: "Troy Davis has impacted the world. They say, 'I am Troy Davis,' in languages he can't speak."

There is a heavy police presence outside the prison, including large numbers of riot police, but no disturbances have been reported.

Protests in Paris

Davis' conviction has been upheld by several federal and appeal courts.

He was previously denied a hearing at the US Supreme Court after a federal judge refused a new trial for his case.

Protests in Georgia have been organized by the Amnesty International and NAACP

Davis' execution date has been stopped three times.

While vigils have been scheduled at both the Georgia state capitol and the jail, protests have taken on an international dimension since Monday's decision to deny clemency.

The Council of Europe has called for Davis' sentence to be commuted.

Amnesty International and other groups organised protests at the US embassy in Paris, where 150 people gathered in Place de la Concorde, holding signs bearing Davis' image.

In Washington DC dozens gathered outside the White House, in the hope that President Barack Obama might intervene at the last-minute.

Reports suggest around a dozen people have been arrested for refusing to co-operate with police.

But White House press secretary Jay Carney said it would not be appropriate for the president to interfere in specific cases of state prosecution, such as this one.

The president does not have the authority to pardon Davis, but he could order an investigation into the case and delay the execution.

Meanwhile in the US state of Texas another death row inmate, Lawrence Russell Brewer, was executed on Wednesday evening - in a very different case.

In 1998, white supremacist gang member Brewer, 44, dragged a black man chained to the back of a pick-up truck along a road until he died.

Source

~~~~~~~~

Commentary

No one should execute him with this much lack of evidence and 7 or 9 witnesses recanting their testimony.

Mid-East shuttle dipomacy ahead of Palestinian UN bid

Catherine Ashton extended her visit for further talks with Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel and the Palestinians

• Israel protests rattle Netanyahu
• Q&A: Palestinian statehood bid
• Poisoned atmosphere in talks
• Heated diplomacy of statehood bid

Senior US and international envoys have begun a fresh round of shuttle diplomacy to try to head off a Palestinian bid for UN membership.

US diplomats Dennis Ross and David Hale, as well as EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Middle-East envoy Tony Blair are in the region to try to revive stalled peace talks.

Palestinians are preparing a bid for UN membership later this month.

Israel has warned of "harsh and grave consequences" if the move goes ahead.

Mr Ross and Mr Hale arrived in Israel on Wednesday and held talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak, the US State Department said.

They were due to travel to the West Bank on Thursday for talks with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.

Baroness Ashton also held talks with Mr Netanyahu on Wednesday morning, and announced she was extending her visit for further talks in the evening.

"I hope that in the coming days what we will be able to achieve together will be something that enables the negotiations to start," she said.

Analysts say the 27-member EU could split over the issue of Palestinian statehood if it comes to a vote at the UN, with some states backing the effort and others likely to oppose it.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday spoke to Mr Blair - who represents the Quartet of international Middle East negotiators - and to Baroness Ashton, state department spokesman Mark Toner said.

Continue reading the main story

• Palestinians head for UN state showdown
• Q&A: Palestinians' UN statehood plans

"This is part of our intensive effort here to find a way forward," he added.

The last round of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians broke down a year ago.

Since then, the Palestinians have launched a campaign to join the UN as a full member state with international recognition based on their 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as a capital.

The UN begins its annual General Assembly general debate in New York on 21 September.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, speaking on Wednesday, warned of dire consequences if the Palestinians went ahead.

"From the moment they pass a unilateral decision there will be harsh and grave consequences," he said.

"I hope that we shall not come to those harsh and grave consequences, and that common sense will prevail in all decisions taken," he added.

Some hardline Israeli politicians have called for Israel to annex sections of the West Bank if the Palestinians go ahead.

Source

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

All these threats simply for asking to be recognized as a country?

Everyone already recognizes Palestine, but this U.N bid could make it official and binding.

Yet they respond with threats of violence? Historians of the future will write wondering how such people today lived. How people like you and me could DENY the right of people to live, safely and securely in their own home.

Israel deserves it's existence, and it is flourishing as a result. Surely the Palestinians deserve the same.

Lets not pillage and plunder their people any longer...

Enough is enough. Give them liberty, don't give them Death.

Palestinian Statehood bid in United Nations - Making sense and finding truth in Media Bias

The ignorant/biased/criminal claim made by the U.S Ambassador that U.N statehood recognition of Palestine, is useless and a waste of time:

(Obviously since she is the American Representative, she is biased in her beliefs and positions)




Reply about this claim:

Why the big fuss if this move is useless? Obviously, it will make a difference and Israel/America's response to this move is PROOF that U.N statehood recognition of Palestine does matter.

California's citizen commission final district maps: Find out what's changed where you live.

Californians stripped the Legislature of the once-a-decade redistricting task amid frustration with a polarized state government and gerrymandering that made seats perennially safe for most incumbents. The commission tentatively approved final maps July 29. A final vote is scheduled August 15 after a two-week public review period.

Read more: Panel's final redistricting maps drawn

Source

______________________________________________

Panel's final redistricting maps drawn

California's new political lines would make some constituencies more 'purple' than either red or blue.

By Jean Merl and Michael J. Mishak, Los Angeles Times

July 30, 2011

Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento -- In a historic first, a citizens commission set new boundaries for California's congressional and legislative districts, reshaping the political landscape into more competitive terrain that could transform the state's usual dynamic of rancor and gridlock.

The new maps, which are intended to govern elections for most of the next decade, would force several entrenched partisan legislators — those who have been deep blue or deep red — to face more moderate political districts.

Some lawmakers, who had been in safe districts where reelection was all but guaranteed for party hard-liners, now find themselves facing a more mixed electorate in districts that are more "purple" than red or blue.

The commission's goal to more fairly reflect the state's existing communities and increasing diversity grew out of voters' frustration with gridlock in Sacramento, where even the most common-sense policies have been held hostage by hyper-partisan lawmakers.

The panel's work already has elected officials scurrying for seats in new districts or pondering retirement. Experts say the maps displace at least 60 elected officials in California from their districts or set them up for tough reelection battles.

Most seats in the state Legislature will remain firmly Republican or Democrat, with the Democrats positioned to capture the coveted two-thirds majority of one house of the Legislature. One drawback: Newly competitive districts could leave lawmakers more reliant on special interest campaign dollars to stay in office.

But in a statehouse where just a couple of votes can change the balance of power on key policy issues, even small changes could have a major impact.

"We lost a decade in terms of making policy in California," said Fred Keeley, a former Democratic assemblyman from Santa Cruz who helped draft the redistricting initiative. "Maybe this will give us a fighting chance at a better outcome."

The maps, which include new district boundaries for State Board of Equalization elections, were approved by the Citizens Redistricting Commission on Friday morning and now move into a 14-day public review period, during which only minor, technical changescan be made before the final commission vote Aug. 15.

"For the first time ever, Californians will know exactly who drew the maps, how they were drawn and for what reason, and they know their voices were heard," Helen Hutchison, vice president of the League of Women Voters of California, told the commission during its meeting Friday.

But challenges loom. Some have vowed to undo the new districts through the courts or by referendum.

"It's not over yet," said U.S. Rep. Gary G. Miller (R-Diamond Bar), whose home was placed in the same district as fellow Republican Ed Royce of Fullerton. "Judges will make the decision…. What they've done to so many districts out there makes no sense."

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) — dean of California House Republicans, whose home was thrown into the same district as a Democratic incumbent — said: "I believe this will not be the final chapter in the 2011 redistricting saga."

The new maps could cost Republicans a handful of seats in Congress, as well as enough seats in the state Senate for Democrats to command the two-thirds majority that would give them complete control of the house, and enough votes to pass tax measures.

California Republican Party officials say they have not decided what, if any, action to take. A challenge to the district lines could result in the courts redrawing the boundaries. But that carries a risk: There is no guarantee the courts wouldn't draw lines even worse for the GOP.

At a news conference Friday at the state Capitol, commissioners said they would aggressively defend their plan against legal challenges.

"In complying with the law, the commission is confident that these maps will prevail against any and all legal challenges," said Chairwoman Connie Galambos Malloy. "We also believe that the new districts will be upheld in the court of public opinion."

Those who championed redistricting reform as a means of easing the dysfunction in Sacramento are optimistic about the possibility of an emerging purple power.

Historically, moderates have helped tip the scales on critical issues in the Legislature. They can kill legislation by withholding key committee votes and cut deals in tax debates.

The new maps already appear to be influencing some lawmakers.

This year, while both parties dug in their heels over the state budget, five Republican senators, facing the prospect of more competitive districts, bucked party leadership and the majority of their GOP colleagues to negotiate with Gov. Jerry Brown on a proposal to renew billions of dollars in expiring tax hikes. In return, they sought an overhaul of public pensions, a cap on state spending and a loosening of environmental regulations.

While both sides deadlocked on details and Brown failed to get the necessary GOP votes, an influx of moderate lawmakers could reignite the debate with a Democratic governor who has expressed a desire to tackle pension and regulatory issues his party has sidestepped for years.

But whether that rise of purple districts will create a more moderate, responsive body of lawmakers is a matter being hotly debated in Sacramento.

"It will all be one big experiment happening at one time," said Matt Rexroad, a Republican political consultant who advises clients on redistricting.

While many elected officials won't be able to take their constituents for granted any longer, forcing more outreach and potentially responsiveness, more competitive districts mean more expensive elections.

Candidates will have to turn to deep-pocketed donors to fund them, potentially making those legislators even more beholden to narrow special interests than ever before.

"Winning a competitive district takes money more than it takes moderation," said Thad Kousser, a political scientist at UC San Diego. "There's this incentive to stake out the positions that will allow you to raise the $2 million to $5 million it will take to compete. And the people that are able to raise that kind of money are generally in one camp or the other."

Partisans from all camps were unanimous in their assessment that drawing the new maps was a gut-wrenching process with high stakes.

"It has been difficult, to say the least, to respond to the moving targets your maps have been," Erica Teasley Linnick of the African American Redistricting Collaborative told the commission Friday.

Earlier versions of the maps threatened to do away with at least one of three Los Angeles County congressional districts where African Americans represent a plurality of voters.

Groups fearful of losing political power pressured the commission into numerous, sometimes dramatic reworkings of its maps.

Commissioners were required to create districts of equal population and adhere to the federal Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities' opportunities to elect representatives of their choosing, as well try to keep communities of interest together, among other criteria. None of it was easy in a state as large, complex and rapidly changing as California.

Among those who gained the most from the process were Latino activists, who demanded more districts where Latinos represent a majority of voters. They said the surge of the Latino population over the last decade cried out for such a change. The maps released Friday reflect 10 new legislative and congressional seats where Latinos command a majority.

The 14-member commission — made up of five Republicans, five Democrats and four members unaffiliated with any political party —was nearly unanimous in its support of the new lines.

A Republican member from Anaheim was the only commissioner to oppose all the maps. One other commissioner, a Republican from Norco, voted against just the proposed congressional districts.

Times staff writers Patrick McGreevy and Anthony York contributed from Sacramento. Times staff writer Richard Simon contributed from Washington.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Commentary

I was one of millions of Californians that voted for this commission.
The reasons are below and are also clearly outlined in the above article:

1. Ending Political deadlock because of Gerrymandered Districts.
2. Transparency - every decision is out in the open and available for scrutiny
3. Fairness through a commission not funded by corporations or held by politicians.

I do feel people have been oppressing minorities in California for a very long time and using the redistricting pen to do so. That's why I'm very happy to hear 10 new districts are being created for Latinos who are as American as anyone, but received so little representation.

My own district has a new state senator and congressman and I've started to see a lot of aversion to the changes by fellow politicians nearby. But regardless no one can argue that I support these changes simply because my districts were untouched.

I think a fairer more open redistricting policy is of benefit to California and while a few cities may have transitional pains, in the long run, the policy and the committee itself is something I fully support.