Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/12/2013 4:04:09 PM

Israelis seethe over Palestinian prisoner release ahead of peace talks


• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

A day after stirring harsh rebuke from Palestinians over the greenlighting of further settlement construction in Palestinian territory, the Israeli government angered many Israelis when it announced the names of 26 Palestinian prisoners to be released on Wednesday as part of the US-backed deal to relaunch peace talks.

The Financial Times reports that the prisoners' release – the first of 104 Palestinians Israel agreed in principle to free as part of the peace talks – is highly unpopular among the Israeli public because most of those being set free were convicted of the murder of Israelis or were suspected Palestinian collaborators.

“It’s a victory for the Palestinians who are identified with the terrorists, and it’s a sad day for society in Israel and it’s a sad day for free society in the world,” Meir Indor, chairman of Almagor, a Jerusalem-based advocacy group for victims of terrorist attacks, told the Financial Times. The group has petitioned Israel’s Supreme Court to stop the release.

Uri Ariel, Israel’s housing minister and a member of the rightwing Jewish Home party in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition, said on Monday that the release made a “mockery of the judiciary”.

The prisoners' names were announced early to provide a 48-hour window for those opposed to their release to file appeals to Israel's High Court. But Reuters notes that "based on past decisions, the court is widely expected not to intervene."

The Israeli furor over the prisoners' release comes less than 24 hours after a similarly negative reaction from Palestinians in response to Israel's statement Sunday that it would allow construction of some 1,200 homes in West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements to move forward. Palestinians say that the move is an attempt to undermine the peace talks before they start.

"Approving such a massive number of housing units three days before we go to negotiations is sick,’’ a Palestinian official familiar with the negotiations told The Christian Science Monitor. "We may not come" to the talks, he said.

But the Monitor also reports that some say the move was necessary to allow peace talks to proceed, by "mollify[ing] Mr. Netanyahu’s pro-settler constituency, which is upset over the renewed talks" and the prisoner releases.

"It’s a familiar playbook. Kerry and the Palestinians knew this kind of announcement was coming. So they have to protest. None of this will affect the opening of talks because it was all choreographed," says [Yossi Alpher, a former prime ministerial adviser on peace talks]. "It's a counter productive dynamic – building settlements to negotiate. It’s not something that Netanyahu invented. Rabin, Peres and Barak all did the same thing.’’

Some Palestinians also see the move as an Israeli tactic to undermine Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and force him to step away from the negotiating table – thereby making the Palestinians seem like the side opposed to peace.

Israel "understands the psychology of the Palestinians. Now that the Palestinians want to override this settlements obstacle, Israeli radicals are planting minefields to undermine the credibility of the PA so it will walk away," says Mohammed Dajani, a political science professor at Al Quds University.

"I think the president (Abbas) is pragmatic. He understands that these people are trying to derail the process. The question is how it will affect his popularity among the Palestinians, and how the Palestinians will read that.’’

In an analysis for Haaretz, Barak Ravid writes that the Israeli government's contradictory responses to the peace talks stem from Netanyahu's unwillingness to "cross the Rubicon" and commit fully to them.

A senior Israeli official close to the prime minister said he thinks Netanyahu still has not yet crossed the river. On the one hand, he has stepped into the water and started marching toward the other bank. But on the other hand, he is looking back every few seconds, and for every step forward, he is allowing the current to push him back three steps. ...

Officials who have spoken to Netanyahu say his behavior, his hesitation and zigzagging result from his lack of trust in Abbas. Netanyahu, say the officials, is willing to cross the river but wants to know if Abbas will do the same. He is worried that while he is jumping into the turbulent waters filled mostly with political whirlpools, Abbas will remain on the bank and let him drown alone.

If Netanyahu wants the Americans, Palestinians and most of all the Israeli public to take him seriously, he must leave his old tactics behind. Abandon the criticism, the spin, worn-out PR tricks and blame games - and enter the peace talks without looking back.

Related stories

Read this story at csmonitor.com

Become a part of the Monitor community


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+0
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/13/2013 10:28:47 AM

Voters mad about NSA spying face uphill battle


President Barack Obama leaves after his news conference in the East Room at the White House in Washington, Friday, Aug. 9, 2013. The president said he'll work with Congress to change the oversight of some of the National Security Agency's controversial surveillance programs and name a new panel of outside experts to review technologies. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
Associated Press
3 hours ago

View Gallery

WASHINGTON (AP) — Charlotte Scot isn't one to take things lying down — like the time President George W. Bush was re-elected and she moved to Canada in protest.

So when the 66-year-old artist from Old Lyme, Conn., heard that major telecommunications providers have been turning over data about every Americans' phone calls to the government since 2006, Scot demanded that her own phone company tell her what, if anything, it had shared about her.

She soon received a non-response from an unnamed customer service representative informing her how to opt out of its marketing program, which only made Scot angrier.

"Dear Anonymous," Scot fired back in an email, "I have always opted out of all advertising emails. ... However, my question was not about advertising. It was about what information AT&T turns over to the federal government and NSA. I appreciate an answer to this question."

AT&T eventually responded with a link to its privacy policy and a promise that, while it doesn't comment on matters of national security, "we do comply with the law."

Americans are becoming increasingly concerned about government invasion of privacy while investigating terrorism, and some ordinary citizens are finding ways to push back. They are signing online petitions and threatening lawsuits. Like Scot, some are pressing their providers to be upfront when data is shared with the government, which federal law allows as long as the person isn't being investigated under an active court order.

The question is whether these anti-surveillance voters will be successful in creating a broader populist movement. Many lawmakers have defended the NSA surveillance program — a program Congress itself reviewed and approved in secret.

And unlike the anti-war effort that rallied Democrats during the Bush administration, and the tea party movement that galvanized conservatives in President Barack Obama's first term, government surveillance opponents tend to straddle party lines. The cause appeals to libertarian Republicans who don't like big government and progressive liberals like Scot who do but favor civil liberties. Together, these voters would have little in common otherwise.

Another complication is the potential of another terrorist attack. One spectacular act and public opinion could flip, much as it did after 9/11, back to favoring government surveillance. Politicians know this, with many of them opting to blast the Obama administration for not being more transparent but most opposing an end to broad surveillance powers.

"If in fact something happens, you're basically putting yourself in a position to look like you didn't do something when you should have. And that's got to be in the back of their head," said Ed Goeas, president of the Tarrance Group in Alexandria, Va., a Republican survey research and strategy company.

That leaves voter-activists like Scot with little to work with, even with midterm elections next year that expose one-third of the Senate and every member of the House.

"I don't believe it's going to be a driving issue" in the upcoming elections, Goeas added. "It's got to be the total picture" on national security that appeals to voters.

At issue is whether the government overstepped its bounds when it began collecting and searching the phone and Internet records of Americans to gather information on suspected terrorists overseas. A Washington Post-ABC News poll released late last month found that Americans are divided over whether they support the surveillance programs revealed earlier this year, but most Americans — 57 percent — still say it's more important for the government to investigate terrorism than to put privacy first.

Like their constituents, lawmakers too are divided. Last month, a House proposal that essentially would have made the NSA phone collection program illegal failed in a 217-205 vote that didn't fall along party lines. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California were among the 217 who voted to spare the program.

In the Senate, a small group of lawmakers — namely Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Mark Udall, D-Colo., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. — is taking a stronger line in favor of civil liberties. But progress has been slow, with few co-sponsors joining their legislative proposals to limit NSA spying powers. Meanwhile, such influential senators as Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have defended the program and said Edward Snowden, who leaked details of the NSA programs, is guilty of treason.

Doug Hattaway, a Washington-based Democratic strategist, said the reluctance by most lawmakers to take sides isn't surprising, considering that most Americans say they want both security and privacy.

"I don't see Democrats benefiting from joining forces with libertarians," he said. "If voters are looking for balance, I wouldn't hop on the bandwagon with Rand Paul."

Another challenge for surveillance foes is that industry isn't exactly fighting back. Technology and phone companies often say they are prohibited from divulging details about government surveillance requests, but that's only partially true. Federal law prohibits alerting customers when they are surveillance subjects as long as a court order remains in effect. But not all gag orders last forever.

So when AT&T wouldn't tell Scot whether her information had ever been shared with the government, chances are that's because it didn't want to — not because it couldn't.

AT&T spokesman Michael Balmoris declined to comment on Scot's case in particular or matters of national security. "We value our customers' privacy and work hard to protect it by ensuring compliance with the law in all respects," he said.

Meanwhile, Scot says she can't understand why other customers are not just as angry. She's now looking to switch providers, and has downloaded a mobile application called Seecyrpt that offers encrypted phone calls for $3 a month. But she knows it's unlikely that a majority of Americans will follow her lead.

"I'm just one of these people who gets riled about things," she said. "People are like sheep."

___

Follow Anne Flaherty on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AnneKFlaherty


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/13/2013 11:01:28 AM

Agents: 44 gunned down in Nigeria mosque


In this photo taken Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013, Nigeria Muslims attend Eid al-Fitr prayers in Maiduguri, Nigeria. Suspected Islamic militants wearing army fatigues gunned down 44 people praying at a mosque in northeast Nigeria, while another 12 civilians died in an apparently simultaneous attack, security agents said Monday Aug. 12, 2013. The slayings occurred Sunday morning at a mosque in Konduga town, some 35 kilometers (22 miles) outside Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria's Borno state. (AP Photo/Sunday Alamba)
Associated Press

View Gallery

MAIDUGURI, Nigeria (AP) — Suspected Islamic militants wearing army fatigues gunned down 44 people praying at a mosque in northeast Nigeria, while another 12 civilians died in an apparently simultaneous attack, security agents said Monday.

Sunday's attacks were the latest in a slew of violence blamed on religious extremists in this West African oil producer, where the radical Boko Haram group, which wants to oust the government and impose Islamic law, poses the greatest security threat in years.

It was not immediately clear why the Islamic Boko Haram would have killed worshipping Muslims, but the group has in the past attacked mosques whose clerics have spoken out against religious extremism. Boko Haram also has attacked Christians outside churches and teachers and schoolchildren, as well as government and military targets.

Since 2010, the militants have been blamed for the killings of more than 1,700 people, according to a count conducted by The Associated Press.

The news about Sunday's violence in Borno state, one of three in the northeast under a military state of emergency, came as journalists received a video featuring Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau, who gloats over recent attacks, threatens more, and even says his group is now strong enough to go after the United States.

The mosque slayings occurred Sunday morning in Konduga town, 35 kilometers (22 miles) outside Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria's Borno state.

A state security service agent and Usman Musa, a member of a civilian militia that works with the military, said Monday they counted the bodies at the mosque after the attack. Musa said four members of his group — known as the Civilian Joint Task Force —also were killed when they reached Konduga and encountered "fierce resistance from heavily armed terrorists."

Musa and the security service agent said the attackers wore military camouflage uniforms used by the Nigerian army, which they may have acquired in one of their attacks on military bases.

On their way back from Konduga, the security forces came upon the scene of another attack at Ngom village, 5 kilometers (3 miles) outside Maiduguri, where Musa said he counted 12 bodies of civilians.

Twenty-six worshippers at the mosque were hospitalized with gunshot wounds, said a security guard at the emergency ward of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital. He and the state security agent both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not allowed to give information to reporters.

Nigeria declared a state of emergency in much of the northeast on May 14 to fight the onslaught after Boko Haram fighters took over several northeastern towns and villages in this nation of more than 160 million people, which is divided almost equally between the predominantly Muslim north and the mainly Christian south.

In the video received by journalists Monday, Shekau brushes off any gains asserted by the security forces.

"You soldiers have claimed that you are powerful, that we have been defeated, that we are mad people," Shekau says, speaking in the local Hausa language. "But how can a mad man successfully coordinate recent attacks in Gamboru, in Malam Fatori, slaughter people in Biu, kill in Gwoza and in Bama, where soldiers fled under our heavy fire power?

"We have killed countless soldiers and we are going to kill more."

He further insists the extremists' "strength and firepower has surpassed that of Nigeria. ... We can now comfortably confront the United States of America."

Shekau also said Nigeria's military is "lying to the world" about its casualties. "They lied that they have killed our members, but we are the ones that have killed the soldiers."

He apparently was referring to Aug. 4 attacks on a military base at Malam Fatori and a police outpost in Bama, both near the border with Cameroon. Joint Task Force spokesman Lt. Col. Sagir Musa told reporters 32 extremists, two soldiers and one police officer were killed. But when the Borno state governor called on the head of the task force to commiserate, Maj. Gen. Jah Ewansiah told him in front of reporters that they lost 12 soldiers and seven policemen. Nigeria's military regularly lowballs casualty figures of civilians and military.

Under orders from the military, cellphone and Internet service has been cut in Borno, making communications difficult. The military says the extremists were using cellphones to coordinate attacks. But some government officials argue that the lack of communication prevents civilians from informing them of suspicious movements and getting help when they are attacked.

___

Faul reported from Lagos, Nigeria.


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
8/13/2013 11:05:07 AM

Russia says Syria peace talks unlikely before October


MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia wants a Syria peace conference to be held as soon as possible but it is unlikely to go ahead before October because there is a busy diplomatic schedule before then, a Russian diplomat said on Tuesday.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said more talks were expected at the end of August on preparing the so-called Geneva-2 conference, aimed at bringing Syrian rebels and President Bashar al-Assad's government together.

"It (the peace conference) is unlikely to happen in September because there are different events, including the 'ministerial week' at the U.N. General Assembly," Gatilov told Interfax news agency.

"We are for it happening as soon as possible, but we need to be realistic about circumstances which could effect the forum."

Russian and U.S. officials agreed last week that the long-delayed conference should take place as soon as possible, but offered no concrete plan to bring the warring sides to the table.

Washington and Moscow, which has sold arms to the Syrian government and at times shielded Assad from condemnation and sanctions at the United Nations, said initially they would try to hold the conference by the end of May.

But the date keeps slipping, partly because the rebels are split and cannot decide who should represent them.

U.N. Arab League peace mediator Lakhdar Brahimi, who held talks with senior U.S. and Russian officials in Geneva, has ruled out a peace conference before August.

Battlefield gains by Assad have added to questions about when and even whether it will take place.

Gatilov also said Russia was still keen on including Iran in the talks, a proposal that Washington has not supported.

(Writing by Elizabeth Piper, Editing by Timothy Heritage)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1