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?
9/10/2013 4:10:57 PM

Amnesty decries 'extreme political violence' in Egypt


Egyptian security officers guard the scene of a bomb attack targeting the convoy of Egypt's Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim, in Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt, Thursday, Sept. 5, 2013. A "large" explosive targeted the convoy of Egypt's interior minister Thursday in Cairo's eastern Nasr City district, the first attack on a senior government official since a coup toppled the country's Islamist president July 3, 2013. (AP Photo/Khalil Hamra)
Reuters

View Gallery

GENEVA (Reuters) - Amnesty International called on Tuesday for an independent investigation into killings by Egyptian security forces as well as torture and violations of the rights to free speech and assembly.

The military's overthrow of President Mohamed Mursi in July after mass protests against him unleashed an "extreme level of political violence", the London-based group told the United Nations Human Rights Council.

"Between 14 and 18 August, at least 1,089 people were killed, many due to the use of excessive, grossly disproportionate and unwarranted lethal force by security forces," said Peter Splinter, Amnesty representative in Geneva.

Egyptian security forces have also failed to prevent or end a wave of sectarian attacks targeting Coptic Christians, he said, referring to attacks on the minority who make up 10 percent of its 85 million people.

"The scale of human rights violations, including of the right to life, the right to fair trial, the right to be free from torture, the right to freedom of expression and assembly, demands an urgent, impartial, independent and full investigation," Splinter said, adding that the results of the inquiry should be made public.

On Monday, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay reiterated her call for an independent inquiry into the killings, as well as her request to send a team to Egypt to assess the situation.

"The path to stability in Egypt lies in its ability to establish the rule of law in an inclusive manner that ensures that all Egyptians, irrespective of their political opinion, gender, religion, or status, are recognized as legitimate stakeholders in the future of their country," she said.

(Reporting by Stephanie Nebehay; Editing by Angus MacSwan)



"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?
9/10/2013 6:17:59 PM

Syria Accepts Russia's Chemical Weapons Plan, Setting Up a Long Day for Obama

National Journal

Bashar al-Assad's government in Syria has agreed to a Russian plan to hand over its chemical weapons to international control, according to Syria's foreign minister. The minister, Walid al-Moallem, said the agreement was quick and intended to "uproot U.S. aggression." Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said Tuesday that his government is working with Syria to come up with a detailed plan, which will be revealed soon.

But that's not all that's happening this morning. France is now looking to take a chemical-weapons handover plan to the United Nations Security Council. Under the plan, the chemical-weapons arsenal would eventually be dismantled. France says that its U.N. resolution would require "extremely serious consequences" if the deal is broken. The Security Council's permanent members—the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China, and France—all seem to be supportive of the idea, with China's foreign ministry offering late backing for the possible deal.

In a series of television interviews yesterday, Obama offered some support for the weapons plan, but he expressed strong skepticism that it would actually come to fruition. Obama told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "If we can accomplish this limited goal without taking military action, that would be my preference." But then there's the skepticism:

On the other hand, if we don't maybe maintain and move forward with a credible threat of military pressure, I do not think we will get the kind of movement I would like to see.

That's a particularly tough position for the president to be in on the eve of a televised address from the White House to explain what he thinks we need to do on Syria. Obama is already facing a public that's largely—and increasingly—against taking military action. And while it may seem baffling to some for the U.S. to wind up as a cosigner on a Russian plan, a new New York Times/CBS poll shows that 62 percent of Americans don't think the U.S. should take a leading role in any international conflicts. With a consistent torrent of new developments, it's hard to imagine what kind of case the president will make Tuesday night.

But, right now at least, it's starting to look as if the American public may get its wish and a military strikemight be avoided. Some are already berating Obama for not acting decisively strong enough on Syria, and there's not much doubt that the administration's moves over the past two weeks have been confusing at best. But since "strength" in this case is the unpopular route, finding a way out may not be such a bad plan.



"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?
9/10/2013 9:03:52 PM
Obama backs arms deal. Yet if Syria does give up it's chemical weapons, the U.S. needs to stay totally out of it... including not arming jihadists to fight Assad.

Obama talks Syria diplomacy, fallback airstrikes


President Barack Obama, accompanied by Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper Terrance Gainer, arrives on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2013, to meet with Senate Democrats and Republicans on Syria, a day after an unexpected Russian proposal for Syria to avert a U.S. military strike by relinquishing control of its chemical weapons. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Associated Press

View Gallery

WASHINGTON (AP) — Pushing military might and raising hopes it won't be needed, President Barack Obama threw his support Tuesday behind a plan for U.N. Security Council talks aimed at securing Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles, even as he continued to advance the fallback idea of U.S. airstrikes against Bashar Assad's regime.

Seizing on that two-track strategy, a bipartisan group of senators crafted a reworked congressional resolution calling for a U.N. team to remove the chemical weapons by a set deadline and authorizing military action if that doesn't happen.

Obama discussed plans for U.N. action with French President Francois Hollande and British Prime Minister David Cameron, then visited Capitol Hill to talk through diplomatic and military options with Democratic and Republican senators growing increasingly wary of U.S. military intervention. He was poised to address the American people from the White House on Tuesday night, still ready to press the case for congressionally-approved military action if diplomacy falls short.

"The key is, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, that we don't just trust, but we also verify," Obama said in an interview with CBS. "The importance is to make sure that the international community has confidence that these chemical weapons are under control, that they are not being used, that potentially they are removed from Syria and that they are destroyed."

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said Obama told senators he was keeping the possibility of military intervention on the table. Markey's recap of the president's message: With the threat of military action, "you'll have a much better chance of the Syrians and the Russians actually doing what they've been talking about. If you don't keep that argument open, they may very well walk away."

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said Obama "believes that the proposal certainly has a long way to go, and that we also need to keep up the pressure." This way, she added, "people know that Syria is going to be on the hook for getting rid of these weapons one way or another."

Prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough unfolded rapidly Tuesday: Assad's government accepted a Russia-advanced plan to turn over its chemical weapons stockpile. France pitched a U.N. Security Council resolution to verify the disarmament. The U.N. Security Council, at Russia's request, scheduled closed consultations for late afternoon. Syria's foreign minister said the nation would declare its chemical weapons arsenal and sign an international chemical weapons treaty.

Secretary of State John Kerry said Obama, Holland and Cameron agreed to work closely together in consultation with Russia and China to explore the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons "under the control of a verifiable destruction enforcement mechanism."

The path forward was far from certain, however. Russian President Vladimir Putin said the U.S. would need to renounce the use of force against Syria because no country will disarm under threat of military action.

He told reporters that the plan "can work, only in the event that we hear that the American side and those who support the U.S.A, in this sense, reject the use of force."

Kerry countered that any deal with Syria to give up its chemical weapons must be enshrined in a binding U.N. Security Council resolution that sets consequences for Syrian non-compliance. He said Russian suggestions that the U.N. endorsement come in the form of a non-binding statement from the rotating president of the Security Council would be unacceptable to the Obama administration.

Obama's dramatic shift toward diplomacy came after weeks of threatening tough reprisals on the Assad regime and in the face of stiff resistance in Congress to a resolution that would authorize him to use military force.

A majority of the senators staking out positions or leaning in one direction were expressing opposition, according to an Associated Press survey. The count in the House was far more lopsided, with representatives rejecting military action by more than a 6-1 margin even as the leaders of both parties in the House professed their support.

On Tuesday, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell became the first congressional leader to come out against a resolution giving the president authority for limited strikes, saying, "there are just too many unanswered questions about our long-term strategy in Syria." In another blow to the administration, Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, announced his opposition, saying the resolution was too broad, "the effects of a strike are too unpredictable, and because I believe we must give diplomatic measures that could avoid military action a chance to work."

Eager for an alternative, a bipartisan group of senators worked on a retooled resolution that would call on the United Nations to state that Syria used chemical weapons and require a U.N. team to remove them within a specific time period, possibly 60 days. If that can't be done, then Obama would have the authority to launch military strikes, congressional aides said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to publicly discuss the reworked resolution.

Russia, Assad's biggest international backer, championed the diplomatic path forward in the hope of preventing the instability that might arise from a broader, Iraq-like conflict involving the United States. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said after meeting with the Russian parliament speaker that his government had agreed to the Russian initiative to "thwart U.S. aggression." But the Syrian National Coalition, which had hoped for airstrikes to tip the balance in the 2-year-old civil war, cast Assad's move as a ploy to escape punishment for a crime against humanity.

Kerry, appearing before the House Armed Services Committee, said the U.N. approach must not be used as a delaying tactic and that it has to provide verifiable, real and include tangible conditions for Assad to forfeit his chemical weapons.

Seeking to reassure legislators worried about a deep U.S. entanglement in Syria, he said, "I don't see any route by which we slide into Syria. I don't see the slippery slope."

For the Obama administration, presenting just the possibility of a diplomatic solution offered an "out" as it struggled to find the 60 votes needed for Senate passage of a use-of-force resolution. Reflecting the difficulty, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., unexpectedly postponed a test vote originally set for Wednesday on Obama's call for legislation explicitly backing a military strike. Reid cited ongoing "international discussions."

Several lawmakers, conflicted by their desire to see Assad punished and their wariness about America getting pulled into another Middle East war, breathed sighs of relief.

"I always thought an international coalition to secure and destroy the chemical weapons is a far better option than military intervention," said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas. He called for an "American plan" to do accomplish these tasks.

But there was plenty of skepticism about the latest diplomatic initiative, too.

"I hope it's not just a delaying tactic," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., after a closed meeting of House Republicans on Tuesday morning. But he added, "Let's see what the president has to say."

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., appeared to be dropping her support for a military strike authorization.

"The few supporters that he had, he's losing them quick," she said. "This is crazy to say that the folks who started the fire — Syria and Russia — are now going to be the firefighters putting out the fires. It's crazy to have Putin be in charge and for us to put credibility and trust with him."

A resolution approved by a Senate committee would authorize limited military strikes for up to 90 days and expressly forbids U.S. ground troops in Syria for combat operations. Several Democrats and Republicans announced their opposition Monday, joining the growing list of members vowing to vote "no." Fewer came out in support and one previous advocate, Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., became an opponent Monday.

Sixty-one percent of Americans want Congress to vote against authorization of U.S. military strikes in Syria, according to an Associated Press poll. About a quarter of Americans want lawmakers to support such action, with the remainder undecided. The poll, taken Sept. 6-8, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

___

Associated Press writers Bradley Klapper, Julie Pace, David Espo, Alan Fram, Pauline Jelinek, Erica Werner and Henry C. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report.

___

Follow Benac on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/nbenac



Obama backs U.N. arms deal with Syria


The president is discussing diplomatic and military options with the U.K. and France ahead of his speech tonight.
Where senators stand




"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?
9/10/2013 9:23:52 PM

High radiation found in Fukushima groundwater


A TEPCO worker checks contamination around a water tank at Fukushima on September 4, 2013. Japan has pledged a renewed push to contain potentially hazardous leaks. (AFP Photo/Tepco)
AFP

Japan pledged a renewed push to contain potentially hazardous leaks at Fukushima on Tuesday after the operator of the crippled plant reported spiking levels of radiation in groundwater.

Late on Monday, two days after Tokyo won the bid to host the 2020 Olympics, plant operator TEPCO announced samples taken from a well at the site showed the presence of radioactive substances, including strontium, a known carcinogen.

Reports said the utility believed it "now seems more likely" that leaks from tanks storing highly polluted water had made their way into subterranean water, which flows out to sea.

In a release, Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) said groundwater showed radiation readings of 3,200 becquerels per litre.

The contamination level compares with government limits of 100 becquerels per kilogramme in food and 10 becquerels per litre in drinking water.

Experts say, if consumed, strontium accumulates in bones and can cause cancer.

The continuing nuclear catastrophe at Fukushima has come under the international spotlight in recent weeks as Tokyo fought off challenges from Madrid and Istanbul for the right to host the 2020 Games.

Speaking to Olympic chiefs in Buenos Aires ahead of their decision to award the Games to Tokyo, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said the situation at Fukushima was "under control".

On Tuesday his ministers huddled to discuss the decommissioning of the plant and its waste water crisis, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said.

"We will consider ways to utilise the knowledge of people in and out of Japan... and to enhance our international communication on the waste water issue," Suga told reporters.

Thousands of tonnes of radioactive water are being stored in temporary tanks at Fukushima. Much of it has been used to cool molten reactors at the plant wrecked by the earthquake and tsunami of March 2011.

TEPCO and Japanese officials are considering releasing some of it into the Pacific Ocean after filtering out radioactive materials, but face opposition from fisherman and neighbouring countries.

The operator said last month that around 300 tonnes of mildly polluted water is running into the Pacific Ocean every day as a result of groundwater flowing underneath the stricken reactors and out to sea.

The Japanese government said last week it would spend $470 million on a scheme to freeze the soil around the reactors to form an impenetrable wall of ice they hope will direct groundwater away from them.

But the admission that water from the tanks holding the highly polluted water appears to be contaminating groundwater risks complicating that operation.

Suga on Tuesday stressed that ocean water samples taken off Fukushima coasts had not shown dangerous levels of radioactive materials.

UN watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency has said it will send a special mission to Japan, calling the waste water crisis "a matter of high priority that needs to be addressed urgently."



New reason for alarm at stricken nuclear plant



Samples taken from a Fukushima well show an increase in radioactive matter, including a known carcinogen.
New threat to ocean water



"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?
9/10/2013 11:58:38 PM

Syria vows to give up chemical weapons, no deal yet at U.N.

Reuters
Ahmad Abu Layl (R), a 15 year-old fighter from the Free Syrian Army, looks through a hole in wall with his father in Aleppo September 10, 2013. REUTERS/Hamid Khatib

By Phil Stewart and Khaled Yacoub Oweis

WASHINGTON/AMMAN (Reuters) - Syria accepted a Russian proposal on Tuesday to give up chemical weapons and win a reprieve from U.S. military strikes but serious differences emerged between Russia and the United States that could obstruct a U.N. resolution to seal a deal.

Even as the White House said it was determined to push ahead with a congressional resolution authorizing force, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the weapons plan would only succeed if Washington and its allies rule out military action.

In what amounted to the most explicit, high-level admission by Syria that it has chemical weapons, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said in a statement shown on Russian state television that Damascus was committed to the Russian initiative.

"We want to join the convention on the prohibition of chemical weapons. We are ready to observe our obligations in accordance with that convention, including providing all information about these weapons," Moualem said.

"We are ready to declare the location of the chemical weapons, stop production of the chemical weapons, and show these (production) facilities to representatives of Russia and other United Nations member states," he said.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Washington believes the proposal must be endorsed by the U.N. Security Council "in order to have the confidence that this has the force it ought to have."

Moscow has previously vetoed three resolutions that would have condemned the Syrian government over the conflict.

The latest proposal "can work only if we hear that the American side and all those who support the United States in this sense reject the use of force," Putin said in televised remarks.

Kerry and U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told Congress the threat of military action was critical to forcing Assad to bend on his chemical weapons.

"For this diplomatic option to have a chance of succeeding, the threat of a U.S. military action - the credible, real threat of U.S. military action - must continue," Hagel told the House Armed Services Committee.

U.S. officials said Kerry would meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva on Thursday for further talks.

Amid the whirlwind of diplomatic activity focused on the response to a suspected chemical weapons attack on a Damascus neighborhood on August 21, the civil war resumed in earnest, President Bashar al-Assad's jets again bombing rebel positions in the capital.

UNITED NATIONS

The United States and its allies remain skeptical about the Russian proposal and President Barack Obama sought to keep the pressure on Syria by maintaining his drive for congressional backing for a possible military strike while exploring a diplomatic alternative.

At the United Nations, Britain, France and the United States discussed elements of a draft Security Council resolution that a diplomat from one of the three countries said would include a timeline for Syria to declare the full extent of its poison gas arsenal and to cede control of it to the United Nations.

France said the resolution should be legally binding and state clearly that Syria would face "serious consequences" if it failed to comply with the resolution's demands - diplomatic code for military force. Such language will be resisted by Russia.

The U.N. Security Council initially called a closed door meeting asked for by Russia to discuss its proposal to place Syria's chemical weapons under international control, but the meeting was later canceled at Russia's request.

French officials said their draft resolution was designed to make sure the Russian proposal would have teeth, by allowing military action if Assad is uncooperative.

"It was extremely well played by the Russians, but we didn't want someone else to go to the U.N. with a resolution that was weak. This is on our terms and the principles are established. It puts Russia in a situation where they can't take a step back after putting a step forward," said a French diplomatic source.

Russia, however, made clear it wanted to take the lead.

Lavrov told his French counterpart that Moscow would propose a U.N. draft declaration supporting its initiative to put Syria's chemical weapons under international control, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

PUTIN: "NO THREAT OF FORCE"

The United States and France had been poised to launch missile strikes to punish Assad's forces, which they blame for the chemical weapons attack. Syria denies it was responsible and, with the backing of Moscow, blames rebels for staging the attacks to provoke U.S. intervention.

The White House said Obama, British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Francois Hollande had agreed in a telephone call on their preference for a diplomatic solution, but that they should continue to prepare for "a full range of responses."

Obama asked Congress on Tuesday to delay votes on authorizing military strikes in order to give Russia time to get Syria to surrender its chemical weapons, according to U.S. senators.

"What he (Obama) wants is to check out the seriousness of the Syrian and the Russian willingness to get rid of those chemical weapons in Syria. He wants time to check it out," Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin said.

The White House said Obama, who has called the Russian proposal a potential breakthrough, would still push for a vote in Congress to authorize force when he makes a televised address to Americans later on Tuesday.

But the U.S. congressional vote now appeared more about providing a hypothetical threat to back up diplomacy, rather than to unleash immediate missile strikes. A bipartisan group of senior members of Congress was working on a resolution that would take into account the Russian proposal.

While the prospects of a deal remain uncertain, the proposal could provide a way for Obama to avoid ordering unpopular action. It may make it easier for him to win backing from a skeptical Congress, which could have severely damaged his authority if it withheld support for strikes. Opinion polls show most Americans are opposed to military intervention in Syria, weary after more than a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Whether international inspectors can neutralize chemical weapons dumps while war rages in Syria remains open to question.

Western states believe Syria has a vast undeclared chemical arsenal. Sending inspectors to destroy it would be hard even in peace and extraordinarily complicated in the midst of a war.

The two main precedents are ominous: U.N. inspectors dismantled the chemical arsenal of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the 1990s but left enough doubt to provide the basis for a U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was rehabilitated by the West after agreeing to give up his banned weapons, only to be overthrown with NATO help in 2011.

SYRIAN REBELS DISMAYED

The Syrian war has already killed more than 100,000 people and driven millions from their homes. It threatens to spread violence across the Middle East, with countries endorsing the sectarian divisions that brought civil war to Lebanon and Iraq.

The wavering from the West dealt an unquestionable blow to the Syrian opposition, which had thought it had finally secured military intervention after pleading for two and a half years for help from Western leaders that vocally opposed Assad.

The rebel Syrian National Coalition decried a "political maneuver which will lead to pointless procrastination and will cause more death and destruction to the people of Syria."

Assad's warplanes bombed rebellious districts inside the Damascus city limits on Tuesday for the first time since the poison gas attacks. Rebels said the strikes demonstrated that the government had concluded the West had lost its nerve.

"By sending the planes back, the regime is sending the message that it no longer feels international pressure," activist Wasim al-Ahmad said from Mouadamiya, one of the districts of the capital hit by the chemical attack.

The Russian proposal "is a cheap trick to buy time for the regime to kill more and more people," said Sami, a member of the local opposition coordinating committee in the Damascus suburb of Erbin, also hit by last month's chemical attack.

Troops and pro-Assad militiamen tried to seize the northern district of Barzeh and the eastern suburb of Deir Salman near Damascus airport, working-class Sunni Muslim areas where opposition activists and residents reported street fighting.

Fighter jets bombed Barzeh three times and pro-Assad militia backed by army tank fire made a push into the area. Air raids were also reported on the Western outskirts near Mouadamiya.

But Damascenes in pro-Assad areas were grateful for a reprieve from Western strikes: "Russia is the voice of reason. They know that if a strike went ahead against Syria, then World War Three - even Armageddon - would befall Europe and America," said Salwa, a Shi'ite Muslim in the affluent Malki district.

(Additional reporting by John Irish in Paris, Louis Charbonneau at the United Nations, Thomas Grove and Steve Gutterman in Moscow and Patricia Zengerle, Arshad Mohammed, Richard Cowan, Paul Eckert and Roberta Rampton in Washington; Writing by Peter Graff, David Storey and Claudia Parsons; Editing by Jim Loney)



Syria says it will give up weapons arsenals



President Bashar Assad's regime says it will forfeit its chemical weapons but President Obama remains skeptical.
Putin's latest demand




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

+1