organization:general assembly

Voici donc la carte vite brossée du résultat du vote sur le traité du commerce des armes le 3 juin 2013. Comme je ne l’ai vu nulle part, j’en ai fait une esquisse rapide. Et ça donne une image pas inintéressante.

Les raisons des abstentions et absences de plus ’une trentaine de pays expliqué dans ce long communiqué de l’ONU en anglais (version française là ----> ►http://www.un.org/News/fr-press/docs/2013/AG11354.doc.htm

Overwhelming Majority of States in General Assembly Say ‘Yes’ to Arms Trade Treaty to Stave off Irresponsible Transfers that Perpetuate Conflict, Human Suffering

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11354.doc.htm

Voici donc la carte vite brossée du résultat du vote sur le trait du commerce des armes le 3 juin 2013

https://dl.dropbox.com/s/gvh97wugyba7kw4/trait%C3%A9%20commerce%20armes%20small.jpg

To a burst of sustained applause, the General Assembly today voted overwhelmingly in favour of a “historic”, first-ever treaty to regulate the astonishing number of conventional weapons traded each year, making it more difficult for them to be diverted into the hands of those intent on sowing the seeds of war and conflict.

By a vote of 154 in favour to 3 against (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Syria), with 23 abstentions, the Assembly passed the 28-article Arms Trade Treaty, aiming to establish the highest possible common international standards for the annual $70 billion business. The adoption follows the failure last week of the Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty to reach consensus on the text at the conclusion of its two-week session. (Please see annex for details of the voting.)

“The final text is, in my view, robust and actionable,” said General Assembly President Vuc Jeremić ( Serbia). It also was “groundbreaking”, in that arms-exporting countries would be legally bound to report arms sales and transfers. They would be obliged to assess whether the weapons they sold could be used to facilitate human rights abuses and humanitarian law violations.

–=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Vote on Arms Trade Treaty

The draft resolution on the Arms Trade Treaty (document A/67/L.58) was adopted by a recorded vote of 154 in favour to 3 against, with 23 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Zambia.

Against: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Syria.

Abstain: Angola, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Oman, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Yemen.

Absent: Armenia, Cape Verde, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Kiribati, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

##armement #onu #traité_commerce_armes

U.N. condemns Assad forces, but unease grows about rebels | Reuters
http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/05/15/syria-crisis-un-vote-idINDEE94E0EO20130515

The U.N. General Assembly condemned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces and praised the opposition on Wednesday, but a decline in support for the resolution suggested growing unease about extremism among Syria’s fractious rebels.

While the non-binding text has no legal force, resolutions of the 193-nation assembly can carry significant moral and political weight. There were 107 votes in favor, 12 against and 59 abstentions - a drop in support compared with a resolution condemning the Syrian government that passed in August with 133 votes in favor, 12 against and 31 abstentions.

U.N. diplomats cited concerns that Syria could be headed for “regime change” engineered by foreign governments and fears about a strengthening Islamist extremist element among the rebels as reasons for the decline in support for the resolution.

Jabara’s classic «Zionism: Racism or Liberation?» deserves a second look
http://mondoweiss.net/2013/05/jabaras-liberation-deserves.html

In 1976, Abdeen Jabara published an occasional paper with the Association of Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG) entitled “Zionism and Racism.” The paper was written in the context of Israeli reaction to U.N. General Assembly Resolution 3379, adopted in 1975, which determined that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination. Jabara’s paper challenged Israel’s contentions on solid legal grounds, citing international law defining “racial discrimination” and proving that racism is built into very structure of the Israeli state

IPS – U.N. Accused of Playing Down Nuke Disarmament Conference | Inter Press Service
http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/05/u-n-accused-of-playing-down-nuke-disarmament-conference

... the Group of 77, the largest single coalition of 132 developing countries, implicitly accuses the United Nations of falling short in its efforts to publicise a meeting on nuclear disarmament scheduled to take place Sep. 26.

Ambassador Peter Thomson of Fiji, the G77 chair, last week described the upcoming talks as “the first-ever high level meeting of the General Assembly on nuclear disarmament.”

He said the meeting is of importance to developing nations, and therefore, all efforts should be made to give it timely and wide publicity.

A G77 delegate told IPS the conference is not getting the advance publicity it should, probably because three of the big powers, the United States, UK and France, are not supportive of the meeting.

“We have not seen anything on the high level meeting so far,” he added.

The lack of coverage stands in contrast to the strong public stand taken by the secretary-general, who has consistently called for the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

Asked about the significance of the upcoming meeting, Dr. John Burroughs, executive director of the New York-based Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, told IPS the meeting is a chance for world leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama and others, to give direction to the nuclear disarmament enterprise, “which is now drifting aimlessly despite much rhetoric over the past five years.”

Adoption du premier traité sur le commerce international des armes conventionnelles.

L’Assemblée générale de l’ONU vient d’adopter aujourd’hui le premier traité sur le commerce international des armes conventionnelles. La résolution – et donc le Traité – a recueilli 154 voix. 3 pays ont voté contre : Syrie, Corée du Nord et Iran. Plus grave, 23 pays ont choisi l’abstention dont de gros exportateurs d’armes comme la Russie et la Chine et d’importants acquéreurs comme l’Egypte, l’Inde, l’Indonésie ou le Pakistan. Chaque membre de l’ONU a la liberté désormais de signer le traité et de le ratifier. La Russie a déjà indiqué qu’elle ne le ferait pas.

Tuesday, April 2, 2013
We have an Arms Trade Treaty! But the hard work starts now...
http://armstradetreaty.blogspot.fr

On Tuesday, 2 April 2013, States gathered at the United Nations General Assembly for the adoption of the UN Arms Trade Treaty. As French President General de Gaulle famously said prior to referenda he put to the French people, “Je veux un ’oui’ massif !” And this is what was achieved today. The resolution—and thus the treaty—was adopted by an overwhelming margin: 154 votes to three with 23 abstentions.

With the benefit of “20-20 hindsight”, we should therefore heartily thank the United States for having blocked agreement at the diplomatic conference in July 2012, as the treaty text that has ultimately been adopted is much better and stronger than the draft proposed by the then-Conference President, Ambassador Moritan.
Here in the General Assembly, the treaty was considered directly in plenary meeting under Agenda Item 94 (General and Complete Disarmament). In the words of the General Assembly President, “The historic dimension of this day” is that a global arms trade treaty is “for the first time the subject of action in this Chamber.” He noted that the Conference on Disarmament had not produced significant results for more than a decade.

Conference President Peter Woolacott then took the floor. He noted that he had ruled that there was not a consensus in the Conference itself due to the objections of Iran, DPR Korea, and Syria. The final text is a compromise text but would make a difference to the broadest range of stakeholders. At this point, Costa Rica introduced the draft resolution that would adopt the treaty. The Costa Rican Ambassador stated that the treaty was a robust and balanced document.

In explanations before vote (…) Syria stated that they “were not against the treaty” but said that “we were in need of a good treaty that we will not regret later”. It had wanted a reference in the text to the right to self-determination of peoples living under foreign occupation, and specifically cited Israel in this regard. It also wanted a categorical reference to non-supply to unauthorised non-state terrorists. It did not refer to aggression. The criteria for denying exports were selective, and also represented interference in the work of the UN Security Council.

(...) Russia stated that the draft had a number of shortcomings, notably the lack of a specific prohibition on transfers to unauthorised non-state actors. It was particularly concerned about Article 6(3). Knowledge meant “full knowledge”—in Russian it would be translated as “possesses knowledge”. It would abstain in the vote.
Sudan noted the lack of a specific prohibition on transfers to unauthorised non-state actors. It regretted the lack of definitions. It would abstain in the vote.

(...) Egypt regretted the lack of consensus in the two diplomatic conferences and that a disarmament treaty was adopted by a vote. The provision of prohibitions should have included a reference to aggression. It also referred to resolutions of the Human Rights Council as being relevant for determinations of whether serious violations of human rights had occurred.

(...) China stated that it had abstained and that the process of adoption of the ATT would not constitute a precedent for future arms negotiations.

(...) The UAE welcomed the adoption of the treaty and had voted in favour of the resolution. It associated itself with the concerns to be expressed subsequently by Lebanon. It regretted the lack of a reference to the rights of people under foreign occupation.
Lebanon regretted the lack of a reference to the rights of people under foreign occupation.

(...) Iran stated that it had voted against the resolution. It had many objections (more than a dozen) to the text of the treaty, including the reference to the UN Security Council.

Statement after the vote:
The European Union stated its appreciation of the adoption of the treaty.

Lebanon speaking on behalf of the Arab Group said that they had hoped to join support for the treaty but they found that the text was not balanced.

Un petit point sur l’une des deux raisons invoquées pour la démission de Mikati :

– Le général Achraf Rifi, chef des Forces de sécurité intérieure, atteint l’âge de la retraite ; l’homme est très proche du 14 Mars. Prochainement également, le chef de l’armée, Jean Kahwagi semble-t-il apprécié du Hezbollah.

Le Futur a proposé une loi pour prolonger les deux mandants :
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Local-News/2013/Mar-22/211132-rifi-downbeat-over-term-extension-prospects.ashx

The Future parliamentary bloc has written an urgent draft law to change the mandatory retirement age for several high-ranking security officials who are set to reach mandatory retirement age this year, including Rifi and Lebanese Army Commander Gen. Jean Kahwagi.

– Pas question pour le Hezbollah et les aounistes de prolonger Rifi, qui est leur bête noire dans plusieurs affaires :
http://www.lorientlejour.com/category/Derni%C3%A8res+Infos/article/806628/Prorogation_du_mandat_de_Rifi_%3A_vers_une_demission_du_gouvernement_

Le ministre d’Etat, Ahmad Karamé, a averti vendredi que le gouvernement pouvait tomber si le mandat du général Achraf Rifi à la tête des Forces de sécurité intérieure (FSI) n’était pas prorogé lors du Conseil des ministres qui se tient cet après-midi.

Pour Kahwagi, le Hezbollah serait favorable, mais pas Aoun :
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Politics/2013/Mar-19/210664-future-seeks-extension-of-rifi-kahwagi-terms.ashx

Both Hezbollah and ally Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun oppose extending Rifi’s term, given his affiliation with the Future Movement.

Similarly, some March 14 groups are said to oppose lengthening Kahwagi’s term because of his perceived closeness to Hezbollah. The Islamist party backs adding to Kahwagi’s mandate, but Aoun does not.

Je n’ai pas trouvé les raisons de l’opposition des aounistes à Kahwagi.

– Joumblatt prétend qu’il était prévu de remplacer Rifi par le général Ali Hajj, bête noire du clan Hariri :
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/76691-jumblat-reveals-plan-to-replace-rifi-with-ali-hajj-it-s-all-about-pr

He revealed a plan that consists of replacing Internal Security Forces chief Asraf Rifi with General Ali Hajj.

Hajj a déjà 58 ans, alors pour remplacer Rifi qui atteint les 59 ans fatidiques le 1er avril, je ne vois bien pas l’intérêt de provoquer des tensions énormes pour seulement quelques mois à la tête des FSI.

– Pour succéder à Rifi, Roger Salem : « mais Salem est grec catholique ».
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Politics/2013/Mar-19/210664-future-seeks-extension-of-rifi-kahwagi-terms.ashx

If Rifi’s term is not extended, ISF Deputy Commander Brig. Roger Salem will become acting head of the ISF until a new director-general is appointed, although Salem too will reach retirement age in only three months. Custom dictates that a Sunni holds the top post at the ISF, but Salem is a Greek Catholic.

Et pour remonter plus loin sur le background de l’affaire :
– Achraf Rifi bloquant l’accès du ministre des télécoms, puis refusant d’obéir aux ordres directs du ministre de l’intérieur ; sur fond de réseau téléphonique suspect :
►http://seenthis.net/messages/18989
– le #cablegate révélait comment Achraf Rifi était très impliqué dans la création de la milice de Saad Hariri :
►http://seenthis.net/messages/15268

The second issue Jumblatt raised was Saad’s reported training of Sunni militias in Lebanon (allegedly 15,000 members in Beirut and more in Tripoli). In establishing his own “security agencies” in Beirut and Tripoli, Saad was being badly advised by “some people,” Jumblatt said, such as ISF General Ashraf Rifi. In his meeting with Jumblatt, Hassan admitted having knowledge that members of Saad’s Future Movement were being trained. Hassan reportedly opposed such training, but “people around Saad” (i.e., Rifi) were telling him to go ahead.

L’homme est donc particulièrement central pour les projets américains au Liban, et il semble tout de même totalement inimaginable que le bonhomme bénéficie du moindre traitement de faveur de la part d’un gouvernement auquel il a déjà très ouvertement désobéi (allant jusqu’à la confrontation physique avec un ministre).

Update: Brotherhood critics elected to Journalist Syndicate board |

Egypt Independent

http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/update-brotherhood-critics-elected-journalist-syndicate-board

Head of the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies Diaa Rashwan won the seat of the head of the Journalists Syndicate in elections held on Friday. 

“The syndicate stood against repression,” he said after the votes were counted. “And oppressive regimes have fallen while the syndicate is still here.”

Rashwan got more than 50 percent of the votes, beating the other main frontrunner, Abdel Mohsen Salama, the managing editor of Al-Ahram newspaper.

#presse #médias

A Conversation with Data Visualization Experts

Features - Source: An OpenNews project

http://source.mozillaopennews.org/en-US/articles/conversation-data-viz-experts

A Conversation with Data Visualization Experts

Working notes on the art and its tools from a General Assembly panel
February 7, 2013
By Renee DiResta

Back in September, I started a project in which I crowdsourced a set of Google Autocomplete answers to an interesting question. Responses came in from all over the country, and within a few weeks, I had a spreadsheet with hundreds of thousands of rows…and no idea what to do next. I had a few questions in mind at the start, so I started slicing the data in various ways (in Excel, with pivot tables), and insights began to emerge. But I couldn’t help wondering: was I asking the right questions, or was I missing something important because I didn’t know to look for it? Were the visualization designs that I’d come up with the best ones for the story I was trying to tell? What would professionals do?

#visualisation #cartographie #information-design #data-journalisme #données #graphique

A Eulogy for #Occupy | Wired Opinion | Wired.com
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/12/a-eulogy-for-occupy/all

On the night of Nov. 15, they hadn’t merely shot the messenger. They’d done that too, but they’d beat the people that had come back from the future with lifeboats. Like Anonymous and Piratbyrån https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piratbyr%C3%A5n before them, OWS was a messenger from the future, not so much fighting the system as explaining to the old way of doing things that it had already lost. That future, still nebulous, soaked into the nondescript stones of Zuccotti. But the old world around us had rejected the message from the new world, never understanding that theirs was a mission of mercy to the lost.
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2012/12/signs-dc-660x440.jpg

Je signalais il y a un an l’immersion de Quinn Norton ►http://seenthis.net/messages/39525 , voilà qu’elle en fait le bilan.

La foire aux « causes faciles »...

Celebrating causes: Dies irae

Every cause has its day, whether deserved or not

http://www.economist.com/news/international/21567057-every-cause-has-its-day-whether-deserved-or-not-dies-irae

World Toilet Day was on November 19th. World Television Day has just passed. International Civil Aviation Day is on December 7th and International Mountain Day comes four days later. (...)

No means exist for purging the calendar of causes when their day is done. And the whims of UN decision-making mean that, though 264 days are free of an observance, others are overloaded. March 21st, for example, requires some contortions for the conscientious: they must simultaneously celebrate Nowruz, eliminate racial discrimination, care about Down’s syndrome and exalt poetry.

Any takers for World Apathy Day?

#causes_faciles #ONU #célébrations

Full text: Abbas speech to UN General Assembly

November 30, 2012 by occupiedpalestine 0 Comments

196453_345x230[1]
Maan News Agency | Nov 30, 2012

New York
Nov. 29, 2012

Mr. President of the General Assembly,
Your Excellency Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Palestine comes today to the United Nations General Assembly at a time when it is still tending to its wounds and still burying its beloved martyrs of children, women and men who have fallen victim to the latest Israeli aggression, still searching for remnants of life amid the ruins of homes destroyed by Israeli bombs on the Gaza Strip, wiping out entire families, their men, women and children murdered along with their dreams, their hopes, their future and their longing to live an ordinary life and to live in freedom and peace.

Palestine comes today to the General Assembly because it believes in peace and because its people, as proven in past days, are in desperate need of it.

Palestine comes today to this prestigious international forum, representative and protector of international legitimacy, reaffirming our conviction that the international community now stands before the last chance to save the two-State solution.

Palestine comes to you today at a defining moment regionally and internationally, in order to reaffirm its presence and to try to protect the possibilities and the foundations of a just peace that is deeply hoped for in our region.

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Israeli aggression against our people in the Gaza Strip has confirmed once again the urgent and pressing need to end the Israeli occupation and for our people to gain their freedom and independence. This aggression also confirms the Israeli Government’s adherence to the policy of occupation, brute force and war, which in turn obliges the international community to shoulder its responsibilities towards the Palestinian people and towards peace.

This is why we are here today.

I say with great pain and sorrow … there was certainly no one in the world that required that tens of Palestinian children lose their lives in order to reaffirm the above-mentioned facts. There was no need for thousands of deadly raids and tons of explosives for the world to be reminded that there is an occupation that must come to an end and that there are a people that must be liberated. And, there was no need for a new, devastating war in order for us to be aware of the absence of peace.

This is why we are here today.

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Palestinian people, who miraculously recovered from the ashes of Al-Nakba of 1948, which was intended to extinguish their being and to expel them in order to uproot and erase their presence, which was rooted in the depths of their land and depths of history. In those dark days, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were torn from their homes and displaced within and outside of their homeland, thrown from their beautiful, embracing, prosperous country to refugee camps in one of the most dreadful campaigns of ethnic cleansing and dispossession in modern history. In those dark days, our people had looked to the United Nations as a beacon of hope and appealed for ending the injustice and for achieving justice and peace, the realization of our rights, and our people still believe in this and continue to wait.

This is why we are here today.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In the course of our long national struggle, our people have always strived to ensure harmony and conformity between the goals and means of their struggle and international law and spirit of the era in accordance with prevailing realities and changes. And, our people always have strived not to lose their humanity, their highest, deeply-held moral values and their innovative abilities for survival, steadfastness, creativity and hope, despite the horrors that befell them and continue to befall them today as a consequence of Al-Nakba and its horrors.

Despite the enormity and weight of this task, the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and the constant leader of their revolution and struggle, has consistently strived to achieve this harmony and conformity.

When the Palestine National Council decided in 1988 to pursue the Palestinian peace initiative and adopted the Declaration of Independence, which was based on resolution 181 (II) (29 November 1947), adopted by your august body, it was in fact undertaking, under the leadership of the late President Yasser Arafat, a historic, difficult and courageous decision that defined the requirements for a historic reconciliation that would turn the page on war, aggression and occupation.

This was not an easy matter. Yet, we had the courage and sense of high responsibility to make the right decision to protect the higher national interests of our people and to confirm our adherence to international legitimacy, and it was a decision which in that same year was welcomed, supported and blessed by this high body that is meeting today.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We have heard and you too have heard specifically over the past months the incessant flood of Israeli threats in response to our peaceful, political and diplomatic endeavor for Palestine to acquire non-member observer status in the United Nations. And, you have surely witnessed how some of these threats have been carried out in a barbaric and horrific manner, just days ago in the Gaza Strip.

We have not heard one word from any Israeli official expressing any sincere concern to save the peace process. On the contrary, our people have witnessed, and continue to witness, an unprecedented intensification of military assaults, the blockade, settlement activities and ethnic cleansing, particularly in Occupied East Jerusalem, and mass arrests, attacks by settlers and other practices by which this Israeli occupation is becoming synonymous with an apartheid system of colonial occupation, which institutionalizes the plague of racism and entrenches hatred and incitement.

What permits the Israeli Government to blatantly continue with its aggressive policies and the perpetration of war crimes stems from its conviction that it is above the international law and that it has immunity from accountability and consequences. This belief, unfortunately, is bolstered by the failure by some to condemn and demand the cessation of its violations and crimes and by positions that equate the victim and the executioner.

The moment has arrived for the world to say clearly: Enough of aggression, settlements and occupation.

This is why we are here now.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We did not come here seeking to delegitimize a State established years ago, and that is Israel; rather we came to affirm the legitimacy of the State that must now achieve its independence, and that is Palestine. We did not come here to add further complications to the peace process, which Israel’s policies have thrown into the intensive care unit; rather we came to launch a final serious attempt to achieve peace. Our endeavor is not aimed at terminating what remains of the negotiations process, which has lost its objective and credibility, but rather aimed at trying to breathe new life into the negotiations and at setting a solid foundation for it based on the terms of reference of the relevant international resolutions in order for the negotiations to succeed.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization, I say: We will not give up, we will not tire, and our determination will not wane and we will continue to strive to achieve a just peace.

However, above all and after all, I affirm that our people will not relinquish their inalienable national rights, as defined by United Nations resolutions. And our people cling to the right to defend themselves against aggression and occupation and they will continue their popular, peaceful resistance and their epic steadfastness, and will continue to build on their land. And, they will end the division and strengthen their national unity. We will accept no less than the independence of the State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on all the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, to live in peace and security alongside the State of Israel, and a solution for the refugee issue on the basis of resolution 194 (III), as per the operative part of the Arab Peace Initiative. I don’t think that is terrorism that we are pursuing in the United Nations.

Yet, we must repeat here once again our warning: the window of opportunity is narrowing and time is quickly running out. The rope of patience is shortening and hope is withering. The innocent lives that have been taken by Israeli bombs – more than 168 martyrs, mostly children and women, including 12 members of one family, the Dalou family, in Gaza – are a painful reminder to the world that this racist, colonial occupation is making the two-State solution and the prospect for realizing peace a very difficult choice, if not impossible.

It is time for action and the moment to move forward.

This is why we are here today.

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentleman,

The world is being asked today to answer a specific question that we have offered repeatedly: Is there a surplus people in our region? Tell us. The world must say it. Are we a surplus people, or is there a state which is missing which must be embodied on its land, which is Palestine. The world is being asked to undertake a significant step in the process of rectifying the unprecedented historical injustice inflicted on the Palestinian people since Al-Nakba of 1948.

Every voice among you supporting our endeavor today is a most valuable voice of courage, and every State that grants support today to Palestine’s request for non-member observer State status is affirming its principled and moral support for freedom and the rights of peoples and international law and peace.

Your support for our endeavor today will send a promising message – to millions of Palestinians on the land of Palestine, in the refugee camps both in the homeland and the Diaspora, and to the prisoners struggling for freedom in Israel’s prisons – that justice is possible and that there is a reason to be hopeful and that the peoples of the world do not accept the continuation of the occupation.

This is why we are here today.

Your support for our endeavor today will give a reason for hope to a people besieged by a racist, colonial occupation. Failure that almost amounts to complicity in Israel’s aggression and in a state of paralysis that some are striving to impose on the international community. Your support, ladies and gentlemen, will confirm to our people that they are not alone and their adherence to international law is never going to be a losing proposition.

In our endeavor today to acquire non-member State status for Palestine in the United Nations, we reaffirm that Palestine will always adhere to and respect the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations and international humanitarian law, uphold equality, guarantee civil liberties, uphold the rule of law, promote democracy and pluralism, and uphold and protect the rights of women. This is what we are pledging today.

As we promised our friends and our brothers and sisters, we will continue to consult with them upon the approval of your esteemed body of our request to upgrade Palestine’s status. We will act responsibly and positively in our next steps, and we will to work to strengthen cooperation with the countries and peoples of the world for the sake of a just peace.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Sixty-five years ago on this day, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 181 (II), which partitioned the land of historic Palestine into two States and became the birth certificate for Israel.

Sixty-five years later and on the same day, which your esteemed body has designated as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, the General Assembly stands before a moral duty, which it must not hesitate to undertake, and stands before a historic duty, which cannot endure further delay, and before a practical duty to salvage the chances for peace, which is urgent and cannot be postponed.

Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The United Nations General Assembly is called upon today to issue the birth certificate of the reality of the State of Palestine. This is why, in specific, we are here today. It is our hope, ladies and gentlemen, our hope in God and in you.

Thank you, and peace be upon you.

#Israël autorise 3.000 nouveaux logements dans des #colonies - Le Nouvel Observateur
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/monde/20121130.OBS1009/israel-autorise-3-000-nouveaux-logements-dans-des-colonies.html

Israël va autoriser la construction de 3.000 nouveaux logements dans des quartiers de colonisation à Jérusalem-Est occupée et en Cisjordanie, a indiqué un haut responsable israélien vendredi 30 novembre, au lendemain de l’accession de la #Palestine au statut d’Etat observateur à l’ONU.

« C’est exact. A Jérusalem et en Cisjordanie », a déclaré ce responsable sous le couvert de l’anonymat, interrogé sur la véracité d’un tweet du correspondant diplomatique du quotidien israélien « Haaretz ».

« Selon un responsable politique, (le Premier ministre Benjamin) Netanyahu a décidé de construire 3.000 nouveaux logements à Jérusalem-Est et dans des colonies de Cisjordanie en réponse à la démarche palestinienne à l’ONU », a écrit Barak Ravid sur son compte twitter.

DRAFT RESOLUTION [26 November 2012]
67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly
Agenda Item 37: Question of Palestine
Status of Palestine in the United Nations

The General Assembly,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, and stressing in this regard the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,

Recalling its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970 [Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (24 October 1970)], affirming, inter alia, the duty of every State to promote through joint and separate action realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,

Stressing the importance of maintaining and strengthening international peace founded upon freedom, equality, justice and respect for fundamental human rights,

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Reaffirming the Charter principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming relevant Security Council resolutions, including, inter alia, resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008),

Reaffirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, with regard to the matter of prisoners,

Reaffirming its resolution 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974, and all relevant resolutions, including resolution 66/146 of 19 December 2011, reaffirming the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent State of Palestine,

Reaffirming its resolution 43/176 of 15 December 1988, resolution 66/17 of 30 November 2011, and all relevant resolutions regarding the “Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine”, which, inter alia, stress the need for (a) the withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem; (b) the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, primarily the right to self-determination and the right to their independent State; (c) a just resolution of the problem of the Palestine refugees in conformity with resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948; and (d) the complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,

Reaffirming also its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,

Recalling the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 9 July 2004,

Reaffirming its resolution 58/292 of 6 May 2004, affirming, inter alia, that the status of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, remains one of military occupation, and that in accordance with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions, the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination and to sovereignty over their territory,

Recalling its resolutions 3210 (XXIX) of 14 October 1974 and 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974, by which, respectively, the Palestine Liberation Organization was invited to participate in the deliberations of the General Assembly as the representative of the Palestinian people and was granted observer status,

Recalling its resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988, by which it, inter alia, acknowledged the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988, and decided that the designation “Palestine” should be used in place of the designation “Palestine Liberation Organization” in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system,

Taking into consideration that the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, in accordance with a decision by the Palestine National Council, is entrusted with the powers and responsibilities of the Provisional Government of the State of Palestine [A/43/928 of 9 December 1988],

Recalling its resolution 52/250 of 7 July 1998, by which additional rights and privileges were accorded to Palestine in its capacity as observer,

Recalling the Arab Peace Initiative adopted in March 2002 by the League of Arab States,

Reaffirming its commitment, in accordance with international law, to the two-State solution of an independent, sovereign, democratic, viable and contiguous State of Palestine living side by side with Israel in peace and security on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;

Bearing in mind the mutual recognition of 9 September 1993 between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Affirming the right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and internationally recognized borders,

Commending the Palestinian National Authority’s 2009 plan for constructing the institutions of an independent Palestinian State within a two-year period, and welcoming the positive assessments in this regard about readiness for Statehood by the World Bank, the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund and as reflected in the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee Chair Conclusions of April 2011 and subsequent Chair Conclusions, which determined that the Palestinian Authority is above the threshold for a functioning State in key sectors studied,

Recognizing that full membership is enjoyed by Palestine in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, and the Group of Asian States and is also a full member as in the League of Arab States, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Group of 77 and China,

Recognizing that, to date, 132 States Members of the United Nations have accorded recognition to the State of Palestine;

Taking note of the 11 November 2011 report of the Security Council Committee on the Admission of New Members,

Stressing the permanent responsibility of the United Nations towards the question of Palestine until it is satisfactorily resolved in all its aspects,

Reaffirming the principle of universality of membership of the United Nations,

1. Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967;

2. Decides to accord to Palestine Non-member Observer State status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice;

3. Expresses that the Security Council will consider favorably the application submitted on 23 September 2011 by the State of Palestine for admission to full membership in the United Nations;

4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfills the vision of two States, an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine, living side by side in peace and security with Israel, on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;

5. Expresses the resumption and acceleration of negotiations within the Middle East peace process, based on the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap, for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all outstanding core issues, namely the Palestine refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, borders, security and water;

6. Urges all States and the specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations system to continue to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to self-determination, independence and freedom;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary measures to implement the present resolution and to report to the Assembly within three months on progress made in this regard.

Source: The Rights Forum

Second Committee Approves Text Demanding End to Israel’s Exploitation of Natural Resources in Occupied Arab Lands
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/gaef3357.doc.htm

In other action today, the Committee approved — by a recorded vote of 152 in favour to 7 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, United States), with 3 abstentions (Cameroon, Colombia, Panama) — a draft resolution titled “Oil slick on Lebanese shores”.

By its terms, the Assembly would reiterate, for the seventh consecutive year, its deep concern over the destruction by the Israeli Air Force of oil storage tanks near Lebanon’s El-Jiyeh electric power plant due to its adverse implications for sustainable development in that country. By other terms, the Assembly would request that Israel assume responsibility for paying prompt and adequate compensation to Lebanon and Syria — whose shores had also been partially polluted — which should pay for the cost of restoring the marine environment and repairing environmental damage.

Following the vote, Israel’s representative said he was disappointed that the Committee had chosen to participate in “this annual ritual”. Year after year, the crucial work of the Committee had been “hijacked” by some delegations driven by narrow political motivations. The text failed to put the 2006 war into context, ignoring the fact that the Hizbullah terrorist organization had been the agitator, having launched rockets across international borders. It also ignored the fact that Hizbullah rockets killed and maimed Israelis, and failed to mention the destruction that those rockets caused in Israel, including damage to endangered fauna and flora caused by forest fires.

FULL TEXT OF DRAFT RESOLUTION PALESTINE PLANS SO SUBMIT TO UNGA | Occupied Palestine | فلسطين
http://occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com/2012/11/10/full-text-of-draft-resolution-palestine-plans-so-submit

FULL TEXT OF DRAFT RESOLUTION PALESTINE PLANS SO SUBMIT TO UNGA

November 10, 2012 by occupiedpalestine 0 Comments

Mitchell Plitnick Blog | Nov 10, 2012

Pasted below is the full text, as it currently stands, of the resolution the Palestinian Authority is planning to bring to the UN General Assembly, apparently on November 29.

The resolution is extremely mild, calling for the State of Palestine to be accorded the same status in the GA as the Vatican has. It also calls for a two-state solution, the resumption of talks based on the relevant resolutions and past negotiations, and for the Security Council to consider “favorably” the application for full membership submitted last year.

None of this can be considered radical or extremist, and most of it is obviously necessary if there is to be any progress toward any resolution. While it can be argued that the two-state solution has already passed the point where it can be reasonably implemented, this remains the stated goal of the US, EU, Palestinian Authority, Arab League and even Israel. It’s pretty hard to see any reasonable argument against this resolution, and even harder to see why this would send the US and Israel into the tizzy it has.

The submission of a resolution which, absent the fanaticism of the Israel Lobby, with its unshakable dedication to obstructing a better future for Israelis as well as Palestinians, and their toadies in Congress, would give President Obama a great opportunity to try to rescue the two-state solution should be cause for celebration. Yes, the passage of the resolution would potentially allow the PA access to the international legal system, but the US and Europe could probably prevent that and Israel would defy the court anyway.

There just isn’t that much to fear here, and the adoption of this resolution would give some life to a moribund peace process, and at least in a small way begin to address the imbalance in negotiating power between Israel and the Palestinians. The US should allow its adoption, though I see little chance that Obama will want to start his second term that way.

In any case, here is the resolution:
DRAFT [8 November 2012]

67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly

Agenda Item 37: Question of Palestine

The General Assembly,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, and stressing in this regard the

principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,

Recalling its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 19701, affirming, inter alia, the duty of every

State to promote through joint and separate action realization of the principle of equal rights and self determination of peoples,

Stressing the importance of maintaining and strengthening international peace founded upon

freedom, equality, justice and respect for fundamental human rights,

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Reaffirming the Charter principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming relevant Security Council resolutions, including, inter alia, resolutions 242 (1967), 338

(1973), 446 (1979), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008),

Reaffirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons

in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,

Reaffirming its resolution 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974, and all relevant resolutions, including

resolution 66/146 of 19 December 2011, reaffirming the right of the Palestinian people to selfdetermination,

including the right to their independent State of Palestine,

Reaffirming its resolution 43/176 of 15 December 1988, resolution 66/17 of 30 November 2011, and

all relevant resolutions regarding the “Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine”, which, inter

alia, stress the need for (a) the withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory occupied since

1967, including East Jerusalem; (b) the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,

primarily the right to self-determination and the right to their independent State; (c) a just resolution

of the problem of the Palestine refugees in conformity with resolution 194 (III) of 11 December

1948; and (d) the complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian

Territory, including East Jerusalem,

Reaffirming also its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the

status of Jerusalem, bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the

international community, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to

resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,

1 Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in

accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (24 October 1970)

2

Recalling the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 9 July 2004,

Reaffirming its resolution 58/292 of 6 May 2004, affirming, inter alia, that the status of the

Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, remains one of military

occupation, and that in accordance with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions,

the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination and to sovereignty over their territory,

Recalling its resolutions 3210 (XXIX) of 14 October 1974 and 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974,

by which, respectively, the Palestine Liberation Organization was invited to participate in the

deliberations of the General Assembly as the representative of the Palestinian people and was granted

observer status,

Recalling also its resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988, by which it, inter alia, acknowledged the

proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988, and

decided that the designation “Palestine” should be used in place of the designation “Palestine

Liberation Organization” in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and

functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system,

Taking into consideration that the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, in

accordance with a decision by the Palestine National Council, is entrusted with the powers and

responsibilities of the Provisional Government of the State of Palestine2,

Recalling its resolution 52/250 of 7 July 1998, by which additional rights and privileges were

accorded to Palestine in its capacity as observer,

Recalling the Arab Peace Initiative adopted in March 2002 by the League of Arab States,

Reaffirming its commitment, in accordance with international law, to the two-State solution of an

independent, sovereign, democratic, viable and contiguous State of Palestine living side by side with

Israel in peace and security on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;

Bearing in mind the mutual recognition of 9 September 1993 between the Government of the State of

Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Affirming the right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and internationally

recognized borders,

Commending the Palestinian National Authority’s 2009 plan for constructing the institutions of an

independent Palestinian State within a two-year period, and welcoming the positive assessments in

this regard about readiness for Statehood by the World Bank, the United Nations and the

International Monetary Fund and as reflected in the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee Chair Conclusions of

April 2011 and subsequent Chair Conclusions, which determined that the Palestinian Authority is

above the threshold for a functioning State in key sectors studied,

Recognizing that full membership is enjoyed by Palestine in the United Nations Educational,

Scientific and Cultural Organization, the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, and

2 A/43/928 of 9 December 1988

3

the Group of Asian States and is also a full member as in the League of Arab States, the Non-Aligned

Movement, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Group of 77 and China,

Taking note of the 11 November 2011 report of the Security Council Committee on the Admission of

New Members,

Stressing the permanent responsibility of the United Nations towards the question of Palestine until it

is satisfactorily resolved in all its aspects,

Reaffirming the principle of universality of membership of the United Nations,

1. Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their

State of Palestine on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;

2. Recognizes that, to date, 132 States Members of the United Nations have accorded recognition to

the State of Palestine;

3. Decides to accord to Palestine Observer State status in the United Nations system, without

prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization as

the representative of the Palestinian people, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and

practice;

4. Expresses the hope that the Security Council will consider favorably the application submitted on

23 September 2011 by the State of Palestine for admission to full membership in the United

Nations;

5. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the

Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the

occupation that began in 1967 and fulfills the vision of two States, an independent, sovereign,

democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine, living side by side in peace and security

with Israel and its other neighbors, on the basis of the pre-1967 borders, with delineation of

borders to be determined in final status negotiations;

6. Expresses the urgent need for the resumption and acceleration of negotiations within the Middle

East peace process, based on the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of

reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet

Roadmap, for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement between the

Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all outstanding core issues, namely the Palestine

refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, borders, security, water and prisoners;

7. Urges all States and the specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations system to

continue to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to selfdetermination,

independence and freedom;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary measures to implement the present

resolution and to report to the Assembly within three months on progress made in this regard.

Israel is a threat to US democracy
http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/americas/4501-israel-is-a-threat-to-us-democracy

Pressions américaines sur l’Union européenne pour qu’elle ne reconnaisse pas l’Etat de Palestine

The US State Department is circulating a confidential letter urging European Union (EU) members and other “friendly” countries to help block Palestinian attempts to secure non-member Observer State status at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly.

Is Iran Trying to Tell Us Something We Won’t Hear?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/185-general/51961-is-iran-trying-to-tell-us-something-we-wont-hear.html

By Danny Schechter
Al Jazeera
October 3, 2012

Although Ahmadinejad’s address at the General Assembly was analytical rather than inflammatory, media outlets continue to anticipate rhetorical aggression from Iran. The media focuses on the country’s alleged nuclear weapons program, while they ignore Iran’s leadership in the Non-Aligned Movement, a nuclear compromise and its potential role in the Syrian crisis. If media continue to defy Iran, they might not be able to keep up with important policy shifts.

#iran #états-unis

Quand ça commence comme ça, tout de suite tu sens que tu vas avoir un discours de qualité :
►http://embassies.gov.il/un/statements/general_assembly/Pages/Prime-Minister-Netanyahu's-Speech-to-the-67th-United-Nations-General-A

Three thousand years ago, King David reigned over the Jewish state in our eternal capital, Jerusalem. I say that to all those who proclaim that the Jewish state has no roots in our region and that it will soon disappear.

Au cas où tu aurais besoin de te référer à la source : Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Speech to the 67th United Nations General Assembly
►http://embassies.gov.il/un/statements/general_assembly/Pages/Prime-Minister-Netanyahu's-Speech-to-the-67th-United-Nations-General-A

Tu as même une version de bonne taille du diagramme explicatif du gugusse (des fois que tu n’aurais pas bien compris) :
http://embassies.gov.il/washington/NewsAndEvents/Netanyahu_Images/UNGA_Bomb_Diagram.jpg

safeworld4women
Syria : Conscience Is Their Only Armour http://goo.gl/fb/psEDa

UN monitors shot at trying to reach site of ’massacre’ in #Syria http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/un-monitors-shot-at-trying-to-reach-site-of-massacre-in-syria-7826482

#Syria violence flares after rebel deadline ►http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/04/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE84S0P020120604

#Syria violence flares after rebel deadline ►http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/04/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE84S0P020120604

Daily Kos: A Black Woman Who Occupied Wall Street: Why She Won’t Be Going Back.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/17/1027186/-A-Black-Woman-Who-Occupied-Wall-Street:-Why-She-Wont-Be-Going-Back

The days I spent at the Occupy Wall Street action in the park were harrowing to say the least. The racism is rampant. There is no regard for the need to factor in black issues or empowerment nor is black leadership in actuality encouraged or welcome, even though they claim it is. There are many white men there are very domineering, controlling, demeaning, sarcastic, condescending and do not make black women feel safe, welcome, empowered, appreciated or protected. They have no regard for black people or women.

Women are being molested in the park and there is no real viable system in place to handle it without the need for police intervention. There are white supremacists groups running around there. There are people smoking drugs there even though it puts the entire action at risk and even after being told that the General Assembly had consensus on the fact that there should be no smoking of cigarettes as they are not only a health hazard to everyone and gives support to the tobacco companies, but also a potential fire hazard, people continue to smoke with no regard for their fellow protesters.

The Real Story of How Israel Was Created by Alison Weir — Antiwar.com
http://original.antiwar.com/alison-weir/2011/10/10/the-real-story-of-how-israel-was-created

The common representation of Israel’s birth is that the U.N. created Israel, that the world was in favor of this move, and that the U.S. governmental establishment supported it. All these assumptions are demonstrably incorrect.

In reality, while the U.N. General Assembly recommended the creation of a Jewish state in part of Palestine, that recommendation was non-binding and never implemented by the Security Council.

Second, the General Assembly passed that recommendation only after Israel proponents threatened and bribed numerous countries in order to gain a required two-thirds of votes.

Third, the U.S. administration supported the recommendation out of domestic electoral considerations and took this position over the strenuous objections of the State Department, the CIA, and the Pentagon.

The passage of the General Assembly recommendation sparked increased violence in the region. Over the following months the armed wing of the pro-Israel movement, which had long been preparing for war, perpetrated a series of massacres and expulsions throughout Palestine, implementing a plan to clear the way for a majority-Jewish state.

It was this armed aggression, and the ethnic cleansing of at least three-quarters of a million indigenous Palestinians, that created the Jewish state on land that had been 95 percent non-Jewish prior to Zionist immigration and that even after years of immigration remained 70 percent non-Jewish. And despite the shallow patina of legality its partisans extracted from the General Assembly, Israel was born over the opposition of American experts and of governments around the world, who opposed it on both pragmatic and moral grounds.

Let us look at the specifics.