Showing posts with label EU European Union. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU European Union. Show all posts
Sunday, September 7, 2008
UN to demand Israel pay Lebanon $1 billion in reparations
"The United Nations will require Israel to pay Lebanon nearly $1 billion for environmental damages caused during the 2006 Second Lebanon War, the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar reported on Saturday."
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
The Myth of 'Weapons-Grade' Enrichment
"Talk about the double standards at the United Nations. Whereas UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon has repeatedly condemned Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad's rhetoric against Israel, expressing "shock and dismay", he has remained ominously, and inexcusably, silent about the blatant Israeli threats of military attacks on Iran, thus undermining the world's confidence in his ability to steer the global community clear of yet another major war in the Middle East caldron. Having turned a blind eye to Iran's formal protest at the UN regarding Israel's explicit threats, Ban may need to revisit his own statement of June 7, 2007, " The secretary general points out that all members have undertaken to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."
Friday, December 7, 2007
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Europeans See Murkier Case for Sanctions
"The Bush administration’s new intelligence assessment that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 is likely to complicate efforts to impose new sanctions on Iran at the United Nations Security Council, European officials said Monday."
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Iran: West should rectify its policies
"Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs calls on the West to rectify its policies on Iran's nuclear issue."
The EU's Palestinian botch-up
"One of the most incisive comments I have heard about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was delivered during a UN-sponsored conference in Brussels a few months ago. "It is futile," a Palestinian solidarity activist argued, "to ask me to achieve reconciliation with somebody who is sitting on my head.""
This sounds a lot like something another "terrorist" said back in 1961 before he was locked away for 27 years on Robbins Island.
"There are many people who feel that it is useless and futile for us to continue talking peace and non-violence — against a government whose only reply is savage attacks on an unarmed and defenceless people..." - Nelson Mandela, 1961
This sounds a lot like something another "terrorist" said back in 1961 before he was locked away for 27 years on Robbins Island.
"There are many people who feel that it is useless and futile for us to continue talking peace and non-violence — against a government whose only reply is savage attacks on an unarmed and defenceless people..." - Nelson Mandela, 1961
Thursday, November 8, 2007
UN: Israel fuels support for extremists
by EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press - Nov 6, 2007
The head of the U.N. agency responsible for aiding Palestinian refugees said Wednesday that Israel's near economic blockade of the Gaza Strip is fueling support for extremists and shattering hopes for a peaceful future.
"They're trying to punish those who've taken control of Gaza but in fact they're punishing everybody inside Gaza, a very small percentage of whom support the people who are controlling Gaza right now," Karen Koning AbuZayd of the United Nations Works and Relief Agency said.
The violent takeover of the Gaza Strip last June by the Islamic militants of the Hamas movement, and their continual rocketing of Israel, has led to Gaza's increasing isolation. In September, Israel declared Gaza a "hostile entity," clearing the way for economic sanctions.
Also Wednesday, Israel's Supreme Court delayed for at least a week a government plan to cut back on electricity to Gaza following appeals from 10 human rights organizations.
The appeals charged that the cut would be an illegal collective punishment because Gaza remains dependent on Israel for most of its electricity and all of its fuel. Gisha, one of the rights groups, said the court gave the state one week to respond to the appeals, and the human rights organizations would have another week to answer.
Israel ordered progressive utility cuts hoping that Palestinian residents would pressure militant groups to stop the attacks. Israel explained the cutbacks as part if its disengagement from Gaza. Israel withdrew its soldiers and settlers from Gaza in 2005.
The human rights groups say that Israel is still responsible for Gaza because it controls its air, sea and land access, and the utility cuts would punish civilians.
At a news conference at U.N. headquarters in New York, AbuZayd painted a grim picture of life in the Gaza Strip, saying there has been a 71 percent decrease in goods going into Gaza since May, there is "zero stock" of 91 drugs compared to 61 last month, and farmers do not have the money to get their crops picked or send them to market so they are rotting.
That means that there are no fruits and vegetables to supplement the basic rations that 80 percent of Gaza's population receive — flour, oil, sugar, a bit of lentils and powdered milk — either from UNRWA or the U.N. World Food Program, she said.
"It's not good enough," AbuZayd said. "UNRWA's only giving 61 percent" of the daily nutritional needs.
The main commercial crossings into Gaza from Israel and Egypt have been closed since June, so "there are no imports, exports," and there isn't even enough cash being brought in which has made living very difficult, she said.
"We at least have these two military crossings we're using and getting in just enough humanitarian supplies," AbuZayd said. "Israel is very concerned that there is no humanitarian disaster there. There will always be enough food and medicine, but these are very basic rations that are coming in."
She also expressed hope that this month's U.S.-sponsored Mideast conference will lead to positive movement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and provide new hope for the Palestinian people.
The head of the U.N. agency responsible for aiding Palestinian refugees said Wednesday that Israel's near economic blockade of the Gaza Strip is fueling support for extremists and shattering hopes for a peaceful future.
"They're trying to punish those who've taken control of Gaza but in fact they're punishing everybody inside Gaza, a very small percentage of whom support the people who are controlling Gaza right now," Karen Koning AbuZayd of the United Nations Works and Relief Agency said.
The violent takeover of the Gaza Strip last June by the Islamic militants of the Hamas movement, and their continual rocketing of Israel, has led to Gaza's increasing isolation. In September, Israel declared Gaza a "hostile entity," clearing the way for economic sanctions.
Also Wednesday, Israel's Supreme Court delayed for at least a week a government plan to cut back on electricity to Gaza following appeals from 10 human rights organizations.
The appeals charged that the cut would be an illegal collective punishment because Gaza remains dependent on Israel for most of its electricity and all of its fuel. Gisha, one of the rights groups, said the court gave the state one week to respond to the appeals, and the human rights organizations would have another week to answer.
Israel ordered progressive utility cuts hoping that Palestinian residents would pressure militant groups to stop the attacks. Israel explained the cutbacks as part if its disengagement from Gaza. Israel withdrew its soldiers and settlers from Gaza in 2005.
The human rights groups say that Israel is still responsible for Gaza because it controls its air, sea and land access, and the utility cuts would punish civilians.
At a news conference at U.N. headquarters in New York, AbuZayd painted a grim picture of life in the Gaza Strip, saying there has been a 71 percent decrease in goods going into Gaza since May, there is "zero stock" of 91 drugs compared to 61 last month, and farmers do not have the money to get their crops picked or send them to market so they are rotting.
That means that there are no fruits and vegetables to supplement the basic rations that 80 percent of Gaza's population receive — flour, oil, sugar, a bit of lentils and powdered milk — either from UNRWA or the U.N. World Food Program, she said.
"It's not good enough," AbuZayd said. "UNRWA's only giving 61 percent" of the daily nutritional needs.
The main commercial crossings into Gaza from Israel and Egypt have been closed since June, so "there are no imports, exports," and there isn't even enough cash being brought in which has made living very difficult, she said.
"We at least have these two military crossings we're using and getting in just enough humanitarian supplies," AbuZayd said. "Israel is very concerned that there is no humanitarian disaster there. There will always be enough food and medicine, but these are very basic rations that are coming in."
She also expressed hope that this month's U.S.-sponsored Mideast conference will lead to positive movement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and provide new hope for the Palestinian people.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
E.U. Seeks Data on American Passengers
Airlines Would Report Personal Details of Europe-Bound Travelers
by Ellen Nakashima, Washington Post - November 4, 2007
American travelers' personal data would for the first time be exported to all European Union states by airline carriers flying to Europe under a proposal to be announced this week.
The data, including names, telephone numbers, credit card information and travel itinerary, would be sent to E.U. member states so they could assess passenger risk for counterterrorism purposes, according to a draft copy obtained by The Washington Post. The European Commission proposal would allow the data to be kept for 13 years or longer if used in criminal investigations and intelligence operations. It would cover all passengers flying into and out of Europe, not just Americans.
Airlines already share data with U.S. authorities on passengers entering the United States. A handful of countries, including Canada and Australia, have similar laws. The European proposal was apparently modeled after an agreement signed in July between the United States and Europe dealing with passenger data from European flights entering and leaving the United States.
Under the proposal by Franco Frattini, European commissioner for freedom, security and justice, airlines or computerized reservation systems would send at least 19 pieces of data on each passenger to data-analysis units set up by each state. The data fields also would include e-mail addresses, names of accompanying passengers and open ones for such special requests as meals or medical service.
Under the proposal, no personal data that could reveal race, ethnicity, political opinions, religion, trade union membership or health or sex-life information could be transmitted. Any such data that was shared would have to be deleted immediately by the data-analyzing units, the proposal says.
The proposal must be approved by all 27 E.U. states to become a Europe-wide law, though individual states could introduce their own programs. It would affect about 30 million people who fly from North America to Europe each year.
The move is part of an effort to combat terrorism by sharing information globally, and it is fueling concerns of loss of privacy and control over personal data.
"It almost becomes an arms race with one country adopting a data-gathering system without reflecting on whether or not the system is necessary," said Allison Knight, staff counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Frattini has made clear that he believes a policy requiring Passenger Name Record data from airlines would be beneficial to combating terrorism in light of terror attacks in Madrid and London.
"The Union is at least as much a potential target of a terrorist attack as the United States, and the use and analysis of passenger name records is an important law enforcement tool to protect our citizens," Frattini told the European Parliament in September.
The U.S. is "definitely open to the idea," Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner said. "It would be fair of the Europeans to ask the same information of us that we're asking of them. We are open to finding ways to make our respective homelands secure."
The U.S.-E.U. pact was opposed by civil libertarians and liberal politicians, many of whom have said they do not favor an E.U. equivalent. But some have suggested retaliating with a mirror policy.
Sophie in 't Veld, a member of Parliament from the Netherlands, said Frattini's proposal would "undermine the credibility" of the E.U., which criticized the E.U.-U.S. pact. "We still do not have sufficient evidence of how effective the use of these data are in the fight against terrorists," she said.
The European countries' units would analyze the data to identify people and their associates who may be involved in terrorism or organized crime. It would also create and update "risk indicators" for assessing them and provide intelligence on travel patterns and other trends relating to terrorist offenses and organized crime, according to the proposal. The data could be used in criminal investigations and prosecutions.
James Harrison, a Sacramento attorney and director of the Identity Project, a privacy organization, said that the prospect of analyzing the data to create risk assessments is "alarming."
"Congress forbids the U.S. from conducting algorithms on passenger data domestically," he said, referring to a ban on testing algorithms assigning risk to passengers not on government watch lists. "That is exactly what they are talking about here."
E.U. officials said that all non-Europeans would be protected under the scheme by European states' data-protection laws, while U.S. privacy laws apply only to U.S. citizens. In the case of passenger data, the United States has extended administrative Privacy Act protections to non-U.S. citizens. The Department of Homeland Security also has an online redress site open to all.
But, in 't Veld said, "Even if there were 27 excellent data protection schemes, if you are an American citizen, and travel around Europe for a month, who will you turn to? Ask yourself: How good is your Hungarian?"
Another difference between the U.S.-E.U. pact and the European proposal deals with sensitive information such as religion, sexual orientation and union membership. Under the U.S.-E.U. deal, that information can be used in exceptional cases, "where the life of a data subject or of others could be imperiled or seriously impaired."
Douglas Lavin, regional vice president North America for the International Air Transport Association, called the European proposal "a positive step" in terms of harmonizing data-sharing policies, but said he is concerned about an international patchwork dealing with passenger data. "We don't want to be faced with conflicting laws in this area," he said.
by Ellen Nakashima, Washington Post - November 4, 2007
American travelers' personal data would for the first time be exported to all European Union states by airline carriers flying to Europe under a proposal to be announced this week.
The data, including names, telephone numbers, credit card information and travel itinerary, would be sent to E.U. member states so they could assess passenger risk for counterterrorism purposes, according to a draft copy obtained by The Washington Post. The European Commission proposal would allow the data to be kept for 13 years or longer if used in criminal investigations and intelligence operations. It would cover all passengers flying into and out of Europe, not just Americans.
Airlines already share data with U.S. authorities on passengers entering the United States. A handful of countries, including Canada and Australia, have similar laws. The European proposal was apparently modeled after an agreement signed in July between the United States and Europe dealing with passenger data from European flights entering and leaving the United States.
Under the proposal by Franco Frattini, European commissioner for freedom, security and justice, airlines or computerized reservation systems would send at least 19 pieces of data on each passenger to data-analysis units set up by each state. The data fields also would include e-mail addresses, names of accompanying passengers and open ones for such special requests as meals or medical service.
Under the proposal, no personal data that could reveal race, ethnicity, political opinions, religion, trade union membership or health or sex-life information could be transmitted. Any such data that was shared would have to be deleted immediately by the data-analyzing units, the proposal says.
The proposal must be approved by all 27 E.U. states to become a Europe-wide law, though individual states could introduce their own programs. It would affect about 30 million people who fly from North America to Europe each year.
The move is part of an effort to combat terrorism by sharing information globally, and it is fueling concerns of loss of privacy and control over personal data.
"It almost becomes an arms race with one country adopting a data-gathering system without reflecting on whether or not the system is necessary," said Allison Knight, staff counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Frattini has made clear that he believes a policy requiring Passenger Name Record data from airlines would be beneficial to combating terrorism in light of terror attacks in Madrid and London.
"The Union is at least as much a potential target of a terrorist attack as the United States, and the use and analysis of passenger name records is an important law enforcement tool to protect our citizens," Frattini told the European Parliament in September.
The U.S. is "definitely open to the idea," Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner said. "It would be fair of the Europeans to ask the same information of us that we're asking of them. We are open to finding ways to make our respective homelands secure."
The U.S.-E.U. pact was opposed by civil libertarians and liberal politicians, many of whom have said they do not favor an E.U. equivalent. But some have suggested retaliating with a mirror policy.
Sophie in 't Veld, a member of Parliament from the Netherlands, said Frattini's proposal would "undermine the credibility" of the E.U., which criticized the E.U.-U.S. pact. "We still do not have sufficient evidence of how effective the use of these data are in the fight against terrorists," she said.
The European countries' units would analyze the data to identify people and their associates who may be involved in terrorism or organized crime. It would also create and update "risk indicators" for assessing them and provide intelligence on travel patterns and other trends relating to terrorist offenses and organized crime, according to the proposal. The data could be used in criminal investigations and prosecutions.
James Harrison, a Sacramento attorney and director of the Identity Project, a privacy organization, said that the prospect of analyzing the data to create risk assessments is "alarming."
"Congress forbids the U.S. from conducting algorithms on passenger data domestically," he said, referring to a ban on testing algorithms assigning risk to passengers not on government watch lists. "That is exactly what they are talking about here."
E.U. officials said that all non-Europeans would be protected under the scheme by European states' data-protection laws, while U.S. privacy laws apply only to U.S. citizens. In the case of passenger data, the United States has extended administrative Privacy Act protections to non-U.S. citizens. The Department of Homeland Security also has an online redress site open to all.
But, in 't Veld said, "Even if there were 27 excellent data protection schemes, if you are an American citizen, and travel around Europe for a month, who will you turn to? Ask yourself: How good is your Hungarian?"
Another difference between the U.S.-E.U. pact and the European proposal deals with sensitive information such as religion, sexual orientation and union membership. Under the U.S.-E.U. deal, that information can be used in exceptional cases, "where the life of a data subject or of others could be imperiled or seriously impaired."
Douglas Lavin, regional vice president North America for the International Air Transport Association, called the European proposal "a positive step" in terms of harmonizing data-sharing policies, but said he is concerned about an international patchwork dealing with passenger data. "We don't want to be faced with conflicting laws in this area," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
