Posted on 10/26/2001 10:46:25 PM PDT by kattracks
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 26 (AFP) -
Hopes of completing a catch-all UN treaty on terrorism by the end of this year faded Friday amid disagreement on whether to exempt military forces and national liberation movements from its provisions.
Jan Fischer, spokesman for the UN General Assembly president, Han Seung-soo of South Korea, said negotiations had also bogged down over the definition of terrorism.
Fischer told reporters the working group negotiating the convention had ended its discussions with three issues unresolved.
The third concerned the links between the proposed comprehensive convention and 12 existing international legal instruments for combating terrorism, he said. Diplomats said the only real obstacle was the exemption clause.
"Although we were all hoping for a draft convention, we have to remember that the working group is dealing with some very difficult issues. A lot of progress was made," Fischer said.
Progress was spurred by the catastrophic attacks on September 11 by hijacked commercial airliners which destroyed New York's World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon near Washington.
At the time, the working group had already been discussing a draft convention, proposed by India, for several months.
Rohan Perera, the Sri Lankan diplomat who chaired discussions, said the speed with which the Security Council adopted a resolution demanding that all countries cooperate to fight terrorism had "acted as a catalyst" on his group.
"Opinions converged after the adoption of the resolution" on September 28 after barely 24 hours of discussion, Perera told reporters.
Last week, Perera said he was "cautiously optimistic" he would able to send a final draft to a committee which had been asked to report to the UN General Assembly by November 15, and added: "Technically, by the end of this year you could have a convention."
But negotiators still could not agree whether language exempting "the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict" from any accusation of terrorism should be extended to include national liberation movements.
Perera said the overall aim of the convention was to establish "an extradite or prosecute regime". Countries which signed up to the treaty would agree to make defined acts of terrorism a criminal offence, he said.
The exemption argument centred on the Middle East, diplomats said, with Arab negotiators insisting that actions by Palestinians against Israeli forces not be classed as terrorism.
Perera said, however, that negotiators were close to agreement on a definition of terrorism that would outlaw attacks on innocent civilians.
"Here, that defence is taken away. If you harm innocent civilians by the use of indiscriminate violence, your motivation cannot excuse your crime," he said.
Asked what negotiators would do now, Fischer replied: "Your guess is as good as mine."
The committee overseeing the working group "may try to find compromise language" in the hope of bringing a draft to the General Assembly by November 15, he said. Or it might ask the working group to resume negotiations early next year.
After all, in their sick minds, the murdered victims are merely Jews.
And of course 'Israeli forces' include the teenagers at the Dolphinarium.
Palestinians victims of terrorism? You gotta be kidding or have an agenda. You would probably call rapist a victim of his crime too.
1. Anyone wearing flannel shirts.
2. Anyone with a gun, especially hunters.
3. People carrying the Bible.
4. People who drive 4x4's with NRA stickers.
5. Pro-life people.
6. Supporters of the second amendment.
7. Supporters of the U.S. Constitution.
8. Supporters of the Founding Fathers.
9. Anyone who Homeschools their children.
10. Anyone who thinks the FBI, CIA, BATF, Congress, etc. are corrupt.
11. Anyone who would like to see the UN headquarters in Afghanistan.
12. Anyone who thinks Bill and Hillary Clinton are corrupt.
13. Anyone who finds fault with various so called investigations such as impeachment, Waco, Ruby Ridge, OKC Bombing, TWA Flight 800, Filegate, Chinagate, Vince Foster, Ron Brown, etc.
14. People who support small limited government.
15. People who get their news at Free Republic, WorldnetDaily, Newsmax, Drudge, or Fox News.
16. Anyone who doesn't support the EPA.
17. Anyone who doesn't support government education at all levels.
18. Anyone who doesn't support all politically correct issues, multi-culturalism, diversity, sensitivity training and other Marxist institutional goals.
19. Anyone against a National ID card.
20. Anyone who thinks Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme.
21. Anyone who thinks the IRS is corrupt and their taxes are too high.
FBI has plans to route "all" Net traffic through central servers for monitoring
""I consider it my job to ensure that civil liberties are not violated, and so far nobody's pointed out to me where we have failed."
Janet Reno
SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';
(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and
(4) by adding at the end the following: `(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
`(B) appear to be intended--
`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3162:
What state? You mean Jordan? Well, the Jordanian army invaded Palestine in 1948 in violation of the UN resolution. In 1968 they were pushed back across the river, but only after threatening together with other Arab states to destroy Israel and kill its population. It is absolutely vital for Israel to have defensible borders. An Arab state in the West Bank is the strategic goal of Islamists bent on Israel destruction
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.