Palestinians Continue Push Towards Declaring Statehood At United Nations

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to declare Palestinian statehood at the United Nations this week, and it's yet another effort to undermine Israeli sovereignty in the process.

We'd just have to ignore all the pronouncements made by Palestinian leaders in the past several weeks to believe that this is about creating a Palestinian state.

Palestinian officials have stated that they want to create a Jew-free Palestine, something that no regime or country has sought to do since Nazi Germany. This is something that would otherwise be considered ethnic cleansing and subject to all manner of hue and outcry from human rights groups around the world, but they have largely remained silent.

Palestinian officials have stated that they do not want to permit Palestinians living outside the West Bank or Gaza the right of return to the Palestinian state and will not resettle refugees living in the dozens of refugee camps scattered throughout the Middle East; they would rather keep these people living in squalor rather than build a productive state.

Mr. Abbas’s plan, made public in a television address, follows months of failed American and European efforts to restart Palestinian negotiations with Israel. Some fear that Mr. Abbas’s move will raise expectations among his people, with nothing changing for them on the ground. Combined with alarmed reactions from Israeli settlers, violent showdowns could erupt.

But the Palestinians say that after decades of occupation and about 20 years of failed talks with an increasingly hawkish Israel, it is time for a new approach in which the borders of a Palestinian state are first recognized globally and then two states, Israel and Palestine, negotiate final details.

The decision to apply for membership through the Council signals a double defeat for the United States. Washington not only failed to dissuade the Palestinians from a unilateral bid for statehood, but also fell short of its goal of confining the application to the United Nations General Assembly, where Obama administration officials believe a vote in favor of statehood would be more symbolic and less divisive.

The Obama administration has vowed to use its veto at the Council to prevent full recognition of Palestine. But it is eager to avoid doing so because that action would likely leave the United States isolated on the issue, weakening its standing with Arab nations at a politically delicate moment.

“We need to have full membership at the U.N.,” Mr. Abbas said in the speech from his office in the West Bank city of Ramallah, which was broadcast live on Al Jazeera and other outlets. “We need a state, a seat at the United Nations.”

He added, “We are going to the Security Council,” as Palestinian dignitaries gave him rousing applause and a standing ovation. Mr. Abbas called it “our decision, which we have conveyed to everyone.”

The borders Mr. Abbas seeks are those of 1967, meaning East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza would be included. More than 500,000 Israelis have settled beyond those lines.

These statements show that Israel lacks a partner in a peace process, and it's little wonder then that Israel has grown more hawkish since the Oslo process began near 20 years ago. What began with so much promise has turned into a nightmare because the Palestinian leaders have been exposed for what they are - they seek a one-state solution that ultimately wants Israel's destruction and all their actions are in furtherance of that goal.

Israel withdrew from Gaza unilaterally, and Palestinians promptly launched a terror war that continues to this day with rockets, missiles, and mortars - precisely because the initial suicide bombing campaign was thwarted with the construction of a security fence. Palestinians complain that the fence thwarts economic activity, but for the terrorism, indoctrination and support for terror activities, Israel would not have had a need to build the fence, maintain a security cordon off Gaza's coast to prevent terrorists from being resupplied, and the economic conditions for Palestinians would be greatly improved.

For the most part, Hamas has been silent about Fatah's Abbas and Palestinian Authority statements, but it has announced that the UN bid is empty of content because it doesn't sufficiently deal with the Palestinian right of return to Israel. That's right folks, Hamas, which is part of the Palestinian government and which controls Gaza, doesn't think that Abbas and the PLO/Fatah are going far enough in their delegitimization efforts. They want the whole kit and kaboodle.

Hamas has never recognized Israel's right to exist, and it refuses to accept any deal that recognizes Israel alongside a Palestinian state.

So, with all that in mind, what is the United States to do with the ongoing situation. Pundits in the US think that Obama has to take a strong stand so as to retain the Jewish vote (and they point to the outcome of the NY-09 House race as proof). But no matter the outcome of the 2012 elections, the UN situation the Palestinian Authority is putting President Obama in the hot seat on how to deal with a major policy crisis. Wording a resolution that somehow raises the status of the Palestinian mission to the UN to something less than a state but more than an observer is a likely outcome.

The Palestinians have done nothing to warrant any kind of support here; they have engaged in terrorism for years on end and have not been a partner in peace. Israel's sovereignty and right to exist are inalienable rights, and yet the Palestinians are busy undermining Israel at every opportunity and with no regard for human rights - Palestinian or Israel.

A peace process requires two partners interested in a peaceful outcome, but the Palestinians refuse to accept any outcome where Israel exists.

Moreover, do the Palestinians really understand what having a state is all about. It's going to put terror attacks on par with acts of war and enables Israel to formally declare war against the Palestinians should they engage in the kinds of rocket battles that have been fought since 2007.


The world's leaders repeatedly chastise Israel when it defends itself from terrorists, but barely shrugs its shoulders when countries like Turkey invade Iraq and kill Kurdish groups that Turkey claims are terrorists or harboring terrorists.

The world's diplomats have no interest in the facts; they are far more interested in their legacy and appearance of signed documents. That's why the Palestinians continue to be advancing their agenda despite an ongoing disregard for the sovereignty of Israel.

This is the quandary facing Israel and the US.

SUNY Albany's Nanotech Center Building Next Generation Semiconductor Facility

SUNY Albany has been working on nanotechnology for the better part of the past 20 years, and has been a major center for research as part of the Sematech consortium. The facility is undergoing a major expansion that would double the space for clean rooms and production facilities to test new technology.

The focus of the new technology is to increase the size of the silicon wafers used in semiconductors from the now standard 12 inch (300mm) wafer to an 18 inch (450mm) design that would reduce production costs significantly. This is the kind of advance that has application potential not only for semiconductors, but for solar power cells:

Renderings and other documents obtained by the Times Union show a dramatic, 500,000-square-foot structure that will nearly double the size of the existing College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering campus. The project, to be built in two phases, is rising opposite Washington Avenue Extension from the existing campus.

Officials from Sematech, the computer chip research consortium headquartered at the NanoCollege, have touted the expansion to insiders in recent months, describing the effort to move the industry from making chips on 12-inch, or 300 millimeter silicon wafers, to 18-inch, or 450 millimeter wafers.

The move could revolutionize the way chips are made by drastically reducing costs while increasing output.

A small-scale 450mm research program has been operated by the International Sematech Manufacturing Initiative, a Sematech program that has received millions of dollars in state funding. NanoCollege officials called it a "limited seed program" only two months ago.

But presentations made at semiconductor conferences around the world by Sematech CEO Dan Armbrust and Paolo Gargini, director of technology strategy at chip giant Intel Corp., show that the 450mm program is poised to grow significantly here.

The focal point is a 45,000-square-foot clean room being built as part of the first phase of the NanoCollege project, which is located on an 11-acre, state-owned parcel between Interstate 90 and Washington Avenue Extension.

Gargini showed numerous photos of the Albany construction project in July at SemiconWest, an annual conference held each year in San Francisco for companies that make computer chip manufacturing equipment, also known as "tools."

The main question is why all the secrecy over the expansion plans and funding sources. Aside from that, it's awesome to see my alma mater at the forefront of tech research and plans made while I was still a student there to come to fruition to turn the university into a major research institution for nanotechnology.

AAA Looks To Block Port Authority Toll and Fare Hikes

The New York affiliate of AAA, which is one of the largest membership groups in the country, is looking to Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to block the Port Authority's massive toll hikes that are scheduled to take effect this weekend.

The group thinks that it might be able to sway LaHood and the Port Authority because some of the funds raised from the toll hikes are going to the World Trade Center rebuilding efforts, and not to transportation infrastructure which is required under a 1989 law.

The auto club's New York, New Jersey, and Mid-Atlantic chapters says a federal court ruled in 1989 that tolls must be used to pay for facilities that have a close and functional relationship with bridges and tunnels, and that should not include rebuilding at the World Trade Center.

"We think that increasing tolls to pay for cost overruns at the World Trade Center violates that legal decision and will impede interstate commerce, and establish and new and ill-conceived policy of diverting toll revenues to local real estate development projects," said Robert Sinclair Jr. of AAA New York.

However, AAA has not pursued any legal action to block the Port Authority's toll hikes.

Starting Sunday, cash tolls on the George Washington Bridge, Holland Tunnel, Lincoln Tunnel, Goethals Bridge, Bayonne Bride and Outerbridge Crossing are scheduled to rise from $8 to $12.

Peak-hour tolls for E-ZPass users will go from $8 to $9.50.

Tolls are set to rise to $15 by December 2015 after a series of increases.

PATH fares will increase Sunday from $1.75 to $2.

The strongest argument to block the toll hikes is that the massive hikes, particularly on truck traffic, is a violation of the Commerce Clause and impedes interstate commerce.

However, the agency can argue that the tolls are supporting major infrastructure improvements, including a rebuilding of the Lincoln Tunnel helix, replacement of hangers on the George Washington Bridge, completion of the PATH terminal at WTC, and raising the Bayonne Bridge for improved port access.

The thing is that the argument about the Port Authority being in the real estate business is one of the drivers that got Larry Silverstein into the whole WTC rebuilding effort; the Port Authority was looking to get out of the real estate business when it agreed to give Silverstein a 99 year lease on the WTC property just months before the 9/11 attacks.

The Port Authority shouldn't be in the real estate business and it should be focused exclusively on improving port access, transportation, and infrastructure.

For its part, the AAA has not brought a legal action against the Port Authority to block the imposition of the fare and toll hike.

Palestinians Now Refusing Right of Return To Fellow Palestinians In Proposed State

First, Palestinians demanded the right of return for all Palestinians to lands occupied by Israel (pre and post 1967 borders - areas within and outside the Green Line that established the borders of Israel as recognized in 1948 following the cease fire).

Now, the Palestinian representatives are saying that they're going to refuse to grant the right of return of Palestinians living all over the world to return to the expectant Palestinian state.

From behind a desk topped by a miniature model of Palestine’s hoped-for blue United Nations chair, Ambassador Abdullah Abdullah spoke to The Daily Star Wednesday about Palestine’s upcoming bid for U.N. statehood.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”

This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would “absolutely not” be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.

Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. “How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all.” He says statehood “will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees.”

Let that sink in.

Palestinians, who have been agitating for decades to have a state to call their own, are going to refuse to grant Palestinians living in refugee camps for decades the right to return to a Palestinian state.

The reasons are clear, but unstated. The PLO and Palestinian Authority war against Israel continues unabated and these groups find it useful to continue a refugee crisis without end. It's all to undermine Israel's inalienable right to exist and it again shows that Israel lacks a peace partner accepting of a 2-state solution.

The Palestinians are looking to supplant Israel and are going to use a declaration of statehood to further alienate and undermine Israel's sovereignty.

The thing is that Palestinians the world over should have a right to return to a state of Palestine if it is established - but that their representative government is looking to disenfranchise them is quite telling. Their leaders see the refugees as pawns for exploitation; they are disposable pawns whose misery is self-inflicted and exploited by not only Palestinian leaders but Arab leaders throughout the region who use the situation to blame Israel and the US for the ongoing problems. It ignores the culpability and failures of Arab regimes and the Palestinians themselves to negotiate in good faith towards a 2-state solution that doesn't seek to eliminate Israel through demographics (forcing a Palestinian right of return on Israel) or which foists indefensible borders on Israel.

Muppets Trailer Parodies Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

That's the Muppets movie reboot, starring Jason Segal and Amy Adams.

For comparison, here's the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo trailer starring Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, and Robin Wright and featuring the music of Academy Award winner Trent Reznor (he of the NIN):

Palestinians Plan On Agitating For Statehood During UN General Assembly Session

The Palestinians have been rumbling for months that they intend on declaring statehood during the United Nations General Assembly sessions this month. That comes even as the Palestinians claim that they want to make their new state free from all Jews.

The Palestine Liberation Organization's ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that any future Palestinian state should be free of Jews, USA Today reported.

"After the experience of the last 44 years of military occupation and all the conflict and friction, I think it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated," Maen Areikat, the PLO ambassador, told reporters. (Ynet)

The PLO is the largest faction within Fatah, which makes up part of the Palestinian Authority - the legitimate government entity for the Palestinians. Hamas would certainly agree to that, and both ultimately seek Israel's elimination.

This statement is essentially the position of the Palestinian representatives to the United Nations and the group with whom Israel is supposed to negotiate.

But the specifics of their plans for the Palestinian state are extremely troublesome.

The Palestinians are pushing for something that no regime has done since Nazi Germany sought to eliminate the Jewish presence from all territories it occupied.

They would engage in racially and religiously profiling to eliminate a population group from lands that it historically lived in for generations stretching back centuries. That's what the PLO is proposing.

But if Israel tries to protect itself from Palestinian terrorists who continue plotting attacks, that's apartheid according to the PLO and pro-Palestinians for the past couple of decades.

Yet, no one blinks when the Palestinians say that they want to make their country free of all Jews. But note that Israel has banned political parties who seek to do the same thing to its Arab populations (Kach and the Kahanists).

Moreover, the Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel's rights to defend itself and pushes such unreasonable demands on Israel that demonize Israel at every opportunity.

Palestinians could have had a functional and vibrant economy in Gaza had they not started a terror war against Israel that continues to this day - including thousands of rockets and mortars fired at Israel since 2006 because Israel has effectively prevented suicide bombers from infiltrating into Israel across the borders with Gaza and limited terror activities in the West Bank in areas that it maintains security control.

But then again, this has never been about settlements in Gaza or the West Bank - land can be transferred and housing can be sold/transferred between groups to improve the contiguous borders for the proposed 2-state solution.

It's about a fundamental refusal to accept Israel's existence.

That's why the declaration of statehood is so troubling; the Palestinians want statehood but not responsibility for what happens thereafter - especially when their elected representatives agitate for war against Israel (Hamas and Fatah are both elected representatives of Palestinians as per the elections previously held). Hamas refuses Israel's existence, and Fatah's many spinoff groups, including the PRCs refuse to recognize Israel's existence and agitate for war.

Moreover, all this would be a fundamental violation of Oslo, which calls for direct negotiation between the parties to bring about statehood. Going to the UN to vote a Palestinian state into existence would abrogate the entire Oslo process.

Israel can have no peace with partners such as this.

NASA Unveils New Space Launch System

NASA will be several years away from being able to launch men into space after retiring the shuttle fleet, but Congress appears ready to approve a new space launch system that will be capable of not only sending men into low earth orbit, but propelling manned spacecraft to the moon or beyond - Mars.

The Obama administration on Wednesday unveiled its much-delayed general plans for its rocket design, called the Space Launch System, which will cost about $35 billion. It will begin unmanned test flights in six years, and carry astronauts in a capsule on top in a decade.

"This is a great day for NASA and the nation," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said at a U.S. Senate news conference called to unveil the concept.

Two of the senators who worked with NASA and the White House on the plan, Florida Democrat Bill Nelson and Texas Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison, said they were pleased by the plan and signaled that Congress would give its assent.

"I believe we really are going forward now, all as one, with one goal," Hutchison told journalists. She said the plan was "a commitment that NASA — NASA — is going to lead the pack."

Closer to Apollo
The size, shape and potentially heavier reliance on liquid fuel as opposed to solid rocket boosters is much closer to Apollo than the recently retired space shuttles, which were winged, reusable ships that sat on top of a giant liquid-fuel tank, with twin solid rocket boosters providing most of the power. It's also a shift in emphasis from the moon-based, solid-rocket-oriented plans proposed by the George W. Bush administration.

"It's back to the future with a reliable liquid technology," said Stanford University professor Scott Hubbard, a former NASA senior manager who was on the board that investigated the 2003 space shuttle Columbia accident.

NASA figures it will be building and launching about one rocket a year for about 15 years or more in the 2020s and 2030s, according to senior administration officials who spoke with The Associated Press on condition of anonymity in advance of Wednesday's announcement.

The idea is to launch its first unmanned test flight in 2017, with the first crew flying in 2021 and astronauts heading to a nearby asteroid in 2025, the officials said. From there, NASA hopes to send the rocket and astronauts to Mars — at first just to circle, but then later landing on the Red Planet — in the 2030s.

At first the rockets will be able to carry into space 77 tons to 110 tons of payload, which would include the six-person Orion multipurpose crew vehicle and more. Eventually it will be able to carry 143 tons into space, maybe even 165 tons, the officials said. By comparison, the long-dormant Saturn V booster that sent humans to the moon was able to lift 130 tons.

Taliban Go On Murderous Spree Of Bombings and Attacks Across Afghanistan and Pakistan

Everyone around the NYC metro area has seen the increased security ahead of 9/11 and the warnings about a potential, but unconfirmed attack planned in conjunction with the 9/11 commemoration.

Well, what if we got the right intel, but the wrong place.

The Taliban have gone on a massive murdering spree, with multiple attacks across Afghanistan targeting US and ISAF forces and additional attacks in Pakistan. There's the ongoing attacks against US facilities in Kabul



That follows an ISAF base hit on 9/11 itself. A suicide bomb truck detonated along a perimeter wall and the resulting explosion injured dozens of US soldiers and killed several Afghans.



Now, this could be coincidence, but I don't think it was. There was chatter about high profile attacks, and a mass casualty attack on a US military base and the US embassy would certainly fit that bill of al Qaeda/Taliban seeking to carry out mass casualty attacks against the US.

It doesn't have the same cachet as a bomb blowing up people in Times Square (and certainly wont get the same level of press if such a bombing occurred during the 9/11 anniversary week), but had this been a bombing that killed scores of Americans in Afghanistan, it would have fit the Taliban/al Qaeda goal of murdering Americans during the anniversary period.

This doesn't mean that American law enforcement should relax; just because the anniversary has come and gone doesn't mean that the terror cells haven't stopped proliferating or plotting further attacks. It means that the public has to remain vigilant and law enforcement has to continue working to disrupt plots before they can become operational.

Disaster Funding Bill Stalls In the US Senate Over GOP Opposition

As you know we've been dealing with the cleanup from Hurricane Irene (affecting the coast from NC on up through Vermont) and then the follow-up deluge from the remnants from TS Lee, which hit upstate NY, PA, and parts of NJ real hard.

The feds have to get funding for FEMA straightened out, because the FEMA coffers have run low due to the high number of natural disasters and to provide coverage to affected taxpayers and residents.

So what has happened? The bill funding the FEMA response has stalled in the Senate after coming up short on the latest vote. The GOP can't be bothered to fund this, although some GOPers in districts affected by the disasters are starting to put pressure on the leadership:

Gov. Chris Christie has said the storm caused billions of dollars worth of damage in New Jersey, and has promised to fight for disaster relief, even if it meant taking on his own party.

"We need the support now here in New Jersey, and that is not a Republican or a Democratic issue," Christie said after touring flood-damaged Lincoln Park. "I don’t want to hear about the fact that offsetting budget cuts have to come first before New Jersey citizens are taken care of."

The governor could not be reached for comment tonight.

Irene, and the ensuing flooding, caused extensive damage throughout the state [NJ - ed], with more than 31,000 residents filing claims through FEMA to help pay for damage. And nearly $38 million has been disbursed so far. FEMA regional spokesman Bill McDonnell says the hardest-hit areas were Bergen and Passaic, with each topping 4,000 claims.

Democrats had hoped the $7 billion bill would replenish FEMA, which has spent almost $400 million in the past two weeks on emergency food and shelter, said Majority Leader Harry Reid, (D-Nev). FEMA has only about $300 million left in its coffers, he said.

President Obama on Friday asked Congress for $500 million to ensure the disaster fund doesn’t run out of cash before the end of the month.

Several Republicans have asked the disaster spending be offset by reductions in other areas.

"I plan to insist my fellow senators take a long, hard look at where the funding comes from," U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said today before the vote. "Will it be more borrowing on the backs of our children and grandchildren, or will it be from the coffers of our numerous nation-building programs overseas? America’s priorities should come first."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), has said Republicans will attach a disaster-aid package to a continuing resolution, necessary to avoid a government shutdown before the end of the month.

That measure, which is likely to be brought up next week, would give the Senate another chance to vote on disaster relief, but it remains unclear if there are enough votes for passage.

Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.) and Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-11th Dist.) sent a letter to John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday, asking him to ensure FEMA is adequately funded.

There's some borrowing that is good - like when you borrow money for a mortgage, so that you have a place to live. Other borrowing makes little sense, like when you use credit cards and don't bother to pay the minimum. The FEMA funding is the former category - it's critical and essential, rather than living beyond our means. The FEMA funding is to make sure that folks and businesses can get back up and running - that would increase tax revenues all around as the money flows back into state, local, and federal coffers.

The GOP has been itching for a fight on funding government spending and thus far, they managed to kill $250 million for the FAA because they refused to reauthorize the FAA taxes that fund its operations over the need to reform the rural air program, that costs a fraction of the $250 million lost - annually. Pennywise and pound foolish then, and they're doing the same thing now.

The cost of doing nothing, and allowing the FEMA funding to run dry will mean that residents all along the East Coast will be out of luck - and that means that small businesses will lose business, close up, and end up costing even more as unemployment rates climb higher and tax revenues drop once again.

September 11, 2011: I Remember Mark Francis Broderick

No one needs reminding that today is the 10th anniversary of the day all our worlds changed forever. 10 years ago today, 19 murderers killed 2,996 innocent men, women and children, in the name or religious fanaticism. Several years ago I participated one of the most stunning tributes I have seen, Project 2,996. Previously, I have remembered: Capt. Patrick J, Brown, Hagay Shefi, Alison Marie Wildman, Daniel Thomas Afflitto, and Donna Bernaerts-Kearns. I tried to write this tribute several times in the last few days, but could not. This year was harder than in years past. The 10th anniversary shook me hard. It actually wasn't until I was listening to the names being read out this morning and I heard the name Daniel Thomas Afflitto and then heard Donna Bernaerts called out, that I turned to my wife, grabbed the computer and showed her (again) the tributes. I knew I had to do another one this year. So, this one is coming a bit later in the day as I had plans this morning. But today, I remember Mark Francis Broderick.

Mark, nicknamed Sparky (because he was famous for taking his time), and Disco Danny b his family, turned 40 years old just days before 9/11. He had three sons, Matthew 7, Andrew 3, and James, 16 months, which from all accounts, he thought the world revolved around. In fact, instead of a birthday party, he told his wife, Carolina, that he wanted a family trip to Hershey Park in Pennsylvania. Mark was known to spend weekends with the kids, as he was often busy at work during the weekend. In his eulogy, his fraternity brother and friend, Chris Dowd, asked "How many of us can remember him standing, smiling, with one or more of his kids hanging from his neck?" What greater memory of a person can one have?

Originally from Bayonne, Mark swam at the YMCA, coached by his father. He attended St. John's University on Staten Island. Mark and Carolina met while working for financial firms in Manhattan, and were in the financial district when the WTC was attacked in 1993.

Mark lived in Old Bridge, NJ, just one town north of where I live. I recently took my two kids, similar in age to Mark's middle and youngest sons, to Hershey Park too. Its thinking about people like Mark, and thinking about how his three children will not grow up with their father, that makes this day hard. Its why I had to make plans to leave the house today as I could not watch the coverage of the memorial ceremony for very long.