Bush illegally in UK against Queen’s Wishes

U.S. President George W. Bush holds talks with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown at No. 10 Downing Street.

It was reported, that Bush is still in the UK against HRM Elizabeth II wishes, for she requested him to leave the country, yesterday.

Queen Elizabeth II did not approve of Bush’s foreign policy towards Palestine and his continuous insults towards Queen Deborah of Palestine.

In the Press conference below, one will not find any reference to Bush’s ideals against the country of Palestine nor the monarchy, which is the legal representative of Palestinian government.

U.S. President Bush Participates in Joint Press Availability with United Kingdom Prime Minister Brown

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

June 16, 2008

Foreign & Commonwealth Office Building -- Lacarno Treaty Room
London, England

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: I'm delighted to welcome President Bush and the First Lady back to London. And his visit today is an opportunity to celebrate the historic partnership of shared purpose that unites the United Kingdom and the United States of America. We both share a great love of history and about how we have forged the ideas of democracy and liberty over centuries. And the special partnership that President Bush and I both agree today is a partnership not just of governments but of peoples is driven forward not simply by mutual interests, but by our shared values: both countries founded upon liberty, our histories forged through democracy, our shared values expressed by a commitment to opportunity for all, putting into practice what Churchill called the "joint inheritance of the English speaking world."

So let me thank President Bush for being a true friend of Britain and for the importance he attaches to enhancing our transatlantic partnership, from the work we do in Afghanistan and Iraq to every part of the world. And let me thank him for the steadfastness and the resolution that he has shown in rooting out terrorism in all parts of the world; in working for a Middle East peace settlement; in bringing hope to Africa; in working for a free trade world, where in spite of today's difficulties with oil and food prices, there is and should be a wider and deeper prosperity in the future for all.

Now in our substantive and wide-ranging talks last night and this morning, the President and I have discussed a number of central issues. We have discussed Iran's nuclear ambitions. We have discussed Iraq and Afghanistan, where our forces are working side by side. We have discussed the criminal cabal that now threatens to make a mockery of free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. We have discussed what we can do about democracy in Burma.

We have resolved, first of all, as we did some years ago, that it is in the British national interest to confront the Taliban in Afghanistan or Afghanistan would come to us. And so today Britain will announce additional troops for Afghanistan, bringing our numbers in Afghanistan to the highest level. And let me thank our troops, and the troops of America and 42 other countries who are in Afghanistan, as I thank our forces in Iraq for their courage and for their professionalism. And let me acknowledge the bravery of the five members of the 2nd paratroop regiment, British men who have in the last few days sacrificed their lives for freedom. Eighteen months ago, the Taliban boasted that they and their paid foreign fighters would drive our forces out of southern Helmand. Now most agree that security is on the way to being transformed. Last week in Paris a total of 80 countries pledged $20 billions, with nearly a billion from the United Kingdom to support the Afghan National Development Strategy.

Our aim is to generate progress, where the fourth poorest country in the world, laid low by decades of conflict, can as a democracy enjoy peaceful social and economic development, with our forces, over time, moving from a direct combat role to train and support Afghanistan's own army and police.

In Iraq, there is still work to be done, and Britain is playing and will continue to play its part. Where we have over 4,000 troops in Basra, we will continue the shared policy of Iraqis taking more control over their own affairs, moving from combat to overwatching Basra. Our policy is showing success as we continue the task we have set ourselves: strong and well-trained Iraqi forces capable of securing the peace, firm commitments to new local government elections soon, and speeding up the social and economic development of Iraq so that people have a stake in the future.

Our message today to the Iranian people is that you do not have to choose the path of confrontation. The latest rounds of talks with the Iranians took place over the weekend. Once again, we put our enhanced offer on the table, including political and economic partnership, and help with nuclear technology for civilian use. We await the Iranian response and we'll do everything possible to maintain the dialogue. But we are also clear that if Iran continues to ignore united resolutions, to ignore our offers of partnership, we have no choice but to intensify sanctions. And so today Britain will urge Europe and Europe will agree to take further sanctions against Iran.

First of all, we will take action today that will freeze the overseas assets of the biggest bank in Iran, the bank Melli.

And second, action will start today for a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas. And I will repeat that we will take any necessary actions so that Iran is aware of the choice it has to make: to start to play its part as a full and respected member of the international community or face further isolation.

We discussed the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe. In recent weeks, under Robert Mugabe's increasingly desperate and criminal regime, Zimbabwe has seen 53 killings, 2,000 beatings, the displacement of 30,000 people, the arrest and detention of opposition leaders, including Morgan Tsvangirai, and this is wholly unacceptable. Mugabe must not be allowed to steal the election that is now less than two weeks away. And that is why we call for Zimbabwe to accept a United Nations human rights envoy to visit Zimbabwe now, and to accept the international monitors from all parts of the world who are available to ensure that this is a free and fair election.

We agreed that at the G8 in Japan, the United Kingdom and the U.S.A. would propose a plan to recruit and train health workers for the poorest countries. To save the lives of mothers who needlessly die in childbirth, we are developing proposals to tackle the diseases that bring needless death and suffering, including malaria, AIDS, and neglected tropical diseases. And we agreed also to work together to ensure G8 commitment to scale up funding on education and get the remaining 72 million children who do not go to school today into school.

The world oil prices trebled in recent months. In the right of this, I welcome Saudi Arabia's initiative to host a producer-consumer summit in Jeddah on the 22nd of June. And we will all work together to ensure an enhanced dialogue between oil producers and consumers.

And the President and I also agreed that over the next few weeks we need to press hard to achieve a world trade deal. Both of us are ensured that this could unlock new opportunities for the world economy. It would also help reduce high global food prices.

Finally, we go from here to Northern Ireland. The United States has played an essential role in securing peace in Northern Ireland and helping the people of Northern Ireland move away from conflict to potentially a new prosperity. And I want to thank President Bush for his personal efforts to speed up the Northern Ireland peace process, and to make sure that there is investment in Northern Ireland, not just from the rest of the United Kingdom, but from America.

And I thank him for his work to ensure that the recent investment conference in Northern Ireland was a huge success, and there will be further announcements of jobs in Northern Ireland today. America has played a huge role in this peace process, and President Bush is to be thanked by all the people of the United Kingdom for what he has done.

So, Mr. President, I thank you again for your friendship, for your leadership, for your commitment to us continuing to work together to solve the challenges facing the world. I'm pleased you're here. I value the gains we've made together, and I look forward to our continued friendship.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. And I thank you very much for your friendship, thank you for your hospitality. This is -- this has been a good trip. By the way, some are speculating this is my last trip. Let them speculate. Who knows? (Laughter.) But it's been a -- we had a great dinner last night. I want to thank you and Sarah. And thanks for calling together the historians. It's a -- you know, Great Britain has produced great historians. And I am -- I love reading a lot of their works, and it was so kind of you to have them over. And the food was good, too. (Laughter.)

And also we had a great visit yesterday. Laura and I went to see Her Majesty, the Queen. I thank her for her hospitality. And then yesterday at the embassy, thanks to our Ambassador, I had the opportunity to speak to some of your soldiers. And I was -- listened to their stories of courage and bravery and sacrifice, and it was so -- really touching. And I really appreciate the British people supporting the people who wear the uniform. And I am looking forward to going to Northern Ireland this evening. You've taken the lead. We're just pleased to help. And hopefully this visit will help keep the process moving.

First thing about Gordon Brown, he's tough on terror, and I appreciate it -- and so should the people of Great Britain and the world. He fully understands that while some want to say that the terrorist threat is gone or there's nothing to worry about, it is something to worry about. And he was -- you were tested early in your Prime Ministership. You dealt with the challenge. And I appreciate your continued focus and your understanding that we've got to work together to protect our people, and your understanding that freedom is transformative, and the ultimate way to succeed against these extremists who use murder as a way to achieve their political objectives is to marginalize them through the advance of liberty.

And that's what we're doing in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. And it is tough work. It's hard to take a society that had been ravished [sic] by brutality and convince people to take the risk necessary to work for civil society and freedom for women and to educate their children. But I believe it's necessary work, for the sake of peace and for our security. And I believe it's in the moral interests of comfortable nations to help others realize the blessings of liberty. Oh, for some that sounds like hopeless idealism; for those of us involved with making public policy necessary to protect our people, it is the only realistic way to guarantee the peace for our people.

And so you've been strong on Afghanistan and Iraq, and I appreciate it. But more importantly, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq appreciate it. The march to democracy is never smooth. We've had our own history. America is viewed as a great democracy; just remember, many of our citizens were enslaved for a long period of time before we finally got it right.

But it's in our interests to help these folks. It's in our interests little girls go to school in Afghanistan. It's in our interests that there be free elections in Iraq. And it's in our interests that we help these governments survive. And it's taken sacrifice from our people, I understand that. The fundamental question of history is going to look back on it, is did we understand the duty that we've been called to do, to protect ourselves and hope others? And this Prime Minister has understood the duty.

No, I know there's a lot of discussion here in the British press about, well, you know, is there going to be enough troops, or not enough troops, and all that business; is he trying to distance this, that and the other -- it's just typical. But I just want to remind you that he has left more troops in Iraq than initially anticipated. And like me, we'll be making our decisions based upon the conditions on the ground, the recommendation of our commanders, without an artificial timetable set by politics.

I thank you for your troop announcement today in Afghanistan, as well. Then you issued a strong statement on Iran. It was a clear statement, and it was a strong statement, and it was a necessary statement, because the free world has an obligation to work together in concert to prevent the Iranians from having the know-how to develop a nuclear weapon. And now is the time to work together to get it done, and I appreciate your statement. Hopefully the Iranian leadership will take a different position then the one they've taken in the past, which is basically, who cares what the free world says, we're going to -- we'll go our own way. And now has faced -- they face serious isolation, and the people who are suffering are the Iranian people. We have no qualms with the Iranian people. As a matter of fact, we want the Iranian people to thrive. It's in our interests that there be a hopeful society. It's their government who has denied them their rightful place in the world.

And so I want to thank you very much for working hard to, you know, to help keep this coalition together to provide pressure necessary so we can solve the problem diplomatically. That's my first choice. Iranians must understand all options are on the table, however.

Thank you for your strong words on Zimbabwe. And I -- you know, you obviously are emotional on the subject and I don't blame you, because the people of Zimbabwe have suffered under Mugabe leadership, and we will work with you to ensure these good folks have free and fair elections to the extent -- best extent possible, which obviously Mr. Mugabe does not want to have.

We talked about Darfur. We talked about Burma. I strongly support your health care worker initiative. I'm looking forward to going to the G8 to articulate that. And we expect the people of the G8 -- the leaders of the G8 countries to fulfill their obligations, because last year we met and we had a -- we discussed a lot of issues, including HIV/AIDS and malaria on the continent of Africa, and they all came forth and said, we'll match the United States -- except most nations haven't matched the United States to date except for Great Britain, and they haven't done their part in matching the United States.

And so my message at the G8 is: Looking forward to working with you; thanks for coming to the meeting -- just remember, there are people needlessly dying on the continent of Africa today, and we expect you to be more than pledge-makers. We expect you to be check-writers for humanitarian reasons.

We did talk about energy and Doha. I'm concerned about Doha. I'm concerned that while we're making some progress on the agricultural side, that nations such as Brazil and India and China are not making corresponding openings on manufacturing and service -- and the service sector on their part. And in order to have a successful round, which I believe is essential -- and so does Gordon -- to fight off protectionism and help poor nations develop, that now is the time to get a Doha Round completed. And in order to do so, there has to be more movement on the manufacturing and service sector so there can be a fair and equitable deal.

Finally, we talked about global climate change and briefed Gordon on our strategy for the major economies meeting to hopefully reach an international goal for 2050 that will have intermediate strategies that are binding on each nation within the U.N. framework. And the reason why I believe this is the right approach to take, that unless China and India are a part of a binding international agreement -- and the United States -- then we will not have effective policy in dealing with climate change. It might make us all feel good, but the results won't be satisfactory. And so hopefully in Seoul, South Korea coming up there will be a major economy meeting agreement on a long-term goal with binding commitments.

Mr. Prime Minister, all in all, it's been a great meeting. Thank you for the conversation and thank you for your friendship.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Thank you.

Q Nick Robinson, BBC News.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Who? (Inaudible.) (Laughter.)

Q Good to have you here.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Missed the hat. (Laughter.)

Q Prime Minister, isn't it time to withdraw British troops from Iraq in order to send them where the military really needs them, to Afghanistan, or are you too worried about his reaction if you do?

PRESIDENT BUSH: We miss you, Nick, we miss you, buddy.

Q Are you prepared to see British troop withdrawn from Iraq while you're still in office, or are you concerned about the symbolic significance of that?

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Can I just say that in Iraq there is a job to be done and we will continue to do the job, and there's going to be no artificial timetable. And the reason is that we are making progress -- making progress in the Iraqis themselves being trained up to run the (inaudible) forces, and of course to be the police men and women in their areas. And we're making progress also because we hope local government elections will happen later this year. We hope to return the airport that we are responsible for in Basra to civilian use, as well. And most of all, in the next stage, we want to see the economic and social development of Basra and the southern part of Iraq proceed, so that people have a stake in the future.

So, yes, we are moving from what we call "combat" to "overwatch", and that's been announced many months ago -- yes, as a result of what happened in Basra a few months ago we have kept higher the level of troops that are necessary, but yes, also, we have a job that's still to be done. And that job is to train up the forces, that job is to speed up economic and social development, and that job is to have local government elections so that Iraqis can take control of their own democracy. And I'm determined that we continue to do that job.

And that will happen not at the cost of lesser troops for Afghanistan, but with more troops going to Afghanistan. The Defense Secretary will announce later this afternoon that we will send more troops to Afghanistan. The reason is that we want to help the Afghans train up their own army and their own police forces, and the reason is we want to have better equipment in Iraq -- in Afghanistan in future; and therefore there's going to be a reconfiguration of our troops, with some coming out and some more going in, and that an overall increase in the numbers so that we will have the highest level of troops in Afghanistan. You cannot trade numbers between the two countries.

There is a job to do in Iraq, and I've described it. And there is a job to do in Afghanistan, and we will continue to do it. And the fact that 43 countries are helping us in Afghanistan and 80 countries are supporting the economic and social development of Afghanistan shows how in this country, which is one of the poorest in the world, we are trying to make progress more quickly. So the announcement will come later today from the Defense Secretary.

PRESIDENT BUSH: We're withdrawing troops. We anticipate the 30,000 surge troops will be coming home by July -- more or less, 30,000. And so the plan is, bring them home based upon success. That's what we expect the British Prime Minister to do. That's what I'm doing -- that as the Iraqis are trained up, as they're taking more responsibility, as the security situations decline, as the economy is improved, as political reconciliation is taking place, we can bring more troops home. That's the whole purpose of the strategy. And so, give the Iraqis more responsibility. Let them take more -- be in more charge of their own security and their own government, and that's what's happening.

And so, you know, I mean -- look, the key thing for me is that I have -- you know, is that Gordon shares with me his plans. He listens to -- he talks to his commanders and he picks up the phone and says, here's what we're thinking. So there's no surprises. And as I said yesterday on TV here, I have no problem with how Gordon Brown is dealing with Iraq. He's been a good partner and -- but, as I told you, we're bringing ours home, too.

Q Mr. President, I'd like to ask you about recent events along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Do you back President Karzai when he says he may send his troops into Pakistan to take care of some of the militants who are launching attacks on his territory? And do you think that the agreements that the new government of Pakistan is pursuing with some of the militant tribes in that area amount to the sort of appeasement that you talked about in your speech last month?

And Mr. Prime Minister, I'd like to ask you about the meeting, upcoming meeting, in Saudi Arabia. What do you expect to come out of that meeting? And do you think it would be helpful if your friend there standing there, Mr. Bush, were to see you in Jeddah at that meeting?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Our strategy is to deny safe haven to extremists who would do harm to innocent people. And that's the strategy of Afghanistan; it needs to be the strategy of Pakistan. It's in all our interests to prevent those who murder innocent people to achieve political objectives to gain safe haven.

And so we'd look forward to working -- I mean, one thing that can happen is there can be, you know, more dialogue between the Pak government and the Afghan government. There was -- in the past they had a jirga amongst tribal leaders in the region on both -- from both sides of the border that made a difference. And I think that would be a good idea to restart the jirga process.

I know there needs to be dialogue between the intel services between the respective countries. And I know there needs to be better cooperation, and there needs to be trilateral cooperation on the border; trilateral being Pak, Afghan and coalition border patrols to prevent people from coming back and forth to cross the border.

And there's a lot of common ground. I repeat, it is no one's interest that extremists have a safe haven from which to operate. And I'm, you know -- and obviously it's a testy situation there. And if I'm the President of a country and people are coming from one country to another -- allegedly coming from one country to another -- to kill innocent civilians on my side, I'd be concerned about it. But we can help. We can help calm the situation down and develop a strategy that will prevent these extremists from, you know, from developing safe haven and having freedom of movement.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Can I say, I'm traveling to Jeddah next Sunday at the invitation of the King of Saudi Arabia. And I want a long-term dialogue, and this is part of a process, not an event, between oil producers and oil consumers. I think there is a view developing that the price of oil is increasingly dependent not just on today's demand and supply factors but on what people perceive as demand outstripping supply next year, in the medium term, and in the long term.

And I want to tell the King of Saudi Arabia and others who are there that the world will build more nuclear power. And I have suggested that on present trends it would be about a thousand nuclear power stations over the next 30 years. The world will increase its use of renewables. The world will increase its use of coal. It will lessen its dependence on oil, and that the world is determined to make a more efficient use of oil.

And I think this dialogue between producers and consumers is absolutely essential. President Bush has just been in Saudi Arabia. I have not been there recently. I want to go and talk to the King and talk to others there about what I believe should be a process whereby we understand what are the pressures on demand in future years, as well as we understand the pressures on supply. And I believe that that long-term debate about the future can have an effect on today's markets.

Now, that's what the debate is about, and that is part of a process that I hope will continue, if necessary, with a meeting in London later, and with further meetings so that there is a genuine dialogue between producers and consumers about what is the most worrying situation in the world at the moment, and that is the trebling of the price of oil.

Q Mr. President, in his last major speech, Tony Blair said on Iraq, "Hand on heart, I did what I thought was right. But if I got it wrong, I'm sorry." Is it possible you got it wrong? Would you share at this point those slightly more reflective sentiments? And in particular, should you, in retrospect, perhaps have concentrated a little more on Afghanistan?

And could I ask the Prime Minister, is the Lisbon Treaty dead in the water now? And if so, what happens next for Europe?

PRESIDENT BUSH: History will judge the tactics. History will judge whether or not, you know, more troops were needed earlier, troops could have been positioned here better or not. Removing Saddam Hussein was not wrong. It was the right thing to do. Right thing to do for our security, right thing to do for peace, and the right thing to do for 25 million Iraqis. And now the fundamental question is will we have the willpower and the patience to help the Iraqis develop a democracy in the heart of the Middle East. It's a democracy that's not going to look like America, it's not going to look like Great Britain, but it's a democracy that will have government responsive to the people. People say, was that worth it, is it necessary. Absolutely it's necessary if you believe we're in an ideological war being -- the theaters of which right now, the most notable theaters are Afghanistan and Iraq.

The strategic implications of a free Iraq are significant for our future. For example, a free Iraq will make it easier to deal with the Iranian issue. A free Iraq will send a clear signal to reformers and dissidents, would-be journalists throughout the Middle East that a free society is available for you, as well. And the question facing the Western world is, will we fall prey to the argument that stability is more important than forms of government; that what appears to be stable and peaceful -- is that more important than how people live their lives, what kind of government? You just heard the Prime Minister speak eloquently about Zimbabwe. The lesson there is, forms of government matter.

Freedom has had a transformative effect in Europe, in the Far East. And the fundamental question is, will we work to see it have a transformative effect in the Middle East? Now, there are many doubters. I understand that, because there is some who say that perhaps freedom is not universal. Maybe it's only Western people that can self-govern. Maybe it's only, you know, white-guy Methodists who are capable of self government. I reject that notion. I think that's the ultimate form of political elitism, and I believe an accurate reading of history says that freedom can bring peace we want. And it'll bring peace to the Middle East, unless of course we become isolationist; unless of course we lose our confidence; unless of course we quit. And, so, yes, I'm sure there's people will say, they could have done things better here and there. But I'm absolutely confident that the decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: And can I just emphasize, the passion for freedom I think is a universal value, and I believe that Iraq is a democracy today because of the action that we have taken. And our next task is to make sure that all Iraqis feel that they have an economic stake as well as a democratic stake in the future of the country. And that's why the work continues.

On Europe, I'll meet Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach of Ireland, when I'm in Belfast later today. The legal position on the European treaty is very clear, that all 27 members must sign and therefore ratify the treaty before it comes into force. It is for each member to decide its own process for doing so, and we will continue our process of debating this in the House of Lords, and then royal assent during the course of this week.

I think a short period of reflection is necessary for the Irish to put forward their proposals about how they will deal with this, and we look forward to the Irish coming to the European Council on Thursday with a view of what should be done. I believe that when David Miliband makes a statement to the House this afternoon following a meeting of the European foreign ministers, he will be able to say that all the European Union members believe that Ireland should be given this time to reflect on what they need to do, and then make their proposals about how the situation can be resolved.

Q Good morning, Mr. President, Prime Minister. I'd like to ask you both about Iran. President Bush, you've talked about it at every stop. A similar process, it seems, that is deterring North Korea from its nuclear ambitions has basically allowed North Korea [sic] to make progress toward nuclear weapons. At what point are you willing to draw a line here with Iran, and isn't Iran seemingly learning a lesson from the North Korea experience?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Ed, I just strongly disagree with your premise that the six-party talks has encouraged Iran to develop nuclear weapons. I don't know why you have even come to that conclusion, because the facts are the six-party talks is the only way to send a message to the North Koreans that the world isn't going to tolerate them having a weapon.

I mean, in other words, they are -- we'll see what they disclose, but we hopefully are in the process of disabling and dismantling their plutonium manufacturing. We're hopefully in the process of getting them to disclose what they have manufactured and eventually turning it over. We're hopefully in the process of disclosing their proliferation activities, and it's a six-party process. I mean, the only way, in my judgment, to diplomatically solve these kinds of problems with nations like Iran and North Korea, non-transparent nations, is through a multilateral process, where there's more than one nation sending the same message to the leaders of these respective countries.

And so I disagree with your premise. As a matter of fact, the Iranians must understand that when we come together and speak with one voice, we're serious. That's why the Prime Minister's statement was so powerful, and that's the lesson that the North Koreans are hearing. And so it's -- I said the other day that, you know, one of the things that I will leave behind is a multilateralism to deal with tyrants, so problems can be solved diplomatically.

And the difficulty, of course, is that sometimes economics and money trumps national security interests. So you go around asking nations -- by the way, it's not a problem for Great Britain -- so you say to your partners, don't sell goods; you know, let's send a focused message all aiming to create the conditions so that somebody rational shows up. In other words, people hopefully are sick of isolation in their respective countries, and they show up and say, we're tired of this; there's a better way forward.

And in order for that to be effective, Ed, there has to be more than one voice. So if I were the North Koreans and I were looking at Iran, or the Iranians looking at North Korea, I'd say, uh-oh, there are coalitions coming together that are bound tightly -- more tightly than ever in order to send us a focused message.

And, you know, let me just say one thing about the Iranian demand for civilian nuclear power. It's a justifiable demand. You just heard the Prime Minister talk about the spread of civilian nuclear power, which I support -- starting in my own country, by the way; we need to be building civilian nuclear power plants.

And so when the Iranians say, we have a sovereign right to have one, the answer is, you bet, you have a sovereign right, absolutely. But you don't have the trust of those of us who have watched you carefully when it comes to enriching uranium, because you have declared that you want to destroy democracies in the neighborhood, for example. Therefore -- and this is the Russian proposal, by the way -- therefore we'll provide fuel for you, and we'll collect the fuel after you've used it so you can have your nuclear -- civilian nuclear power, which undermines what the Iranians are saying, and that is, we must enrich in order to have civilian nuclear power. You don't need to enrich to have civilian nuclear power. The Russian proposal is what we support. This proposal wouldn't have happened had there not been a multilateral process.

And so what these nations need to see is we're serious about solving these problems. And the United States spends a lot of time working with our partners to get them solved.

Thank you very much.

PRIME MINISTER BROWN: Thank you all very much.

END

President Bush Participates in Joint Press Conference with President Sarkozy of France

U.S. President George W. Bush and French President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, shake hands following their joint press Conference, 14 June 2008, in Paris.

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 14, 2008

Video

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: (As translated.) Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming to work with us on this Saturday morning. I wanted to thank President Bush for his visit to Paris on his European tour. I see how much importance it has to Franco-American relations and the transatlantic relation. And I think everyone should firmly bear in mind the importance of this transatlantic relation between the United States and Europe, especially as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. This is an opportunity for me to extend the same sort of hospitality, warm hospitality that was extended to me last November when I went to Washington and to Mount Vernon.

It's also an opportunity to continue to pursue this confident, trusting regular dialogue between France and the United States on all issues that we have in common -- and there are so many of them. We had an extended discussion on the international situation on the Middle East, but also on economic and trade matters. We checked that -- once again saw that there were many areas of convergence, although perhaps slight differences, and that's only right and normal. Friendship should not prevent France or the United States from expressing independent views. But if there are differences, we can discuss them calmly, in a level headed manner. And this is once again an opportunity for me to say to the American people the deep gratitude of the French people and our friendship.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yesterday I reminded the world, really, Nicolas, that America's first friend was France. And frankly, we wouldn't be where we are today with the French support early in our revolution. You are not only our first friend, you've been a consistent friend, and the meetings here have reconfirmed and strengthened our friendship between our countries and our personal friendship.

I really enjoy being with President Sarkozy. He's an interesting guy. (Laughter.) He is full of energy. He's full of wisdom. He tells me what's on his mind. And we've had -- every time I've met with him we've had very meaningful discussions. We discussed Afghanistan -- and thank you very much for supporting the Paris support conference; it made a big difference for that young democracy. And I do thank the people of France for supporting the women and children and the young democrats in Afghanistan. And thank you, too, Nicolas.

We talked about Lebanon, of course. Talked to him about the Holy Land, about our deep desire for there to be two states living side by side in peace; two democracies, a Palestinian democracy and Israel; having a -- resolving this conflict which creates so much difficulty for not only the Palestinians and the Israelis, but for much of the Middle East.

We talked about Darfur, and I want to thank you very much for having your troops there in Chad. We talked about Iran -- spent a lot of time talking about Iran. And I will tell you that we both have a mutual desire to prevent the Iranians from gaining the knowledge so that they could build a weapon. And we do that for the sake of peace and security of the world.

We talked about Doha, the importance of the Doha Round. And frankly -- and then we spent some time on climate change. We had a meaningful, good discussion. And I thank you very much for the dinner last night. And it was a great pleasure to have been able to meet your wife. She's a really smart, capable woman, and I can see why you married her. (Laughter.) And I can see why she married you, too. (Laughter.)

Anyway, thanks. It's been a good visit. We'll be glad to take some questions.

The media's shadow drops across the courtyard of the Elysée Palace in Paris 14 June 2008, as the honor cordon and color guard prepare for the arrival of U.S. President George W. Bush, who spent the morning with France's President Nicolas Sarkozy.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Thank you, George. Perhaps a first question from the French press.

Q (As translated.) To both of you, what specific, concrete requests do you wish to make or send to the Syrian President, Bashar Assad, so that he normalize his relations with the West, and of course to achieve stability in Lebanon and in the rest of --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, my message would be, stop fooling around with the Iranians and stop harboring terrorists; serve as a constructive force in the Middle East to help the advance of a Palestinian state; make it clear to Hamas that terror should stop for the sake of peace; and make it clear to their Iranian allies that the West is serious when we talk about stopping them from learning how to enrich, which would be the first -- a major step for developing a bomb; and to make it clear to their Iranian allies that Hezbollah is a destabilizing force for not only Lebanon but elsewhere.

That would be my message. I'd make it clear to him that there is a better way forward for Syria. And Nicolas and I talked about this subject today.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, George and I totally agree on the need to guarantee Lebanon's independence. Lebanon is entitled, like any other country anywhere in the world, to its independence and to remain independent. And this is one of the preconditions that I have laid down -- the election of a new President for Lebanon. That is exactly what happened. It was done with the election of General Suleiman.

Second point, we will go through with the process, the procedure of the international tribunal to track down those who assassinated Mr. Rafik Hariri. But once I have said to Bashar Assad, let the presidential process run its course, we would get back into contact with them, and that is exactly what we've done. We have to let Lebanon stand free.

I also share the view of the United States of America on the fact that the Iranian question, and the fact that they might get their hands on a nuclear weapon is of the essence; it is a major issue. Syria has to peal off, as much as possible, from Iran in its desire to lay its hands on a nuclear weapon. Once that has happened, then the process will continue.

Lastly, I told the President of the United States that we have taken the initiative of convening a summit for the Mediterranean, and to my knowledge, Syria is part of the Mediterranean region, is a Mediterranean country. Now if we should go around the Mediterranean region and start picking and choosing, and simply inviting those who correspond to exactly our criteria, then we'll probably have a meeting with very few people attending it.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I want to call on Bill Plante from CBS, but before I do, I want to say something about one of your colleagues.

America lost a really fine citizen yesterday when Tim Russert passed away. I've had the privilege of being interviewed by Tim Russert. I found him to be a hardworking, thorough, decent man. And Tim Russert loved his country, he loved his family, and he loved his job a lot. And we're going to miss him all, and we send our deepest sympathies to Maureen, his wife, and Luke, his son. I know they're hurting right now, and hopefully the prayers of a lot of Tim's friends and a lot of Americans will help them during this time of difficulty.

Plante.

Q Mr. President, Iran's government spokesman, shortly after the package had been presented by the Europeans, dismissed it out of hand, saying that if it does not -- if it includes suspension of enrichment, it absolutely will not fly. Can you convince the rest of your allies and partners to enforce the sanctions which are envisioned in that package? It seems that many of them are reluctant.

PRESIDENT BUSH: That's probably a question you ought to ask the President of France. Let me just give you my impressions of the situation. We have worked hard -- "we" being our allies -- have worked hard to say to the Iranian people: There is a better way forward for you; you've got a government that has isolated you; you've got a government that is creating the conditions so that you can't live a full and hopeful life, and the reason why that's happening is because your government has defied the demands, the just demands of the free world. In other words, they refuse to abandon their desires to develop the know-how which could lead to a nuclear weapon.

Now, they say, well, we want civilian nuclear power. And as I explained to Nicolas today, I agree, they should have the right to have civilian nuclear power. As a matter of fact, Vladimir Putin delivered that very message to the Iranian regime. He also delivered this message: that because you have been untrustworthy, because you haven't fully disclosed your programs to the IAEA in the past, that we can't trust you to enrich. And therefore Russia will provide the fuel necessary for the civilian nuclear reactor. And therefore you don't need to [en]rich.

So our demands are just and fair. And Bill, we have been implementing the sanctions through the United Nations. And we're working with our friends and allies. As a matter of fact, much of my discussions on this trip have been dominated by this subject because our allies understand that a nuclear-armed Iran is incredibly destabilizing, and they understand that it would be a major blow to world peace.

So I'm disappointed that the leaders rejected this generous offer out of hand. It's an indication to the Iranian people that their leadership is willing to isolate them further. And our view is we want the Iranian people to flourish and to benefit. We want their economy to be strong so people can grow up in peace and hope; and they've got a -- this Ahmadinejad is obviously -- takes a different position from that. So his policies are what's creating the depravation inside Iran.

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, I think France's position is well known. If Iran gets a nuclear bomb, that is totally unacceptable. That's very clear. It is an unacceptable threat to world stability, especially when you think of the repeated statements made by the President of Iran right now. Anyone is entitled -- including Iran -- to access to civilian nuclear energy. We will help them to do so if they act in good faith. If the Iranian authorities are in good faith then they should let inspections run their course. If they nothing to hide, then they have nothing to hide -- let's show it.

And meanwhile the only solution in order to persuade the Iranians of this is a faultless, seamless sanction system, you see. The door is wide open to access to civilian nuclear technology -- straightaway, now. But as far as military nuclear access is concerned, this is "no" on the part of the international community. And as the President just said, Vladimir Putin has with us sung from the same hymn sheet and our position will not change. The Iranian people -- who are great people and a major civilization -- they need economic progress, they need growth, they deserve better than the impasse, the dead-end into which some of their leaders are leading them.

Q President, to you, Mr. Sarkozy. It would appear that the building and shaping of Europe has been seriously shaken yesterday by the Irish "no." In fact, some have called for the ratification procedure to be suspended. Can this not be the case? And secondly, do you want your presidency, the French presidency to be one which, as you called for, continues to push Europe forward? And do you not think that the Irish "no" is going to hinder this?

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, it's going to make things more difficult, but when you're a head of state and when the bubble -- you take over the presidency of the union, if you like easy jobs then you should step down straightaway.

Now, the Irish "no" is a political reality. It's a fact. It's happened. But the issue is not whether we like or not; it's a fact, we have to live with it. The Irish people said what they had to say, and we have to accept that. Now, having said that, we, with Angela Merkel, believe that we have to continue with the ratification process, because at this stage 18 European states have ratified the treaty. We have to continue doing so and that is Gordon Brown's intention, as he explained to me yesterday over the telephone, so that this Irish hiccup not become a major crisis.

So despite that, let's continue to ratify. But at the same time, we have to put our heads together, all of us. It is no coincidence, it is no surprise to a certain extent -- in fact I spoke yesterday with the Irish Taoiseach, the Irish Prime Minister. A lot of Europeans do not understand how we are shaping Europe right now and building Europe, and we have to take account of that. And we have to do so very fast. We have to change our way of building Europe.

The idea of a European construct -- it was one of the most wonderful ideas that the founding fathers had some half a century ago. We cannot allow -- we shouldn't sabotage it. But perhaps we should do it differently. Europe was set up to protect, and yet it worries so many Europeans. We can't not take account of this. We have to do so, and we have to do so now. So I have every intention of taking initiatives. I'm thinking, for instance, of a European immigration policy. I'm thinking of a European response to this endless increase in oil prices. It seems to me that we have a duty to be more effective and look at what the daily lives of our fellow citizens look like. And I take the Irish "no" as a call for us to do things differently and do things better.

Now, of course it's not going to simplify the work and the task of the French President, Presidents of the European Union, but --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Olivier. Tossing a bone to somebody who has got a French name. (Laughter.) Might want to use the mic, Olivier.

Q Yes, I will. Thank you, Mr. President. Merci, Monsieur Président. First --

PRESIDENT BUSH: Speaks the language, too. (Laughter.)

Q Just wait. (Laughter.) I'd like to ask you each a question --

PRESIDENT BUSH: In the great tradition of David Gregory.

Q Who?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes -- just trying to work him in the news here.

Q I'd like to ask you a question first, Mr. President. (As translated.) And then a question to the President of France. (Speaking English.) President Bush, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says that talks on a status of forces agreement are at an impasse, or a dead end -- not dead, but in trouble. How do you break this impasse, and are the conditions that the United States have set forward in support so far non-negotiable?

(As translated.) And to you, President, is the Franco-American relationship the privilege, the priority number one relationship in the transatlantic context?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Olivier, if I were a betting man, we'll reach an agreement with the Iraqis. You know, of course we're there at their invitation; this is a sovereign nation. And therefore, we're working hard with the elected government of Iraq about, you know, U.S. presence and coalition presence, in a way that the elected government is comfortable.

And it's interesting to be working with a democracy where, you know, people are trying to prepare the ground to get something passed in the parliament, for example, or the free press is vibrant. But we're going to work hard to accommodate their desires. It's their country.

And at the same time, we believe that a strategic relationship with Iraq is important. It's important for Iraq. It's important for the United States. It's important for the region. And I repeat to you that whatever we agreed to, it will not commit future Presidents to troop levels, nor will it establish permanent bases.

Anyway, we'll see how it goes. And thanks for the question -- in English. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: Well, the Americans and the French have had a privileged relationship for two centuries now. I mean, when the United States of America was born, France made a choice. It was not a European choice, because we chose to side with the Americans of the United States of America, as opposed to Britain at the time. And in two world wars we've been together. We share the same values.

So yes, it is a privileged relationship, but it's not privileged since I came to be elected; it's been privileged for two centuries now. You can't neglect that. Now, through this -- throughout that, we have had ups and downs -- hiccups -- because two peoples -- I'm talking about the French and the American peoples -- that actually resemble one another. We express our feelings. The American people can be heard, and likewise for the French people. We have to be careful about this. We have to be mindful of this when we talk to one another in our relations.

I have always seen American leaders -- and thank you to President Bush -- for accepting European originality and independence; and of course French originality and independence. And I've always noted that we can talk very frankly when we had points of disagreement. But we have to do so as allies and as friends, and be mindful of not hurting one another. We can agree on an issue, on the substance of issue, but we don't have to say so in an unpleasant manner. It so happens that today we have a lot of areas of convergence. But yes, maybe on such and such an issue, we don't totally agree, but it doesn't in any way undermine the basis of what I have to say, which is that the Americans are our friends and our allies. They know they can count on us.

Might I add that it seems to me that the more you trust somebody, the more trust there is on both sides of the Atlantic, the more leeway we have. We don't ask the United States to apologize to us because they have their own vision of their strategic interests, and they don't ask us to apologize for the fact that we are defending our own strategic interests, precisely because the relationship is a strong one, it is a calm one, and when a relationship is that strong, you accept one's divergences or differences. And that is my whole point -- you've got to understand if you're in a strong relationship, then you have more room for freedom, more room for maneuver. That's what this is all about.

Perhaps one last question?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Oh. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT SARKOZY: (Speaking English.) One more, last.

Q You have set the target before leaving the White House that by the end of this year you will hopefully achieve an historical peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. However, in light of what's happening to the fragile position of Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and the continuous process of building illegal settlements in eastern Jerusalem and certain parts of the occupied territories, do you think that peace is far away right now in light of those obstacles?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you. First of all, I view the concept of a Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian state for Israeli security, as well as Palestinian security and hope, as bigger than the political process. And I fully recognize there's a lot of uncertainty in the Israeli political scene now.

On the other hand, what is not uncertain is that most people or many people in Israel understand that for their own security there has to be a Palestinian state, with clearly defined borders, a state that doesn't look like Swiss cheese, a resolution of the refugee issue and the security issue, and of course issues surrounding Jerusalem.

Most Palestinians want to coexist in peace with Israel. And that peace must be in a state that is clearly visible, well defined, and in actuality is a state. And so in other words, the concept -- and by the way, this is newly arrived; I'm actually the first President ever to have articulated a two-state solution, two democracies living side by side with peace -- in peace. And during my time as President I've seen a notable shift amongst folks in the Middle East that recognize the importance of having that state.

So my point to you is, is that, you know, it's been a -- there's always difficulties in democracies, but the notion of getting this work done is important. And therefore our diplomacy is to remind all the parties involved that they have now an opportunity to get a state negotiated. And I think it can be done by the end of the year. Condi is very much involved with it on a, you know, a nearly weekly, it seems like, basis. And of course I'm in touch with the leaders. The Palestinians are discouraged by the settlement activity -- all the more reason to get the borders clearly defined as quickly as possible.

I want to thank Nicolas and the EU, for example, for helping build civil society in the Palestinian Territory, as well as helping Prime Minister Fayyad with security measures.

I'll also remind you that it's essential that we get a state defined as quickly as possible so that leaders such as President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad can say to their people, here's an alternative vision to what's taking place in Gaza. You support us and you're going to get a state. You support Hamas, and you're going to get Gaza. Take your pick.

And therefore, it is imperative that we, you know, convince the parties to get this done. Now, I know some say, all America has got to do is say, do it. No -- the way it works is the parties have got to come to this agreement. Our job, along with the EU through the Quartet, is to keep the process moving.

And so I'm optimistic. I understand how difficult it is, but difficultly should not cause people to do the right thing. If you believe in your soul something is right, then you have an obligation to work. And in this case, I firmly believe that the establishment of a Palestinian state will bring hope and peace to the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Thank you.

END

Commentary:
It is being more found that Bush’s speeches and remarks are such repeaters, that they are predictable, before the yawn; which is common with an alcoholic.

As for answering media questions, he appears to be having increasing problems doing so, showing his mental degeneration.

Furthermore, it is becoming an increasing idea, if Bush may have had a minor alcoholic induced stroke; along with a more pronounced slurring speech.

As for a remark, towards working with the leaders in Palestine, Bush has numerous times refused to do so and would rather blanket the media with propaganda, which is contrary to the truth and his known associations with global terrorists; such as Mahmoud Abbas's terrorist organization who has no leadership capacity in Palestine.

Israeli Police Detain African Migrants

A Sudanese refugee surveys an empty shelter deserted after a police raid in Tel Aviv, Monday, Feb. 25, 2008. Israeli police on Monday detained about 200 Africans who infiltrated the country through the porous border with Egypt in recent months, a police official said, a day after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered a crackdown on illegal migrants.(AP Photo/Tara Todras-Whitehill)

25 February 2008

By ARON HELLER

TEL AVIV-Israeli police arrested about 200 African migrants Monday, a day after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered a crackdown on the growing problem of illegal immigration, officials said.

Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said the migrants, mostly Sudanese who entered through the porous border with Egypt, were arrested in a raid near Tel Aviv's old bus station, where many live. Rosenfeld said the arrests would continue this week.

The dilapidated buildings that shelter migrants in southern Tel Aviv were nearly empty after the raid as people tried to avoid arrest. They left hundreds of barren mattresses side-by-side in smelly underground dwellings.

Solomon Mangstie-Dayan, a 40-year-old migrant from Ethiopia who crossed into Israel nine days ago, said police officers raided his shelter, seizing fellow African migrants and hurrying them onto three buses. He said he was spared only because of the cries of his 3-year-old daughter, Sunight.

Olmert on Sunday ordered security officials to tighten supervision of the Egyptian border and directed officials to expedite the processing of those seeking asylum, to decide which were just seeking work and could be deported.

Africans have been sneaking into Israel in increasing numbers over the past year. More than 7,000 have entered the country illegally through Egypt in just over a year, including more than 2,000 so far in 2008, said Michael Bavly, a representative in Israel of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.

Israeli government statistics estimate about 100,000 legal foreign workers in the country. At least 100,000 others, many from Africa, work in Israel without permits, according to experts.

Foreign workers flock to Israel because the higher wages allow them to send relatively large amounts of money back home to their families. Refugees seeking asylum from wars or persecution see Israel as a welcoming, Westernized country.

Many Israelis feel an obligation to help refugees because of the centuries of persecution Jews endured before they created their own state.

Most migrants are from Sudan, including southern Sudan, where a 22-year conflict left 2.5 million people dead, and Darfur, where a rebellion has cost more than 200,000 civilian lives and made 2.5 million homeless. Others have fled Eritrea and forced military conscription there.

This year, Israel granted temporary residency status to 600 refugees from Darfur. It also recognized about 2,000 migrants from Eritrea whose lives would be endangered if sent home.

But the nation plans to deport another 4,500, many of whom came from countries like Ivory Coast, Ghana and Nigeria.

Their route to Israel is often treacherous. Egyptian border police on Monday shot and wounded a Sudanese and a man from Ivory Coast in separate incidents as they tried to cross into Israel. On Sunday, Egyptian forces shot and killed an African woman who was trying to cross the border into Israel, a medical official said.

A spokeswoman for Israel's Interior Ministry said those arrested Monday who have work permits would be released. Those whose refugee status is being reviewed by the U.N. would be granted a limited stay, and the others would be deported.

Sigal Rozen, of the Hotline for Migrant Workers in Tel Aviv, who represents the migrants, said authorities were shipping some of the arrested migrants to a prison in southern Israel.

Israel Releases 50 Darfur Refugees

A Sudanese refugee plays in the southern Israeli town of Kadesh Barnea in August 2007. Israel has released 51 Darfur asylum seekers from a prison compound in the Negev desert to allow them to work on collective farms in the Jewish state.(AFP/File/Gali Tibbon)

18 October 2007

KETZIOT, Israel (AFP) -Israel on Thursday released 51 Darfur asylum seekers from a prison compound in the Negev desert to allow them to work on collective farms in the Jewish state.

The group was being held at a centre on the Ketziot prison compound, said an AFP correspondent who witnessed their release.

The asylum seekers have been granted temporary residency permits and will live and work on kibbutzim, as have other Sudanese refugees for months.

Last month, the government decided to grant residency to around 500 Darfur refugees after months of public debate, but Israel says it would expel all other Africans who had entered illegally from Egypt.

It is not clear what exact legal status Darfur refugees will be granted, although Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit has said he supported naturalising the Darfur refugees who have crossed into Israel with about 3,000 other Africans.

A four-year civil war in Darfur has killed at least 200,000 people and displaced two million others. Khartoum says only 9,000 died in the conflict.

Many in Israel argue that the Jewish state -- founded in part as a refuge for the victims of the Nazi Holocaust -- has a moral obligation to offer sanctuary to those fleeing what some have described as a genocide in Darfur.

But in Israel there are also more than 1,000 other Sudanese refugees, along with 700 from Eritrea and 600 from the Ivory Coast, according to the UN.

Emergency in Darfur

HOME/DONATE

Darfur, Sudan is being called the worst humanitarian crisis in the world today.

Tens of thousands of people have died. Two million more have been forced to flee their homes and livelihoods. For these innocent civilians, living on the edge of survival, their only hope is the dwindling number of humanitarian organizations willing to risk the dangers on the ground in Darfur to provide relief. International Medical Corps was one of the first relief organizations to arrive on the scene in Darfur, and remains there to this day.

Established in 1984 by volunteer doctors and nurses, IMC provides help in more than 25 countries and regions worldwide that have been ravaged by war and disaster. IMC's network of some 5,000 doctors, nurses and other health care professionals makes it one of the fastest, most effective emergency response agencies in the world.

In Darfur, IMC has been providing critical emergency medical services to a target population of about 300,000. This includes operating seven primary health care centers and two mobile clinics aimed at improving access to health care, nutritional assistance, and clean water and sanitation. These facilities provide family medicine; pre-natal, maternal, and child health care; immunizations; referrals and transportation for secondary care; and health and hygiene education. IMC also has rehabilitated local health care facilities, providing medicines, supplies and health care training to local professionals.

Video

Dr. Bob Arnot reports on International Medical Corps' humanitarian response in Darfur, Sudan.

Global Protests Held Over Darfur

Ban Ki-moon, the UN chief, visited Darfur early this month [AFP]

16 September 2007

The conflict in Darfur has drawn celebrities and activists onto the streets across the globe, all calling for urgent action by the world's leaders.

In London, scores of activists put on blindfolds on Sunday as part of Darfur Day, while demonstrators in Rome wore T-shirts printed to look like blood-stained hands.

The various protests all symbolised the international community's failure to act to stop the atrocities being carried out in Sudan's troubled western region.

The Rome protesters carried a peace torch, which they said had been lit in Chad where there are hundreds of thousands of Darfur refugees.

The co-ordinated demonstrations come ahead of a meeting this week of the UN general assembly.

Global protests

Organisers, who planned protests in more than 30 countries, said some in the international community had become complacent since the UN Security Council approved plans in July for a 26,000-strong peacekeeping force for the vast region.

The deployment of the joint African Union-United Nations peacekeeping force faces delays, however, due to a lack of aviation, transport and logistics units, Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, said last month.

In the meantime Darfur's violence has increased, organisers said.

Campaigners are demanding that the force be deployed quickly, and that the world's most powerful countries put pressure on all sides in the conflict until attacks on civilians stop.

In London, demonstrators carried signs reading 'Stop genocide in Darfur' and 'Rape, torture, murder. How much longer for Darfur?'

In a video made to mark Darfur Day, Desmond Tutu, the South African archbishop, called Darfur "the world's largest concentration of human suffering", adding "it's also entirely avoidable if people speak out".

Mounting misery

More than 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been uprooted since ethnic African rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated Sudanese government in 2003, accusing it of decades of neglect.

Sudan's government is accused of retaliating by unleashing a militia of Arab nomads known as the Janjawid - a charge it denies.

Sunday's events were being organised by a coalition of more than 50 organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Save Darfur Coalition.

Source

UN Chief on Peace Mission to Darfur

5 September 2007

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, is visiting Sudan's war-torn Darfur region in an attempt to accelerate moves towards peace.

Ban, who has made solving the conflict a priority since taking office in January, is attempting to ensure conditions are right for an early deployment of a joint UN and African Union peacekeeping force to Darfur.

Darfuris remain concerned over long-term security in the war-torn region [AFP]

For too long the international community has stood by, as seemingly helpless witnesses. That is now changing," Ban said in a speech to a university in the southern Sudanese capital of Juba.

The UN chief has been on a visit to Sudan since Tuesday.

Camp visit

Ban arrived at a refugee camp at Al-Fasher on Wednesday for a first-hand look at the humanitarian situation.

The secretary-general was handed a petition by a small group claiming to represent people displaced by the conflict.

It called for Ban to support a government-backed policy to encourage displaced Darfuris to return to their villages.

Mohammed Adow, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Sudan, said the visit comes amid fighting between rival Arab tribes and reports of division among anti-government groups in Darfur.

"The Arab tribes are fighting each other, but the rebel groups are also splintering. They don't share one vision for Darfur," he said.

Adow said that displaced people sheltering at the al-Salam camp near the town of al-Fahser were desperate to return to their homes.

"[The camp at Al-Fasher] is a place where more people are coming to, following the new fighting," he said.

"The people at the camp want to go back to the villages, restart their lives, rear livestock and grow their crops. The new conflict is not encouraging them at all."

After his visit to the camp, Ban is due to return to Khartoum on Thursday, ahead of meetings with Sudan's neighbours Chad and Libya.

The UN secretary general said he had urged Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Sudan's president, to help in the planned deployment of a hybrid UN-AU peacekeeping force.

Ban said that al-Bashir had replied that his government would provide "all necessary administrative and logistical support".

"Time is of the essence. The government's co-operation is essential on a range of practical matters," Ban said.

'Bolstering peace'

During his visit, Ban is also seeking to bolster a 2005 peace deal that ended two decades of civil war in Sudan, which has become increasingly fragile of late.

Ban will address the deployment of a hybrid peacekeeping force for Darfur [AFP]

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in January 2005 to end 21 years of war between the Muslim north and Christian and animist south that killed at least two million people and displaced millions more.

"It is crucially important that we implement the CPA ... it is important that the leaders of both the north and the south be fully committed," Ban said in Juba.

A senior UN official travelling with Ban said there were "worrying signals" about the implementation of the peace deal, including delays in the promised pullout of government troops from the south.

The UN official said: "There are a number of signs that show there is a need to push the CPA forward.

"Both sides have indicated their commitment to the agreement but it is important not to let it slip."

New envoy

In Juba, Ban held talks with Salva Kiir, Sudan's vice-president and a former rebel leader who took over as head of the Sudan People's Liberation Army in July 2005.

In a separate development, Ban announced he has appointed Ashraf Qazi, currently UN envoy to Iraq, as his new special representative for Sudan, replacing Jan Pronk.

Ban cited Qazi's "wide and extensive diplomatic experience" in naming him to the post.

Pronk was expelled from Sudan in October 2006 for criticising the army over its conduct against Sudanese rebels.

Source

International Court vs. George W. Bush

A little interesting antidote, George W. Bush going to International court; when he leaves the white house?

He is allegedly charged on everything from war crimes, numerous cases of abuse of human rights, issues pertaining to Darfur, handling of Palestine; among other charges, stemming back as much as 2002.

Unidentified people that were interviewed, expressed he should be charged and prosecuted.

Update:

It has been brought to my attention, that also allegedly indicted in this scenario are may in the Israeli government, some in the U.K. government, collaborators and many in the Bush government.

Canada Says Sudan Diplomat to be Ousted

29 August 2007

By ROB GILLIES

TORONTO -A Sudanese diplomat will be expelled from Canada within days in response to Sudan's decision to kick out Canada's charge d'affaires, the Foreign Ministry said Wednesday.

The Foreign Affairs Department said the Sudanese diplomat, who has yet to be identified, will be ordered to leave the country by Saturday. Ministry officials said the diplomat would hold a similar rank to Canadian acting charge d'affaires Nuala Lawlor, who the Sudanese government ordered expelled last Thursday after accusing him of "meddling in its affairs."

"Canada considers the expulsion of our charge d'affaires to be entirely unjustified," Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier said in a statement.

Along with Lawlor, Sudan said it was expelling the European Union's top diplomat in the country for "meddling" in its affairs. But the government later said it would allow Kent Degerfelt to complete the remaining three weeks of his mandate as long as he was replaced by someone new.

On Monday, Sudan also ordered out the head of CARE International's operations in the country. No reason was given for the official's expulsion, but the group had been directing one of the largest private aid efforts in Darfur.

Sudan has faced mounting criticism in the face of violence in Darfur, where 200,000 people have died since 2003 in fighting that began when ethnic African rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated government, accusing it of discrimination.

The government is accused of unleashing the janjaweed militia in response — a force allegedly behind some of the worst atrocities against civilians in the region.

Stung by criticism, Sudan has taken a hard line against what it says is interference in its internal affairs by outsiders.

George Galloway Defends Afghan Fighters...

Taken from the Global Peace and Unity Event 2006 broadcast Live on The Islam Channel.

George Galloway condemns the U.S. and Great Britain for killing "Afghans who reject the foreign occupation of their country."

He then accuses the U.S. government of faking interest in the genocide of Darfur only to get access to steal oil resources, effectively condemning any future U.S. intervention in the area.

Darfur: The Tragedy

Video made for a school's on-campus club Amnesty International to raise awareness about Darfur.

Links:

Human rights 'eroded worldwide'
Amnesty says politics of fear fuelling divisions

A Donkey for President Bush

May 12, 2007

by Jane Wells

In his most recent op-ed piece in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof argues that what is needed to galvanize President Bush and the public to do something about the genocide in Darfur is a suffering puppy.

Kristof referenced a number of scientific studies that explore how and why decent people (fail to) respond to genocide, famine and poverty. A single child or animal is more effective than actual facts and statistics about suffering or even a group of starving children. With bewilderment Kristof reminds us that when he first started writing about the genocide in Darfur "A single homeless hawk (Pale Male of New York City) aroused more indignation than two million homeless Sudanese".

Yet indifference and donor fatigue can dissipate with the right prompt. So, what would be the pivotal prompt that could get America to stand up and respond now? Some wags have suggested that if only Anna Nicole Smith had died in a camp in Chad, or perhaps if Paris Hilton had been arrested drunk in Darfur, the media attention would have wrought some change.

There aren't many cute puppies roaming Darfur these days, but I'd like to present a Darfurian donkey to President Bush and the American public:


His scars are the result of burns. He was burned while his owner's home was ransacked in the village of Alliet. A witness untied him from a tree so he could escape the flames, but Government of Sudan soldiers tied him up again so he could not run away. He was left to slowly die from festering burn wounds, tethered, helpless and without food or water.

Welcome to his world America. His name is Eeyore.