As a social policy researcher who has written extensively about the links between structural injustice and social disadvantage, I can see some merit in their argument that conflict resolution requires addressing the structural basis of oppression and violence. But I also believe that many conflicts are far more complex than that. To be sure, some involve structural oppression of small powerless countries or peoples by larger powerful countries or peoples. But alternatively, other intra-national conflicts often involve

persecution by majority groups of minority groups as a result of national, racial and religious hatred. This includes majorities who were themselves previously victims of colonialism or invasion.

In my opinion, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not fit easily into either of these two categories given that it obviously has multi-layered causes, and there is no international consensus on the causes of this conflict. The protagonists and their key supporters are totally polarized. For pro-Israel partisans, Israel is the David acting in self-defense. The conflict is seen as the product of unrelenting Arab and Palestinian hostility since 1948 based on nationalist and religious fanaticism. For pro-Palestinian partisans, Israel is the Goliath bullying the region. The conflict is viewed as the outcome of the exile of most Palestinians in 1948, and the Israeli occupation of territories claimed by the Palestinians since 1967.

Those who genuinely want to promote peace need to find some way of mediating and achieving a mid-way compromise between these two polarized perspectives. Instead, the CPACS seem to have adopted a simplistic view of Israel/Palestine based on the binary opposites of good and bad nations. CPACS’ caricatures deftly avoid the complexity of the conflict, and the existence of moderates and extremists on both sides of the fence. Their aim does not appear to be to support compromise or reconciliation, but rather to impose pariah status on one particular nation. In addition, they seem to have labelled any and all supporters of Israel – whatever their diverse views on solutions to the conflict – as apologists for structural oppression. This labeling has been particularly apparent in two episodes: the 2003 controversy over the awarding of the Sydney Peace Prize to Hanan Ashrawi, and the more recent campaign by CPACS Director Jake Lynch to boycott all Israeli institutions.

Resolution Mediation

http://www.resolutionmediation.net/

Auto Carrier Ottawa

Auto Carriers Ontario

Auto Dealers Surrey

• The Danger of Fad Diets and Why They Never Work When desperate to loss weight, people tend to lean toward fad dieting, due to their tendency to offer "instant" results. They’re always commercially successful, but they leave their practitioners without many options and issues with health. In short order, another...
• Hamas Agrees to One-Week Cease-Fire   JERUSALEM (CNN) -- Palestinian militants agreed Sunday to a one-week cease-fire against Israel, Hamas spokesman Ayman Taha said. The Hamas announcement came hours after Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert announced a unilateral cease-fire in the country's assault on Hamas in...
• Caring for a Violin Instrument Care: Make sure that you tighten up your bow before you play. The way that you can achieve this is by turning your instrument's tension screw. You are going to want to avoid allowing the hairs of the bow...

• The act would require all state and local governments to collectively bargain with public safety employees–police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel.
• States would be forced to permit bargaining over wages, hours, and all terms and conditions of employment.
• States would have to provide a dispute resolution mechanism, such as binding arbitration.
• PSEECA allows the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) to determine whether a state’s collective bargaining arrangements meet the standards as defined by the act. If they do not, the FLRA could impose a collective bargaining system on the state.
• The FLRA would have considerable authority to enforce the act, including:
• • Determining the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation;
  • Conducting hearings and resolving complaints of unfair labor practices; and
  • Supervising or conducting elections to determine whether a labor organization has been selected as an exclusive representative by a voting majority of the employees.
• States would be granted the authority to pass laws more expansive than those the federal government imposed.
• States would not, however, be allowed to pass narrower laws than those contained in the act.

Policy Objections

• Unionized state and local government employees earn 11-12 percent higher pay than comparable non-union workers.
• They also have more expensive benefit packages than non-union workers.
• The act would end local control and flexibility by forcing the minority that has chosen not to collectively bargain to do so. Different states and local governments have different needs and should be free to fit their policies to their individual needs. Collective bargaining does not work everywhere.
• Large majorities of public safety employees already collectively bargain. The states in which collective bargaining is appropriate and affordable have already chosen to do so. The legislation represents a solution in search of a problem.
• Not all issues should be collectively negotiated. For instance:
• • Police unions should not negotiate the terms and conditions under which their members may use deadly force.
  • Many state and local governments promote police officers on the basis of merit and performance instead of through collectively bargained seniority schedules. Merit-based promotions and raises encourage hard work and help put the best workers in the most sensitive positions. However, unions prefer seniority-based promotions. States should not be forced to bargain over this issue.
• Experience demonstrates that collective bargaining does not lead to increased cooperation between public safety employees and their employers.
• • The process is inherently adversarial: Pitting employees and employers against each other at the bargaining table creates as much conflict as cooperation.
  • Consequently, public-sector employees will often strike when the law explicitly forbids it, putting vital public services at risk.
• PSEECA may deter or even eliminate volunteer firefighting. Firefighters unions vehemently oppose volunteer firefighters because they reduce the need for paid firefighters. They levy stiff internal fines against unionized firefighters who volunteer off-duty. By requiring all states and localities to collectively bargain, PSEECA would make it easier for unions to crack down on volunteer firefighting.

Economic Effects

• The act imposes an expensive unfunded mandate on state and local governments.
• Without providing financing for the mandate, the act will force these governments to either cut services or raise taxes.
• The act prevents employers from hiring workers who would do the same job for less than union wages, thus undermining potentially more qualified competition.
• This gives the union much more negotiating power but harms workers who could negotiate a better individual deal with the employer. A non-union worker who prefers merit-based promotions must instead accept what the union negotiates for him.

Wpg Auto Financing

Resolution Mediation

http://www.resolutionmediation.net

• Enterprise Log Management: An Overview (Part 1) - - FOSE Log management is the collection of self-generated data from IT hardware devices and software applications.  The collection of this data can contain useful information about business processes such as the number of errors on a website or even a security...
• Retirement Careers, Volunteering and Public Service Looking for a retirement or second career that combines volunteering, public service and some income? The federal government is trying to help. Baby Boomers, Retirement Careers, and the Serve America Act of 2009 Congress has passed and the President recently...
• The Pros and Cons of Collecting US Currency There are multiple types of currency for individuals to choose from when thinking about their coin collection, including US currency. US currency provides a strong background for many who are looking to get into the world of collecting and are...
• Get to Know What Makes Up the Coin Collection Price Guide There are a few different things you will need to know if you are going to collect coins. You will need to know which coins are in the highest demand. You will need to know how to care for your...
• Avon Collectibles Collectibles -> Decorative Collectibles -> Decorative Collectible Brands-> Avon The Avon Company has been a respected institution in the United States since 1886, and their line of decorative collectibles contain some of the most sought after pieces on record. The...
• Earn a Profit Collecting Rare Coins If you are looking to earn a profit with a unique type of collection, then one of the collection options that you may want to consider is rare coins. When you are collecting coins for the purpose of an investment,...