Dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, seddiam nonumy eirmod tempor. invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadip- scing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur.
 

Small Business Loan – Review Your Options

So you want to start your own business! Great; do it now then. Are you worried about fund? Well, that’s a practical problem. To start a business you need fund. Initial investment is very important. Raw materials, office space, furniture, overheads, wages – everything should be managed. Where from the fund will come?

People often have great ideas, but cannot make them real just because of fund. It is difficult to find investors, sponsors and advertisers especially when you are a start up. Consider taking bussines loan gather the required fund.

However, most lenders would ask for collateral when it comes to business loan. Some people find it difficult to arrange collateral. Secured loan get approved easily, but it is difficult to qualify for one.

Here is a good alternative. Go for a business cash advance. If you are looking for bussines loan and your application was rejected for you could not show adequate collateral, go for business cash advance.
Read more

Secured or unsecured loans – which is right for you?

When it comes to getting a loan there are a number of choices available, but all loans come under one of two categories, which include the secured and the unsecured loan. There are some key differences between these two loan types, and it is important to ensure that you choose the right loan for your needs based on your circumstances and preferences. Some people will find that they are eligible for both secured and unsecured loans, whereas others may find that they are only available for one or the other. There are pros and cons to both secured and and in order to ensure that you get the right loan for you it is important that you look carefully at both loan types to determine which is most likely to suit your needs. By doing a little research and learning more about the two types of loans you can see which is going to match your needs, and also which you will be eligible for.
one that is secured against some form of asset, and this is usually the home. This means that in order to qualify for a secured loan you will need to be a homeowner, and you will usually need to have some level of equity in your home. You can work out the equity by deducing the outstanding balance of your mortgage or other existing secured loans from the market value of the home – the remaining figure is the equity.

With a secured loan you will usually find that the borrowing levels are far higher than with an unsecured loan, although the exact amount that you can borrow will depend on your equity levels, financial status, credit rating, and a number of other factors. In addition to this the repayment periods are usually far longer, and this means that you have more time to repay the loan, which can help to keep your monthly repayments down.

Another benefit of a secured loan is that they are often available to those with damaged credit, because the secured nature of the loan makes it a lower risk for the lender. However, there are some risks involved with these loans, and this includes the risk of falling into negative equity if house prices fall, and the risk of losing your home if you fall behind with repayments.

An unsecured loan on the other hand is one that is based on contract rather than being secured against an asset, and this means that you do not risk your home if you fall behind on repayments, although your credit rating will obviously be affected. Whilst the risk is lower with an unsecured loan, you will generally find that the borrowing power is not as great as with an unsecured loan, the repayment terms are shorter, and you will usually need pretty good credit to quality.
Read more

Basic fees associated with mortgages

When you take out a mortgage there are many things that you need to consider, and whilst the interest rate and repayment period are of paramount importance it is important to remember that there are a number of other fees that are linked to mortgages. It is vital that you are aware of the different fees that come with mortgages before you make any commitment, as learning about these fees will ensure that you know what you are getting into, what sorts of costs you are facing, and whether you can afford to take out the mortgage.

Mortgage organisation or arrangement fee: When you take out a mortgage loan you may be charged an organisation of arrangement fee by the company that has arranged or set up the mortgage loan. You should expect to pay around 2% or under by way of this fee, and if the fee is any higher than this you should seriously consider shopping around, as you can save yourself money by doing this.

Credit report fee: When you apply for a mortgage loan you will need to have a credit report issues, and the cost for this is relatively low, but must still be factored into your budget. You should expect to pay around $10 to $20 for your credit report. The lender will usually request the credit report from the credit reference agency in order to check your financial details and credit profile.

Mortgage appraisal fees: Whether you are buying a new home or refinancing your mortgage, you will usually have to pay a mortgage appraisal fee, and this is the fee that is paid for a professional appraiser to come out and approve the property either for sale or for refinancing. In cases where it is a new home purchase it is the borrower that would have to pay this fee and not the seller. The fees will generally amount to several hundred dollars, but this can depend on the area.

Mortgage processing fees: A third party provider or a profession loan processor may also charge a mortgage processing fee, which can also run to several hundred dollars. This is charged because it can be a lengthy task to get together all of the information necessary before the loan is authorized, and in order to do this effectively a professional and experienced industry official is required.

Mortgage underwriting fees: This fee is sometimes referred to as the mortgage administration fee, and it covers costs such as the closing, underwriting, and funding of the mortgage loan. The fee is charged by a firm for helping the borrower to find a suitable home loan.

Purchasing a property these days, or even refinancing your existing property, is not necessarily a cheap task, as there are many fees and charges involved. It is important to ensure that you know what sort of costs you are facing when it comes to loans, as this will enable you to better determine whether you can afford the loan.
Read more

Reduce your financial worries by enrolling in a suitable debt management program

When you are overwhelmed by your existing debts, it is very important that you take proactive steps and get your creditors paid off by working out payment arrangements with them. If you are enrolling in a debt management program, be sure that you have understood the terms and conditions of your debt management company before enrolling for their services. The company working to eliminate your debts should not put you in more troubles by keeping your money with themselves and not paying anything to your creditors. You should know more on the debt management loans and find out more details on the advocacy programs.
Different types of debt management services: The counselor assisting in your debt management program has different options and repayment plans according to your situation. Make sure that you get enrolled in the right program in reducing your debts. He will also give you budgeting tips so that you don’t fall into the same situation again.
Non profit debt management services: There are a few debt management consultants or companies that are non-profit. Every company that is in the business wants to earn something from the customers. They may be having a lower cost of their services in comparison to other debt management companies. They will offer you free counseling sessions and lower cost debt management services. Be sure that you know about the policies of the debt management company before signing up with them.
Debt management loans: There are many debt management companies who offer debt consolidation loans to consumers. These loans can be used to pay off all your existing debts. Many people often find it strange to take another loan when you are already going through problems with your multiple debts. There are several reasons for considering a debt consolidation loan. When you take one debt consolidation loan, it means that you can use this amount to pay off all other debts and have one interest rate on the debt consolidation loan. These loans come with a variety of options for different people. These loans can be offered at longer terms and lower interest rates, making the monthly payment plan more realistic. When you take a debt consolidation loan, be sure that you are disciplined with your finances and focus on paying off your debts before considering for new credit.
Debt management scheduled payment plans: This is the perfect option for many people enrolled in the debt management program. You are able to set up a scheduled payment plan with your creditors through your debt management service provider. According to your present financial situation, you can tailor the repayment plan in this program. Make sure that you are working with a reputed debt management company because they will be sending your monthly payments to all your creditors after negotiating to reduce the interest rates. If your creditors do not receive timely payments from your debt management company, they will be charging high interests and late fees and you will be in more debts. And you don’t want to see a blemish remark on your credit report after wanting to take care of your debts by enrolling in the debt management program.
Read more

angerous, Untreated Wastewater in the West Bank

B'Tselem is the Jerusalem-based independent Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (OPT) with a well-deserved reputation for accuracy and integrity. It was founded in 1989 to "document and educate the Israeli public, policymakers (and concerned people everywhere) about human rights violations in the OPT, combat the phenomenon of denial prevalent among the Israeli public (and elsewhere, especially among Jews), and create a human rights culture in Israel" to convince government officials to respect human rights and comply with international law.

It conducts wide-ranging, carefully researched, and thoroughly cross-checked reports, most recently its June one titled, "Foul Play: Neglect of wastewater treatment in the West Bank." This article discusses its findings as further evidence of how Israel violates international humanitarian law as an occupying power. Because no global authority holds it accountable, over 2.8 million West Bank Palestinians suffer along with another 1.5 million under siege in Gaza for over two years and counting.

Introduction

Human activity produces wastewater for which treatment is essential "to prevent and reduce sanitation and environmental hazards" that otherwise would result - from dangerous viruses, bacteria, parasites, heavy metals, and other toxic substances that pollute water, farm crops, flora, and fauna, and reduce land fertility.

Israeli West Bank and Jerusalem settlements produce about 91 million cubic meters of wastewater annually, more than double the amount from Palestinian communities. Yet most of it goes untreated. As an occupying power, international humanitarian law requires it be done, yet Israel violates its obligations across the board making Palestinians suffer grievously as a result.

Wastewater from Settlements and Jerusalem

Israel's Civil Administration environmental protection staff officer, Benny Elbaz, told B'Tselem that (other than outpost wastewater) all of it from settlements gets "adequate" treatment, and raw effluent isn't allowed to flow freely.

However, an August 2008 study refutes his assertion. Jointly conducted by the Nature and Parks Authority Environment Unit, the Ministry of Environmental Protection's Water and Streams Department, and the Civil Administration, it showed that in 2007, only 81 of 121 West Bank settlements were connected to wastewater treatment facilities. Also, over half of treatment plants (38 of 74) are small facilities able to service only a few hundred families, way short of what's needed.

In addition, to operate properly, plants need "round-the-clock maintenance," but because the per-capita cost is high, "maintenance of most of the facilities is defective." They experience frequent problems, sometimes shut down entirely, and can't handle the volume channeled to them. As a result, "raw wastewater from settlements floods West Bank valleys," Israel's disclaimer notwithstanding.

In large settlements, built in the 1970s and 1980s, no wastewater is treated or facilities in place "have been neglected for decades." Among them are:

-- Kirat Arba, founded in 1972; its wastewater flows into the Hebron stream that runs into Israel;

-- Ofra, founded in 1975; its sewage flows into the Mountain Aquifer and pollutes groundwater; in 2008, Israel began constructing a settlement treatment plant, but it's being built on Palestinian land without Civil Administration approval;

-- Kfar Adumim, founded in 1979; instead of being treated, its wastewater is disposed of in cesspits cut into the ground for effluent disposal; from there, it pollutes land and groundwater; and

-- Bat Ayin, founded in 1989; it has a partial collection system, and residents dispose of their wastewater in cesspits.

Other settlements, like those below, experience frequent breakdowns that shut facilities for extended periods:

-- Ariel's treatment plant was defective for a decade, then shut down in 2008; thereafter wastewater flowed into the Shilo stream, a major Yarkon River tributary;

-- Elqana's treatment plant stopped operating; its wastewater flows into the Rava stream, another Yarkon tributary; renovation funding was allocated to make it operable by the end of 2009;

-- Qedumim's two treatment plants ceased functioning in 2007; its wastewater flows into the Abu Jamus stream; in March 2008, one plant resumed operations;

-- Beit Ariyeh's plant stopped functioning in 2008; its effluent flowed into the Shilo stream until renovations let it resume operations in January 2009;

-- Qedar, Ma'aleh Amos, Nokdim, Otni'el, Etz Ephraim, and Enav settlements dispose of their wastewater in septic tanks, "from which it seeps into the groundwater and pollutes it;" and

-- 25 Jordan Valley settlements' wastewater is only partially treated in sedimentation basins and oxidation ponds, an outdated method not used inside Israel.

Overall, Israeli and independent studies show that settlements' waterwater treatment inadequacies are long-standing and serious - confirmed by the Ministry of Environmental Protection saying that many settlements "do not have a proper solution to wastewater." According to Yael Mason, the Industrial Wastewater and Polluted Lands Department director, some settlement plants "do not meet requisite standards and pollute both the Mountain Aquifer and streams."

Conditions were as bad in 1998 when a Municipal Environmental Association of Judea survey found half the plants (where over 40,000 settlers lived), polluted the environment "to a great or moderate extent," and only 13 plants (for 16,000 people) performed "to a reasonable extent."

A 2002 Municipal Environmental Association of Samaria report (responsible for 100 settlements,) showed 14 left their wastewater untreated. Eleven others either didn't treat it or only partially did for 25 years until the Kana stream conduit was completed in 2006.

Other reports document the same neglect, citing defective maintenance, no electrical connection, raw sewage seepage into groundwater, "usually primitive" factory wastewater treatment, and pollution caused by "cow pens."

For over 40 years of occupation, "Israel has not built advanced regional wastewater treatment plants in the settlements to match those inside Israel" even though a 1983 master plan was formulated. After its cost was estimated to be $110 million, budgetary constraints stopped its implementation. The single recent facility addition began operating in 2006, servicing six settlements.

Under still in force Jordanian West Bank building and planning laws, provisions for treatment must be approved before proceeding. However, Israeli authorities ignore the requirement and allow building occupancies and industrial operations anyway. The Modi'in Illit settlement was approved even though raw sewage from 17,000 people flowed into the Modi'im stream, and construction was never completed for a Meitarim industrial area treatment plant.

Blurred authority between the Civil Administration and Ministry of Environmental Protection complicates the problem. The former ensures that building plans include treatment solutions, but enforcement power lies with the latter. From 2000 - September 2008, it was used only 53 times for not treating wastewater. Most were warnings. Only four indictments were filed. By comparison, in 2006 alone, 230 enforcement measures were taken inside Israel, mostly warnings on suspected Water Law violations. In Israel, building plans are stopped until proper hook-up to wastewater treatment is in place. "Across the Green Line," no similar action is taken.

Jerusalem's Wastewater Channeled East

Since the 1940s, untreated wastewater has been channeled from West and East Jerusalem to the Kidron Basin in the city's southeast. It flows into an open duct from where it moves over 30 kilometers into the Dead Sea.

A Horqaniya Valley diversion facility treats some of it for Jordan Valley settlements' irrigation, while the rest flows freely into the Mountain Aquifer, "an area sensitive to pollution." It creates dangerous sanitation and environmental hazards, including groundwater pollution. Yet it's used as livestock drinking water and for Palestinian farmland irrigation, "despite the (considerable) health risk."

Since the 1970s, remediation plans were proposed and rejected - according to Israel's Jerusalem Municipality because of a lack of Palestinian Authority (PA) cooperation, not gotten because giving it would grant legitimacy to the settlements.

More recently, Jerusalem's Ministry of Environmental Protection director warned Israeli officials about criminal responsibility for failure to address this growing problem. Only then were various treatment options suggested, including piping it from its origin through Abu Dis and Eizariya to the Og Reservoir facility to be expanded with added capacity. However, PA opposition over the "geopolitical situation" suspended the plan. Jerusalem's District Planning and Building Committee scheduled discussion of alternative options, but nothing so far has materialized.

Despite inadequate solutions, Jerusalem's population growth exacerbates the problem. For example, residents moved into the Pisgat Ze'ev settlement before a treatment facility was completed - in violation of by-law provisions that Jerusalem's District Planning and Building Committee chose to ignore, either there or in other settlements.

Wastewater from Palestinian Communities

Only 20% of Palestinian homes are connected to sewage systems. Yet they're outdated, often leak, can't handle the volume, and thus spill into cesspits along with effluent from the other 80% of Palestinians. As a result, groundwater gets seriously contaminated because 90 - 95% of Palestinian sewage isn't treated at all, and only one treatment plant for it is functioning.

Israeli neglect is the problem. In the early 1970s, it built four treatment facilities - in Jenin, Tulkarm, Hebron and Ramallah, but their effectiveness has been "minimal to poor" and three of them no longer function. The one Ramallah operating one is small with inadequate capacity to handle the city's wastewater. As a result, it's barely treated.

The 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim (West Bank and Gaza) Agreement stipulated that both sides cooperate on taking "all necessary measures" to prevent water pollution or contamination. An Israeli-Palestinian Joint Water committee (JWC) was established with unanimity required for all decisions. Yet no dispute resolution mechanism exists so Israel can unilaterally approve or reject all water and wastewater treatment requests and it does. As a result, new facilities haven't been built despite an urgent need for them.

Besides adequate funding, approval procedures are prolonged and complicated because of environmental and other considerations. In addition, Israel's approval is needed, and a large land area (away from residential neighborhoods) is required for an initial facility with plenty of room for expansion.

Years elapse with no resolution, so today the Palestinian Water Authority says Israel is currently delaying or obstructing 140 water and wastewater projects. For example:

-- in 1996, a Tulkarm plan was submitted; yet it took until 2006 before the JWC agreed on an Area C location - under Israeli control on matters relating to land, planning and building; in December 2008, the Civil Administration's International Organizations Desk chief recommended that "establishment of the facility in Area A (under Palestinian control) be examined, and that care be taken that it does not extend into Area C;" the project is now in jeopardy;

-- in 1997, the JWC received a West Nablus plan; the Civil Administration twice demanded a location change, and it took until May 2008 for construction permits to be issued, yet nothing so far has proceeded; another East Nablus proposal was cancelled because of delays in obtaining approval; and

-- in 1999, a West Ramallah proposal was submitted to the JWC; it was approved, but the Civil Administration demanded a location change because it was close to the Separation Wall's planned route; a final plan has yet to be introduced for approval.

From 1996 - 1999, Israel required Palestinian facilities to treat settlements' wastewater, way beyond their proposed capacity and something the PA won't do because it would grant legitimacy to the settlements in violation of international law.

Israel creates other obstacles as well. In 2002, the Civil Administration required a proposed Hebron plant to meet advanced treatment standards, not demanded for settlement facilities or in Israel until 2005 under a plan for gradual implementation through 2015 because of the cost involved.

Israeli policy exploits the situation to its advantage. It treats some Palestinian wastewater flowing into Israel but charges the PA for doing it. Also ignored is a proper Palestinian water treatment solution and the contamination that results.

Consequences of Neglecting Wastewater Treatment in the West Bank

Settlers rely on Israel's water supply system with no problems. Palestinians, however, suffer from pollution and a shortage of safe drinking water. Also, using wastewater for irrigation contaminates crops and endangers human health. Over time, land fertility is also diminished.

A 2002 UN Environmental Program report showed that raw sewage polluted West Bank Palestinian water sources. A 1998 Al-Quds University study of the Jordan Valley, Nablus, Jenin and Tulkarm found one-third of samples with higher than WHO recommended nitrate levels. A 1999 Bethlehem University investigation showed over 99% of 400 spring water samples with high concentrations of coliform bacteria requiring removal before use. Later studies revealed similar problems - exacerbated because most settlements are on ridges and hilltops so their wastewater flows down to nearby Palestinian communities. The problem is extremely serious.

Three years ago it was exacerbated when the Elon Moreh settlement facility broke down causing wastewater to flow toward nearby Palestinian villages. Elon Moreh processed very toxic effluent from leather and meat-processing plants - containing extremely high acidity levels able to cause burns on contact. Lab analysis confirmed "a grave sanitation risk to humans and animals (likely to) cause loss of life (and an) environmental and health disaster."

The wastewater destroyed crops and olive trees for up to 30 meters on either side of its channel. Azmut farmers couldn't sell their contaminated crops, and a severe mosquito problem and powerful stench caused allergies, dizziness and headaches among nearby village residents. A woman called life their "terrible...as if we're living in a swamp. We can't even eat our food."

Other villages were also affected the same way. In 2008, B'Tselem demanded that action be taken to stop this. Only then did the Municipal Environmental Association of Samaria take any remediation measures that diminished but didn't eliminate the problem.

Similar conditions exist throughout West Bank areas, exacerbated by growing settler populations and scant attention to Palestinian needs and welfare. Ariel is one of the largest settlements, yet its facility experiences frequent breakdowns. In 2006, the Ministry of Health reported that it was non-functional, and in 2008, the Civil Administration's environmental protection officer told B'Tselem that the "facility can't handle the load."

It stopped operating the same year, and ever since, raw sewage has flowed into the Shilo stream, a tributary of the Yarkon River, then southwest toward the town of Salfit and west to Brukin and Kafr a-Dik villages. Despite its best efforts, Salfit Local Council member, Dr. Bassam Madi, said infectious diseases occur as well as damaged crops, livestock, and the virtual extinction of deer, rabbits and foxes once common to the area. Natural vegetation like hyssop also disappeared.

Until 2004, the Ministry of Environmental Protection turned a blind eye to the situation. It then merely warned of a Water Law violation. Enforcement measures were frozen after agreement was reached to build a collection pipeline to move Ariel's wastewater to the Dan Bloc Wastewater Treatment Plant in Israel. Its estimated completion date is 2011, but so far no financing has been arranged, and the pipeline's planner said the project "would take years" once final approval is gotten.

Wadi Fukin village is gravely harmed by Betar Illit settlement wastewater. About 20 meters above its fields, the Housing Ministry built a facility that directs effluent to the Soreq treatment site. Frequent breakdowns occur because a growing settlement population overtaxes the facility causing spillage into Wadi Fukin fields, including ones near the village center that produce a severe stench.

A Bethlehem University study showed that test samples from nine adjacent springs contained coliform bacteria concentrations and high nitrate levels. It concluded that the water was unfit to drink. Betar Illit settlement assumes no responsibility for the problem, and until mid-2008, did nothing minimally to address it. It remains a major problem

Israeli Breaches of International Law

Israel is a serial offender, including repeated violations of its obligations as an occupying power. Its failure to address wastewater issues is one of many examples, and B'Tselem puts it this way:

"Neglect in treating wastewater in the West Bank infringes the rights of Palestinians to (clean) water and sanitation and their right to gain a livelihood from their agricultural crops."

Fourth Geneva's Article 56 requires an occupier to "ensur(e) and (maintain), with the cooperation of national and local authorities....public and hygiene in the occupied territory, with particular reference to the adoption and application of the prophylactic and preventive measures necessary to combat the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics."

Israel is obligated to assure safe water sources to ensure "public order and safety" and protect the population from harm. The High Court of Justice interprets this to mean a duty to take "all means necessary to ensure growth, change and development (and do what's essential through) investments and carrying out long-term plans for the benefit of the local population (even if they remain in place) after the military government ends." The Court also held that this duty "applies to the varied living requirements of the inhabitants, including medical needs, sanitation....and other needs that people require in modern society."

In 1966 for the first time, the UN's Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) defined clean drinking water as a right, given that it's essential to life, health and well-being. So do other UN Conventions, including the 1981 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In 2006, the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion of Human Rights adopted CESCR recommendations for safe drinking water and sanitation. They require nations to prevent water pollution and assure that all persons have the "right to access adequate and safe sanitation that protects public health and the environment." UNICEF also calls access a "basic human right" to assure health and human dignity. The UN 2000 Millennium Declaration affirmed a goal of halving by 2015 the world population without these fundamental essentials, and a UN Human Rights Council 2008 resolution, among others, included the same declaration.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Of the West Bank's 2.8 million Palestinians, wastewater for over two million of them goes untreated, the result of Israel's willful neglect in violation of international humanitarian law and its obligation as an occupier. As a result, the Nature and Parks authority warns that "sooner or later, critical damage will be caused to Israeli and Palestinian water sources."

The Palestinian Applied Research Institute Jerusalem calls neglect "a grave environmental threat," and a UN Environmental Program delegation said "urgent action" is needed to address the problem. Israel remains unresponsive to a worrisome situation, and its growing settlement population exacerbates it.

It's essential for a joint Israeli - Palestinian initiative to address it responsibly, but Israel must take the lead. B'Tselem puts it this way:

So long as Israel is an occupying power and its "settlements remain, all their wastewater (and that of Palestinians) must be treated in accordance with treatment standards (applied) inside Israel, and the law must (strictly) be enforced against polluting settlements." In cooperation with each other, remediation projects must be undertaken to serve both sides, and "ultimately....Palestinians, if the settlements are evacuated," as international law so states.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on Republic Broadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening and are accessible through Global Research.ca.
Read more