(read this book)
"A human is a human because of other humans"
- Bantu dictum
"He who will hold another down in the mud must stay in the mud to keep him down"
- Igbo proverd
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
It is right it should be so'
Men was made for Joy and Woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro the world we safely go.
Joy and Woe are woven fine,
A clothing for the soul divine.
- William Blake
(image: from the Book of Job, Blake's work)
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
China put one of its best-known dissidents on trial Wednesday for his role in creating a political manifesto.
December 23, 2009
NPR.com
With police, journalists and diplomats gathered outside a Beijing courthouse, a few demonstrators showed up to show support for Liu Xiaobo, or seek media attention for their own grievances. Inside, Liu pleaded not guilty to the charges of "incitement to subvert state power." The court said Liu had committed "serious crimes." His lawyers and relatives take this to mean that Liu could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison. More than 10,000 people signed the Charter 08, a liberal political manifesto calling for human rights and democracy. Many signers were questioned by police, but Liu was the only one to be arrested so far.
Liu spent 20 months in jail for his role in the 1989 pro-democracy protests, although he was never charged with a crime. He spent 1996-1999 in a labor camp for some of the hundreds of political essays he has written in the past 20 years. His wife, Liu Xia, said that given his long history of activism, she had worried that authorities could easily paint her husband as a ringleader of the Charter 08 movement. "I told him that if they arrest anyone first, it will be you," she said in an interview. "If they search anyone's home it'll be ours, and if anyone goes to jail to visit you, it'll be me. I said I'm so sick of passing the days that way. He said, 'OK, I'll only sign the charter.' " The charter does what Chinese intellectuals often do. It looks at China's modern history and examines why, over the past century, successive governments, from republicans to nationalists to communists, have failed to deliver a modern and democratic state.
Most of the charter was written by Zhang Zuhua, a former communist youth league official. He says that both Chinese liberals and conservatives agree on the need for political reform. "The questions is: Given China's specific conditions, how do we achieve what we call universal values?" Zhang said, speaking from his home, where police keep him under surveillance. "In the past two or three decades, nobody has addressed this question very systematically." In China, leftists are considered conservatives and it's the rightists who are liberals — the opposite of how it is in the United States. Charter 08 specifically reflects the views of China's liberals or rightists, and its prescriptions would sound familiar to Americans: separation of powers, federalism, and competitive elections at all levels of government.
Liu Xiaobo's former lawyer Mo Shaoping, who also signed the charter, says all this is just part of a normal debate about forms of government. "From a legal viewpoint, federalism or a unitary state are just different ways to organize a country," he says. "They have absolutely nothing to do with overthrowing the state. "Police discouraged Mo from representing Liu this time because he had also signed the charter. Mo delegated Liu's defense to another lawyer at his firm. Charter 08 has its critics, particularly on the political left. Among them is Zhang Hongliang, an economist at the Central Institute of Nationalities in Beijing. He believes that the charter's drafters are just elitists who only want the kind of democracy that they can control and profit from.
"Charter 08 calls for freedom of the press and the right to organize political parties. Leftists support this. But if we had freedom of the press now, China's media would be completely dominated by rich people and foreigners." Zhang advocates a return to the more egalitarian days of Mao Zedong's rule. Chinese authorities have silenced critics on both the left and the right. Zhang Zuhua says China's government just does not welcome citizens' prescriptions for political reform.
"The government has always seen people who bring up these political topics and hold different views as hostile forces," he remarks. "It reacts with a very outdated political logic, no matter how moderate or rational or constructive your views may be." For now, debate about Charter 08 is mostly limited to intellectual circles, since authorities have censored any mention of it from the media and the Internet. In an interview last year, Liu Xiaobo said this is why the plight of China's dissidents remains largely unknown.
"Things that are not exposed in the domestic media cannot generate the pressure of public opinion. "Dissidents can only rely on pressure from foreign governments, media and NGOs." China has rejected recent calls by the U.S. and European Union for Liu's release. A verdict in his case is expected at a time when many foreigners' attentions will be elsewhere: Christmas Day.
NPR.com
With police, journalists and diplomats gathered outside a Beijing courthouse, a few demonstrators showed up to show support for Liu Xiaobo, or seek media attention for their own grievances. Inside, Liu pleaded not guilty to the charges of "incitement to subvert state power." The court said Liu had committed "serious crimes." His lawyers and relatives take this to mean that Liu could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison. More than 10,000 people signed the Charter 08, a liberal political manifesto calling for human rights and democracy. Many signers were questioned by police, but Liu was the only one to be arrested so far.
Liu spent 20 months in jail for his role in the 1989 pro-democracy protests, although he was never charged with a crime. He spent 1996-1999 in a labor camp for some of the hundreds of political essays he has written in the past 20 years. His wife, Liu Xia, said that given his long history of activism, she had worried that authorities could easily paint her husband as a ringleader of the Charter 08 movement. "I told him that if they arrest anyone first, it will be you," she said in an interview. "If they search anyone's home it'll be ours, and if anyone goes to jail to visit you, it'll be me. I said I'm so sick of passing the days that way. He said, 'OK, I'll only sign the charter.' " The charter does what Chinese intellectuals often do. It looks at China's modern history and examines why, over the past century, successive governments, from republicans to nationalists to communists, have failed to deliver a modern and democratic state.
Most of the charter was written by Zhang Zuhua, a former communist youth league official. He says that both Chinese liberals and conservatives agree on the need for political reform. "The questions is: Given China's specific conditions, how do we achieve what we call universal values?" Zhang said, speaking from his home, where police keep him under surveillance. "In the past two or three decades, nobody has addressed this question very systematically." In China, leftists are considered conservatives and it's the rightists who are liberals — the opposite of how it is in the United States. Charter 08 specifically reflects the views of China's liberals or rightists, and its prescriptions would sound familiar to Americans: separation of powers, federalism, and competitive elections at all levels of government.
Liu Xiaobo's former lawyer Mo Shaoping, who also signed the charter, says all this is just part of a normal debate about forms of government. "From a legal viewpoint, federalism or a unitary state are just different ways to organize a country," he says. "They have absolutely nothing to do with overthrowing the state. "Police discouraged Mo from representing Liu this time because he had also signed the charter. Mo delegated Liu's defense to another lawyer at his firm. Charter 08 has its critics, particularly on the political left. Among them is Zhang Hongliang, an economist at the Central Institute of Nationalities in Beijing. He believes that the charter's drafters are just elitists who only want the kind of democracy that they can control and profit from.
"Charter 08 calls for freedom of the press and the right to organize political parties. Leftists support this. But if we had freedom of the press now, China's media would be completely dominated by rich people and foreigners." Zhang advocates a return to the more egalitarian days of Mao Zedong's rule. Chinese authorities have silenced critics on both the left and the right. Zhang Zuhua says China's government just does not welcome citizens' prescriptions for political reform.
"The government has always seen people who bring up these political topics and hold different views as hostile forces," he remarks. "It reacts with a very outdated political logic, no matter how moderate or rational or constructive your views may be." For now, debate about Charter 08 is mostly limited to intellectual circles, since authorities have censored any mention of it from the media and the Internet. In an interview last year, Liu Xiaobo said this is why the plight of China's dissidents remains largely unknown.
"Things that are not exposed in the domestic media cannot generate the pressure of public opinion. "Dissidents can only rely on pressure from foreign governments, media and NGOs." China has rejected recent calls by the U.S. and European Union for Liu's release. A verdict in his case is expected at a time when many foreigners' attentions will be elsewhere: Christmas Day.
Police, protesters clash in southern Iran
(A.P.)
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI (AP) – 4 hours ago
TEHRAN, Iran — Security forces and hard-line militiamen assaulted opposition protesters, beating men and women and firing tear gas, as thousands gathered in a central Iranian city for a memorial commemorating the country's most senior dissident cleric, who died this week. The government's crackdown showed signs of moving for the first time against clerics who support the opposition: Basij militiamen surrounded the house and office of two prominent religious figures, shouting slogans and breaking windows, opposition Web sites reported. The death on Sunday of the 87-year-old Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, a sharp critic of Iran's leaders, gave a new push to opposition protests, which have endured despite a heavy security crackdown since disputed presidential elections in June.
His memorials have brought out not only the young, urban activists who filled the ranks of earlier protests, but also older, more religious Iranians who revered Montazeri on grounds of faith as much as politics. Tens of thousands marched in his funeral procession in the holy city of Qom on Monday, many chanting slogans against the government. Wednesday's violence erupted when thousands tried to gather for a memorial to Montazeri at a mosque in the central city of Isfahan, 200 miles (325 kilometers) south of Tehran. They were met by a large force of riot police and Basijis, which stormed the crowds to disperse them, according to a witness and opposition Web sites. Farid Salavati, an Isfahan resident who tried to attend the memorial, said baton-wielding riot police clubbed people on the head and shoulders, and kicked men and women alike, injuring dozens.
"They didn't allow anybody to enter the mosque," Salavati told The Associated Press. "I saw at least two people with blood pouring down their face after being beaten by the Basijis." "Tens of thousands gathered outside for the memorial but were savagely attacked by security forces and the Basijis." He said sporadic clashes continued into the early afternoon, and the memorial at the Sayed Mosque was canceled.
More than 50 people were arrested in the Isfahan clashes, including pro-opposition cleric Masoud Adib, who was expected to address the gathering at the mosque, the Salaamnews and Parlemannews Web sites said. Parlemannews reported that Basijis beat people, including women, and used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse the crowds. The reports could not be independently confirmed. Iranian authorities have banned foreign media from covering protests. Security forces also surrounded the home of Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri, a senior reformist cleric who organized the memorial, several Web sites reported. "Treating people this way at a memorial service is deplorable," Taheri said in a statement. Later in the evening, his supporters forced their way through the cordon, scuffling with security forces, who eventually relented and moved from the area, Web sites reported.
Taheri was the chief Friday prayer leader in Isfahan until he resigned in 2002 in protest against the establishment, which he said was paralyzing the country in the name of religion to maintain its hold on power. Meanwhile, for the past two nights, plainclothes hard-liners, thought to be Basijis, surrounded the office in Qom of another prominent pro-reform cleric, Grand Ayatollah Youssef Saanei, shouting "insulting slogans," tearing up posters and breaking windows, Saanei's office said in a statement carried on opposition Web sites. In the postelection crisis, Saanei has emerged as one of the most prominent critics of Iran's clerical leadership among the country's grand ayatollahs, the highest rank in the Shiite religious hierarchy. He denounced the crackdown launched after the June election, which the opposition says President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won by massive vote fraud. Saanei and other reform clerics have been criticized by hard-liners in past months, but rarely have they come under direct harassment or pressure.
The leadership may be particularly nervous about the fallout from Montazeri's death because it came as Iran marks one of the most important periods on the Shiite religious calendar, the first 10 days of the Islamic month of Moharram, a time of mourning rituals for a revered Shiite saint. The period culminates on Sunday with Ashoura — a day that coincides with the seventh day after Montazeri's death, a traditional day of further commemorations. That could fuel greater protests.
Iran's police chief, Gen. Ismail Ahmadi Moghaddam, on Wednesday threatened tougher action against protesters and issued a warning against those in the opposition who he said "made a show of supporting" the Islamic Republic — an apparent reference to the many pro-reform political leaders and clerics who are veterans of the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought clerics to power. "Today, it has been proven to the people that they are moving in violation of (the Islamic Republic) and the law," he said, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency. "The hypocritical nature of this movement has become clear."
"We once again urge them to stop their actions, or else severe action will be taken against them under the law," he said.
Meanwhile, Ahmadinejad removed opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi from his official post as head of the Art Academy.
Mousavi, who the opposition says was the true winner of the election, is an architect who has long been prominent in the arts scene. Iranian state television announced Wednesday that Ahmadinejad appointed a new head. Salaamnews said Ahmadinejad broke off a tour of southern Iran Tuesday to attend the meeting that sacked Mousavi. There have been concerns Mousavi could be arrested and tried, along with hundreds of opposition supporters now on trial for taking part in the protests. Pro-reform lawmaker Darioush Ghanbari said it was a "politically motivated decision" by the government. "It shows they can't tolerate Mousavi even" as part of the academy.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI (AP) – 4 hours ago
TEHRAN, Iran — Security forces and hard-line militiamen assaulted opposition protesters, beating men and women and firing tear gas, as thousands gathered in a central Iranian city for a memorial commemorating the country's most senior dissident cleric, who died this week. The government's crackdown showed signs of moving for the first time against clerics who support the opposition: Basij militiamen surrounded the house and office of two prominent religious figures, shouting slogans and breaking windows, opposition Web sites reported. The death on Sunday of the 87-year-old Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, a sharp critic of Iran's leaders, gave a new push to opposition protests, which have endured despite a heavy security crackdown since disputed presidential elections in June.
His memorials have brought out not only the young, urban activists who filled the ranks of earlier protests, but also older, more religious Iranians who revered Montazeri on grounds of faith as much as politics. Tens of thousands marched in his funeral procession in the holy city of Qom on Monday, many chanting slogans against the government. Wednesday's violence erupted when thousands tried to gather for a memorial to Montazeri at a mosque in the central city of Isfahan, 200 miles (325 kilometers) south of Tehran. They were met by a large force of riot police and Basijis, which stormed the crowds to disperse them, according to a witness and opposition Web sites. Farid Salavati, an Isfahan resident who tried to attend the memorial, said baton-wielding riot police clubbed people on the head and shoulders, and kicked men and women alike, injuring dozens.
"They didn't allow anybody to enter the mosque," Salavati told The Associated Press. "I saw at least two people with blood pouring down their face after being beaten by the Basijis." "Tens of thousands gathered outside for the memorial but were savagely attacked by security forces and the Basijis." He said sporadic clashes continued into the early afternoon, and the memorial at the Sayed Mosque was canceled.
More than 50 people were arrested in the Isfahan clashes, including pro-opposition cleric Masoud Adib, who was expected to address the gathering at the mosque, the Salaamnews and Parlemannews Web sites said. Parlemannews reported that Basijis beat people, including women, and used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse the crowds. The reports could not be independently confirmed. Iranian authorities have banned foreign media from covering protests. Security forces also surrounded the home of Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri, a senior reformist cleric who organized the memorial, several Web sites reported. "Treating people this way at a memorial service is deplorable," Taheri said in a statement. Later in the evening, his supporters forced their way through the cordon, scuffling with security forces, who eventually relented and moved from the area, Web sites reported.
Taheri was the chief Friday prayer leader in Isfahan until he resigned in 2002 in protest against the establishment, which he said was paralyzing the country in the name of religion to maintain its hold on power. Meanwhile, for the past two nights, plainclothes hard-liners, thought to be Basijis, surrounded the office in Qom of another prominent pro-reform cleric, Grand Ayatollah Youssef Saanei, shouting "insulting slogans," tearing up posters and breaking windows, Saanei's office said in a statement carried on opposition Web sites. In the postelection crisis, Saanei has emerged as one of the most prominent critics of Iran's clerical leadership among the country's grand ayatollahs, the highest rank in the Shiite religious hierarchy. He denounced the crackdown launched after the June election, which the opposition says President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won by massive vote fraud. Saanei and other reform clerics have been criticized by hard-liners in past months, but rarely have they come under direct harassment or pressure.
The leadership may be particularly nervous about the fallout from Montazeri's death because it came as Iran marks one of the most important periods on the Shiite religious calendar, the first 10 days of the Islamic month of Moharram, a time of mourning rituals for a revered Shiite saint. The period culminates on Sunday with Ashoura — a day that coincides with the seventh day after Montazeri's death, a traditional day of further commemorations. That could fuel greater protests.
Iran's police chief, Gen. Ismail Ahmadi Moghaddam, on Wednesday threatened tougher action against protesters and issued a warning against those in the opposition who he said "made a show of supporting" the Islamic Republic — an apparent reference to the many pro-reform political leaders and clerics who are veterans of the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought clerics to power. "Today, it has been proven to the people that they are moving in violation of (the Islamic Republic) and the law," he said, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency. "The hypocritical nature of this movement has become clear."
"We once again urge them to stop their actions, or else severe action will be taken against them under the law," he said.
Meanwhile, Ahmadinejad removed opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi from his official post as head of the Art Academy.
Mousavi, who the opposition says was the true winner of the election, is an architect who has long been prominent in the arts scene. Iranian state television announced Wednesday that Ahmadinejad appointed a new head. Salaamnews said Ahmadinejad broke off a tour of southern Iran Tuesday to attend the meeting that sacked Mousavi. There have been concerns Mousavi could be arrested and tried, along with hundreds of opposition supporters now on trial for taking part in the protests. Pro-reform lawmaker Darioush Ghanbari said it was a "politically motivated decision" by the government. "It shows they can't tolerate Mousavi even" as part of the academy.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Edwin Legarda Commemoration Solidarity Appeal
"false positive"
colombiansolidarity.org.uk
Background
Edwin Legarda, the husband of Colombian indigenous leader Aida Quilcue, was killed on 16 December 2008 when the Colombian army ambushed his car in an attack seemingly meant for Aida. Soldiers fired 106 bullets at the vehicle, piercing it 17 times. President Uribe and army figures immediately claimed that Edwin had failed to stop at an army checkpoint, and for this reason the soldiers opened fire.
Investigators in the case have established that there was no checkpoint, and believe that the plan was to set up a ‘false positive’: plant firearms on the corpses of those travelling in the car and claim that Edwin and Aida were guerrillas. On her recent trip to the UK, at the invite of Unison Northern and the Northern TUC and in conjunction with the Colombia Solidarity Campaign, Aida said that if the army had managed to successfully carry out the false positive then the government would have been able to portray the indigenous movement and the Minga of Social and Communitarian Resistance (which Aida led in social mobilisations in October 2008) as ‘terrorist organisations’.
Seven soldiers are currently on trial for Edwin’s murder, and the court case is slowly progressing. The army has produced Edwin’s father as witnesses to claim that Aida was in fact responsible for making the call to the army giving information that a ‘guerrilla chief’ was carrying arms in the car, in what Aida calls “a perverse plan to implicate me in the murder of my own husband, and at the same time change the nature of the crime from a political assassination by the state, to a crime of passion”. The next hearing in the case is in January, when testimonies and evidence will begun to be heard.
Commemoration event
Aida and indigenous organisations from the South West of Colombia are planning an event to commemorate the anniversary of Edwin’s murder on December 16th this year. The event, which is expected to have the participation of 1500 indigenous community members as well as people from diverse social sectors, will be held in the area around Totoro municipality where Edwin was killed. The agenda will include a symbolic march on the road down which Edwin was driving, followed by interventions from indigenous and social leaders, a homage to Edwin, traditional indigenous rituals, and a report on the progress of the legal case.
Aida is requesting solidarity with the event from social organisations and individuals familiar with the case and the Colombian context. Organisations and individuals are requested to send messages of solidarity and support which can be read out in the event. Financial donations are also welcome to help with the event logistics.
Please send any correspondence to colombiasolidarity@riseup.net .
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
HaitiAction.net
Port au Prince, Haiti - HIP — Haitian activists in Port au Prince are accusing the Obama administration of turning a blind-eye to the political activities of alleged criminal bosses in Haiti while backing a ruling to exclude the widely popular Fanmi Lavalas party. The party of ousted president Jean-Bertrand Aristide, known as Fanmi Lavalas, was barred by current Haitian president Rene Preval's handpicked election council from participating in parliamentary elections scheduled for Feb. 2010.
The accusations made against the Obama administration by community leaders in Haiti stems from a recent meeting of the Front for National Reconstruction (FRN) held at the Hotel Olofson in downtown Port au Prince on Dec. 19. The FRN gathering of former paramilitary commanders who helped oust former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in a bloody takeover in 2004 was officiated by their party leader Guy Philippe. He was indicted on Nov. 22, 2005 for conspiring to import cocaine into the United States and money laundering. Lawyers contacted in Miami confirmed that the indictment is still open and that Philippe remains on a wanted list of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) of the United States.
Philippe escaped from a high-profile DEA raid that was supported by the Haitian government in July 2007. According to the Miami Herald, "The raid's failure angered Haitian President René Préval, who had to work hard to persuade his minister of justice to allow the U.S. agents to capture Philippe and other drug suspects on Haitian territory, according to well-informed U.S. and foreign officials who asked for anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record about the case."
The DEA raid was launched after Philippe revealed on a local Haitian radio station that Andre Apaid and members of his Group 184 had provided funding to paramilitary forces in the neighboring Dominican Republic to oust Aristide. The Group 184 led the opposition movement to Aristide and mounted an international public relations campaign seeking his resignation. Apaid and the Group 184 claimed that they were a peaceful civil society organization with no relationship to Philippe as his forces entered Haiti on a killing spree of Lavalas supporters in early Feb. 2004. During a broadcast on radio Signal FM, Philippe claimed that the Group 184 and business leaders that included Apaid had sent money to buy arms and provided logistical support to their invasion from the Dominican Republic. Apaid owns Alpha Industries that is one of the largest garment assembly factories in Haiti. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited one of Apaid's factories last April to tout his partnership with Canadian apparel giant Gildan Activewear as an example for economic development in Haiti.
A leader of one of the many community organizations affiliated with Aristide's Fanmi Lavalas and who spoke on condition of anonymity stated, "It's clear to us that Obama and Preval never really intended to arrest Philippe but only wanted to send him a message to shut his mouth. While Fanmi Lavalas has been barred from the next elections in 2010, Philippe's party has been accepted to run by Preval's election council. Now Philippe openly holds an FRN meeting in the capital...where's the DEA? He's right here if they really want him. Obama and Preval are hypocrites."
While Fanmi Lavalas, which is still recognized as Haiti's most popular political party is barred from participation in the upcoming parliamentary contest in Feb. 2010, Philippe's Front for National Reconstruction was approved to run in the elections by Preval's election council.
©2009 Haiti Information Project
The Haiti Information Project (HIP) is a non-profit alternative news service providing coverage and analysis of breaking developments in Haiti.
Winner of the CENSORED 2008 REAL NEWS AWARD for Outstanding Investigative Journalism
For further information about the Haiti Information Project (HIP) visit: http://www.teledyol.net/HIP/about.html
Contact: HIP@teledyol.net
Port au Prince, Haiti - HIP — Haitian activists in Port au Prince are accusing the Obama administration of turning a blind-eye to the political activities of alleged criminal bosses in Haiti while backing a ruling to exclude the widely popular Fanmi Lavalas party. The party of ousted president Jean-Bertrand Aristide, known as Fanmi Lavalas, was barred by current Haitian president Rene Preval's handpicked election council from participating in parliamentary elections scheduled for Feb. 2010.
The accusations made against the Obama administration by community leaders in Haiti stems from a recent meeting of the Front for National Reconstruction (FRN) held at the Hotel Olofson in downtown Port au Prince on Dec. 19. The FRN gathering of former paramilitary commanders who helped oust former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in a bloody takeover in 2004 was officiated by their party leader Guy Philippe. He was indicted on Nov. 22, 2005 for conspiring to import cocaine into the United States and money laundering. Lawyers contacted in Miami confirmed that the indictment is still open and that Philippe remains on a wanted list of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) of the United States.
Philippe escaped from a high-profile DEA raid that was supported by the Haitian government in July 2007. According to the Miami Herald, "The raid's failure angered Haitian President René Préval, who had to work hard to persuade his minister of justice to allow the U.S. agents to capture Philippe and other drug suspects on Haitian territory, according to well-informed U.S. and foreign officials who asked for anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record about the case."
The DEA raid was launched after Philippe revealed on a local Haitian radio station that Andre Apaid and members of his Group 184 had provided funding to paramilitary forces in the neighboring Dominican Republic to oust Aristide. The Group 184 led the opposition movement to Aristide and mounted an international public relations campaign seeking his resignation. Apaid and the Group 184 claimed that they were a peaceful civil society organization with no relationship to Philippe as his forces entered Haiti on a killing spree of Lavalas supporters in early Feb. 2004. During a broadcast on radio Signal FM, Philippe claimed that the Group 184 and business leaders that included Apaid had sent money to buy arms and provided logistical support to their invasion from the Dominican Republic. Apaid owns Alpha Industries that is one of the largest garment assembly factories in Haiti. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited one of Apaid's factories last April to tout his partnership with Canadian apparel giant Gildan Activewear as an example for economic development in Haiti.
A leader of one of the many community organizations affiliated with Aristide's Fanmi Lavalas and who spoke on condition of anonymity stated, "It's clear to us that Obama and Preval never really intended to arrest Philippe but only wanted to send him a message to shut his mouth. While Fanmi Lavalas has been barred from the next elections in 2010, Philippe's party has been accepted to run by Preval's election council. Now Philippe openly holds an FRN meeting in the capital...where's the DEA? He's right here if they really want him. Obama and Preval are hypocrites."
While Fanmi Lavalas, which is still recognized as Haiti's most popular political party is barred from participation in the upcoming parliamentary contest in Feb. 2010, Philippe's Front for National Reconstruction was approved to run in the elections by Preval's election council.
©2009 Haiti Information Project
The Haiti Information Project (HIP) is a non-profit alternative news service providing coverage and analysis of breaking developments in Haiti.
Winner of the CENSORED 2008 REAL NEWS AWARD for Outstanding Investigative Journalism
For further information about the Haiti Information Project (HIP) visit: http://www.teledyol.net/HIP/about.html
Contact: HIP@teledyol.net
Charter 08 --wiki--
Charter 08 (Chinese: 零八宪章; pinyin: Língbā Xiànzhāng) is a manifesto signed by over 303 Chinese intellectuals and human rights activists to promote political reform and democratization in the People's Republic of China.
“ This year is the 100th year of China's Constitution, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 30th anniversary of the birth of the Democracy Wall, and the 10th year since China signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. After experiencing a prolonged period of human rights disasters and a tortuous struggle and resistance, the awakening Chinese citizens are increasingly and more clearly recognizing that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal common values shared by all humankind, and that democracy, a republic, and constitutionalism constitute the basic structural framework of modern governance. A "modernization" bereft of these universal values and this basic political framework is a disastrous process that deprives humans of their rights, corrodes human nature, and destroys human dignity. Where will China head in the 21st century? Continue a "modernization" under this kind of authoritarian rule? Or recognize universal values, assimilate into the mainstream civilization, and build a democratic political system? This is a major decision that cannot be avoided.”
As a document of Chinese origin, it is unusual in calling for greater freedom of expression and for free elections. It was published on 10 December 2008, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and its name is a reference to Charter 77, issued by dissidents in Czechoslovakia. Since its release, more than 8,100 people inside and outside of China have signed the charter
Charter 08 (Chinese: 零八宪章; pinyin: Língbā Xiànzhāng) is a manifesto signed by over 303 Chinese intellectuals and human rights activists to promote political reform and democratization in the People's Republic of China.
“ This year is the 100th year of China's Constitution, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 30th anniversary of the birth of the Democracy Wall, and the 10th year since China signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. After experiencing a prolonged period of human rights disasters and a tortuous struggle and resistance, the awakening Chinese citizens are increasingly and more clearly recognizing that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal common values shared by all humankind, and that democracy, a republic, and constitutionalism constitute the basic structural framework of modern governance. A "modernization" bereft of these universal values and this basic political framework is a disastrous process that deprives humans of their rights, corrodes human nature, and destroys human dignity. Where will China head in the 21st century? Continue a "modernization" under this kind of authoritarian rule? Or recognize universal values, assimilate into the mainstream civilization, and build a democratic political system? This is a major decision that cannot be avoided.”
As a document of Chinese origin, it is unusual in calling for greater freedom of expression and for free elections. It was published on 10 December 2008, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and its name is a reference to Charter 77, issued by dissidents in Czechoslovakia. Since its release, more than 8,100 people inside and outside of China have signed the charter
Human Rights Watch.org News
Related Materials: China: Liu Xiaobo’s Release Hinges on International Action
The only purpose of this trial is to dress up naked political repression in the trappings of legal proceedings. Liu’s crimes are non-existent, yet his fate has been pre-determined. This is a travesty of justice.
Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director(New York) – By mounting a pre-determined political trial of China’s most prominent dissident, the Chinese government is violating the rights of Liu Xiaobo and showing contempt for its universal human rights commitments, Human Rights Watch said today.
Liu Xiaobo, a leading intellectual who spent nearly two years in prison after the Tiananmen crackdown, has been indicted for “incitement to subvert state power,” a charge frequently used against dissidents because it allows the criminalization of criticisms of the government and the party. Liu’s trial is due to open on the morning of December 23 in Beijing.
“The only purpose of this trial is to dress up naked political repression in the trappings of legal proceedings,” said Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “Liu’s crimes are non-existent, yet his fate has been pre-determined. This is a travesty of justice.”
Liu has been indicted for “incitement to subvert state power” for his contribution to the drafting of “Charter ‘08,” a political manifesto calling for human rights and the rule of law in China, as well as several articles he had published in previous years. He was arrested on December 8, 2008, and detained for over a year before being indicted. He faces up to 15 years in prison, the maximum under a single charge of “fixed-term imprisonment” under Chinese law.
Although Liu was promised an open trial, his wife Liu Xia was told by court officials this week that she would not be allowed to attend the trial. Several original co-signatories of Charter ‘08 who had earlier expressed their solidarity with Liu Xiaobo, as well as other supporters, have been warned by security agents that they should not attempt to attend the trial and placed under police surveillance.
“Liu Xiaobo’s case has been marked by grave rights violations from the outset,” said Richardson. “His arrest was political, the charges are political, and his trial is political.”
Human Rights Watch urged foreign governments to continue to press the Chinese government for Liu Xiaobo’s immediate release.
Background:
Liu, a prolific writer and pro-democracy essayist, has been detained, arrested, and sentenced repeatedly for his peaceful political activities since the late 1980s. Arguably China's most well-known dissident abroad, he has received several international human rights prizes.
After his detention in December 2008, a group of leading writers, China scholars, lawyers, and human rights advocates from around the world, including several Nobel Prize winners, released a letter urging for Liu's release to Chinese President Hu Jintao. On January 21, 2009, the appeal was echoed by a consortium of 300 international writers coordinated by PEN, including Salman Rushdie, Umberto Eco, Margaret Atwood, and Ha Jin.
In March 2009, Liu was awarded the Homo Homini prize, which was presented by President Václav Havel to several other signatories of Charter ‘08 representing Liu at a ceremony in Prague. Human Rights Watch, as well as Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and PEN have repeatedly called for his release, and recently asked President Obama to raise his case in his meeting with President Hu Jintao.
Related Materials: China: Liu Xiaobo’s Release Hinges on International Action
The only purpose of this trial is to dress up naked political repression in the trappings of legal proceedings. Liu’s crimes are non-existent, yet his fate has been pre-determined. This is a travesty of justice.
Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director(New York) – By mounting a pre-determined political trial of China’s most prominent dissident, the Chinese government is violating the rights of Liu Xiaobo and showing contempt for its universal human rights commitments, Human Rights Watch said today.
Liu Xiaobo, a leading intellectual who spent nearly two years in prison after the Tiananmen crackdown, has been indicted for “incitement to subvert state power,” a charge frequently used against dissidents because it allows the criminalization of criticisms of the government and the party. Liu’s trial is due to open on the morning of December 23 in Beijing.
“The only purpose of this trial is to dress up naked political repression in the trappings of legal proceedings,” said Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “Liu’s crimes are non-existent, yet his fate has been pre-determined. This is a travesty of justice.”
Liu has been indicted for “incitement to subvert state power” for his contribution to the drafting of “Charter ‘08,” a political manifesto calling for human rights and the rule of law in China, as well as several articles he had published in previous years. He was arrested on December 8, 2008, and detained for over a year before being indicted. He faces up to 15 years in prison, the maximum under a single charge of “fixed-term imprisonment” under Chinese law.
Although Liu was promised an open trial, his wife Liu Xia was told by court officials this week that she would not be allowed to attend the trial. Several original co-signatories of Charter ‘08 who had earlier expressed their solidarity with Liu Xiaobo, as well as other supporters, have been warned by security agents that they should not attempt to attend the trial and placed under police surveillance.
“Liu Xiaobo’s case has been marked by grave rights violations from the outset,” said Richardson. “His arrest was political, the charges are political, and his trial is political.”
Human Rights Watch urged foreign governments to continue to press the Chinese government for Liu Xiaobo’s immediate release.
Background:
Liu, a prolific writer and pro-democracy essayist, has been detained, arrested, and sentenced repeatedly for his peaceful political activities since the late 1980s. Arguably China's most well-known dissident abroad, he has received several international human rights prizes.
After his detention in December 2008, a group of leading writers, China scholars, lawyers, and human rights advocates from around the world, including several Nobel Prize winners, released a letter urging for Liu's release to Chinese President Hu Jintao. On January 21, 2009, the appeal was echoed by a consortium of 300 international writers coordinated by PEN, including Salman Rushdie, Umberto Eco, Margaret Atwood, and Ha Jin.
In March 2009, Liu was awarded the Homo Homini prize, which was presented by President Václav Havel to several other signatories of Charter ‘08 representing Liu at a ceremony in Prague. Human Rights Watch, as well as Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and PEN have repeatedly called for his release, and recently asked President Obama to raise his case in his meeting with President Hu Jintao.
Serbian atrocities during Bosnian War haunt the recent attempt of the Serbian state to apply for E.U. membership.
Serbia submits EU membership application
(BBC.CO.UK)14:42 GMT, Tuesday, 22 December 2009
The Srebrenica Massacre --wiki--(1995)
The Srebrenica Massacre, also known as the Srebrenica Genocide, refers to the July 1995 killing of more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys, as well as the ethnic cleansing of 25,000-30,000 refugees in the area of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, by units of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) under the command of General Ratko Mladić during the Bosnian War. In addition to the VRS, a paramilitary unit from Serbia known as the Scorpions, that officially operated as part of the Serbian Interior Ministry until 1991, also participated in the massacre. The United Nations had declared Srebrenica a UN-protected "safe area" but that did not prevent the massacre, even though 400 armed Dutch peacekeepers were present at the time.
The Srebrenica massacre is the largest mass murder in Europe since World War II. In 2004, in a unanimous ruling on the "Prosecutor v. Krstić" case, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) located in The Hague ruled that the Srebrenica massacre was genocide, the Presiding Judge Theodor Meron stating:
"By seeking to eliminate a part of the Bosnian Muslims, the Bosnian Serb forces committed genocide. They targeted for extinction the 40,000 Bosnian Muslims living in Srebrenica, a group which was emblematic of the Bosnian Muslims in general. They stripped all the male Muslim prisoners, military and civilian, elderly and young, of their personal belongings and identification, and deliberately and methodically killed them solely on the basis of their identity."
The Siege of Sarajevo --wiki-- (1992-1996)
The Siege of Sarajevo is the longest siege of a capital city in the history of modern warfare. Serb forces of the self-proclaimed Republika Srpska and the Yugoslav People's Army (later to become the Army of Serbia and Montenegro) besieged Sarajevo, the capital city of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from April 5, 1992 to February 29, 1996 during the Bosnian War.
After Bosnia and Herzegovina had declared independence from Yugoslavia, the Serbs, whose strategic goal was to create a new Serbian State of Republika Srpska (RS) that would include part of the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, encircled Sarajevo with a siege force of 18,000 stationed in the surrounding hills, from which they assaulted the city with weapons that included artillery, mortars, tanks, anti-aircraft guns, heavy machine-guns, multiple rocket launchers, rocket-launched aircraft bombs, and sniper rifles. From May 2, 1992, the Serbs blockaded the city. The Bosnian government defence forces numbering roughly 40.000 inside the besieged city were poorly equipped and unable to break the siege.
It is estimated that nearly 10,000 people were killed or went missing in the city, including over 1,500 children. An additional 56,000 people were wounded, including nearly 15,000 children. By 1995, killings and forced migration had reduced the city’s population to 334,663 - 64% of its prewar size.
Serbia submits EU membership application
(BBC.CO.UK)14:42 GMT, Tuesday, 22 December 2009
The Srebrenica Massacre --wiki--(1995)
The Srebrenica Massacre, also known as the Srebrenica Genocide, refers to the July 1995 killing of more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys, as well as the ethnic cleansing of 25,000-30,000 refugees in the area of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, by units of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) under the command of General Ratko Mladić during the Bosnian War. In addition to the VRS, a paramilitary unit from Serbia known as the Scorpions, that officially operated as part of the Serbian Interior Ministry until 1991, also participated in the massacre. The United Nations had declared Srebrenica a UN-protected "safe area" but that did not prevent the massacre, even though 400 armed Dutch peacekeepers were present at the time.
The Srebrenica massacre is the largest mass murder in Europe since World War II. In 2004, in a unanimous ruling on the "Prosecutor v. Krstić" case, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) located in The Hague ruled that the Srebrenica massacre was genocide, the Presiding Judge Theodor Meron stating:
"By seeking to eliminate a part of the Bosnian Muslims, the Bosnian Serb forces committed genocide. They targeted for extinction the 40,000 Bosnian Muslims living in Srebrenica, a group which was emblematic of the Bosnian Muslims in general. They stripped all the male Muslim prisoners, military and civilian, elderly and young, of their personal belongings and identification, and deliberately and methodically killed them solely on the basis of their identity."
The Siege of Sarajevo --wiki-- (1992-1996)
The Siege of Sarajevo is the longest siege of a capital city in the history of modern warfare. Serb forces of the self-proclaimed Republika Srpska and the Yugoslav People's Army (later to become the Army of Serbia and Montenegro) besieged Sarajevo, the capital city of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from April 5, 1992 to February 29, 1996 during the Bosnian War.
After Bosnia and Herzegovina had declared independence from Yugoslavia, the Serbs, whose strategic goal was to create a new Serbian State of Republika Srpska (RS) that would include part of the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, encircled Sarajevo with a siege force of 18,000 stationed in the surrounding hills, from which they assaulted the city with weapons that included artillery, mortars, tanks, anti-aircraft guns, heavy machine-guns, multiple rocket launchers, rocket-launched aircraft bombs, and sniper rifles. From May 2, 1992, the Serbs blockaded the city. The Bosnian government defence forces numbering roughly 40.000 inside the besieged city were poorly equipped and unable to break the siege.
It is estimated that nearly 10,000 people were killed or went missing in the city, including over 1,500 children. An additional 56,000 people were wounded, including nearly 15,000 children. By 1995, killings and forced migration had reduced the city’s population to 334,663 - 64% of its prewar size.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Yemen and Civil War
courtesy of the BBC.CO.UK
The reputed home of the Queen of Sheba, Yemen has been at the crossroads of Africa, the Middle East and Asia for thousands of years thanks to its position on the ancient spice routes. The Romans knew this fertile and wealthy country as Arabia Felix, in contrast to the relatively barren Arabia Deserta to the north. And today it maintains its distinct character.
Overview
The modern Republic of Yemen was born in 1990 when traditionalist North Yemen and Marxist South Yemen merged after years of border wars and skirmishes. But the peace broke down in 1994 and a short civil war ended in defeat for separatist southerners and the survival of the unified Yemen.
Politics: President Ali Abdallah Saleh has been in power since 1978. Shia rebels led by Abdul-Malik al-Houthi have been conducting a low-level insurgency in the north
Economy: Yemen is the poorest country in the Middle East; economic difficulties have sparked unrest
International: Yemen has been co-operating in the US-led "war on terror", risking domestic resentment
Timeline
Since unification Yemen has been modernising and opening up to the world, but it still maintains much of its tribal character and old ways. Tensions persist between the north and the south; some southerners say the northern part of the state is economically privileged.
Since the summer of 2009, hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands displaced by clashes between government troops and north-western rebels belonging to the Zaidi sect, a branch of Shia Islam in the mainly Sunni country. The conflict has acquired a regional dimension, with the Yemeni authorities accusing Iran of backing the rebels, while the rebels accuse Saudi Arabia of supporting the Yemeni government.
courtesy of the BBC.CO.UK
The reputed home of the Queen of Sheba, Yemen has been at the crossroads of Africa, the Middle East and Asia for thousands of years thanks to its position on the ancient spice routes. The Romans knew this fertile and wealthy country as Arabia Felix, in contrast to the relatively barren Arabia Deserta to the north. And today it maintains its distinct character.
Overview
The modern Republic of Yemen was born in 1990 when traditionalist North Yemen and Marxist South Yemen merged after years of border wars and skirmishes. But the peace broke down in 1994 and a short civil war ended in defeat for separatist southerners and the survival of the unified Yemen.
Politics: President Ali Abdallah Saleh has been in power since 1978. Shia rebels led by Abdul-Malik al-Houthi have been conducting a low-level insurgency in the north
Economy: Yemen is the poorest country in the Middle East; economic difficulties have sparked unrest
International: Yemen has been co-operating in the US-led "war on terror", risking domestic resentment
Timeline
Since unification Yemen has been modernising and opening up to the world, but it still maintains much of its tribal character and old ways. Tensions persist between the north and the south; some southerners say the northern part of the state is economically privileged.
Since the summer of 2009, hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands displaced by clashes between government troops and north-western rebels belonging to the Zaidi sect, a branch of Shia Islam in the mainly Sunni country. The conflict has acquired a regional dimension, with the Yemeni authorities accusing Iran of backing the rebels, while the rebels accuse Saudi Arabia of supporting the Yemeni government.
TV talent show exposes China's race issueBy Emily Chang, CNN
December 21, 2009 -- Updated 2036 GMT (0436 HKT)
CNN.COM
Shanghai, China (CNN) -- It all started with the lure of the glitz, the glamour and the dream of being China's next pop star. But, as with many reality shows, Lou Jing's instant fame came with unanticipated consequences.
Lou Jing was born 20 years ago in Shanghai to a Chinese mother and an African-American father. According to her mother, who asked not to be identified in this report, she met Lou's father while she was still in college. He left China before their daughter was born.
Growing up with a single mom in central Shanghai, Lou Jing said she had good friends and lived a normal life. "When I was young, I didn't feel any different," she said.
But as soon as she stepped into the national spotlight on a Chinese reality television show called "Go! Oriental Angel," Lou Jing became a national sensation -- not necessarily because of her talent, but how she looked.
"After the contest started, I often got more attention than the other girls. It made me feel strange," Lou said.
The reality show hosts fondly called her "chocolate girl" and "black pearl." The Chinese media fixated on her skin color. Netizens flooded Web sites with comments saying she "never should have been born" and telling her to "get out of China."
Lou Jing's background became fodder for national gossip, sparking a vitriolic debate about race across a country that, in many respects, can be quite homogenous. There are 56 different recognized ethnic groups in China, but more than 90 percent of the population is Han Chinese. So people who look different stand out.
"We lived in a small circle before," said her mother. "But after Lou was seen nationwide, some Chinese people couldn't accept her."
It has been a shocking ordeal for someone who says she always considered herself just like every other Chinese girl.
Video: Being Chinese and black "Sometimes people on the street would ask me, 'Why do you speak Chinese so well?' I'd just say, 'Because I'm Chinese!'" Lou said.
But, as any curious child would, Lou Jing certainly thought about why she looked different. In a clip reel aired on the show, her classmates say they tried to protect her from feeling out of place.
"She used to wonder why she had black skin," said one classmate. "We thought about this question together and decided to tell her it's because she likes dark chocolate. So her skin turned darker gradually."
Another classmate weighed in, "We said it's because she used to drink too much soy sauce."
Even Lou Jing's maternal grandmother admitted in a taped interview, "I told Lou Jing she was black because her mom was not very well and had to take Chinese medicine."
But such explanations were not enough for a voracious Chinese public. Show producers convinced Lou Jing's mom to appear on-air and asked her to address the many unanswered questions.
"Lou Jing did not ask about her father until she was sixteen years old," her mother told the audience. "She said, 'Where is my dad?' I didn't answer, I just cried and Lou Jing never asked me this question again."
On stage this time, it was Lou Jing who wept as she held an arm tightly around her mother, gripping the microphone in the other. The camera zoomed in on audience members tearing up as well.
"Lou Jing would cook dinner for me before I got home," her mother said. "I was quite sad then. In other families a girl her age would have a mom and a dad who loved her."
Although her father has been absent, Lou seemed to be curious about learning more. On the reality show, the host inquired, "Lou Jing, have you ever thought about going to find your dad, to get to know him?"
Lou Jing pauses for a moment and softly responds, "Yes, I have thought about that before."
In this way, the most private aspects of Lou Jing's otherwise quiet life became painfully public. But as the show went on, so did Lou Jing. She stuck with her daily routine, listening to Beyonce, her favorite artist, hanging out with her friends and continuing to go to school.
"I was so angry," said her drama teacher, Tao Yandong, of the Shanghai Drama Academy's School for the Television Arts. "My student had been insulted by others so of course I felt bad, too. But she told me she was fine and wasn't letting these things hurt her heart."
Watching Lou Jing laugh and gossip with her Chinese classmates today, this appears to be true. Back in her modest two-bedroom apartment, it is hard to imagine that Lou Jing and her mother are subjects of national scrutiny.
Instead, they are focused on her future. Her career goals are many, spanning from hosting a television show to becoming a diplomat "to bring people together," she said.
As a college junior, Lou Jing is thinking about graduate school applications, hoping to pursue a master's degree in foreign policy in New York City after she graduates from college.
When asked what she will do without her mother, Lou excitedly said, "My mom is going to come with me!"
Her mom shakes her head and smiles. If anything, their enduring bond as mother and daughter only seems to have gotten stronger. After all, for all their critics, there were just as many supporters.
Until the end of her run on "Go! Oriental Angel," fans continued to vote for Lou Jing show after show. The judges praised her confidence. Lou Jing was eventually eliminated before the finale, but not without a powerful parting message.
"I think I'm the same as all the girls here, except for my skin color. We share the same stage and the same dream. I've tried my best, so no matter what happens, I'll hold onto my dream."
December 21, 2009 -- Updated 2036 GMT (0436 HKT)
CNN.COM
Shanghai, China (CNN) -- It all started with the lure of the glitz, the glamour and the dream of being China's next pop star. But, as with many reality shows, Lou Jing's instant fame came with unanticipated consequences.
Lou Jing was born 20 years ago in Shanghai to a Chinese mother and an African-American father. According to her mother, who asked not to be identified in this report, she met Lou's father while she was still in college. He left China before their daughter was born.
Growing up with a single mom in central Shanghai, Lou Jing said she had good friends and lived a normal life. "When I was young, I didn't feel any different," she said.
But as soon as she stepped into the national spotlight on a Chinese reality television show called "Go! Oriental Angel," Lou Jing became a national sensation -- not necessarily because of her talent, but how she looked.
"After the contest started, I often got more attention than the other girls. It made me feel strange," Lou said.
The reality show hosts fondly called her "chocolate girl" and "black pearl." The Chinese media fixated on her skin color. Netizens flooded Web sites with comments saying she "never should have been born" and telling her to "get out of China."
Lou Jing's background became fodder for national gossip, sparking a vitriolic debate about race across a country that, in many respects, can be quite homogenous. There are 56 different recognized ethnic groups in China, but more than 90 percent of the population is Han Chinese. So people who look different stand out.
"We lived in a small circle before," said her mother. "But after Lou was seen nationwide, some Chinese people couldn't accept her."
It has been a shocking ordeal for someone who says she always considered herself just like every other Chinese girl.
Video: Being Chinese and black "Sometimes people on the street would ask me, 'Why do you speak Chinese so well?' I'd just say, 'Because I'm Chinese!'" Lou said.
But, as any curious child would, Lou Jing certainly thought about why she looked different. In a clip reel aired on the show, her classmates say they tried to protect her from feeling out of place.
"She used to wonder why she had black skin," said one classmate. "We thought about this question together and decided to tell her it's because she likes dark chocolate. So her skin turned darker gradually."
Another classmate weighed in, "We said it's because she used to drink too much soy sauce."
Even Lou Jing's maternal grandmother admitted in a taped interview, "I told Lou Jing she was black because her mom was not very well and had to take Chinese medicine."
But such explanations were not enough for a voracious Chinese public. Show producers convinced Lou Jing's mom to appear on-air and asked her to address the many unanswered questions.
"Lou Jing did not ask about her father until she was sixteen years old," her mother told the audience. "She said, 'Where is my dad?' I didn't answer, I just cried and Lou Jing never asked me this question again."
On stage this time, it was Lou Jing who wept as she held an arm tightly around her mother, gripping the microphone in the other. The camera zoomed in on audience members tearing up as well.
"Lou Jing would cook dinner for me before I got home," her mother said. "I was quite sad then. In other families a girl her age would have a mom and a dad who loved her."
Although her father has been absent, Lou seemed to be curious about learning more. On the reality show, the host inquired, "Lou Jing, have you ever thought about going to find your dad, to get to know him?"
Lou Jing pauses for a moment and softly responds, "Yes, I have thought about that before."
In this way, the most private aspects of Lou Jing's otherwise quiet life became painfully public. But as the show went on, so did Lou Jing. She stuck with her daily routine, listening to Beyonce, her favorite artist, hanging out with her friends and continuing to go to school.
"I was so angry," said her drama teacher, Tao Yandong, of the Shanghai Drama Academy's School for the Television Arts. "My student had been insulted by others so of course I felt bad, too. But she told me she was fine and wasn't letting these things hurt her heart."
Watching Lou Jing laugh and gossip with her Chinese classmates today, this appears to be true. Back in her modest two-bedroom apartment, it is hard to imagine that Lou Jing and her mother are subjects of national scrutiny.
Instead, they are focused on her future. Her career goals are many, spanning from hosting a television show to becoming a diplomat "to bring people together," she said.
As a college junior, Lou Jing is thinking about graduate school applications, hoping to pursue a master's degree in foreign policy in New York City after she graduates from college.
When asked what she will do without her mother, Lou excitedly said, "My mom is going to come with me!"
Her mom shakes her head and smiles. If anything, their enduring bond as mother and daughter only seems to have gotten stronger. After all, for all their critics, there were just as many supporters.
Until the end of her run on "Go! Oriental Angel," fans continued to vote for Lou Jing show after show. The judges praised her confidence. Lou Jing was eventually eliminated before the finale, but not without a powerful parting message.
"I think I'm the same as all the girls here, except for my skin color. We share the same stage and the same dream. I've tried my best, so no matter what happens, I'll hold onto my dream."
Mon Dec 21, 2009 12:07pm EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
U.S.
The latest statistics suggest that U.S. violent crime could drop for a third full year in a row, a steady decline despite the harsh economic recession that some policymakers and police groups had feared would lead to an upward spike.
The number of murders plummeted 10 percent compared to the same six-month period in 2008, while robbery fell 6.5 percent and forcible rape dropped 3.3 percent, according to preliminary statistics released by the FBI. Violent crime in all of 2008 fell 1.9 percent from 2007. But in some cities hit hard by the economy, like Baltimore and Detroit, the murder rate climbed. In Detroit, hurt by the auto industry's woes, there were 163 murders reported in the first six months of 2009 versus 146 during the same period in 2008.
But other cities where murder rates had been high, like New York and Los Angeles, saw a drop off. In New York, there was a drop from 252 murders in 2008 to 204 reported during the first half of 2009. The overall decline was not limited to violent crime. Property crimes dropped 6.1 percent during the first six months of 2009, with vehicle theft plummeting 18.7 percent and burglary falling 2.5 percent, the FBI statistics showed.
Reported cases of arson also fell during the first half of 2009, dropping 8.2 percent from the same period in 2008. The FBI report did not offer an explanation for the declining crime rates. Violent crime in all four regions of the country measured by the FBI fell. The only region that saw an uptick in property crimes was the southern United States, inching up 0.7 percent during the first half of 2009, the FBI said. There was also a small increase in violent crimes in cities with populations of 10,000 to 24,999, rising 1.7 percent.
(Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky, editing by Will Dunham)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
U.S.
The latest statistics suggest that U.S. violent crime could drop for a third full year in a row, a steady decline despite the harsh economic recession that some policymakers and police groups had feared would lead to an upward spike.
The number of murders plummeted 10 percent compared to the same six-month period in 2008, while robbery fell 6.5 percent and forcible rape dropped 3.3 percent, according to preliminary statistics released by the FBI. Violent crime in all of 2008 fell 1.9 percent from 2007. But in some cities hit hard by the economy, like Baltimore and Detroit, the murder rate climbed. In Detroit, hurt by the auto industry's woes, there were 163 murders reported in the first six months of 2009 versus 146 during the same period in 2008.
But other cities where murder rates had been high, like New York and Los Angeles, saw a drop off. In New York, there was a drop from 252 murders in 2008 to 204 reported during the first half of 2009. The overall decline was not limited to violent crime. Property crimes dropped 6.1 percent during the first six months of 2009, with vehicle theft plummeting 18.7 percent and burglary falling 2.5 percent, the FBI statistics showed.
Reported cases of arson also fell during the first half of 2009, dropping 8.2 percent from the same period in 2008. The FBI report did not offer an explanation for the declining crime rates. Violent crime in all four regions of the country measured by the FBI fell. The only region that saw an uptick in property crimes was the southern United States, inching up 0.7 percent during the first half of 2009, the FBI said. There was also a small increase in violent crimes in cities with populations of 10,000 to 24,999, rising 1.7 percent.
(Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky, editing by Will Dunham)
Blackwater in Colombia
14.12.2009 Source: english.pravda.ru
Blackwater in Colombia
By: Eva Golinger
In early 2008, the U.S. Army Missile Command and Space Defense awarded contracts in the amount of 15 billion dollars to a group of private contractors, including Blackwater. The contract, which includes intelligence operations, espionage and reconnaissance, among other things, faces two countries in Latin America, Mexico and Colombia.
Not surprisingly, came the revelation in Ecuador of Washington's role in the illegal invasion of Ecuadorian territory in March 2008. The participation of military and U.S. intelligence agents, then located at the military base of Manta, was initially suspected in the operation that killed persons in a FARC camp. Now an official report from Ecuador confirms this fact. It reaffirms further that where there are military bases used by the U.S. military, action be carried out by Washington - no matter what the rules, laws and regulations of the host country.
The controversial military agreement between Colombia and the United States, signed on Oct. 30, means the largest military expansion in Latin America by Washington. The agreement allows the presence of private contractors to service the needs of Washington agencies in Colombia, with all the same immunity granted to U.S. officials and military. This is not new. Under the agreement of Plan Colombia, Washington used by over 30 contractors for 10 years to perform military and intelligence work and espionage in Colombia. Some of them are the most powerful companies of the military industrial complex, such as DynCorp, Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, the Rendon Group, and Raytheon, among others.
Within the new military agreement, the amount of contractors - or mercenaries of war - will increase. The privatization of war and the use of private companies to perform security operations, defense and intelligence, is now the modus operandi of Washington. The Blackwater company is certainly more controversial, now known as Xe Services. During the past eight years, Blackwater has earned over 1.4 billion dollars in contracts from the State Department and Pentagon. Since 2005, Blackwater has also gotten semi-secret contracts with the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. for security and defense operations within the country, which have been seen as the beginning of the creation of a privatized state police to suppress and control a population that each day is in a more desperate economic situation.
In early 2008, the U.S. Army Missile Command and Space Defense awarded contracts in the amount of 15 billion dollars to a group of private contractors, including Blackwater. The contract, which includes intelligence operations, espionage and reconnaissance, among other things, involves two countries in Latin America, Mexico and Colombia. The contract specifically details the "air training provision" to the Colombian armed forces and "strategic PR support" to the Colombian government (read: psychological operations). In the case of Mexico, Blackwater is responsible for supporting the missions against drug trafficking.
Days ago, it was revealed that Blackwater was hired by the CIA to kill suspected insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Blackwater mercenaries were involved in some of the most sensitive and clandestine CIA operations, including transport of prisoners to secret CIA prisons. Former Blackwater mercenaries have indicated that their role in those clandestine operations was so routine that the division between the CIA, Pentagon and Blackwater no longer existed.
Now, this CIA front company and the Pentagon operate freely in Colombia. In the U.S., there are dozens of lawsuits and legal cases against Blackwater for violations of laws, arbitrary killings and human rights violations. However, Álvaro Uribe's government has opened the door for the presence of this dangerous enterprise in South America, which represents a great threat to peace and regional security.
The countries of ALBA and UNASUR members collectively should prohibit the presence of contractors - mercenaries of war in Latin America. But, there will be more death, conflicts, violations of sovereignty, and we expect there will ultimately be a war.
Translated from the Portuguese version by:
Lisa KARPOVA
PRAVDA.Ru
14.12.2009 Source: english.pravda.ru
Blackwater in Colombia
By: Eva Golinger
In early 2008, the U.S. Army Missile Command and Space Defense awarded contracts in the amount of 15 billion dollars to a group of private contractors, including Blackwater. The contract, which includes intelligence operations, espionage and reconnaissance, among other things, faces two countries in Latin America, Mexico and Colombia.
Not surprisingly, came the revelation in Ecuador of Washington's role in the illegal invasion of Ecuadorian territory in March 2008. The participation of military and U.S. intelligence agents, then located at the military base of Manta, was initially suspected in the operation that killed persons in a FARC camp. Now an official report from Ecuador confirms this fact. It reaffirms further that where there are military bases used by the U.S. military, action be carried out by Washington - no matter what the rules, laws and regulations of the host country.
The controversial military agreement between Colombia and the United States, signed on Oct. 30, means the largest military expansion in Latin America by Washington. The agreement allows the presence of private contractors to service the needs of Washington agencies in Colombia, with all the same immunity granted to U.S. officials and military. This is not new. Under the agreement of Plan Colombia, Washington used by over 30 contractors for 10 years to perform military and intelligence work and espionage in Colombia. Some of them are the most powerful companies of the military industrial complex, such as DynCorp, Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, the Rendon Group, and Raytheon, among others.
Within the new military agreement, the amount of contractors - or mercenaries of war - will increase. The privatization of war and the use of private companies to perform security operations, defense and intelligence, is now the modus operandi of Washington. The Blackwater company is certainly more controversial, now known as Xe Services. During the past eight years, Blackwater has earned over 1.4 billion dollars in contracts from the State Department and Pentagon. Since 2005, Blackwater has also gotten semi-secret contracts with the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. for security and defense operations within the country, which have been seen as the beginning of the creation of a privatized state police to suppress and control a population that each day is in a more desperate economic situation.
In early 2008, the U.S. Army Missile Command and Space Defense awarded contracts in the amount of 15 billion dollars to a group of private contractors, including Blackwater. The contract, which includes intelligence operations, espionage and reconnaissance, among other things, involves two countries in Latin America, Mexico and Colombia. The contract specifically details the "air training provision" to the Colombian armed forces and "strategic PR support" to the Colombian government (read: psychological operations). In the case of Mexico, Blackwater is responsible for supporting the missions against drug trafficking.
Days ago, it was revealed that Blackwater was hired by the CIA to kill suspected insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Blackwater mercenaries were involved in some of the most sensitive and clandestine CIA operations, including transport of prisoners to secret CIA prisons. Former Blackwater mercenaries have indicated that their role in those clandestine operations was so routine that the division between the CIA, Pentagon and Blackwater no longer existed.
Now, this CIA front company and the Pentagon operate freely in Colombia. In the U.S., there are dozens of lawsuits and legal cases against Blackwater for violations of laws, arbitrary killings and human rights violations. However, Álvaro Uribe's government has opened the door for the presence of this dangerous enterprise in South America, which represents a great threat to peace and regional security.
The countries of ALBA and UNASUR members collectively should prohibit the presence of contractors - mercenaries of war in Latin America. But, there will be more death, conflicts, violations of sovereignty, and we expect there will ultimately be a war.
Translated from the Portuguese version by:
Lisa KARPOVA
PRAVDA.Ru
US Drones Hacked in Iraq Deliberately: Pentagon Needs More Cash
21.12.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru
Iraqi gunmen have learned to intercept secret data from US intelligence and use them in their purposes. It goes about the information collected by Predator unmanned aircraft. A program, which can be downloaded online for less than $26, gives the gunmen an opportunity to access video signals transmitted by unmanned aircraft.
The software, supposedly developed by Russian programmers, works with the traffic from a satellite, unpacks files from it and saves them on computer hard drives according to specified filters. The warriors of the Iraqi resistance use the information to find out which objects the US intends to attack in the future.
The information first appeared in the WSJ, which referred to high-ranking defense and intelligence officials of the United States. Mujahedeens, the newspaper wrote, generously shared the received information with many extremist groups. As a result, the above-mentioned program became a part of the standard equipment of an Iraqi gunman. The authors of the article in the WSJ said that the gunmen could not intercept the control of the drones. However, their achievement minimizes the potential of unmanned planes.
The program is neither a hacking nor a pirate program per se. It was developed to access legal freeware. Who would have thought that Americans will be transmitting secret information via open channels? The issue of the drone safety appeared for the first time during the middle of the 1990s, during the military operation in Bosnia. American specialists were working on the system to encode the signals sent to drones and from them. They eventually decided not to install the systems on the aircraft since they made the planes heavier.
The Pentagon apparently believed that the enemy would never be able to find out how to use such a drawback. The Pentagon thought it wrong. The information proving that Iraqi Mujahedeens could intercept the signals from US drones surfaced in 2008. The laptop of a seized Iraqi gunman was found containing secret information of US air intelligence. Afterwards, in the summer of 2009, US servicemen seized several computers containing hours of recordings which Iraqi gunmen intercepted from drones.
Many countries of the world, including the United States, stake on the use of unmanned aircraft. Their share may make up to 36 percent of all other US aircraft already in 2010. They are particularly 375 MQ-9 Reaper drones, the cost of which amounts to $12 million each. What is going to happen to the program of unmanned aircraft now?
Pavel Zolotarev, a senior expert with the Institute for the United States and Canada, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru that the drone program would not be revised because of the scandal. Alexander Mordovin, an aviation expert, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru that the recent scandal in Iraq would obviously affect the development of the unmanned aircraft program.
“I believe that there is no program that can guarantee absolute protection against hacking. It’s quite possible that it was the US Defense Department that asked journalists to create the scandal to obtain more funding for the program. Drones will always be in demand. The only exception is a nuclear war because the impulse of a nuclear explosion puts all types of equipment out of order.
Sergey Balmasov
Pravda.Ru
21.12.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru
Iraqi gunmen have learned to intercept secret data from US intelligence and use them in their purposes. It goes about the information collected by Predator unmanned aircraft. A program, which can be downloaded online for less than $26, gives the gunmen an opportunity to access video signals transmitted by unmanned aircraft.
The software, supposedly developed by Russian programmers, works with the traffic from a satellite, unpacks files from it and saves them on computer hard drives according to specified filters. The warriors of the Iraqi resistance use the information to find out which objects the US intends to attack in the future.
The information first appeared in the WSJ, which referred to high-ranking defense and intelligence officials of the United States. Mujahedeens, the newspaper wrote, generously shared the received information with many extremist groups. As a result, the above-mentioned program became a part of the standard equipment of an Iraqi gunman. The authors of the article in the WSJ said that the gunmen could not intercept the control of the drones. However, their achievement minimizes the potential of unmanned planes.
The program is neither a hacking nor a pirate program per se. It was developed to access legal freeware. Who would have thought that Americans will be transmitting secret information via open channels? The issue of the drone safety appeared for the first time during the middle of the 1990s, during the military operation in Bosnia. American specialists were working on the system to encode the signals sent to drones and from them. They eventually decided not to install the systems on the aircraft since they made the planes heavier.
The Pentagon apparently believed that the enemy would never be able to find out how to use such a drawback. The Pentagon thought it wrong. The information proving that Iraqi Mujahedeens could intercept the signals from US drones surfaced in 2008. The laptop of a seized Iraqi gunman was found containing secret information of US air intelligence. Afterwards, in the summer of 2009, US servicemen seized several computers containing hours of recordings which Iraqi gunmen intercepted from drones.
Many countries of the world, including the United States, stake on the use of unmanned aircraft. Their share may make up to 36 percent of all other US aircraft already in 2010. They are particularly 375 MQ-9 Reaper drones, the cost of which amounts to $12 million each. What is going to happen to the program of unmanned aircraft now?
Pavel Zolotarev, a senior expert with the Institute for the United States and Canada, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru that the drone program would not be revised because of the scandal. Alexander Mordovin, an aviation expert, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru that the recent scandal in Iraq would obviously affect the development of the unmanned aircraft program.
“I believe that there is no program that can guarantee absolute protection against hacking. It’s quite possible that it was the US Defense Department that asked journalists to create the scandal to obtain more funding for the program. Drones will always be in demand. The only exception is a nuclear war because the impulse of a nuclear explosion puts all types of equipment out of order.
Sergey Balmasov
Pravda.Ru
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Tishrei (or Tishri) (IPA: [ˈtɪʃri] or [ˈtɪʃreɪ]) (Hebrew: תִּשְׁרֵי (תִּשְׁרִי) Standard Tišre (Tišri) Tiberian Tišrê (Tišrî) ; from Akkadian tašrītu "Beginning", from šurrû "To begin") is the first month of the civil year (which starts on 1 Tishrei) and the seventh month of the ecclesiastical year (which starts on 1 Nisan) in the Hebrew calendar. The name of the month is Babylonian. It is an autumn month of 30 days. Tishrei usually occurs in September–October on the Gregorian calendar.
1 Tishrei - Adam & Eve were created
On Tishrei 1, which corresponds to the sixth day of creation -- "God said: 'Let us make Man in Our image, after Our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth...'" (Genesis 1:26).
1 Tishrei - First Sin & Repentance
On the same day man was created, man also committed the first sin of history **This statement should be edited. It is improbable and is not implied anywhere in scripture. It is more likely that a significant amount of time had passed prior to this event.**, transgressing the divine commandment not to eat from the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil." Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, and humanity became subject to death, labor and moral confusion. But also on that day, the first persons also repented their sin, introducing the concept and opportunities of teshuvah ("return").
1 Tishrei - (2105 BCE) - Dove's 3rd Mission
On the 1st of Tishrei, (the 307th day of the Great Flood), Noah dispatched a dove from the ark, for the third time. When the dove returned carrying an olive branch, this is how Noah knew that the flood was drained from the earth. On that day, Noah removed the roof of the ark; but Noah and his family, and all the animals, remained in the ark for another 57 days, until the 27th of Cheshvan, when the surface of the earth was completely dry and God commanded them to leave the ark and resettle and repopulate the earth.
1 Tishrei - (1677 BCE) - Binding of Isaac; Sarah's Death
Abraham's test of faith—his binding of Isaac in preparation to sacrifice him as per God's command, occurred on the 1st of Tishrei of the Hebrew year 2084 (1677 BCE), and is recalled each Rosh Hashanah with the sounding of the shofar (ram's horn, for the reason that a ram was sacrificed in Isaac's place when an angel revealed that the command to sacrifice Isaac was a divine test). The Torah's account of the event is publicly read in the synagogue on the 2nd day of Rosh Hashanah. On the day of Isaac's binding, the Talmud tells that his mother, Sarah, died at age 127, and was then buried in the Machpelah Cave in Hebron.
1 Tishrei - (2-4 B.C.E.) Jesus of Nazareth, Abrahamic prophet and founder of Christianity (born in the month of Ethanim (Tishrei)
The painting is from Rembrandt titled "Joseph's Dream in the Stable" from the story of the Nativity or the events before and after the birth of Christ.
courtesy of --wiki--
courtesy of --wiki--
The Global Peace Index (GPI) is an attempt to measure the relative position of nations’ and regions’ peacefulness. It is maintained by the Institute for Economics and Peace and developed in consultation with an international panel of peace experts from peace institutes and think tanks with data collected and analysed by the Economist Intelligence Unit. The list was launched first in May 2007 and then in May 2008 and recently on 2 June 2009 and is claimed to be the first study to rank countries around the world according to their peacefulness.
The Second Republic of Spain
democracy before facism
excerpt from the Abraham Lincoln Brigade Archives
Spain in 1931 was a country riven by inequalities. Still predominantly an agrarian country, traditional divisions endured between wealthy landowners, doggedly preserving their position, and a huge number of landless labourers and poverty-stricken smallholders, desperate to lift themselves from an existence of near-starvation. One of the largest landowners was the Catholic Church who, in addition to any theological motivations, were thus determined to maintain the status quo. Opposing the Church was the largest Anarchist movement in Europe, with a history of incendiary anti-clericalism. 'Spaniards' it was said, 'followed their priests either with a candle or a club'.
In the very few areas witnessing industrial change- chiefly Catalonia and the Basque regions- corresponding social and political change was largely absent. Aspirations by these regions for some degree of autonomy were bitterly opposed by the Spanish army who, fighting in Morocco to regain an empire which had been lost with the catastrophic defeat to the United States in 1898, strongly resisted any attempts to break up Spain. Large, powerful and extremely top-heavy in officers, the Spanish army had a tradition of involvement in politics; Primo de Rivera's military dictatorship had ruled Spain as recently as the 1920s. The dictatorship's legacy was a huge budget deficit at a time when the world was already sinking into economic depression, and its collapse spelled the end for the Spanish monarchy.
In April 1931, municipal elections were taken to be a plebiscite on the monarchy and the result was an overwhelmingly hostile vote against it. The King, Alfonso XIII, realising that he had lost not just the support of the populace but, crucially, the support of the military, fled Spain. Thus, on April 12, 1931, Spain's Second Republic, la nina bonita, was born.
Gutierrez bill would give millions citizenship
White House, others say it's too liberal
December 20, 2009
BY ERIN KELLY
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a leading congressional advocate for immigrants' rights, has introduced a bill that would allow millions of illegal immigrants to become U.S. citizens and would end a controversial program that enlists local police to enforce immigration laws. The bill is widely viewed as too liberal to pass.
Obama administration officials have said they are looking instead to a more moderate, bipartisan immigration-reform bill to be introduced in the Senate early next year by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Still, the Chicago Democrat made it clear that he and his allies expect a seat at the negotiating table as lawmakers and the White House seek middle ground on the polarizing issue.
Gutierrez's bill, endorsed by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Black Caucus and Asian Pacific American Caucus, would allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country while they apply to become legal residents or citizens. They would have to pay a $500 fine and show they've made a contribution to the country through work, education, military or community service. The legislation also would repeal a program that enlists local police and sheriff's deputies to enforce federal immigration laws. The bill says only the federal government has the authority to enforce those laws.
It also includes a provision that would allow states to offer in-state school tuition to students who aren't citizens and whose parents may be in the country illegally. The bill acknowledges that strong border security is needed, but it also calls for increased oversight of border control agents to ensure civil liberties are protected. "As a candidate for president, Barack Obama promised comprehensive immigration reform, and we have brought him the bill to accomplish this," Gutierrez said. Opponents of the bill said they're angry the bill offers amnesty to millions of illegal workers while so many citizens are out of work.
"People feel shocked and completely betrayed that any elected official would propose legalizing illegal immigrants, stopping local police from enforcing immigration law, and stopping increased border security when we have over 15 million Americans out of work," said William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who has co-sponsored past immigration-reform bills with Gutierrez, said he was disappointed by the legislation. "It repeats the mistakes of the '86 reform -- massive legalization without a temporary-worker program to accommodate future labor demands," Flake said. Flake also criticized the bill for watering down the penalties illegal immigrants would face before they could become legal residents. Previous bills have called for a $2,000 fine and would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries before returning to the United States.
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) said the bill is going nowhere. "Congressman Gutierrez is an ardent supporter of immigrant rights and has introduced at least 20 major immigration bills in the past 10 years, but none has been cleared by a committee for a vote on the House floor," Lewis said.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said last week the Obama administration is pinning its hopes for reform on Schumer's bill. "We are providing assistance now to Sen. Schumer," she said.
Gannett News Service
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism
--HarmonyMalaysia.wordpress.com --
MCCBCHST AIMS & OBJECTIVES
Aims
(a) To promote understanding, mutual respect and co-operation between people of different religions.
(b) To study and resolve problems affecting all inter religious relationships.
(c) To make representations regarding religious matters when necessary.
(d) To advance and promote the religious, cultural, educational and social rights and interests of the religious bodies.
Objectives
(a) To uphold and promote the ideas as enunciated in the Rukun Negara.
(b) To promote unity, harmony and understanding amongst people of different religions through conferences, seminars and other channels.
(c) To print, publish and distribute journals, periodicals, leaflets or books that the Executive Committee may consider desirable for the promotion of its objects, with the proviso that, prior approval must be obtained from the competent authority.
Battle of Ravine-à-Couleuvres, Toussaint Louverture, in addressing his soldiers before the battle of Battle of Ravine-à-Couleuvres (on February 23, 1802) speaks of his adversary Leclerc and the French invasion forces:
"You are going to fight against enemies who have neither faith, law, nor religion. They promise you liberty, they intend your servitude. Why have so many ships traversed the ocean, if not to throw you again into chains? They disdain to recognise in you submissive children, and if you are not their slaves, you are rebels. The mother country , misled by the Consul , is no longer anything for you but a step-mother. Was there ever a defence more just than yours? Uncover your breasts, you will see them branded by the iron of slavery."
from --wiki-- The Louverture Project
from --wiki-- The Louverture Project
Friday, December 18, 2009
Religion in Africacourtesy of -- wiki--
A map of Africa, showing the major religions distributed as of today. Map shows only the religion as a whole excluding denominations or sects of the religions, and is colored by how the religions are distributed not by main religion of country. Where overlap, majority is displayed except for traditional religions practiced in a syncretic fashion.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
"...because love of truth is alwyas accompanied by humility. Real genius is nothing else but the supernatural virtue of humility in the domain of thought." -- from the essay Human Personality by Simone Weil
Monday, December 14, 2009
Kurds in Iran: A letter from the Kurdistan Congress of North America
Letter from Kurd North American Congress
-PEN Kurd.org
In the past years, the Iranian despotic regime has been busier than ever before murdering Kurdish human rights activists. Sadly enough, the Kurdish activists are put on trial in an orchestrated court with very limited access to legal representatives or without any legal counsel at all. Recently, the Iranian Revolutionary Court in Kermanshah sentenced another Kurdish activist, a twenty- seven year old Ms. Zaynab Jalalian to death. Sarcastically, in the matter of minutes, she was tried before the Court without a legal representation and was given death sentence for being an “Enemy of God.” After her sentence was read to her, she asked the Court if she could say good-bye to her mother. Her appeal was denied and she was not allowed to see her mother. Since her arrest in May 2008, Ms. Jalalian had been under constant physical-psychological torture and humiliation.
According to the Iranian judicial authorities, she was an enemy of God, because she was a Kurdish activist and struggled for the most basic human rights that have been suppressed by the Iranian state- the same state that was among the first 48 nations that on December 10, 1948 adopted the Declaration of Human Rights. Ironically today, while still a signatory to the same covenant, Iran executes activists and advocates who strive to promote the same rights. While we are concerned about Ms. Jalalian’s fate we realize that she is not alone in this fate -- there are about a dozen more Kurdish prisoners who are put on death row for promoting Kurdish human rights in Kurdistan-Iran. They include Ali Haydarian, Anwar Hosain Panahi, Arsalan Awlyaie, Farhad Chalesh, Farhad Vakili, Farzad Kamangar, Fasih Basamani, Habiballa Lotfi, Hiwa Botimar, Ramazan Ahmed, Rostam Narkia, and Sherko Marafi.
Showing no regard for international norms and human dignity, Iran has been stubbornly murdering and imprisoning Kurdish activists. Perhaps Iran assumes that it can suppress the “just struggle” of more than ten million Kurds whose only claim is to have their own cultural and political identity within Iran. Without any doubt, such an assumption would lead Iran to a deeper internal disharmony and alienation. The motto that “there is no difference between Persians and non-Persians” has never held the truth while other ethnicities have been prevented from practicing their native cultures/languages. Therefore, it is time for the Iranian authorities to review their sectarian political culture and try to adapt a form of government that represents all ethnicities in Iran, and free all human rights activists. Members of the ancient Kurds have been struggling for centuries to preserve their national identity; hence, the Iranian theocrats should not think that they would be able to silence them. Instead of resorting to a military solution, it would be wise for the Iranian authorities to amend Iran’s Constitution where all ethnicities are equal before the law and their unique identities are recognized and respected.
-PEN Kurd.org
In the past years, the Iranian despotic regime has been busier than ever before murdering Kurdish human rights activists. Sadly enough, the Kurdish activists are put on trial in an orchestrated court with very limited access to legal representatives or without any legal counsel at all. Recently, the Iranian Revolutionary Court in Kermanshah sentenced another Kurdish activist, a twenty- seven year old Ms. Zaynab Jalalian to death. Sarcastically, in the matter of minutes, she was tried before the Court without a legal representation and was given death sentence for being an “Enemy of God.” After her sentence was read to her, she asked the Court if she could say good-bye to her mother. Her appeal was denied and she was not allowed to see her mother. Since her arrest in May 2008, Ms. Jalalian had been under constant physical-psychological torture and humiliation.
According to the Iranian judicial authorities, she was an enemy of God, because she was a Kurdish activist and struggled for the most basic human rights that have been suppressed by the Iranian state- the same state that was among the first 48 nations that on December 10, 1948 adopted the Declaration of Human Rights. Ironically today, while still a signatory to the same covenant, Iran executes activists and advocates who strive to promote the same rights. While we are concerned about Ms. Jalalian’s fate we realize that she is not alone in this fate -- there are about a dozen more Kurdish prisoners who are put on death row for promoting Kurdish human rights in Kurdistan-Iran. They include Ali Haydarian, Anwar Hosain Panahi, Arsalan Awlyaie, Farhad Chalesh, Farhad Vakili, Farzad Kamangar, Fasih Basamani, Habiballa Lotfi, Hiwa Botimar, Ramazan Ahmed, Rostam Narkia, and Sherko Marafi.
Showing no regard for international norms and human dignity, Iran has been stubbornly murdering and imprisoning Kurdish activists. Perhaps Iran assumes that it can suppress the “just struggle” of more than ten million Kurds whose only claim is to have their own cultural and political identity within Iran. Without any doubt, such an assumption would lead Iran to a deeper internal disharmony and alienation. The motto that “there is no difference between Persians and non-Persians” has never held the truth while other ethnicities have been prevented from practicing their native cultures/languages. Therefore, it is time for the Iranian authorities to review their sectarian political culture and try to adapt a form of government that represents all ethnicities in Iran, and free all human rights activists. Members of the ancient Kurds have been struggling for centuries to preserve their national identity; hence, the Iranian theocrats should not think that they would be able to silence them. Instead of resorting to a military solution, it would be wise for the Iranian authorities to amend Iran’s Constitution where all ethnicities are equal before the law and their unique identities are recognized and respected.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
"...those who most often have occassion to feel that evil is being done to them are those who are least trained in the art of speech." - Simone Weil, from the essay Human Personality
Who's who in Iran
Conflict and Protest
--bbc.co.uk--
20:13 GMT, Friday, 19 June 2009 21:13 UK
Ali Khamenei -- Ayatollah Khamenei is believed to back President Ahmadinejad Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is the country's most powerful figure. He appoints the head of the judiciary, six of the 12 members of the powerful Guardian Council, the commanders of all the armed forces, Friday prayer leaders and the head of radio and TV. He also confirms the president's election. Khamenei was a key figure in the Islamic revolution in Iran and a close confidant of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic republic. He was later president of Iran from 1981 to 1989 before becoming Supreme Leader for life.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad-- President Ahmadinejad was previously the mayor of Tehran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has been Iran's president since 2005, was actively involved in the Islamic revolution and was a founding member of the student union that took over the US embassy in Tehran in 1979. But he denies being one of the hostage-takers. He became the first non-cleric to be elected president since 1981 when he won a run-off vote against former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani in elections in June 2005. He is a hard-liner both at home - where he does not favour the development or reform of political institutions - and abroad, where he has maintained an anti-Western attitude and combative stance on Tehran's nuclear programme. Much of his support comes from poorer and more religious sections of Iran's rapidly growing population, particularly outside Tehran.
Mir Hossein Mousavi-- Unusually for Iran, Mousavi's wife campaigned alongside him. The 68-year-old former prime minister stayed out of politics for some years but returned to stand as a moderate. Mir Hossein Mousavi was born in East Azerbaijan Province and moved to Tehran to study architecture at university. He is married to Zahra Rahnavard, a former chancellor of Alzahra University and political advisor to Iran's former President Mohammad Khatami. One of his closest associates and backers in this election was Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the former President of Iran who now heads two of the regime's most powerful bodies: the Expediency Council (which adjudicates disputes over legislation) and the Assembly of Experts (which appoints, and can theoretically replace, the Supreme Leader).
Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani-- Rafsanjani has dominated Iranian politics since the 1980s. Described as a "pragmatic conservative", he is part of the religious establishment, but he is open to a broader range of views and has been more reflective on relations with the West. Mr Rafsanjani was president for eight years from 1987 and ran again in 2005. He lost to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the second round. He has been openly critical of the president since then. He is still a powerful figure in Iranian politics as he heads two of the regime's most powerful bodies: the Expediency Council (which adjudicates disputes over legislation) and the Assembly of Experts (which appoints, and can theoretically replace, the Supreme Leader). He is also a wealthy businessman.
The Reformists-- Mohammad Khatami is a long-time friend and adviser of Mir Hossein Mousavi. The Iranian reform movement is a political movement led by a group of political parties and organizations in Iran who supported Mohammad Khatami's plans to introduce more freedom and democracy. In 1997, Khatami was elected president on a platform of greater freedom of expression, as well as measures to tackle unemployment and boost privatisation. However, much of his initial liberalisations were stymied by resistance from the country's conservative institutions. He initially stood for election in 2009 but later stood aside and lent his support to Mir Hossein Mousavi. Other key reformist figures include Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Hadi Khamenei, Mohsen Aminzadeh, and Mostafa Tajzadeh.
The Revolutionary Guard and the Army-- The Revolutionary Guard have influence in Iran's political world. The armed forces comprise the Revolutionary Guard and the regular forces. The two bodies are under a joint general command. Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) was set up shortly after the revolution to defend the country's Islamic system, and to provide a counterweight to the regular armed forces. It has since become a major military, political and economic force in Iran, with close ties to the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a former member. The force is estimated to have 125,000 active troops. It boasts its own ground forces, navy and air force, and oversees Iran's strategic weapons. The Guards also have a powerful presence in civilian institutions and are thought to control around a third of Iran's economy through a series of subsidiaries and trusts.
The Militias-- The Basij serve as an auxiliary force. The Revolutionary Guard also controls the Basij Resistance Force, an Islamic volunteer militia of about 90,000 men and woman with an additional capacity to mobilise nearly 1m. The Basij, or Mobilisation of the Oppressed, are often called out onto the streets at times of crisis to use force to dispel dissent. There are branches in every town.
The Clerics-- Conservative clerics play an important part in political life in Iran, Clerics dominate Iranian society. Only clerics can be elected to the Assembly of Experts, which appoints the Supreme Leader, monitors his performance and can in theory remove him if he is deemed incapable of fulfilling his duties. The Assembly is currently headed by Iran's former President Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is described as pragmatic and conservative. Former President Mohammad Khatami accused the clerics of obstructing his reforms and warned against the dangers of religious "despotism". Clerics also dominate the judiciary, which is based on Sharia (Islamic) law. In recent years, conservative hardliners have used the judicial system to undermine reforms by imprisoning reformist personalities and journalists and closing down reformist papers.
Jundallah- It was founded in 2002 to defend the Baluchi minority in the poor, remote and lawless region of south-east Iran. Its leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, denies the group has either foreign links or a separatist agenda. In an interview in October 2008, he said the group - also known as the People's Resistance Movement - was not interested in trying to break away from Iran. It simply wanted the state to respect the human rights, culture and faith of the Baluchis. The Baluchis in Iran - and their brethren across the border in Pakistan - see themselves, rather like the Kurds, as a nation without a state. But in predominantly Shia Iran, the issue is complicated by the fact that they are Sunni Muslim.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Russia policeman jailed for death of Kremlin critic
11:40 GMT, Friday, 11 December 2009
-- bbc.co.uk --
Yevloyev was considered a thorn in the side of former Ingush President Zyazikov
A Russian court has sentenced a policeman to two years in jail for the killing of the owner of a website critical of the Kremlin. Magomed Yevloyev died from a gunshot wound sustained while travelling in a police car in the restive southern Russian region of Ingushetia.
Mr Yevloyev's supporters say his death was deliberate. The police have always insisted it was an accident. His Ingushetiya.ru. website reported on abductions and killings in the region. His family have criticised the involuntary manslaughter sentence of police officer Ibragim Yevloyev - who was not related to the victim - as too light.
The court in the Ingush town of Karabulak said the officer, a former bodyguard for the local interior ministry, would serve his sentence in a low-security prison settlement. "This is a peculiar farce and we can say that no-one has been punished, neither the masterminds nor the perpetrators," Musa Pliyev, a lawyer for the victim's family, was quoted as telling Moscow Echo radio after the verdict.
Thorn in the side
Magomed Yevloyev was arrested and later shot after getting off the same flight as the local, Kremlin-backed leader, in the region's main city Nazran in August 2008. Kaloi Akhilgov, a lawyer close to his website (now Ingushetia.org), said at the time that Mr Yevloyev had been taken away in a car and shot in the temple. Local police reports said Mr Yevloyev had tried to seize a policeman's gun when he was being led to a vehicle. A shot was fired and he was injured in the head.
Opposition leaders said at the time the killing was part of Russia's policy of "open genocide" towards the Ingush people. Mr Yevloyev was considered a thorn in the side of then Ingush President Murat Zyazikov, a former KGB general. His website reported on alleged Russian security force brutality in Ingushetia, an impoverished province of some half a million people, mostly Muslims, which is now more turbulent than neighbouring Chechnya. The area is plagued by a low-level insurgency, with regular small-scale ambushes against police and soldiers.
11:40 GMT, Friday, 11 December 2009
-- bbc.co.uk --
Yevloyev was considered a thorn in the side of former Ingush President Zyazikov
A Russian court has sentenced a policeman to two years in jail for the killing of the owner of a website critical of the Kremlin. Magomed Yevloyev died from a gunshot wound sustained while travelling in a police car in the restive southern Russian region of Ingushetia.
Mr Yevloyev's supporters say his death was deliberate. The police have always insisted it was an accident. His Ingushetiya.ru. website reported on abductions and killings in the region. His family have criticised the involuntary manslaughter sentence of police officer Ibragim Yevloyev - who was not related to the victim - as too light.
The court in the Ingush town of Karabulak said the officer, a former bodyguard for the local interior ministry, would serve his sentence in a low-security prison settlement. "This is a peculiar farce and we can say that no-one has been punished, neither the masterminds nor the perpetrators," Musa Pliyev, a lawyer for the victim's family, was quoted as telling Moscow Echo radio after the verdict.
Thorn in the side
Magomed Yevloyev was arrested and later shot after getting off the same flight as the local, Kremlin-backed leader, in the region's main city Nazran in August 2008. Kaloi Akhilgov, a lawyer close to his website (now Ingushetia.org), said at the time that Mr Yevloyev had been taken away in a car and shot in the temple. Local police reports said Mr Yevloyev had tried to seize a policeman's gun when he was being led to a vehicle. A shot was fired and he was injured in the head.
Opposition leaders said at the time the killing was part of Russia's policy of "open genocide" towards the Ingush people. Mr Yevloyev was considered a thorn in the side of then Ingush President Murat Zyazikov, a former KGB general. His website reported on alleged Russian security force brutality in Ingushetia, an impoverished province of some half a million people, mostly Muslims, which is now more turbulent than neighbouring Chechnya. The area is plagued by a low-level insurgency, with regular small-scale ambushes against police and soldiers.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The text of President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, delivered Thursday in Oslo, Norway, as provided by the White House:
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:
I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations — that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.
And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize — Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela — my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women — some known, some obscure to all but those they help — to be far more deserving of this honor than I.
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43 other countries — including Norway — in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict — filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.
These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.
Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.
For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations — total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.
In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations — an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize — America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide and restrict the most dangerous weapons.
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.
A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.
Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts, the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies and failed states have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children scarred.
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life's work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.
Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions — not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other people's children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.
So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another — that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths — that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human feelings. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions."
What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?
To begin with, I believe that all nations — strong and weak alike — must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I — like any head of state — reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards strengthens those who do, and isolates — and weakens — those who don't.
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait — a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.
Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don't, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the legitimacy of future intervention — no matter how justified.
This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.
I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.
America's commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.
The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries — and other friends and allies — demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali — we honor them not as makers of war, but as wagers of peace.
Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant — the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.
I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior — for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure — and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles.
But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.
The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo or repression in Burma — there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.
This brings me to a second point — the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.
It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.
And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists — a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.
I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please, choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests — nor the world's — are served by the denial of human aspirations.
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope and history are on their side.
Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.
In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable — and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.
Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights — it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.
It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.
And that is why helping farmers feed their own people — or nations educate their children and care for the sick — is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action — it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying power, to complete this work without something more — and that is the continued expansion of our moral imagination, an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.
And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities — their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.
Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of one's own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago: "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."
So let us reach for the world that ought to be — that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he's outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)