Duke and Duchess of Cambridge witness swearing in of new Canadians on the second day of their North American tour Prince William saw the swearing in of 25 new Canadian citizens on Friday, though he – prince of Canada that he is – was not one of them. There were Chinese, Cubans, French, Greeks, Haitians, Romanians and even Madagascan residents swearing an oath of allegiance to his grandmother and to him as one of her heirs and successors, yet if anyone noticed the irony, they did not care to mention it. The prince, with his wife, Duchess Kate, beside him, was guest of honour on Canada Day in Ottawa and tens of thousands turned out to cheer and whoop. From early morning a sea of red and white converged in front of the country’s parliament. On what was to become a hot and nearly cloudless day Canadians trudged towards the site, most wearing the national colours, many carrying maple leaf flags in their hair or on their baseball caps or T-shirts. Canadians may be God’s doughty people and while they were stoically out to enjoy themselves they carried macs, just in case. Across the river, outside the Canadian Museum of Civilization, an appropriate place for the citizenship ceremony in this most civilised nation, there was the first demonstrator of the tour. Dressed in a bear costume and bearing a motto “Bearskins look better on bears”, she didn’t seem to mind being ignored. Inside the museum’s hall, lined with giant totem poles, mounties genially posed for photographs with the new citizens while the Canadian air force’s string quartet gently strummed the theme from Desert Island Discs like a palm court orchestra – a strange choice as desert islands are one thing Canada lacks. On television screens more characteristic scenes were shown, most of them seemingly including snow. Two of the new citizens, Romanians Adrian and Florentina Uzea, cradling their baby daughter, Stephanie, were explaining their choice. Both agricultural economists – Adrian now works for the national organisation of broiler chicken farmers – they had decided Canada was a safer place to raise their daughter, though they retain their old nationality as well just in case there is a roasting in the Canadian poultry sector. “In Romania when you decide to have kids you have to think twice, but here you know you can support your family,” said Florentina. Looking round, she added: “This is better than I expected … and yes, it is a thrill. We didn’t know the prince would be here until recently.” “It’s appropriate,” chipped in her husband. “Canada was a dominion of Britain, which makes it more special.” Ceremonies were taking place across the country, from Gander to Whitehorse, the governor general said, swearing in maybe 150,000 new citizens, but only Ottawa had a prince to watch. And soon he was among them, grinning his diffident chipmunk smile, with his wife, a striking vision in white and red, beside him. Her costume, by the Montreal-born designer Erdem Moralioglu, was apparently the one chosen for her engagement photographs by Mario Testino last year – waste not want not, though hardly an austerity drive. It was topped by a small scarlet cross between a hat and a fascinator crowned with maple leaves and tailed by equally scarlet stilettos. Dutifully, the couple waited while the governor general, David Johnston, read out the oath of citizenship – first in French – leading the new citizens as they murmured allegiance to Sa Majesté la Reine Elizabeth Deux; and then in English, louder, just to make sure. “We are grateful you have chosen Canada,” he said as if they had taken out a life insurance policy, which in a way some probably had. It was a gentle invitation, he said, echoing words of the Queen. Then: “Do your best for Canada.” For the royal party it was then on to the more boisterous celebrations across the river and up the hill, a journey partly undertaken in the state landau. Meanwhile, the crowds at the museum agreed the couple were lovely, sweet, gorgeous, a credit to Canada, a country Kate had not visited before. Three characters standing well back from the crowd, bearing posters saying “No oath to royalty”, “Democracy not royalty” and, slightly more cumbersomely, “Monarchy oaths violate charter freedoms” were politely ignored – it is the Canadian way. Canada Prince William Kate Middleton Monarchy Stephen Bates guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Libyan leader said in radio message he would carry out attacks in Europe if Nato didn’t cease its airstrike campaign Muammar Gaddafi has threatened to carry out attacks in Europe against “homes, offices, families,” unless Nato halts its campaign of airstrikes against his regime in Libya. The Libyan leader, sought by the International Criminal Court for brutally crushing an uprising against him, delivered the warning in an radio message played to thousands of supporters gathered in the main square of Tripoli. Addressing the west, Gaddafi said Libyans might take revenge. “These people (the Libyans) are able to one day take this battle … to Europe, to target your homes, offices, families, which would become legitimate military targets, like you have targeted our homes,” he said. “We can decide to treat you in a similar way,” he said of the Europeans. “If we decide to, we are able to move to Europe like locusts, like bees. We advise you to retreat before you are dealt a disaster.” In his speech, Gaddafi denounced the rebels as traitors and blamed them for Libya’s troubles. He said Libyans who fled to neighbouring Tunisia are now “working as maids for the Tunisians.” “What brought you to this stage? The traitors,” Gaddafi said in the radio message. He urged his supporters to “march on the western mountains” to clear the area of weapons the French government delivered to the rebels there several days ago. Friday’s was one of the largest pro-government rallies in recent weeks. It came just four days after the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam and Libyan intelligence chief Abdullah al-Sanoussi for crimes against humanity. International prosecutors allege government troops fired on civilian protesters during anti-Gaddafi street demonstrations earlier this year. Libya Muammar Gaddafi Arab and Middle East unrest Middle East Africa guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Glenn Beck’s finale yesterday was pretty much what you’d expect: lotsa fond remembrances, beginning with Beck’s own version of his “greatest hits” (we much prefer our version, , but you can’t please everyone) and wrapping up with a few moments’ preachiness and a list of credits on a chalkboard. Of course, we’ve already given our thoughts on his exodus, and what more can you say that hasn’t already been said — and said well — over at Media Matters ? Now, of course, the anticipation will be about seeing how Fox fills his time slot. Will Eric Bolling’s months-long audition as someone nuttier and nastier than Glenn Beck finally pan out? Or will Ailes & Co. try to tone it down a bit? Which only raises the more important point: Beck’s show was only the worst of many awful things on Fox. Ultimately far more noxious — and damaging to democratic discourse — is the relentless lying and propagandizing that now permeates nearly every corner of the Fox News operation (Shep Smith’s show being the lone possible exception). Beck was especially bad because he so effortlessly transmitted far-right extremist ideas into the mainstream, and on such a massive level. But it still happens elsewhere on Fox. And one of the major effects of these kinds of transmissions — to alienate ordinary people from factual reality, creating a kind of wedge with the real world, thus priming many of them, particularly those with mental illnesses or violent instabilities, for acting out in extreme and often violent ways — in fact is also present with “newscasts” that deliberately falsify and distort. Disinformation can radicalize people as surely as conspiracy theories. That’s still very much ongoing at Fox. Beck may be gone, but the beat goes on. And so does the work of people keeping an eye on it. Click here to view this media
Continue reading …
Glenn Beck stepped down from his Fox News show on Thursday after two and a half tumultuous, controversial years at the network. He kept the chalkboards to a minimum, and shed no tears. He also shied away from too many specific recollections about his show. Instead, he broadly reminisced about what he said he had learned from the experience, repeatedly praised Fox News for allowing his show to air and professed his excitement for his next step: the Web TV channel known as “GBTV.” Beck said that the reason for his departure from Fox News was simple: there was more that he wanted to do. The show, he said, was really a movement “that belongs in your home. It belongs in your neighborhoods. Not really television.” He repeatedly directed viewers to his website, where the next chapter of his professional life will be centered. The show featured many of the things that made Beck famous—long monologues, high emotion, mentions of God and Hitler—but, in some ways, was hardly representative of the show that made him, for a few years at least, a cultural icon and a lightning rod. Watch the final minutes of the show: Beck’s impassioned, grandiose, often inflammatory style and his embrace of the Tea Party movement sent his notoriety skyrocketing, and made him the most polarizing personality on an already-polarizing network. He drew high ratings (even when his show’s popularity fell, it was still the fourth most watched cable news program) and a large following; his rally on the Washington Mall in 2010 was evidence of his ability to move masses. However, Beck often drew equally heated criticism for his highly controversial comments and elaborate, chalkboard-laden explanations of the world. Most famously, he called President Obama a “racist” with a “deep-seated hatred of white people,” accused liberal billionaire George Soros of being at the center of a destructive global order, and warned that the so-called “Arab Spring” would lead to a new Islamic caliphate. Scroll down for a recap of Beck’s farewell show. Beck and Fox News each benefited from their relationship—his popularity, and its ratings, both grew. But, as the criticism of Beck increased—and as an aggressive campaign caused up to 400 advertisers to drop their support of his show—both sides grew weary. Tensions between Beck’s camp and Fox News spilled out in public, and the two groups eventually decided to sever their ties. Now, Beck is setting out on his own, like so many of his media peers these days. He will be starting his own Web TV channel called GBTV. On his Thursday radio show, Beck said that he would immediately launch the channel following the end of his Fox News show. “I’m so sick and tired of being in the system,” he said. “I’m not going to play the game anymore.” It remains to be seen how successful Beck’s new venture will be. With the vast majority of his income coming from outside Fox News, though, and with a growing media empire, he is more well-positioned than most.
Continue reading …Minnesota’s Government Shuts Down After GOP Refuses To Agree to Revenue Increases
July 1, 2011 No CommentAs of midnight today, Minnesota’s government is shut down and 20,000 government workers are on hiatus. Why? Because the Republican legislature would not agree to any revenue increases to balance the budget. If Minnesota is any indication, there is absolutely no reason to think the United States Congress will step up and be reasonable. Via Duluth News-Tribune : With little more than three hours left before a shutdown, most House and Senate Republicans walked into their chambers and took the seats they use during a session. Leaders said they did it to show they were ready to pass a temporary budget to keep government operating. Rep. Dan Fabian, R-Roseau, said that going to the legislative chambers and inviting the media in was not a stunt. Instead, he said, “we’re hoping the governor will call us to work.” “We are here, we want to reach an agreement,” Rep. Tim Kelly, R-Red Wing, said. Rep. Rod Hamilton, R-Mountain Lake, said Dayton should call a special session. “We found agreement on a majority of the bills,” he said. But Dayton said Republicans refused to agree to more revenue, proposing instead to delay school payments and borrow money from a tobacco lawsuit settlement. What will it take to overcome this crazy hostage-taking? Dayton said that on Thursday he lowered his proposed tax increase and limited to only a fraction of the richest Minnesotans. But Republicans constantly rejected any tax increase and even gave up a much-desired tax cut during budget talks.
Continue reading …Andy Murray v Rafael Nadal – Wimbledon 2011 men’s semi-final live! | Scott Murray
July 1, 2011 No Comment
• Email your thoughts to scott.murray@guardian.co.uk • Press F5 to refresh this page or use our auto-refresher First set: Murray* 5-4 Nadal. Now it’s Murray’s turn to hold to love. He’s serving big, and standing up to Nadal during the rallies. First set: Murray 4-4 Nadal*. Nothing for Nadal to worry about here, as he wins his service game to love. “Sorry, but wasn’t Harold Mahony, although born in Edinburgh, really an Irishman from Kerry?” asks Dermot Meagher. Hmm. And for goodness sake, please don’t google Vere St Leger Goold, you’ll reveal this report to be a tissue of lies. First set: Murray* 4-3 Nadal. A majestic rally for the first point, Nadal nearly passing Murray at the net but the Scot anticipating well to volley a point-blank winner. Then another mini-classic for the second, Nadal whipping a cross-court backhand through both advantage courts. Murray sees the game out with some more powerful serving. This match isn’t exactly exciting as of yet, but the tennis is of very high quality. “That roll call of men’s finalists contains some of the finest names I have ever read,” opines Daniel Boynton. “It’s a close call, but Vere St Leger Goold must be the best. ‘Andrew Murray’ doesn’t really stack up by comparison does it?” I hope I copied that out correctly. First set: Murray 3-3 Nadal*. Nadal goes 30-0 up. Murray sends a screamer down the right-hand sideline, then Nadal dumps a woeful backhand out of play down his deuce court. Nadal bounces back by forcing a Murray error at the end of a 19-shot baseline rally, and before you know it the game is won. This is a proper face off at the moment. “McIntyre and Corden are together?” shudders Louise Wright. “You realise that means that the other two horsemen of the apocalypse are almost certainly on their way? I’d return top your loved ones and wait for the Rapture if I were you. Or just go down the pub.” Russell Howard and Joe Pasquale are coming too? Lord help us, there’s no need for this. First set: Murray* 3-2 Nadal. An easy service game to love for Murray. Everything’s going well. Apart from that dodgy hip, the poor old soul. But there’s some good news there too: the pusher comes on, offering powerful drugs, but Murray waves him away. It’s the only way to deal with these people. Listen to what Bo Diddley tells you , kids. First set: Murray 2-2 Nadal*. Both players take turns to dump easy strokes into the net, Nadal a forehand, Murray a sliced backhand. Murray looks particularly annoyed, as he had an easy chance to put Nadal away while approaching the net and move 0-30 up. Nadal mops the remaining points up without fuss. First set: Murray* 2-1 Nadal. At 30-15, Nadal moves Murray around hither and yon, before passing his opponent with a blistering cross-court shot from his own deuce court to Murray’s. It’s in, but the ball’s called out, and Nadal doesn’t challenge. Nadal wins the next point, so he’s effectively been robbed of the first break point of the match. Murray serves out to hold. All good news, except he’s called for the trainer. That hip is playing up again. He’s been given the option to get a jab if it doesn’t simmer down during the next couple of games, but he’ll have to go off court for that. First set: Murray 1-1 Nadal*. A fairly painless game for Nadal. Murray gets his racquet on all but one of the serves, forcing three rallies, but Nadal wins all the points, then finishes off with a booming ace of his own. A fairly painless game, I say, other than some clown shouting “We love you Andy”, then a gaggle of other goons laughing at the bon mot. Maybe it was McIntyre testing out some new material. If so, he’s getting edgier. First set: Murray* 1-0 Nadal. Nope. Rafa wins his first point, but Murray responds by whistling down another huge ace. His first-serve averages haven’t been the best this tournament; he’ll be hoping for more of this, because that’s a very impressive opening. 4.45pm: And we’re off! Murray belts down an ace to start, then serves and volleys a second point to go 30-0 up. And then another ace! Can he win his first service game to love writes hack who needs to break this game into two entries in order to segue into the proper format ? 4.40pm: Is the BBC trying to throw everyone into a thundering depression before Murray even has a chance to crash out in three sets? The first celebrity cutaway of the match is of landfill comedians Michael McIntyre and James Corden, chatting away to each other. Maybe they’re swapping notes on how they’ve got away with it. 4.35pm: Murray has won the toss. He elects to serve in the first game. The players are knocking up. Nadal is wearing a determined look today – when doesn’t he? – but much good that gameface will do him: win or lose Wimbledon, he’ll not be world number one any more come Monday morning. 4.30pm: The idle chatter on Centre Court turns into a smattering of polite applause as the players walk out. It’s almost as though half the crowd have gone off to purchase Pimm’s, and the ones remaining are paggered on Pimm’s. Either way, it’s a low-key start to the big event. Murray almost immediately leaves the court – he’s got his bag of rackets, and is wearing both of his shoes, so perhaps he’s forgot his wristband – then makes his entrance again. Still no big cheer. 4.20pm: Murray and Nadal should be out on centre court in a few minutes, as Novak Djokovic has just beaten Jo Wilfred Tsonga 7-6, 6-2, 6-7, 6-3 , making it to his first Wimbledon final. He’s not having too bad a year, is he? He’ll be the new world number one after this tournament, whatever happens on Sunday. The crowd: Unfunny. The weather: Sunny. Still, here’s hoping, and the head-to-head in slams isn’t the disaster zone it could be:. Nadal leads 4-2, having beaten Murray in the last 16 at the 2007 Australian Open, in the quarters at Wimbledon in 2008, in the semis here last year, and in the semis of the French Open in May. Murray has triumphed over Nadal in the semi-final of the 2008 US Open, and the quarters of the 2010 Australian Open. Murray’s due one. Like that means anything. Let’s face it, the odds aren’t in his favour (and I’m talking him down with a view to managing expectations and tempting fate). Murray is spectacularly good – and the most entertaining tennis player on the circuit at the moment by a long chalk – but Rafael Nadal is just that little bit better. Duller, but better. Relentless and better. Spencer Gore. William Marshall. Frank Hadow. John Hartley. Vere St Leger Goold. Herbert Lawford. William Renshaw. Ernest Renshaw. Willoughby Hamilton. Wilfred Baddeley. Joshua Pim. Wilberforce Eaves. Harold Mahony. Reginald Doherty. Lawrence Doherty. Arthur Gore. Sydney Smith. Frank Riseley. Herbert Barrett. Josiah Ritchie. Randolph Lycett. Bunny Austin. Fred Perry. So can Andy Murray join this roll call of British gentlemen’s Wimbledon finalists, a roll call I’m sure we can all rattle off, the tennis loving nation that we are? Wimbledon 2011 Wimbledon Andy Murray Rafael Nadal Tennis Scott Murray guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Eurozone finance ministers scrap planned meeting in Brussels on Sunday for phone talks on Saturday evening Eurozone finance ministers have cancelled a crisis meeting planned for Sunday because they need more time – as much as two more months – to nail down the details of a second bailout for Greece, officials said Friday. They will, however, hold a video conference on Saturday to sign off on a new loan instalment that will keep Greece from bankruptcy over the summer. Whereas the payout of the next loan instalment from Greece’s first bailout was a near certainty after Athens voted through new austerity measures this week, talks were still ongoing over a second rescue package that would support Greece over the longer-term. “It would have been too ambitious to get the deal [on a second package of rescue loans] done by Sunday,” said a eurozone official. Several key aspects of a new bailout, such as the contribution of banks and other investment funds, are still up in the air – although eurozone leaders said last week that there will be new financing for the struggling country. The ministers will continue their discussions on the new programme at their next scheduled meeting on 11 July, but getting everything done by then may also prove difficult, the official said. He was speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks on Greece. A second eurozone official said that while the cornerstones of the new programme have to be drawn up soon, it may not be finalized until the next Greek loan instalment is due in September. The official was also speaking on condition of anonymity. A spokesman for Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg and chairman of the eurogroup, said earlier that a video conference had been scheduled for Saturday evening, but didn’t provide a reason for the change in the plan. He said he didn’t know whether a statement would be released after the call. The ministers have to sign of on a €12bn (£10bn) loan instalment of Greece’s existing bailout, without which the debt-ridden country would default in July. Greece this week fulfilled the preconditions for getting the money by passing unpopular austerity and privatization programmes through parliament. “It is good that the eurogroup procedure is being speeded up,” said a Greek finance ministry official. “The voting of the midterm programme and the implementation bill is acting internationally in favour of the country’s credibility and is the basis for tomorrow’s discussion at the Eurogroup.” The official declined to be named in line with department policy. European debt crisis European banks Greece Europe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former head of IMF and leading French presidential candidate Dominique Strauss-Kahn appears at bail hearing as reports claim sexual assault case against him could be close to collapse 3.56pm: My colleague Dominic Rushe is in court now. He says the court is packed, although the crowd is smaller than last time, and there are no maids outside protesting. “It’s bank holiday weekend [independence day, 4 July, is on Monday] so everyone wants out of her asap. James Cox, law professor at Duke University, told Dominic: “This has got to be the prosecution’s worse nightmare. You do what you think is right and then your witness goes south on you.” He said the prosecution was right to act decisively and quickly on the case when the charges were brought and could not be blamed for the media furore that followed. “You can not have a chambermaid bringing allegations against an aristocrat like Strauss-Kahn without there being this find of frenzy,” he said. But, said Cox, given subsequent developments he said he was surprised that the prosecution had not done more homework on their witness ahead of making such strong statements about the case and the strength of their witness. 3.53pm: The Associated Press news agency is now reporting that the New York district attorney will release Strauss-Kahn without bail, citing an “AP source”. 3.52pm: The Wall Street Journal is reporting that prosecutors have agreed to modify Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s bail and end his house arrest. 3.50pm: Strauss-Kahn is arriving at court now. 3.49pm: Strauss-Kahn is on his way to court. CNN has just been showing pictures of him and his wife leaving their residence to head to court. 3.33pm: Dominic Rushe writes that the local New York media is being let into the court first, much to the annoyance of the international media. 3.31pm: In a clear-headed piece at the Atlantic , Andrew Cohen draws out what he reckons is the key point from the New York Times’s article. It will be virtually impossible to neutralise this (from the Times’s piece): “According to the two officials, the woman had a phone conversation with an incarcerated man within a day of her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn in which she discussed the possible benefits of pursuing the charges against him. The conversation was recorded.” If this is true, it establishes a motive for the woman to (falsely) accuse Kahn of rape after a consensual sexual encounter. It is enough, alone, to establish reasonable doubt? Prosecutors seem to think so and they are probably right. This accusation comes from the New York Times piece and cannot be corroborated by the Guardian. 3.24pm: Paul Harris in New York adds that CNN is reporting that Strauss-Kahn’s criminal charges might be reduced to a misdemeanour. “That means DSK will have his bail reduced greatly or even removed altogether and he will be free to travel throughout the US. Eventually, defence sources tell the channel, the defence will push to have all the charges dropped.” 3.23pm: My colleague Dominic Rushe writes from New York. He says there are around 200 journalists lining up at the court to get in and jockeying for position: French, German, British, American. Dominic writes: “Sympathy seems to be with the maid still in the line. She may have lied about her past but the question remains: was she assaulted?” 3.17pm: Just to translate “on his own recognizance” ( see 3.06pm ), it is a term used when the defendant is released but promises to attend all court proceedings and not to engage in any illegal activity or prohibited conduct. A financial bond is often set, but not demanded unless the court orders it forfeited. 3.10pm: Reuters has interviewed the brother of the woman who has accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault and attempted rape. He said she was the victim of a smear campaign. Mamoudou, whose surname is being withheld to protect his sister’s identity, said from Guinea: “These are lies that have been invented to discredit my sister.” 3.06pm: Bloomberg news is already tweeting that prosecutors have agreed to release Strauss-Kahn prosecutors “on his own recognizance”. The court hearing will begin in around an hour and a half. 3.05pm: In court in May, bail was set for Dominique Strauss-Kahn at $1m (£624,000) in cash with a $5m insurance bond. He was required to surrender all his travel documents and remain under house arrest in Manhattan under 24-hour armed guard. Stringent conditions included an electronic bracelet that sent a signal to a security company and a police station the moment Strauss-Kahn left the property, and video cameras to monitor him inside the property. The conditions are costing Mr. Strauss-Kahn $250,000 a month. The New York Times says that under the relaxed conditions of bail to be requested today, the district attorney’s office would retain Strauss-Kahn’s passport but he would be permitted to travel within the United States. 2.55pm: Dominique Strauss-Kahn will appear at the state supreme court in Manhattan this afternoon for a hearing at which Justice Michael Obus is expected to consider easing the former IMF chief’s bail conditions. The hearing comes as reports claim the sexual assault case against the man once considered a leading Socialist candidate for the French presidency is on the verge of collapse. As my colleagues Ed Pilkington, Dominic Rushe and Angelique Chrisafis report , there were claims in the New York Times last night that significant problems had emerged in the case against Strauss-Kahn. These could see the conditions of his house arrest in New York being relaxed with immediate effect. The paper claims “major holes” in the case will be admitted in court as early as today. The claims have thrown French politics into disarray , the second time this case has done so. Strauss-Kahn, a Socialist, was seen as the leading candidate to beat Nicolas Sarkozy in next year’s presidential elections until the allegations against him dramatically emerged in May. Strauss-Kahn is accused of sexually assaulting and attempting to rape a maid at the Sofitel hotel in Manhattan on 14 May. France’s former Socialist prime minister Lionel Jospin described the latest developments as a “thunderbolt” as allies speculated Strauss-Kahn may now be able to run after all. His job at the IMF has been taken by former French finance minister Christine Lagarde. This week, the Socialist party launched its primary race for a candidate on the basis that Strauss-Kahn’s political career was over. But the dramatic developments in New York have prompted some members to call on the party to suspend the process. Citing “two well-placed law enforcement officials”, the New York Times claims Strauss-Kahn’s “accuser has repeatedly lied”. Although forensic tests found unambiguous evidence of a sexual encounter between Mr Strauss-Kahn, a French politician, and the woman, prosecutors now do not believe much of what the accuser has told them about the circumstances or about herself … Senior prosecutors met with lawyers for Mr Strauss-Kahn on Thursday and provided details about their findings, and the parties are discussing whether to dismiss the felony charges. In addition to the New York Times claims, the Associated Press has reported that prosecutors have raised questions about the woman’s credibility and background. But Kenneth Thompson, a lawyer for the woman (who is not being named), told the NYT: “Nothing changes one very important fact, namely, that Dominique Strauss-Kahn violently sexually assaulted the victim inside of that hotel room at the Sofitel.” Here’s a timeline of the case so far , courtesy of my colleague Richard Nelsson: 13 May: Dominque Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF, checks into $3,000 a night suite, room 2806, at the luxury Sofitel hotel in midtown Manhattan. 14 May: At around midday, a 32-year-old maid enters the suite, which she thought unoccupied, and an attack by the Frenchman is alleged to have occurred after she opened the bedroom door and found him naked. She reports what happened to her supervisor who calls the police. 14 May: At around 4.40pm Strauss-Kahn is pulled off a Paris-bound flight minutes before take-off from New York’s JFK airport and arrested . He is accused of a sexual assault on a maid in his suite. He asks “What is this about?” and 15 minutes later, says ” I have diplomatic immunity “. 15 May: The 62-year-old economist is charged with “criminal sexual act, unlawful imprisonment, attempted rape” of the so far unidentified woman employee of the hotel. 16 May: He enters Manhattan Criminal Court for a hearing . A New York judge accepts the prosecution argument that Strauss-Kahn is a flight risk and orders him detained without bail in New York’s Rikers Island jail . 17 May: Strauss-Kahn is reportedly under suicide watch on Rikers Island. US treasury secretary Timothy Geithner says the Frenchman is “obviously not in the position to run the IMF”. 18 May: The victim, an immigrant from the west African nation of Guinea, testifies behind closed doors at a grand jury hearing. Denies she had consensual relations with Strauss-Kahn. The New York police conduct forensic search of hotel suite. 18 May: Strauss-Kahn resigns as managing director of the IMF and denies all the allegations. 19 May: He is formally indicted by the grand jury and the seven charges against him are confirmed. Faces a potential maximum of 74 years prison if convicted. Bail is granted after he agrees to post $1m cash and $5m bond and submit to round-the-clock surveillance under house arrest 20 May: Released from Rikers and moves into an apartment near Wall Street, before moving on to a townhouse rented for a reported $50,000 a month. 23 May: Newspaper reports suggest that traces of Strauss-Kahn’s semen have been found on the maid’s shirt. 27 May: French president Nicolas Sarkozy calls it a “sad” affair. 6 June: At a brief hearing at Manhattan criminal court, the former head of the IMF pleads not guilty to allegations of attempted rape and the sexual assault of a hotel maid. His lawyers say they need six weeks to assess evidence collected by the US authorities. Hundreds of hotel workers gather outside the courthouse roaring their disapproval at Strauss-kahn by shouting “shame on you”. 28 June: Christine Lagarde selected to serve as IMF managing director. Dominique Strauss-Kahn France IMF United States Paul Owen guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Judges will consider application to stay judgment meaning officers can no longer bail suspects for more than four days without charging or releasing them The supreme court is to consider suspending a legal ruling on police bail that overturns 25 years of police practice. A court spokeswoman said three judges will consider the application to stay the judgment – which means officers can no longer bail suspects for more than four days without either charging or releasing them – on Monday. If granted, the move would put the ruling on hold until a full appeal is heard at the same court on 25 July. There will be no public hearing on Monday, with the three justices considering the application, by Greater Manchester police, in private. The Home Office was criticised on Thursday for not acting sooner to reverse the ruling, which could hamper tens of thousands of investigations and leave officers doing their job with “one hand tied behind their back”. The criticism came after the policing minister, Nick Herbert, told MPs that emergency legislation to reverse the ruling would be brought forward because he feared an appeal to the supreme court would take too long. The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, said the Home Office was “clearly in chaos”, adding: “The home secretary is still failing to sort the problem.” “Shocking delays and home office incompetence are still putting investigations at risk and jeopardising justice for victims.” She said ministers “confirmed that the home office has known about this for over a month yet they still haven’t finished the emergency legislation, and the police still don’t know what they are supposed to do with suspects today”. “That means thousands of ongoing investigations are being jeopardised,” she added. “The catalogue of incompetence is deeply worrying.” Herbert admitted that officials were told of the oral judgment in May, but its full impact only became clear when the written judgment was handed down on 17 June and ministers were alerted on 24 June . The row started when district judge Jonathan Finestein, sitting at Salford magistrates court, refused a routine application from Greater Manchester police for a warrant of further detention of Paul Hookway, a murder suspect, on 5 April. High court judge Mr Justice McCombe confirmed the ruling in a judicial review on 19 May, which meant time spent on police bail counted towards the maximum 96-hour limit of pre-charge detention. Afterwards, Home Office officials were told about the problems. Herbert told MPs: “The police believe that the judgment will have a serious impact on their ability to investigate crime. “In some cases, it will mean that suspects who would normally be released on bail are detained for longer. It is likely that, in most forces, there will not be enough capacity to detain everybody in police cells. “In other cases, it risks impeding the police to such an extent that the investigation will have to be stopped because the detention time has run out. The judgment will also affect the ability of the police to enforce bail conditions.” He said the judgment “upsets a careful balance which has stood for a quarter of a century and impedes the police from doing their job”, adding: “That is why it must be reversed.” About 85,200 people are on bail in England and Wales at any one time, and the common practice in most major inquiries of releasing suspects on bail and calling them back for questioning weeks later is “pretty much a dead duck” following the ruling, police chiefs said. Police Yvette Cooper Labour Liberal-Conservative coalition guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
‘People are fighting with their guns, we are fighting with our voices,’ says FB 17, named after day rebellion broke out in Libya Bands the world over complain about how tough it was in the early years: no money, no gigs, money-grabbing producers. But such annoyances pale alongside the travails of Libya’s FB 17. Try cutting your first CD in Misrata, with the city under siege and missiles crashing down around you, in a studio that is no more than a bombproof room and a laptop which only works between long power cuts. That was how FB 17 – named for 17 February, the day rebellion broke out in Libya – recorded No More Lies, an album of five tracks which has become a hit across this besieged city. The English lyrics and Arabic rap of the album’s title song blare out of car stereos, shopfronts and crackly radios on the frontline trenches: “No more silence, no more fear, no more lies, no more tears, no more violence, no more screams.” The album was recorded between late March and late April, while rebel fighters were battling with Muammar Gaddafi’s tanks to push government forces out of the city . “When there was electricity we took the chance,” said Mohammed Derrija, 22, nicknamed Modee, who worked as a translator before the war. “The problem was we all lived far from each other so some guy would get a car and collected everyone. Then we would start immediately, and save [each track] immediately in case the electricity was cut.” The seed for the band was sown by Abdullah Elwafi, a 24-year-old singer-songwriter who wrote the first song, We Have a Dream, with his 19-year-old brother, Hakim on 17 February. Abdullah, nicknamed Abdo, lived a life of frustration under the Gaddafi regime. Studios would let a artist cut a song only if it namechecked Libya and its dictator. “Before we could do nothing, just write nothing,” he explains. “We had ideas but because of Gaddafi, he said you write about his family or his legion and that’s it.” When Gaddafi responded to the February protests by sending in the tanks, Abdo and other band members joined the rebels. Guitarist Mohamed Jibril – nickname Haq – was operating a rocket- propelled grenade launcher on Tripoli Street . “I was fighting, but now it’s about the music,” he says. “We are writing new songs all the time. We have many ideas. ” Once the front stabilised and the immediate crisis passed, the five friends decided to cut the album. “After the revolution a lot of bands came out,” says Nidal Hassen, a journalist at Radio Misrata. “In Benghazi there are hundreds of them, but in Misrata there is one band. Their songs, they are not only words. They capture everything we feel.” On a recent evening the band were in their new recording studio, which has a sound booth the size of a phone box, cutting a new album, this time to remember the dead. The sun had gone down and the nightly rumble of Grad rockets slamming into the city to the east was echoing through the streets. Modee said that the work was very different from conventional songwriting: “Just writing lyrics imagining something, thinking about it, and writing about it? No, we’re not doing this any more,” he said. “We’re just writing what we see in front of our eyes.” The band see themselves as plugged into a system in which all citizens do their bit – whether fighting, patching up the wounded, or organising food supplies. Initially, they were surprised by their popularity but now see themselves as on a mission. “People are fighting with their guns, we are fighting with our voices,” said Modee. “We are inspiring them, giving them the courage to fight.” Libya Middle East Africa Chris Stephen guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …