NPR's Julie Rovner lined up proponents of the federal Title X program on Friday's Morning Edition, devoting most of her four-minute report to three employees at a Washington, DC health care clinic who all pushed for continuing the funding of the subsidy for contraceptives. Rovner left only 30 seconds for a conservative advocate of defunding the program. During the bulk of her report , the correspondent featured Unity Health Care's Upper Cardozo Clinic in Washington, DC. She stated that it is locate in a “heavily Hispanic neighborhood” and accented this by playing a clip of one of the clinic's doctors, Andrea Anderson, speaking in Spanish with a patient. Dr. Anderson's female patient had a “sinus problem,” according to Rovner, but continued by noting that the “family physician” also asked the patient “if she's happy with the birth control method she's using. Thanks to the Title X program, Unity has available a wide array of contraceptive options …. Anderson says one of her favorite things about the family planning program is the way it lets her integrate contraceptive choices into her everyday practice .” After playing a clip from Dr. Anderson, who described her routine of promoting contraceptives, the NPR reporter gave a brief history of the Title X program, emphasizing its connection to two past Republican presidents: ROVNER: The Title X family planning program was created in 1970, signed by President Richard Nixon and championed by then Congressman George H.W. Bush . Its goal was to provide low-cost family planning services. Abortion has been banned as an allowed service since the program began. But even so, Title X has long been entangled in abortion politics. Among the many reasons for that is that Planned Parenthood affiliates get about a quarter of all Title X dollars. Planned Parenthood clinics are also the nation's largest abortion providers, although they use don't use federal funding for that. Actually, while this Title X money can't be used to directly pay for abortions, it should be pointed out that the millions of tax dollars that Planned Parenthood receives every year helps the organization use the rest of their yearly budget for services like abortion. Rovner then turned to two more employees of Unity Health Care, who both lobbied for Title X: ROVNER: The controversy surrounding the program is a shame, says Doctor Mark Hathaway, Unity's Title X Medical Director . That's because of the roughly six million pregnancies in the U.S. every year, half are unintended. DOCTOR MARK HATHAWAY: And of that half, half of those end up as abortions, and that's a ridiculously, ridiculously high level of abortions in a country like ours, where we have, supposedly, the best technologies and the best available methods to help women avoid pregnancy when they don't want to be pregnant. ROVNER: And if reducing abortion is a goal, then getting rid of the Title X program is not the way to accomplish it, says Unity nurse midwife, Karen Klauss . KAREN KLAUSS, NURSE MIDWIFE: If the Title X program goes away, there's no question that the unintended pregnancies would go up and, as a consequence of that, abortions across the country would go up. The correspondent finally turned to the conservative opponents of Title X near the end of her report, but then countered with another liberal-leaning argument to keep it: ROVNER: Some religious conservatives oppose the entire idea of the government handing out contraceptives, particularly to people who aren't married. But others oppose the program for other reasons. Chuck Donovan is a senior research fellow with the conservative Heritage Foundation . CHUCK DONOVAN, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: At the end of the day, there's just a question of how many things can you afford and is this one a national priority. ROVNER: Donovan says Heritage isn't against contraception. He just thinks the program should be funded through people's individual insurance. DONOVAN: And then it would be a matter of individuals deciding what their needs are and using their insurance dollars to purchase those services, rather than all of the cost and bureaucracy of a federal program. ROVNER: In the meantime, however, as more and more people are losing their health insurance, the demand for services under the Title X program has been rising . In 2009, the program served just over five million patients. I f it actually is cancelled, how those patients will get care remains a question yet to be addressed . This is the second time in two weeks that NPR has vouched for Title X. On March 21, Liza Halloran's article on NPR.org quoted exclusively from liberal supporters of the program or from conservatives who had second thoughts about targeting the program. The accompanying article which Rovner wrote for her network's website featured a sidebar explanation of the federal subsidy of contraceptives taken from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute. — Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here .
Continue reading …
Letter to cabinet colleague accuses No camp of ‘scares and smears’ against supporters of electoral reform Cabinet ministers have become embroiled in an extraordinary row over electoral reform amid claims that the campaign against the alternative vote is “poisoning” British politics and hiding the sources of its funding. In a dramatic break from cabinet etiquette, Chris Huhne, the energy secretary, who backs AV, has written to Tory chairman Baroness Warsi demanding that she “comes clean” over funding and stops the “scares and smears” against supporters of change. He also accuses the campaign of being a front for the Tory party. “Are the No camp campaigning in dark glasses because they don’t want to show that the bulk of their funds, in cash and in kind, are donations from the Conservative party?” Huhne asks his fellow cabinet member. “How many Conservative employees have been seconded to the No campaign? Will you declare the full value of their services properly as donations?” The No campaign has not revealed its donors, which it is allowed to do until six months after the 5
Continue reading …
UN workers warn killings in surge of anger prompted by Qur’an burning could end Afghan mission Syed Jamal had a front-row seat for Friday’s sacking of the UN compound in Mazar-e-Sharif. The small building containing offices for the provincial mission are separated from the bread shop owned by the 17-year-old’s family by just an open drain and a few dozen yards of rutted, unpaved road. The day after the attack, a group of 20 bored policemen were lounging around in the front of the gutted building, biding their time by reading UN leaflets that had become strewn in front of the building, and standing guard in front of a pair of burned-out trucks. But the dramatic events of Friday – events that shocked the world, imperilled the entire UN mission and raised serious doubts about how Afghanistan will handle the handover of power from its foreign backers – were of marginal interest to Jamal and the boys messing around on the corner. And there were mixed feelings about the rights and wrongs of an incident that cost the lives of seven UN staff – four Gurkha security guards and three European UN diplomats – making it the worst crisis to hit the international organisation in Afghanistan. Yes, they thought what happened on their doorstep was wrong – particularly the beheading of two UN staff, who they accepted were only in Mazar to “serve Afghanistan”. But, they said, “the foreigners” needed to understand the level of anger at the desecration of the Qur’an by a Christian extremist on the other side of the world. “Why do they not respect us?” asked Jamal. “We do not burn their Christian books, so they need to understand that the Qur’an is our most holy book.” It was a question repeated in other parts of Afghanistan as anger over the Qur’an-burning fuelled a second day of violence, sparking riots in the southern city of Kandahar in which nine protesters died and more than 80 were injured. Demonstrations in cities such as Kabul and Herat against Florida pastor Terry Jones’s stunt were reported to have stayed peaceful, in stark comparison to Friday’s drama in Mazar. It was in the city’s exquisite Blue Mosque, where Jones’s Qur’an-burning was the subject of a Friday-prayers sermon, that the afternoon’s bloody sequence of events began to unfold. Upon leaving the mosque, worshippers found another set of religious leaders in a Toyota Corolla kitted out with loudspeakers urging people to join them at the burning of Jones in effigy. But then the crowd turned and started walking the one-mile journey towards the UN compound. Atiullah Ansari, head of the Blue Mosque, said there had been no plan to do that and claimed that radical madrasa students from outside the city were to blame. These “agents of the Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami [a Taliban-allied insurgent group]” were solely responsible for the violence, he argued. That view was also being pushed by provincial government officials keen to blame a small minority for inciting the violence, although few analysts accepted it. Unusually, one of the Taliban’s spokesmen, Zabiullah Mujahid – a man not usually given to missing an opportunity to claim credit for mayhem – sent a text message to the Observer denying involvement. If the glimmer of popular sympathy for violence in Mazar is disturbing, so too is the fact that such a terrible attack on western civilians should have happened there at all. Mazar is a highly secure city of ordered streets, where cars are regulated by traffic lights which, almost uniquely in Afghanistan, not only work but are obeyed. When Liam Fox, the defence secretary, toured Afghanistan, he made a point of adding Mazar to the usual British itinerary of Kabul and Helmand. “It was a totally unthreatening environment,” he said at the time. “It’s a city the size of Bristol and it felt just like any safe city in Central Asia.” Indeed, there are few signs of the concrete bastions and blast walls that encrust important buildings in other Afghan cities. The newly opened US consulate, which has taken over an old hotel, does not even have razor wire along its not particularly high walls. And the UN compound looks, with hindsight, absurdly under-protected. Little stood in the way of Friday’s crowds except a metal car barrier and a couple of Gurkhas who, on being overwhelmed by the crowds, were beaten with the butts of their own assault rifles, eyewitnesses said. The image of a furious mob cutting down the white men who had come into their midst conjured up parallels with the west’s previous forays into the country, not least the first Anglo-Afghan War, which was preceded by a crowd overwhelming a British position and killing the famous diplomat Alexander Burnes in 1841. That incident had in part been due to the dissolute behaviour of foreigners that had been gradually enraging the locals in the conservative Islamic country for some time. Many believe the same is happening again. “There is a lot of anger after years in which western military operations have caused an accumulation of civilian casualty cases,” wrote Thomas Ruttig , director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network. “Afghans are tired of the repeated initial denials, then admission that something may have gone wrong and then apologies. Paying compensation might be nice gestures but cannot bring anyone back to life.” Politicians, including the president Hamid Karzai, tap into public anger in order – claim his many critics – to mask his own shortcomings. The day before the Mazar riots, the Afghan president fuelled the controversy by condemning the Qur’an burning and calling for Jones to be arrested. In days gone by, the UN liked to think it stood above the many conflicts in Afghanistan, working as a vital independent arbiter. Today, however, the international organisation is regarded as too weak to be truly useful by the Americans and partisan by both the government and much of the insurgent movement. The Karzai government’s displeasure with the UN was illustrated earlier this month when Ban Ki-moon, the organisation’s secretary general, received an extraordinary letter from the Afghan foreign minister demanding radical changes to its mandate in the country. The government demanded that the UN close down many of its offices, limiting its presence to just “six recognised zones throughout the country.” The tragedy is that the UN had just started preparing for potentially greater risks to its staff in future, as the country starts a multi-year process of “transition” from Nato to Afghan security control. By the end of 2014, the entire country is meant to be in the hands of the Afghan National Army and its police force, with certain cities and provinces due to be transfer this year – including Mazar. But in a sign that they are not fully confident in Afghanistan’s security services, UN officers have been looking at ways to improve the safety of their staff in areas that are soon to be handed over. Even in Bamiyan, by far the most benign and anti-Taliban area in the country, which is also slated to be transferred away from Nato control this year, the UN has drawn up plans to move from the compound that has served it well for years to the other side of the town and a more secure area. It is the sort of development that is likely to further erode already rock-bottom morale among many UN staff who, over the last two years, have seen their freedom to operate drastically curtailed in the name of security. Today they live and work in increasingly fortress-like facilities and only see everyday Afghanistan through the thick glass of their armoured vehicles. Now things could get even worse, with many UN staffers predicting that – as with the aftermath of an attack on a Kabul guesthouse in 2009 that left five dead – many people might be sent out of the country altogether to work remotely for Afghanistan from Dubai. Writing on her personal blog in response to Friday’s attack, one aid worker called Una Moore said that the episode did not represent the beginning of the end of the international presence in Afghanistan; “this is the end,” she wrote. “Unless we, the internationals, want our guards to fire on unarmed protesters from now on, the day has come for us to leave Afghanistan.” Afghanistan United Nations Jon Boone guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
I’m the editor of Progressive Congress News Transit & Urban Development feed. This is the first in a weekly series of topical posts on cities and the roads & rails that connect them. Trains are a highly-developed, widely-used, and very popular form of transportation — a strange choice of culture war for the right. Yet hatred of trains, especially ones that run on time, is a pronounced theme of Mrs. Rand’s Bible of selfish economic wisdom. After decades of gestation in Hollywood development hell, Atlas Shrugged Part I will soon star star Vice President Joe Biden as Dagny Taggart, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood as Hank Rearden, and Florida Governor Rick Scott as Wesley Mouch. There are some problems with high speed rail (HSR); the big one is that these trains are fast and run on time . That makes HSR competitive with air travel. A train going 110 or even 150 miles per hour makes intercity trips faster than a bus or car, but without having to go through TSA screening. (In fact, if you hate the TSA you should be taking a train as often as possible .) In order to reach these speeds, HSR uses independent tracks . This is a major argument of detractors, for whom the independent rails that let trains run fast and on time are the problem. The word they always use is “Amtrak,” which is Exhibit A for why independent rails are needed : Where intercity passenger trains compete with freight – in most of the country these days, excluding the (Northeast Corridor) – “Amtrak can only run a handful of trains per day because they’re leasing space on a freight railroad that doesn’t keep the schedules,” said Petra Todorovich, an expert on high-speed rail with the nonprofit America 2050. “When [freight trains] fill up their cargo from the yard, then they leave the yard. So Amtrak is trying to run passenger trains on a schedule on tracks that are owned by a railroad that doesn’t keep a schedule .” That’s why rail service in much of the country has been infrequent and unreliable and has been in a poor position to compete with private automobiles or air travel . Amtrak continues to run those lines as a public service, in many cases mandated by Congress – but they’re not profitable or efficient. (Emphasis mine) God forbid trains be profitable or efficient, because people will enjoy the legroom on trains…and the lack of bag fees…and the absence of seat belts. Yet, brace yourself on a platform when Acela goes by; feel the rush. That’s safe, fast, comfortable travel on a reliable schedule, with fuel costs low enough to give the system a price edge on air travel — or driving the Interstates . The costs are not unreasonable, and HSR would actually be less dependent on federal money than highways or airlines . Add the FAA’s $ 16 billion budget in 2010 to the cost of making America’s airline industry profitable again after 9/11, plus the current subsidy levels that airlines enjoy …and that thoroughly price-deregulated and competitive industry is almost as expensive for the American taxpayer as our highways. In today’s dollars, the US interstate system cost about $425 billion to build; even the price at the time — some $114 billion — is more than twice the projected total cost of HSR networks serving 80% of Americans. Yet Amtrak, which took just $1.5 billion in federal funding last year , is “socialism” — see how that works? HSR is actually an example of democratic capitalism . Amtrak stands to get HSR funding, for example, but may also face competition for that funding . The California High Speed Rail Authority has received over 1,100 applications of interest from businesses large and small, local and global . Eight major rail companies were interested in the Florida line before Rick Scott canceled it, leaving Florida’s contractor community feeling ” burned ” because transit creates more jobs than new roads (.PDF). A recent travel survey found that 79% of Americans would like to have the option of a high speed train for their travel plans. Americans are excited; support is bipartisan , and enthusiasm for alternative choices of transportation crosses all ideological boundaries . David Frum likes it . George Will used to like it until Obama did . So why would Rick Scott cancel the Tampa-Orlando project contrary to popular opinion , his Senate Republican caucus , studies that showed it would be profitable , and an astounding industry guarantee that the state wouldn’t lose one thin dime (.PDF)? Well, it’s not just because it’s Obama’s railroad, though that certainly plays a role. Critics called the Florida project a “showcase;” in fact, of all the HSR routes in the nation, the Tampa-Orlando line was simply the most ready to break ground. And it isn’t that Scott doesn’t like railroads, either. He has yet to make a final decision on the Sun Rail commuter project for Orlando, for instance, but his budget proposal includes the state funding . Scott Walker similarly has no problem applying for federal funds to upgrade existing Amtrak lines. Sadly, the answer to this question takes us to an all too-familiar destination. In turning down federal funds, Rick Scott relied on a dubious report from the Reason Foundation claiming the line would lose money. If that name rings a bell, it’s because David Koch is a Trustee of the Reason Foundation . Matt Welch, editor in chief of Reason magazine, is listed as an officer. Together, foundation and magazine promote the work of — get this! Ayn Rand . You can’t make this stuff up. Libertarian institutions hate railroads because the Koch fortune, and through it the various foundations and think tanks and magazines and PACs connected to the Koch fortune, make a lot more money from new roads than new passenger rails. Not only does your new highway have a covering of oil-based asphalt, but building new lanes on that highway instead of a high speed train in the median guarantees you will have no choice in intercity travel. Their “libertarian” opposition to trains is about naked self-interest; they do their goddess proud. In a world past peak oil, supply of oil and oil products will no longer meet demand . When gasoline costs $5 a gallon, it will add some 1.5 billion rides to America’s public transit systems . Rick Scott has yet to explain how a rapidly-aging Florida population will get from Orlando to Tampa; are all those retirees going to drive? Will the highway be widened to thirty lanes? That would be fine with the Reason Foundation, though probably not Floridians. Tea party Republicans all over America seem fixated on not meeting demographic or infrastructure challenges . They want to do away with New Hampshire’s Rail Transit Authority , an entirely volunteer organization that costs taxpayers nothing, in a bid to block HSR in that state. In Ohio, which has turned its nose at HSR funding, the newly-appointed DOT chief — a former asphalt industry lobbyist — is systematically canceling streetcar and rail projects. Alabama , North Carolina , and Wisconsin have all turned down federal funding for HSR projects. But it may not matter. Building a rail system was always going to be a patchwork affair: Texas seems fine with HSR ; St. Louis-to-Chicago is a go ; Washington State is in ; California may actually shift to a transit-first policy for coastal areas , making rails higher priority than roads. Nevada wants to create 34,000 HSR jobs connecting Las Vegas and Los Angeles. The northeast is very interested in HSR , though there are some upstate Republicans in New York who don’t get it . And in Florida, cities along the canceled line are bidding for the lost $2.4 billion as a consortium . When regional lines are built, the pressure on states to link their metro areas to HSR will only grow. For instance, Chicago and Minneapolis would love to meet in Madison; Scott Walker is standing in the way of their HSR love. So it’s time for progressives, liberals, and Democrats to get behind HSR. With rising oil prices , our national security and trade deficit are reason enough to invest in 21st Century transportation. The middle-class green jobs are even better. But a nationwide “going Galt” to declare our national transportation independence from the Kochs? That would be priceless. And precisely on time. Cross-posted at Daily Kos .
Continue reading …WaPo Story on 40th Anniversary of Congressional Black Caucus Omits Incidents of Discrimination Against White Would-be Members
April 2, 2011 No CommentIn her April 1 Washington Post story, staffer Krissah Thompson explored how the “mission” and “challenges” of the Congressional Black Caucus have “evolved” from its initial aim “to eradicate racism.” Yet nowhere in Thompson's 23-paragraph article is any mention of how the CBC has denied entry to prospective members on the basis of skin color, such as liberal Democrats Steve Cohen (Tenn.) and Pete Stark (Calif.). Here's how Politico's Josephine Hearn reported on the controversy surrounding the former in January 2007: As a white liberal running in a majority African American district, Tennessee Democrat Stephen I. Cohen made a novel pledge on the campaign trail last year: If elected, he would seek to become the first white member of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Continue reading …
Sri Lanka 274-6; India 277-4 India win by six wickets Relive the game with our over-by-over report The India captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni and his team-mate Gautam Gambhir pulled off an impressive run chase to beat Sri Lanka by six wickets in the World Cup final in Mumbai. The fourth-wicket pair ensured India did not panic in front of a capacity home crowd after the early loss of big guns Virender Sehwag and Sachin Tendulkar in pursuit of 274 for six. The favourites prevailed with 10 balls to spare in today’s showpiece between sub-Continental neighbours, both seeking their second World Cup, despite a wonderful 103 not out from Sri Lanka’s Mahela Jayawardene. The expectations of many were that this contest might be a tale of two champion players, at watershed moments in their record-breaking careers. But there was no major impact for Sri Lanka’s Muttiah Muralitharan on his last appearance for his country, or a 100th international hundred for India’s Tendulkar in his home town. Instead, with 97 for Gambhir and Jayawardene’s third World Cup century, three other world-class performers took centre stage in a contest just shaded by India. It was Dhoni (91 not out) who completed the job, after promoting himself to No5 and producing his first half-century of the campaign in a telling stand of 106 with Gambhir and then an unbroken 54 with Yuvraj Singh. He did it with crowd-delighting gusto too, smashing a six high over long-on off Nuwan Kulasekera for the winning runs. Cricket World Cup 2011 India cricket team Sri Lanka cricket team Cricket guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Loyalist and rebel forces accuse each other of atrocity in Duékoué, while fears deepen of protracted warfare in Abidjan The full horror of the violence sweeping Ivory Coast has emerged as the battle for Abidjan raged and thousands of civilians faced critical shortages. Forces loyal to President Laurent Gbagbo defied expectations by mounting stubborn resistance in the economic capital for a third day, raising fears of protracted urban warfare and soaring casualties. The heavy weapons fire and fighting left thousands of people barricaded inside their homes and in increasingly urgent need of food, water and medical treatment. Looting is rife amid a sense of lawlessness and anarchy. Deepening the fear in the capital, it was reported that at least 800 people were massacred in intercommunal violence in the western town of Duékoué, which fell to rebels last week. This was despite the presence of hundreds of UN peacekeepers there. In five days, the rebel forces aiming to install Alassane Ouattara, the widely recognised winner of last November’s election, took nearly 80% of Ivory Coast before entering Abidjan and encircling the presidential residence and palace. But hopes for a swift climax appear to have been dashed as Gbagbo makes an improbable last stand. His most reliable fighters, the roughly 2,500-strong elite republican guard, and remaining regular army troops have not yielded to seemingly overwhelming odds. Gbagbo’s Europe-based adviser Toussaint Alain defiantly told reporters in Paris that the president was still in his residence “like Sarkozy at the Elysée and Obama at the White House”. Foreign secretary William Hague called for restraint last night amid the violent struggle for power. “I am determined that all alleged human rights abuses in the city and elsewhere in Côte d’Ivoire must be investigated and those responsible held to account,” he said. “Laurent Gbagbo must heed the calls from the international community and step down at once to prevent further bloodshed.” On Friday, shooting near the presidential palace and residence died down, suggesting that the rebel group had been pushed back. A fighter with Ouattara’s forces, Boubacar Drame, said they were waiting for reinforcements. An adviser to Ouattara said fighters had surrounded the palace, but stopped shooting to give Gbagbo time to surrender overnight. “He said there has been too much blood,” he said. “Ouattara does not want for Gbagbo to die. But he also said that patience has a limit.” The fighting soon restarted on Saturday morning around the palace, state broadcaster and military bases. Gun battles and the sound of heavy weapons fire rang out across the city. The UN said one of its patrols and the office of its mission chief had both come under fire. Residents said they heard loud explosions near Agban base, the city’s biggest compound, in the Adjame neighbourhood near Cocody where Gbagbo has his official residence. There were also rumours of government soldiers fighting among themselves. Jules Konin, who lives nearby, told Reuters: “Mortar fire has been heard since late last night around the gendarmerie. It is very loud and we’re taking shelter in our homes.” A sports coach, who did not wish to be named, told how he and 10 of his colleagues have been seeking shelter from the fighting behind the bar of a sports club for three consecutive days. “I went to look for food yesterday because we had nothing left to eat,” he said. “The streets were deserted – I saw two other people at most, and zero cars. I was able to buy a bag of rice and a bit of cooking oil in a nearby shantytown. But we have all run out of phone credit and we are no longer able to call our relatives.” Henry Gray, a field coordinator for Médecins Sans Frontières, said in an email: “It’s quite a hairy situation here at the moment. We’re hearing constant gunfire along with the occasional heavy detonation. We had been visiting clinics until a few days ago, but the situation on the streets has deteriorated to such an extent that it’s just become too dangerous to go outside. There’s a lot of pillaging and looting going on, and if you’re out on the streets you’re basically a target. There is a real atmosphere of fear, particularly in poorer areas.” At least 1,200 people – mostly Lebanese and European citizens – have sought refuge at the French army base. The Lebanese, who own hundreds of shops and supermarkets across the city, have been particularly targeted by looters. Pro-Gbagbo forces retain control of state broadcaster RTI, which came back on air on Friday after heavy fighting took it down, showing pro-Gbagbo rallies and footage of his swearing-in ceremony after the contested November election. In a bizarre announcement, a news presenter appeared, looking nervous and wearing a dishevelled yellow T-shirt, and claimed the station had been attacked by the UN peacekeeping mission, “assisted by Guinean, Malian, Senegalese, Beninese and Burkinabe mercenaries”. He denied that Gbagbo’s residence had been attacked: “The president of the republic is at work; he continues to watch over Ivory Coast.” A military spokesman then read a statement calling on all military personnel to join forces at five locations in the besieged city. One lieutenant colonel urged the population to “go about their usual business in all quietude”. A flashing scroll said Gbagbo’s youth leader, Charles Blé Goudé, would give an order soon. The army handed out weapons to hundreds in the notorious Young Patriots group last week and they have killed a number of civilians, particularly west African immigrants whom state TV blames for the rebellion. Ouattara’s government spokesman Patrick Achi insisted that Gbagbo’s fall was imminent. “I’m not worried at all,” he told Reuters. “Where is he going to go? He doesn’t control the army or the gendarmerie. They will be exhausted. They are running out of ammunition.” Human Rights Watch called on Ouattara to control his rampant troops, amid reports of atrocities from both sides. Daniel Bekele, the watchdog’s Africa director, said: “Ouattara should send an unequivocal public message to all his commanders and forces fighting on his behalf that reprisals of any kind will be punished.” The rebels have swept south this week, but not without disastrous loss of life. On Tuesday, a day after Ouattara’s forces took Duékoué, intercommunal fighting broke out, killing at least 800 people, the Red Cross said. Kelnor Panglung, spokesman for the Red Cross in Ivory Coast, said there were “lots of people dead in the streets. We could see a lot of people killed. It’s truly horrific. There is no point for us to say if a certain ethnic group has been targeted because this inter-communal tension is a general problem. We are calling on the armed groups to protect the civilian population – this should be a priority.” It was unclear if Ouattara’s forces were involved in the attack in Duékoué, which has been the scene of communal violence before. Ouattara’s government denied their fighters were involved in any atrocities, and blamed the killings on Gbagbo forces. The UN puts the death toll since the conflict began at nearly 500, but events of past week have probably pushed it into the thousands – with no end in sight. Ivory Coast Laurent Gbagbo Alassane Ouattara David Smith guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Terrorism returns to scene of worst atrocity during the Troubles as blast kills officer preparing to drive to work Deadly terrorism returned to the scene of the worst atrocity of the Northern Ireland Troubles when a booby-trap car bomb exploded in Omagh. One police officer was confirmed killed in the blast underneath a car in Highfield Close in the Co Tyrone town. The officer, a local Catholic named as Ronan Kerr, had been preparing to drive to work in the local Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) station. The bomb exploded shortly before 4pm, close to a Gaelic sports club in a new housing development off the Gortin Road, near the town centre. Suspicion for this latest bomb attack will now fall on one of three republican dissident terror groups that have resumed their violent campaigns in the north of Ireland over recent weeks. The attack in Omagh will conjure up memories of August 1998 when a Real IRA car bomb exploded in the centre of the market town. Twenty-nine men, women and children died in the bombing, as well two unborn children. It was the single biggest loss of life during 35 years of conflict. No one was ever convicted of direct involvement in the atrocity, although some of the families of Omagh’s victims later took a landmark civil action against a number of men they claimed were leading figures in the Real IRA – one of the three dissident groups considered most likely to have carried out the bombing. The alleged Real IRA leaders are currently appealing against a high court ruling that they must pay compensation to the victims of the Omagh bombing. The Omagh bomb also resulted in a damning police ombudsman report criticising the Royal Ulster Constabulary’s handling of intelligence material prior to the Real IRA attack. The atrocity came just five months after the Good Friday peace agreement was signed. Although a faction of the Real IRA declared a ceasefire, militants broke away and formed terror units, including Óglaigh na hÉireann (ONH). The group has attracted a number of former Provisional IRA bombers. Last year it detonated a bomb underneath the car of Catholic PSNI officer Peadar Heffron, who lost his legs in the blast. The death of the officer in Omagh brings to two the number of PSNI members who have been killed by terrorists since the police service underwent radical reforms in Northern Ireland. One of the dissidents’ main strategies is to target Catholic recruits to the police service in order to deter nationalists from joining the security
Continue reading …Glenn Beck describes how he and his Jewish friends will all vouch for each other when they stand before Jesus
April 2, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media I was watching Glenn Beck yesterday hosting Daniel Pipes and Christopher Holton as they talked about how leftists are funding Middle Eastern terrorism and the subject turned (as it often does with Beck and the Mideast) apocalyptic: BECK: I was made fun of by bringing up — because I don’t know. You know, I’m a Christian and I don’t know when Jesus is coming back. I have a lot of Jewish friends and I say — I’ve made a pact with them. Look, both die, we get up to the pearly gates and the Savior is there and he’s like hey, I haven’t been to Earth yet. You vouch for me. If he’s like, I’m just about ready to go back, I vouch for you. And I have no idea when — when he’s coming. But it’s always kind of a good idea just prepare. His — how many — how many people are Christian here? OK. How many people — how many people think that a lot of the things — and I know it’s happened a million times. I mean, the apostles were saying, oh, Jesus is going to be right back. He just went to go get a sandwich and stuff. So, how many people here believe that this feels like a time that you haven’t experience in your lifetime? That’s a little disturbing. It left me scratching my head. Now, I’m neither Jewish nor particularly deeply versed in their theology, but I would be awfully surprised if their vision of the afterlife entails meeting Jesus at the Pearly Gates. I checked some online sources for more information, and concluded that this is probably right. Indeed, most Jews I know, if faced with the above scenario, would be pretty upset that they had backed the wrong horse in the big Messiah sweepstakes, you know? Not to mention having Glenn Beck vouch for you. That kind of endorsement likely would land you in Gehenom.
Continue reading …Rep. Eric Cantor finally said what was really on his mind to a Conservative Think Tank (Hoover Institute) about Social Security and America. Campaign For America’s Future: Last week, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said out loud what he really thinks: He believes Social Security “cannot exist.” At all. For anyone . This week NPR played Cantor’s remarks to the conservative Hoover Institution: He declared: “So we’ve got to protect today’s seniors. But for the rest of us? For – you know, listen. We’re going to have to come to grips with the fact that these programs cannot exist if we want America to be what we want America to be.” These guys say things like this at right-wing think tanks, expecting that the folks back home won’t hear them. We want to make sure every person in Rep. Cantor’s congressional district hears those words straight from his mouth. The Campaign for America’s Future isn’t letting Rep. Cantor get away with it. We have a TV ad that will let his constituents know about his extreme opposition to Social Security. But we need your help to get it on the air. The more you can donate, the more we can get his constituents to see the ad and the more we can spread the truth, and put him on the hot seat. Click here to help us keep this ad on the air What does Cantor mean when he says, ” if we want America to be what we want America to be.” Why does Eric Cantor and Conservatives in think tank’s like the Hoover hate working class Americans and seniors so much so that they would destroy Social Security? They are smart enough to know that cutting it now would destroy their election chances in 2012, so they make these sweeping unfactual statements about the future of Social Security. Here’s the link to the NPR news report. Rep. CANTOR: I mean, just from the very notion that it said that 50 percent of beneficiaries under the Social Security program use those moneys as their sole source of income. So we’ve got to protect today’s seniors. But for the rest of us? For – you know, listen. We’re going to have to come to grips with the fact that these programs cannot exist if we want America to be what we want America to be. CORNISH: Cantor says Republicans will unveil their plans for the 2012 budget soon, which will include entitlement program reforms. They’re keeping the details quiet for now. But it’s clear the GOP will have to make the first move, since the president didn’t include changes to entitlements in his budget proposals, and Democrats are on the defense. That’s no easy task, considering the unveiling will likely collide with the ongoing debates over the debt ceiling, the current budget, and the threat of a government shutdown . Please pass this Eric Cantor video around.
Continue reading …