As Hurricane Irene continues to grow as it crosses the Bahamas and approaches the East Coast , the storm is on track to become historically huge, reports CBS News —and it could end up ranking among the likes of 1991′s Hurricane Bob or 1954′s Hurricane Carol. Based on current projections, CBS…
Continue reading …Where in the world is Moammar Gadhafi? Apparently he’s still in Tripoli, where he was almost captured yesterday, according to a source. Libyan commandos raided a private home where he had apparently been hiding, Reuters reports, citing Paris Match magazine. But he was gone from the safe house when agents…
Continue reading …Steve Jobs revolutionized Apple in his second go-round with the company, taking the stock from a split-adjusted $6.05 per share in 1996 to $376 today . But with Jobs resigning as CEO , everyone is wondering what the future holds for Apple. Some reactions: What will change? Not much, write Nathan…
Continue reading …
Critics say Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng’s views on gender and equality ‘make mockery’ of South Africa’s progressive constitution Civil rights groups in South Africa have condemned Jacob Zuma’s choice for the role of the country’s top judge, arguing that the nominee’s views on gender equality and marital rape “make a mockery” of the country’s constitutional rights. Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng was a surprise pick for the position of chief justice, with many critics arguing that he lacked the experience and qualifications of rival candidates. His apparently socially conservative views have also come under scrutiny because, as the head of South Africa’s constitutional court, he will be responsible for upholding one of the most progressive constitutions in the world. Documents seen by the Guardian detail appeal cases at the superior court over the past decade in which Mogoeng’s judgments are being questioned by gender and legal activists. One was a 2001 appeal by a man named Mathibe who tied a woman to the bumper of his car and “drove that vehicle at a fairly high speed over a distance of about 50 metres”. Mogoeng ruled that the two-year sentence imposed was “too harsh by any standards”. Among his reasons were that the accused had been “provoked” and “the complainant did not sustain serious injuries”. Three years later a Mr Moipolai appealed against his sentence for the rape of his common law wife. She was eight months pregnant, and another person was present during the attack. Court records show Mogoeng upheld the conviction but reduced the 10-year sentence, meaning half was suspended for five years. Marital rape is a crime in South Africa, but Mogoeng felt there were “mitigating factors”. He listed these as: The appellant was a first offender; the appellant and complainant were no strangers to each other (they were lovers) and said: “But for the presence of [another person], the appellant and complainant would probably have had consensual intercourse.” Another case was the 2007 appeal of a man named Modise, who had been jailed for five years for attempted rape. He and his victim were undergoing a divorce and had not shared the same bed for almost a year. One night, Modise went to the marital bedroom and later the complainant went to bed, where the incident took place. Mogoeng was among the judges who suspended the man’s sentence, stating: “The desire to make love to his wife must have overwhelmed him, hence his somewhat violent behaviour. He, however, neither smacked, punched nor kicked her. Minimum force, so to speak, was resorted to in order to subdue the complainant’s resistance.” The judges added: “The case is not comparable to a case where a lady comes across a stranger on the street who suddenly attempts to rape her.” The documents – which also raised concerns over Mogoeng’s attitude to sexual orientation – are likely to intensify pressure on Zuma, who was cleared of a rape charge before his election as president, to rethink the nomination. Louise Olivier, the law programme manager at the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, said: “The South African constitutional court has been regarded by jurists both internationally and on the continent as a model, socially and legally progressive and providing jurisprudence that protects and promotes human rights. “To appoint judge Mogoeng Mogoeng as its chief justice makes a mockery of the substantial constitutional advances made by the court. His previous judgments on gender equality and marital rape indicate that he has scant regard for legal protections that most South Africans hold dear.” Olivier added: “It also shows either that President Zuma’s legal counsel have not done their homework in finding these judgments, as it is unlikely that after reading them they would have advised him to recommend Mogoeng’s appointment, or his views on women’s rights and marital rape find resonance within the presidency.” South African media have reported that Mogoeng belongs to the Winners Chapel International church, which preaches that homosexuality is a perversion that can be cured. The City Press newspaper said Mogoeng is a member of the Johannesburg branch and provides “pastoral services”, such as house visits, but does not preach. There has already been a strong backlash against Zuma’s decision to overlook the deputy chief justice Dikgang Moseneke, widely seen as a formidable legal mind. Pierre de Vos, an expert in constitutional law, said: “It is as if president Zuma, acting like a spoilt child who could not get his way with the extension of the term of office of the outgoing chief justice because he relied on a clearly unconstitutional provision to do so, is now trying to get back at critics by indicating a wish to appoint one of the less suitable candidates to that post.” Jacob Zuma South Africa Africa David Smith guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Critics say Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng’s views on gender and equality ‘make mockery’ of South Africa’s progressive constitution Civil rights groups in South Africa have condemned Jacob Zuma’s choice for the role of the country’s top judge, arguing that the nominee’s views on gender equality and marital rape “make a mockery” of the country’s constitutional rights. Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng was a surprise pick for the position of chief justice, with many critics arguing that he lacked the experience and qualifications of rival candidates. His apparently socially conservative views have also come under scrutiny because, as the head of South Africa’s constitutional court, he will be responsible for upholding one of the most progressive constitutions in the world. Documents seen by the Guardian detail appeal cases at the superior court over the past decade in which Mogoeng’s judgments are being questioned by gender and legal activists. One was a 2001 appeal by a man named Mathibe who tied a woman to the bumper of his car and “drove that vehicle at a fairly high speed over a distance of about 50 metres”. Mogoeng ruled that the two-year sentence imposed was “too harsh by any standards”. Among his reasons were that the accused had been “provoked” and “the complainant did not sustain serious injuries”. Three years later a Mr Moipolai appealed against his sentence for the rape of his common law wife. She was eight months pregnant, and another person was present during the attack. Court records show Mogoeng upheld the conviction but reduced the 10-year sentence, meaning half was suspended for five years. Marital rape is a crime in South Africa, but Mogoeng felt there were “mitigating factors”. He listed these as: The appellant was a first offender; the appellant and complainant were no strangers to each other (they were lovers) and said: “But for the presence of [another person], the appellant and complainant would probably have had consensual intercourse.” Another case was the 2007 appeal of a man named Modise, who had been jailed for five years for attempted rape. He and his victim were undergoing a divorce and had not shared the same bed for almost a year. One night, Modise went to the marital bedroom and later the complainant went to bed, where the incident took place. Mogoeng was among the judges who suspended the man’s sentence, stating: “The desire to make love to his wife must have overwhelmed him, hence his somewhat violent behaviour. He, however, neither smacked, punched nor kicked her. Minimum force, so to speak, was resorted to in order to subdue the complainant’s resistance.” The judges added: “The case is not comparable to a case where a lady comes across a stranger on the street who suddenly attempts to rape her.” The documents – which also raised concerns over Mogoeng’s attitude to sexual orientation – are likely to intensify pressure on Zuma, who was cleared of a rape charge before his election as president, to rethink the nomination. Louise Olivier, the law programme manager at the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, said: “The South African constitutional court has been regarded by jurists both internationally and on the continent as a model, socially and legally progressive and providing jurisprudence that protects and promotes human rights. “To appoint judge Mogoeng Mogoeng as its chief justice makes a mockery of the substantial constitutional advances made by the court. His previous judgments on gender equality and marital rape indicate that he has scant regard for legal protections that most South Africans hold dear.” Olivier added: “It also shows either that President Zuma’s legal counsel have not done their homework in finding these judgments, as it is unlikely that after reading them they would have advised him to recommend Mogoeng’s appointment, or his views on women’s rights and marital rape find resonance within the presidency.” South African media have reported that Mogoeng belongs to the Winners Chapel International church, which preaches that homosexuality is a perversion that can be cured. The City Press newspaper said Mogoeng is a member of the Johannesburg branch and provides “pastoral services”, such as house visits, but does not preach. There has already been a strong backlash against Zuma’s decision to overlook the deputy chief justice Dikgang Moseneke, widely seen as a formidable legal mind. Pierre de Vos, an expert in constitutional law, said: “It is as if president Zuma, acting like a spoilt child who could not get his way with the extension of the term of office of the outgoing chief justice because he relied on a clearly unconstitutional provision to do so, is now trying to get back at critics by indicating a wish to appoint one of the less suitable candidates to that post.” Jacob Zuma South Africa Africa David Smith guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …For the five days they were held in Tripoli’s Rixos Hotel by Moammar Gadhafi loyalists, Matthew Chance and his fellow journalists feared they could be executed or used as “human shields.” “We had been acting out in our heads these paranoid scenarios,” Chance told the Huffington Post hours after being…
Continue reading …
Report says armed forces struggling to maintain nuclear submarines and bombs while facing further cuts to resources The risk of accidents and radioactive leaks from Britain’s ageing nuclear bombs and submarines is getting “progressively worse” because of deepening spending cutbacks, according to an internal Ministry of Defence report . The report, which has been released under the Freedom of Information Act, reveals that the MoD is facing an increasing struggle to maintain the safety of the nation’s military nuclear activities as cuts become “yet more painful”. There was a “lack of adequate resource to deliver the defence nuclear programmes safely,” it says. Written by the MoD’s senior nuclear safety watchdog, the report warns that the number of incidents at nuclear sites is “too high”. This poses a “risk to the workforce and public safety and to the environment, in both short and medium term”. It also says that measures meant to overcome prolonged shortages of safety engineers “may be insufficient”, and criticises the MoD for failing to allocate funding for the decommissioning and disposal of 17 defunct nuclear submarines now laid up at Devonport in Plymouth and Rosyth in Fife. The report covers 2010 and was written by Howard Mathers, the chairman of the MoD’s defence nuclear environment and safety board . It offers an assurance that levels of nuclear safety are currently “acceptable”. But he adds: “My confidence in making this judgement is reduced from 2009 due to the adverse trend in resources (which I expect will become yet more painful), further aggravated by constraints on regulatory capacity.” The defence nuclear programmes are unlikely to be exempt from the pressures caused by the MoD’s plan to shed 17,000 military and 25,000 civilian jobs, the report says. The aspiration for a 25% cut in operating costs “is obviously pulling in an opposite direction to the current shortfall in resource”. The study urges nuclear managers “to establish the most robust baselines possible and defend them rigorously.” He cautions that the government’s decision to extend the life of the existing Trident weapons system to save money “will present safety justification challenges”. The release of the 2010 nuclear safety report follows the release of reports for previous years in January . “This again shows that the ever continuing reduction in resources is putting the safety of MoD staff and the public at increasing and indeed unacceptable risk,” said Fred Dawson, a former senior MoD safety official. “The MOD has failed to allocate sufficient resources to nuclear safety,” he told the Guardian. “The report acknowledges this situation is becoming worse and not better.” Dawson worked for the MoD for 31 years and was head of the radiation protection policy team before retiring in 2009. The repeated warnings by Mathers and his predecessors were clearly failing to persuade ministers to devote enough money to nuclear safety, he argued. John Ainslie, the co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament , accused the government of “cutting corners” on nuclear safety. “The defence minister, Liam Fox, is determined to replace Trident, but he doesn’t want to spend money on protecting the public from a nuclear accident.” The MoD stressed that it maintained the highest standards of nuclear safety and had an excellent record over the last 50 years. “This is recognised in the report, which describes a wide range of actions we have already taken to ensure we have sufficient numbers of qualified and experienced personnel,” said an MoD spokeswoman. “As is routine for all MoD programmes, the submarine dismantling project is funded in stages and is fully funded for the current assessment phase.” Nuclear weapons Defence policy Military Trident Rob Edwards guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Report says armed forces struggling to maintain nuclear submarines and bombs while facing further cuts to resources The risk of accidents and radioactive leaks from Britain’s ageing nuclear bombs and submarines is getting “progressively worse” because of deepening spending cutbacks, according to an internal Ministry of Defence report . The report, which has been released under the Freedom of Information Act, reveals that the MoD is facing an increasing struggle to maintain the safety of the nation’s military nuclear activities as cuts become “yet more painful”. There was a “lack of adequate resource to deliver the defence nuclear programmes safely,” it says. Written by the MoD’s senior nuclear safety watchdog, the report warns that the number of incidents at nuclear sites is “too high”. This poses a “risk to the workforce and public safety and to the environment, in both short and medium term”. It also says that measures meant to overcome prolonged shortages of safety engineers “may be insufficient”, and criticises the MoD for failing to allocate funding for the decommissioning and disposal of 17 defunct nuclear submarines now laid up at Devonport in Plymouth and Rosyth in Fife. The report covers 2010 and was written by Howard Mathers, the chairman of the MoD’s defence nuclear environment and safety board . It offers an assurance that levels of nuclear safety are currently “acceptable”. But he adds: “My confidence in making this judgement is reduced from 2009 due to the adverse trend in resources (which I expect will become yet more painful), further aggravated by constraints on regulatory capacity.” The defence nuclear programmes are unlikely to be exempt from the pressures caused by the MoD’s plan to shed 17,000 military and 25,000 civilian jobs, the report says. The aspiration for a 25% cut in operating costs “is obviously pulling in an opposite direction to the current shortfall in resource”. The study urges nuclear managers “to establish the most robust baselines possible and defend them rigorously.” He cautions that the government’s decision to extend the life of the existing Trident weapons system to save money “will present safety justification challenges”. The release of the 2010 nuclear safety report follows the release of reports for previous years in January . “This again shows that the ever continuing reduction in resources is putting the safety of MoD staff and the public at increasing and indeed unacceptable risk,” said Fred Dawson, a former senior MoD safety official. “The MOD has failed to allocate sufficient resources to nuclear safety,” he told the Guardian. “The report acknowledges this situation is becoming worse and not better.” Dawson worked for the MoD for 31 years and was head of the radiation protection policy team before retiring in 2009. The repeated warnings by Mathers and his predecessors were clearly failing to persuade ministers to devote enough money to nuclear safety, he argued. John Ainslie, the co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament , accused the government of “cutting corners” on nuclear safety. “The defence minister, Liam Fox, is determined to replace Trident, but he doesn’t want to spend money on protecting the public from a nuclear accident.” The MoD stressed that it maintained the highest standards of nuclear safety and had an excellent record over the last 50 years. “This is recognised in the report, which describes a wide range of actions we have already taken to ensure we have sufficient numbers of qualified and experienced personnel,” said an MoD spokeswoman. “As is routine for all MoD programmes, the submarine dismantling project is funded in stages and is fully funded for the current assessment phase.” Nuclear weapons Defence policy Military Trident Rob Edwards guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
European migrants arriving to fill skilled labour gaps or to study, while British emigration levels fall The government’s cap on migration to Britain from outside Europe is being more than offset by a renewed rise in migration from Poland and other EU countries, immigration experts have warned. British employers are increasingly turning to EU migrants to fill the gaps left by the government’s clampdown on the recruitment of overseas skilled labour from outside Europe, according to Oxford University’s migration observatory. The latest annual statistics show that net inward migration – which Conservative ministers have pledged to reduce to below 100,000 by the general election – actually rose by 21% during 2010, to 239,000. The Office for National Statistics said fewer people were leaving Britain to live abroad and net migration from eastern Europe was up – from 5,000 in 2009 to 40,000 in 2010. Emigration from the UK fell from a peak of 427,000 in 2008 to 336,000 last year. Publishing figures for the second quarter of 2011, covering April to June this year, the ONS said study remains the most common reason for people from outside Europe to come to Britain. Analysts at the Department for Work and Pensions said above-average unemployment rates in eurozone countries hit by the financial crisis, including Spain (20%), Lithuania (16%) and Latvia (16%), were behind increased migration to Britain. They also note that UK national insurance registrations from Ireland rose by 56% in 2010/11. The return of the skilled Polish worker to Britain is also confirmed by the latest figures. The Polish community now numbers 555,000, larger than the Irish (353,000) and the Indian (327,000) communities. “The UK clearly remains an attractive destination for migrants from Poland and other eastern European (A8) countries,” said Carlos Vargas-Silva of the Migration Observatory. “Despite all EU member states having to open their labour markets to A8 workers, the factors that created the initial pull for A8 workers to the UK still remain in place – there is a demand for their labour, wages are still much higher than Poland or other A8 nations and there are now well established A8 communities and networks here to help new and returning EU migrants to find a job and negotiate the complexities of life in a new country.” Matt Cavanagh, migration specialist at the Institute for Public Policy Research, said the figures show that ministers’ hope of meeting their target of reducing net migration to below 100,000 was becoming harder. He pointed to evidence earlier this week that employers were responding to the cap by recruiting more EU workers rather than increasing the skills of their current workforce or unemployed British teenagers. “Ministers need to start thinking about how to harness immigration to promote growth,” said Cavanagh. “All the indicators show that the immigration cap is not helping youth unemployment, which is back up above 20%, with those not in education, employment or training above 20%.” But the immigration minister, Damian Green, said immigration remained a British “addiction” and took comfort from the fact that the 239,000 net inward migration for the 12 months to December was lower than the previous quarter for the first time in two years. “After almost two years of increasing net migration the figures stabilised in the last quarter,” he said. “This explains why the government radically changed immigration policy, from our first months in office, to drive the numbers down with a limit on economic migration and changes to student visas to ensure we attract the brightest and best whilst tackling widespread abuse of the system. We are currently consulting on a range of further measures which will drive down numbers further.” The 2010 net migration figures include the period when the temporary cap on non-EU migration was imposed last July soon after the coalition came to power but exclude the period since April when the cap was made permanent. The ONS immigration figures also show that the number of people granted settlement in Britain hit a record 241,000, including dependants. The Home Office said the bulk were due to the one-off resolution of the backlog of asylum cases many of whom had been in Britain for years. They also show a 9% rise in asylum applications between April and June, including 336 from Libya in the first sign that the Arab Spring is having an impact on the flow of refugees coming to Britain. Some 25,900 people were held in detention in 2010. Nine children were held in immigration detention in July despite the coalition pledge to scrap the practice. Immigration removals and deportations fell to a 10 year low of 11,388 during between April and June. Immigration and asylum Europe European Union Poland Spain Lithuania Latvia Liberal-Conservative coalition Conservatives Damian Green Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …