Yet evidence given by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during hundreds of torture sessions, including over a hundred sessions of waterboarding, is admissible in the US, torture apparently not being duress like the threat of losing your job.
The US is at the same time going through more angst about the underpants bomber. Get this into your heads; people want to kill you because as a nation you behave in a murderous and arrogant way. That does not justify a terrorist in killing innocent civilians; but killing innocent civilians did not seem to bother the Blackwater boys, or the US armed forces who kill innocent civilians every single day.
Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees, said Canadian officials would have to have access to interview Mr. Djamel Ameziane first. The current hold-up, she said, seems to be that the Americans are waiting until they have reviewed all the prisoners’ cases. “No one has formally and officially said that it is waiting for the U.S. to do their internal review but … all signs seem to point to” that cause for the delay, Ms. Dench said. “Once they’ve done the reviews, then they’ll be starting to think about ‘how do we find solutions for all of the people in Guantánamo and how do we involve these different other countries that might play a role?'”Bishop Barry Clarke decided to sponsor Mr. Ameziane as a part of an ecumenical partnership with the Presbyterian Church in Montreal. “There’s an injustice here,” he said, noting that one the Five Marks of Mission in the Anglican Communion is changing unjust structures in society.
"I never thought they would kill us because we were just ordinary people," says Saih. "I only realised [what they were going to do] when they began the countdown... Een, twee, drie." Three soldiers started shooting the men in the back.Rawagede is one of the most notorious events in the history of Indonesian struggle for independence against the Dutch. Witness accounts from survivors (Dutch-Indonesian-Sundanese) say that some young males of 11-12 years old were among those massacred!
According to the village, the soldiers shot dead all the men – 431 people. It was summary justice, meted out as the men were running away or hiding in the river. In 1969, an investigation by the Dutch government into war crimes in Indonesia says 150 were killed in Rawagede.
Saih, now in his late 80s, is one of the 10 survivors and relatives who, 61 years later, are asking for an apology and compensation for the massacre in the Indonesian village of Rawagede carried out by Dutch soldiers on December 9, 1947.
A gay man who faces the death penalty in Iran has won asylum in the UK after protests prompted the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, to reconsider his case.More background here.
Family and supporters of Mehdi Kazemi, now 20, welcomed the decision yesterday not to send him back to Iran where his boyfriend was arrested by the state police and executed for sodomy.
---
Mr Kazemi came to London to study in 2005, but in April 2006 discovered his gay partner had been arrested and named him as his boyfriend before his execution. Fearing he might suffer the same fate if he returned, Mr Kazemi decided to seek asylum in Britain. His claim was refused and he fled to the Netherlands where he also failed to win asylum before returning to Britain last month.
---
In an open letter to the British Government, Mr Kazemi told the Home Secretary: "I wish to inform the Secretary of State that I did not come to the UK to claim asylum. I came here to study and return to my country. But in the past few months my situation back home has changed. The Iranian authorities have found out that I am a homosexual and they are looking for me."
Yesterday, the UK Border Agency said it had decided to allow him asylum, granting him leave to remain for five years.
Whistle-blower finds support in royal circlesPieter van Vollenhoven analyzes problems rationally. And sometimes he meets criticism with a touch of humour and self-knowledge. He has a really independent mind and isn't afraid to put blame where it belongs. In the letter the state-secretary for Defence was urged to request Professor mr Pieter van Vollenhoven to act as mediator; the Dutch government still has to approve his offer to help Mr Spijkers.
Pieter van Vollenhoven, husband of one of Queen Beatrix's sisters [Princess Margriet, shown in the photograph with Van Vollenhoven], wants to act as a mediator in the case of the whistle-blower Fred Spijkers. He says Mr Spijkers is a courageous man, who he gladly wants to help.
Almost twenty-five years ago, Mr Spijkers prevented a Ministry of Defence cover-up after the deaths of eight soldiers. The eight were killed by landmines with fatal design error in the detonating mechanism. At the time, Fred Spijkers, who was a social worker for the Ministry of Defence, refused to tell the widow of one of the soldiers that his death was caused by his own carelessness. As a result of his action, Mr Spijkers still faces problems with his income, pension and tax assessments today. Several parliamentary parties [Labour, Socialists, GreenLeft, Christian Union , the progressive liberals (D66) and MP Verdonk] have called for these problems to be resolved before the summer.
The Ministry of Defence was aware of the faulty detonating mechanism as early as 1970. But it was only admitted by Defence Minister Joris Voorhoeve in 1997.
The question that you should ask the AG nominee is "How would you feel about these methods of 'robust interrogation' being used against US troops if captured by an enemy?" It's acceptable for the US to treat horribly the detainees at Guantánamo, but I reckon there'd be an outcry of disgust if the so-called "enemy" were to do the same thing to American citizens and this country's "partners." I read in the papers about the "grilling" members of the Senate Judiciary Cmte gave to Judge Mukasey and was appalled by their soft-ball questions and his vague answers. Let's face it, he's too much alligned with the policies of the current administration. And his ties to former NYC Mayor Guiliani would make me question his credibility. News reports quote you as saying that Mukasey's appearance before the committee was better than Gonzales' and that Mukasey will be confirmed. Why? Y'all are lawyers, so I guess y'all stick up for each other, with no moral fibre in y'alls bodies. That's why I'm thoroughly disgusted with the congressional leadership, our representatives, and your too often collusion with the actions of the current president and his cronies. Don't give me this bullshit that you are standing up for justice and democracy, because you are not, Senator. You are not at all. I am requesting that you vote not to confirm Judge Mukasey as AG.
The Burlington School Board resolution asking the City Council to spread low-income housing more evenly around the city adds a twist that would place more obstacles in the way of creating low-cost housing.COMMENT: Always loyal to it's corporate and developer interests, the Free Press is dead wrong. Integrating affordable housing in all parts of the city, not segregating it in certain areas only, is not utopian at all. It is a moral issue to keep our neighborhoods diverse and representative of the whole range of people who make up our communities, rather than create pockets of privilege and pockets of the poor.
The School Board resolution passed Oct. 9 was part of the search for a way to reduce the concentration of students from poor families in the two elementary schools in the Old North End where much of the city's low-cost housing is found.
Low-cost housing faces enough controversies that create barriers toward serving people in real need. Too many people see such housing simply as a government handout and a magnet for people who need expensive taxpayer-funded services. Brian Pine, the city's Community and Economic Development Office assistant director for housing, is right to worry that the School Board resolution might lead the City Council to slow down efforts to add subsidized units in the Old North End.
The city planning tools for creating a diverse neighborhood of households with varying income levels is the kind of policy initiative that has a better chance of succeeding -- if at all -- in new developments. Forced attempts to change the socio-economic makeup of an existing neighborhood in a mature city near full development, like Burlington, can be cost-prohibitive and disruptive.
There are solid economic reasons low-cost housing tends to be clustered in certain parts of a community, mainly cost. The tight housing market is putting the squeeze on even solidly middle-income families.
A policy that would create low-cost housing in existing higher-rent neighborhoods makes little sense. Creating a low-cost home in such a neighborhood would require a much greater subsidy than in some other areas of the city. Targeting areas with relatively cheaper housing costs allows those doing the necessary subsidizing -- often with taxpayer dollars -- to get the most for their money.
Also, few people living in a neighborhood of single-family homes are likely to welcome seeing apartments go up in their midst because such buildings would be out of character with what's already there.
For most people who have trouble finding a home they can afford -- different from a home they like that they can afford -- the chief issue is availability, not location. North Street resident Mary Davis put that concern succinctly when she told the Free Press, "It could be anywhere. Just get it to where people can actually afford to live in Burlington."
While the School Board's action might be well-intentioned, the vision behind the resolution is disturbingly utopian, creating a Burlington where each neighborhood reflects the broad diversity -- social, economic, cultural, racial and ethnic -- of the entire city. Solutions to real-world problems are rarely found in utopia.
You’d think, wouldn’t you, that after the warcrimes of Iraq and Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, after the warrantless wiretapping of its own citizens, and the theft of an election, that the congressional Democrats would be taking a long, hard look at any candidate for Attorney General that Bush might’ve nominated. A reasonable person might consider that the very fact that Bush, a known criminal and liar, nominated him or her should be sufficient to put a confirmation on indefinite hold.
You’d be wrong.
This is the man, Michael Mukasey, that the Democrats have agreed is a fit person to be potentially in charge of of the impartial administration of federal justice and to be the arbiter of the legality of all executive actions:the judge who took away habeas corpus.
---
Those who want actual change in America aren’t going to find it via any Democrat.
Either Dems’ve been pressured (it’s not just hippies get wiretapped) or they really do not give a shit anymore for anything except short-term political self-interest or they’ve just gone “Oh, it’s only another 15 months, what the hell, saves hassle”. Any one of those reasons is enough to prove they’ve totally abdicated their responsibility to their country.
An electorate that allows their Democratic representatives to continue to cave in to Bush and the far-right, over and over again, and who then continue to donate to and vote for them, deserves everything it gets as a consequence. America was a great political experiment, once. It’s very sad to anyone who believes in liberty and equality to see it fall apart like this.
Yesterday's demonstration in Jena was a great success on many fronts, but still has two important goals to achieve.
First the successes. It brought the argument to the people who needed to hear it. I'm sure it convinced very few white people in Jena that hanging nooses is more than a prank or that the judicial system is weighted against African-Americans. From most of the quotes I've seen they are still in denial. But I'm equally sure that it made any administrator, legislator, judge or attorney there realise that much of the world does not share their standards. This message reverberates beyond Jena. The notion that what happens in small towns stays in small towns no longer holds. No local official wants a "Jena" on their hands.
Second, it was huge and managed to galvanise a new generation of activists. One of the noteworthy aspects of this demonstration - in contrast to many - is that it appears to have been multi-generational. With nooses and jail time the issues it raised linked the old Jim Crow and new quite effectively.
Third, it revealed a new network of bloggers and radio hosts (similar to the immigrant rallies) that can kept this issue alive when others would have allowed it to die or could not keep it going.
Fourth, it was peaceful. Nothing would have been gained by violence in Jena. The fact that none occurred left locals who had shuttered up the town, in fear of black hordes arriving to ransack the place, with nothing to talk about but the issues.
Now the hard part. The Jena Six remain either in jail or awaiting trial. The demonstration did a great job of highlighting their plight. The judicial system knows the world is watching. Now it is down to the lawyers to get them a fair shake. That means a proportionate punishment for the alleged crime.
And last but by no means least the activists must leverage the attention that has been given to the Jena 6 to raise the broader issues of social justice and racism in the penal and judicial systems in the US. In its details what took place in Jena is very particular to this small town. In its substance - overbearing prosecutors, disproportionate sentencing and racial inequality - it is not aberrant but consistent with the what is taking place elsewhere in the US.
June 7, 2007
Daniel Mark Fogel
President
To Our Friends at Vermont Interfaith Action:
Since I cannot be with you for your gathering on June 10 at Ohavi Zedek Synagogue, I wanted to share this brief personal overview of the results of our recent discussion about the potential for the construction of affordable housing on UVM land.
I think we had a very frank and productive meeting on May 31st. Although we did not see eye to eye on everything, we found much comment ground among us; we have a good foundation from which we can move ahead and make progress on creating more affordable housing. - particularly for UVM employees.
VIA has worked hard to bring attention and awareness to these problems, and I greatly respect the energy, passion and persistence with which you have approached this issue. Although I did not agree with some aspects of your analysis with respect to UVM's role in creating current affordable housing shortages to the local community, we did not spend much time debating these differences. Rather, we quickly moved to what I think is a genuine "win-win" strategy.
That strategy involves the University's sincere commitment to pursue the construction of affordable housing units for our employees on an appropriate site or sites. Such a project needs to be consistent with our University mission, which includes our need to recruit and retain high quality faculty and staff who need to find housing they can afford. On a priority basis we are moving forward to identify, for such a project, potential sites that are consistent with our Campus Master Plan, will not interfere with future academic and other facilities needs, and can be accomplished within our available resources. We will keep this process moving as quickly as possible, and will keep VIA regularly and appropriately informed as to our progress.
In the near term, we will be working behind the scenes with local officials in the municipalities in which the properties we are considering are located. Once we have identified our preferred site(s), a more public phase of discussion will begin.
I am proud of the countless ways UVM positively impacts the greater Burlington community every day. These impacts will be enhanced and strengthened when this project comes to fruition. Be assured that this effort has my full personal commitment and support.
I wish to thank Vermont Interfaith Action for its possible role in helping to address important set of issues, and, with your help and encouragement, I have every confidence that we will succeed in this effort to create more affordable housing at UVM.
With every good wish, sincerely,
Daniel Mark Fogel
Be assured that this effort has my full personal commitment and support.
We will keep this process moving as quickly as possible...
The Anglican divine Humphry Primatt famously described cruelty as “atheism” in his landmark book The Duty of Mercy in 1776, and subsequent luminaries, such as William Wilberforce and Lord Shaftesbury, maintained that cruelty was incompatible with Christian discipleship. The Anglican priest Arthur Broom founded the SPCA (as it then was) as a Christian society in 1824. The contemporary animal rights movement would have been inconceivable without these Christian pioneers.
In fact the “Christian” view of animals is altogether more ambiguous than many suppose. Despite the almost universal view that Christianity teaches that animals are here for our use, the Bible never explicitly endorses that idea — its originator was (most probably) Aristotle.
Many think that the “dominion” over animals granted in Genesis i, 26 means despotism, but since human beings are subsequently prescribed a vegetarian diet (v29-30), it is difficult to see how herb-eating dominion can be a licence for tyranny.
Although most think that human salvation alone is Christian doctrine, many Bible verses make clear that the scope of salvation is cosmic. Untrammelled human supremacy, it is supposed, is part of the core message, whereas the Bible indicates how humans are uniquely wicked, capable of making themselves lower than the beasts — the Book of Job compares us unfavourably with the Leviathan and Behemoth (chaps 40-41).
Last month more than 100 academics (including 40 theologians) helped to launch the new Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, an international academy dedicated to rethinking the ethics of our treatment of animals. Christianity — once judged to be the cornerstone of “speciesist” and “supremacist” attitudes — in fact comprises resources to help us discover more convivial and respectful relations with animals.
Next time we peer into a Christmas crib, with Jesus surrounded by the adoring animals, we should remind ourselves of the survival of an alternative, animal-inclusive tradition at the heart of Christianity.
