BB FANS

UK Big Brother Forums






Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 48  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 04 Oct 07, 19:18 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Father Ties Up Girl To 'Help' Training Sky


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Oct 07, 14:39 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Opposition rejects Burmese leader's negotiation offer
By Andrew Buncombe, Asia Correspondent


The party of the detained Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi yesterday dismissed the military junta's purported offer of talks, claiming its pre-set conditions would force her to admit to offences of which she was not guilty.

The country's senior general, Than Shwe, who was ultimately responsible for the violent repression of pro-democracy demonstrations last week, has said he will meet the head of the National League for Democracy (NLD) if she drops her support for international sanctions and abandons her "confrontational attitude". But Nyan Win, a spokesman for the NLD, said: "They are asking her to confess to offences that she has not committed."

The NLD's dismissal of the regime's conditions – which was supported by activists and campaigners outside Burma – came as the United Nations' special envoy briefed the Security Council about his talks earlier in the week with General Shwe. Ibrahim Gambari said he was cautiously optimistic of progress.

At the same time, the most senior US diplomat in Burma, Shari Villarosa, travelled to the jungle capital, Naypyidaw, for talks with the Deputy Foreign Minister, Maung Myint. The American embassy in Burma has been outspoken in its criticism of the regime and vocal in its support of dissidents and groups such as the NLD.

According to state-run television, General Shwe set out his conditions for talks with Ms Suu Kyi when he met Mr Gambari on Tuesday. He reportedly demanded that she must abandon "confrontation", give up "obstructive measures" and her support for sanctions.

Western activists said General Shwe had been making such demands since 1992. "We have been here before," said Mark Farmaner, of the Burma Campaign UK. "The regime is still refusing to enter into genuine dialogue. Gambari's mission has failed. We have to break out of this cycle. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon must go to Burma and deliver a strong message to the regime that further delay is unacceptable."

The UN leader is unlikely to undertake such a mission without a resolution from the Security Council, but that would be blocked by Burma's most important trading partner, China. Yesterday, Beijing again stated that the repression of pro-democracy protests in Burma did not demand international action. China's UN ambassador, Wang Guangya, said: "There are problems there but these problems, we still believe, are basically internal. No international-imposed solution can help the situation. We want the government there to handle this issue."

Campaigners believe as many as 200 people were killed by Burmese troops as they moved to crush the street protests led by Buddhist monks. The junta, however, claims only 10 people were killed.

In New York yesterday, Mr Gambari told the UN Security Council he was "cautiously encouraged" that the Burmese regime was offering talks. "This is an hour of historic opportunity for Myanmar," he said. "This is a potentially welcome development which calls for maximum flexibility on all sides."

His comments came shortly after Ban Ki-moon, speaking in the Security Council chamber, urged Burma's rulers to "take bold actions towards democratisation and respect for human rights".

Burmese state television broadcast rare footage of Ms Suu Kyi yesterday for the first time in four years. The junta claimed it had freed hundreds of detained monks and restored internet access – steps which appeared aimed at appeasing world opinion. The regime admitted its troops raided 18 monasteries and jailed more than 700 monks as an estimated 2,000 people were rounded up last week.

However, it insisted that only 109 monks remained in custody.

Independent


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Oct 07, 14:42 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Musharraf set for five more years despite questions over election
By Andrew Buncombe and Omar Waraich in Islamabad

Eight years after he seized power in a military coup and six years after making a deal with the US that enabled him to hold on to that power, General Pervez Musharraf is today poised to secure another five years as Pakistan's leader.

National and regional assemblies are scheduled to vote in a ballot most observers say General Musharraf will comfortably win. However, an element of uncertainty was thrust into proceedings last night when the country's Supreme Court ruled the ballot's outcome cannot officially be recognised until it rules on the eligibility of the military leader's candidacy – a decision it will not take for at least 11 days.

The surprise ruling raised the Alice-in-Wonderland scenario of Mr Musharraf's victory being announced "unofficially" with the prospect of the court then seeking to annul such an outcome if it later decided he was not, after all, permitted to run.

Quite how the court would enforce such a finding is unclear. Though the government claimed it would "honour the decision and ... implement it in letter and spirit", it has ignored previous court rulings that would have proved to be inconvenient. Just last month it brushed aside the court's ruling that Nawaz Sharif should be permitted to return to Pakistan without "hindrance" and instead deported the former prime minister when he tried to return from exile and challenge General Musharraf.

In reality, with a power-sharing arrangement with another former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, having been secured, General Musharraf's opponents will face an arduous task to derail him if, has expected, he wins today's vote. Prior to the Supreme Court's decision, General Musharraf's efforts to cement another five years as leader had been progressing seamlessly. In the early hours of yesterday, it emerged a deal had been formalised with Ms Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP). That opened the way for her to return to political life by quashing corruption charges against her and other politicians. Last night, General Musharraf signed that amnesty, the National Reconciliation Ordinance. Pointedly, it does not apply to Mr Sharif's convictions.

In exchange, Ms Bhutto – who plans to return to Pakistan on 18 October – agreed PPP members of the assemblies would not boycott the vote, as some parliamentarians have vowed to do in an effort to undermine the credibility of General Musharraf's victory.

Talat Hussain, director of current affairs at Aaj TV, said: "Throughout all this talk of a deal, Benazir Bhutto has maintained plausible deniability. She has put a good varnish of altruistic motives. There's been a lot of shadow-boxing that doesn't reflect a true state of affairs. Many of these matters were already settled, and it's been more a matter of fine-tuning."

That deal between General Musharraf and Ms Bhutto was heavily shaped by the US and Britain, with diplomats from both countries involved in a dialogue that has been going on for a year. Indeed, the Bush administration – which, in the aftermath of 9/11 gave General Musharraf the choice of being either "100 per cent with us or 100 per cent against us" – has been among the general's most important supporters.

Ayesha Siddiqa, a political analyst and author of Military Inc: Inside Pakistan's Military Economy, said: "The reason that General Musharraf has managed to carry his army with him is mainly due to American support. The very fact that Washington want him there makes it imperative for the army to accept him."

Yet for all Washington's support, many question whether General Musharraf has delivered on his agreement to sign up to Mr Bush's so-called war on terror and confront extremism inside Pakistan. A Western military official in Pakistan told the Washington Post the country's military was not equipped for counter-terrorism.
Independent


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Oct 07, 14:43 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London


Exam failure: the price Gaza's children are paying for international blockade

By Donald Macintyre in Gaza City
Published: 06 October 2007

Unfailingly polite, and spotless in their uniforms of blue and white striped smocks, the teenage pupils from the UN Relief and Works Agency Girls' Preparatory A school in Al Deraj were initially shy about talking about why they had wound up in a remedial class.

"We can't concentrate," said Kholoud Shehada, 15. "We have other things on our minds." What exactly? Kholoud paused before saying hesitantly: "My father is unemployed."

Gradually emboldened the girls began to speak up. They would like new clothes for next week's Eid al Fitr, one of the two great religious festivals in the Muslim calendar, and a time of giving and celebration; but they know it is unlikely. "There are many things we are lacking," said Raja Abu Asser, 16. "Our parents are unemployed. It is difficult for them even to get the basic stationery we need. Living conditions are difficult. We love our school but we would like a happy Eid." And there are other problems at home, some at least a result of a Gaza unemployment rate which a World Bank official suggested in July could reach an unprecedented 44 per cent. "Some of the girls' parents are fighting with each other," said Sojoud Nattat, 15.

With their ready smiles and warm welcome for visitors, the girls are touching on – and understating – only a few of the factors that have caused a devastating deterioration in educational indicators across the Gaza Strip, riven over the past two years by conflict, both internal and external, and by ever-deepening poverty.

UNRWA figures show that in their schools – which cater for the refugee families who make up three-quarters of Gaza's 1.4 million population – the exam failure rates in Arabic for grades 4 to 9 (ages nine to 15) range from 34.9 per cent for grade 4 to a peak of 61.1 per cent at grade 8.

And the figures for mathematics are worse still. At every grade between four and nine more than 65 per cent fail and at grade six the failure rate is 90 per cent.

And to reinforce the point that the problem is specific to Gaza (or at least to the occupied territories; the exam system in the West Bank makes a comparison impossible) the results are dramatically worse than those for UNRWA-run Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria. In Lebanon, just over 90 per cent of Palestinian children passed the Baccalaureate 2 exam in the last academic year; in Syria just under 90 per cent passed the Preparatory State exam.

The results would be a shock anywhere; for Palestinians who, not least in Gaza, set the highest value on education it is social catastrophe. Amna Nabahin, the school's resourceful head, is in no doubt that poverty and unemployment are top of a long list of "inter-related factors". Of course the years of bloody conflict have taken their toll; but a child "whose parents cannot meet the basic needs like a uniform, stationery or pocket money will be anxious and not progress with their studies," she says.

Against a background of two years of a draconian international economic boycott and – since Ham s's bloody takeover in June – a continuous closure by Israel of the main Karni crossing which has seen manufacturing industry shut down and more than 50,000 workers laid off, 10 per cent of the girls admit to coming to school with no breakfast – and the true number is probably higher. "Many girls are very shy and embarrassed to say they have had no breakfast," she adds.

With locally raised donations she has instituted a free school breakfast programme. Such is the solidarity among the girls that "one girl came to us and said her father had got a job and she wanted another girl to take her place for free breakfasts". She said that the mother of one girl who stayed away for the first month finally came to her and admitted that it was because she could not afford the uniform – which Mrs Nabahin then managed to provide.

Whether because they are too busy trying to keep their families together or look for jobs, or because of the apathy often induced by unemployment Mrs Nabahin says only around half of the 120 parents invited to a recent meeting attended. One item on the agenda was domestic violence – husbands against wives, fathers against children and brothers against sisters – which Mrs Nabahin says has increased over the past two to three years. "A father who is unemployed will become aggressive and that will affect family life and make the child less creative," she adds. With an acute shortage of classrooms, the school day is truncated by a two-shift system. And with class sizes of 45 to 48 Mrs Nabahin says "each girl does not get the right to express herself and the teacher is unable to follow up with each child".

Despite its chronic shortage of resources in the face of ever rising demand UNRWA is making valiant steps to alleviate the crisis. This includes replacing automatic end-of-year upgrades with remedial classes like the one at Al Deraj, limiting class sizes for boys – whose results are worse than for girls – to 30, building a new teacher training college, running extra classes in Arabic and maths, and hiring 1,500 new teachers' assistants across the Strip. "The cumulative impact of years of violence, and closures, of disrupted schooling and endemic poverty is clear from the stark exam results," says John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, adding that despite all the challenges "we are determined to ensure that our reforms and our drive to excellence in UNRWA schools will be successful".

It will be an uphill struggle, especially while the isolation imposed on Gaza by the international community and Israel continues. It's hard to over-estimate the impact on a generation of Gaza schoolchildren whom UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness says are being "bred in despair". He adds: "We risk radicalising people who show every sign of wanting only a measure of prosperity and dignity".
Independent


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Oct 07, 14:45 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Inside France's secret war
For 40 years, the French government has been fighting a secret war in Africa, hidden not only from its people, but from the world. It has led the French to slaughter democrats, install dictator after dictator – and to fund and fuel the most vicious genocide since the Nazis. Today, this war is so violent that thousands are fleeing across the border from the Central African Republic into Darfur – seeking sanctuary in the world's most notorious killing fields

By Johann Hari in Birao, Central African Republic
Published: 05 October 2007

I first heard whispers of this war in March, when newspapers reported in passing that the French military was bombing the remote city of Birao, in the far north-east of the CAR. Why were French soldiers fighting there, thousands of miles from home? Why had they been intervening in Central Africa this way for so many decades? I could find no answers here – so I decided to travel there, into the belly of France's forgotten war.

On the battlefield - Birao

I am standing now on its latest battlefield, looking out over abandoned mud streets streaked with ash. The city of Birao is empty and echoing, for the first time in 200 years. All around are miles of burned and abandoned homes, with the odd starved child scampering through the wreckage. What were all these buildings? On one faded green sign it says Ministry of Justice, on a structure reduced to a charcoal husk. In the market square, the people who have returned are selling a few scarce supplies – rice and manioc, the local yeasty staple food – and talking quietly. At the edges of the town, there are African soldiers armed and trained by the French, lolling behind sandbags, with machine guns jutting nervously at passers-by. They are singing weary nationalist anthems and dreaming of home.

To get here, you have to travel for eight hours on a weekly UN flight that carries eight passengers at most, and then ride on the back of a rusting flat-top truck for an hour along ravaged and broken roads. It is hard to know when you have arrived, because you are greeted only by emptiness and silence. What has happened here? Sitting amid the mud and dust and sorrow, I find Mahmoud, one of the 10 per cent of Birao's residents who have returned to the rubble.

He is a thin-faced 45-year-old farmer, and explains, in a low, slow voice, how his home town came to this. "I woke up for morning prayers on 4 March and there was gunfire everywhere. We were very frightened so we stayed in the house and hoped it would stop. But then in the early afternoon my brother's children came running to our house, screaming and crying. They told us the Forcés Armées Centrafricanes [Faca – the army trained and equipped by the French, on behalf of their friendly neighbourhood strongman, President François Bozize] had gone into their house. They wouldn't calm down and explain. So I ran there, and I saw my brother on the floor outside, dead. His wife explained they had forced their way in and rounded him up, along with three men who lived nearby. They took them out on to the street and shot them one by one in the head."

Mahmoud's friend, Idris, lived nearby, and feared he, too, would be shot. He says now: "We could see the villages burning and the children were screaming and really scared, so we ran two kilometres out into the jungle. From there we could see our whole city on fire. We fled along the river and stayed out there. We ate fish, but there weren't many. Some days we couldn't catch anything and we starved. The children were so terrified. Still, when they hear a loud noise, they think there are guns coming and they start shaking." Idris looks off into the distance and continues: "On the fourth day, we saw the French planes come. They each had six rockets that they fired. The explosions were loud. We don't know what they were targeting, or why. Then the French soldiers arrived." A military truck filled with French soldiers rumbles by not long after, its tanned troops wearing designer sunglasses and a "why am I here?" anxiety.

As Mahmoud and Idris talk it gets dark, and a suffocating blackness and silence falls on the city. There is no electricity and no moonlight. They explain in this blackness that the French-backed troops began firing and the French military began bombing in March for one reason: the desperate locals had begun to rise up against President Bozize, because he had done nothing for them. People here were tired of the fact that "there are no schools, no hospitals, and no roads". "We are completely isolated," they explain. "When it rains, we are cut off from the world because the roads turn to mud. We have nothing. All the rebels were asking was for government help." As I stumble around Birao, I hear this every time: the rebels were simply begging for government help for the hungry, abandoned people. Even the bemused French soldiers and the Bozize lackeys sent to the area admit this privately. Yet the French response was with bombs against the rebels' pick-up points. Why? What is there here that they want?

I look out towards the jungle and realise many of Birao's residents are still hiding out there, risking the wild beasts. In the similarly burned-out areas in the north-west, I drive out into the jungle with Unicef and find these clusters of starving families scattered everywhere. In one cleared patch, I find a group of four men with their wives and mothers, clearing an area of ground with their bare hands where they will try to plant peanuts. They are living in handmade huts and set traps to catch mice to eat. Ariette Nulguhom is cradling her eight-month-old grandson with his distended little belly and praying he will survive another night. She tells me: "He's been sick for a long time. We tried to get him to a nurse but there aren't any. We think it is malaria but there is no medicine here. We don't know what will happen... We are all weak and feverish. We're exhausted because we work all day, every day. I have not eaten for days now." When they left behind their houses, they left behind access to clean water, electricity, and medicine. When the Faca burned those homes, they burned away the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries for these families, too.

This is a forgotten corner of a forgotten country. Birao lies and dies in the far north-east of the Central African Republic. CAR itself has a population of just 3.8 million, spread across a territory bigger than Britain's, landlocked at the exact geographical heart of Africa. It is the least-reported country on earth. Even the fact that 212,000 people have been driven out of their homes in this war doesn't register on the global radar. In Birao, I realise I am too close to the immediate horror to find the deeper explanations for this war. I only begin to uncover the origins of this story when I stumble across a very rare find in the CAR – an old man.

A country of children - Paoua

In the CAR, you have beaten the odds if you live to be 42. There are times when this seems like a country of children, swarming around with guns and hardened laughs, without an adult in sight. So when I see Zolo Bartholemew limping past the wreckage of another burned-out town – this time in the distant north-west, outside the city of Paoua – he seems like a mirage. He has no teeth and a creased face, and when I ask, he does not know his age. But he remembers. He remembers the tail-end of the first time the French were here – and why.

"I watched my parents forced to work in the fields when I was a child," he says in Sango, the local language. "When they got tired, they were whipped and beaten and made to go faster. It was constantly like this." The French flag was first hoisted in the heart of Africa on 3 October 1880, seizing the right bank of the Congo for the cause of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité – for the white man. The territory was swiftly divided up between French corporations, who were given the right effectively to enslave the people, like Zolo's parents, and force them to harvest its rubber. This rubber was processed into car tyres for sale in Paris and London and New York. A French missionary called Father Daigre described what he saw: " It is common to meet long files of prisoners, naked and in a pitiful state, being dragged along by a rope round their necks. They are famished, sick, and fall down like flies. The really ill and the little children are left in the villages to die of starvation. The people least affected often killed the dying, for food."

Zolo nods when I mention this. "When the whites were here, we suffered even more," he says. "They forced us to work. We were slaves."

One horrified French administrator wrote in the 1920s that the locals reacted to being enslaved by the corporations by becoming "a troglodyte, subsisting wretchedly on roots until he starves to death, rather than accept these terrible burdens". Areas that had "only a few months ago been rich, populous and firmly established in large villages" became, he wrote, "wasteland, sown with dilapidated villages and deserted plantations".

But in the 1950s, men like Zolo rose and refused to be enslaved. "We followed Boganda," he says. Barthélemy Boganda was born in a Central African village near here in 1910, and, as a child, he saw his mother beaten to death by the guards in charge of gathering rubber for a French corporation. He rose steadily through the Catholic priesthood, married a French woman, and, quite suddenly, became the leader of the CAR's pro-democracy movement. He would begin his speeches to the French by introducing himself as the son of a polygamous cannibal, and then lecture them on the values of the French Revolution with a fluency that left them stunned and shamed. He crafted a vision of a democratic Africa beyond tribe, beyond race and beyond colonialism. He was passionate about the need for a plurality of political parties, a free press, and human rights. He rhapsodised about his vision of a United States of Africa, linking together the countries of Central Africa into a USA Mk II.

"And they killed him," Zolo says, shaking his head and kicking at the earth beneath his feet. On 29 March 1959, not long after the French era of direct rule had ended, President Boganda's plane was blasted out of the air. The French press reported that there had been "suspicious materials " found in the remains of the fuselage – but on the orders of the French government, the local investigation was abandoned. The French installed the dictator David Dacko in his place. He swiftly shut down Boganda's democratic reforms, brought back many French corporations, and reintroduced their old system of forced labour, rebranding it "village work". French rule over the CAR – the whippings Zolo remembers – did not end with "independence". It simply mutated, into a new and slippery form, and it is at the root of the current war.

But the clues to this lie far to the west, in the capital city. " Nothing happens in this country without somebody pulling a lever in Paris," a taxi driver tells me as I leave to travel to Bangui at the bottom of the country, driving through clouds of red-dust and past swarms of street-children. I have an appointment with an underground figure in the opposition to keep.

A tortured president - Bangui

Bangui looks like a city that rose with a heave from the jungle a century ago, and has been sighing back into it ever since. Every building appears to be rusting away, and great eruptions of vegetation are shoving the homes and shops aside, reaching for the sky. On corner after corner there are huge, hideous caricature-statues of black people, showing them as thick-lipped and kinky-haired, giving the city the ambience of a Ku Klux Klan garage sale.

Every few hours, the power supply dies, and the city stammers to a halt. People dawdle in the streets, playing cards and wiping away their sweat with the back of their wrists. It is during one of these blackouts that I arrive at the office of a leader of the opposition with a delegation from the British campaigning group Waging Peace. His office is above a parade of shops, and it is a simple room filled with African carvings and pictures of past and faded glories. He walks towards us in a green suit, and – although he does not say it – we all know he is taking a huge risk by meeting us secretly like this. Last year, 40 political figures who criticised the government of President Bozize were tossed into jail and tortured. " They tried to kill my son. They are trying to assassinate me," he says, with a matter-of-fact shrug. He gives the long, horrible details. I cannot repeat them here because they would identify him – and become a death sentence.

"The country is in a dire situation," he says. "We have been described by the magazine Foreign Policy as one of the worst failed states in the world, after Iraq and Afghanistan." He says the CAR is now " a total and ferocious dictatorship" under the absolute command of Bozize. The roots of the wars in the north-east and north-west are, he says, simple. "Local people in these regions are rebelling against the government, because the government provides them with nothing. There are no services. There aren't even roads. So the rebels rise up to get attention – and the government retaliates by rampaging through the area, killing civillians and burning homes."

So who is this Francois Bozize, and why are the French supporting him with batallions and bombs? I telephone the vast presidential palace to meet the man who stares out from behind a smartly-trimmed moustache in the pictures hanging on every wall, and the President's press officer eventually gets back to me. "Call me back, I am running out of credit on my mobile phone," he snaps. Then he promises a meeting with the President, but finds mysterious "complications" that lead him to cancel every time. There are rumours across Bangui that Bozize is becoming ever-more paranoid and locked down, employing food tasters to check for poison before every meal and refusing to meet strangers. So I look instead to the few scraps of independent journalism that survive here for clues as to who this French love-child really is.

Le Citoyen is distributed on rough photocopied paper every day and sold on street corners for a few pennies – but it is one of the bastions of Central Africa's remaining freedoms. Its editor Maka Obossokotte has a neat grey beard, square cheekbones, and balls of steel. He has been jailed for criticising the President and his cronies more than once, but he insists I quote him on-the-record and by name. "In jail, you were given rotten fish to eat. I got gout. The toilets..." he shakes his head. "It is hell." He says he knows now that "it is very likely somebody from the presidential clan will kill me... Every morning when I wake up, I think there are three beds I could end up in tonight. Back here at home, the hospital, or the morgue." But he says: "I will not be afraid. It is when you are afraid that you lose."

Sitting in a delicious cloud of smoke, puffing away on high-tar cigarettes, Maka talks me through the President's biography. He was born in nearby Gabon, the son of a police officer from the CAR. He wasn't smart at school, but he managed to get a coveted job as bodyguard to Jean-Bedel Bokassa, one of the vicious dictators flattered and fawned over by the French. Bokassa was famously mad, declaring himself "Emperor of the CAR", eating the leader of the opposition, and opening fire on a group of children who were protesting for help to buy their school uniforms. Bozize carried Bokassa's cane and his bag, and, Maka explains: "It was through watching him that Bozize got his taste for power." The "Emperor" promoted him to the rank of general.

After a while, Bokassa's foaming madness made him an unreliable servant of the French, so they backed a coup against him. Bozize left to study at the Ecole Spécial Militaire de Saint-Cyr in France, and returned only to stage a farcical coup attempt of his own. In 1982, he seized control of one of the national radio stations and announced that he was now President. Everybody laughed; Bozize fled. A few years later he was deported back to Bangui to be punished. "They tortured him," Maka says. "They pissed in his mouth, they broke his ribs, they really mistreated him for three years."

Eventually, they let him go back to France for medical treatment – and the French government swiftly began to build him up as an alternative president, in case their current pick became too disobedient and got ideas of his own. From being a poor man, Bozize suddenly had the money to run a huge presidential campaign. He ran, and he lost. So in October 2002, he paid for a vast private mercenary army (you might wonder – with whose money?) to invade the CAR from neighbouring Chad, depose the sitting president and install himself as the supreme ruler. Since then, he has "won" a disputed election he arranged for himself and bathed in French approbation.

"France sees the CAR as a colony," Maka says. "The presidents are selected by France, not elected by the people. The presidents do not serve the interests of this country; they serve the interests of France." He lists the French corporations who use the CAR as a base to grab Central African resources. This French behaviour is, he reasons, at the root of the wars currently ripping apart the north of the country. Whoever becomes president knows his power flows down from Paris, not up from the people – so he has no incentive to build support by developing the country. Rebellions become inevitable, and the president crushes them with the house-burnings and French bombs I learned about in Birao.

"The country will only be able to develop when France stops putting in place these dictators and the people choose," Maka adds, stubbing out his cigarette into an overflowing ashtray. "The CAR will only progress when the president is scared of his people, not the French."

Into rebel country - Bossangoa

I am driving now through the skin-sizzling heat of Bossangoa, the home-town of Bozize – and the last outpost of his power before you stumble into bandit-and-rebel territory. The Marie Celeste villages stretch for miles once more. Silence. Walls eaten by fire. Dead towns. In the houses there are smashed pots, abandoned as their residents fled Bozize's marauding murderers. I find a stray shoe sitting alone in one. In another village, the bell that calls children to school is still hanging from a tree, forgotten. On the blackboard is the final lesson, still there: a map of the CAR in chalk.

But then, after an hour of driving beyond Bossangoa into the jungle, there are signs of life. In yet another burned village, there are 20 young men, all sweat and Kalashnikovs. We pull up, and realise we are in an unexpected rebel camp. The boys' leader strolls toward us – an elder, at the age of 24 – and shakes our hands. He explains they are part of the rebel Army for the Restoration of the Republic and Democracy (French acronym APRD), who have taken this area. His "troops" are dressed oddly. One is swearing ski glasses and a ski hat, in a place as far from a ski slope as any on earth. Another is wearing nothing but bright red swimming trunks, and half a dozen strings of bullets around his neck. He is wearing a single woman's flip-flop, silver and glittering in the sun.

They explain they are not allowed to make statements – only their leader can do that – but they are eager to have their photographs taken. As soon as I agree, they contort themselves into wild poses. They stick bullets in their mouths, flex their muscles and screw their faces into a fake rage, like they are recreating a Rambo poster. The baby-faced soldier in the corner, they tell me casually, is 13. They look like teenagers on any street corner anywhere in the world, playing at being rebels. Except these are real rebels, with real guns. A 13-year-old with a gun is a comic sight – until he points it towards you and smiles strangely.

Why, I ask, did you join the rebellion? "Bozize killed my father, my mother and my brother," their leader steps forward to say, in a low voice. He peels up his vest and shows an angry scar where he says he was bayoneted. "They thought I was dead, so they left me." I ask what the rebels want. "We want peace, we want schools, we want roads," the leader says. Most of them nod. Do you want power? "That's up to God. We want roads and schools."

With that, we drive away, and they cheerfully wave their guns in our direction. I follow the trail of burned homes up to Paoua, a town at the top of the north-west – and I am sitting now on a bench with the man who ordered so many to be torched. A lieutenant of the Garde Présidentiel (GP) is chewing gum in the sun, behind barbed wire and sleeping security guards. The GP is the jagged spike of the country's military accountable only to President Bozize – his own private militia. When you see them approach on the streets, with their wild eyes and ready guns, pulses surge and spines stiffen. In the market-square in Paoua, a GP "officer" put a gun to the head of a Médecins sans Frontières doctor and told him: " We will do what they did in Rwanda." And I am making small talk with one of its bosses.

He is wearing long shining purple robes and a white fez, and he tells us haltingly that he will be interviewed, yes, but we cannot use his name. He is young – 33 – with hunched shoulders. His bodyguard is a muscled ripple of anxiety, and he watches every move we make, as if ready to pounce. So, lieutenant, why do you think people join the rebels and fight against you? He makes eye contact only with his bodyguard. "I don't know." Chew, chew. Why do you think people are so scared of the GP here? " There have been a few undisciplined elements, but we have dealt with them." Chew, chew, chew. So it is only undisciplined soldiers who burn all these thousands upon thousands of homes? You don't order them to? "If they burn homes, we deal with them." How have you dealt with them? "We use discipline." He stops leaning and sits up. Really? How many people have you disciplined? When? His bodyguard doesn't like this question; he glares at me. "I had an officer who went to the market when he was not supposed to. I disciplined him." That's it? "We have disciplined."

That's not what people in the villages say, I comment. They are terrified. " Show me the villages. I will show you how we have done good." After we drive away from his compound, we meet up with two pale, disturbed workers from the Italian charity Coopi. They explain that as the lieutenant was assuring us his forces are disciplined, a GP officer drove up on a motorbike and waved a gun in their faces.

At every one of these scenes, the question keeps coming back: why? Why are the French providing military support and training for these militia? The French government says it is in the CAR because it signed a military agreement back in the 1970s to protect the country from external aggression. The rebellions in the north are, they say, supported by Sudan – so this counts. Mes amis, we are protecting a democratically elected President from a tyrannical and genocidal neighbour.

But I couldn't find anyone in the CAR – not a single person, not even the most pro-French – who thought Sudan had anything to do with the rebels. So I arrange to meet up in Bangui with Louise Roland-Gosselin, an Anglo-French director of the group Waging Peace, who has been studying the Central African Republic. "The policies here in the CAR are part of a much bigger approach by France towards Africa," she says. "We call this system 'Franceafrique', and it was set up by Charles de Gaulle to replace the former colonial system. There is clear continuity from the imperial system to the present day."

The motives for this war are, Roland-Gosselin says, drenched in dollars and euros and uranium. "The overarching goal is to take African resources and funnel them towards French corporations," she says. "The CAR itself is a base from which the French can access resources all over Africa. That is why it is so important. They use it to keep the oil flowing to French companies in Chad, the resources flowing from Congo, and so on. And of course, the country itself has valuable resources. CAR has a lot of uranium, which the French badly need because they are so dependent on nuclear power. At the moment they get their uranium from Niger, but the CAR is their back-up plan." So this is, in part, a war for nuclear power? " Yes, but also a lot of this money has been funnelled, through corruption, straight back into the French political process. Say somebody needs a road built here in the CAR. The French government will insist on a French company – and the French company back home donates a lot to the 'right' French political party."

This neo-imperial war reached its psychotic apogee in 1994, when the French government used the CAR as a base to fund and fuel the Rwandan genocide, the most bloody since the death of Adolf Hitler. Vincent Mounie is a leading figure in Sur Vie, a French organisation monitoring its government's actions in Africa. He explains: "The French were totally complicit in the genocide. There were French troops there before, during and after the genocide, backing the most extreme Hutu forces as they murdered the Tutsis. You know the identity cards that divided the Rwandan population into Hutus and Tutsis in preparation for the slaughter? They were printed in Paris."

The French military base in Bangui had to be abandoned in 1996 after it was burned down by enraged locals, tired of the French ramming tyrants down their national gullet. Today the old base is overgrown, and the French military has shifted to new camps in Birao. But I stare at it now. The French planes that backed the Rwandan holocaust left from here.

President François Mitterrand began his career supporting one genocidal force, and he ended it supporting another. As a young man he rose through the ranks of the Hitler-hugging Vichy regime, only quitting and joining the Resistance when it became obvious the democrats would win. He then became nominally a Socialist and, finally, President – when at last genocide entered his life again. The French government had long seen the Hutu nationalists in Rwanda as Their Men, the people most friendly to French demands for military and corporate access. So when, starting in 1989, the Tutsi refugees who had been driven out decades before started to demand their right to return to their homes, the French were furious. Mitterrand saw this Tutsi rights movement as a creation of the CIA, designed to displace a pro-French regime and replace it with a buddy of Uncle Sam. His own aides told him there was no evidence of a link to the CIA – but he refused to listen. He announced that the Tutsis were a "Khmer Noir" , an evil anti-French force, and began to rapidly build up the Hutu Power forces to fight back.

In just four years, starting in 1990, the French buffed up the Hutu nationalist military forces in Rwanda from 10,000 to more than 40,000. The moderate forces within Rwanda began desperately trying to broker a power-sharing agreement between the two sides, "And the French government deliberately destroyed any attempt at a peace deal," Mounie says. Then the hacking up of Tutsi men, women and children began. Mitterrand extended bigger loans to the Hutus, which they used to buy more weapons and ammunition. He publicly mocked anyone who talked about a Hutu-led genocide.

Then, when the international outrage became so great even Mitterrand could not ignore it, the French announced they would send in a military force to stop the killing. "It was France's last lie, and the most cruel," Mounie adds. "Even at this point, Mitterrand's real aim was to recapture Kigali and restore the Hutus to power." In Birao today, many of the soldiers patrolling the city are veterans of this "rescue operation". I am sipping sweet tea in one of the local bigwig's ramshackle houses when a group of local soldiers on patrol arrive. They are working-class men from the Paris and Lyons banlieues, and in the course of the small talk, they admit that they were in Rwanda – and they are still traumatised by what they were ordered to do by Mitterrand and his men. " Children would bring us the severed heads of their parents and scream for help," one says, "but our orders were not to help them."

A year after the holocaust ended, Mitterrand told an aide: "Nobody in France cares about the genocide." These disturbed soldiers, sitting in the waning sunlight, show the old cynic was wrong, at least, about that.

Mother, do not beat us - Bangui

In the red-dusted heart of Bangui, there is a rusting, collapsing metaphor for this war – and where it is going. On one side of the road is the vast stadium the French government built for Bokassa in the 1970s, so he could crown himself Emperor of Central Africa and Lord of All He Surveyed. It is falling down now, a dangerous wreck. Opposite, there is a gleaming new sports stadium with plush seating and marble floors. It was built by the Chinese. France is only one slice of this new great game, this global scramble for Africa's resources. Every swaggering world power – the US, Britain, China – is grabbing Africa's remaining riches now, shunting aside democracy and human rights to get to them. But even the Chinese dictators remember to toss some of the loose change from the riches they have pillaged to Bangui. The French have long since given up even on that. They come only with bullets and bombs.

As I prepare to leave the CAR, I am told by senior French and African sources that Paris could be getting ready to ditch President Bozize. Like a string of Central African dictators before him, he has been tugging too hard on the French leash, imagining he is the independent ruler of an independent country. He has decided to nationalise some of the energy companies operating here, including the French mega-corporations Total and ELF. " If he wants the French to crush his rebellions and keep him in power, he has to do what they say," my source says. Bozize is trying to deal with this pre-emptively, by offering the rebel leaders a place in his cabinet. As I drive past his presidential palace for the last time, I wonder if the paranoia that kept me from meeting him was justified all along.

But as my plane finally propels me away from this place, one CAR voice – angry, crazed – seems to follow me. In the jungles around Paoua, I was taken to the entrance to a remote burned-out village to meet Laurent Djim-Woei, the spokesman for the rebels in the north-west. He is a man talked about in awe by his followers – and his enemies.

A group of young men greeted us. They were carrying spears alongside their ski hats and scars. Silently, they beckoned us to follow them through more charcoal villages and dense foliage and beyond. Eventually we reached a clearing. Laurent was dressed in stained combat gear. He had a big smile that was marred by the absence of almost all his teeth. There were three cellphones hanging from his neck. He led an inspection of his rag-tag forces for our benefit, getting them to stand to attention and yelling hoarse orders at them in Sango. Then Laurent told us to sit down and embarked on a rambling, barely comprehensible lecture.

There were only a few of us in a silent jungle, but he looked beyond us and boomed, like he was addressing a stadium full of supporters. The CAR needs " a guard dog" to "bark about justice" and not "the kind of dog that leads you, which we have had in the past", he said. It is the first of a string of odd metaphors. I kept trying to draw him back to specifics: what does he want? He would only use abstract nouns – justice, peace – but then occasionally he voiced his grievances succinctly, before they were doused in metaphor and burned into incomprehensibility again: " Bozize is burning our villages. A country shouldn't burn its own country's villages. It is like a mother and a child, a mother does not burn her child, it would be madness." His eyes danced nervously around the jungle as we spoke, as if he was waiting for a raid.

"France is the mother of Central Africa, and we are the child," he said, oddly picking up the old racist metaphor and making it his own. " The French must now change sides and support us, not Bozize. The French are our parents, we want them to be good parents." This is a sentiment that kept cropping up in the rubble of France's interventions – an appeal to the French to suddenly become a benevolent mother, acting on the side of good, despite all the evidence. France and the CAR are, it strikes me at last, locked in a sick embrace. The French crave the riches offered by this lush, hungry patch of Africa, and the people of Central Africa pine for a deus ex machina to enter stage right and resolve their internal disputes with raw force.

Looking into the far distance, Laurent cries: "We say to France: 'Mother, we are your child, you must love us like a mother should. Do not beat us.'" In the jungle, his voice echoes for miles, until it dies, unheard.
Independent


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Oct 07, 17:13 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Jim Carrey calls for U.N. sanctions on Myanmar reuters


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Oct 07, 11:54 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
A woman's right? We'll be the judge of that


Five judges in the American Supreme Court have taken what may be the first step towards outlawing abortion in the US. Could it happen here? By Louise France



In their long, black cloaks, the eight men and one woman look like crows on a telegraph wire. In reality they are the most powerful judges in America and, on 18 April 2007, they made a decision which opponents fear brings the end of legal abortion in the United States one step closer.

The legal wrangling in the case known as Gonzales v Carhart had gone on for four years. Behind thick walnut doors there was division and anguish. But the outcome was final. By a vote of five to four the American Supreme Court decided to uphold a federal law that allows states to criminalise a certain form of second-trimester termination. It was the first time judges have agreed that a specific abortion procedure could be banned and the first time that they have approved an abortion restriction that does not contain an exception for the health of the woman (although there is an exception to save the woman's life).


Justice Anthony M Kennedy announced the decision before a hushed chamber. While it did not overturn the landmark Roe v Wade legislation which effectively made abortion legal in America in 1973, the ruling marked an unmistakable shift in favour of the rights of the unborn foetus over the rights of the woman. For America's vocal and powerful pro-life movement it was a moment for celebration. For the beleaguered pro-choice contingent this was yet another example of how the rights of women to access safe abortion in America are being whittled away.

One member of the Supreme Court was particularly incensed. The only woman on the bench, 74-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg was so angry she was driven to speak out. A deceptively frail-looking woman, she was simmering with rage and steely reason.

'The court deprives women of the right to make an autonomous choice, even at the expense of their safety,' she retaliated. 'The protection of reproductive rights is about a woman's autonomy to decide for herself her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature... This way of protecting women recalls ancient notions about women's place in society .... ideas that have long been discredited.'

Trenchant words from a lawyer who has spent her life campaigning for equal rights for women under the law and who once hid one of her own pregnancies under loose legal clothes for fear of damaging her career. Words, however, that could do nothing to overturn the judgment.

While the arguments may differ across America, one fact is clear: women's access to abortion in the United States is diminishing. Last month a storage company in New York - one of the few pro-choice states left in the country - even made a bleakly comic joke out of it. A new billboard campaign on the corner of 44th Street and Twelfth Avenue shows a picture of a coat hanger next to the words 'Your closet space is shrinking as fast as her right to choose'.

For the last 10 years the pro-life lobby has been winning over the cultural and political establishment. She may still be essentially pro-choice but writing in the New Republic the feminist Naomi Wolf surprised many by her use of language when she suggested 'the abortion-rights movement [must be] willing publicly to mourn the evil - necessary evil though it might be - that is abortion'. Campaigners have lamented that this year's blockbuster comedy Knocked Up about a woman who gets pregnant on a one-night stand barely mentions abortion as an option and in the one scene that it is referred to it is euphemistically called the 'A' word. Even Democrats are nervous about speaking out in favour. Last year Hillary Clinton called abortion a 'sad, even tragic choice'.

Gloria Feldt has spent most of her career battling for the pro-choice side, a position which has meant pickets outside her house and death threats from the opposition. The former chair of Planned Parenthood, she describes 'the Gonzales v Carhart decision like a bungee snapping me back to 1950s west Texas where, as a girl, I absorbed the culture's non-aspirations for women'.

She tells me: 'Gonzales v Carhart marks a seismic shift and one that has not been well recognised. It is basically saying that a woman's health is no longer relevant. For the first time it gives more rights to the foetus than to the woman.'

Most states now allow abortion only up to 13 weeks. Some have imposed mandatory 'cooling-off' periods before the termination can take place, some have laws that require women under 18 to have parental consent. In some areas women are required to undergo an information session during which they will be warned about the possible psychological damage they could suffer, or told the foetus might suffer pain. Should a woman decide to go ahead she must pay around $400 for the procedure.

'These incremental changes to the abortion law have played games with people's minds,' says Feldt. 'You can see people thinking "One more little objection. What can it hurt? Women can still get abortions." The problem is that each restriction on access doesn't seem to impact on the lives of real human beings - until it's you.'

A few months ago Feldt received a call from a Catholic priest. He was anxious to talk to her about better sex education. Two parents in his parish had recently come to visit him. Unbeknown to them, their 14-year-old daughter had got pregnant and had been told by the legal authorities that she must tell her parents if she wanted to go ahead with an abortion. Instead she had found someone who could do the procedure illegally. She died.

'There could be more just like her,' says Feldt. 'But we don't hear from them. It's the most vulnerable who are being affected by this kind of legislation, and it's the most vulnerable who never get their stories heard.'

If abortion has been a vexed and debated topic in America over the last decade, it's about to become one in this country too. But what's worrying British pro-choice groups is the notion that the tactics that have been used to great effect by anti-abortion groups across the Atlantic are already proving successful here as well. So much so, they have decided to go on the offensive for the first time since David Steel's landmark abortion legislation was passed in 1967, exactly 40 years ago.

It means that the next few months could be a tipping point for our abortion debate. As well as the attendant brouhaha around the 40-year anniversary, in November the Human Tissue and Embryo Bill goes through Parliament - and lobbyists on both sides of the argument are planning to hijack it on its way through. An investigation by the Commons science and technology committee into whether medical advances in the care of very premature babies means the 24-week abortion limit should be reduced is also due to report before Christmas.

Both sides claim that they represent the majority of public opinion. Both sides quote statistics and research papers and reports from scientists and doctors. In short, both sides of the abortion argument are gearing up for a fight. The prize is the hearts and minds of young British women who may take the right to abortion for granted. (Complacency, one pro-choice campaigner told me, is his greatest fear.)

Admitting publicly to having had an abortion is still relatively taboo. In the media we're much more likely to hear from the 40-something women who can't get pregnant and regret this fact than the 20-something ones who can and don't want to go ahead. However, it is estimated that one in three women in Britain will at some point in their lives decide to have a termination.

The new face in the pro-life corner is a 36-year-old former television researcher from Manchester called Julia Millington. She is the spokesperson for Alive & Kicking, an alliance of 10 groups who want to see the number of abortions in Britain halved. The group first came to prominence four years ago when they highlighted the case of a woman who had an abortion at 24 weeks because scans showed the unborn baby had a cleft palate.

Where once the pro-life lobby might have been epitomised by intense-looking men in corduroy jackets waving graphic placards, Julia Millington has a friendly 'everywoman' air about her with her long blonde hair and fashionable ballet pumps. Funded by donations, Alive & Kicking is based in a chic office in a Knightsbridge mansion block.

The group's website asks the question: 'Nearly six million abortions since 1967. Happy with that? Neither are we.'

'The overall aim,' she says, 'is to make abortion rare. It is trying to eliminate the need for abortion so that no woman finds herself in a situation where she feels she has no choice but to have one. That cannot be the best that we can do for women. When we talk about a woman's right to choose it's often in the name of women's liberation but in fact it's about as far from being liberated as it is possible to get because you end up having a procedure which at the very least is exceedingly unpleasant and for some has repercussions that last for many years. For many it is not a choice, it is the only option.'

She repeatedly uses the word 'choice', a word that has traditionally been part of the pro-abortion vocabulary. It's a sign of an intriguing shift in the pro-life lobby. Their language used to be aggressive and emotional, the emphasis upon the defenceless unborn foetus. They used to talk about God, and morals, and ethics. Now they're more likely to concentrate on what they see as the rights of the woman. Ignore the bits about abortion and Millington can sometimes sound uncannily like a feminist (in America there's even a voluble group called Feminists for Life who are anti-abortion but argue in favour of better social and educational support for women who find themselves with an unplanned pregnancy).

'Women have abortions for all the same reasons they did in 1967,' says Millington. 'We have not done anything to improve the status of women. We have just made this procedure more hygienic and more socially acceptable.'

But try to pin her down about what she suggests is done to improve the lives of women to such an extent that many more of them feel emotionally, economically and mentally strong enough to go through with an unplanned pregnancy, whatever their age or circumstances, is trickier. 'I don't presume to have the answer,' she says. 'All I know is that whatever we are doing isn't working.'

She means the fact that Britain's abortion statistics are some of the highest in Europe. Last year 193,700 terminations were carried out, an increase of almost four per cent on the previous year. In a bid to reverse these statistics Alive & Kicking proposes some of the same policies that have been approved in America: a reduction of the 24-week time limit, mandatory counselling, an enforced cooling-off period. Their prime concern is so-called conveyor-belt abortions. In exactly the same way as has happened in America, the strategy is incremental changes which, taken in isolation, might sound reasonable - even to those who support a woman's right to choose.

But behind these proposals the group remains against abortion of any kind. 'We would never draw a line in the sand before which life has less value than after, because we are equally opposed to abortion in early pregnancy too,' she says.

Ann Winterton, Conservative MP for Congleton, is one of three MPs - all of them female - who have introduced 10-minute rule bills over the last 12 months seeking in some way to re-address the 1967 legislation. She is against so-called social abortions ('I'm not Roman Catholic; it's an instinctive thing') and wants women to be given mandatory counselling before termination procedures. 'One woman told me, "I had a pregnancy test on Monday, a scan on Tuesday, an abortion on Wednesday. No one asked me if I was sure." I wanted to address what I see as the lack of information, back-up and support given to women when they go for an abortion.'

She was inspired partly by a close friend who had an abortion when she was younger and has suffered periodic depression ever since. 'No one chooses to have an abortion without some soul-searching. It is a horrific decision to make. It runs deep and the effect goes on for a very long time.'

Winterton never expected the bill to succeed - with a large pro-choice majority in the House of Commons, including prime minister Gordon Brown, the bill was defeated by 75 votes - but in many ways that did not matter. It did its job by giving another hearing to the pro-life lobby's view that abortion causes long-term psychological damage and reinforcing the idea that they have the woman's best interests at heart.

She sees no contradiction in the idea that, on the one hand, pro-life groups want shorter time limits, and on the other they want women to wait longer before they make a decision. 'The last 40 years have been a horrific story,' says Winterton, sounding increasingly irate. 'I don't think it has done women any good at all. We are on a slope whereby if something becomes available, it becomes more available. We virtually have abortion on demand in this country. Finally the penny has dropped. These are not blobs of jelly that can be flushed down the lavatory.'

In smart, glass-fronted new offices near the British Telecom tower in central London, Tony Kerridge is planning a counterattack. He's the spokesperson for Marie Stopes International, the organisation which carries out about a third of all the abortions in Britain, both privately and under licence to the NHS. He's in the middle of arranging a conference titled Safe Abortion: Whose Right? Whose Choice? Who Cares?, a conference he has described as 'a call to action'.

Since beginning work in this field 11 years ago he's become increasingly concerned about the diminishing proportion of media coverage the pro-choice lobby has received. 'It's time to go on the offensive. Since the 1967 act we've played a defensive role and too often we've felt on the back foot. It's time to take a more positive stance, to create modern legislation for the 21st century.'

Anne Quesney, a former teacher and the chair of the campaign group Abortion Rights, was born in Belgium where abortion was only made legal in 1990. When she was growing up young women would travel to Holland to have a termination. 'There is a sense at the moment that women are harmed by abortion but in my experience women who cannot access safe legal abortion are in much more trouble than the women who can. The situation in the States has very much shaped the anti-abortion rhetoric in this country. They are using the same hot buttons - late abortion, parental concern, psychological harm.

'In the Fifties the anti-choice lobby said ********** made you blind. We've worked out that's not true. Then that abortion made you infertile, which has been discounted. Then that abortion gives you breast cancer. Also disproved. Now they say abortion causes psychological trauma. We all know women who have had an abortion. Is it really having such a devastating effect?'

One of the speakers at the conference is the columnist Suzanne Moore, one of the few female journalists who has written about her own abortion when she was younger. 'Believe most of the media,' she says, 'and you'd imagine we are all binge-drinking, having sex, getting pregnant, leaving it late and going out in our lunchtime to have our babies killed.' For her, denying women the right to an abortion is a type of fundamentalism. 'Objecting to abortion means controlling women's bodies. This is fundamentalist, it just isn't Muslim fundamentalism.'

Marie Stopes International, Abortion Rights and 11 other 'Voice for Choice' organisations have put together their own set of proposals which directly counterbalance those on the pro-life side. As well as extending abortion to Northern Ireland where it is still illegal, they want to see quicker and easier access by ending the legal stipulation that there must be two doctors' signatures before an abortion can go ahead (abortion is the only medical procedure that requires the consent of two medical experts) and the introduction of legislation which would mean a nurse could conduct the procedure in the first trimester.

According to Kerridge, Britain - once the pioneer in abortion rights - has fallen behind much of the rest of Europe. 'At the time it was an amazing piece of legislation, absolutely fantastic. But don't forget,' he says, 'the 1967 law was passed when most doctors were men. It was empowering men to have a hold over women's decision-making and autonomy over their bodies.' Eighty-nine per cent of abortions already happen before 13 weeks; a termination in the first three months is no more challenging than fitting a coil, he argues. 'What women want is something that is quick, over and done with, back on with my life, no fuss.'

If anything has harmed their cause over the last five years it would be the ultrasound images from Stuart Campbell, former professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at King's College London. The arresting pictures of a 12-week-old foetus, repeatedly described as 'walking' or 'sucking its thumb', proved irresistible to newspaper editors and provoked a new debate around viability despite the fact that neonatal experts said the scans, while compelling, revealed nothing new medically.

'Every woman who has a termination knows what she is doing,' says Kerridge. 'She knows that if she doesn't interrupt the pregnancy there will be a baby and it is patronising to think that is going to change because we have more sophisticated ways of looking at the images. An unwanted pregnancy is an unwanted pregnancy. End of story.'

What would be disastrous for the pro-choice side is a reduction in the time limit. Campaigners argue that these later abortions are both rare and often the most vulnerable cases. These are women in extreme and desperate situations, says Quesney. The victim of domestic violence, the teenager who refuses to believe she is pregnant, poorer women who can not afford the £400 to go privately. Campaigners argue that, unlike many other countries in Europe, we don't have abortion on demand, far from it. She recently heard of a woman who had an abortion at 21 weeks who had originally presented at her GP's surgery at five weeks pregnant. Another came up against so many delays from her pro-life doctor - around five per cent are said to actively deter women from having abortions - that she ended up having to carry on with the pregnancy.

'The very few women who make the decision to have a late abortion do so for very good reasons,' says Quesney. 'It is not an easy decision.' It's a view backed up by the British Medical Association who have voted to retain the 24-week time limit.

'The anti-abortion lot cherry-pick their causes,' says Kerridge. 'They go for what they see are the most vulnerable elements. Things like the 24-week time limit despite the fact that that is only one per cent of all abortions.... The fear is that the 24-week aspect will suffer because people are taken in by the one child in how ever many thousands who survives without profound physical and mental difficulties at 23 weeks.'

Suzanne Moore agrees. She believes an attack on late abortion is an attack on all abortion. 'Know your enemy,' she says. 'The pro-lifers have spotted the weak link - the moderates who think abortion up to 12 weeks is OK. Everybody has to wake up and understand that in this country we don't want the kind of culture wars they have had in the US. Don't imagine it won't happen. The anti groups will try to do it, by whatever means necessary.' Observer


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Oct 07, 19:25 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London

WE MUST CONFESS
TORTURE AND ORWELLIAN LIES ARE DESTROYING U.S. IDEALS
nypost


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Oct 07, 19:26 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
U.S. military chief accuses Tehran's ambassador of being senior figure in Republican Guard Mail


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Oct 07, 14:02 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Russian Paper Publishing New Details of Journalist’s Killing nytimes


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Oct 07, 14:04 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Condoleezza Rice opposed Israel’s attack on Syrian nuclear site timesonline


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Oct 07, 20:20 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Fresh-faced Deputy Sheriff shoots dead six teenagers in revenge for 'break-up with girlfriend' thisislondon


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Oct 07, 13:13 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Jerusalem may be part of peace deal, says Israel


Conal Urquhart in Jerusalem
Tuesday October 9, 2007


A senior Israeli cabinet minister said yesterday that Israel may be willing to divide Jerusalem with the Palestinians as part of a future peace agreement.

Haim Ramon said Jewish districts of Jerusalem should remain Israeli while Arab areas could be transferred to the Palestinian Authority. "Wouldn't it be the right deal today for the Palestinians, the western world and the international community to recognise [Israel's] annexation of .... [Jewish] neighbourhoods as part of Jerusalem, and for us to quit the Arab neighbourhoods?" he told Israel Radio.

Israeli and Palestinian leaders are expected to meet at a peace conference next month in Annapolis, Maryland, but a peace deal is not believed to be close.

Mr Ramon, the vice-prime minister, said decisions over the sovereignty of holy sites of Jerusalem such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Haram al-Sharif and the Western Wall would be more complicated. "We need to say there will be a special regime in the 'holy basin', which we will talk about in the future," he said.

Many Israelis insist that Jerusalem should never be shared, even though almost half its population is Palestinian. It is often referred to as the "indivisible" capital of the Jewish people. Israel took control of West Jerusalem in 1948 and conquered East Jerusalem in 1967. Since then Israel has built huge housing estates on the occupied territory, mixing Jewish and Arab areas. Palestinians insist that all of East Jerusalem, including the Old City, should form part of a Palestinian state and that all Jewish settlements are illegal under international law. The former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak proposed dividing Jerusalem in 2000 but failed to reach an agreement with Yasser Arafat.

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, told the Knesset yesterday that he intended to spend the next year working on a peace deal with the Palestinians.
guardian


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Oct 07, 13:15 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Burma shuts down last communication links



Ian MacKinnon, south-east Asia correspondent
Tuesday October 9, 2007

Burma's regime is targeting the last remaining communications links that brought images of the bloody crackdown on the recent pro-democracy protests to the outside world.

Exiled dissident groups in neighbouring Thailand say up to 10 satellite telephones and countless computers earlier smuggled into Burma have been seized, the last lines of contact after the government shut down the internet and blocked mobile and fixed-line telephones.

Officials from Burma's foreign affairs ministry and home department security officers also visited a UN office in the Traders Hotel in downtown Rangoon late last week and demanded to see the organisation's permits for its satellite phones.


The officials also inspected the Japan International Co-operation Agency at the Sakura Tower and offices at the Sedona Hotel, which has a vantage point overlooking the Shwedagon Pagoda, one of the flashpoints for the demonstrations.

"I think they came to the Traders Hotel and Sakura Tower in an effort to identify the systems that allowed information about the demonstrations to get out," said a UN official.

The junta's determination to snuff out the last trickles of information signals its paranoia over the damage images of the military's suppression of the demonstrations had inflicted. The pictures, coupled with accounts from bloggers, fuelled the international community's anger over the beatings and arrests of monks, and the killing of at least 13 that heightened demands for tougher sanctions.

Among the most shocking were images of a monk floating face down in a pool and others of the Japanese video journalist, Kenji Nagai, being shot at close range, giving the lie to the regime's claim that he died accidentally from a stray bullet.

Yesterday Burmese exiles, family members and fellow journalists in Tokyo paid their last respects at the funeral of the 50-year-old, who died from massive blood loss after a bullet pierced his liver.

The ceremony came as the 15-member UN Security Council met in New York to debate a resolution condemning Burma's "violent repression of peaceful demonstrations" while calling for a halt to the regime's heavy-handed measures.

Burma's military leaders last night named deputy labour minister Aung Kyi as the "manager for relations" to build bridges with opposition groups. His chief concern will be the junta's dealings with the detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, in line with a suggestion by UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari to Burma's leader, General Than Shwe.

Despite the apparently conciliatory gestures, the arrests of those suspected of taking part in the 100,000 pro-democracy marches were reportedly still continuing in Rangoon. Among those taken were the owners of computers suspected of being used to transmit images and testimony to the outside world.

Yesterday the British and US embassies in Rangoon, reachable by phone until late last week, were impossible to get through to from outside the country. British ambassador Mark Canning and US charge d'affaires Shari Villarosa were outspoken critics of the regime's actions.

guardian


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Oct 07, 13:59 
Offline
News Team Member
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 30 Dec 02, 18:50
Posts: 63927
Location: London
Is this the footmark of T-Rex? Metro


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 48  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Material breaching copyright laws should be reported to webmaster (-at-) bbfans.com. BBFans.com is in no way affilated with Channel4 or Endemol.