The government unveiled a plan for deep cuts in the higher education budget, which in the worst would slash a fifth from university finance, the Sunday Times reports.
If implemented, it would lead to the widespread closure of university departments, and could cause some institution to shut altogether.
According to the Daily Telegraph, at least 100, 000 students face larger class sizes, and less time with tutors as university and colleges job cuts.
Figures published by the University and College Union (UCU) showed universities have already begun preparing for cuts in funding, and suggested almost 6,000 jobs are at risk.
Previously, the government maintains the higher education spending will rise while contingency plans drawing up 20% cuts in public spending across Whitehall, said the Sunday Times.
Vice-chancellors at universities fear their £8.5 billion budget will be among the first to suffer, whichever party wins the next general election.
Richard Pike, chief executive of the Royal Society of Chemistry, told the Sunday Times: “We were told by staff at the funding bodies that this was the worst-case scenario they were working on.
“Later another member of staff was in contact with us to confirm the 20% scenario. These is a terrible risk to science.”
Graeme Paton, education editor said in the Daily Telegraph, eight out of 10 of the cuts are being made at universities.
This comes from existing fears over a lack of degree places combined with pressure to deliver greater “value for money”, as well as the following imposition of 3,100-a-year student tuition fees.
Graeme Paton went on to write “the elite Russell Group” members such as Sheffield and Leeds universities are among those considering making redundancies, the UCU source revealed.
Sally Hunt, UCU general secretary, told different publications: "In difficult economic times we need to be doing everything we can to help education and the countless potential students who see education as a vital lifeline to improve skills and their opportunities of finding work. The Government may have said it would not let education become a victim of the recession, but those warm words look rather hollow when put up against the hard facts.”
A study by the UCU said 5,891 positions were at risk in the UK - 4,593 at universities and 1,298 at colleges. Over a third of these will be lost in London alone, said the Daily Telegraph.
The study by UCU continuously showed job cuts would be felt across higher education, it warned established institutions would be affected as well as the newer universities, such as London Metropolitan.
At Sheffield University, there would be 340 job cuts, while 100 could go at York and 187 would be cuts at Leeds. A further 160 positions are at risk at Reading University, according to the Daily Telegraph.
However, a spokesman for the department of Lord Mandelson, who is responsible for universities, told the Sunday Times 20% Whitehall plan had not been instigated by minister.
He said: “We remain committed to investing in our world-class higher education system. Funding will increase by over 4% next year and by 25% in real terms since 1997.”
Even if the most drastic option is not imposed, the Sunday Times continues the number on a secret official list of institutions “at high risk” of financial failure is expected to grow from the current seven to as many as 30 next year. This is nearly one fifth of the total.
Figures gathered by The Sunday Times show some universities are tried to resolve financial problems by recruiting more overseas undergraduates.
Those from outside the European Union pay the full cost if tuition – often above £10,000 a year.
University College London spokesman said they had a long-term plan to cut British students and increase its foreign intake.
Another way of helping to plug the financial gap is to increase tuition fees. Minsiters have refused to discuss the issue of raising the £3,225 fee cap in advance of a review by Mandelson, according to the Sunday Times.
The Tories confirmed they were discussing whether tuition fees could be increased.
One option would be for students to pay the extra charge up-front rather receiving taxpayer-subsidised loans, as happens now.
David Willetts, the shadow universities secretary told the Sunday Times: “We will not decide on fees before the review. There are various ideas people are floating and this is one of them.”
20/07/09
Monday, 20 July 2009
Sunday, 19 July 2009
Croydon BNP Election Candidate Rants about “Violent Immigrant”
Croydon Central's BNP candidate was being investigated by his own party after ranting about “violent immigrants” in News Addington, said the Croydon Today.
The 50-year-old postal worker and dad-of-three, Clifford Le May gave his response to a Tory questionnaire urging residents to raise any concern with London mayor Boris Johnson.
According to the Croydon Today, he wrote the answer: “Stop ruining our community by stuffing New Addington with violent immigrants who have no right to live among decent civilised white people.”
In his response, he also refers to his Tory rival for the Croydon Central seat, Gavin Barwell, as a “traitor to his race and nation”.
Both of the Croydon Today and Lancaster Unit said Mr Barwellwas appalled when he read the questionnaire response.
He went on to say: “Mr Le May's comments show the BNP remains a party that judges people not by their actions but by the colour of their skin.
“People who are thinking of voting BNP should be aware what kind of people they really are.”
Mr Le May admits the words were written in anger, but he refused to retract anything he wrote and is now hoping he will not be deselected followed by the incident.
He told the Croydon Today: “I'm not a racist – I'm a British patriot.
“I hope what I wrote won't affect my candidacy.”
Mr Le Mat explained the basis for his strong views. He said his 15-year-old daughter, Eve, was “pepper sprayed and attacked” by a West Indian immigrants in 2007 and his mum, Marie, was punched in a face by two black men at Bayswater station 20 year ago.
He also said his grandmother was mugged by a gang of young black men who left her with a broken hip and died during the surgery to replace it.
He went on to say he can recount hundreds of incidents that 99% of all violent crime will be at the hands of black youths, and everywhere he goes he see violent black men and women.
He said: “I read New Scientist and they say there's evidence that people in gangs are predisposed to violence.
“They didn't bring race into the equation, but you can read between the lines.”
Referring back to his comments on the survey, he denied trying to be inflammatory, according to Croydon Today.
He said he was so annoyed and angry to get his survey from a failed party who are not interested in what he has got to say, and he claimed the Tories and Labour have ruined the country's economy and prospects.
He finally said he stood by what he had wrote, but when he addresses the electorate when a general election date is set he would probably use different words.
Simon, Darby, a BNP press spokesman, said the result of the inquiry will be reported in due course to Mr Le May.
He said he agreed with Mr Le May's sentiments, but he added Mr Le should change the wording and put it a bit more polite – he should have couched his language more.
The 50-year-old postal worker and dad-of-three, Clifford Le May gave his response to a Tory questionnaire urging residents to raise any concern with London mayor Boris Johnson.
According to the Croydon Today, he wrote the answer: “Stop ruining our community by stuffing New Addington with violent immigrants who have no right to live among decent civilised white people.”
In his response, he also refers to his Tory rival for the Croydon Central seat, Gavin Barwell, as a “traitor to his race and nation”.
Both of the Croydon Today and Lancaster Unit said Mr Barwellwas appalled when he read the questionnaire response.
He went on to say: “Mr Le May's comments show the BNP remains a party that judges people not by their actions but by the colour of their skin.
“People who are thinking of voting BNP should be aware what kind of people they really are.”
Mr Le May admits the words were written in anger, but he refused to retract anything he wrote and is now hoping he will not be deselected followed by the incident.
He told the Croydon Today: “I'm not a racist – I'm a British patriot.
“I hope what I wrote won't affect my candidacy.”
Mr Le Mat explained the basis for his strong views. He said his 15-year-old daughter, Eve, was “pepper sprayed and attacked” by a West Indian immigrants in 2007 and his mum, Marie, was punched in a face by two black men at Bayswater station 20 year ago.
He also said his grandmother was mugged by a gang of young black men who left her with a broken hip and died during the surgery to replace it.
He went on to say he can recount hundreds of incidents that 99% of all violent crime will be at the hands of black youths, and everywhere he goes he see violent black men and women.
He said: “I read New Scientist and they say there's evidence that people in gangs are predisposed to violence.
“They didn't bring race into the equation, but you can read between the lines.”
Referring back to his comments on the survey, he denied trying to be inflammatory, according to Croydon Today.
He said he was so annoyed and angry to get his survey from a failed party who are not interested in what he has got to say, and he claimed the Tories and Labour have ruined the country's economy and prospects.
He finally said he stood by what he had wrote, but when he addresses the electorate when a general election date is set he would probably use different words.
Simon, Darby, a BNP press spokesman, said the result of the inquiry will be reported in due course to Mr Le May.
He said he agreed with Mr Le May's sentiments, but he added Mr Le should change the wording and put it a bit more polite – he should have couched his language more.
British journalists arrested while documenting seal hunt
Two journalists were convicted of entering a protected marine area without a permit in Namibia while filming the clubbing of seals, the Washington Post has learnt.
After appearing in a magistrates court in the coastal town of Swakopmund, they were given the choice of 12 months in jail or fine of 10,000 Namibian dollars each - about $1,200, along with a six-month suspended sentence, said Nomibian police spokesman Angula Amulungu.
According to the Washington Post, their employer, the British investigative agency Ecostorm, has agreed to pay the fine, said spokesman Andrew Wasley.
Jim Wickens, a British journalist and his South African cameraman Bart Smithers tried to document the seal hunt at the Cape Cross Seal Reserve in western Namibia at about 7 am on 16 July.
The pair were filming the killing of seals for about 20 minutes before a group of hunters approached and assaulted them, reportedly punching them to the ground and hitting them with clubs, said the Press Gazette.
Andrew Wasley, also the co-director of Ecostorm, told the Press Gazette: "Clearly this was a violent and unwarranted attack on two journalists doing their job; gathering information and pictures of the highly secretive Namibian seal hunt.
"As well as calling for the immediate release of Jim Wickens and Bart Smithers, we want the Namibian authorities to investigate the assaults and theft of equipment."
Jim and Bart were working with Bont voor Dieren – a Dutch charity which is a member of the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) – when they were reportedly attacked by a group of seal hunters armed with clubs.
A spokeswoman from the WSPA said their cameras and videos footage were seized by police before were arrested on suspicion of trespass and obstruction, according to the Press Gazette.
The pair were detained for several hours in the town of Henties Bay after their arrest and before being released on bail. The attackers remain at large.
According to the Washington Post, Namibia's seals number about 850,000 and live on a dozen remote, rocky islands where have a sparse population off its southern African country.
More than 90,000 seals will be clubbed to death during the annual sealing season, which started in early July.
The hunt reportedly takes place under clandestine circumstances to avoid the glare of publicity and upsetting tourists.
The Namibian government has said seals consume 900,000 tons of fish each year, more than a third of the fishing industry's catch, and the fisheries needed to be protected.
Animal welfare groups counter that most of the seals killed are nursing pups.
After appearing in a magistrates court in the coastal town of Swakopmund, they were given the choice of 12 months in jail or fine of 10,000 Namibian dollars each - about $1,200, along with a six-month suspended sentence, said Nomibian police spokesman Angula Amulungu.
According to the Washington Post, their employer, the British investigative agency Ecostorm, has agreed to pay the fine, said spokesman Andrew Wasley.
Jim Wickens, a British journalist and his South African cameraman Bart Smithers tried to document the seal hunt at the Cape Cross Seal Reserve in western Namibia at about 7 am on 16 July.
The pair were filming the killing of seals for about 20 minutes before a group of hunters approached and assaulted them, reportedly punching them to the ground and hitting them with clubs, said the Press Gazette.
Andrew Wasley, also the co-director of Ecostorm, told the Press Gazette: "Clearly this was a violent and unwarranted attack on two journalists doing their job; gathering information and pictures of the highly secretive Namibian seal hunt.
"As well as calling for the immediate release of Jim Wickens and Bart Smithers, we want the Namibian authorities to investigate the assaults and theft of equipment."
Jim and Bart were working with Bont voor Dieren – a Dutch charity which is a member of the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) – when they were reportedly attacked by a group of seal hunters armed with clubs.
A spokeswoman from the WSPA said their cameras and videos footage were seized by police before were arrested on suspicion of trespass and obstruction, according to the Press Gazette.
The pair were detained for several hours in the town of Henties Bay after their arrest and before being released on bail. The attackers remain at large.
According to the Washington Post, Namibia's seals number about 850,000 and live on a dozen remote, rocky islands where have a sparse population off its southern African country.
More than 90,000 seals will be clubbed to death during the annual sealing season, which started in early July.
The hunt reportedly takes place under clandestine circumstances to avoid the glare of publicity and upsetting tourists.
The Namibian government has said seals consume 900,000 tons of fish each year, more than a third of the fishing industry's catch, and the fisheries needed to be protected.
Animal welfare groups counter that most of the seals killed are nursing pups.
Friday, 17 July 2009
Barack Obama Urges Young Black No Excuse for Failure
US President Barack Obama said in his first speech on race since his election there were “no excuses” for failure, the Daily Telegraph reports.
He said: “No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands, and don’t you forget that. That’s what we have to teach all of our children! No excuses! No excuses!”
Mr Obama addressed his speech at the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP).
NAACP, America’s largest civil rights organisation, was currently celebrating its 100th anniversary.
According to the BBC, Mr Obama told the organisation at a dinner party in New York there were “no excuses” for minority children not to succeed.
Jon Donnison, BBC correspondent in Washington said the tone of the speech was passionate, even preacher-like.
The main focus of Barack Obama’s speech encouraged black young people against all the odds to pursue their dreams and live their life the fullest.
He said African American children should instead aspire to be scientists, engineers, Supreme Court judges and president.
“We have to say to our children: ‘Yes, if you’re African-American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighbourhood, you will face challenges that someone in a wealthy suburb does not.’
“But that’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school.” He said.
Apart from urging young black generation to grow up as an educated person, the president also said “the pain of discrimination is till felt in America”.
He added discrimination was still felt by minorities in the US, including African American, Lations, Muslims Americans and gay people.
However, Mr Obama told the NAACP members they had to take responsibility for their lives and their communities, the BBC reports.
He said: “government programmes alone will not get our children to the promised land – we need a new mindset, a new set of attitudes.”
The president then went on to say African American communities had “internalised a set of limitations” and “come to expect so little from the world and from outside”.
Barack Obama also said he wanted to see a return to strong parenting and adults taking responsibility for the discipline of all children in their community.
He drew on his own experience and praised his single mother for giving him “the chance to make the most of life”.
He said: “No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands, and don’t you forget that. That’s what we have to teach all of our children! No excuses! No excuses!”
Mr Obama addressed his speech at the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP).
NAACP, America’s largest civil rights organisation, was currently celebrating its 100th anniversary.
According to the BBC, Mr Obama told the organisation at a dinner party in New York there were “no excuses” for minority children not to succeed.
Jon Donnison, BBC correspondent in Washington said the tone of the speech was passionate, even preacher-like.
The main focus of Barack Obama’s speech encouraged black young people against all the odds to pursue their dreams and live their life the fullest.
He said African American children should instead aspire to be scientists, engineers, Supreme Court judges and president.
“We have to say to our children: ‘Yes, if you’re African-American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighbourhood, you will face challenges that someone in a wealthy suburb does not.’
“But that’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school.” He said.
Apart from urging young black generation to grow up as an educated person, the president also said “the pain of discrimination is till felt in America”.
He added discrimination was still felt by minorities in the US, including African American, Lations, Muslims Americans and gay people.
However, Mr Obama told the NAACP members they had to take responsibility for their lives and their communities, the BBC reports.
He said: “government programmes alone will not get our children to the promised land – we need a new mindset, a new set of attitudes.”
The president then went on to say African American communities had “internalised a set of limitations” and “come to expect so little from the world and from outside”.
Barack Obama also said he wanted to see a return to strong parenting and adults taking responsibility for the discipline of all children in their community.
He drew on his own experience and praised his single mother for giving him “the chance to make the most of life”.
British soldiers death causes “lack of personnel” debate
A British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan after being struck by an explosion during his foot patrol, the Guardian has learnt.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) spokesman said the soldier was the 16th British serviceman to die as under the escalated fight with Taliban.
According to the Guardian, the soldier became the 185th member of the British military to die in Afghanistan to date - compared to the Iraq war, more people have been killed.
The soldier was reportedly from the 2nd Battalion The Rifles and attacked by an explosion while on his foot patrol near Gereshk in central Helmand, the BBC reports.
Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, a spokesman for Task Force Helman told the Guardian: “It is with extreme sadness that I must report the death of a brave soldier.
“He laid down his life for his country and for the good people of Afghanistan. We grieve for his loss and join with his family and friends to mourn his passing. He will always be remembered.”
The continuous death of the British soldiers in Afghanistan raised a new debate about whether British troops are adequately equipped.
General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Head of the British Army told the BBC troops “needed more” and said he would be compiling a “shopping list” of what was required.
Other publications like the Timesonline reports Sir Richard Dannatt flew around Afghanistan in an American helicopter.
The General made it clear he would have flown in a British helicopter if there had been one available and called for greater urgency over the supply of new equipment, though some people accused him of playing politics.
However, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has repeatedly insisted the Army has enough equipment and denied claims of a helicopter shortage, the BBC said.
Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox told the BBC the Conservatives would be “extremely likely” to agree with bringing more troops to Afghanistan, if there were more in office.
Sir Gen Dannatt told the BBC it was “critical” to tackle the problem of improvised bombs in Afghanistan.
He said if we want to ensure the safety of Army forces, we need to receive more coalition troops or Afghan personnel to build better intelligence and better “overhead surveillance” of Taliban activity, and require more technical ability to see where they were planting explosives.
He has also previously called for more “boots on the ground”, pointing out the Ministry of Defence needs to focus its priorities towards the “land environment”, and shift away from navy and air force needs.
However, he added the military chiefs had never made a direct request for 2,000 extra personnel.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) spokesman said the soldier was the 16th British serviceman to die as under the escalated fight with Taliban.
According to the Guardian, the soldier became the 185th member of the British military to die in Afghanistan to date - compared to the Iraq war, more people have been killed.
The soldier was reportedly from the 2nd Battalion The Rifles and attacked by an explosion while on his foot patrol near Gereshk in central Helmand, the BBC reports.
Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, a spokesman for Task Force Helman told the Guardian: “It is with extreme sadness that I must report the death of a brave soldier.
“He laid down his life for his country and for the good people of Afghanistan. We grieve for his loss and join with his family and friends to mourn his passing. He will always be remembered.”
The continuous death of the British soldiers in Afghanistan raised a new debate about whether British troops are adequately equipped.
General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Head of the British Army told the BBC troops “needed more” and said he would be compiling a “shopping list” of what was required.
Other publications like the Timesonline reports Sir Richard Dannatt flew around Afghanistan in an American helicopter.
The General made it clear he would have flown in a British helicopter if there had been one available and called for greater urgency over the supply of new equipment, though some people accused him of playing politics.
However, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has repeatedly insisted the Army has enough equipment and denied claims of a helicopter shortage, the BBC said.
Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox told the BBC the Conservatives would be “extremely likely” to agree with bringing more troops to Afghanistan, if there were more in office.
Sir Gen Dannatt told the BBC it was “critical” to tackle the problem of improvised bombs in Afghanistan.
He said if we want to ensure the safety of Army forces, we need to receive more coalition troops or Afghan personnel to build better intelligence and better “overhead surveillance” of Taliban activity, and require more technical ability to see where they were planting explosives.
He has also previously called for more “boots on the ground”, pointing out the Ministry of Defence needs to focus its priorities towards the “land environment”, and shift away from navy and air force needs.
However, he added the military chiefs had never made a direct request for 2,000 extra personnel.
Government Supports Tony Blair for EU Presidency
Tony Blair will have the full support of the British government for competing as the first EU President, Glenys Kinnock, European Minister told the Guardian on 16 July.
Though many people in Europe have never forgave him to back Bush over Brussels and went war in Iraq, Lady Kinnock, confirmed in Strasbourg for the parliament's opening session, it was “certainly” the former Prime Minister will gain full support from the government.
Kinnock said in an interview with the BBC: “The UK government is supporting Tony Blair's candidature for president of the Council.”
However, the Blair camp, in Jerusalem as he continues his current job as a Middle East envoy, was caught off-guard.
Blair's spokesman told the Guardian: “Nothing has changed. The job doesn't exist, so there is nothing to be candidate for.”
Some of the British diplomats were also caught off-guard and cautioned that Kinnock's remarks remained speculation.
According to the BBC, the post will be created under the Lisbon treaty, which needs to be ratified by the 27 member states.
Ireland is the only country to hold the referendum in early October, if the Irish vote yes on 2 October, EU leaders are expected to decide who will be the political figure to get the top job at a summit at the end of October.
Downing street said if Mr Blair wants to stand for the job, the government would back him, if he wanted to put his name futher, but the Prime Minister's spokesmen declined to say whether Mr Brown had discussed the post with Tony Blair or had encouraged him to stand for the post.
French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who was previously a key backer of Mr Blair, said he “had changed” his mind about Mr Blair's suitability for the post, the Daily Telegraph has learnt.
He have altered his stance, partly because of Mr Blair's perceived "failure" to achieve any change in the Middle East.
The Conservatives told the BBC the British people had not been given a say on whether Europe should have a new president, as the party was previously in an attempt to get a UK referendum on the Lisbon treaty, which were defeated in the Commons.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague told the BBC the new role could be “enormously damaging”.
He went on to say “any holder is likely to try to centralise power for themselves in Brussels and dominate national foreign policies”
“In the hands of an operator as ambitious as Tony Blair, that is a near certainty. He should be let nowhere near the job.”
Though many people in Europe have never forgave him to back Bush over Brussels and went war in Iraq, Lady Kinnock, confirmed in Strasbourg for the parliament's opening session, it was “certainly” the former Prime Minister will gain full support from the government.
Kinnock said in an interview with the BBC: “The UK government is supporting Tony Blair's candidature for president of the Council.”
However, the Blair camp, in Jerusalem as he continues his current job as a Middle East envoy, was caught off-guard.
Blair's spokesman told the Guardian: “Nothing has changed. The job doesn't exist, so there is nothing to be candidate for.”
Some of the British diplomats were also caught off-guard and cautioned that Kinnock's remarks remained speculation.
According to the BBC, the post will be created under the Lisbon treaty, which needs to be ratified by the 27 member states.
Ireland is the only country to hold the referendum in early October, if the Irish vote yes on 2 October, EU leaders are expected to decide who will be the political figure to get the top job at a summit at the end of October.
Downing street said if Mr Blair wants to stand for the job, the government would back him, if he wanted to put his name futher, but the Prime Minister's spokesmen declined to say whether Mr Brown had discussed the post with Tony Blair or had encouraged him to stand for the post.
French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who was previously a key backer of Mr Blair, said he “had changed” his mind about Mr Blair's suitability for the post, the Daily Telegraph has learnt.
He have altered his stance, partly because of Mr Blair's perceived "failure" to achieve any change in the Middle East.
The Conservatives told the BBC the British people had not been given a say on whether Europe should have a new president, as the party was previously in an attempt to get a UK referendum on the Lisbon treaty, which were defeated in the Commons.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague told the BBC the new role could be “enormously damaging”.
He went on to say “any holder is likely to try to centralise power for themselves in Brussels and dominate national foreign policies”
“In the hands of an operator as ambitious as Tony Blair, that is a near certainty. He should be let nowhere near the job.”
Wednesday, 15 July 2009
Barack Obama Inspires ...
U.S President Barack Obama was called an inspiration towards young black Americans by a leading U.S civil rights organisation, during its 100th annual convention for celebrating the country’s first black president, the Reuters reports.
However, the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) said the battles to close gaps in health, education and legal justice all still remain.
According to the Reuters, a study shows Black Americans in U.S occupies 13 percent of its whole population. On average they die younger than U.S whites and earn less money, they are more likely to be imprisoned or have a bad education.
Benjamin Jealous, 36, the youngest person ever to serve as president of NAACP, said people now have a situation in which hope is up, but because the situation has not changed much, frustrations are up as well.
“Since Obama was elected, there’s a feeling of pride and accomplishment, hope for young folks,” said Gerald Stansbury, president of the NAACP Maryland State Conference.
“It’s given them a true picture of what African-Americans can do and that it pays off to stay forthright in the struggle – and that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel,” he said. “We are inspired, and now we need tools.”
Even though America has got a black president “there is discrimination out there”, said Mary Hall, 69, of Fayetteville, Georgia, a retired newspaper executive and NAACP delegate.
Joe Canady, 46, President of the Conway County NAACP branch in Arkansas, said Obama is going to do all he can, but he cannot do it all and we have got to help ourselves. “It’s going to take us all working together.”
NAACP national field director, Stefanie Brown, 28, from Bedford Heights, Ohio, said black Americans now want to see progress in areas where racial disparities still exist.
“People will not only just give him a pass because he is African-America, I feel they still want to hold the president’s feet,” Brown said. “We do want him to be vocal on issues that we care about.”
Since Obama came into office in January there has been more optimism about race relations.
The United States has long fought the battle with racial tensions. Slavery only ended after a bloody 19th century civil war and segregation still persisted into the late 20th century.
For centuries, racism and lynchings targeted at blacks ensued, especially under Jim Crow laws, which were a set of rules promoting the inferior treatment and accommodations of black Americans in comparison to white Americans, and also built up a system with a number of economic, educational, and social disadvantages.
However, the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) said the battles to close gaps in health, education and legal justice all still remain.
According to the Reuters, a study shows Black Americans in U.S occupies 13 percent of its whole population. On average they die younger than U.S whites and earn less money, they are more likely to be imprisoned or have a bad education.
Benjamin Jealous, 36, the youngest person ever to serve as president of NAACP, said people now have a situation in which hope is up, but because the situation has not changed much, frustrations are up as well.
“Since Obama was elected, there’s a feeling of pride and accomplishment, hope for young folks,” said Gerald Stansbury, president of the NAACP Maryland State Conference.
“It’s given them a true picture of what African-Americans can do and that it pays off to stay forthright in the struggle – and that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel,” he said. “We are inspired, and now we need tools.”
Even though America has got a black president “there is discrimination out there”, said Mary Hall, 69, of Fayetteville, Georgia, a retired newspaper executive and NAACP delegate.
Joe Canady, 46, President of the Conway County NAACP branch in Arkansas, said Obama is going to do all he can, but he cannot do it all and we have got to help ourselves. “It’s going to take us all working together.”
NAACP national field director, Stefanie Brown, 28, from Bedford Heights, Ohio, said black Americans now want to see progress in areas where racial disparities still exist.
“People will not only just give him a pass because he is African-America, I feel they still want to hold the president’s feet,” Brown said. “We do want him to be vocal on issues that we care about.”
Since Obama came into office in January there has been more optimism about race relations.
The United States has long fought the battle with racial tensions. Slavery only ended after a bloody 19th century civil war and segregation still persisted into the late 20th century.
For centuries, racism and lynchings targeted at blacks ensued, especially under Jim Crow laws, which were a set of rules promoting the inferior treatment and accommodations of black Americans in comparison to white Americans, and also built up a system with a number of economic, educational, and social disadvantages.
Pope Benedict XVI has fallen under the latest Potter spell
The latest Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince release was surprisingly praised by the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, as “a clear link of demarcation between good and evil” and “making clear that good is right”, the Timesonline said.
L’Osservatore Romano sided with Harry in his battle with You Know Who, arguing that the film promoted the values of friendship, altruism and loyalty.
The paper also said the film’s depiction of adolescent love had the “correct balance”, but criticised the movie for making no clear reference to the transcendent.
According to the Timesonline, now the Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger, appears to have fallen under the latest Potter spell.
In 2003, as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and head of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he criticised the books about the teenage wizard for “distorting Christianity” in young people.
In a letter in March 2003 to the German Catholic sociologist Gabriele Kuby, author of Harry Potter – Good or Evil, the Pope expressed his concern that Rowling’s stories of the boy wizard threatened to corrupt an understanding of Christian faith among the impressionable young.
He went on to say the Harry Potter creation was anti-religious and encouraged the occult, “because this is a subtle seduction, which has deeply unnoticed and direct effects in undermining the soul of Christianity before it can really grow properly.”
In 2008, under the headline “The Double Face of Harry Potter”, L’Osservatore Romano said the series was “rich in Christian values” but ultimately offered a “malicious and unreligious” hero as a model for the young.
Edoardo Rialti, professor of literature at Florence University and translator of Tolkien and CS Lewis into Italian, said Ms Rowling “transmits a vision of the world and human beings full of deep mistakes and dangerous suggestions, even more seductive since it is mixed with half truths and compelling storytelling.”
This time the film’s reviewers praised the special effects in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the sixth Potter film, which again stars Daniel Radcliffe as the young wizard.
The changing attitude towards the film by the Vatican newspaper represents a remarkable U-turn that has previously attacked the series, saying that, although the books had narrative value, they held up witchcraft and the occult as positive ideals.
L’Osservatore Romano sided with Harry in his battle with You Know Who, arguing that the film promoted the values of friendship, altruism and loyalty.
The paper also said the film’s depiction of adolescent love had the “correct balance”, but criticised the movie for making no clear reference to the transcendent.
According to the Timesonline, now the Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger, appears to have fallen under the latest Potter spell.
In 2003, as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and head of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he criticised the books about the teenage wizard for “distorting Christianity” in young people.
In a letter in March 2003 to the German Catholic sociologist Gabriele Kuby, author of Harry Potter – Good or Evil, the Pope expressed his concern that Rowling’s stories of the boy wizard threatened to corrupt an understanding of Christian faith among the impressionable young.
He went on to say the Harry Potter creation was anti-religious and encouraged the occult, “because this is a subtle seduction, which has deeply unnoticed and direct effects in undermining the soul of Christianity before it can really grow properly.”
In 2008, under the headline “The Double Face of Harry Potter”, L’Osservatore Romano said the series was “rich in Christian values” but ultimately offered a “malicious and unreligious” hero as a model for the young.
Edoardo Rialti, professor of literature at Florence University and translator of Tolkien and CS Lewis into Italian, said Ms Rowling “transmits a vision of the world and human beings full of deep mistakes and dangerous suggestions, even more seductive since it is mixed with half truths and compelling storytelling.”
This time the film’s reviewers praised the special effects in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the sixth Potter film, which again stars Daniel Radcliffe as the young wizard.
The changing attitude towards the film by the Vatican newspaper represents a remarkable U-turn that has previously attacked the series, saying that, although the books had narrative value, they held up witchcraft and the occult as positive ideals.
Muslims teens bring positive impact to their own through creating social film
A campaign giving young people interesting things to do on Friday and Saturday nights are backed by teenagers who have created their own film on living as Muslims in Rochdale, England.
The boys-only group “Don’t Hate Us, Rate Us”, based at Wardleworth and Hamer Youth Centre, recently filmed and produced ‘Proud To Be Muslim’, a short film focusing on the reality of day-to-day life as a Muslim in Rochdale.
These young teens filmed in a local mosque and challenged negative preconceptions of the faith, interviewing local peace makers and members of the local Islamic community.
The short film is expected to be accepted by the local schools and youth centres as part of their educational package.
The ‘Proud To Be Muslim’ group reportedly meets every Friday night at the youth centre, discussing current affairs and other issues.
The group was made up of 15 young Asian men, aged between 13 and 17.
Local residents reported the young teen boys had regularly been a nuisance on Friday evenings, hanging around and carrying out anti social behaviour.
Youth worker Mohammed Sheraz decided to assist the boys set up “Don’t Hate Us, Rate Us” and spend their spare time in a positive way.
Mohammed spoke to those local teenagers and asked what they would like to do with their spare time, and many of them expressed a strong interest in news and current affairs, and suggested they would like to bring ‘Proud To Be Muslim’ into a reality.
Mr Sheraz said: “Some of these young men used to cause trouble in their local community, but we have harnessed their creativity and they are now engaged in a really positive project. It’s so important for young people to have interesting activities to take part in on weekend evenings, when they want it the most.”
The film was launched on 10 and 11 July, in a weekend of free nationwide activities to kick-start the campaign, which is part of the Government’s Aiming High Strategy for young people.
It was a key milestone for local authorities and their partners to work together to improve positive activities for young people.
During the film launching weekend, young teens took part in a variety of activities from playing in a rock band to making pizza.
The government has planed to provide £3.988 million for those youths between 2008 and 2011 in Rochdale, England. It will ensure young people have places to go and things to do at their weekend.
The boys-only group “Don’t Hate Us, Rate Us”, based at Wardleworth and Hamer Youth Centre, recently filmed and produced ‘Proud To Be Muslim’, a short film focusing on the reality of day-to-day life as a Muslim in Rochdale.
These young teens filmed in a local mosque and challenged negative preconceptions of the faith, interviewing local peace makers and members of the local Islamic community.
The short film is expected to be accepted by the local schools and youth centres as part of their educational package.
The ‘Proud To Be Muslim’ group reportedly meets every Friday night at the youth centre, discussing current affairs and other issues.
The group was made up of 15 young Asian men, aged between 13 and 17.
Local residents reported the young teen boys had regularly been a nuisance on Friday evenings, hanging around and carrying out anti social behaviour.
Youth worker Mohammed Sheraz decided to assist the boys set up “Don’t Hate Us, Rate Us” and spend their spare time in a positive way.
Mohammed spoke to those local teenagers and asked what they would like to do with their spare time, and many of them expressed a strong interest in news and current affairs, and suggested they would like to bring ‘Proud To Be Muslim’ into a reality.
Mr Sheraz said: “Some of these young men used to cause trouble in their local community, but we have harnessed their creativity and they are now engaged in a really positive project. It’s so important for young people to have interesting activities to take part in on weekend evenings, when they want it the most.”
The film was launched on 10 and 11 July, in a weekend of free nationwide activities to kick-start the campaign, which is part of the Government’s Aiming High Strategy for young people.
It was a key milestone for local authorities and their partners to work together to improve positive activities for young people.
During the film launching weekend, young teens took part in a variety of activities from playing in a rock band to making pizza.
The government has planed to provide £3.988 million for those youths between 2008 and 2011 in Rochdale, England. It will ensure young people have places to go and things to do at their weekend.
Home Secretary refuses to cap the number of immigrants
Home Secretary Alan Johnson has refused to limit the number of immigrants coming to Britain, while his Immigration Minister Phil Woolas has pledged the population will not grow to 70 million, according to the Daily Mail.
Mr Johnson said he would not bring in a cap because it would harm the economy, and claims the economic contribution that immigration had made was ‘irrefutable’.
Johnson said: “I do not lie awake at night worrying about a population of 70 million.
“I’m happy to live in a multi-cultural society. I’m happy to live in a society where we not only welcome those coming to live and work in this country, but also where we can go and live and work in other countries.”
According to the paper, earlier this week, a poll found one in four Britons would like to see the population reduced by up to a third to ease overcrowding.
Seven out of ten told the Daily Mail the best way to curb population growth was to cut immigration.
The population at the moment stands at around 61 million. If it hits 70 million, it is most likely the other seven million immigrants will make up most of the rise.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think tank Migrationwatch said in an interview with the Daily Express: “Mr Johnson’s comments to the home affairs select committee were a seismic shift in Labour’s immigration policy and a humiliating blow to Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, who has promised to limit the population to below 70 million.”
His campaign group also warned the balance of those settling in the country would have to be reduced to 50,000 from the current level of 237,000 every year.
“The minister should be having nightmares about the impact on our schools, hospitals, environment and quality of life of another 10 million people,” Sir Andrew added.
In recent years, Labour has tried to give the impression that the party is talking tough on immigration, and tried to head off the rise of the British National Party (BNP), who defeated Labour in the Euro election last June.
The government’s points-based system is likely to cut immigrant numbers by around 8 per cent to 217,000. Tory immigration policies are likely to bring about a drop of 27 per cent to 172, 000.
Former Labour Minister Frank Field was dismissive of the Home Secretary’s claims ‘not to lie awake at night’. He said: “It must be a mis-quote because it should be."
Mr Field runs a cross-party group called Balanced Migration, which campaigns to limit the number of immigrants to manageable levels.
Mr Johnson said he would not bring in a cap because it would harm the economy, and claims the economic contribution that immigration had made was ‘irrefutable’.
Johnson said: “I do not lie awake at night worrying about a population of 70 million.
“I’m happy to live in a multi-cultural society. I’m happy to live in a society where we not only welcome those coming to live and work in this country, but also where we can go and live and work in other countries.”
According to the paper, earlier this week, a poll found one in four Britons would like to see the population reduced by up to a third to ease overcrowding.
Seven out of ten told the Daily Mail the best way to curb population growth was to cut immigration.
The population at the moment stands at around 61 million. If it hits 70 million, it is most likely the other seven million immigrants will make up most of the rise.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think tank Migrationwatch said in an interview with the Daily Express: “Mr Johnson’s comments to the home affairs select committee were a seismic shift in Labour’s immigration policy and a humiliating blow to Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, who has promised to limit the population to below 70 million.”
His campaign group also warned the balance of those settling in the country would have to be reduced to 50,000 from the current level of 237,000 every year.
“The minister should be having nightmares about the impact on our schools, hospitals, environment and quality of life of another 10 million people,” Sir Andrew added.
In recent years, Labour has tried to give the impression that the party is talking tough on immigration, and tried to head off the rise of the British National Party (BNP), who defeated Labour in the Euro election last June.
The government’s points-based system is likely to cut immigrant numbers by around 8 per cent to 217,000. Tory immigration policies are likely to bring about a drop of 27 per cent to 172, 000.
Former Labour Minister Frank Field was dismissive of the Home Secretary’s claims ‘not to lie awake at night’. He said: “It must be a mis-quote because it should be."
Mr Field runs a cross-party group called Balanced Migration, which campaigns to limit the number of immigrants to manageable levels.
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
Sharia courts in UK should follow US Example
End of June, different publications in the UK revealed a study, carried out by the Westminster-based think-tank Civitas, showing that at least 85 Sharia tribunals now operate nationwide.
The British press expressed their major concern that the British law is supposedly under attack, threatened by the creeping tide of radical sharia.
Luke W Goodrich, a legal counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty wrote to the Guardian on 6 July suggesting that the UK should follow the US example and relax about the issue.
Before unveiling the study, it was believed only about five Sharia courts were operating in Britain – London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton.
According to the Daily Telegraph, these five Sharia courts are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose ruling are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.
In Februay, 2008, the spread of Sharia law has become increasingly controversial as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has publicly spoke out that adoption of certain aspect of Sharia law in the UK “seems unavoidable”.
Lord Phillips, the most senior judge in England and Wales who stepped down last October, also supported Sharia law and told the Guardian there is no reason why decisions made on Sharia principles should not be recognised by the national courts.
According to the Guardian, the major concern on the expanded Sharia tribunals arbitration is that dozens of them are regularly giving illegal advice on issues such as marriage and divorce.
Like decisions concerning marriages are not recognised under English law.
Civita told the Guardian there is no clear division between the functions of imams and the Sharia courts.
An imam who conducts a marriage which is not registered and then advices on disputes within that marriage acts in breach of the law and outside the scope of the Sharia court's role.
The Daily Telegraph argued that they are unlikely to treat women as equals and could even be against human rights law.
The UK's highest court said in 2008 that Sharia law was “wholly incompatible” with human rights law, and the House of Lords described Sharia law in Lebanon as “created by and for men in male dominated society”.
The British press expressed their major concern that the British law is supposedly under attack, threatened by the creeping tide of radical sharia.
Luke W Goodrich, a legal counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty wrote to the Guardian on 6 July suggesting that the UK should follow the US example and relax about the issue.
Before unveiling the study, it was believed only about five Sharia courts were operating in Britain – London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton.
According to the Daily Telegraph, these five Sharia courts are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose ruling are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.
In Februay, 2008, the spread of Sharia law has become increasingly controversial as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has publicly spoke out that adoption of certain aspect of Sharia law in the UK “seems unavoidable”.
Lord Phillips, the most senior judge in England and Wales who stepped down last October, also supported Sharia law and told the Guardian there is no reason why decisions made on Sharia principles should not be recognised by the national courts.
According to the Guardian, the major concern on the expanded Sharia tribunals arbitration is that dozens of them are regularly giving illegal advice on issues such as marriage and divorce.
Like decisions concerning marriages are not recognised under English law.
Civita told the Guardian there is no clear division between the functions of imams and the Sharia courts.
An imam who conducts a marriage which is not registered and then advices on disputes within that marriage acts in breach of the law and outside the scope of the Sharia court's role.
The Daily Telegraph argued that they are unlikely to treat women as equals and could even be against human rights law.
The UK's highest court said in 2008 that Sharia law was “wholly incompatible” with human rights law, and the House of Lords described Sharia law in Lebanon as “created by and for men in male dominated society”.
Is Jewish school admission a matter of race or religion?
Recently, a Jewish school admission has raised a national controversy which the Appeal Court ruled out its admission based on racial ground, whereas the Office of the Chief Rabbi and the school adjudicator insists the issue is purely a religious matter.
JFS, previously known as the Jews' Free School, in Brent, London, rejected a 12-year-old boy known as M, because of his mother’s conversion to Judaism in a procedure not recognised by the Orthodox Chief Rabbi, according to the Guardian.
JFS is reportedly one of the Britain’s oldest Jewish schools and the largest Orthodox Jewish school across Europe, with 2,000 pupils.
The Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills described JFS as outstanding and oversubscribed every academic year.
Two years ago, the case was sealed supporting the school, but today the Court of Appeal overturned the previous judgement and ruled that a policy determining eligibility based on a person’s descent, rather than religious practice, amounted to racial discrimination, the Guardian has learnt.
The Jewish Chronicle Journalist, Simon Rocker, wrote to the Guardian on 11 July, the judges were able to arrive at the decision because Jews and Sikhs are considered as an ethnic group under the Race Relations Act in a way that Christians, Muslims and Hindus are not.
Lord Justice Sedley told the BBC: “It appears clear to us…that Jews constitute a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion.”
He added: “To discriminate against a person on the ground that he or someone else either is or is not Jewish is therefore to discriminate against him on racial grounds.”
However, the school plans to appeal to the House of Lords, and argued that it had rejected the boy purely on religious grounds, according to the Guardian.
The law says faith schools are exempt from religious discrimination in giving priority to children of their own faith.
The country’s largest non-Orthodox denomination, the Movement for Reform Judaism (MRJ), says it deplores entry policies which have barred children like M from entering Orthodox schools.
However, it insists that the Appeal Court should reverse its decision, as MRJ believes the issue is an internal Jewish affair and should not be intervened, the Guardian reports.
Part of the admission Code of Conduct in JFS, according to the Timesonline, means it can favour non-practising children whose mothers were born Jewish over those whose mothers converted to the faith and are religiously observant.
The United Synagogue told the BBC all Jewish schools in future will need to adopt a religious practice test to select pupils, similar to Christian schools which require church attendance.
However, Jewish leaders fear such methods could make it harder for less ritually observant Jews to gain a place at a Jewish school, thereby deny Jewish education to a sector of the community that may need it most.
Simon Rocker went on to explain that when people talk of religion, they may think of it simply in terms of creed and ritual but for Judaism, identification with peoplehood is a critical component.
Rabbi Dr Tony Bayfield, Head of the Reform Movement said in an interview with Simon Rocker, the Appeal Court ruling is a “disaster” which “fails to completely to understand the nature of Jewish identity and of Jewish religiosity”.
Simon Rocker commented that anti-discrimination legislation can be a double-edged sword for minorities that believe it is designed to protect them.
Recent year’s new laws have come in against religious discrimination and hatred, including groups that fell outside race relations law.
However while extension of the law has been broadly welcomed by religious leaders, the flipside is that it gives the courts more power to interfere in the business of religious communities.
Similar cases also happened in February 2008, the school refused to admit a 13-year-old girl, who actively leads a Jewish life, but her mother’s conversion is not recognised by Chief Rabbi in this country.
Her father, Mr Lightman said: “My daughter asks why she can’t go to the school. I find it hard to explain to her. We will seek a judicial review on the grounds that we believe the admission code is racially discriminatory against people not born into religion.”
Mr and Mrs Lightman are seeking a judicial review in the High Court to resolve their four-year battle, according the Timesonline.
JFS, previously known as the Jews' Free School, in Brent, London, rejected a 12-year-old boy known as M, because of his mother’s conversion to Judaism in a procedure not recognised by the Orthodox Chief Rabbi, according to the Guardian.
JFS is reportedly one of the Britain’s oldest Jewish schools and the largest Orthodox Jewish school across Europe, with 2,000 pupils.
The Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills described JFS as outstanding and oversubscribed every academic year.
Two years ago, the case was sealed supporting the school, but today the Court of Appeal overturned the previous judgement and ruled that a policy determining eligibility based on a person’s descent, rather than religious practice, amounted to racial discrimination, the Guardian has learnt.
The Jewish Chronicle Journalist, Simon Rocker, wrote to the Guardian on 11 July, the judges were able to arrive at the decision because Jews and Sikhs are considered as an ethnic group under the Race Relations Act in a way that Christians, Muslims and Hindus are not.
Lord Justice Sedley told the BBC: “It appears clear to us…that Jews constitute a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion.”
He added: “To discriminate against a person on the ground that he or someone else either is or is not Jewish is therefore to discriminate against him on racial grounds.”
However, the school plans to appeal to the House of Lords, and argued that it had rejected the boy purely on religious grounds, according to the Guardian.
The law says faith schools are exempt from religious discrimination in giving priority to children of their own faith.
The country’s largest non-Orthodox denomination, the Movement for Reform Judaism (MRJ), says it deplores entry policies which have barred children like M from entering Orthodox schools.
However, it insists that the Appeal Court should reverse its decision, as MRJ believes the issue is an internal Jewish affair and should not be intervened, the Guardian reports.
Part of the admission Code of Conduct in JFS, according to the Timesonline, means it can favour non-practising children whose mothers were born Jewish over those whose mothers converted to the faith and are religiously observant.
The United Synagogue told the BBC all Jewish schools in future will need to adopt a religious practice test to select pupils, similar to Christian schools which require church attendance.
However, Jewish leaders fear such methods could make it harder for less ritually observant Jews to gain a place at a Jewish school, thereby deny Jewish education to a sector of the community that may need it most.
Simon Rocker went on to explain that when people talk of religion, they may think of it simply in terms of creed and ritual but for Judaism, identification with peoplehood is a critical component.
Rabbi Dr Tony Bayfield, Head of the Reform Movement said in an interview with Simon Rocker, the Appeal Court ruling is a “disaster” which “fails to completely to understand the nature of Jewish identity and of Jewish religiosity”.
Simon Rocker commented that anti-discrimination legislation can be a double-edged sword for minorities that believe it is designed to protect them.
Recent year’s new laws have come in against religious discrimination and hatred, including groups that fell outside race relations law.
However while extension of the law has been broadly welcomed by religious leaders, the flipside is that it gives the courts more power to interfere in the business of religious communities.
Similar cases also happened in February 2008, the school refused to admit a 13-year-old girl, who actively leads a Jewish life, but her mother’s conversion is not recognised by Chief Rabbi in this country.
Her father, Mr Lightman said: “My daughter asks why she can’t go to the school. I find it hard to explain to her. We will seek a judicial review on the grounds that we believe the admission code is racially discriminatory against people not born into religion.”
Mr and Mrs Lightman are seeking a judicial review in the High Court to resolve their four-year battle, according the Timesonline.
Friday, 10 July 2009
Muslim courtroom death provokes international discussion
I am re-editing the article at the moment, some parts might be not in a flow.
The death of Marwa al-Sherbini, who was stabbed in a German appeal court for being a Muslim has sparked international debatd on whether Europeans are islamophobic?
Nesrine Malik defends Europeans in a piece in the Guardian, she says that the incident should not be blown at of proportion. She says that the murderer was a right-wing extremists and is as much in the minority as Muslim extremists.
A 32-year-old Egyptian woman named Marwa al-Sherbini was fatally stabbed to death in a court in Dresden, Germany, the BBC reports.
Before the incident happened, Ms Sherbini had been giving evidence against her killer, Alex W during an appeal hearing, as he insulted on her religion and called her “terrorist”.
Alex W, 28, was reportedly a Russian man with a deep hatred of Muslims.
On the appeal hearing day, he leapt across the courtroom, and stabbed Ms Sherbini 18 times in front of her husband and her son, the BBC has learnt.
The killing has sparked anger in Egypt and the Arab world.
The Egyptian media expressed their outrage, asking how the incident was allowed to happen, and dubbed Ms Sherbini “the martyr of the Hijab”, in reference to her Islamic headscarf.
The BBC said the German government was criticised for its muted reaction by Egyptians.
However, German government spokesman Thomas Steg defended the government’s reaction, saying Germany had “not been silent”, and the early details about the case had not been sufficiently clear for “spontaneous reaction”.
He added: “This is an abhorrent deed, one that has left us all dismayed and shocked.”
Mr Steg went on saying the Chancellor Merkel would discuss the incident with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak during G8 summit in Italy.
Amr Moussa, the Egyptian Secretary-General of the Arab League, called the incident a “totally unjustified hate crime”, according to the BBC.
However, even the anger over the killing is understandable, but are Muslims right to say they are targeted in Europe? Nesrine Malik, a Sudanese-born writer and commentator wrote to the Guardian on 7 July.
She asked “Is Europe really Islamophobic?”
She wrote the outcry has sparked calls for severing links with Germany, and the murder was committed by a reported neo-Nazi in the country.
However, this fact does little to temper a perception that Muslims are the targets of racial hatred.
The Arab world even declares a “world hijab day” to honour Marwa’s memory.
An article for the Huffington Post on 6 July, called “European Islamophobia a Creeping Threat: Alaysis”.
Firas al-Atraqchi, the author states “given the racism many Muslims endure in Europe, the murder of an Egyptian woman because she wore a hijab should not be dismissed as the act of a lone man who many are now calling insane”.
Firas went on saying “today, Muslims in Europe are seen as existing outside of a democratic culture”, and for centuries “Islam was rejected as a fundamental religion and seen as a direct challenge to Christianity”.
According to Nesrine Malik, the sensationalist coverage of Muslims and their perpetrated crimes contributed to a creeping normalisation of language and discourse.
Both of them may spill over into xenophobic incidents where Islamophobia servers as a vehicle for racism.
When moral/economic/social panic comes, people are looking for someone to blame and apparently, Muslims are sometimes seen as a viable option.
However, Nesrine argues it is too exaggerated to create an image of comprehensive, conspiratorial, and institutional discrimination against Muslims in Europe.
Muslims, includes herself, constantly protest the actions of a few extremists that should not be allowed to denigrate Islam and its adherents as a whole.
Unfortunately, this is exactly what Muslims are doing for themselves in connection with Europeans and the actions of Axel W, Nesrine commented.
More ironically, Nesrine went on saying Marwa al-Sherbini was stabbed in the court appealing against Axel W’s insult on her.
The German authority was clearly not complacent about the incident, and it is the court’s earlier verdict that provoked the attacker’s wrath.
From the incident, Ms Sherbini was empowered enough to bring a case against Axel W and received official support in doing so.
The Muslim row was also triggered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who publicly spoke out against Muslim women wearing of the burka, reported on the BBC in June.
The death of Marwa al-Sherbini, who was stabbed in a German appeal court for being a Muslim has sparked international debatd on whether Europeans are islamophobic?
Nesrine Malik defends Europeans in a piece in the Guardian, she says that the incident should not be blown at of proportion. She says that the murderer was a right-wing extremists and is as much in the minority as Muslim extremists.
A 32-year-old Egyptian woman named Marwa al-Sherbini was fatally stabbed to death in a court in Dresden, Germany, the BBC reports.
Before the incident happened, Ms Sherbini had been giving evidence against her killer, Alex W during an appeal hearing, as he insulted on her religion and called her “terrorist”.
Alex W, 28, was reportedly a Russian man with a deep hatred of Muslims.
On the appeal hearing day, he leapt across the courtroom, and stabbed Ms Sherbini 18 times in front of her husband and her son, the BBC has learnt.
The killing has sparked anger in Egypt and the Arab world.
The Egyptian media expressed their outrage, asking how the incident was allowed to happen, and dubbed Ms Sherbini “the martyr of the Hijab”, in reference to her Islamic headscarf.
The BBC said the German government was criticised for its muted reaction by Egyptians.
However, German government spokesman Thomas Steg defended the government’s reaction, saying Germany had “not been silent”, and the early details about the case had not been sufficiently clear for “spontaneous reaction”.
He added: “This is an abhorrent deed, one that has left us all dismayed and shocked.”
Mr Steg went on saying the Chancellor Merkel would discuss the incident with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak during G8 summit in Italy.
Amr Moussa, the Egyptian Secretary-General of the Arab League, called the incident a “totally unjustified hate crime”, according to the BBC.
However, even the anger over the killing is understandable, but are Muslims right to say they are targeted in Europe? Nesrine Malik, a Sudanese-born writer and commentator wrote to the Guardian on 7 July.
She asked “Is Europe really Islamophobic?”
She wrote the outcry has sparked calls for severing links with Germany, and the murder was committed by a reported neo-Nazi in the country.
However, this fact does little to temper a perception that Muslims are the targets of racial hatred.
The Arab world even declares a “world hijab day” to honour Marwa’s memory.
An article for the Huffington Post on 6 July, called “European Islamophobia a Creeping Threat: Alaysis”.
Firas al-Atraqchi, the author states “given the racism many Muslims endure in Europe, the murder of an Egyptian woman because she wore a hijab should not be dismissed as the act of a lone man who many are now calling insane”.
Firas went on saying “today, Muslims in Europe are seen as existing outside of a democratic culture”, and for centuries “Islam was rejected as a fundamental religion and seen as a direct challenge to Christianity”.
According to Nesrine Malik, the sensationalist coverage of Muslims and their perpetrated crimes contributed to a creeping normalisation of language and discourse.
Both of them may spill over into xenophobic incidents where Islamophobia servers as a vehicle for racism.
When moral/economic/social panic comes, people are looking for someone to blame and apparently, Muslims are sometimes seen as a viable option.
However, Nesrine argues it is too exaggerated to create an image of comprehensive, conspiratorial, and institutional discrimination against Muslims in Europe.
Muslims, includes herself, constantly protest the actions of a few extremists that should not be allowed to denigrate Islam and its adherents as a whole.
Unfortunately, this is exactly what Muslims are doing for themselves in connection with Europeans and the actions of Axel W, Nesrine commented.
More ironically, Nesrine went on saying Marwa al-Sherbini was stabbed in the court appealing against Axel W’s insult on her.
The German authority was clearly not complacent about the incident, and it is the court’s earlier verdict that provoked the attacker’s wrath.
From the incident, Ms Sherbini was empowered enough to bring a case against Axel W and received official support in doing so.
The Muslim row was also triggered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who publicly spoke out against Muslim women wearing of the burka, reported on the BBC in June.
Wearing burka undermines women’s dignity
French President Nicolas Sarkozy spoken out strongly and publicly against Muslim women wearing burka in France, the BBC has learnt.
He said the burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience.
The French republic will not accept women imprisoned behind netting, cut off from society, and deprived of all identity. It is not the French republic’s idea of women’s dignity.
However, President Sarkozy also stressed that France “must not fight the wrong battle”, saying “the Muslim religion must be respected as much as other religions” in the country.
During middle of June, a group of cross-party lawmakers urged parliamentary commission to investigate the spread of the burka in France.
They want to exam whether women are forced to cover themselves or doing so voluntarily, and whether wearing the burka undermines French secularism, the BBC’s correspondent said.
The investigation was backed by Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Paris Mosque and a former head of the Muslim council.
He insists Islam in France should be an “open and convivial Islam that allows people to live side by side”, and called the President’s remarks “in keeping with the republican spirit of secularism”.
Mr Boubakeur fears the anecdotal evidence that more women are wearing the burka in France is linked to an “excess, a radicalisation” among some Muslims, the BBC reports.
However, the head of the French Council for the Muslim Religion warmed the French MPs that they risked to stigmatise Muslims in France again.
He said five year ago, while France trying to ban Islamic headscarves from the schools, the incident already caused so many youths of Muslim origin feeling forgotten by French society.
Followed by the burka debate addressed in French Parliament, the US president Barack Obama attacked the French headscarf rule in a speech in Cairo, saying the United States did not believe the government should dictate people’s dress, the Times Online said.
Meanwhile, the issue has also split the French cabinet.
Rama Yade, the Muslim human rights minister, backed President Sarkozy by saying she would be open to a ban if it was aimed at protecting women who wore a burka against their will.
On the contrary, the immigration minister Eric Besson said a full ban will only “create tensions”, according to the BBC.
President Sarkozy may have given his backing to an open debate on the burka, but he also insisted France needed to make sure it knew exactly what it was debating.
According to the BBC, France has been a long battle fighting for its secularism, and the French constitution states the republic “does not recognise, subsidise or remunerate any religious body”.
It underpinned the French Revolution, and has been a basic tenet of the country’s progressive thought since the 18th century, when French Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire, Diderot and Montesquieu regarded religion as divisive, benighted and intolerant.
It was this same concept that invoked to ban Islamic headscarves from schools five years ago.
Critics claimed it stigmatised Muslims at a time when France needed to be stepping up its fight against rife discrimination in the job market.
He said the burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience.
The French republic will not accept women imprisoned behind netting, cut off from society, and deprived of all identity. It is not the French republic’s idea of women’s dignity.
However, President Sarkozy also stressed that France “must not fight the wrong battle”, saying “the Muslim religion must be respected as much as other religions” in the country.
During middle of June, a group of cross-party lawmakers urged parliamentary commission to investigate the spread of the burka in France.
They want to exam whether women are forced to cover themselves or doing so voluntarily, and whether wearing the burka undermines French secularism, the BBC’s correspondent said.
The investigation was backed by Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Paris Mosque and a former head of the Muslim council.
He insists Islam in France should be an “open and convivial Islam that allows people to live side by side”, and called the President’s remarks “in keeping with the republican spirit of secularism”.
Mr Boubakeur fears the anecdotal evidence that more women are wearing the burka in France is linked to an “excess, a radicalisation” among some Muslims, the BBC reports.
However, the head of the French Council for the Muslim Religion warmed the French MPs that they risked to stigmatise Muslims in France again.
He said five year ago, while France trying to ban Islamic headscarves from the schools, the incident already caused so many youths of Muslim origin feeling forgotten by French society.
Followed by the burka debate addressed in French Parliament, the US president Barack Obama attacked the French headscarf rule in a speech in Cairo, saying the United States did not believe the government should dictate people’s dress, the Times Online said.
Meanwhile, the issue has also split the French cabinet.
Rama Yade, the Muslim human rights minister, backed President Sarkozy by saying she would be open to a ban if it was aimed at protecting women who wore a burka against their will.
On the contrary, the immigration minister Eric Besson said a full ban will only “create tensions”, according to the BBC.
President Sarkozy may have given his backing to an open debate on the burka, but he also insisted France needed to make sure it knew exactly what it was debating.
According to the BBC, France has been a long battle fighting for its secularism, and the French constitution states the republic “does not recognise, subsidise or remunerate any religious body”.
It underpinned the French Revolution, and has been a basic tenet of the country’s progressive thought since the 18th century, when French Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire, Diderot and Montesquieu regarded religion as divisive, benighted and intolerant.
It was this same concept that invoked to ban Islamic headscarves from schools five years ago.
Critics claimed it stigmatised Muslims at a time when France needed to be stepping up its fight against rife discrimination in the job market.
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Housing not favouring migrants
This article I might need to do some slight changes, and just for now to keep it like this.
The perception of new arrivals jumping on council housing queues, and being given priority in the waiting list for council accommodation was wrong, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) told the BBC.
Mr Trevor Phillips, head of the EHRC said it is vital for social housing providers and policy makers to convince people the housing system is not in favouring of migrants.
He added: “We have to recognise that people's perceptions are powerful, and we need to foster understanding about what is really happening on the ground.”
He went on by saying public’s concern about the migration impact on social housing is the failure of social housing supply to meet the demands of the population.
“The poorer the area, the longer the waiting lists, therefore the greater the tension.” Mr Phillips told the BBC.
According to an Equality and Human Rights Commission report, once the new arrivals settled and are entitled to help, it adds, the same proportion live in social housing as UK-born residents.
64% of people who arrived in the UK within the last five years live in private rented accommodation.
However, after five years, when many immigrants are able to get residency and become entitled to government help, one in six live in social housing - exactly the same proportion as those who were born in Britain, the BBC has learnt.
Only 11% of new arrivals get help with housing - almost all of them asylum seekers.
On the other hand, the British National Party (BNP) has campaigned heavily on the issue, claiming that British people are being short-changed for housing in favour of newly arrived immigrants, according to the Independent.
Housing minister John Healey told the BBC the changes were designed to tackle the “myth” that the system was unfair.
He then added the changes would get council more “leeway” to deal with specific housing pressures in their areas.
The council will enable to help people who have been waiting the longest or those, in rural areas, who have strong local or family connections.
When speaking about extra 20,000 affordable homes will be built up for the next years, in addition to 90, 000 are already announced, the critics say this is inadequate given the four million people now on a waiting list for homes.
Mr Healey also said it was “wrong” to say the government had been forced into action to counter the BNP's arguments after it succeeded in getting two Euro MPs elected.
The conservatives have accused Labour of “spin”, saying the forthcoming equality bill would make it legal for councils in favouring of local people.
The Lib Dems said the government was trying to "grab headlines" rather than deal with the underlying issues.
Housing spokesman Grant Shapps told the BBC: “Housing waiting lists are at a record high level because of Labour's historic failure to build enough social housing.”
According to the Times, the investigation of the immigration impact - housing allocation was launched in November 2007, after the Conservative Party called for a cap on migrants coming into the UK.
Mr Trevor Phillips, the head of the EHRC has proposed a joint study with the Local Government Association to examine whether immigrants are given any priority in the waiting list for council accommodation.
Local housing provision has become one of the most hotly contested areas of the immigration debate. Mr Phillips wants to assess comprehensively whether there is any truth behind the claim that local white families are discriminated against.
The perception of new arrivals jumping on council housing queues, and being given priority in the waiting list for council accommodation was wrong, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) told the BBC.
Mr Trevor Phillips, head of the EHRC said it is vital for social housing providers and policy makers to convince people the housing system is not in favouring of migrants.
He added: “We have to recognise that people's perceptions are powerful, and we need to foster understanding about what is really happening on the ground.”
He went on by saying public’s concern about the migration impact on social housing is the failure of social housing supply to meet the demands of the population.
“The poorer the area, the longer the waiting lists, therefore the greater the tension.” Mr Phillips told the BBC.
According to an Equality and Human Rights Commission report, once the new arrivals settled and are entitled to help, it adds, the same proportion live in social housing as UK-born residents.
64% of people who arrived in the UK within the last five years live in private rented accommodation.
However, after five years, when many immigrants are able to get residency and become entitled to government help, one in six live in social housing - exactly the same proportion as those who were born in Britain, the BBC has learnt.
Only 11% of new arrivals get help with housing - almost all of them asylum seekers.
On the other hand, the British National Party (BNP) has campaigned heavily on the issue, claiming that British people are being short-changed for housing in favour of newly arrived immigrants, according to the Independent.
Housing minister John Healey told the BBC the changes were designed to tackle the “myth” that the system was unfair.
He then added the changes would get council more “leeway” to deal with specific housing pressures in their areas.
The council will enable to help people who have been waiting the longest or those, in rural areas, who have strong local or family connections.
When speaking about extra 20,000 affordable homes will be built up for the next years, in addition to 90, 000 are already announced, the critics say this is inadequate given the four million people now on a waiting list for homes.
Mr Healey also said it was “wrong” to say the government had been forced into action to counter the BNP's arguments after it succeeded in getting two Euro MPs elected.
The conservatives have accused Labour of “spin”, saying the forthcoming equality bill would make it legal for councils in favouring of local people.
The Lib Dems said the government was trying to "grab headlines" rather than deal with the underlying issues.
Housing spokesman Grant Shapps told the BBC: “Housing waiting lists are at a record high level because of Labour's historic failure to build enough social housing.”
According to the Times, the investigation of the immigration impact - housing allocation was launched in November 2007, after the Conservative Party called for a cap on migrants coming into the UK.
Mr Trevor Phillips, the head of the EHRC has proposed a joint study with the Local Government Association to examine whether immigrants are given any priority in the waiting list for council accommodation.
Local housing provision has become one of the most hotly contested areas of the immigration debate. Mr Phillips wants to assess comprehensively whether there is any truth behind the claim that local white families are discriminated against.
My friends nickenamed us the United Nations says Mrs Nurse
A British family has nicknamed their kids as the rainbow children because of their completely different skin colours.
Ms Carla Nurse, 27 and her black husband Cornel, 31, had their first child Jermaine with a mixed race complexion, and a daughter Tanisha arrived with an Afro-Caribbean appearance, their second son Jayden was born with white skin and blonde hair.
They said they were not surprised with Jermaine’s mixed race complexion, but were amazed by their other two kids with totally different-coloured skin, according to the Daily Telegraph.
Ms Nurse, a part-time model from Lowestoft, Suffolk, said she lives in a predominantly white town, and she finds it is pretty strange when she walks around with her brood of rainbow children.
Her major concern is that many people assume the children to have different fathers.
She told the Daily Telegraph when giving birth to each of them at the hospital, and all the doctors where looking at her doubting she had all these children to different men.
“When people thinking I’ve cheated, it makes me so angry, but I would never stray from Cornel.” Ms Nurse added.
Mr Nurse, who was born and breaded in Suffolk village of Halesworth, has a white mother coming from London and an Afro-Caribbean father from Barbados.
He said he definitely believes all these three children are his, “They all have our facial features, it’s just the colour of their skin which is different – it’s hard to believe.” He told the Daily Telegraph.
He went on saying Tanisha was dark from the beginning, but when the boys got older one has gone darker, the other has gone whiter, and the whole thing is just a freak of nature.
Mr Nurse also said in an interview with the Daily Mail, all the three kids were planned – Jermaine was conceived on holiday in Florida, Tanisha and Jayden were conceived at home.
The mixed race couple did not forgetting the joke sent by their friends, who nicknamed them – the couple and their children “the United Nations”, the Daily Telegraph said.
According to the Daily Mail, the British Society for Human Genetics (BSHG) said it was highly unusual for one family give birth to three totally different skin-coloured children.
Dr Jess Buxton, the BSHG spokesman said he has never heard of this before, but several different genes control skin colour in a similar way to eye and hair colour.
Children from the same parents only shares about 50 per cent of their parents’ genes.
If one parent has several “light skin” gene variants, the other has several “dark skin” variants, then their children can have a skin colour anywhere in between, but it depends on which the combination of variants they receive.
Because it is a random process, it is certainly possible for the same parents to have children with completely different-coloured skin.
Dr Jess Buxton went on saying they do not know all of the genes involved, and it is impossible to predict when this will happen, “there is still a lot we do not know about individual genes and how they govern characteristics.”
Ms Carla Nurse, 27 and her black husband Cornel, 31, had their first child Jermaine with a mixed race complexion, and a daughter Tanisha arrived with an Afro-Caribbean appearance, their second son Jayden was born with white skin and blonde hair.
They said they were not surprised with Jermaine’s mixed race complexion, but were amazed by their other two kids with totally different-coloured skin, according to the Daily Telegraph.
Ms Nurse, a part-time model from Lowestoft, Suffolk, said she lives in a predominantly white town, and she finds it is pretty strange when she walks around with her brood of rainbow children.
Her major concern is that many people assume the children to have different fathers.
She told the Daily Telegraph when giving birth to each of them at the hospital, and all the doctors where looking at her doubting she had all these children to different men.
“When people thinking I’ve cheated, it makes me so angry, but I would never stray from Cornel.” Ms Nurse added.
Mr Nurse, who was born and breaded in Suffolk village of Halesworth, has a white mother coming from London and an Afro-Caribbean father from Barbados.
He said he definitely believes all these three children are his, “They all have our facial features, it’s just the colour of their skin which is different – it’s hard to believe.” He told the Daily Telegraph.
He went on saying Tanisha was dark from the beginning, but when the boys got older one has gone darker, the other has gone whiter, and the whole thing is just a freak of nature.
Mr Nurse also said in an interview with the Daily Mail, all the three kids were planned – Jermaine was conceived on holiday in Florida, Tanisha and Jayden were conceived at home.
The mixed race couple did not forgetting the joke sent by their friends, who nicknamed them – the couple and their children “the United Nations”, the Daily Telegraph said.
According to the Daily Mail, the British Society for Human Genetics (BSHG) said it was highly unusual for one family give birth to three totally different skin-coloured children.
Dr Jess Buxton, the BSHG spokesman said he has never heard of this before, but several different genes control skin colour in a similar way to eye and hair colour.
Children from the same parents only shares about 50 per cent of their parents’ genes.
If one parent has several “light skin” gene variants, the other has several “dark skin” variants, then their children can have a skin colour anywhere in between, but it depends on which the combination of variants they receive.
Because it is a random process, it is certainly possible for the same parents to have children with completely different-coloured skin.
Dr Jess Buxton went on saying they do not know all of the genes involved, and it is impossible to predict when this will happen, “there is still a lot we do not know about individual genes and how they govern characteristics.”
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
Mugabe labels top US official “an idiot” the reports say
President Robert Mugabe described the US assistant secretary of state for African Affairs as “an idiot” after their African summit in Libya, Zimbabwe’s state-owned Herald newspaper reports on 8 July.
Mr Mugabe said nothing came out of his talks with Mr Johnnie Carson – his first meeting with a US government official for many years.
According to the Herald newspaper, Mr Mugabe said: “You wouldn't speak to an idiot of that nature. I was very angry with him, and he thinks he could dictate to us what to do.”
He went on saying the Southern African Development Community supported the unity government.
However, “You have the little fellow like Carson wanting to say ‘You do this, you do that'.
“Who is he?
“I hope he was not speaking for Obama, I told him he was a shame, a great shame, being an African American.”
According to the BBC, the Obama administration has been sceptical of the power-sharing government formed between Mr Mugabe and Mr Tsvangirai, who had been lobbying for aid and re-engaging Zimbabwe with Western leaders last month in United States and Europe.
Mr Tsvangirai said the country needed $7bn to revive its economy.
President Obama committed $73 million, but said: “It will not be going to the government directly because we continue to be concerned about consolidating democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”
Mr Mugabe was also not fond of Mr Carson’s predecessor, Jendayi Frazer, who is the same as Mr Carson, a black, the Independent said.
He described Jendayi as “a little American girl trotting around the globe like a prostitute” in last May, after she suggested the Movement for Democratic Change had won the disputed national presidential election in March 2008.
Apart from Jendayi, Mugabe also called former British Prime Minister Tony Blair a “B-Liar”.
Bofore Tsvangirai joined the coalition government, Mugabe had referred to him as “Fatcheeks” and a tea boy, a lowly domestic worker, according to the Independent.
Mr Mugabe is known for his vitriolic outbursts against his critics, such as former US Ambassador to Zimbabwe James McGee, who is a harsh black critic of Mugabe’s autocratic rule.
Mugabe described him as a “house Negro” for white western leaders.
McGee rejected the idea Zimbabwe needed more support from donors to restore the rule of law, respect for human rights and to guarantee basic freedoms of speech and association.
He said: “It doesn’t cost anything…to have judges apply the law equally. Dropping phantom politically motivated prosecutions is free. Stopping the arrests of political activists and independent journalists is also free.”
Mr Mugabe said nothing came out of his talks with Mr Johnnie Carson – his first meeting with a US government official for many years.
According to the Herald newspaper, Mr Mugabe said: “You wouldn't speak to an idiot of that nature. I was very angry with him, and he thinks he could dictate to us what to do.”
He went on saying the Southern African Development Community supported the unity government.
However, “You have the little fellow like Carson wanting to say ‘You do this, you do that'.
“Who is he?
“I hope he was not speaking for Obama, I told him he was a shame, a great shame, being an African American.”
According to the BBC, the Obama administration has been sceptical of the power-sharing government formed between Mr Mugabe and Mr Tsvangirai, who had been lobbying for aid and re-engaging Zimbabwe with Western leaders last month in United States and Europe.
Mr Tsvangirai said the country needed $7bn to revive its economy.
President Obama committed $73 million, but said: “It will not be going to the government directly because we continue to be concerned about consolidating democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”
Mr Mugabe was also not fond of Mr Carson’s predecessor, Jendayi Frazer, who is the same as Mr Carson, a black, the Independent said.
He described Jendayi as “a little American girl trotting around the globe like a prostitute” in last May, after she suggested the Movement for Democratic Change had won the disputed national presidential election in March 2008.
Apart from Jendayi, Mugabe also called former British Prime Minister Tony Blair a “B-Liar”.
Bofore Tsvangirai joined the coalition government, Mugabe had referred to him as “Fatcheeks” and a tea boy, a lowly domestic worker, according to the Independent.
Mr Mugabe is known for his vitriolic outbursts against his critics, such as former US Ambassador to Zimbabwe James McGee, who is a harsh black critic of Mugabe’s autocratic rule.
Mugabe described him as a “house Negro” for white western leaders.
McGee rejected the idea Zimbabwe needed more support from donors to restore the rule of law, respect for human rights and to guarantee basic freedoms of speech and association.
He said: “It doesn’t cost anything…to have judges apply the law equally. Dropping phantom politically motivated prosecutions is free. Stopping the arrests of political activists and independent journalists is also free.”
Reports say conservative warning on multiculturalism
Conservative leader David Cameron told the BBC One’s Andrew Marr show he agreed that “state multiculturalism” had been the wrong approach.
Mr Cameron said: “What he said was that state multiculturalism – the idea that as welcoming people into our country and keep them all in silos, and treat British Muslims as Muslims, rather than as British citizens, treat British Jews as Jews rather than as British citizens – that is wrong.
“I think trying to integrate more, trying to bring people together more, trying to build a strong British identity for the future, I think that’s absolutely right.”
His former home secretary Dominic Grieve backed Mr Cameron’s opinion, and warned British multiculturalism approach has left a “terrible” legacy which has allowed extremists to flourish, the Guardian reports.
He said “cultural despair” has led “long-term inhabitants” and newer arrivals to feel alienated and unsure of UK values.
“Some second- and third-generation immigrant communities who say they don’t know what British values are and that they’re alienated.” Dominic said in an interview with the Guardian.
As an Anglican, Mr Grieve drew out Britain should not ignore the importance of Christianity, and warned against downplaying Britain's Christian heritage.
He said: “The role of Christianity is really rather important. It can't just be magicked out of the script. It colours many of the fundamental viewpoints of British people, including many who have never been in a church.”
He went on warning the vacuum created by multiculturalism is to blame, as both the BNP and Hizb ut-Tahrir rise.
He added: “They are two very similar phenomena experiencing a form of cultural despair about themselves and their identities.”
According to the BBC, Dominic Grieve is not the first Tory home secretary to speak out against multiculturalism.
Followed the London bombing in 2005, Dominic’s predecessor David Davis called on the government to scrap the "outdated" policy, saying that allowing people of different cultures to settle without integrating is wrong, because it lets the “perverted value of suicide bomber” take root.
He urged ministers to build a single nation and claim “respect for the British way of life”.
However, the Muslim Council of Britain told the BBC there is no contradiction between multiculturalism and integration.
David Davis went on saying he strongly opposed Mohammed Naseem, Birmingham Central Mosque chairman, who focused his anger on the security services rather than the London bombers after one of the suspected terrorists was arrested in the city in 2005.
Mr David said: “The question now we should ask is what has been happening inside Britain’s Muslim communities and how the perverted values of the suicide bomber have been allowed to take root.”
He also expressed his worrying on the authorities seemed have encouraged more with distinctive identities than with promoting common cultural values of nationhood.
Mr Cameron said: “What he said was that state multiculturalism – the idea that as welcoming people into our country and keep them all in silos, and treat British Muslims as Muslims, rather than as British citizens, treat British Jews as Jews rather than as British citizens – that is wrong.
“I think trying to integrate more, trying to bring people together more, trying to build a strong British identity for the future, I think that’s absolutely right.”
His former home secretary Dominic Grieve backed Mr Cameron’s opinion, and warned British multiculturalism approach has left a “terrible” legacy which has allowed extremists to flourish, the Guardian reports.
He said “cultural despair” has led “long-term inhabitants” and newer arrivals to feel alienated and unsure of UK values.
“Some second- and third-generation immigrant communities who say they don’t know what British values are and that they’re alienated.” Dominic said in an interview with the Guardian.
As an Anglican, Mr Grieve drew out Britain should not ignore the importance of Christianity, and warned against downplaying Britain's Christian heritage.
He said: “The role of Christianity is really rather important. It can't just be magicked out of the script. It colours many of the fundamental viewpoints of British people, including many who have never been in a church.”
He went on warning the vacuum created by multiculturalism is to blame, as both the BNP and Hizb ut-Tahrir rise.
He added: “They are two very similar phenomena experiencing a form of cultural despair about themselves and their identities.”
According to the BBC, Dominic Grieve is not the first Tory home secretary to speak out against multiculturalism.
Followed the London bombing in 2005, Dominic’s predecessor David Davis called on the government to scrap the "outdated" policy, saying that allowing people of different cultures to settle without integrating is wrong, because it lets the “perverted value of suicide bomber” take root.
He urged ministers to build a single nation and claim “respect for the British way of life”.
However, the Muslim Council of Britain told the BBC there is no contradiction between multiculturalism and integration.
David Davis went on saying he strongly opposed Mohammed Naseem, Birmingham Central Mosque chairman, who focused his anger on the security services rather than the London bombers after one of the suspected terrorists was arrested in the city in 2005.
Mr David said: “The question now we should ask is what has been happening inside Britain’s Muslim communities and how the perverted values of the suicide bomber have been allowed to take root.”
He also expressed his worrying on the authorities seemed have encouraged more with distinctive identities than with promoting common cultural values of nationhood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)