Saturday, January 14, 2012

What future for Afghan woman jailed for being raped ?

What future for Afghan woman jailed for being raped ?

Gulnaz
Gulnaz gave birth to her daughter, Moska, in jail

Related Stories

Two high profile cases of violence have sparked domestic and international outcry over the treatment of Afghan women, but campaigners fear a winding down of the military campaign will mean the international community will no longer be interested.

Outside it was a gloriously sunny winter's day. The mountains that loom above the city silhouetted against a cloudless blue sky. But inside the house was dark and the curtains drawn, so that the neighbours could not see in.

This was the safe house in Kabul where Gulnaz and her child had found refuge. The women there asked not to be identified in case their house was burnt down.

Just 21, Gulnaz had been released that week from prison, where she had given birth to her daughter Moska. Gulnaz seemed younger than her years, but she held my gaze almost defiantly as she told her story.

She had been imprisoned in a Kabul women's jail after her cousin's husband raped her.

The crime came to light when the unmarried Gulnaz became pregnant.

The police came and arrested both Gulnaz and her attacker. Under Afghan law she too was found guilty of a crime known as "adultery by force", with her sentence increased on appeal to 12 years.

From Our Own Correspondent

  • Broadcast on Saturdays at 11:30 GMT on BBC Radio 4, and weekdays on BBC World Service

When the case aroused condemnation abroad, President Hamid Karzai intervened and Gulnaz was pardoned.

Looking bewildered at her sudden freedom, she told me all she wanted was to go home to her family. In order to do that, she was prepared to marry the man who raped her - otherwise their families would be enemies.

The problem for Gulnaz is that if her attacker will not marry her - or cannot come up with a substantial dowry - the "stain" on her family's honour will remain, perhaps with lethal consequences for Gulnaz and her child. That may mean she can never go home.

For a single mother, unskilled and unqualified, there are few ways for a woman to survive in Afghanistan without family support.

An American lawyer in Kabul, Kim Motley, has taken up Gulnaz's case. She is trying to raise money for her to fund a new life, somehow, somewhere, if Gulnaz cannot go home.

Rescued from violence

I was still wondering what would happen to her when we went to meet 15-year-old Sahar Gul, as she lay in a hospital bed recovering from her injuries, too traumatised to talk.

Sahar Gul Sahar's injuries caused public outcry in Afghanistan

Married off to a 30-year-old man for a dowry of about $4,500 (£3,000), Sahar had been kept locked in a cellar for several months, starved and tortured by her husband and his family. It is still not really clear why.

Sahar may not have been able to speak, but her injuries did.

Burns to her arm and her fragile body, a swollen black eye, clumps of hair torn out. One small hand was scarred, where her fingernail had been pulled out.

“Start Quote

Tradition and family or community honour is often seen as more important than an individual's misery or misfortune”

The abuse aroused public indignation in Afghanistan, as well as horror abroad.

But Sahar was perhaps, in a strange way, lucky.

She did not run away from a violent marriage, as some Afghan brides have, but was instead rescued from it by police. So she cannot be found guilty of what might otherwise be deemed a "moral crime", as other young Afghan women have been.

Both Sahar and Gulnaz's stories are extreme. But they made me wonder how many other women in Afghanistan still suffer in silence, 10 years after the fall of the Taliban.

There are laws banning violence against women, but enforcing them is hard. Tradition and family or community honour is often seen as more important than an individual's misery or misfortune.

Poverty and lack of education also mean under-age marriage remains common.

When Sahar did try to escape her torturers, it was apparently the neighbours who brought her back to them, before the police intervened.

Sima Samar, Head of Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission
Dr Samar is concerned about the future of women's rights in Afghanistan

In a quiet, book-lined office in Kabul - a world away from the controlled chaos of the hospital and the dimly-lit safe house - I asked the head of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission what she thought.

A no-nonsense woman with steely grey hair, Dr Sima Samar has long risked her own life to speak out for the principles she believes in, equality and justice.

Her answer was clear: She and her colleagues in Afghanistan will carry on fighting to improve the lives of women like Gulnaz and Sahar.

But Dr Samar, like many others, fears the international community is no longer quite so interested in keeping up the pressure on women's rights, as the West seeks to wind down its military campaign.

When Western soldiers no longer patrol the streets of Afghanistan, it will be easier to ignore what goes on behind locked doors and closed curtains in a faraway place.

How to listen to From Our Own Correspondent:

BBC Radio 4: A 30-minute programme on Saturdays, 11:30 GMT.

Second 30-minute programme on Thursdays, 11:00 GMT (some weeks only).

Listen online or download the podcast

BBC World Service:

Hear daily 10-minute editions Monday to Friday, repeated through the day, also available to listen online.

Read more or explore the archive at the programme website.

Source

Mohamed ElBaradei will end Egypt presidency bid

Mohamed ElBaradei will end Egypt presidency bid

Mohamed ElBaradei (file photo - 15 December 2011)
Mr ElBaradei has been an outspoken critic of Egypt's military govenrment

Egyptian politician and former head of the UN nuclear watchdog Mohamed ElBaradei is dropping his candidacy in presidental elections later this year.

Mr ElBaradei, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005, said he had taken his decision in protest at the way Egypt's military rulers governed "as though no revolution had taken place".

A military council has run Egypt since President Hosni Mubarak was ousted.

The election is scheduled to take place in June 2012.

A BBC Arabic reporter in Cairo said Mr ElBaradei - seen as one of the leading liberal candidates - had been the subject of a smear campaign even before he declared his candidacy.

Constitution

In his statement, Mr ElBaradei praised the young people who led the uprising against Mr Mubarak, who was toppled in February 2011 after 18 days of street protests.

"My conscience does not permit me to run for the presidency or any other official position unless it is within a democratic framework," he said.

The BBC's Jon Leyne, in Cairo, says the comments are fairly damning, coming from someone with such international prestige.

However, Mr ElBaradei's critics will say he never stood much chance of becoming president, our correspondent adds.

Mr ElBaradei had wanted a new constitution to be drawn up from scratch before any elections took place.

However, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (Scaf) opted to go ahead with parliamentary elections first.

The third round of voting has just concluded. The lower house of parliament will elect a 100-member assembly which will then draft a new constitution.

Mr ElBaradei played a prominent role in the Egyptian uprising but his secularist politics have been eclipsed by the main Islamist parties, the Muslim Brotherhood and the conservative Salafist Nour party.

The Islamists took the lion's share of the vote in the first two rounds of elections and will dominate the new parliament.

Even on the liberal wing of Egyptian politics, feelings about Mr ElBaradei are very mixed, our correspondent says.

Source

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Heroes Discussing Poverty in America

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Remaki


Amazing panel on Poverty in America.

Muslim Woman and Med Student Sexually Harassed, Labeled a Terrorist, Thrown out of University, Even Though She's innocent. All this in 2012



Inside Story US 2012: Is the American dream fading?

Inside Story US 2012: Is the American dream fading?

Israel upholds citizenship bar for Palestinian spouses

Israel upholds citizenship bar for Palestinian spouses

Israeli flags (file)
The law is thought to have prevented thousands of Palestinians from living with their Israeli spouses

Israel's Supreme Court has upheld a law banning Palestinians who marry Israelis from gaining Israeli citizenship.

Civil rights groups had petitioned the court to overturn the law, saying it was unconstitutional.

"Human rights do not prescribe national suicide," Judge Asher Grunis wrote in the judgement.

The law was introduced in 2003, with its backers citing security concerns and the need to ensure Israel remains a Jewish-majority state.

Human rights activists and Arab politicians condemned the court's decision.

The court "had failed the test of justice", said Arab-Israeli MP Jamal Zahalka of the Balad party.

"It is a dark day for the protection of human rights and for the Israeli High Court," lawyers from the Association for Civil Rights in Israel told AFP.

"The ruling proves how much the situation regarding the civil rights of the Arab minority in Israel is declining into a highly dangerous and unprecedented situation", Arab-Israeli civil rights group Adalah, one of those that brought the petition, said in a statement.

The Citizenship and Entry Law was passed in 2003, during the second Palestinian intifada (uprising), as waves of suicide bombings targeted Israel.

Many were launched from the West Bank, some with the help of Israeli Arabs.

Initially, the law was emergency legislation which has since been extended periodically.

It was amended in 2005, allowing women over 25 and men over 35 to apply for temporary permits to live in Israel, but still ruling out citizenship for all but a handful of cases.

In 2007, it was expanded to apply to citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

Source


Can anyone disagree with the fact that Israel is an Apartheid state now? This ruling confirms that sentiment.

World's smallest frog discovered

World's smallest frog discovered

Frog on coin
The tiny frog sits easily on a US dime, whose diameter is 18mm

A frog species that appears to be the world's smallest has been discovered in Papua New Guinea by a US-based team.

At 7mm (0.27 inches) long, Paedophryne amauensis may be the world's smallest vertebrate - the group that includes mammals, fish, birds and amphibians.

The researchers also found a slightly larger relative, Paedophryne swiftorum.

Presenting the new species in PLoS One journal, they suggest the frogs' tiny scale is linked to their habitat, in leaf litter on the forest floor.

What are amphibians?

Frog eye
  • First true amphibians evolved about 250 million years ago
  • Three orders: frogs (inc. toads), salamanders (inc. newts) and the limbless caecilians
  • Adapted to many aquatic and terrestrial habitats
  • Present on every continent except Antarctica
  • Many metamorphose from larvae to adults

Finding the frogs was not an easy assignment.

They are well camouflaged among leaves on the forest floor, and have evolved calls resembling those of insects, making them hard to spot.

"The New Guinea forests are incredibly loud at night; and we were trying to record frog calls in the forest, and we were curious as to what these other sounds were," said research leader Chris Austin from Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, US.

"So we triangulated to where these calls were coming from, and looked through the leaf litter.

"It was night, these things are incredibly small; so what we did after several frustrating attempts was to grab a whole handful of leaf litter and throw it inside a clear plastic bag.

"When we did so, we saw these incredibly tiny frogs hopping around," he told BBC News.

Littering the leaves

The Paedophryne genus was identified only recently, and consists of a number of tiny species found at various points in the eastern forests of Papua New Guinea.

Frog limbs The tiny limbs of amauensis (top) and swiftorum are rendered translucent

"They're occupying the relatively thick leaf litter of tropical forest in low-lying parts of the island, eating incredibly small insects that typically are much smaller than insects that frogs eat," said Professor Austin.

"And they're probably prey for a large number of relatively small invertebrates that don't usually prey on frogs."

Predators may well include scorpions.

Intriguingly, other places in the world that also feature dense, moist leaf litter tend to possess such small frog species, indicating that amphibians are well placed to occupy this ecological niche.

Before the Paedophrynes were found, the title of "world's smallest frog" was bestowed on the Brazilian gold frog (Brachycephalus didactylus) and its slightly larger Cuban relative, the Monte Iberia Eleuth (Eleutherodactylus iberia). They both measure less than 1cm long.

The smallest vertebrates have until now been fish.

Adult Paedocypris progenetica, which dwells in Indonesian swamps and streams, measure 7.9-10.3 mm long.

Male anglerfish of the species Photocorynus spiniceps are just over 6mm long. But they spend their lives fused to the much larger (50mm long) females, so whether they should count in this contest would be disputed.

Paedophryne amaunensis adults average 7.7mm, which is why its discoverers believe it how holds the crown.

The remote expanses of Papua New Guinea rank alongside those of Madagascar as places where hitherto undiscovered amphibian species are expected to turn up, as they are largely undeveloped and not well explored.

Source

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Unable to Work, Retirees Move in with Kids and Find it’s not So Bad

Unable to Work, Retirees Move in with Kids and Find it’s not So Bad

Bunching family under one roof isn’t the Holy Grail of retirement. But for those with few choices at least it’s an answer with some unexpected benefits.
Getty Images
Getty Images

You’ve heard it over and over: the Holy Grail of retirement security is working longer. By sticking around for a few extra years or phasing into retirement with a part-time job, you can defer Social Security benefits and avoid tapping your nest egg right away—and boost your retirement income by 30% or so.

But what if you can’t work longer? What if you are physically unable or, as many have found since the financial crisis, no one will hire you? The next best thing to the Holy Grail seems to be moving in with the kids, if your resources are lacking and they’ll have you.

(MORE: Americans Are Expected to Buy a Million More Cars in 2012)

More than 51 million Americans—about one in six encompassing 12 million homes—live in a multigenerational household. That is a 10% increase since 2007 and while it includes struggling young adults who have moved in with Mom and Dad, struggling parents moving in with the kids are a big part of the mix, according to a report from Generations United.

In the survey, 66% of those who live in a multigenerational household said economic considerations were part of the reason and 21% said economic considerations were the only reason they live that way. Other findings:

  • 40% reported that job loss, change in job status, or underemployment was a reason their family became a multigenerational household.
  • 20% reported that health care costs prompted them to form a multigenerational household.
  • 14% reported that foreclosure or other housing loss prompted them to form a multigenerational household.

Evidently Robert Frost was correct when he wrote that “home is the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in.” Yet the living arrangement may not be as awful as you imagine. Some 72% report that living with multiple generations has improved their finances; 82% say it has forged closer bonds with family; and 75% say it has relieved the hardship of finding elder care or childcare.

Multigenerational living brings occasional stress, 78% in the survey report. But in general they agree that the benefits are significant and make it financially possible, for example, to go back to school or get additional job training.

(MORE: One Promising Economic Sign: Demand for Coins is Up)

This is a back to the future trend. When America was primarily an agricultural country, multiple generations routinely lived together on the farm. We may have been headed back this direction even without economic problems. Immigrant populations are growing and, as a matter of culture, often house multiple generations under one roof. Aging and suddenly single boomers, meanwhile, are choosing to take in family or roommates for companionship.

But the biggest driver going forward would seem to be the giant boomer generation now hitting age 66 at a clip of 10,000 a day and, after a lost decade for stocks, looking at retiring with fewer resources than they had planned. According to the report:

“Many boomers may end up turning to their adult children for help—and a place to live in the near future. Even if relatively few baby boomers follow this course, the sheer size of the baby boom population guarantees that their economic struggles will have a significant impact.”

Bunching family under one roof isn’t the Holy Grail of retirement. But for those with few choices, at least it’s an answer with some unexpected benefits.


Source

Warren Buffett Ready to Take Republicans’ Tax Challenge

Warren Buffett Ready to Take Republicans’ Tax Challenge


Mark Seliger for TIME
Mark Seliger for TIME

Updated, 6:10 p.m. E.T.

Warren Buffett is ready to call Republicans’ tax bluff. Last fall, Senator Mitch McConnell said that if Buffett were feeling “guilty” about paying too little in taxes, he should “send in a check.” The jab was in response to Buffett’s August 2011 New York Times op-ed, which made hay of the fact that our tax system is so unbalanced, Buffett (worth about $45 billion) pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Senator John Thune promptly introduced the “Buffett Rule Act,” an option on tax forms that would allow the rich to donate more in taxes to help pay down the national debt. It was, as Buffett told me for this week’s TIME cover story, “a tax policy only a Republican could come up with.”

Still, he’s willing to take them up on it. “It restores my faith in human nature to think that there are people who have been around Washington all this time and are not yet so cynical as to think that [the deficit] can’t be solved by voluntary contributions,” he says with a chuckle. So Buffett has pledged to match 1 for 1 all such voluntary contributions made by Republican members of Congress. “And I’ll even go 3 for 1 for McConnell,” he says. That could be quite a bill if McConnell takes the challenge; after all, the Senator is worth at least $10 million. As Buffett put it to me, “I’m not worried.” (See below for a statement from McConnell’s office.)

Listen to Buffett’s retort to McConnell’s contribution theory:

(PHOTOS: The Life and Career of Warren Buffett)

Buffett doesn’t want to sound ungrateful, especially since McConnell and other Republicans have lobbied to keep taxes low for the über-rich, saving him between $6 million and $7 million this year. Oddly, though, conservatives can’t seem to make up their mind about taxes. On Wednesday in the Wall Street Journal, supply sider Arthur Laffer bashed Buffett for, among other things, shielded income, because he doesn’t pay taxes on unrealized capital gains (currently taxed at 0%) or charitable contributions (which are tax deductible). “Well, I had a net unrealized loss in 2011,” says Buffett. “But if Arthur has a plan for how he wants to tax unrealized capital gains, I’d love to hear it — it’s an interesting thing for a Republican to put forward!”

If Buffett had his way, he’d pay more than the 17% rate he currently forks over on his net adjusted income — and he’d have the government put that additional money to work by making sure that whatever portion of the 99% that isn’t thriving in the market economy gets some help. As Buffett wrote in Fortune a few years back, “I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions.”

Listen to Buffett discuss why a capitalist system should take care of good citizens:

(PHOTOS: The Berkshire Hathaway Annual Shareholders’ Meeting)

Buffett doesn’t want to hobble capitalism. He just wants to give it a heart. And he says the way to do that is to change our tax policy to ensure that people who earn their money from investments rather than by working for a paycheck contribute their fair share. “We need a tax system that takes very good care of people who just really aren’t as well adapted to the market system and to capitalism but are nevertheless just as good citizens and are doing things that are of use in society.” Note to bond traders: your higher taxes should help subsidize the building of bridges and the running of state-sponsored day-care centers.

Buffett has plenty of other prescriptions for America — from more progressive consumption taxes to penalties for errant corporate directors to an overhaul of health care. He’s also got a few choice words for the Republican field and their ideas about bootstrapping and “merit” economies: “This whole business about [Newt] Gingrich going down to Occupy and saying, ‘They ought to be getting a job,’ that’s just … you know, maybe they can be historians for Freddie Mac too and make $600,000 a year.” When I ask whether Mitt Romney is a job creator or destroyer, Buffett says that while businesses shouldn’t keep people they don’t need, “I don’t like what private-equity firms do in terms of taking out every dime they can and leveraging [companies] up so that they really aren’t equipped, in some cases, for the future.”

(SPECIAL: See Warren Buffett in TIME’s List of the People Who Mattered in 2011)

Listen to Buffett explain why education can’t solve all the U.S.’s problems:

Despite Buffett’s disenchantment with conservatives and partisan politics, he’s more than ever a bull on America’s future. What would Warren do to get the U.S. back on track? Read TIME’s cover story this week, available Thursday morning online and Friday on newsstands, to find out.

Listen to Buffett talk about why housing will bounce back:

(MORE: What Politicians Have to Lose — and Gain — from the “Buffett Rule”)

Listen to Buffett discuss the tensions between the U.S. and China:

UPDATE: Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senator McConnell, provided the following response to Buffett’s remarks:

Sen. McConnell says that Washington should be smaller, rather than taxes getting bigger. And since some, like President Obama and Mr. Buffett, want to pay higher taxes, Congress made it possible for them to call their own bluff and send in a check. So I look forward to Mr. Buffett matching a healthy batch of checks from those who actually want to pay higher taxes, including Congressional Democrats, the President and the DNC.

Will an Aspirin Prolong Your Life? It Depends

Will an Aspirin Prolong Your Life? It Depends

Heart patients benefit from taking a low-dose aspirin daily, but the same same protection doesn't extend to healthy people hoping to prevent a first heart attack

Mark Weiss
Mark Weiss

For a pill that costs just pennies per dose, aspirin can do an awful lot. It prevents heart attack and stroke in people with a history of cardiovascular events. It’s recommended for angina and heart attack patients as soon as they arrive at the hospital. It may lower risk of colon and other types of cancer. And, yes, it’s good for the occasional aches and pains, too.

So it’s no wonder that in recent years, some health experts have been wondering whether everyone, whether or not they have heart troubles or headaches, should be taking low-dose aspirin as a preventive for some chronic illnesses. But the evidence doesn’t seem to support that idea, including a new review of nine clinical trials, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine. The study shows that aspirin does reduce the risk of heart attack in middle-aged adults without known heart disease, but that those benefits are “modest,” according to the study authors. The review showed that aspirin appeared to confer no protection against stroke or fatal heart attack, and the limited benefits against non-fatal heart attack were offset by relatively rare but dangerous side effects.

Aspirin helps to prevent heart attacks by preventing blood clots from forming, which can impede blood flow to the heart and brain. Recent studies also hint that it works to lower inflammation, which not only inhibits clot formation, but may protect unstable plaques in heart vessels from rupturing. Unfortunately, however, limited blood clotting can be dangerous as well. People who take a regular aspirin appear to be at increased risk of internal bleeding, which in some cases can be life-threatening.

MORE: This Isn’t Your Mother’s Bayer Aspirin

The new study in Archives is the largest of its kind to date. It includes nine clinical trials which together involve more than 100,000 study participants from a number of developed countries. In each of the nine trials, participants were randomly assigned either to take a daily aspirin or to take a placebo. On average, the aspirin-takers took their pills for six years.

The analysis finds that, on average among the trials, one cardiovascular disease event was averted for every 120 people who took a daily aspirin. But there was one “nontrivial bleeding event” for every 73 people on the daily aspirin regimen. And the researchers found no significant difference in mortality between the aspirin groups and the placebo groups.

Because more people were likely to experience a bleeding episode than be protected from a heart-related event, the study authors conclude: “routine use of aspirin for primary prevention is not warranted and treatment decisions need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.” For most people, the benefits of a daily aspirin simply don’t outweigh the risks.

MORE: Aspirin Doesn’t Increase Chances of Pregnancy with IVF

That’s not the case for people who have already suffered heart attack or stroke, however. This new study did not look at those individuals, since that benefit has been well documented in other studies. The bigger debate in recent years has been the effect of aspirin on adults without known cardiovascular problems.

In a separate statement to the public, lead researcher Rao Seshasai said:

The beneficial effect of aspirin on preventing future cardiovascular disease events in people with established heart attacks or strokes is indisputable. We urge people with these conditions not to discontinue their medication unless advised to do so by their physicians for valid reasons.

For everyone else, it’s back to basics if you want to protect yourself from heart disease — eat a low-fat, low-sodium diet, and get enough exercise to get your heart pumping. And no, you can’t get that in a pill.