Author: Mick Hartley

ypocrites on this issue. A savage form of terror has been unfolding in our own backyard for four years, yet until now, neither the Arab League nor any individual Arab government has sought to do much about it. Many of our political and religious leaders have strongly denounced what are arguably lesser crimes – such as the awkward and insensitive remarks made by the pope during an academic lecture – but have turned a blind eye as their fellow Muslims are slaughtered in Sudan. Where are the cries of outrage over Darfur?

The pope’s remarks are arguably a lesser crime? Good to see some acknowledgement of Arab lack of concern over Darfur, but it looks like there’s a way to go yet.

I’m not a rail buff, but after that Russian tank engine (snow plough?) I can’t resist posting these, from a website aiming to record the industrial heritage of the Workington area.

ging, and of course, the classic beheading. One actually asked a lawyer if it was legal to now kill him, since this verdict clearly brands him as an apostate, and the Sharia punishment for an apostasy is death. People were talking about killing him in the most casual manner, as if he was no longer a human being to them. […]

The consequences of the verdict and sentence are grave, both for Abdel Kareem and the for the Egyptian blogosphere in general.

If Abdel Kareem’s appeals are unsuccessful, he will have to spend the next four years in prison, where he could very likely get killed by an over-enthusiastic believer. His other option is to spend the next four years in solitary confinement, which won’t probably bode well for his mental health. Dead or crazy, those are his options now.

As far as the blogosphere, the implications are equally dangerous. This verdict sets a legal precedent for prosecuting someone for what they write on the Internet, on charges that are not easily defined or defended against. This could be used to prosecute any blogger the government feels like punishing, and serves a huge blow to freedom of speech in Egypt.

In the last years, the country’s blogosphere has been shedding light on the victims of police torture by showing videos of their mistreatment and identifying the police officers who committed those acts, which has embarrassed the Ministry of Interior and the government greatly. This is the real reason why they are now prosecuting bloggers. They have made an example out of Abdel Kareem, who was neither influential nor famous before, punishing him with an unprecedented long sentence in order to send a message to the rest of the blogosphere: This could happen to you, so watch what you write.

It is too early to judge whether this intimidation tactic will make some Egyptian bloggers tone down their rhetoric. However the Egyptian bloggers, at least the ones that have talked about it, remain defiant for now and express their view that they won’t let the verdict scare them or soften their writing. Whether that fighting spirit will linger if the government intensifies its crackdown on bloggers remains to be seen.

From Reuters:

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor will name the first suspects accused of committing war crimes in Sudan’s Darfur region next Tuesday, the prosecutor’s office said on Thursday.

Chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said in December his investigators had found evidence of rape, torture, murder and sexual violence in Darfur. His announcement is keenly awaited to see if he charges government figures as well as rebels.

Experts say around 200,000 people have been killed and about 2.5 million others driven from their homes in Darfur since 2003, when rebels took up arms against the government, charging it with neglect. Khartoum says only about 9,000 people have died.

“Moreno-Ocampo will submit evidence, in connection with named individuals, of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur,” his office said in a statement, adding that the prosecutor would hold a news conference at 1300 GMT on Feb. 27.

Once Moreno-Ocampo has filed the evidence, pre-trial judges will decide whether to issue summons or arrest warrants for the named individuals. Formal charges will only follow later.

Here’s the ICC press release.

(Via Coalition for Darfur)

ges 12 to 19 fell by 78% and among women ages 20 to 24 by 70%, nearly double the drop among women older than 25….

Why has rape and violence against women, particularly younger women, declined so dramatically over the last generation?

Little research exists on this question, and tentative explanations — from tougher sentencing of violent offenders to pornography’s effects in sublimating violence — are not persuasive.

The three-decade decline in teenage and young-adult rape accompanies huge drops in all crimes — murder, assault, drug abuse and property — committed by youth. And get-tough policies designed to imprison more teenagers don’t seem to be a factor either. Just-released California Division of Juvenile Justice figures show that fewer youths are locked up today than in 1959, when numbers were first reported.

The most likely explanation involves impressive generational developments. In 1970, women made up one-third of all college students (versus 57% today), earned about one-fourth of all young-adult income (versus nearly half today) and made up small fractions of doctors and lawyers (versus majorities of new entrants into these fields now). Women’s rapidly rising status and economic independence in the larger society fostered new attitudes and laws that rejected violence against women.

That younger people growing up in this environment of greater gender equality should show the biggest decreases in rape, while older generations lag behind, is consistent with this explanation. The youngest teenagers (presumably those raised with the most modern attitudes) show the biggest declines of all. Over the last 30 years, rape arrest rates have fallen by 80% among Californians under age 15, much larger than the 25% drop among residents age 40 and older.

What do they say? – California’s ahead of the rest of the US by 10 years, and the US is ahead of the UK by 10 years. So give it 20 years…

evelopment, the Afghani Taliban movement presented what it called its “new weapon,” which will confront NATO’s lethal weapons. This is the weapon of suicide operations. Taliban military commander [Mullah] Dadallah used this gathering to recruit over 500 suicide bombers for the coming spring campaign, which he promised would be bloody. He stressed that the Taliban is capable of multiplying their numbers.

Mullah Dadallah (translated into Arabic): Praise be to Allah, who gave us this great power of self-sacrifice, among Arabs and non-Arabs. Our preparations for the war in the field of self-sacrifice activities are not enough by themselves. These operations are not sufficient to defeat them. The weapon of devotion is still the most important. In addition, we must remember our martyrs and their blood, which they sacrificed for a greater cause.

Reporter: One of the suicide bombers summed up for Al-Jazeera the reasons for carrying out this act. He denied that poverty or depression, or any other of the reasons given by commentators, had led to his decision.

Suicide bomber (translated into Arabic): I understand what a self-sacrifice operation means. I am an educated student from a well-off family. I have no mental problems or anything like that. I could complete my studies and become a doctor.

But instead he’s going to blow himself up, killing as many others as he can in the process. All in the name of religion.

I can’t quite work out if Matthew Parris has his tongue in his cheek here:

Why do women leave lavatory seats in the “down” position? I am getting increasingly fed up with this inconsiderate behaviour. Hygiene and common sense dictate that “up” should be the default option and everyone should leave the seat lifted, to keep it unsplashed next time. Public toilets should have sprung seats, returning automatically to up.

I don’t think so though: it’s not Parris’ style. Maybe the Times’ editor wanted something controversial to boost the letters page. I doubt he’ll be disappointed.

I lost the argument long ago chez Hartley. Seat down looks better. The main point though, surely, is that it’s polite to cater for the likely next user, and in a mixed household, with women always having the seat down, and men sometimes having the seat down, it’s seat down that wins.

Also, I think, women resent having to lower the seat when they know that any splashes on it will have come from men.

I’ve no idea why Parris thinks seat up is more hygienic, unless they’re in the habit chez Parris of not bothering to raise the seat when they stagger in for a piss in the middle of the night.

fic research, huh? Despite the rich, creamy texture, the ingredients are probably from a minke and not a sperm. Perhaps we should all be glad for that.

Or shark fin:

Shark Fin Noodle Ice Cream (Fukahire Ramen Aisu) Just when you thought it was safe … to eat ice cream again, here’s something you can really get your jaws into. The tangy taste of Shark Fin Noodle Ice Cream is definitely one for the fin-nicky fan. A great white ice cream!

Come back Alan Whicker, all is forgiven.

What with Thabo Mbeki’s regrettable history – nevermind his health minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang – plus Gaddafi and the Benghazi trial, African leaders don’t have a great record when it comes to Aids. Now here’s Gambia’s president, Yahya Jammeh:

From the pockets of his billowing white robe, Gambia’s president pulls out a plastic container, closes his eyes in prayer and rubs a green herbal paste on to the ribcage of his patient. He then orders the thin man to swallow a bitter yellow drink, followed by two bananas.

“Whatever you do there are bound to be sceptics, but I can tell you my method is foolproof,” Yahya Jammeh says, surrounded by his bodyguards inside his presidential compound as he prepares to treat more patients.

“Mine is not an argument, mine is a proof. It’s a declaration. I can cure AIDS, and I will.”

In a continent suffering from the world’s worst AIDS epidemic, claims of miracle cures like those of Mr Jammeh are alarming public health workers already struggling against the corrosive effect of faith-healers dispensing herbal remedies.

The biggest concern to experts is that Mr Jammeh requires his patients to stop taking their anti-retroviral drugs, a dangerous move, since doing so can weaken the body’s immune system, making the patient prone to infection, said Dr Antonio Filipe, the local head of the World Health Organisation in neighbouring Senegal.

Matthew Syed on the Mental Health Bill:

The Bill, which suffered a number of defeats in the House of Lords on Monday, widens the scope of those who can be forcibly detained by mental health professionals, even if locking them up has no therapeutic benefit for the patient.

In other words, the Government is content for a mentally ill person who is innocent of any crime to be locked up, even if he will not benefit from being in custody.

It is highly unlikely that there will be a public outcry at the prospect of banging up a load of dangerous nutcases — but it is for this reason that we should be particularly suspicious of the Government’s inclination to press ahead despite the concerns of their lordships.

The fundamental flaw in the Bill is essentially mathematical. When we lock people up on the basis of the risk that they are thought to pose to the public, then there is a corresponding risk that we will end up detaining people who, in reality, would have posed no threat at all of committing a crime.

Well no: if the problem is that some of the detained people wouldn’t, in fact, have gone on to commit a crime, that’s implying that there’s no problem in locking people up who would have committed a crime. That it’s all a question of getting the balance right. That’s conceding far too much. The fundamental flaw in the bill is that it advocates depriving people of their liberty when they have done absolutely nothing wrong: that people can be imprisoned for what they are rather than for what they do – a very unpleasant precedent.