Nun dies after Hindu hardliners torch Christian churches and an orphanage

Taken from Daily Mail, UK, 25th August 2008

A nun has been killed and a priest seriously injured after Hindu hardliners set fire to an orphanage run by Christian missionaries.

The attack occurred in the village of Khuntapali, in India’s Orissa state, during protests against the murder of a Hindu religious leader on Saturday.

Police say tensions between the two groups have been growing in recent weeks, with some Hindu groups accusing the missionaries of bribing villagers to convert to Christianity.

Yesterday the religious fanatics converged on the orphanage and asked nearly 20 residents to leave the complex.

They then set the orphanage on fire with the nun and the priest locked inside.

The priest suffered extensive burns and was last night in a serious condition in hospital.

Although India’s constitution is secular, 84 per cent of its 1.2billion population is Hindu.

Around 2.5 per cent of Indians are Christians.

In the past Hindu extremists in Orissa state have attacked other Christian missionaries.

In 1999 an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his two sons were killed by a Hindu mob that set their car on fire.

Churches have denied that residents have been pressured or bribed to change their religious beliefs.

Indian law accepts missionaries but bars forced conversions. Nevertheless, any missionary activity generally provokes controversy.

Afghan president 'pardoned rapists'

Taken from the Independent, UK,
By Kate Clark in Kabulm, 24 August 2008

The Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has pardoned three men who had been found guilty of gang raping a woman in the northern province of Samangan.

The woman, Sara, and her family found out about the pardon only when they saw the rapists back in their village.

“Everyone was shocked,” said Sara’s husband, Dilawar, who like many Afghans uses only one name. “These were men who had been sentenced and found guilty by the Supreme Court, walking around freely.”

Sara’s case highlights concerns about the close relationship between the Afghan president and men accused of war crimes and human rights abuses.

The men were freed discreetly but the rape itself was public and brutal. It took place in September 2005, in the run up to Afghanistan’s first democratic parliamentary elections.

The most powerful local commander, Mawlawi Islam, was running for office despite being accused of scores of murders committed while he had been a mujahedeen commander in the 1980s and a Taliban governor in the 1990s, and since the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Sara said one of his sub-commanders and body guards had been looking for young men to help in the election campaign.

“It was evening, around the time for the last prayer, when armed men came and took my son, Islamuddin, by force. I have eye-witness statements from nine people that he was there. From that night until now, my son has never been seen.”

Dilawar said his wife publicly harangued the commander twice about their missing son. After the second time, he said, they came for her. “The commander and three of his fighters came and took my wife out of our home and took her to their house about 200 metres away and, in front of these witnesses, raped her.”

Dilawar has a sheaf of legal papers, including a doctors’ report, which said she had a 17mm wound in her private parts cut with a bayonet. Sara was left to stumble home, bleeding and without her trousers.

When I met the couple in May 2006, they were in hiding and struggling to pursue the four men through the courts, petitioning the parliament, the president, human rights organisations and the United Nations. Sara and Dilawar say that one of the men involved in the attack used money and connections to repeatedly evade justice, particularly after his boss, Mawlawi Islam, became an MP and, they allege, was fully able to protect him.

In January 2007, Mawlawi Islam was assassinated. However, the other three men accused of the gang rape were put on trial, found guilty and sentenced to 11 years in prison. Abdul Basir died in jail. The other two rapists, Nur Mohammad and Kheir Mohammad, were released last May. The commander was found not guilty.

A copy of the pardon was numbered, dated in May and appeared to bear the personal signature of Hamid Karzai. It recommended the men’s release because, it said, “they had been forced to confess to their crimes.”

When showed copies of the presidential pardon and court papers, President Karzai’s spokesman, Hamayun Hamidzada, was visibly shocked and said that if the documents proved genuine, Mr Karzai would be “upset and appalled.”

He said it was impossible that President Karzai could knowingly have signed a pardon for rapists, but refused to speculate on how the pardon could have come about. He promised an investigation into all aspects of the case, including the - as yet unsolved - mystery of Sara’s missing son.

He denied that there was one law for the rich and well-connected in Afghanistan and another for people like Sara. “There are difficulties - we’re rebuilding institutions, including our justice institutions and there are shortcomings, but the president and the government are committed to the rule of law on all equally.”

A UN human rights official said that, although she could not remember a similar case of the president giving a pardon in such a serious case, corruption in the police and courts was endemic.
The MP, Mir Ahmad Joyenda, said cases similar to Sara’s were actually becoming more common. The police and the courts, he said, were usually under the sway of local commanders.

“The commanders, the war criminals, still have armed groups,” he said. “They’re in the government. Karzai, the Americans, the British sit down with them. They have impunity.

They’ve become very courageous and can do whatever crimes they like.”

Sara and Dilawar are again in hiding, having felt too vulnerable to stay in their village. Dilawar was prepared to discuss the case. In Afghanistan, speaking about rape means risking further dishonour, but when asked whether he minded Sara’s story being publicised, Dilawar said, “We’ve already lost our son, our honour, we’ve sold our land to pay for legal costs and we’ve lost our home – what else can we lose?”

'Librarian' of global paedophile ring jailed

Taken from Daily Mirror, 18.08.2008

By Hannah Wood

This is the face of one of the bosses behind a worldwide internet paedophile ring smashed apart by UK cops in a massive undercover operation.

Twenty-seven year old Philip Thompson, who acted as the ‘librarian’ of the network that spanned 33 countries, was jailed today for three years nine months – but warned he could remain behind bars for much longer.

The self-taught British computer expert used his skills to moderate an invitation-only website forum that featured ‘borderline illegal’ images of children playing in their underwear.

Police said the gateway site was used to prove users had a perverted interest in children and once users were accepted as members they would then be linked up to other more secretive online environments.

It was here that thousands of more disturbing images and videos, as well as information about vulnerable children, were exchanged.

The capture of Thompson, of Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, has saved 15 children from the evil clutches of the vile paedophile ring and led to dozens more arrests, it has emerged.

Police have so far pinpointed 360 suspects involved in this global trade of child pornography, the court was told.

Thompson, who lived with his mother, pleaded guilty to 27 charges, including 16 counts of making indecent photographs of children, seven counts of distributing indecent photographs of children and one count of causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity.

Prosecutor Harry Hadfield told Teesside Crown Court that when cops raided the unemployed driver’s home in February this year they recovered two desktop computers and a laptop, as well as a selection of other computer paraphernalia.

Forensic analysis by computer experts established that the defendant had 241,000 indecent photographs of children, being one of the largest seizures of indecent photographs in the UK,’ he told the court.

Mr Hadfield said: “The defendant’s role was to police the website, which gave him the opportunity to transfer these images to his computer.

“The evidence recovered from his computer showed he had amassed a vast collection of indecent photographs of children.

“It appeared the defendant kept some of the most serious images to use as trading chips.”

Detective Chief Superintendent Mark Braithwaite, of Cleveland Police, said: “Thompson was a critical piece of this network. He was, essentially, the librarian for a myriad of images that were distributed to like-minded individuals both in this country and elsewhere.

“I hope this result acts as a deterrent and sends out a clear warning that activity such as this will not be tolerated.”

Of the near 250,000 images on Thompson’s computers, more than 3,000 were of levels four and five - the worst kind of child abuse images.

“The Crown would say that this collection of indecent photographs and the subsequent police investigation revealed that this defendant has been involved in the distribution of these photographs for the last four or five years,” Mr Hadfield said.

He added that 51 arrests had been made as a result of the investigation into Thompson and inquiries were continuing.

The international child abuse network was infiltrated by police in the largest deployment yet of undercover officers in the UK used in a child protection inquiry.

Detective Sergeant Becky Driscoll, of Cleveland Police, said Thompson thought he was operating ‘below the radar’.

“He was integral. He played a key role. He was trusted by others members of this site, so much so that he stored horrific images of child abuse on their behalf,” she said.

“He described the 250,000 child abuse images as his collection. He was prepared to share that with acquaintances he found on his forum.”

Jim Gamble, chief executive of the Ceop, added: “This website, whilst appearing to operate on the margins of legality, was clearly a front for the sinister, sexual abuse of children and an image trading ground for paedophiles.

“There is a simple message for those individuals like Thompson, who think they can go to this website - or indeed any space on the internet - and discuss their sexual interest in children and share images.

“You leave a digital footprint. We will track you down and hold you to account.”

Mary Dejevsky: Russia the bad guys? Who are the West trying to kid?

Taken from the Independent, UK
Friday, 15 August 2008

As Russian forces started to hand over control of the Georgian town of Gori yesterday, you could detect a note of surprise, even disappointment, in many media reports. So the all-out Russian invasion of plucky little democratic Georgia might not be going to happen after all. Could it be that the bear was drawing in his claws?

Well, Russia did not have long to worry about losing its reputation as backyard bully. Within hours, the United States envoy to Georgia was spinning a whole new myth to the BBC about how it was only decisive US intervention – by which he presumably meant the warplanes laden with humanitarian aid by then ostentatiously parked at Tbilisi airport – that the mighty erstwhile Red Army had been turned back.

The many Georgians who had counted on more timely and robust assistance from their US protector surely laughed a bitter laugh. But there were signs, with the arrival of the US Secretary of State in Georgia, that this version was gaining hold. The story of this war, it seems, will be that the US faced down a snarling, expansionist Russia, and forced it to limp back to its lair.

This is a travesty. But it is only the latest and most glaring in a series of Western misrepresentations and misreadings of Russian intentions throughout this sorry episode. They began with the repeated references to Russian "aggression" and "invasion", continued through charges of intended "regime change", and culminated in alarmist reports about Russian efforts to bomb the east-west energy pipeline. None of this, not one bit of it, is true.

Take "aggression" and "invasion". Georgia declared itself to be in a state of war with Russia.

War, regrettably, is war, and a basic objective is to reduce, or destroy, the enemy's military capability. This is what Russia was doing until it accepted the ceasefire. The positions it took up inside Georgia proper can be seen as defensive, not offensive. Gori houses the Georgian garrison on South Ossetia's border.

And anyway, how did hostilities begin? Georgia sent troops into South Ossetia. The status of that region – which declared unilateral independence – is anomalous. It is inside Georgia's borders, but outside its control. But one reason why the dispute has not been solved is that the "fudge" over independence brought with it a degree of stability. Georgia's action upset that stability. But did anyone describe it as "aggression"? Trying to explain Russian "aggression", many reports went further, observing a "new" mood of Russian aggressive nationalism. Today's Russia, they reasoned, was uniquely liable to lash out, because energy wealth had fuelled new national ambitions. Where, though, is the evidence that Russian national pride is automatically malign?

If you exclude Chechnya, which Russians have always regarded as part of Russia, then neither Putin, nor Medvedev, had sent troops outside Russian borders before this point. As for the idea that Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union – derived from his remark about the Soviet collapse being "among the greatest catastrophes" of the 20th century – nothing could be further from what he did. Far from hankering after a lost empire, Putin used his years as president systematically to fix Russia's post-Soviet borders, signing treaties with every neighbouring country that would agree – including, last month, China. Of course, Russia does not like the idea of another Nato member on its borders. But this is not the same as wanting to restore "ex-Soviet space". It reflects Russia's view of its legitimate security interests.

Perhaps the most pernicious assumption over the past week, however, is that Russia wanted to effect "regime-change". Russian officials categorically denied this, insisting that they had no business overthrowing an elected leader. You might scoff, but Russia has done nothing that would contradict this. The Kremlin would probably be delighted if Georgians eventually punished their President for his misguided enterprise, but Russia seems to accept that Georgians decide what happens in Georgia.

Why was it so difficult for outsiders to believe that Moscow wanted precisely what its leaders said they wanted: a return to the situation that had pertained before Georgia's incursion into South Ossetia – and does it matter that its intentions were so appallingly misread? Yes it does. If outsiders impute to Moscow motives and objectives it does not have, they alienate Russia even further, and make a long-term solution of many international problems that more difficult. It is high time we treated Russia's post-Soviet leaders as responsible adults representing a legitimate national interest, rather than assuming the stereotypical worst.

UNIFIL commander: Israel violating 1701

Taken from The Jerusalem Post, Aug 15, 2008

Commander of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Maj.-Gen. Claudio Graziano on Thursday accused Israel of violating UN Security Council Resolution 1701 that brought an end to the Second Lebanon War.

During a press conference at the United Nations headquarters in New York, Graziano cited the IAF forays over Lebanon and the village of Ghajar, which he called "a permanent violation of 1701" and "a permanent area under occupation."

A further violation, according to Graziano, was Israel's failure to provide maps of all the locations where it dropped cluster bombs during the 2006 war.

In contrast, he said that the UN enjoyed excellent cooperation with Hizbullah and with the local Lebanese people.

"At this moment Hizbullah is one of [the] parties that agrees with 1701," he stressed.

Graziano asserted that apart from UN troops, Lebanese soldiers and hunters, no one was armed south of the Litani River.

"We have seen hunters, we saw somebody moving with one weapon and he was arrested, but we never met anybody [else] moving with weapons," he said.

He conceded that his soldiers were not trying to prevent weapons smuggling from Syria as demanded by the UNSC because the Lebanese government had not requested such action.

The UNIFIL commander emphasized that Israel's numerous allegations regarding violations of the UN resolution were being investigated.

Iraq contractors 'cost US $85bn'

Taken from Al-Jazeera News Agency, 13 Aug 2008

The US government has spent at least $85 billion on private contractors during the 2003 Iraq war and its aftermath, a government review has said.

About 20 per cent of money spent for operations in Iraq has gone to contractors, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said.

At present there are at least 190,000 contractors in Iraq and in neighbouring countries, a ratio of about one per US service member, the report said.

The report sparked heavy criticism by US Democrats, with Senator Kent Conrad, chairman of the US senate budget committee, saying the reliance on contractors "restricts accountability and oversight; opens the door to corruption and abuse and ... may significantly increase the cost to American taxpayers".

The study did not include figures for 2008 and therefore the total paid tocontractors for work in Iraq since the invasion could be even higher, possibly topping $100 billion by the end of this year, the report said.

The US military has relied increasingly on contractors in its wars as it reduced the size of its own forces.

Increased scrutiny
The CBO estimated on Tuesday that between $6 billion to $10 billion has gone to pay for security work in Iraq, which was comparable to the costs of having a US military unit performing the same tasks.

The work of contractors in Iraq - of whom between 25,000 to 30,000 are in security work - has faced increased scrutiny following a series of fatal incidents involving Iraqi civilians.

Last September, 17 Iraqis were killed in a shooting involving contractors from Blackwater security company, an incident that provoked furious protests from the Iraqi government and strained relations with the US.

The US Justice Department is expected to decide soon whether to bring charges over the incident, although Blackwater itself is not expected to be prosecuted.

The firm recently announced that they planned to scale back their securitycontracting business and focus on other areas, due in part to negative publicity from the shooting.

In addition, contracting companies such as Halliburton, previously run by Dick Cheney, the US vice-president, and KBR, formerly known as Kellogg, Brown and Root, have also been accused of overcharging and corruption.

Charles Tiefer, a professor of government contracting at the University of Baltimore Law School, told the New York Times newspaper that the scale of contractor usage in Iraq was

"unprecedented".
"It was considered an all-out imperative by the administration to keep troop levels low, particularly in the beginning of the war, and one way that was done was to shift money and manpower to contractors," he told the paper.

"But that has exposed the military to greater risks from contractor waste and abuse."

Israeli troops kill West Bank boy

Taken from Al-Jezeera News Agency, Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Israeli troops have shot dead a Palestinian boy during a protest near the separation wall in the occupied West Bank, according to Palestinian medics and witnesses.

Hammad Hossam Mussa was hit by a bullet fired by Israeli soldiers in the village of Ni'lin on Tuesday, Salah Al Khawaja, a member of Ni'lin's Committee Against the Wall, said.





He died of his wounds while being transported to hospital in an ambulance, medical sources said.
Al Jazeera's Jacky Rowland in Jerusalem said that the Israeli military had not yet given a definitive account of the incident.

"They have merely told us that they are carrying out 'a careful and thorough investigation' into how this child died, and only once they have done that investigation will we get their comment on how this boy happened to die," she said.

Live rounds

According to Khawaja, soldiers fired live rounds towards a group of protesters who had run into the village after the army dispersed protesters outside using rubber-coated bullets.

"Protesters arrived at the wall's construction site outside the village and the soldiers started to open fire with rubber bullets and tear gas. This pushed the protesters back into the village where the boy was hit by a live bullet in his chest," he told AFP.

However, other witnesses said that the boy was hit in the head as strone-throwers confronted Israeli troops.

Fifteen people were also lightly injured by rubber-coated bullets during the demonstration in Ni'lin, which has in recent months become the site of regular demonstrations against the barrier.

"This barrier, made of coiled razor wire, deep trenches and a fence equipped with electronic sensors, is cutting through the land of the village," Rowland reported.

Earlier this month, demonstrators in Ni'lin and other locations marked four years since the International Court of Justice issued a non-binding resolution calling for parts of the barrier inside the West Bank to be torn down and for a halt to construction there.

Israel has largely ignored the ruling.