What the US said about Zimbabwe’s elections yesterday

The United States yesterday said it was deeply concerned about the lack of transparency in electoral preparations, the continued partisan behaviour by state security institutions, and the technical and logistical issues hampering the administration of credible and transparent elections in Zimbabwe.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell told a press briefing that Zimbabwe, the Southern African Development Community and the African Union should accept nothing short of SADC and internationally accepted standards of electoral credibility, fairness, and transparency.

He said he was not sure if Secretary of State John Kerry had written to President Robert Mugabe to express US concern.

Zimbabwe is holding its elections at the end of this month. Special voting has already been concluded though the Movement for Democratic Change had gone to court to stop the voting because of alleged irregularities.

The other faction of the MDC has asked the African Union to postpone the elections and the case will be heard on Friday.



Below is the transcript of what Ventrell said about Zimbabwe:



QUESTION: Sounds like you’re saying that those conditions are not there.

MR. VENTRELL: Well, again, I don’t want to preview what we’re not yet – where we haven’t gotten to yet. But we’ve been deeply concerned and disappointed that the direction of this is the elections moving forward in the absence of reforms that the Government of Zimbabwe and SADC themselves agreed to in the Global Political Agreement and the SADC electoral roadmap. So that includes the security sector, media, and other reforms. And we call on the Government of Zimbabwe, SADC, and the African Union to accept nothing short of SADC and internationally accepted standards of electoral credibility, fairness, and transparency.



QUESTION: The election campaign is ramping up, got elections at the end of the year. Are the conditions there in the country – and would you say that the conditions within the country make for a free and fair election currently?

MR. VENTRELL: Let me say, Lesley, that this is a critical moment for the people of Zimbabwe. Progress has been made since the Global Political Agreement was signed in 2008. Zimbabwe’s economy has begun to recover from devastating economic mismanagement and hyperinflation, and the people of Zimbabwe peacefully approved a new constitution in March. The United States joins the Southern African Development Community and our international partners in calling for elections in Zimbabwe that are peaceful, transparent, and credible. Elections that do not meet these standards risk undermining the progress that Zimbabwe has made since 2008. We are deeply concerned about the lack of transparency in electoral preparations, the continued partisan behavior by state security institutions, and the technical and logistical issues hampering the administration of a credible and transparent election.

QUESTION: Sounds like you’re saying that those conditions are not there.

MR. VENTRELL: Well, again, I don’t want to preview what we’re not yet – where we haven’t gotten to yet. But we’ve been deeply concerned and disappointed that the direction of this is the elections moving forward in the absence of reforms that the Government of Zimbabwe and SADC themselves agreed to in the Global Political Agreement and the SADC electoral roadmap. So that includes the security sector, media, and other reforms. And we call on the Government of Zimbabwe, SADC, and the African Union to accept nothing short of SADC and internationally accepted standards of electoral credibility, fairness, and transparency.

So we’ve raised our concerns. You know where we are on the sanctions policy, that we’ve wanted these free, transparent, and credible elections, and that could have an impact on our sanctions policy. But I don’t have anything for you in terms of the elections that we haven’t arrived at.

QUESTION: I understand Secretary Kerry has written to President Mugabe. Do you know what he said in that?

MR. VENTRELL: I’d have to check on that. I’m not sure if there’s been correspondence directly in that channel. You know we have an ambassador on the ground who communicates directly with the government, but I’d have to check on that.


http://www.insiderzim.com/stories/5927-what-the-us-said-about-zimbabwes-elections-yesterday.html?

Edited by Joffa: 17/7/2013 09:34:53 PM

Is the number of whales dangerously declining? If it is the whaling must be reined in. If not then its just like any other fishing. The only thing is, I have trouble putting much credence in any figures released by Greenpeace - wouldn't trust that mob further than I could kick them.

Crime & Justice, Democracy, Headlines, Human Rights, North America
U.S. Backlash Growing Against “Stand Your Ground” Laws
By Cydney Hargis
Reprint | | Print | Send by email

The acquittal of George Zimmerman, who killed unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, has sparked backlash against Stand Your Ground laws. Above, a 2012 protest against Martin's death. Credit: David Shankbone/CC by 2.0

WASHINGTON, Jul 18 2013 (IPS) - In the aftermath of the recent acquittal of 31-year-old Florida native George Zimmerman, the state’s so-called Stand Your Ground law has come under national scrutiny, as have dozens of other states that have enacted similar legislation.

The criticism will perhaps be led by whatever the U.S. Justice Department chooses to do with the case. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder denounced the law Tuesday in a keynote address at an annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP), an esteemed advocacy group.

During his speech, Holder also pledged to open a full investigation into the death of Trayvon Martin, the 17-year-old African-American youth whom Zimmerman, a Latino, fatally shot in February 2012. Over the past two months, Zimmerman’s case has riveted U.S. audiences and sparked a countrywide discussion of the role of race – and racial profiling – in the United States today.

“It is our collective obligation,” Holder said. “We must stand our ground to ensure that our laws reduce violence and take a hard look at laws that contribute to more violence than they prevent.”

"We must..take a hard look at laws that contribute to more violence than they prevent."
-- Eric Holder
Florida’s Stand Your Ground law was passed in 2005 with a unanimous vote in the state senate and a 94-20 vote in the house. Five years later, the rate of so-called justifiable homicide in Florida had tripled. And since 2005, 31 other states have followed Florida’s lead in passing similar “self-defence” laws.

Under the Florida law, a person can use “defensive force” that is intended to cause harm to another person if they feel “reasonably” threatened – say, if someone is breaking into their house or if they are beaten or kidnapped. The law does not apply if the person against whom defensive force is used has a right to be on the property or is a law-enforcement officer.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force is he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so,” according to the Florida law.

The law also states that if a person is being unreasonably attacked, they have no obligation to retreat. This element has led to increasingly strident criticism from those who worry the law results in escalation, rather than de-escalation, of potentially violent situations.

Such a dynamic appears to have taken place in the ensuing fight between Zimmerman, an armed “neighbourhood watch” volunteer, and Martin in February 2012.

Some suggest the law is a solution looking for a problem and point out that there was no evidence of any such problem prior to the signing of the Stand Your Ground law in Florida.

“It [the law] allows someone to shoot and kill another human being in the fear of great bodily harm. Great bodily harm means a fist fight,” Ladd Everitt, director of communications at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, an advocacy group, told IPS.

“Even if someone hasn’t sustained any damage, this law allows them to shoot and kill someone based only on a fear.”

Zimmerman’s lawyers did not bring up the law during his trial, but it was included in the instructions to the jury, who acquitted him on Saturday, Jul. 13.

Time to re-examine

“There has always been a legal defence for using deadly force if – and the ‘if’ is important – no safe retreat is available,” Holder noted Tuesday.

The Immunity from Criminal Prosecution clause of the Florida law states that if the person who used defensive force in accordance with the law is granted immunity in court and wins the case, the prosecution is required to pay the defence’s attorney fees, court costs and compensation for any loss of income. Zimmerman did not file for immunity in the criminal court case that ended last week.

Related IPS Articles

Zimmerman Verdict Sparks Outrage at U.S. “Vigilante Culture”
“The attorney general fails to understand that self-defence is not a concept, it’s a fundamental human right,” Chris W. Cox, the executive director of the National Rifle Association‘s Institute for Legislative Action, the lobby group’s advocacy arm, said in a statement.

“To send a message that legitimate self-defence is to blame is unconscionable, and demonstrates again that this administration will exploit tragedies to push their political agenda.”

Following the 2005 passage of the Stand Your Ground law, NRA operatives and legislators aligned with the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and created a piece of model legislation mirroring the Florida law and which could in turn be passed throughout the country. ALEC encouraged and advocated this passage and initially called the legislation one of its successes.

Subsequently, 49 major corporations, including General Motors, General Electric and Coca-Cola, severed ties with the organisation. ALEC has since abandoned its criminal justice task force that promoted the Stand Your Ground law and has disavowed gun bills.

Thirty-one states, including Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky and Louisiana, currently have a Stand Your Ground law. Eight states have related bills in the legislature right now or are expected to have legislation introduced soon, including Alaska, Illinois and Massachusetts.

California, Colorado and Washington do not have a bill, but Stand Your Ground actions have been upheld in their courts, making it a de facto law. Only seven states have no such laws or bills.

The Zimmerman trial may have sparked pushback against this legislative trend, however.

President Barack Obama “urges upon all communities to examine what we can do … to prevent these kinds of tragedies from happening in the future; and to reduce gun violence in general”, press secretary Jay Carney said during a press briefing at the White House on Tuesday.

The president is also urging communities “to look at our laws and examine whether those laws that we have serve to reduce gun violence or, in some cases, inadvertently make the problem worse”.

Holder sharpened this growing critique by suggesting on Tuesday that such self-defence laws actually undermine public safety.

“Separate and apart from the case that has drawn the nation’s attention,” he said, “it’s time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defence and sow dangerous conflict in our neighbourhoods.”

The NRA did not return calls for comment.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/07/u-s-backlash-growing-against-stand-your-ground-laws/?

Teen sisters shot dead over dancing in the rain video

July 1, 2013

Two teenage girls have been shot dead in an apparent honour killing in Pakistan after a video was circulated showing them dancing in the rain.

The girls, aged 15 and 16, are seen running around wearing traditional dress, covered in green and purple headscarves, outside their stone bungalow in the town of Chilas, in the far north of the country.

Local media named them as Noor Basra and Noor Sheza, the daughters of a retired police officer. According to Dawn newspaper, five masked men barged into their house and opened fire last Sunday. Their mother was also killed.

The report said police believed that the crime was motivated by a video clip circulated on mobile telephones. The short film, shot six months ago, shows the girls smiling and laughing as they run around their home, breaking into a dance.

Advertisement
An initial investigation, quoted by Dawn, suggested that the girls' stepbrother, named as Khutore, considered the video an "assault on the honour of his family" and carried out the attack. Officers are also examining whether a property dispute or an audio clip - in which the girls are apparently heard talking to an unknown man - might be a motive.

Human rights activist Atiya Jehan was quoted by Yahoo7 as saying "the video of the sisters breaking into dance and flashing a smile at the camera became a big issue in Chillas area."

Five women and two men were reportedly killed in the same region following footage of them singing and dancing together at a wedding, the UK Telegraph reported.

The alleged killer is believed to still be on the run.

Honour killings in Pakistan are carried out to restore honour the the family name, following an action by a family member that causes the name to be shamed in some way.

Meanwhile, a Pakistani girl who was falsely accused of burning a religious text has fled to Canada, according to her supporters.

Rimsha Masih, a Christian believed to be 14, was jailed for several weeks last year after witnesses claimed she had set fire to an Islamic book. The blasphemy case was dropped when it emerged that she had been framed.

The Telegraph, London



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/teen-sisters-shot-dead-over-dancing-in-the-rain-video-20130701-2p66o.html#ixzz2ZOkKHe79

Islam ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

We already did this.

20 cars torched in Paris suburb after tensions over veil ban

By Associated Press, Updated: Sunday, July 21, 6:49 PM

PARIS — Some 20 cars have been torched and four people detained in a second night of violence in suburbs west of Paris.

France’s interior minister said Sunday that the incidents overnight targeted the town of Elancourt.

Police union official said on BFM television that about 50 assailants were involved, some firing weapons and a gasoline bomb at police.

The night before, about 250 people clashed with police in the nearby town of Trappes in apparent protest over the enforcement of France’s ban on Islamic face veils.

Interior Minister Manuel Valls said police presence will be reinforced in the area until calm returns.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/20-cars-torched-in-paris-suburb-after-tensions-over-veil-ban/2013/07/21/61e0641e-f1e2-11e2-8464-57e57af86290_story.html?

I'm afraid this veil ban is a case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted.

Actually, more a case of (In the words of Dr. Frank N Furter) "Removing the cause but not the symptom".

You can look at it differently. Europe has replaced 6 million Jews with 6 million Muslims. I don't think it's done well out of that.

I don't think it's a case of replacing one with the other. That seems like a very "us vs them" way of looking at it.

Nature does not tolerate empty space, something always replaces something else.

Fuck you're daft sometimes.

Sorry I was a little over your head mate.

You're not 'replacing' one with the other. The Moors have been in Europe for thousands of years. The Holocaust didn't suddenly 'create space' for the muslim community.

I'm sorry history is a little over your head mate.

The Moors did get kicked out, though not before leaving their seed all over the place.

The Holocaust and muslim immigration did indeed create a situation where 6 million Jews got replaced with 6 million Muslims.

The two are mutually exclusive events ](*,)

Sad that 78 people died in the Spanish train crash. Crazy footage.

[youtube]o32nxuHshv4[/youtube]

Edited by mr: 25/7/2013 10:07:27 PM

Edited by mr: 25/7/2013 10:07:46 PM

Also in Spain, their unemployment rate has fallen for the first time in 2 years.

Naturally, no one is suggesting they are not.

What I am saying and the point that you are missing is that it is quite ironic that the Europe that stood by and allowed the Holocaust to happen has now imported pretty much the same number of Muslims as the number of Jews that their indifference helped put to death.

It is also historically ironic that these new European Muslims are as anti-Semitic as the Nazi regime was. I am not sure history will judge this ironic substitution as beneficial to Europe.

Edited by thupercoach: 26/7/2013 10:55:58 AM

Let's be honest, almost nothing Europe does is historically judged as beneficial to them :lol:

:lol: :lol:

Amen to that.

Republican candidate wants to revise laws, ban oral sex

Lee-Anne Goodman, The Canadian Press
Published Tuesday, July 23, 2013 5:57PM EDT

WASHINGTON -- The gubernatorial race in Virginia is raising eyebrows across the nation thanks to the seemingly archaic views of the Republican vying for the job -- in particular, Ken Cuccinelli's desire to bring back laws that would outlaw oral and anal sex between any two people.
On the campaign trail, Cuccinelli, the state's attorney general, has been defending the state's so-called Crimes Against Nature laws, struck down earlier this year by a federal court. The laws banned what it called "sodomy" -- including anal and oral sex between any two consenting adults, married or unmarried, gay or straight.
Cuccinelli, who unveiled a website this week that called for the laws to be resurrected, insists they were meant to protect children from sexual predators. In a tight race for the governor's mansion against Democrat Terry McAuliffe, Cuccinelli also says his support of Crimes Against Nature isn't aimed at consenting adults.
The text of the statute, however, states that any person who "carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony."
Cuccinelli, a Tea Party darling for his unflinching social conservatism, is being roundly mocked for his support of the law by everyone from his political foes in Virginia to the women of "The View."
Barbara Walters asked earlier this week: "What happened to the slogan 'Virgina Is For Lovers?"'
When Walters opined that Cuccinelli "equates oral sex with homosexuality," co-host Sherri Shepherd replied: "Then I'm as gay as a gay two-dollar bill."
Under withering attack from McAuliffe, Cuccinelli has gone on the offensive, accusing his foe of endangering children by failing to support the law.
In Virginia -- a state considered "purple" because it used to be reliably Republican but has elected a Democratic commander-in-chief in the past two presidential elections -- some are questioning the strategy of taking a far-right stance on social issues. Voters in the state's urban areas and northern reaches are largely Democratic, while those in the rural south vote Republican.
Even fellow Republicans aren't fans of Cuccinelli's.
"I have serious reservations about his ability to effectively and responsibly govern our state," Bill Bolling, the state's lieutenant governor, said recently.
Cuccinelli bested Bolling for the party nomination, prompting Bolling to launch a media tour lamenting the party's puzzling embrace of social conservative causes at a time when the state is becoming more moderate. He also established the The Virginia Mainstream Project aimed at recruiting moderate Republican candidates and to promote "responsible conservative policy solutions."
It's certainly not the first time Cuccinelli has campaigned on an extreme social conservative platform. While running for attorney general in 2009, Cuccinelli said he opposed all "homosexual acts."
"My view is that homosexual acts, not homosexuality, but homosexual acts are wrong," he said four years ago. "They're intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural-law-based country, it's appropriate to have policies that reflect that."
As a state senator, he also gave the thumb's up to anti-adultery laws.
In an interview the Virginian Style Weekly magazine in 2008, Cuccinelli defended laws criminalizing extramarital sex, saying that such restrictions "ought to stay on the books."
"Frankly it wouldn't hurt to enforce them more," he told the publication.
Cuccinelli is in hot water on another front -- an ethics scandal that has predominantly engulfed Gov. Bob McDonnell, a fellow Republican who's can't run for governor again due to term limits.
On Tuesday, a government watchdog group called on the Internal Revenue Service to probe whether McDonnell, his wife, Maureen, and Cuccinelli had failed to report and pay taxes on lavish gifts received from a wealthy executive.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, known as CREW, filed formal complaints with the IRS, alleging that luxury items and monetary gifts given to the McDonnells and Cuccinelli should have been taxed.
Cuccinelli's spokesman accused CREW of having a political bias.
"Let's get one thing straight, CREW is a Democrat front group; it's run by Democrats and for Democrats," said Richard Cullen.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/republican-candidate-wants-to-revise-laws-ban-oral-sex-1.1380291#ixzz2aEjzf93M

:lol:

:lol: but sadly I can see him win the seat as many religious nut Jobs will vote for him

:? How does oral sex promote sexual predators? Like...why would a sexual predator stick their genitals in a hole lined with teeth? :lol:

You're looking for logic in this?

Not really. I'm not even sure why I said what I said :lol:

Pretty sure you implied that the victim of oral rape would chomp his genitals off. :lol:

People forget America is a massive country full of diverse opinions. You've got some fucknuckles wanting to ban oral sex between husband and wife and other fucknuckles wanting to decriminalise pedophilia.

I give up.