All about principles

Flip Boom Classic 2.0 - 2D animation tool designed for kids of all ages. (Demo)

Limbaugh guest host attacks Obama appointee as extremist for supporting comprehensive immigration reform, which Bush also supports

Media Matters for America

- 7 hours and 58 minutes ago

During the December 3 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, guest host Mark Davis asserted that Cecilia Muñoz, senior vice president of the Office of Research, Advocacy, and Legislation at the National Council of La Raza, and others at NCLR "are amnesty fetishists" and said, "[T]hat is what you get" in an Obama administration -- "a fan of amnesty." In fact, the position taken by NCLR and Muñoz, who has been named by Obama to be the director of intergovernmental affairs in his administration, on immigration is far from radical, contrary to Davis' suggestion. NCLR strongly advocates passage of comprehensive immigration reform, a position that is shared in principle by members of Congress from both parties and by President Bush.

NCLR states on its website:

NCLR supports comprehensive immigration reform that includes the following principles: 1) a path to citizenship for the current undocumented population; 2) the creation of new legal channels for future immigrant workers; 3) a reduction of family immigration backlogs; and 4) the protection of civil rights and civil liberties. By legalizing immigrants who live, work, and contribute to life in the U.S., the U.S. could deal fairly with hardworking people who have responded to an economic reality ignored by the law. At the same time, the U.S. can become more secure by enforcing the new law and by allowing undocumented immigrants to come out of the shadows and participate fully in their communities.

Bush supported a bipartisan bill that would have "creat[ed] a temporary worker program" and given undocumented immigrants who passed criminal background checks and remained employed the opportunity to apply for a green card in the future, and ultimately citizenship. NCLR sharply criticized the "Senate's failure to move a comprehensive immigration reform bill forward" when a cloture motion to cut off debate on that bill failed. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) once sponsored a bill with Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and several other Democrats and Republicans to create a temporary worker program and give illegal immigrants a path to apply for a green card and ultimately for citizenship. (As Media Matters for America has noted, during the presidential campaign, McCain abandoned his support for that bill, saying during CNN's January 30 Republican presidential primary debate that he would no longer vote for it if it came up for a vote in the Senate.)

From the December 3 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

DAVIS: One quick tidbit in transition news. I believe a president-elect is judged by those he brings into the fold. So, joining the White House staff in the Obama administration will be Cecilia Muñoz. She currently serves as senior vice president for the Office of Research, Advocacy, and Legislation at the National Council of La Raza. The National Council of La Raza makes LULAC look reasonable. These folks are amnesty fetishists. Cecilia Muñoz, in her post, [reading] "advocated for federal legislation to give the estimated 12 million" -- this from CNS News, Penny Starr has the byline -- and I guess the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants -- yeah, that's estimated by people who lowball that figure -- to give them [reading] "a path to citizenship." And she has been tapped for the job of director of Intergovernmental Affairs.

And again, it's funny -- I just offer this not to raise an eyebrow, I mean, hello, it's a fan of amnesty in the Obama administration. Whoa, that's shocking. This is what you get. I love the emails that I sometimes get. "Mark, I'm concerned that Janet Napolitano will not be, you know, strong enough on our borders." Really? Really? Well, if enough Americans had been concerned about that, they would not have voted for Senator Obama. Of course, no -- no Homeland Security chief under President Obama is going to be ardent enough about protecting our borders. It's only in the last 18 months that President Bush's Homeland Security chief has been ardent enough about our borders.

Add a comment

john mccain,senate,extremist,strongly,republicans

GroupALoop.com - An Alternative To Online Groups

KillerStartups.com - all

- 10 hours and 7 minutes ago

br /What it doesbr /br /If for any reason you are unsatisfied with either Yahoo or Google groups and are on the lookout for a viable alternative, chances are a visit to this newly-launched service will sort you out. br brIn principle, GroupALoop is a free service that is open to anybody, and which has some features that intend to give it an edge over its close competitors. One of the most notable features is the ability to create unlimited groups within any given group. It can be claimed that this can actually clutter proceedings if not used sparingly, but it is always better to have the chance to do something different than being constricted to tried and tested formulas. Moreover, widgets are featured as a way of attracting further members and showing your allegiance on the sites you visit frequently. br brOther features that merit mentioning include a “Lurking” option that effectively enables you to keep the group in your group list without appearing as an actual member, and the ability to add keywords to the group’s description itself. br brTo sum it up, this is a viable alternative to related services which is already acquiring an interesting shape. See it in action for yourself at www.groupaloop.com and draw your own conclusions. brbr /br /In their own wordsbr /br /“GroupALoop mirrors the same kind of fluid group interaction that takes place in real life.”br /br /Why it might be a killerbr /br /It is an endeavor that injects some life into a established formula.br /br /Some questionsbr /br /What features are going to be added in the foreseeable future? br /br /Link: a href='http://www.groupaloop.com'http://www.groupaloop.com/abr /Our Review: a href='http://www.killerstartups.com/Comm/groupaloop-com-an-alternative-to-online-groups'http://www.killerstartups.com/Comm/groupaloop-com-an-alternative-to-online-groups/abr /br / nbsp;div class="feedflare" a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=UIPaZADD"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=41" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=w9YskXv5"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=52" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=ZoHTkIF3"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=ZoHTkIF3" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=28eHoGzs"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=28eHoGzs" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=ftP5WcT0"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=43" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=Io9LV0Ew"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=Io9LV0Ew" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/killerstartups/BkQV/~4/3J3O8kEMMs8" height="1" width="1"/

Add a comment

conclusions,principles,notables,yahoo,mirrors

Contingency Management in Substance Abuse Treatment

Notifixio.us - Get Notifications In Real Time

KillerStartups.com - all

- 12 hours and 22 minutes ago

br /What it doesbr /br /Generally speaking, Notifixious is a web service whereby you can be informed when any site that interests you is updated. This way, you avoid the hassle of having to check manually and free up valuable time that can be better employed elsewhere. br brThe implementation of this service is quite straightforward, as all you have to do is provide the URL of the site that you want to subscribe to and then specify your preferred notification channel. In principle, you can choose to be notified either via e-mail or straight to your cellphone. Likewise, you can request to be contacted through your chosen IM network. br brAt the end of the day, this is a free service that can help you focus your attention on different tasks and still remain fully posted on what’s going on online in real-time. You can reach the website at www.notifixio.us, sign up for free, subscribe to any site that interests you and form your own opinion. br /br /In their own wordsbr /br /“Get notifixied!”br /br /Why it might be a killerbr /br /It makes for being abreast of the latest developments in a supple manner.br /br /Some questionsbr /br /Is there a limit to the number of sites you can subscribe to? br /br /Link: a href='http://www.notifixio.us'http://www.notifixio.us/abr /Our Review: a href='http://www.killerstartups.com/Web-App-Tools/notifixio-us-get-notifications-in-real-time'http://www.killerstartups.com/Web-App-Tools/notifixio-us-get-notifications-in-real-time/abr /br / nbsp;div class="feedflare" a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=PUsddNc1"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=41" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=qIIrW4ey"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=52" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=a6JAL8GE"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=a6JAL8GE" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=svBmDqVM"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=svBmDqVM" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=ukx1pIwc"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?d=43" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?a=nRLMYhXE"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/killerstartups/BkQV?i=nRLMYhXE" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/killerstartups/BkQV/~4/67H9AZqyp5Q" height="1" width="1"/

Add a comment

cellphones,principles,checks,googles,onlines

US military interrogator decries torture -- worse than useless

Boing Boing

- 15 hours and 10 minutes ago

Democracy Now! interviews Matthew Alexander, author of How to Break a Terrorist: The US Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq. Alexander is a former US military interrogator who deplores the use of torture in interrogation as ineffective at extracting intelligence -- and he argues that it's very effective at outraging potential enemies and turning them into murderous extremists. Yeah, you know, torture, it’s so narrowly or broadly defined depending on who you’re talking to these days. I would say torture, to me, is just unethical behavior. And you can do things that are legal, within the rules, that are unethical. And so, I just know, me, by my gut feeling, based on the principles that I was raised on, you know, that my parents gave to me, that there’s things I’ll never do, because I know it feels wrong and it is wrong. And so, you know, others felt comfortable either pushing all the way up to the limits and doing things that were unethical, but were legal, or breaking the rules. I felt that was not something I was ever going to do and I wasn’t going to allow my team to do. I think what’s more important at this point is we know that torture has cost us American lives. We know that it’s ineffective. And we know that it’s wrong, and it’s damaged our image. I think, you know, for me as a military officer, my job isn’t to identify broken wheels, it’s to fix them. And so, the approach that I took and that I talk about in the book is, how do we move forward? You know, we’re given this choice of either terrorist attacks or torture. But maybe there’s a third way. Maybe there’s a better way to do interrogations that has nothing to do with torture. And in the book, I describe the process of coming up with these new ways and how my team, together, we were able to come up with the new methods. US Interrogator in Iraq Says Torture Policy Has Led to Deaths of Thousands of American Soldiers, How to Break a Terrorist: The US Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq on Amazon (Thanks, Denver Jewelry Guy!)...br style="clear: both;"/ a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=ada9e5163f6d49afdb17fd54a73459aap=1"img alt="" style="border: 0;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?s=ada9e5163f6d49afdb17fd54a73459aap=1"//a img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=ada9e5163f6d49afdb17fd54a73459aa" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/

Add a comment

democracy,choices,principles,torture,borders

Principles of Asymmetric Synthesis (Tetrahedron Organic Chemistry ) (Tetrahedron Organic Chemistry)

SF Archbishop Niederauer Wants Gays to Accept Second-Class Status

-Daily. Gay. News.- Towleroad: a premium site for modern gay men.

- 20 hours and 5 minutes ago

San Francisco Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer has spoken out on his role in the passage of Proposition 8 in the aftermath of the ensuing protests, asking, "What is the way forward for all of us together? Even though we supporters of Proposition 8 did not intend to hurt or offend our opponents, still many of them, especially in the gay community, feel hurt and offended. What is to be done?"

Niederaurer Niederauer, who is credited with bringing in the Mormon church and the massive finances of its donors, urged people to tone down the rhetoric: "Tolerance, respect, and trust are always two-way streets, and tolerance respect and trust often do not include agreement, or even approval. We need to be able to disagree without being disagreeable. We need to stop talking as if we are experts on the real motives of people with whom we have never even spoken. We need to stop hurling names like 'bigot' and 'pervert' at each other. And we need to stop it now."

The SF Chronicle reports:

"During the campaign, Niederauer issued statements, sent flyers and gave a videotaped interview posted at www.marriagematterstokids.org. But Niederauer's most prominent action was drawing in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose members responded with intensive grassroots organizing and an estimated $20 million in campaign contributions from individuals that accounted for half of the Yes on 8 campaign's total. Niederauer noted that many other Christian denominations supported Prop. 8, including evangelical Protestant, Orthodox and historically African American churches. The Mormon church has said Niederauer, previously the bishop of Salt Lake City for 11 years, played a pivotal role in its joining the cause. 'We were invited to join the coalition,' Michael Otterson, managing director of public affairs for the church, told The Chronicle in an interview shortly after the election. 'We didn't unilaterally go into the battle.' Otterson said Niederauer's letter persuaded the Mormon church that they wouldn't be fighting this battle alone, a status that would have made them vulnerable."

Niederauer wants everyone to accept the procreation argument for the family and the "marriage" label, and wants gays to accept "a contract for the benefit of a relationship between adults" but not call it marriage.

He forgives "single parents, grandparents, foster parents and others" who "fail to realize" the ideal procreative one man-one woman model but doesn't deny them his permission to marry, because they are heterosexual.

Basically, Niederauer wants gays and lesbians (many of whom do procreate through surrogates, etc, I might add) to accept our status as second-class citizens and move on.

Read his full message, entitled "Moving Forward Together," AFTER THE JUMP...

S.F. archbishop defends role in Prop. 8 passage [sf chronicle]

***

SAN FRANCISCO CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP NIEDERAUER - "MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER"

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” In the weeks since the adoption of this amendment the media have carried many speculations about the role of the Catholic bishops in California, and about my role in particular, in the passage of this proposition. It is my wish to clarify here what was done and why it was done, and offer some thoughts about the way forward amid so many misunderstandings and hard feelings.

Five years before my appointment as Archbishop of San Francisco, in the year 2000, Proposition 22 was placed on the California ballot. This statute, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman, passed with 61% of the vote. On May 15th of this year, the California State Supreme Court declared that statute unconstitutional and legalized same-sex marriage in California. Around the same time, Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment qualified for the ballot.

The Catholic bishops of California, organized as the California Catholic Conference, and speaking through their office of public policy in Sacramento, endorsed Proposition 8 and urged Catholics, and organizations of lay Catholics, to work for its passage, by means of grass roots activity and contributions from their resources. We bishops also endorsed Proposition 4, regarding parental notification of a minor child’s intended abortion (defeated at the polls) and we opposed Proposition 6, a “tough on crime” initiative inconsistent with the principles of restorative justice (defeated).

The Archdiocese of San Francisco did not donate or transfer any Archdiocesan funds to the campaign in favor of Proposition 8. As far as I know, that is also true of other Catholic dioceses in California. The Archdiocese did pay, and appropriately disclose, printing and distribution of flyers to parishes.

Last May the staff of the Conference office informed me that leaders and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) had given their support to the campaign for Proposition 22 in the year 2000, and were already considering an involvement in connection with Proposition 8. Accordingly, I was asked to contact leaders of the LDS Church whom I had come to know during my eleven years as Bishop of Salt Lake City, to ask them to cooperate again, in this election cycle. I did write to them and they urged the members of their Church, especially those in California, to become involved.

It is important to point out here that a wide range of churches became active in favor of Proposition 8: in addition to Catholics and LDS members, evangelical Protestant churches and churches with many African-American members joined the effort, and, among the Orthodox churches, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of San Francisco and three other Orthodox bishops signed and published a joint statement in favor of Proposition 8.

That is what was done. Why was it done? Some voices in the wider community declare that there could be only one motive: hatred, prejudice and bigotry against gays, along with a determination to discriminate against them and deny them their civil rights. That is not so. The churches that worked in favor of Proposition 8 did so because of their belief that the traditional understanding and definition of marriage is in need of defense and support, and not in need of being re-designed or re-configured.

Some of our opponents respond with this question: Even if these churches saw the California State Supreme Court decision in May as damaging to the institution of marriage as they understood and valued it, shouldn’t they have kept quiet and stayed on the sidelines? Some would say that, in light of the separation of church and state, churches should remain silent about any political matter. However, religious leaders in America have the constitutional right to speak out on issues of public policy. Catholic bishops, specifically, also have a responsibility to teach the faith, and our beliefs about marriage and family are part of this faith.

Indeed, to insist that citizens be silent about their religious beliefs when they are participating in the public square is to go against the constant American political tradition. Such a gag order would have silenced many abolitionists in the nineteenth century and many civil rights advocates in the twentieth. Quite a number of important political issues regularly touch upon the ethical, moral, and religious convictions of citizens: immigration policy, the death penalty, torture of prisoners, abortion, euthanasia, and the right to health care are some such issues.

Members of churches who supported Proposition 8 sincerely believe that defining marriage as only between a man and a woman is one such issue. They see marriage and the family as the basic building blocks of human society, existing before government and not created by it. Marriage is for us the ideal relationship between a man and woman, in which, through their unique sexual complementarity, the spouses offer themselves to God as co-creators of new human persons, a father and mother giving them life and enabling them to thrive in the family setting.

Are there many instances in which this ideal fails to be realized? Of course there are. Single parents, grandparents, foster parents and others deserve praise and support for their courage, sacrifice and devotion in raising the children for whom they are responsible. Still, the proponents of Proposition 8 subscribe to a definition of marriage that recognizes and protects its potential to create and nurture new human life, not merely a contract for the benefit of a relationship between adults.

Whatever others may say, the proponents of Proposition 8 supported it as a defense of the traditional understanding and definition of marriage, not as an attack on any group, or as an attempt to deprive others of their civil rights. The fact remains that, under California law, after the passage of Proposition 8, same sex couples who register as domestic partners will continue to have “the same rights, protections and benefits” as married couples. Proposition 8 simply recognizes that there is a difference between traditional marriage and a same sex partnership.

What is the way forward for all of us together? Even though we supporters of Proposition 8 did not intend to hurt or offend our opponents, still many of them, especially in the gay community, feel hurt and offended. What is to be done?

Tolerance, respect, and trust are always two-way streets, and tolerance respect and trust often do not include agreement, or even approval. We need to be able to disagree without being disagreeable. We need to stop talking as if we are experts on the real motives of people with whom we have never even spoken. We need to stop hurling names like “bigot” and “pervert” at each other. And we need to stop it now.

For our part, we churchgoers need to speak and act out of the truth that all people are God’s children and are unconditionally loved by God. While we argue among ourselves, the people who need our help with hunger, unemployment, homelessness and other problems wait for us to turn together toward them. More particularly, we Catholics in the Archdiocese of San Francisco need to minister to the needs of all Catholics in this local Church. Whoever they are, and whatever their circumstances, their spiritual and pastoral rights should be respected, together with their membership in the Church. In that spirit, with God’s grace and much prayer, perhaps we can all move forward together.

***END OF STATEMENT***

Add a comment

one woman,sincerely,gays,spirit,rhetoric

Base de données sur la recherche extra-financière

Review: Frost/Nixon

Cinematical

- 1 days and 1 hours ago

"You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore ..."
-- Richard Nixon, on his 1962 loss to Pat Brown for the Governorship of California

That statement turned out, of course, not to be true; we would have Nixon to kick around for decades more. That statement also concealed a different truth, which is that Nixon -- the hunched, scowling, puritan-satyr of American politics -- could not only take a beating, but also dish one out. Frost/Nixon, Ron Howard's film adaptation of Peter Morgan's stage play, kicks Nixon around, but it also lets him kick back, as TV personality (not journalist or reporter, but personality) David Frost faces Nixon in a series of 1977 interviews for an ambitious, expensive and poorly-planned multi-night TV broadcast. Why would Nixon agree to an on-camera inquisition? Because Frost paid him -- $600,000 -- for the chance to do so, and because Nixon thought it might be a chance to re-emerge from his exile after resigning the presidency in 1974. Two men, their careers in decline, circling each other for a shot at redemption: Frost (Michael Sheen) is wagering his fortune on the chance to re-make his reputation; Nixon (Frank Langella), with neither reputation or fortune, is desperate for a chance to escape infamy.

But Frost/Nixon is not simply the equivalent of Thunderdome for readers of The Nation, where two men enter and one man leaves. Morgan's script is smart enough to make sure there are things hidden under that clash, a quieter film about character and communication, modern media and ancient principles. And we also get the interview field of combat, which drapes the slick surface of modern manners over the kind of brute, bloody battle you normally see only in nature documentaries. The film, like Frost's interviews, is not merely about Watergate -- which is good, because we have, I should think, drained that well of venality fairly dry -- but instead about bigger issues of accountability and process and principle. Frost, stripped of all pretense, was asking Nixon a good question: Who the hell do you think you are? Nixon, stripped of all pretense, was asking an equally good question: Who the hell are you to ask?

Filed under: Drama, Universal, Theatrical Reviews, Politics, Oscar Watch

Continue reading Review: Frost/Nixon

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Add a comment

cameras,email,principles,stripped,watergate

Position dependent mismatch discrimination on DNA microarrays - experiments and model.

BMC Bioinformatics

- 1 days and 2 hours ago

Publication Date: 2008 Dec 1 PMID: 19046422br/Authors: Naiser, T. - Kayser, J. - Mai, T. - Michel, W. - Ott, A.br/Journal: BMC Bioinformaticsbr/br/ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The propensity of oligonucleotide strands to form stable duplexes with complementary sequences is fundamental to a variety of biological and biotechnological processes as various as microRNA signalling, microarray hybridization and PCR. Yet our understanding of oligonucleotide hybridization, in particular in presence of surfaces, is rather limited. Here we use oligonucleotide microarrays made in-house by optically controlled DNA synthesis to produce probe sets comprising all possible single base mismatches and base bulges for each of 20 sequence motifs under study. RESULTS: We observe that mismatch discrimination is mostly determined by the defect position (relative to the duplex ends) as well as by the sequence context. We investigate the thermodynamics of the oligonucleotide duplexes on the basis of double-ended molecular zipper. Theoretical predictions of defect positional influence as well as long range sequence influence agree well with the experimental results. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular zipping at thermodynamic equilibrium explains the binding affinity of mismatched DNA duplexes on microarrays well. The position dependent nearest neighbor model (PDNN) can be inferred from it. Quantitative understanding of microarray experiments from first principles is in reach.br/br/post to: a href = http://www.citeulike.org/posturl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fentrez%2Fquery.fcgi%3Fcmd%3DRetrieve%26db%3DPubMed%26dopt%3DAbstract%26list_uids%3D19046422title=Entrez+PubmedCiteULike/a

Add a comment

conclusions,principles,affinity,probes,thermodynamics

Art Through Children's Literature: Creative Art Lessons for Caldecott Books

Man blamed for Darfur crisis says 'I am at peace with myself'

Guardian Unlimited

- 1 days and 3 hours ago

divimg alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/35029?ns=guardianpageName=World+news%3A+Man+blamed+for+Darfur+says+I+am+at+peace+with+myselfch=World+newsc3=The+Guardianc4=Sudan+%28News%29%2CHuman+rights+%28News%29%2CWar+crimes+%28News%29%2CWorld+newsc5=Not+commercially+usefulc6=Simon+Tisdallc7=2008_12_04c8=1128339c9=articlec10=GUc11=World+newsc12=Sudanc13=c14=h2=GU%2FWorld+news%2FSudan" width="1" height="1" //divpThe man accused by the international criminal court of planning, organising and directing an orgy of violence against civilians in Darfur that left up to 200,000 people dead and 2.5 million homeless has angrily protested his innocence, calling the allegations part of a political plot by the western powers to recolonise Sudan./ppIn an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Ahmad Muhammad Harun, Sudan's minister of state for humanitarian affairs, said he defied the ICC and the international community to do their worst and vowed never to give himself up to the tribunal./ppHarun claimed the evidence against him was concocted and unreliable. And he described the court's chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, as a disgrace to the legal profession who should be sacked. "My conscience is clear. I have no regrets," Harun said. "What I have done was legal, it was my responsibility, it was my duty. I am content. I am at peace with myself."/ppThe ICC has charged Harun, in his former capacity as Sudan's minister of state for the interior, with 42 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Darfur in the period from August 2003 to March 2004./ppThe eight-month period witnessed a peak in fighting between rebel and pro-government forces. The large-scale civilian casualties, gross human rights abuses and mass displacement later caused the US government to accuse Sudan's political leadership of genocide and led to UN and EU sanctions against Sudan./ppThe Darfur carnage caused international outrage that has yet to abate as the violence there continues, albeit at a reduced level. Numerous efforts to forge a lasting peace agreement during the past five years have foundered while hundreds of thousands of people remain in refugee camps. Meanwhile, human rights and advocacy groups have added their voices to calls for Harun and other alleged war criminals on both sides to be prosecuted./ppBut Sudan is not a party to the ICC. It has so far ignored UN security council demands that it cooperate with the court and surrender Harun and his co-accused, Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-al-Rahman, an alleged Janjaweed leader also known as Ali Kushayb. /ppICC judges are currently considering a request by Moreno-Ocampo for an arrest warrant for Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, on charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity also relating to events in Darfur./ppSpeaking in his ministry's smart new offices in Khartoum, Harun said the ICC was in effect conducting a political vendetta against Sudan that had little or nothing to do with justice. /ppstrongRelaxed and confident/strong/ppThroughout the interview, Harun, a tall 43-year-old dressed in a smart charcoal suit and open-necked shirt, appeared mostly relaxed and confident. Occasionally his eyes flashed with anger as he discussed the accusations against him./pp"We believe the ICC has digressed from its main objective and become part of the international political conflict. It is another phase of international colonisation. It targets mainly the Africans. It reminds us of the 19th century when the white people were dominating here in Africa./pp"The main aim of the white people in Africa at that time, the British and the Europeans, was to disseminate their culture and their traditions. Under the flag of attractive slogans, so many things happened. Now there is a new imperial era but this time it is led by the United States and supported by the Europeans."/ppHarun, a trained lawyer from the Bargo tribe in western Sudan and a former judge, argued that UN security council resolution 1593 that referred Darfur to the ICC in 2005 was discriminatory because it exempted citizens of the US, which like Sudan is not a party to the ICC's founding treaty, from action by the court. For this reason, the ICC prosecutor was ignoring the "first principle" of equality before the law./pp"This is a discriminatory prosecution. It is also discriminatory because the ICC is targeting only African countries," Harun said. "Also, any serious investigation should begin on the ground, in theatre, in Darfur. And witnesses who are part of the problem should not be taken into consideration. They are not reliable sources."/ppSuggesting the ICC investigation was superfluous as well as politically motivated, Harun said a national investigation committee created by Bashir had examined many senior officials over their roles in Darfur. "I was one of them. I gave answers to all their questions. No action was taken. There was no evidence, so there was no reason to take action."/ppHarun added that any future move to indict Bashir, or any backroom deal in which he himself might be handed over to the ICC in return for Bashir being granted immunity, would only prove his contention that the ICC proceedings were political. In such circumstances, he said, he would never voluntarily surrender himself. And nor was he prepared to meet Moreno-Ocampo if the latter came to Khartoum./pp"The prosecutor has brought his profession into disrespect. He is not welcome in Sudan ... He should be replaced. This is what we are requesting. I add my voice to the voices of the international society because he is insulting the profession of justice and insulting African countries."/ppAsked to explain his actions in Darfur in 2003-4, Harun said he had faced an internal, essentially local conflict between Darfurian tribes that quickly transformed into a political conflict with encouragement from forces outside the province./ppRebel leaders Minni Minnawi, Abd al-Wahid Muhammad Nur, and Abdallah Abbakar initially called themselves the Darfur Liberation Movement, he said. But this later became the Sudan Liberation Movement as external actors got involved./ppThe Darfur rebellion, also fuelled by Khalil Ibrahim's opposition-backed Justice and Equality Movement, threatened the stability of the Sudanese state as a whole, for example by undermining the 2005 North-South comprehensive peace agreement which was then nearing fruition, Harun said. The government had no choice but to act./pp"The policy and tactics of the government, like any other government when things like this are happening, is to begin by mobilising./pp"We have a security reserve force - the Popular Defence Forces - to respond to those attacks, a paramilitary force. Some people call the PDF by different names, some call it militia, others are calling it Janjaweed. But it is a formal force and it works under the directions of the army."/ppUnable to match pro-government forces militarily, the rebels changed tactics and created a humanitarian crisis in Darfur to attract international attention and intervention, he said./ppstrongRebels blamed/strong/pp"They started putting pressure on civilians to move out of villages, they killed their children, women they abducted, they destroyed the infrastructure and means of people's livelihood, and caused the mass migration of people into refugee camps."/ppIn other words, he suggested, it was the rebel groups that were responsible for the civilian massacres, atrocities and mass displacements in 2003-4, not himself or the government. Sudan's government in any case disputes the UN's casualty estimates, claiming only about 10,000 people died./ppReports that he boasted in a 2003 speech that he had "the power and the authority to kill or forgive whoever in Darfur" were fabricated, Harun added. And he insisted his 2004 description of the rebels as "fish" who needed the "water" of the villages to survive (thereby allegedly justifying the destruction of villages) was a distortion of his meaning./ppPeople in Darfur knew the truth, he said, which was why he was still welcome there. "I move freely in Darfur. I have strong support. I am popular in Darfur because they know who protected them."/ppLeaning back in a well-padded armchair with a broad smile on his face, Harun said he was a religious man who had done nothing to offend against God. But he did not claim to have a close relationship with the Almighty./pp"I am not like George Bush. I do not talk to God. In Islam, we believe Muhammad was the last prophet. Since Muhammad, no one can talk to God."/ppAs for the future, he suggested relations between Sudan and the international community would deteriorate further if the ICC persisted with its present course. A total breach with the UN was not out of the question./ppHarun's openly defiant stance underlines how difficult it may be to bring justice to Darfur while avoiding an open confrontation with Sudan and, at one remove, its African Union and Arab League allies. If allowed to continue unanswered, it also threatens the credibility of the ICC./pp"We don't expect anything good from the ICC. But for every action, there will be a response," Harun said. "The ICC will do whatever they want. We will wait and see what they do. We will defend our country as best we can to the best of our ability, according to our opinions."/ph2Backstory/h2pThe stronginternational criminal court/strong was established in strong2002/strong as an independent tribunal to try individuals responsible for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It was designed to complement national legal systems, stepping in when a country appeared unable or unwilling to prosecute. More than 100 countries are members./ppAtrocities committed by rebel commanders in the strongDemocratic Republic of the Congo/strong and by the Lord's Resistance Army in strongUganda/strong prompted the opening of the first cases in 2004. Investigations into abuses in Sudan's strongDarfur/strong region began a year later. /ppIn February 2007, ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced that Sudanese minister strongAhmad Harun/strong and Janjaweed militia leader strongAli Kushayb/strong were suspected of committing crimes against humanity. The indictment and warrant for their arrests, dated April 2007, specifically accuses Harun of targeting the ethnic African Fur, Zaghawa and Masalit tribes by employing elements of the Sudanese armed forces and Popular Defence Forces paramilitaries, and by "recruiting, arming and funding" irregular Arab militias known as strongJanjaweed/strong/ppAccording to the court, pro-government forces over which Harun exercised command launched a campaign of terror that included "murders of civilians, rapes and outrages upon the personal dignity of women and girls ... and destruction of property and pillaging of towns"./ppThe indictment claims that the campaign was of a "strongsystematic/strong strongand/strong strongwidespread/strong strongnature/strong" conducted "over an extensive period of time... in furtherance of a state or organisational policy consisting in attacking the civilian population"./ppIt goes on: "Ahmad Harun intentionally contributed to the commission of the above-mentioned crimes ... In his public speeches, Harun not only demonstrated he knew the militia/Janjaweed were attacking civilians and pillaging towns and villages but also personally encouraged the commission of such illegal acts."/pdiv style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"ullia href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/sudan"Sudan/a/lilia href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/humanrights"Human rights/a/lilia href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/warcrimes"War crimes/a/li/ul/diva href="http://www.guardian.co.uk"guardian.co.uk/a copy; Guardian News Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html"Terms Conditions/a | a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html"More Feeds/a pa href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/99ZPD_i__SILc-p8fgs1R8yAN7A/a"img src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~at/99ZPD_i__SILc-p8fgs1R8yAN7A/i" border="0" ismap="true"/img/a/p

Add a comment

allegedly,hundreds of thousands,investigations,allies,african union

Cryopreservation and banking of mammalian cell lines

Giz Explains: Why OS X Shrugs Off Viruses Off Better Than Windows [Giz Explains]

Gizmodo

- 1 days and 8 hours ago

pimg src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2008/12/windowosxvirus.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="804" height="359" style="display:block;float:none;" /Mac OS X, mythically immune to common computer plagues, has actually always a href="http://gizmodo.com/5100996/false-alarm-apple-mac-os-x-anti+virus-recommendation-is-old"welcomed antivirus software/a. Or, uh, a href="http://gizmodo.com/5101266/apple-removes-antivirus-support-note-reiterates-os-xs-built+in-protection"maybe not/a. Confused? No worriesmdash;here's how OS X and Windows differ on resisting viruses and other nasties./p pIt's not a matter of opinion: OS X emis/em less susceptible to catching a cold than Windows. So is Linux, for that matter. There are two major reasons (and a href="http://gizmodo.com/5100217/the-simpsons-gets-20-years-of-apple-jokes-out-of-the-way-at-once"Steve Jobs' pee/a actually isn't one of them). First, Windows is a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/154800/.html"on 89.6 percent of the world's computers/a, while OS X is on just 8.9 percent of them. Second, the Unix architecture that OS X and Linux are based on is inherently more secure than Windows, particularly pre-Vista versions. (If these reasons are familiar to you, you may not know the subtler side-effects of each reason that strengthen the case even more, so read on.)/p pThere are a few different ways that Microsoft's mammoth market share actually hurts Windows and helps OS X. For one, writing nastiness that the vast majority of the world's computers are susceptible to is a more efficient use of resources than writing the same evil for a sliver of the population. In biology, a more homogeneous population is more susceptible to a genocidal plague. Same principle applies to the vast, Windows-powered ecosystem. I don't mean someone could write a virus that wipes ieverybody/i out. Just that if everybody's running Windows, the population is a much easier target./p pThe flipside of thismdash;which you might not have consideredmdash;is that most malware writers obviously use Windows. They're going to whip up code for the OS they're familiar with and know best. And more to that point, most of the tools and scripts used to wreak havoc on computers are written for Windows. The same ecosystem that provides the biggest, most susceptible audience also provides the most fertile breeding ground for the nasty executables./p pBut suppose this was some bizarro world where OS X was king. Would Microsoft run ads about how virus-plagued OS X was? Well, it would still be more prudent to run anti-virus software, since there'd be a lot more thrown crap thrown at the Mac OS, but if malware acted mostly like it does today, it likely wouldn't have the same impact as it did on Windows pre-Vista./p pA lot of that is because of the way permissions work in OS X vs. Windows. Basically, Unix-based systems are architected so that they require administrator privileges to modify the OS and are traditionally more strict in enforcing them. Critical areas are walled off from normal usersmdash;you see this when OS X asks for a password to install updates or change a system setting. A standard non-admin user account is restricted; bad software can't wreak much havoc at all without that password./p pThis is precisely what Vista's somewhat-maligned User Account Control attempts to replicate, limiting points of intrusion and requiring explicit user permission to get anywhere deep. On Windows, historically, the enforcement of these restrictions has been lax in the name of convenience./p pa href="http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasicarticleId=9007883pageNumber=1"This is not to say/a that OS X is invulnerable, a href="http://news.zdnet.com/2424-9595_22-251586.html"by any means/a. The main applications folder is a href="http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_infocPath=11products_id=174"relatively unprotected/a, and any running app can write to it and most of what's inside. Coupled with OS X's app-bundling architecture, this makes it easier to replace program executables or sneak in a piggybacking one. Even then, however, the malware would need to elicit elevated permissions to do any hardcore damage to the core OS; it could, unfortunately, nuke your relatively unprotected Home folder though. Another point of vulnerability, or at least a pain point, according to Mac Forensics Lab, is OS X's centralized address book, which also has weak defenses. If the Home folder book did require the same level of permissions, it would be kinda unusable, because you'd have to elevate permissions to make any and every change./p pThis brings us to OS X's biggest security hole, the one that it actually shares with every operating system: you. It doesn't matter how good baked-in security is if a user throws out the welcome mat for whatever crap comes their way. On the flip side, you're also the first, and best, line of protection. Don't do anything stupid, and you'll be fine, anti-virus software or notmdash;whatever OS you're running./p pemSomething you still wanna know? Send any questions about viruses, VD or the 1995 Dustin Hoffman film/em Outbreak emto tips@gizmodo.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line./em/p br style="clear: both;"/ a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=ea76be512a1b5e82408e9e88bbf3d629p=1"img alt="" style="border: 0;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?s=ea76be512a1b5e82408e9e88bbf3d629p=1"//a img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=ea76be512a1b5e82408e9e88bbf3d629" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/div class="feedflare" a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/gizmodo/full?a=B8GNhwRg"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/gizmodo/full?d=120" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/gizmodo/full?a=0peLo6HL"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/gizmodo/full?d=41" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/gizmodo/full?a=H669PA1I"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/gizmodo/full?i=H669PA1I" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/gizmodo/full?a=h8BN2hCC"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/gizmodo/full?i=h8BN2hCC" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~4/5AiJS0lUyg8" height="1" width="1"/

Add a comment

alarms,forensics,elicit,gizmodo,principles

Giz Explains: Why OS X Shrugs Off Viruses Better Than Windows [Giz Explains]