Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Saturday, September 23, 2017

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Reminds Certain Rich Countries that Torture Is Wrong and Bad

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Reminds Certain Rich Countries that Torture Is Wrong and Bad

No automatic alt text available.BY EMILY TAMKIN-SEPTEMBER 22, 2017

“Torture is not only deeply wrong, but, from an intelligence gathering standpoint, deeply counterproductive.”

So said Prince Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at a U.N. General Assembly side event straightforwardly named, “Torture during Interrogations — Illegal, Immoral, and Ineffective.”

Accent on the latter. The overarching message of the event was not just that torture is repugnant, but that it does not work — a direct rebuttal to defenders of “enhanced interrogation” who maintain that it can provide intelligence officials with valuable information they’d otherwise never be able to get.

Al-Hussein opened by pointing out that Napoleon knew that torture didn’t work (and ordered his generals not to use it), and noted that some modern states have agencies “using psychologists to design brutal interrogation methods such as waterboarding.” That was a clear reference to techniques employed during the George W. Bush years — and promised a comeback during Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Some of Trump’s advisers, led by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, convinced him not to return to questionable interrogation tactics of the past. Other top intelligence officials, such as new CIA chief Mike Pompeo, have also clearly repudiated torture, making it unlikely that the belligerent campaign rhetoric will morph into policy anytime soon.

But few are taking any chances. Mark Fallon, who spent three decades in law enforcement and the U.S. government, recalled how the Bush administration authorized enhanced interrogation less than one week after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. “Those decisions were made out of fear, frankly ignorance, as well as arrogance,” Fallon said.

Fallon said he was unsure if the same decision would have been taken today, given the large body of scientific research that has emerged as a byproduct of the U.S. torture and interrogation program. Beyond the morality, Fallon said that torture can be downright counterproductive.

“If you’re coercive or abusive, you might get information, the information you want, but it might not necessarily be the truth,” Fallon explained.

But the scientific findings about torture’s inefficacy may not have found the widest possible audience yet. Fallon recalled that Trump openly campaigned on bringing torture and interrogation back, and said he feared what would happen “unless the international community continues to stand up for human rights and puts pressure on my country.”

Photo credit: FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP/Getty Images

Saudi women throng stadium first time for national day


Celebration comes at crucial time for Saudi Arabia, which is in struggle for regional influence with arch-rival Iran
Saudi families arrive at stadium to attend event in capital Riyadh on Saturday commemorating anniversary of founding of kingdom (AFP)

Saturday 23 September 2017 

Hundreds of women thronged a sports stadium for the first time to mark Saudi Arabia's national day on Saturday, celebrated across the conservative kingdom with a raucous display of concerts, folk dance and fireworks.
The presence of women at the King Fahd Stadium for a pageant operetta marks a departure from previous celebrations in the Gulf kingdom where they were effectively barred from sports arenas by strict rules on segregation of the sexes in public.
Women were allowed to enter the stadium, a previously male-only venue used mostly for football matches, with their families and seated separately from single men to watch a play on Saudi history.
"It is the first time I have come to the stadium and I feel like more of a Saudi citizen. Now I can go everywhere in my country," said 25-year-old Sultana, green and white flags painted on both cheeks as she entered the complex with her girlfriends.
"God willing, tomorrow women will be permitted bigger and better things like driving and travel."
The whole town is in green! Saudi National Day... check out Riyadh’s Kingdom Tower light show!

Ultra-conservative Saudi Arabia has some of the world's tightest restrictions on women and is the only country where they are not allowed to drive, despite ambitious government reforms aimed at boosting female employment.
Under the country's guardianship system, a male family member - normally the father, husband or brother - must grant permission for a woman's study, travel and other activities.
But the kingdom appears to be relaxing some norms as part of its "Vision 2030" plan for economic and social reforms conceived by powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
The General Entertainment Authority, the government agency organising the National Day festivities, expects about 1.5 million Saudis to attend events in 17 cities over four days.
Vision 2030 reforms are intended to capture up to a quarter of the $20b currently spent overseas by Saudis, who are accustomed to travelling abroad to see shows and visit amusement parks in nearby tourist hub Dubai or further afield.
This weekend's events, though, are free to the public.
READ MORE ►
The national day celebration coincides with a crucial time for Saudi Arabia, which is in a battle for regional influence with arch-rival Iran, bogged down in a controversial military intervention in neighbouring Yemen and at loggerheads with fellow US Gulf ally Qatar.
Iconic buildings in Riyadh were bathed in green light and stereos blared patriotic songs as revellers raced through the streets in cars bedecked with the national flag.
With drumming and poetry, traditional sword dancers celebrating the warrior tradition of Saudi Arabia strode through Tahlia Street, an upscale shopping strip in the heart of Riyadh.
The operetta at the stadium told the story of the founding of the modern Saudi state by Ibn Saud, King Salman's father, following a series of territorial conquests and eight years before the discovery of oil opened the way to making the new kingdom the world's top oil exporter.
"On this great occasion, we feel that the kingdom has become an important state with a pioneering role at the regional and international levels," Prince Mohammed said in a speech earlier cited by the official Saudi Press Agency.


The 32-year-old prince is set to be the first millennial to occupy the throne in a country where half the population is under 25, although the timing of his ascension remains unknown.
Already viewed as the de facto ruler controlling all the major levers of government, from defence to the economy, the prince is seen as stamping out traces of internal dissent before any formal transfer of power from his 81-year-old father King Salman.
Authorities this month arrested about two dozen people, including influential clerics, in what activists decried as a coordinated crackdown.
Analysts say many of those detained are resistant to Prince Mohammed's aggressive foreign policy that includes the boycott of Qatar as well as some of his bold reforms, dubbed Vision 2030, which include privatising state assets and cutting subsidies.
"On this cherished anniversary of the unification of our dear country, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, we assert its effective and influential status," the prince said in his speech.
"The kingdom is an active member in the G20, the world's strongest 20 economies, and is keen to achieve the kingdom's Vision 2030 that represents the beginning of a new phase of hard work for a better future, with the same Islamic values." 
The kingdom's General Entertainment Authority is hosting 27 events across 17 cities to celebrate national day, including concerts, laser shows and firework displays.

‘I love Alabama — it’s special’: At rally for Sen. Luther Strange, Trump vents frustrations in rambling speech

 President Trump spoke on a variety of topics at a Sept. 22 rally in Huntsville, Ala., where he was campaigning for Sen. Luther Strange. (The Washington Post)



HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — President Trump spent the first 25 minutes of a Friday night campaign rally explaining and defending his decision to endorse the Republican establishment’s pick for the Alabama Senate race.

Then, he basically took it all back.

“I might have made a mistake. I’ll be honest, I might have made a mistake,” Trump told a crowd of several thousand gathered at the Von Braun Center that cheered much louder for him than for the candidate he was there to support, Sen. Luther Strange, who was appointed earlier this year to fill the seat vacated by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

If Strange loses a Republican primary runoff election Tuesday, the president said that the media will accuse him of being “unable to pull his candidate across the line” and cast the loss as a “total embarrassment.” Strange is polling behind rival Roy Moore, a former Alabama Supreme Court chief justice who is popular with evangelical Christians and many Trump supporters.

“And, by the way, both good men. Both good men,” the president said of the two Republican candidates. “If his opponent wins, I’m going to be here campaigning like hell for him. But, I have to say this … Luther will definitely win.”

Prominent Republican leaders aggressively lobbied the president to travel to Alabama to campaign with Strange, something that Trump himself said was a great risk. He was greeted by a full house of supporters, many of whom stayed on their feet during the entire rally, laughing at his jokes and cheering his attacks on political and foreign adversaries.

The president's rambling speech lasted nearly 90 minutes. He repeatedly cursed, mocked the leader of North Korea, jokingly threatened to fire a Cabinet member who endorsed Moore, called on professional football team owners to fire players who kneel during the national anthem, promised to build a new “see-through wall” on the southern border, called allegations of Russian interference in the election a “hoax,” accused unions of protecting “sadists” who abuse elderly veterans, and repeatedly relived the 2016 election.


Strange’s campaign organized the rally and corralled reporters in a pen far from the thousands of rally-goers — many of whom said in interviews outside the arena that they were there to see the president and planned to vote for Moore on Tuesday, not Strange. Four Moore supporters stationed outside with campaign signs were absolutely giddy that so many passersby told them that they planned to vote for Moore.

Strange took the stage just before Trump and proudly put on a red “Make America Great Again” hat. Up in the stands, a veteran of the war in Afghanistan remarked: “I don’t know who this guy is. I’m here for Trump.”

“Are you ready to support our president tonight?” Strange asked. From the stands, a young Trump supporter shouted back: “You suck!”

Strange rattled off many of the buzzwords that were central to Trump’s unexpected win last year: “… fight the establishment … make America great again … build the wall … create jobs … historic election.” Strange told the crowd that the president needs to keep him in the Senate to “stand up to” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, whose political action committee has spent millions of dollars on TV ads supporting Strange and attacking Moore. The crowd booed McConnell.

“Even our own Republicans, so-called conservatives, are standing in the way of the president’s agenda,” Strange said. “That’s why he’s here to support me, because he knows that I’ve got his back.”
After speaking for fewer than four minutes at his own rally, Strange called the president to the stage as Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Sweet Home Alabama” blared. The crowd clapped and screamed, and the two politicians embraced. As Strange left the stage, the president smiled and pointed at him.

“I love this place,” Trump said. “You know, we set every record in Alabama. I love Alabama, it’s special.”

The crowd began to chant: “USA! USA! USA!”

Behind the president was a massive U.S. flag and two VIP boxes draped with patriotic bunting and filled with prominent Strange supporters seated under signs that read: “Stand with Trump” and “Vote for Luther.” The president called the senator a “really great person” who “knows the true source of America’s strength — it’s God, it’s family and it’s country.”

Trump praised Alabama for sheltering “17 million people” displaced by recent hurricanes, a number that seemed high given that the state has fewer than 5 million residents and that nearby Florida has 20.6 million residents. He promised that the country will “win all the time,” just like Alabama’s beloved football teams — and he repeated his attacks on North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

“We can’t have madmen out there, shooting rockets all over the place. And by the way: Rocketman should have been handled a long time ago,” Trump said, as the crowd erupted into its loudest cheers of the night. “… This shouldn’t be handled now, but I’m going to handle it, because we have to handle it. Little rocketman.”

Trump ominously warned that North Korea could explode a “massive weapon” over the Pacific Ocean, resulting in “tremendous, tremendous calamity where the plume goes.” Then he told everyone not to worry about that.

“Maybe something gets worked out and maybe it doesn’t, but I can tell you one thing: You are protected. Okay? You are protected,” Trump said. “Nobody’s going to mess with our people.”
Trump shifted back to the Senate race, saying that he had approved of some of his friends endorsing Strange’s rival and joking that he might fire members of his administration who did so. Hours before the rally, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson announced he was supporting Moore.

Trump shared a “quick, crazy story” about health-care reform that he said explains why he likes Strange. But first he name-dropped McCain, prompting loud boos from the crowd, and said that he might have moved to Alabama or Kentucky if he lost the 2016 election because “it’s nice to go to where people love you and you love them.” He added that he has accomplished a lot as president but doesn’t get credit for it.

“We have a Supreme Court justice, Judge [Neil M.] Gorsuch, who will save — how about a thing called your Second Amendment,” the president said. “Right? Okay, remember that? If Crooked Hillary got elected, you would not have a Second Amendment, believe me. You’d be handing in your rifles. You’d be saying: ‘Here, here they are.’ ”

The president then stepped away from the lectern to act out how his supporters would have handed over their rifles to Democrat Hillary Clinton, who never called for rounding up all of the rifles in the country. Trump smirked and shrugged as the crowd started to chant: “Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!” A small group of young men sitting close to the stage, dressed in blazers and red campaign hats, kept the beat by pumping their fists into the air.

“You gotta speak to Jeff Sessions about that,” Trump said.

He eventually returned to this quick, crazy story. Basically, the president said, several Republican lawmakers would consider voting for the legislation only if the president had dinner with their various relatives.

“Pictures all night, everything,” Trump said. “Brutal. Brutal. You know what that is, folks, right? It’s called brutality.”

But Trump says that when he called Strange, the senator promised his vote and didn’t attach any strings — stunning the president.

“I said: ‘Do I have to come and meet you some place? Do I have to have dinner with your family?’ I think his wife, by the way, is fantastic, but I said: ‘Do I have to have dinner with you and your wife?’ [Strange answered:] ‘No, sir, you don’t have to have anything,’ ” said Trump, who was now doing a much bigger favor for Strange by speaking at this rally.

This, Trump said, was “the coolest thing that has happened to me in six months.” Then he mentioned McCain again, inspiring another wave of boos.

Trump repeatedly claimed that Strange “doesn’t know Mitch McConnell at all,” despite the majority leader’s heavy investment in the race. Trump said Strange is a “tough, tough cookie” who is going to “kick everyone’s a--" in the Senate race.

Then the president wandered into the topic of the “dishonest” media and its obsession with his wife’s shoes. Mid-sentence, Trump was back to talking about Strange’s loyalty — and how this endorsement might be a mistake, although he firmly believes that Strange has a better chance than Moore of beating the Democratic candidate, Doug Jones, during the special election in December. Trump repeatedly said that he expects Strange to win — but he also repeatedly said that he would back Moore if he wins.

And eventually that led to a reflection on why Trump won.

“I think we won because of the military,” Trump said to cheers. “I think we won because of the vets. I think we won because of the evangelicals — I mean, take a look at that, right?”

Okay, back to Strange: Trump said that if the senator can just get out the vote, he will win and the people will have “a great senator” — and a very tall one, as Strange is 6-foot-9. The president seemed to claim that he was the one who nicknamed the senator “Big Luther.”

All of a sudden, Trump summoned his chief of staff, retired Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, to jump onstage and be recognized.

“Where’s General? Where is he? Where is he?” Trump said. “General! Come up here. Quick! Come here, come here. Four star. Come here. Come, come, come, come.”

Kelly ran onstage and shook the president’s hand. Trump pulled him toward the lectern, but Kelly declined to say anything. Instead, he pointed at the president with a smile and told the audience to direct their applause to Trump, not him. He then slowly backed his way off the stage.

“He just wants to work,” Trump said. “He’s done a good job. Four-star Marine. That’s good.”

Oh, and by the way, the president said, the wall is happening.

“Believe me, folks,” he said. “The wall is happening.”

Trump said that there’s already a wall along the border and that the administration is renovating it over the next six to seven months to be “pristine, perfect, just as good as new, although we may go a little bit higher than that, but that’s okay.” And Trump said that he’s collecting samples for building a new wall that’s “see through.”

“If you can’t have vision through it, you don’t know who’s on the other side,” Trump said, later explaining that building is what he does best, though he’s also pretty good at this politics thing.
Without a see-through wall, a criminal in “wonderful, wonderful” Mexico could use a catapult to throw “a hundred pounds of drugs” over the wall.

“And it lands, and it hits somebody in the head — you don’t even know they’re there,” Trump said. “Believe it or not, this is the kind of stuff that happens. So you need to have a great wall, but it has to be see-through.”

Trump praised Twitter, slammed the media, questioned pricey consultants from the “Harvard school of something,” pointed to a campaign hat in the crowd, declared that “Luther is your man” and disclosed that he and Sen. Richard C.  Shelby (R-Ala.) recently gossiped about which members of Congress are the “smart ones” and which are “the less-smart ones.”

“I learned a lot,” the president said. “That’s a lot of knowledge.”

Trump said Strange has the same “American values” as everyone in the arena that night. And that brought him to the topic of football.

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a b---- off the field right now. Out. He’s fired. He’s FIRED!’” Trump boomed.
At a political rally for Sen. Luther Strange (R-Ala.), President Trump called on NFL owners to fire players who kneel during the national anthem as a form of protest. Editor's note: This video contains strong language. (Reuters)

As the crowd burst into cheers, the president threw his hands into the air and shook his head. For the fourth time that night, the crowd began to chant: “USA! USA! USA!”

“That’s a total disrespect of our heritage,” Trump said. “That’s a total disrespect of everything that we stand for. Okay? Everything that we stand for. And I know we have freedoms, and we have freedom of choice and many, many different freedoms, but you know what? It’s still totally disrespectful.”

Trump added that the NFL “ratings are down massively,” which he attributed to his own popularity, referees “ruining the game” to impress their wives watching at home and players taking a knee during the national anthem to protest police brutality and racial inequality. The crowd booed in agreement.

“Not the same game anymore, anyway,” Trump said, before riffing on religious liberty, the Second Amendment and supporting law enforcement officers — comments that he seemed to be reading off his long-forgotten teleprompter.

“These are Alabama values — I understand the people of Alabama. I feel like I’m from Alabama, frankly,” the president said. “Isn’t it a little weird when a guy who lives on Fifth Avenue in the most beautiful apartment you’ve ever seen, comes to Alabama and Alabama loves that guy? I mean, it’s crazy. It’s crazy.”

Trump marveled at the full arena and said that there were “thousands of people outside who can’t get in.” Several arena employees who were outside at the time said that a couple hundred people could not get in after the doors closed, and they tried to watch the rally on a big screen outside but there was no audio, so they left.

“Thousands,” Trump said. “We’ve got thousands of people outside.”

Oh, and Strange is a Distinguished Eagle Scout, Trump told the crowd.

Pretty soon, Trump hit his stride, and his frustrations poured out in a river of disconnected thoughts. 

He demanded to know why Republicans voted 61 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act when President Barack Obama was in office — “61 times,” he emphasized — but suddenly don’t have the guts to do it now that he’s president. And he provided a full-throttle, jargon-filled defense of why Clinton won the popular vote, saying that he was fully focused on winning the electoral vote and that it would have been much easier for him to win the popular vote.

“To me, winning the popular vote is easier,” Trump said. “The electoral college is actually something that I’ve come to respect.”

He floated the idea of Clinton running again in 2020, prompting groans and boos, and mocked her for not campaigning enough in places like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. A few people yelled out: “Lock her up!”

“We won by a lot,” the president added, calling the win “awe-inspiring.”

“Oh, and by the way, folks, just in case you’re like curious: No, Russia did not help me. Okay?” Trump said. “I call it the Russian hoax, one of the great hoaxes.”

As the crowd laughed, the president asked: “Any Russians in the audience? Are there any Russians in the audience, please? I don’t see too many Russians. I didn’t see too many Russians in Pennsylvania. I didn’t see too many Russians.”

He called Kim a “menace,” listed endorsements that Strange has received and accused CNN of turning off its cameras whenever he attacks the network.

As the president’s remarks passed the one-hour mark, some of the seats in the stands began to empty, revealing large swaths of blue and gray where people once were. The flurry of movement in the upper-decks must have caught the president's attention because he told those gathered that the newly empty seats belonged to those who were just taking a bathroom break. He noted the “tremendous gains” in the stock market that he said have prompted business leaders who once hated him to hug and kiss him. He hinted that he would start wrapping up, but he just kept going.

He blamed problems at the Veterans Affairs medical centers on union members who wanted to protect the jobs of dangerous employees instead of patients.

“So you would have people working in the VA who were sadists, who would abuse our great, great people, our veterans — by the way, 25 years before, they would have had their a-- kicked by the same person that they’re abusing,” Trump said. “They would have been in trouble. They would have been in trouble.”

He mentioned the war on coal, pipelines, fighter jets, missile defense systems, law enforcement officers, immigrant access to welfare, “radical Islamic terrorists” and tax reform, as if quickly running through all of the talking points waiting on the teleprompters, along with anything else he wanted to say out loud.

He compared his approach to health-care reform to a boxer who keeps getting knocked out but keeps getting up to fight another round. And he threatened to revoke his endorsement of Strange if the senator did not vote for tax reform — even though he had repeatedly told those gathered that Strange would act independently in Washington.

“We are Americans, and the future belongs to us,” Trump said in closing. “The future belongs to all of you — but we have got to go out and take it. We have got to go out and earn it. We have got to go out and vote. If we don’t vote, it’s not going to happen.”

As the president finished speaking, Strange again joined him onstage for another embrace.

Trump attacks McCain and other Republicans over healthcare failure

  • President says veteran Republican senator has ‘let Arizona down’
  • McCain seemed to have dashed GOP hopes of repealing Obamacare

 John McCain said on Friday: ‘I cannot in good conscience vote for the Graham-Cassidy proposal.’ Photograph: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

 in Hunstville, Alabama- in Hunstville, Alabama

Donald Trump went on the attack on Twitter on Saturday morning over the latest failure of the Republican-controlled Senate to pass healthcare reform.

In a series of tweets starting at 6.42am, the president attacked Senator John McCain, whom he said had “let Arizona down”; goaded wavering Republicans in an attempt to persuade them to come on board; and praised Graham-Cassidy, the current and controversial plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

On Friday, McCain seemed to quash Republican hopes to push Graham-Cassidy through the Senate before a 30 September deadline, after which it would require a 60-vote super-majority to pass, on the way to making good on a seven-year promise to undo Barack Obama’s signature domestic reform.
In a surprise statement, McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, said: “I cannot in good conscience vote for the Graham-Cassidy proposal. I believe we could do better working together, Republicans and Democrats, and have not yet really tried.”

McCain joined the Kentucky conservative Rand Paul in stating his intention to vote against the bill. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, moderates who joined McCain in voting down the last attempt at Senate reform, have not confirmed their position, although Collins said on Friday she was “leaning against” it. Republican Senate leadership can only afford to lose two votes to pass Graham-Cassidy before 30 September.

At a Friday night rally on behalf of Alabama senator Luther Strange, who is facing a close primary runoff on Tuesday, Trump said McCain’s opposition to the new bill was “totally unexpected” and “terrible”.

“It was sad,” the president said. “We had a couple of other senators, but at least we knew where they stood. That was really a horrible thing, honestly. That was a horrible thing that happened to the Republican party.”
 He amplified his criticism on Saturday, first tweeting: “John McCain never had any intention of voting for this bill, which his Governor [Doug Ducey] loves. He campaigned on Repeal & Replace. Let Arizona down!.”

Trump continued: “Arizona had a 116% increase in ObamaCare premiums last year, with deductibles very high. [Senate minority leader] Chuck Schumer sold John McCain a bill of goods. Sad.”

Referring to Graham-Cassidy’s proposed transfer of healthcare administration away from the federal government, he added: “Large Block Grants to States is a good thing to do. Better control & management. Great for Arizona. McCain let his best friend LG down!”

“LG” was a reference to the South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, a close friend of McCain and a co-sponsor of the new bill with Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. The proposal would eliminate the expansion of Medicaid, the federal program that provides access to healthcare for low-income Americans under the ACA. It would also enable states to circumvent ACA requirements for coverage of pre-existing conditions.

Cost of healthy foods may explain heart risks linked to ‘food deserts’


Shereen Lehman-SEPTEMBER 22, 2017

(Reuters Health) - Living in an area with little access to fresh and nutritious foods has been linked to high heart disease risk, but a new study suggests that it’s the inability to afford a healthy diet, rather than access, that’s to blame.

Researchers studied Atlanta residents and found that people living in “food deserts,” where there are few places to buy fresh produce and other healthy foods, had more heart risk factors like hardened arteries and inflammation than people with easy access to healthy foods.

But within food-desert neighborhoods, people with high personal income had fewer heart risk factors than those with low incomes, suggesting it’s money, not access, that prevents some people from having a healthy diet that would lower their heart risk, the study team concludes in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.

“Food deserts are defined as areas that have below average income together with poor access to healthy foods, ie. lack of grocery stores (within 1 mile in urban and 10 miles in rural communities),” lead author Dr. Arshed Quyyumi told Reuters Health in an email.

“We found that area income, and even more importantly, personal income was associated with higher cardiovascular risk, and that access to food was not that important a risk,” said Quyyumi, a cardiologist at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.

Researchers have known that neighborhood factors are important social determinants of disease outcomes, he added.

For the study, Quyyumi and his colleagues examined data on more than 1,400 adults, averaging about 50 years old, and living in the Atlanta metropolitan area. Just under 40 percent were men and about 37 percent were African American.

The researchers collected personal and economic information and performed tests to detect signs of inflammation, elevated blood sugar and blood pressure, as well as arterial stiffness.

About 13 percent of participants lived in areas considered food deserts. These people also had higher rates of smoking, were more likely to have high blood pressure and hardened arteries and to be overweight or obese, compared to those not living in food deserts.

When the study team took average neighborhood income and individual incomes into consideration, they found that people living in food deserts in low-income areas had about the same risk of heart disease as their peers living in low-income areas with good food access.

Meanwhile, high-income individuals in low-income neighborhoods had fewer cardiovascular risk factors compared to their lower-income neighbors, and that was true even when they lived in food deserts.

“People not having access to healthy food choices is a possible cause for poor health. However, our study shows the greater impact of lower socio-economic status as a stronger risk factor,” Quyyumi said.

The study team was partly surprised to find so little impact from food access, he said, but speculated that distances might be more important in rural areas. Because this study was in an urban setting, it’s not surprising that income was an important player, he added.

Racial disadvantages are particularly important to highlight, said Dr. Keith Ferdinand, a cardiologist at Tulane University School of Medicine in New Orleans, who co-wrote an editorial accompanying the study.

“African Americans have higher rates of hypertension, stroke, heart attack deaths and heart failure than other groups in the U.S.,” Ferdinand told Reuters Health in an email. Those racial disparities are caused by multiple factors, he added.

“Food desserts may contribute to higher heart disease and strokes, with many black neighborhoods reportedly having more fast food restaurants, fewer supermarkets with healthy options, and there being less availability of safe places for outdoor physical activity,” he said.

Although there is no one best diet for reducing heart disease risk, Ferdinand said, he recommends a Mediterranean-style dietary pattern, which is high in fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, fatty fish, low in red meat and lower-fat or fat-free dairy products.

“For many lower socio-economic status communities, these foods are absent, rarely found or extremely expensive,” he said.

SOURCE: bit.ly/2wFmCdl and bit.ly/2ffoJyg Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, online September 13, 2017.

Friday, September 22, 2017

Bridging the impunity gap: a look at the Jayasuriya initiative


Sep 22, 2017

At the end of last month, criminal complaints were filed in Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Peru against Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Latin America, Jagath Jayasuriya. Brought by the International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) in coordination with local human rights groups and lawyers, the complaints allege Jayasuriya’s responsibility for serious crimes committed by units under his control as Vanni Security Forces Commander in the final stages of the civil war in 2009. During that brutal final assault, tens of thousands of civilians were killed, with widespread reports of abductions, torture and sexual violence.
The impact was seemingly immediate: on the 27th August (the day before the first complaint was made) Jayasuriya – apparently acting on a suspected tip-off – caught a flight from Brasilia, returning to the safety of Colombo soon after.[1] But the effects of the initiative did not end there, with the ensuing weeks punctuated by several significant, and at times extraordinary, developments. These include Jayasuriya’s own response to the allegations, as well as interventions from rival military officials, the Sri Lankan President, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
In this blog piece, we take stock of events so far, and consider what they might mean in the broader fight for accountability in Sri Lanka given that, for now at least, Jayasuriya has managed to evade justice.
What are the allegations against Jayasuriya?
Jayasurya war crimes universal jurisdictionAccording to ITJP’s briefing note, the complaints filed against Jayasuriya allege that he bears individual criminal responsibility[2] for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by units under his control in the final stages of the war. These crimes fall across three distinct categories:
  • First, torture and sexual violence at Joseph Camp, the notorious headquarters of the Vanni Security Forces where hundreds of individuals are believed to have been detained.
  • Second, violations of international humanitarian law in the conflict-zone, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians, enforced displacement and the denial of humanitarian assistance.
  • And third, the disappearance and extra-judicial killing of individuals who surrendered or were detained at the end of the war.
While the full dossier filed by ITJP has not been disclosed, evidence for the allegations against Jayasuriya can be found in a broad range of publicly available materials. This includes ITJP’s own earlier documentation (see, for instance, here and here), as well as various other civil society and UN reports. Many of these squarely contradict Jayasuriya’s claims that he was not in a position of authority with respect to the alleged crimes.[3]
Why were the complaints filed in Latin America?
Quite simply, complaints were filed in Latin America because the jurisdiction in which Jayasuriya is alleged to have committed the crimes – Sri Lanka – has shown itself so unwilling to prosecute suspected perpetrators like him. The latest initiative seeks to overcome the impunity gap that this has created by instead relying on the willingness of the countries in question to exercise ‘universal jurisdiction’ – that is, the idea that states may prosecute crimes beyond their borders when they are of an especially grave nature.
While ambassadors are typically protected from such initiatives by the principle of diplomatic immunity, the aim in this instance appears to have been to encourage the countries in question to ask Sri Lanka to waive this privilege, after which an arrest warrant or extradition request would become viable.
What has been the response in Sri Lanka?
The government’s response to the initiative was sadly all too predictable. Speaking just a few days after the filing of the complaints, President Sirisena reiterated his long-standing vow to shield perpetrators from justice, telling a crowd at a party rally that he would “not allow the international community to lay a hand on former Army Commander General Jagath Jayasuriya, or any of Sri Lanka’s military chiefs or war heroes for that matter.”
Sarath FonsekaLess predictable and potentially more significant, was the response of Sarath Fonseka, currently the highest-ranking officer in the Sri Lankan military and previously Jayasuriya’s superior during the final stages of the war. In an interview with a Sri Lankan newspaper, Fonseka not only volunteered his view that crimes were committed by Jayasuriya, but said that he would be willing to testify against him were a proper legal process put in place.
Equally striking was the response of Jayasuriya himself who, similarly to Fonseka (albeit rejecting personal responsibility), stated that the sorts of crimes alleged by ITJP “may have had happened on the frontline”, and moreover that they ought to be investigated through a proper mechanism which he would be willing to participate in.[4]
So, has the initiative been effective in helping to bring about justice?
As recently queried by one legal commentator: “If Jayasuriya’s worst-case scenario is that he has to exercise some caution in his vacation planning, what is the value of attempting to launch a universal jurisdiction prosecution against him?” With Jayasuriya safely back in Sri Lanka, the question is a valid one. Yet although he has, for the time-being, escaped justice, we at the Sri Lanka Campaign believe there to be three compelling grounds for optimism about this latest initiative.
First, recent events have demonstrated the great potential for universal jurisdiction cases to disturb the political narratives about the war that help prop up impunity. While a degree of caution must be exercised in relation to the recent public responses by Jayasuriya and Fonseka (an alleged war criminal himself, whose personal animosity towards the former is no secret) their significance is hard to ignore. With two of the most senior war-time military personnel now in agreement not only that the alleged crimes may have occurred, but also that they ought to be investigated, those who in power continue to deny them may increasingly have their work cut out.
Second, the initiative will have sent a clear signal to the government of Sri Lanka that the protection they continue to afford perpetrators of mass atrocities is not boundless or cost-free, and that, in the words of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the absence of credible action nationally will simply “make the exercise of universal jurisdiction even more necessary”. While the recent remarks by the President suggest that Sri Lanka is a long way from seeing the emergence of the kinds of pro-accountability champions in government that the country so needs, initiatives such as this may help alter the political calculations of those in power who might otherwise be willing to embrace impunity as the status quo.
Finally, the complaints against Jayasuriya should act as a loud deterrent message to all would-be perpetrators: if you commit serious violations human rights inside Sri Lanka, you will not be safe outside of it. In the context of ongoing abuses, and with the long-term risk of a return to mass violence posed by the government’s ongoing failure to reckon with the past, this may well prove to be one of the most important and valuable contributions of the initiative of all.
Footnotes:
[1]  Jayasuriya maintains he had previously scheduled to end his term of office at the end of the August.
[2] It is assumed that Jayasuriya’s liability for these crimes is established via ‘command responsibility’ – a long-established legal doctrine, with its roots in the post-WWII tribunals, which ensures that senior military officers are answerable for the actions of their subordinates.
[3] For example, with regards to violations of international humanitarian law in the conflict-zone, Jayasuriya has recently asserted in an interview that he “never commanded troops on the front issuing orders to ‘fight here’ and ‘fight there’”. Yet a 2014 report by the International Crimes Evidence Project cites a 2010 statement by Jayasuriya in which he declares clearly:“As the Security Forces Commander Vanni, the entire northern operation was conducted in the tactical area of responsibility that came under my command. I was actively involved in the ground operations executing the directives from Army Headquarters and the Ministry of Defence from the very inception of the north humanitarian operations, starting from Mannar in 2007, right up to the very end, May 18, 2009”. Similarly, the 2015 report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ investigation on Sri Lanka found that Jayasuriya not only announced the first ‘No Fire Zone’ into which civilians were encouraged to gather, but that latterly he received the coordinates of a hospital within that area which was subsequently shelled by Army divisions under his direct command.
[4] Ceylon Today Interview Exceprt. Interviewer: This is where the Special Court comes into play. You would like a Court hearing?. Jayasuriya: Whatever. If the country has accepted a mechanism to sort it out, we have to face it. If we are summoned, we cannot say we cannot go for that inquiry. All must be lined up and inquired. Interviewer: Why do you think there is an agitation for a special court, which is meant to clear everything, related to war crimes? Jayasuriya: I don’t know what you mean by a Special Court, but whatever the Court is, then they should do that. No problem. What we want is, to have a Court or whatever name it goes by (or anything else) and finish it off.