Google Ads

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

The Bahamas: ...The number of reported child sexual abuse cases in 2011 increased by 11 percent over over the previous year

Reported child sex abuse cases rise


By Royston Jones Jr
Guardian Staff Reporter
royston@nasguard.com


Nassau, The Bahamas



The number of reported child sexual abuse cases increased last year by 11 percent over the year before, officials reported yesterday.

One hundred and sixty-seven cases of child sexual abuse were reported in The Bahamas last year, officials said.

One hundred and fifty-one were reported in 2010.

“Sadly the actions of too many do not create safe, happy and healthy environments for our children,” said Alpheus Forbes, deputy permanent secretary in the Ministry of Labour and Social Development.

“We are also aware that [last year’s] figures do not begin to account for cases which go undetected and unreported. Thus, we would like to appeal to anyone who knows or suspects that a child is being abused to report it to the Department of Social Services or the police.”

He added: “Child abuse tears at the very fabric of our community. We can ensure that every child matters by listening to what [they] are saying, recognizing the signs of child abuse and never assuming that someone else will do something about it.”

Officials also revealed that reported cases of child abandonment, emotional and verbal abuse increased in 2011 over 2010.

There were 615 reported cases of child abuse in 2010. The department said 499 were reported in New Providence and 116 in the Family Islands.

Last month, Minister of State for Social Development Loretta Butler-Turner revealed in the House of Assembly that there were 636 reported cases of child abuse last year.

Of that number, 547 cases were reported in New Providence and 89 were reported in the Family Islands, according to Assistance Director in the Ministry of Labour and Social Development Lorraine Duvalier.

In 2011, there were 141 reported cases of physical abuse; 11 reported cases of verbal abuse; 10 reported cases of emotional abuse; 11 reported cases of incest; 254 reported cases of neglect and 10 reported cases of abandonment.

Forbes said some of the figures, especially the increase in sexual abuse cases, were even more disturbing than the overall increase in cases of child abuse in The Bahamas.

“The immediate question is, what are the reasons for this increase?” said Forbes during a press conference at the Department of Rehabilitative and Welfare Services on Thompson Boulevard.

He explained that based on the matters referred to the department, some of the reasons included more occurrences of young Bahamians experimenting sexually; statutory rape and adult gratification and commercial sexual abuse, whereby a parent or guardian accepts money or benefits for the sexual use of a minor or child.

The majority of these types of cases involve young girls, Forbes said.

Child Protection Month will be observed next month under the theme ‘Every Child Matters’.

Mar 27, 2012

thenassauguardian

Monday, March 26, 2012

POPE JOHN PAUL II’S VISIT TO CUBA --- A lesson to the world




By Dalia González del

Gado


AS the Popemobile moved along

Havana’s wide avenues lined with enthusiastic people,

chants of "You can feel it, you can feel it, the

Pope is here with us," and "Juan Pablo, friend, Cuba

is with you," could be heard.











Current Vatican Secretary of State

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, affirmed in

his book
Un

cuore grande, Omaggio a Giovanni Paolo

II that the Pope confided in him that

possibly no head of state had so

profoundly prepared for the visit of a

Pontiff.



From January 21 through 25, 1998,

Cuba gave the world a lesson, one of many. One did

not have to be religious to feel the intensity of

the encounter between the Cuban people and the

Supreme Pontiff.


Cuba’s enemies wanted to celebrate.

But the idea of an alleged Apocalypse presented by

the foreign media ceded to the image of a people who

listened with affection and respect to his message.

Those five days did not change the history of Cuba,

they enriched it.


Cardinal Roger Eychegaray, then

president of the Justice and Peace Pontifical

Commission, stated in an interview with Granma,

"Rarely has a Papal visit aroused such universal

interest and infused in his diverse interlocutors a

responsibility so great that it commits all of one

and everyone."


Pope John Paul II defined a central

theme in each one of the four masses he gave. In

Santa Clara he dedicated his sermon to the family;

in Camagüey to youth, and in Santiago de Cuba to the

homeland.


In the José Martí Plaza de la

Revolución he devoted his reflections to the role of

laypersons in the Church.




REENCOUNTER WITH FIDEL




They already knew each other. They

had met in the Vatican on November 19, 1996.

Thousands of journalists, camera crews, reporters

for various foreign television and press networks,

transmitted images of a Pope and a Communist leader

which swept aside ill-intentioned commentaries and

their alleged differences with the second shaking of

hands.











Believers and non-believers showed

hospitality and respect toward the Holy

Father during his visit to Cuba.



Fidel Castro received the Pope and

bade him farewell at José Martí International

Airport, and met with him privately in the Palace of

the Revolution. He also accompanied John Paul II in

the encounter with cultural figures and during the

mass in Plaza de la Revolución.


"Fidel was the President who gave

the best attention to Pope John Paul II," Cardinal

Tarcisio Bertone, current Vatican Secretary of State,

affirmed years later in his book Un cuore grande,

Omaggio a Giovanni Paolo II
. "Fidel showed

affection for the Pope, who was already ill, and

John Paul II confided to me that possibly no head of

state had so profoundly prepared for the visit of a

Pontiff (...). Fidel had read the encyclicals and

principal speeches of John Paul II and even some of

his poems."




A LESSON TO THE WORLD




The Supreme Pontiff’s visit to Cuba

took place in the upheavals of the 1990s. The

disappearance of socialism in Eastern Europe and the

USSR had unleashed great euphoria within the U.S.

government and among counterrevolutionary groups in

Miami. It was predicted that the Cuban Revolution

would collapse in a matter of days or weeks. Cuban

exiles began to make political moves to organize a

new government.


They themselves described John Paul

II as a kind of exterminating angel of socialism, as

a man whose visit would be prejudicial to the

national social project.











The people greet His Holiness John


Paul II in Havana’s Plaza de la

Revolución.


(Photo: Ahmed Velásquez)



With his usual clarity of vision,

Fidel had observed that. "I see so many illusions

being created in desperation, that the Pope’s visit

will be somewhat tragic for the Cuban Revolution, a

fiery sword which is going to liquidate socialism

and communism in Cuba (...). They do not know the

Pope, they do not know him (...). They are

underestimating his intelligence, underestimating

his character, underestimating his thinking."


For that reason, as if in response

to those deluding themselves, Fidel stated at the

farewell to the Holy Father, "I think we have given

a good example to the world: you, in visiting what

certain people chose to call the last bastion of

communism; we, in receiving the religious leader to

whom they wanted to attribute the responsibility of

having destroyed socialism in Europe. And there were

those prophesying apocalyptical events. Some even

dreamed of them."


Unfortunately for those dreamers,

Cuba demonstrated to the world that, despite

erroneous interpretations, socialism can be

reconciled with religious faith. Fidel confirmed

that upon receiving the Pope. "There will not be any

country better prepared to understand your

felicitous idea, as we understand it and which is so

similar to what we preach, that equitable

distribution of wealth and solidarity among human

beings and peoples must be globalized."




AGAINST THE BLOCKADE




Fidel recalled the injustices being

committed against the country. "Cuba, your Holiness,

is currently standing up to the strongest power in

history like a new David, a thousand times smaller,

who in the same spirit of biblical times, is

fighting to survive against a gigantic Goliath of

the nuclear age who is trying to prevent our

development by forcing us to surrender through

sickness and hunger. If that story had not been

written then, it would have had to have been written

today. This monstrous crime cannot be ignored or

excuses given for it."


For that reason, it was gratifying

to hear the leader of the Catholic Church condemn

the U.S. blockade of Cuba, describing it as

"restrictive economic measures imposed from outside

of the country, unjust and ethically unacceptable."


At the same time he criticized

neoliberalism, then in its apogee. "Economically

unsustainable programs are being imposed on nations,

as a condition of receiving more aid and the

exaggerated enrichment of a few at the cost of the

impoverishment of many can be confirmed."




MESSAGES OF ENCOURAGEMENT AND

GRATITUDE




"Dear Cubans, upon leaving this

beloved land, I am taking with me a lasting

impression of these days and great confidence in the

future of your homeland," John Paul II affirmed in

his farewell address.


"I have experienced full and moving

events with the people of God, on a pilgrimage

through the beautiful land of Cuba, which has left a

profound impression on me. I will take with me the

memory of the faces of so many people whom I have

met during the last few days. I am grateful for your

cordial hospitality, a genuine expression of the

Cuban soul."


His words were in response to all

the affection shown him by the Cuban population.

Everyone – believers and non-believers – gave the

Pope a massive demonstration of hospitality and

respect.

Havana. March 22, 2012

granma.cu

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Holocaust survivor Rena Finder shares her story of pain and hope in Nazi occupied Poland during World War II with Bahamians

Holocaust survivor shares story of hope with Bahamians


By Travis Cartwright-Carroll

Guardian Staff Reporter

travis@nasguard.com

 

Nassau, The Bahamas

Rena FinderHolocaust survivor Rena Finder shared her powerful story of pain and hope with hundreds of Bahamians on Thursday night.

“Life was hell,” Finder told the crowd.

Finder was speaking of her experiences in Nazi occupied Poland during World War II.  She was only 10 when her hometown of Kracow was invaded.

Finder is one of the last Holocaust survivors who was employed by German industrialist Oskar Schindler.

Schindler saved nearly 1,200 Jews from the clutches of Nazi concentration camps by employing as many Jews as he could in his factory.

His story was turned into a book, “Schindler’s Ark”, and then into a movie in 1993, titled “Schindler’s List”.

Finder spoke after a public screening of “Schindler’s List” at the Sheraton Nassau Beach Resort.

She moved to the Untied States and since the 1970s she has spread her message of hope across the world.

“He treated us like humans,” Finder said.

“It was like being liberated, like being put in the hands of an angel. We knew from the very beginning that Oskar Schindler would take care of us.”

She continued, “Oskar Schindler gave us life, gave me a chance to grow up, to get married to have children, grandchildren and a great-grandchild.”

Finder’s story attracted many Bahamians, including College of The Bahamas (COB) professors Dr. Nicolette Bethel and Jessica Minnis to name a few.

Governor General Sir Arthur Foulkes also gave remarks.

“It is important that we are educated about the Holocaust and that we are never allowed to forget,” he said.

Sir Arthur added that it is important also that humankind never forget all the other atrocities and genocides that have taken place.

Finder said it is important to her and for those who survived the Holocaust how much difference young people can make.

“The worst crime is indifference,” she said. “The worst crime is to be a bystander.”

Sponsors of the event included Aetos Holdings Ltd, Atlantis, Banque Privee Edmond de Rothschild Ltd., Bank of The Bahamas (BOB), Colina Insurance, Diane Phillips and Associates (DP&A) and ICD Utilities.

Mar 24, 2012

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Impending war in the Middle East: ...What attitude will the United States adopt if Tel Aviv bombs Iranian installations and Tehran responds with a heavy counterattack?

 

US-ISRAEL-IRAN

Israel Iran War

Impending war in the Middle East

Juan Diego Nusa Peñalver

THROUGHOUT the history of humanity no war has been so foretold as the military conflict looming in the explosive region of the Middle East in relation to Iran and its controversial civil nuclear program, which the West charges has military ends, without any concrete evidence.


Studies indicate that these would be the three potential routes for an Israeli massive air strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.


Virtually every day the drums of war are sounded in the region, in the form of harsh economic sanctions against Tehran, excessively bellicose anti-Iranian rhetoric, and covert actions on the part of Western and Israeli special services on the ground. These include selective assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and sabotage attempts on its industrial infrastructure, as well as sustained military exercises on both sides, all of which is creating a dangerous pre-war atmosphere, a war which, if it should occur, would inexorably have apocalyptic consequences for the world, as the leader of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro, has repeatedly warned.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the U.S. capital in early March obliged the U.S. President to give a clearer definition of where the United States draws the so-called red line which the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must not cross. However, its placing is not exactly where Israel wants it, the latter country being in favor of the use of weapons before it is supposedly too late and the Ayatollah’s regime has sufficient enriched uranium to manufacture nuclear weapons, as Zionist leaders would have it believed.


In his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, President Barack Obama explicitly discounted U.S. agreement to a contention policy in relation to an Iran with nuclear weapons.

However Obama, concerned about his reelection; hounded by the Republican camp and the powerful Zionist lobby, which are branding him as weak; with a depressed economy and the traumatic imperial adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan still fresh in his memory, is obliged to be more cautious than his uncomfortable Middle Eastern ally and give diplomacy and harsh economic sanctions a certain margin of action.

Experts consider that the decision concerning a 2012 attack has been left in Israeli hands. And that is what Netanyahu came to say in the Oval Office, invoking Israel’s right to security, which Obama acknowledges.

To the surprise of many, the sensation of an imminent attack was reinforced by U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, speaking to a Washington Post journalist. He affirmed that Israel could launch a Spring attack on Iran (in April, May or June), thus triggering all the alarms.

The well-informed Israeli Haaretz newspaper further fuelled the Iranian furnace, stating that Bibi, as the Israeli premier is known to those close to him, had asked Washington to approve the sale of military materials needed to bomb Iran.

The leader of the Likud Party, considered a hawk, a veteran of the 1973 Yom Kipur War and a member of the Sayeret Matkal (Israeli special forces) in his time, asked for the acquisition of advanced in-flight refueling systems for sophisticated Israeli warplanes, and powerful GBU-28 anti-bunker bombs to destroy the principal Iranian nuclear program facilities. These would make it possible for Israel to inflict credible damage, particularly on the Fordow atomic plant, partially constructed within a mountain, close to the holy city of Qom, in which Tehran is manufacturing enriched uranium (to 20%), and the Natanz installation south of the capital, constructed at a depth of eight meters below ground and protected by various layers of cement.

Haaretz, basing its information on the words of an unidentified high-ranking U.S. official, notes that Obama instructed Panetta to work directly on the issue with his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak, and that he is inclined to give the go-ahead to the petition as quickly as possible.

It is significant that the George W. Bush administration rejected the same request on the basis that Israel would use the material for bombing Iran while, with Obama in the White House, military cooperation between the two allied countries has reached unprecedented levels, as their respective leaders emphasized.

In this context, the Israeli state armaments corporation recently presented new, improved penetration bombs, such as the MPR-500 Multi-Purpose Rigid Bombs, with greater penetration, less fragmentation and compatible with the Boeing JDAM guidance system, as the Israel Military Industry explained in a communiqué.

This weapon is "ideal for hardened targets in densely populated urban areas or close to friendly troops… and is designed to penetrate more than one meter of reinforced cement and perforate floors or walls of 200-milimeter thickness," it notes.

Israel has also continued testing its Jericho-3 missile, with a capacity for nuclear or conventional warheads.

In spite of its military superiority, the magnitude of an air attack such as the one Israel is planning on Iran would exceed its capacities and obligatorily require U.S. military support, given that the announced operation is nothing like the selective strike by Israeli aircraft on the Iraqi Osiraq nuclear plant in 1981 and the Syrian atomic site of Al-Kibar, in the Dayr az-Zawr region in 2007.

In another twist of the screw, Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron, meeting in Washington, recommended the Iranian government to take advantage of the opportunity offered it by the major powers to negotiate its nuclear program because, as the U.S. President has warned, the margin of time for resolving the situation via the diplomatic route is diminishing.

IRAN ALSO PREPARING

Given the presence in the Persian Gulf of formidable air and sea squadrons of the U.S. and its Western allies, which includes a number of yankee aircraft carriers, plus overt Israeli test flights, Iran has warned of a preventive attack on its part if it perceives itself in imminent danger. Deputy Commander Mohammad Hejazi of the Iranian Armed Forces told the national Fars agency that if national interests are endangered, the country "will act without waiting for an enemy action."

This logic includes an Iranian navy blockade of the vital Strait of Hormuz which, with its habitual arrogance, the United States has defined as the "red line" which Tehran must not cross at the risk of exposing itself to a devastating strike.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Energy, 15.5 to 16 millions barrels of oil a day pass through this maritime corridor, approximately 40% of the world’s maritime transportation of crude oil.

The resulting blow to the ailing Western economy during a time of various crises would be serious. Oil prices have already spiraled to more than $120 a barrel, virtually restrictive for any nation.

Moreover, the Islamic Republic’s ground, air and sea forces, on alert, are undertaking frequent maneuvers, while its military commands are announcing a number of advances in the country’s armaments and military technology.

Within this context is the creation of the Central Cyberspace Council, aimed at controlling this material, on the basis of a decree signed in early March by the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Jamenei, according to the Iranian Mehr agency.

In the same context, General Gholam Reza Jalali, director of the Iranian Passive Defense Organization, said that Tehran is to create a cybernetic army to counteract potential threats from the U.S. and other countries, in particular to its nuclear installations.

Jalali announced the installation of a cyber-commando to combat possible pirate attacks on the country’s networks, with the mission of "guarding, identifying and counterattacking in the eventof informatics threats to national infrastructure."

In the last two years, the dangerous Stuxnet and Duqu viruses were introduced into Iranian computers, an action which points to Tel Aviv and Washington, which would mean a first-time escalation to cyberspace war. Iran confirms that it was able to neutralize the two attacks using national software.

Experts also took note of the results of the trilateral summit between Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran mid-February in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital. In the final press conference with the Afghani and Iranian leaders, President Asif Ali Zardari openly affirmed that his country would not provide any support to U.S. forces if that country were to attack Iran, which is a significant setback for the White House. Washington’s relations with Islamabad and Kabul have been undermined by mistrust.

This was an important goal for Tehran which, in an open conflict with the Israeli regime could count on military backing from the Lebanese Hezbollah organization and the Palestinian movements of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. Given Washington’s strong commitment to Israel’s security over the past 60 years, the key question analysts are posing is: What attitude will the United States adopt if Tel Aviv bombs Iranian installations and Tehran responds with a heavy counterattack? The cards are on the table.

Havana.  March 22, 2012

Granma.cu

Tehran's quest to expand its diplomatic frontiers in Latin America

by Lemi Tilahun, COHA Research Associate:





While the West continues to read Iran as a threat to world peace, the Middle Eastern nation aggressively seeks non-traditional friends and markets elsewhere in an often stress-driven attempt to prove that the country is not as isolated, feared and despised as many in Europe and the United States make it out to be. To fight the sanctions that have been imposed on them from the outside, its leaders furiously attempt to enter into new allegiances as an imperative to boost the Iranian economy and support the ruling government’s self-interest. Once labeled as a charter member of the ‘Axis of Evil’, Iran has recognized the survival strategy of forging new partnerships while retaining old ones.



In 2009, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Brazil, becoming the first Iranian head of state to visit it since the early 1960s. Iran’s involvement in Latin America is, without a doubt, widening and deepening. Many in the West, especially the United States see this as a security threat in their own backyard.



Since President Ahmadinejad came into power seven years ago, Iran has built six new embassies in Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Uruguay. The emergence of these embassies shows the strength of Iran’s enhanced influence in the region. Prior to 2005, Iran had five embassies operating in Latin America; and in a span of seven years, they have managed to double that number.



Is Iran’s involvement in Latin America strategic, or is it simply a publicity stunt meant to prove Tehran’s diplomatic prowess or the new economy? The answer to this question is bound to vary, depending on the ideological orientation of the respondents. Venezuelan political power brokers would likely disagree with the notion that Iranian diplomacy in Latin America is mainly more than just a publicity stunt, citing that Iran and Venezuela’s important partnership as founding members of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). On the other hand however, the American perspective believes Iran’s actions appear to be a destabilizing threat to Washington’s diplomatic overtures in the US sphere of influence.



Venezuela and Iran have developed a unique friendship mainly based on mutual distrust towards the US embodied in Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s similar views on perceived abominating Western imperialism. The same is true for the Castro government in Cuba, which has welcomed, Ahmadinejad with open arms. Many argue that Iran’s involvement in the area is mainly political and lacks economic viability. However, one can easily recognize the benefits of a Tehran-friendly South America that refuses to comply with international economic sanctions imposed against Iran. Likewise, Iran’s burgeoning economic involvement in the region could potentially divert Latin American bound trade away from the US, which currently serves as the largest, or near largest trading partner for the vast majority of these countries.



On the political side of this discussion, Iran’s saber rattling rhetoric has been met with suspicion and skepticism in various parts of the world community. By targeting long-term alliances in Latin America, Iran is hedging its vulnerability to further isolation and global mistrust regarding its supposedly peaceful nuclear program. Tehran is not about to supersede Washington’s predominance in Latin America, but by encouraging anti-American sentiments amongst its newfound friends, Iran presumptively poses an irritating and complex foreign policy problem for the United States that by no means is readily solvable.



The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, visitwww.coha.org or email coha@coha.org

March 24, 2012

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Friday, March 23, 2012

The roads leading to disaster

REFLECTIONS OF FIDEL

(Taken from CubaDebate)

 

 

 

THIS Reflection could be written today, tomorrow or any other day without any risk of being mistaken. Our species is confronting new problems. When I stated 20 years ago at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, that a species was in danger of extinction, I had fewer reasons than today to warn of a danger, one which could perhaps be perceived as 100 years distant. At that time, a few leaders of the most powerful countries were managing the world. They applauded my words out of mere courtesy and placidly continued digging our species’ grave.

It appeared that commonsense and order reigned on our planet. For some time, economic development supported by technology and science seemed to be the Alpha and Omega of human society.

Today, everything is much clearer. Profound truths have gradually come to light. Close to 200 states, supposedly independent, constitute, in theory, the political organization responsible for governing the destiny of the world.

Approximately 25,000 nuclear weapons in the hands of allied or antagonistic forces prepared to defend the changing order - out if self-interest or necessity - are virtually reducing to zero the rights of billions of people.

I will not disingenuously assign responsibility to Russia or China for the development of this type of weapons, in the wake of the monstrous slaughter of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ordered by Truman after the death of Roosevelt.

Neither will I fall into the error of denying the holocaust, which signified the death of millions of children and adults, men and women, principally Jews, Romanies, Russians or people of other nationalities who were the victims of Nazism. For that reason the infamous policy of those denying the Palestinian people their right to exist is repugnant.

Does anyone think that the United States will be capable of acting with the independence that could preserve it from the inevitable disaster awaiting it?

Within a few weeks, the $40 million which President Obama committed himself to raise for his election campaign will only serve to demonstrate that his country’s currency is very devalued, and that the United States, with its unprecedented and growing public debt, approaching 20 trillion dollars, is living off the money it issues and not off what it produces. The rest of the world is paying for what they are squandering.

Neither does anybody believe that the Democratic candidate will be better or worse than his Republican opponents: whether they are called Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum. Light years separate the three from figures as outstanding as Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King. It is really extraordinary to observe a nation so powerful technologically and a government so bereft of both ideas and moral values.

Iran does not possess nuclear weapons. It is accused of producing enriched uranium, which serves as fuel for generating energy or as a component for medical use. Like it or not, its possession or production is not equivalent to the production of nuclear weapons. Dozens of countries use enriched uranium as an energy source, but it cannot be used in the manufacture of a nuclear weapon without a prior, complex purification process.

However Israel, which with the help and cooperation of the United States manufactured nuclear weapons without informing or making itself accountable to anyone, today has hundreds of these weapons, without acknowledging possession of them. In order to prevent research development in neighboring Arab countries, it attacked and destroyed the reactors of Syria and Iran. It has also declared its intention to attack and destroy Iran’s nuclear fuel production facilities.

International politics have been revolving around this crucial issue in this complex and dangerous region of the world, where a major portion of the fuel which moves the world economy is produced.

The selective elimination of Iran’s most eminent scientists on the part of Israel and its NATO allies has become a practice which foments hatred and sentiments of revenge.

The Israeli government has openly declared its intention to attack the enriched uranium production plant in Iran, and the government of the United States has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in manufacturing a bomb for that purpose.

On March 16, 2012, Michel Chossudovsky and Finian Cunningham published an article revealing that "A top U.S. Air Force general has described the biggest conventional warhead – the 30,000-pound bunkerbuster bomb – as ‘great’ for a military strike on Iran.

"Such glib comment about a massive killing device comes in the same week that U.S. President Barack Obama appeared to caution against ‘loose talk’ about war in the Persian Gulf.

"…’The massive ordnance penetrator [MOP] is a great weapon,’ said Lieutenant General Herbert Carlisle, the U.S. Air Force deputy chief of staff for operations, who added that the bomb would likely be used in any attack on Iran ordered by Washington.

"The MOP also referred to as The Mother of All Bombs is designed to drill through 200 feet of reinforced concrete before detonating its massive warhead. It is believed to be the biggest conventional, non-nuclear, weapon in the American arsenal.

"The Pentagon is planning on a process of extensive destruction of Iran’s infrastructure and mass civilian casualties through the combined use of tactical nukes and monster conventional mushroom cloud bombs, including the MOAB and the larger GBU-57A/B or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which surpasses the MOAB in terms of explosive capacity.

The MOP is described as "a powerful new bomb aimed squarely at the underground nuclear facilities of Iran and North Korea. The gargantuan bomb—longer than 11 persons standing shoulder-to-shoulder or more than 20 feet base to nose—"

I beg readers to forgive me for this tortuous military jargon.

As can be noted, such calculations are based on the assumption that the Iranian combatants, which include millions of men and women known for their religious commitment and traditions of struggle, will surrender without firing a shot.

Recently, over a period of just three weeks, Iranians have seen how United States soldiers occupying Afghanistan have urinated on the bodies of murdered Afghans, burned copies of the Koran and killed more than 15 defenseless citizens.

Imagine United States forces dropping monstrous bombs, capable of penetrating 60 meters of cement, on industrial facilities. Never before has such an adventure been conceived.

Not another word is needed to comprehend the seriousness of such a policy. Following this path, our species will be led inexorably toward disaster. If we do not learn to comprehend, we will never learn to survive.

As far as I am concerned, I do not harbor the slightest doubt that the United States is about to commit, and lead the world toward, the greatest error in its history.

 

Fidel Castro Ruz

March 21, 2012

7:35 p.m.

Translated by Granma International

Bahamas Blog International

Thursday, March 22, 2012

...taking a look at the current state of the polity and recent events that have occurred in The Bahamas... it leaves one to wonder whether we the Bahamian people have a united front to serve our country toward a common loftier goal

A common loftier goal


Arinthia S. Komolafe


Nassau, The Bahamas




The words of our national anthem written by the late Timothy Gibson urge us as Bahamians to march together to a common loftier goal.  The importance of a common purpose to nation building is further highlighted in the words of our national pledge which states, “I pledge my allegiance to the flag and to the Commonwealth of The Bahamas for which it stands one people united in love and service.”  However, taking a look at the current state of our polity and recent events that have occurred in our country, it leaves one to wonder whether the Bahamian people have a united front to serve our country toward a common loftier goal.

A lot has been said about the recent documentary entitled “Caribbean Crime Wave”, produced by Australian reporter Mark Lazaredes, which seeks to highlight the crime problem that is spiralling out of control in The Bahamas.  The aforesaid documentary seems to create the impression that we are a nation under siege.  Many Bahamians who viewed the documentary were incensed that our beloved nation was portrayed and characterized in such a manner for the entire world to see.  In a country that is heavily dependent upon the tourism and financial services industries, it is an understatement to say that the documentary represents unsolicited bad publicity for The Bahamas in the midst of an already challenging economy.

While it is undeniable that crime and the fear of crime have taken hold of our nation, it does not seem to justify the characterization of The Bahamas as a nation under siege.  The everyday Bahamian citizen and residents as well as the millions of tourists who grace our shores annually are still able to enjoy to a great extent the freedom of movement and enjoyment in peace and harmony.  Unfortunately, we are experiencing a record number of murders, break-ins, robberies and crimes against persons.  It also seems fair to state that the government could address the issue of crime in a more significant manner and should have taken a more rigorous approach toward crime.

What are we doing to address the problem?

The Bahamas seems to have become a nation that has traded its moral and spiritual values for materialism, power, vanity and self-promotion.  The reality is that sectors of our society and stakeholders such as parents, the church, the community, civic organizations and the government are failing us daily by not making a concerted effort to address our moral and social issues and find plausible solutions.  More detrimental to the Bahamian society is the fact that our politics over the years has done very little to unite us as a people, but rather continues to encourage a “divide and rule” mentality among our people.  It was reported that there have been attacks against supporters of both major political parties.  However, it is noteworthy and encouraging to state that the leaders of the Free National Movement (FNM) and Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) have openly condemned this unruly behavior and urged their supporters to act in a civil manner.

How did we find ourselves at this point?  We have always prided ourselves on being a nation that has a long history of stable democracy and civil governance.  The recent behavior of our politicians leaves little to be desired by those of us who stand by on the sidelines and witness the continuous mudslinging and personal attacks to the gratification of political crowds who in many cases have been blinded beyond party lines.  It must always be remembered that regardless of our political persuasion, ideology or affiliation, we are first and foremost Bahamians.  The inability of our leaders to address issues that are plaguing our nation sets a poor example for the citizenry of our country.  It presents the “don’t do what I do, but do what I say” philosophy that so many parents raise their children by.  How can a politician expect to be taken seriously as an advocate of conflict resolution when he/she is supposedly guilty of the same offense?  The same question can be directed toward parents and leaders of the aforementioned sectors of society who seem in some cases to lead a double standard life.  It must be emphasized that children and people in general follow the actions of those who preside over them rather than listen to their words or rhetoric.  It is imperative that we set the right example for those that we lead.

Paradigm shift needed

It is difficult for our nation to arrive at non-partisan solutions to the myriad of issues that plague our nation without a paradigm shift by our political leaders.  The conception seems to be that crime starts and stops with murder, hence the cry for the death penalty each time one of our fellow citizens falls victim to murder.  It appears that the documentary among other things focused upon the fact that The Bahamas because of its judicial ties to the United Kingdom has been prohibited from enforcing the death penalty.  However, can it really be said that the death penalty will solve our problems?  It appears that our problems are far greater than imposing the ultimate punishment for what is considered arguably the most unacceptable crime – that is, murder.

It must be emphasized that crime includes all forms of illegal activity.  Therefore, if we take an introspective look at ourselves, we will find that the first step to addressing the criminal element in this country is to adjust ourselves accordingly.  The saying that “we must become the change that we seek” is true now more than ever.  We must refrain from nurturing a culture of lawlessness in our society that continues to erode the moral and spiritual fabric of our nation.

Political, civic, business and religious leaders must regain their focus and although not prohibited from following or supporting the political party of their choice, they must ensure that they demonstrate that their first allegiance is to our common loftier goal.  The Bahamas must come first at all times and above all individual ambitions.  This common loftier goal comes with the mentality of being our brothers’ keepers and truly building our nation until the road we trod leads unto our God.  It is only then will we be able to move foward, upward, onward, together and our Bahamaland can truly march on.

• Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law.  Comments can be directed at: arinthia.komolafe@komolafelaw.com

Mar 22, 2012

thenassauguardian