Thursday, September 14, 2017

South Korea Says North Has Fired Another Missile Over Japan

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono, center, arrives at prime minister's official residence in Tokyo Friday morning, Sept. 15, 2017 following a report of North Korean missile launch. South Korea's military said North Korea fired an unidentified missile Friday from its capital Pyongyang that flew over Japan before landing in the northern Pacific Ocean. (Saki Tsukada/Kyodo News via AP)

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA (AP) — South Korea's military said North Korea fired an unidentified missile Friday from its capital Pyongyang that flew over Japan before landing in the northern Pacific Ocean. It was the second aggressive test-flight over the territory of the close U.S. ally in less than a month and it followed the sixth and most powerful nuclear test by North Korea to date on Sept. 3.

South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said the missile traveled about 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) while reaching a maximum height of 770 kilometers (478 miles). The missile was launched from Sunan, the site of Pyongyang's international airport.

North Korea last month used the airport to fire a Hwasong-12 intermediate range missile that flew over northern Japan. The North then declared it a "meaningful prelude" to containing the U.S. Pacific island territory of Guam and the start of more ballistic missile launches toward the Pacific Ocean.

Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga denounced North Korea's latest launch, saying he was conveying "strong anger" on behalf of the Japanese people. Suga said Japan "will not tolerate the repeated and excessive provocations."

The North American Aerospace Defense Command determined the intermediate range missile did not pose a threat to North America. In addition, U.S. Pacific Command said it did not pose a threat to Guam. South Korean experts said the August launch was Pyongyang's attempt to make missiles flying over Japan an accepted norm as it seeks to test new missiles and win more military space in the region dominated by its enemies.

The Offices of Guam Homeland Security and Civil Defense said the latest launch posed no immediate threat to Guam or the Marianas. South Korea's Defense Ministry said the country's military conducted a live-fire drill of a Hyunmoo-2 ballistic missile in response to the North's launch on Friday.

Seoul's presidential office said President Moon Jae-in has scheduled a National Security Council meeting to discuss the latest launch. North Korea claimed its latest nuclear test was a detonation of a thermonuclear weapon built for its developmental intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The North flight-tested its Hwasong-14 ICBMs twice in July and analysts say the missiles potentially could reach deep into the U.S. mainland when perfected. North Korea initially flight-tested the Hwasong-12 and Hwasong-14 missiles at highly lofted angles to reduce range and avoid neighboring countries.

The two launches over Japan indicate North Korea is moving toward conducting launches at angles close to operational as it seeks to test whether the warheads survive the harsh conditions of atmospheric re-entry and detonate properly.

North Korea has been accelerating its nuclear weapons development under leader Kim Jong Un, a third-generation dictator in his 30s, who has conducted four of North Korea's six nuclear tests since taking power in 2011.

His military has maintained a torrid pace in testing weapons, which also include solid-fuel missiles designed to be launched from road mobile launchers or submarines. In his aggressive pursuit of nuclear weapons, Kim is seen as seeking a real nuclear deterrent to help ensure the survival of his government and also the stronger bargaining power that would come from it.

North Korea's latest missile launch came days after the U.N. Security Council unanimously approved new sanctions over the nuclear test. The latest sanctions are not as tough as what the U.S. had sought, they are expected to have a significant impact.

AP writer Mari Yamaguchi contributed to this report from Tokyo.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

California Governor, Lawmakers Propose $30M To Defend Dreamers

California Governor Jerry Brown Via SCV News 



SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA (SCV NEWS, SANTA CLARITA) – Ramping up their fight against the Trump administration’s plan to end protections to children of undocumented immigrants, California lawmakers on Tuesday announced they will dedicate $30 million to defending and educating the state’s 200,000 Dreamers.

The agreement between Gov. Jerry Brown and state Democratic leaders earmarks $20 million for legal aid and $10 million in financial aid to assist Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program recipients.

The late additions to the state budget were to be reviewed this afternoon by the state Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee.

“The new funding for DACA services we are adding to the budget will provide answers and help young Californians stay in the only country they’ve ever known,” Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a statement. “Donald Trump may love chaos. These kids don’t deserve it.”

The funding announcement comes one day after California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed a lawsuit against the administration’s recent decision to phase out the Obama-era DACA program. California is one of 19 states fighting the proposed wind-down of DACA over the next six months.

The Golden State is home to more than 200,000 DACA recipients, nicknamed Dreamers, more than any other state. Democratic lawmakers have routinely promised to protect Dreamers and the rest of California’s undocumented residents from deportation since Trump took office.

State Senate President pro Tem Kevin De Leon, D-Los Angeles, is pushing a proposal that would limit communication and cooperation between state law enforcement and federal immigration officials. He said California Dreamers, brought to the United States while they were children, are an integral part of the state’s future.

“We will not let one man with xenophobic tendencies undercut years of progress we have made in California to integrate these young adults into our society and economy,” De Leon said of the emergency funding.

In a statement, Gov. Brown said: “California stands with the millions of immigrants who make this state a vibrant and prosperous place. We are suing the Trump administration for canceling the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program and we are investing millions of dollars in new legal aid to help law-abiding people stay with their families in the U.S.”

If approved by the budget committee, $20 million in additional funding will go toward immigration legal services under the One California Program. The program provides naturalization, legal and educational services to the state’s immigrant population.

An additional $10 million will assist Dreamers with college financial aid, including $7 million for community college students and the remaining $3 million for state university and University of California students.

Nigerian Army “Places Nnamdi Kanu Under House Arrest” – Lawyer

Nnamdi Kanu Image Via Premium Times Nigeria


ABIA STATE, NIGERIA (PREMIUM TIMES ONLINE) -- The Nigerian Army has again laid siege to the residence of the leader of Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, in Abia State, his lawyer has claimed.

In a statement on Tuesday, Mr. Kanu’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, accused the Nigerian government of placing the separatist agitator under house arrest.

He added that at least four IPOB members had been killed in the area.

However, the police spokesperson in the state, Geoffrey Ogbonna, denied the claim.

He said the Army was only on its routine patrol and passed through the area.

“They have moved on now to other parts of the city. I have been to that area, they were on their normal ongoing show of force. I don’t think they tried to break into the building,” Mr. Ogbonna said.

According to Mr. Ejiofor: “Just to notify the world that my client’s (Nnamdi Kanu) house is presently under siege by the trigger-happy soldiers acting under the direct instruction of Chief of Army Staff.

“He has been placed under house arrest at the moment while shooting sporadically into the air.

“Casualties are being counted as the unprovoked assault progresses. Some IPOB members have just been killed at least four people.

“They drove in in their thousands to arrest and maim him. I just got a distress call from him now. Further efforts to establish contact with him have remained unsuccessful.

“As it stands now, I can’t confirm whether he is dead or alive.”

Mr. Ejiofor said the Operation Python Dance presently launched by the Buhari-led administration in the South East was principally targeted at eliminating my client.

“It is yielding the desired result to the presidency, having launched a manhunt for my client and unarmed members if Indigenous People of Biafra,” he said.

“Let the world know that the federal government has practically abandoned their case in court in search of a brute route to eliminate my client.

“As I type this statement, his residence has been cordoned off by the military, majority of whom are of Fulani extraction.

“The world should hold Buhari-led Federal Government responsible if anything untoward happens to Nnamdi Kanu. The situation is very tense at the moment,” the statement said.

Mr. Ejiofor had earlier accused the military of killing over 20 IPOB members on Sunday, but the army dismissed the allegation as baseless and mischievous.

Governors of states in the South East region they have commenced investigation into the allegations traded between Mr. Kanu’s lawyer and the military on Sunday.

On Friday, the Nigerian Army had launched Operation Ogbu Eke II, which it said would be seen around the South East region between September 15 and October 14.

The army said the military operation, also known as Operation Python Dance II, is to check criminal agitators and other forms of criminal activities.

But the Igbo socio-cultural group, Ohaneze Ndigbo, has demanded the withdrawal of the troops from the region, saying their presence would raise the level of tension it said already exists in the country.

Meanwhile, a constitutional lawyer and Chairman of The Patriots, Ben Nwabueze, has condemned the alleged invasion of Mr. Kanu’s by the army, describing it as “a matter of grave concern.”

In a statement sent to PREMIUM TIMES, Mr. Nwabueze, a former Secretary (Minister) for Education, said the situation in the country called for great restraint on the part of all.

The statement said, “The report in this morning newspapers of the attack on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s Umuahia home by soldiers of the Nigerian army during which some people were reportedly killed or injured is a matter of grave concern, because it occurred at a time the country is facing destabilizing crisis and threats to its peaceful co-existence and at a time the South East Governors are making valiant efforts to contain the danger of the repercussions of the crisis by interventions with Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the IPOB.

“The situation in the country calls for great restraint on the part of all, and for the Federal Government to take firm steps to restrain any actions capable of escalating the crisis, such as the reported attack on the home of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s home in Umuahia.”

Monday, September 11, 2017

UN Approves Watered-Down New Sanctions Against North Korea

Members of Korea Freedom Federation shout slogans during a rally to denounce North Korea's nuclear test in Seoul, South Korea, Monday, Sept. 11, 2017. North Korea says it will make the United States pay a heavy price if a proposal Washington is backing to impose the toughest sanctions ever on Pyongyang is approved by the U.N. Security Council this week. The signs read " We denounced North Korea's nuclear test".



UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. Security Council on Monday unanimously approved new sanctions on North Korea but not the toughest-ever measures sought by the Trump administration to ban all oil imports and freeze international assets of the government and its leader, Kim Jong Un.

The resolution, responding to Pyongyang's sixth and strongest nuclear test explosion on Sept. 3, does ban North Korea from importing all natural gas liquids and condensates. It also bans all textile exports and prohibits any country from authorizing new work permits for North Korean workers — two key sources of hard currency for the northeast Asian nation.

As for energy, it caps Pyongyang's imports of crude oil at the level of the last 12 months, and it limits the import of refined petroleum products to 2 million barrels a year. The watered-down resolution does not include sanctions that the U.S. wanted on North Korea's national airline and the army.

Nonetheless, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley told the council after the vote that "these are by far the strongest measures ever imposed on North Korea." But she stressed that "these steps only work if all nations implement them completely and aggressively."

Haley noted that the council was meeting on the 16th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attack. In a clear message to North Korean threats to attack the U.S., she said: "We will never forget the lesson that those who have evil intentions must be confronted."

"Today we are saying the world will never accept a nuclear armed North Korea," she said. "We are done trying to prod the regime to do the right thing" and instead are taking steps to prevent it "from doing the wrong thing."

Haley said the U.S. doesn't take pleasure in strengthening sanctions and reiterated that the U.S. does not want war. "The North Korean regime has not yet passed the point of no return," she said. "If it agrees to stop its nuclear program it can reclaim its future. If it proves it can live in peace, the world will live in peace with it. ... If North Korea continues its dangerous path, we will continue with further pressure."

The final agreement was reached after negotiations between the U.S. and China, the North's ally and major trading partner. Haley said the resolution never would have happened without the "strong relationship" between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

But its provisions are a significant climb-down from the very tough sanctions the Trump administration proposed last Tuesday, especially on oil, where a complete ban could have crippled North Korea's economy.

The cap on the import of petroleum products could have an impact, but North Korea will still be able to import the same amount of crude oil that is has this year. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, China supplies most of North Korea's crude oil imports, which a U.S. official put at 4 million barrels a year. The agency cited U.N. customs data showing that China reported sending 6,000 barrels a day of oil products to North Korea, which it said is mostly gasoline and diesel fuel vital to the country's agriculture, transportation and military sectors.

That would mean North Korea imports nearly 2.2 million barrels a year in petroleum products, so the 2 million barrel cap in the resolution would represent a 10 percent cut. But the U.S. official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said North Korea now receives about 4.5 million barrels of refined petroleum products, which would mean a more than 50 percent cut.

The textile ban is significant. Textiles are North Korea's main source of export revenue after coal, iron, seafood and other minerals that have already been severely restricted by previous U.N. resolutions. North Korean textile exports in 2016 totaled $752.5 million, accounting for about one-fourth of its total $3 billion in merchandise exports, according to South Korean government figures.

Haley said the Trump administration believes the new sanctions combined with previous measures would ban over 90 percent of North Korea's exports reported in 2016. As for North Koreans working overseas, the U.S. Mission said a cutoff on new work permits will eventually cost North Korea about $500 million a year once current work permits expire. The U.S. estimates about 93,000 North Koreans are currently working abroad, the U.S. official said.

The original U.S. draft would have ordered all countries to impose an asset freeze and travel ban on Kim Jong Un and four other top party and government officials. The resolution adopted Monday adds only one person to the sanctions list — Pak Yong Sik, a member of the Workers' Party of Korea Central Military Commission, which controls the country's military and helps direct its military industries.

The original U.S. draft would also have frozen the assets of North Korea's state-owned airline Air Koryo, the Korean People's Army and five other powerful military and party entities. The resolution adds only the Central Military Commission of the Workers' Party of Korea and the party's powerful Organization and Guidance Department and its Propaganda and Agitation Department to the sanctions blacklist.

North Korea's Foreign Ministry issued a statement early Monday saying it was watching the United States' moves closely and warned that it was "ready and willing" to respond with measures of its own. It said the U.S. would pay a heavy price if the sanctions proposed by Washington are adopted.

Britain's U.N. ambassador, Matthew Rycroft, told reporters who questioned the watering down of the initial U.S. text that "there is a significant prize in keeping the whole of the Security Council united."

Rycroft called the resolution "a very significant set of additional sanctions," declaring that "we are tightening the screw, and we stand prepared to tighten it further." French Ambassador Francois Delattre said, "We are facing not a regional but a global threat, not a virtual but an immediate threat, not a serious but an existential threat."

"Make no mistake about it," he said, "our firmness today is our best antidote to the risk of war, to the risk of confrontation, and our firmness today is our best tool for a political solution tomorrow."

China and Russia had called for a resolution focused on a political solution to the escalating crisis over North Koreas nuclear program. They have proposed a freeze-for-freeze that would halt North Korean nuclear and missile tests in exchange for the U.S. and South Korea stopping their joint military exercises — but the Trump administration has rejected that.

China's U.N. ambassador, Liu Jieyi, said Beijing has been making "unremitting efforts" to denuclearize and maintain peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. Liu again urged the council to adopt the freeze-for-freeze proposal and said talks with North Korea are needed "sooner rather than later." He expressed hope that the United States will pledge not to seek regime change or North Korea's collapse.

Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia went further, making clear that while Russia supported the resolution, it wasn't entirely satisfied with the council's approach. He said the "unwillingness" of the U.S. to reaffirm pledges not to seek regime change or war in North Korea or to include the idea of having U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres use his good offices to try to resolve the dispute "gives rise to very serious questions in our minds."

"We're convinced that diverting the gathering menace from the Korean Peninsula could be done not through further and further sanctions, but by political means," he said. The resolution does add new language urging "further work to reduce tensions so as to advance the prospects for a comprehensive settlement." It retains language reaffirming support for long-stalled six-party talks with that goal involving North Korea, the U.S., Russia, China, Japan and South Korea.

Associated Press writers Christopher Bodeen in Beijing, Matthew Pennington in Washington and Jennifer Peltz in New York contributed to this report.

California Governor Agrees To Immigrant Protections

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, right, flanked by Secretary of State Alex Padilla, speaks to reporters at the Capitol in Sacramento. Becerra filed a lawsuit Monday, Sept. 11, against the Trump administration over its decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, that protects young immigrants from deportation who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or by parents who overstayed visas.



SACRAMENTO, CALIF. (AP, SEPT. 12, 2017) — California Gov. Jerry Brown and the state Senate leader said Monday they've agreed to changes in proposed legislation that would further restrict interactions between law enforcement officers and federal immigration agents.

The agreement came on the same day the state sued the Trump administration over its decision to end a program that shields young immigrants from deportation. Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, agreed to changes demanded by Brown following fierce opposition from sheriffs and other law-enforcement officials.

The bill would still prohibit state and local police from asking about people's immigration status or enforcing federal immigration laws. However, following Monday's changes, it would preserve the ability of law officers to cooperate on federal task forces as long as the task force doesn't specifically work on immigration enforcement.

Police and jail officials would be able to notify U.S. immigration agents if they detain people with convictions for some 800 crimes, including serious felonies, battery, assault and sexual crimes. Immigration agents would still be allowed to interview immigrants in jail, and immigration agents would not be barred from accessing state databases.

"This bill protects public safety and people who come to California to work hard and make this state a better place," Brown said in a statement. Brown and de Leon reached their agreement in the last week of the legislative year. The Assembly and Senate must approve the measure by Friday or delay action until next year.

U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement had no immediate comment. California already has some of the most protective laws in the country for immigrants detained by law enforcement. The state has limited the ability of police to detain immigrants for federal deportation agents since 2014, and requires jailers to inform inmates if agents are trying to detain immigrants.

Illinois recently passed even more protective legislation that bars law enforcement from detaining immigrants solely for deportation, said Shiu Ming Cheer, senior staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center.

A handful of cities including Chicago and San Francisco, meanwhile, are refusing to cooperate with new federal requirements for tougher immigration enforcement, prompting the Trump administration to threaten to withhold funding.

Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood, a critic of the initial state bill, said sheriffs would be discussing the latest version on a call Tuesday and declined to discuss the details. He noted that ICE generally seeks cooperation on people convicted of major crimes.

Immigrant rights groups held a noisy rally in the Capitol last week urging Brown and de Leon not to back off from the strict immigrant protections de Leon originally proposed in the wake of Donald Trump's election as president.

But the activists generally praised the compromise with Brown. "We hope that it will serve as a model for other states and encourage them to adopt similar protections," said Jenny Pasquarella, immigrant rights director for the American Civil Liberties Union of California. "This is where the dragnet is."

The legislative deal was announced the same day that California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said he's filing a lawsuit over the Trump administration's decision to phase out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which protects young immigrants living in the U.S. illegally from deportation.

The lawsuit's legal arguments largely mirror those already filed in a lawsuit last week by 15 other states and the District of Columbia. Attorney generals for the states of Maine, Maryland and Minnesota joined California's lawsuit.

More than 200,000 of the 800,000 participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program live in California. The University of California has also filed a legal challenge to ending the program.

Also on Monday, Mexico Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray said he and other Mexican diplomats are urging members of Congress to make the DACA program permanent and that he is not expecting an immediate influx of hundreds of thousands of young people back to Mexico.

Associated Press writers Sudhin Thanawala in San Francisco, Amy Taxin in Orange County, Kathleen Ronayne in Sacramento and Marine Villeneuve in Augusta, Maine, contributed reporting.

Saturday, September 09, 2017

Why My Nigerian Father Never Said Goodbye

THE GUARDIAN, LONDON



After Camilla Balshaw‘s father disappeared, she spent years trying to forget him. But then a meeting with a cousin she never knew existed led to a series of very odd phone calls – and a new understanding of her heritage



Camilla Balshaw: ‘Why would I want to find a man who had no hand in my upbringing and whose face I could barely remember?’ Photograph: Si Barber for the Guardian



I had been warned by my cousin about the strange telephone habits of Nigerians so, as I prepared to speak to my father for the first time in 30 years, I thought I was ready. But I wasn’t. The conversation lasted four minutes. Not the way I had expected to strike up a relationship with the man I had last seen when I was 10.

My memories of my father are sketchy. I have no photographs of him, but I remember he was tall and thin and always wore expensive cologne. He smoked, too, a forgotten brand now relegated to empty packets on eBay.

My parents had met in London in the early 60s. They were part of the new wave of arrivals from India, Pakistan, Africa and the Caribbean. London swelled with a Commonwealth population who came to work and build new lives.

My father had come to study engineering. He met my mother, a trainee nurse, and swept her off her feet. My grandmother simply couldn’t understand why she insisted on a relationship with a Nigerian and not a “nice Caribbean gentleman”.

My parents’ union became increasingly fraught thanks to my father’s somewhat laissez-faire attitude to his duties as a husband. He had come from a wealthy family in Nigeria. His mother, a formidable businesswoman, spoiled and indulged him. Once in England, he was easily intoxicated and seduced by the brights lights, parties, whiskey and, whisper it, probably, other women. Engineering was abandoned and, regardless of a growing family, he showed no sign of succumbing to domestic life. He took a series of meaningless jobs and continued his playboy lifestyle.

Years of unhappiness and bitterness festered and finally exploded into an acrimonious parting. My mother gained custody of me and my siblings. She became a single woman with three children and no financial help from my father. After a few visits to London to see him, and occasional shopping sprees to Marks & Spencer (the 70s Nigerian shopper’s paradise), he disappeared. We were told that he had probably gone back to Nigeria.

I never saw him again.

We were brought up with a daily mantra from our mother to “never, ever marry a Nigerian”. After all she had been through, you couldn’t blame her.

I suppressed my African heritage and fully embraced the Jamaican. My father was a waste of space. In the early 80s, I wanted limited association with Nigeria. Jamaica was cool. They had reggae, a killer cricket team and lovely sounding patois. Nigeria was too foreign and they wore strange headwraps and spoke in sing-song dialects that I couldn’t understand. Plus, I had a fierce loyalty to my mother. She had brought us up single-handedly and done a very fine job. Why would I want to find a man who had no hand in my upbringing and whose face I could barely remember?

As the years and decades passed, there was still no contact, until a phone call changed everything. It was a cousin. Cousin? I had no sense of a wider family of cousins, aunts or uncles.

This cousin told me he had managed to track me down on the orders of the family in Nigeria. He was a professor, lived in Oxfordshire and made frequent visits to Nigeria. He told me I had a father who was very much alive and a host of family members in Abuja who were desperate to contact me. Apparently, the search had started years ago. My father had tried the Salvation Army with no results. Familymembers had tried too, until, bingo, they had tracked me down through social media.

When I eventually met my cousin, he handed me a letter; it was from my father. It was simple and short. The word “sorry” dominated each paragraph. At first I did nothing. I didn’t reply. I didn’t tell my mother he had made contact, not at first. It felt disloyal. I left his letter in a drawer for months but continued to meet my UK cousin. He was full of stories of Nigeria, its rich history and our large family tree. I wanted to know more about them. They had beautiful names and I couldn’t blame them for my father’s mistakes.
Advertisement


I wrote back to him. I saw it as an opportunity to let off steam and berate him for being a pretty lousy husband and father. He wrote again, apologetic, regretful and asked for forgiveness. Something thawed. I forgave him. We arranged a phone call.

At this point, my cousin in Oxfordshire gave me the warning about Nigerians and their telephone habits. My initial thought was: generators. I knew there were frequent blackouts and assumed this would affect our call as would the amount of credit on his phone.

Our first call came and there were no proclamations of long-lost love on either side. The conversation was incredibly formal. He asked about my health, my family’s health, my husband’s health. I asked about his health. He was 82 after all. Four minutes and the call was over.

What perplexed me most was the lack of questioning on his part and at the end of the call he said, “OK”, and the phone went down. He didn’t end the conversation with “goodbye”, which I thought incredibly rude.

We went through the same three-question telephone ritual a couple of times. I knew he had an interest in politics so I interspersed our chat with added comments on Theresa May and the weather. I asked questions. He didn’t. He would say, “OK” and midway through my own “goodbye” the phone went down firmly. We continued to call each other and on each occasion I was left with the receiver in my hand, incredulous at the brutal end of our conversation.

In one call, I mentioned I would visit him in Nigeria. It was a deviation from the three-question script. “When, when?” he said. I blurted out “April” without thinking. This was never going to work it was already early March. Why had I said April of all months?

I called a few days after this and told him April was out of the question and I hoped to visit in October.

“Thank God,” he said.

My father spoke Igbo, English, Yoruba and Hausa. I had learned from a phrasebook the Yoruba for “goodbye” “O da dor”. My intention on our next call was to impress him with my rudimentary attempt. I’d written him a letter too. It asked, “Why do you never say goodbye at the end of a call?”

I never got the chance to practise my Yoruba or get a reply to my letter. The phone call came in May. My father had died. A stroke. He was 83.

And then I got an invitation from another cousin to come over and meet all the family. They had been waiting, she told me. She put the phone down and didn’t say goodbye.

I made the trip to Nigeria and discovered Abuja – a green, wide-spaced, international, vibrant, youthful city, full of coffee shops (yes, Africa has them, too). I met a whole new family of aunts, cousins and uncles.

In Abuja, I learned that my name, which I had always thought was very English and not Nigerian-sounding at all, is quite a popular name. Its roots are in Arabic and it is spelt Kamilah or Kamilaat. My family were all solidly middle-class professionals with law degrees and architectural practices; one or two were presidents of oil companies, and a cousin held a seat in the Nigerian senate – quite an achievement for a woman.

They spoke fondly about my father, or Uncle as he was known by all the family. They told me he was a quiet, thoughtful presence, always elegantly dressed, who never forgot birthdays and smelled of cologne.

I asked one of my cousins about his phone habits. “My dad never said goodbye. Why was that?”

“Sometimes we don’t,” she said matter-of-factly. “Everything has been said already.”

And I suppose it had.

Clinton Book Relives Democrats' Agonizing Defeat






NEW YORK (AP, SEPTEMBER 09, 2017) — In a candid and pointed new book, Hillary Clinton relives her stunning defeat to Donald Trump, admitting to personal mistakes and defending campaign strategy even as her return to the stage refocuses attention on a race Democrats still can't believe they lost.

Clinton is unsparing in her criticism of Trump and also lays out some of the factors she believes contributed to her loss: interference from Russian hackers, accusations leveled at her by former FBI Director James Comey, a divisive primary battle with Bernie Sanders, even her gender. She also addresses common criticisms of her campaign, including the idea that she didn't have a compelling narrative for seeking the presidency and that she ignored Midwestern turf where Trump picked up enough white working-class voters to win several battleground states.

"Some critics have said that everything hinged on me not campaigning enough in the Midwest," Clinton writes in the book "What Happened." ''And I suppose it is possible that a few more trips to Saginaw or a few more ads on the air in Waukesha could have tipped a couple of thousand voters here or there."

"But let's set the record straight: we always knew that the industrial Midwest was crucial to our success, just as it had been for Democrats for decades, and contrary to the popular narrative, we didn't ignore those states," she wrote.

Clinton already is taking some criticism — complete with mockery from late-night television hosts — for planning book-tour stops in the Great Lakes and Midwestern states that ultimately cost her the election. But she writes that her campaign had more staff and spent more on advertising in both Michigan and Pennsylvania, two states she lost, than President Barack Obama did when he won them in 2012.

She acknowledges that "if there's one place where we were caught by surprise, it was Wisconsin," saying that polls showed her ahead until the end. But while she did not visit the state in the fall, she noted that her surrogates blanketed the state.

In Wisconsin, Democratic pollster Paul Maslin called it a "bitter irony" that Clinton is now trying to reach voters — or consumers — in states he believes her campaign mostly ignored. But he said it's ultimately a side show from a has-been.

"Let her do whatever she's going to do for whatever reason she's doing it, but it doesn't matter. There's just so much else happening every day with Trump," Maslin said. He said he hopes Clinton understands that "most Democrats are beyond" blaming her for November. "For her sake, I hope she can sell enough books, but if she thinks she's affecting the debate in any way, I think she's more delusional than anyone thought."

Clinton's anger is most sharply focused on Comey. She said that all of the theories about why she lost need "to be tested against the evidence that I was winning until October 28, when Jim Comey injected emails back into the election."

She called her use of a private email server while serving at the State Department "dumb" but accused Comey of tarnishing her image and called him "rash" for publicly re-opening the probe in the campaign's final days. She also owns up to other mistakes, saying her comment about putting coal miners out of business was the mistake "I regret the most" and that her paid speeches to Wall Street banks were bad "optics."

Many Democrats have viewed Clinton's return to the spotlight with trepidation, fearing it could trigger another round of infighting over the future of the party between her more centrist supporters and Sanders' progressives.

Michigan Democratic Chairman Brandon Dillon, whose state Clinton lost by about 10,000 votes, said Clinton's book can help Democrats try to "learn the right lessons from 2016." But he said Democrats and other activists on the left should avoid using Clinton's re-emergence to rehash 2016.

"There's a clear difference between all Democrats and any of the Republicans. That's what we should be focusing on," Dillon said. In a recent interview, Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon argued that history will render a favorable verdict on Clinton and her approach to Trump.

"All of these things she tried to warn people about that were a theoretical concern, ... now it's real," said Fallon. "He's the president." In the book, obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its release date, Clinton is unsparing in her assessment of the president, calling him "a clear and present danger to the country and the world." She says she considered saying to Trump: "Back up, you creep. Get away from me" when he loomed over her shoulder during a general election debate.

But Clinton, who has a reputation for avoiding blame for her failures, said she takes "responsibility for all" of her campaign's mistakes. "You can blame the data, blame the message, blame anything you want -- but I was the candidate," she writes. "It was my campaign. Those were my decisions."

She also expressed frustration over what she felt was unfair media coverage. "What makes me such a lightning rod for fury? I'm really asking. I'm at a loss," she asks her readers, before concluding: "I think it's partly because I'm a woman."

Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Follow Lemire on Twitter at http://twitter.com/@JonLemire and Barrow at http://twitter.com/BillBarrowAP

Egypt Announces Discovery Of 3,500-Years Old Tomb In Luxor

Archaeologists work on mummies found in the New Kingdom tomb that belongs to a royal goldsmith in a burial shaft, in Luxor, Egypt, Saturday, Sept. 9, 2017. Egypt has announced the discovery in the southern city of Luxor of a pharaonic tomb belonging to a royal goldsmith who lived more than 3,500 years ago during the reign of the 18th dynasty.

LUXOR, EGYPT (AP, SEPTEMBER 09, 2017) — Egypt on Saturday announced the discovery in the southern city of Luxor of a pharaonic tomb belonging to a royal goldsmith who lived more than 3,500 years ago during the reign of the 18th dynasty.

The tomb, located on the west bank of the river Nile in a cemetery for noblemen and top officials, is a relatively modest discovery, but one that authorities has announced with a great deal of fanfare in a bid to boost the country's slowly recovering tourism industry.

"We want tomorrow's newspapers to speak about Egypt and make people want to come to Egypt," Antiquities Minister Khaled el-Anani told reporters. El-Anani said the tomb was not in good condition, but it contains a statue of the goldsmith and his wife as well as a funerary mask. He said a shaft inside the tomb contained pottery as well as mummies and coffins belonging to ancient Egyptian people who lived during the 21st and 22nd dynasties.

The minister identified the goldsmith as Amunhat. The tomb was discovered by Egyptian archeologists, something that a senior official at the Antiquities Ministry hailed as evidence of their growing professionalism and expertise.

"We used to escort foreign archeologists as observers, but that's now in the past. We are the leaders now," said Mustafa Waziri, Luxor's chief archaeologist.

Friday, September 08, 2017

Appeals Court: Grandparents Not Part Of Trump's Travel Ban

Karen Shore holds up a sign outside of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The appeals court on Thursday, Sept. 7, rejected the Trump administration's limited view of who is allowed into the United States under the president's travel ban, saying grandparents, cousins and similarly close relations of people in the U.S. should not be prevented from coming to the country.



SEATTLE (AP) — Grandparents, cousins and similarly close relations of people in the United States should not be prevented from coming to the country under President Donald Trump's travel ban, a federal appeals court has ruled in another legal defeat for the administration on the contentious issue.

The decision Thursday from three judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling by a federal judge in Hawaii, who found the administration's view of who should be allowed into the country under the ban is too strict.

The unanimous ruling also said refugees accepted by a resettlement agency should not be banned. "Stated simply, the government does not offer a persuasive explanation for why a mother-in-law is clearly a bona fide relationship, in the Supreme Court's prior reasoning, but a grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or cousin is not," the 9th Circuit said.

The appeals panel wrote that under typical court rules, its ruling would not take effect for at least 52 days. But in this instance, the judges said, many refugees would be "gravely imperiled" by such a delay, so the decision will take effect in five days.

"Refugees' lives remain in vulnerable limbo during the pendency of the Supreme Court's stay," they wrote. "Refugees have only a narrow window of time to complete their travel, as certain security and medical checks expire and must then be reinitiated."

The Justice Department said it would appeal. "The Supreme Court has stepped in to correct these lower courts before, and we will now return to the Supreme Court to vindicate the executive branch's duty to protect the nation," the agency said in a statement.

The U.S. Supreme Court said in June that President Donald Trump's 90-day ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced pending arguments scheduled for October, partially overturning lower-court rulings. But the justices said it should not apply to visitors who have a "bona fide relationship" with people or organizations in the U.S., such as close family ties or a job offer.

That set the stage for much disagreement over what constitutes a bona fide relationship. The government interpreted such family relations to include immediate family members and in-laws, but not grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles. The judge in Hawaii overruled that interpretation, expanding the definition of who can enter the country to the other categories of relatives.

He also overruled the government's assertion that refugees from those countries should be banned even if a resettlement agency in the U.S. had agreed to take them in. The administration argued that resettlement agencies have a relationship with the government, not with individual refugees. The appeals court rejected that, saying the Supreme Court was concerned with any harm the travel ban might impose on people or organizations in the U.S.

Resettlement agencies have spent time and money securing rental housing, buying furniture and performing other tasks that would be in vain if the refugees were blocked, the 9th Circuit said. They also would lose out on government funding for the resettlement services.

Lawyers for the government and the state of Hawaii, which challenged the travel ban, argued the case in Seattle last week. Deputy assistant attorney general Hashim Mooppan ran into tough questions as soon as he began arguing the government's case, with Judge Ronald Gould asking him from "what universe" the administration took its position that grandparents don't constitute a close family relationship.

Mooppan conceded that people can have a profound connection to their grandparents and other extended relatives, but from a legal perspective, the administration had to draw the line somewhere to have a workable ban based largely on definitions used in other aspects of immigration law, he said.

Hawaii is also one of 15 states that sued the Trump administration Wednesday over its plans to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that protects young immigrants from deportation. "Today's decision by the 9th Circuit keeps families together. It gives vetted refugees a second chance," state Attorney General Douglas Chin said in a statement. "The Trump administration keeps taking actions with no legal basis. We will keep fighting back."

Associated Press writer Sudhin Thanawala contributed from San Francisco.

Wednesday, September 06, 2017

Ryan Sees Compromise On Immigration After Trump Forces Issue

House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, center, arrives for a meeting with House Republicans, Wednesday, Sept. 6, 2017, on Capitol Hill in Washington.



WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Paul Ryan said Wednesday he sees the possibility for compromise after President Donald Trump gave Congress six months to resolve the status of immigrants brought illegally to the country as children. And he called on Trump to work with the House to get there.

"If we have legislation coming through here that is worked with and supported by the president I'm very confident that our members will support that," Ryan said. Trump said Wednesday he has "no second thoughts" a day after announcing an end to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that former President Barack Obama created to give temporary work permits and deportation protections to qualifying immigrants brought illegally to this country as children.

Nearly 800,000 younger immigrants, known as "Dreamers," have now obtained the protections and are pleading desperately with Congress not to subject them to deportation. But Ryan made clear that any solution would also have to be paired with border security measures, a bid for conservative support that could alienate Democrats.

"I think there's a serious humane issue here that needs to be dealt with," Ryan, R-Wis., told reporters after a closed-door meeting of the House Republican conference. "But it's only fitting and reasonable that we also deal with some of the root cause of this problem," Ryan said. "We're going to work with our members to find out where that compromise is."

Despite Ryan's optimistic words, the deep divisions among House Republicans that have stymied past efforts on immigration reform were already starkly on display as lawmakers entered and exited Wednesday's conference meeting. Ryan, who became speaker two years ago only after promising he wouldn't bring an immigration bill to the floor without majority support from Republicans, began the meeting promising them the issue would be addressed "deliberately."

Rep. Steve King of Iowa, a hardliner on immigration, rejected any move toward what he termed "amnesty" and criticized Trump for not ending the DACA program on Day One of his presidency as he had promised during the campaign.

"Why is this discussion taking place this way? Because he didn't want to make the decision boldly and distinctly," King said of Trump. "And instead it's kind of a King Solomon decision, cut the baby in half and throw both halves to Congress and let us fight over it."

What will actually happen in six months absent congressional action remained unclear. Trump himself took some of the sting from his threats with a tweet issued late Tuesday declaring that if Congress can't act to "legalize" DACA, "I will revisit this issue!"

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said Wednesday that Trump was not committing to any course of action in six months, stressing that he wants Congress to act. "It is the Congress' role in our country to make the laws, including the immigration laws. Congress has promised to quote act on DACA. We'll see what that means," Conway said. She said if Congress does not act "then the president will perhaps revisit the issue. That's six months from now, let's see what happens."

Conway said that for Trump "DACA is one piece of larger immigration reform," which she said includes a border wall and other items. She added that if Congress wants to "get an earful" from constituents for the next six months "then they are welcome to sit back and wait for further executive action."

The debate confronts Congress four years after comprehensive immigration legislation passed the Senate only to die in the House. And if the six-month deadline holds it will arrive in March of next year, just as primary season gets under way ahead of the November 2018 midterm elections with control of the House at stake. It's an issue with devastating political potential for House Republicans, in particular. Many Republicans represent conservative districts that strongly embraced Trump's tough campaign rhetoric against illegal immigration.

These lawmakers would court voters' wrath, and potential primary challenges, if they flirted with anything that could be labeled amnesty — unless Trump himself sells his base on it first. Many advocates believe that legislation supporting Dreamers could pass the House now if Ryan brought it up, because it would garner overwhelming Democratic backing and some GOP support. But such a move by Ryan would risk conservative fury. Asked Wednesday whether he would stick with his past commitment not to bring up a bill unless the majority of Republicans in his conference support it, Ryan did not answer directly but bid for the president's involvement.

For their part, Democrats insisted they would persist on the issue by trying to attach legislation to other unrelated measures if it's not otherwise resolved. "I'd ask my friend the majority leader and Speaker Ryan to put a clean Dream Act on the floor of both chambers in September," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said.

Associated Press writer Catherine Lucey contributed to this report.

Monday, September 04, 2017

Coalition Raises Alarm, Says AI Plots To Destabilize Nigeria With N10b

Ask FG To Expel Amnesty International


THE NATION
SEPTEMBER 4, 2017






A pressure group, Coalition For Truth and Justice (CFTJ), on Monday informed Nigerians that Amnesty International ( AI ) had earmarked about N10 billion to settle “dormant terror NGOs and CSOs to champion the break up of the country.

The organisation also alleged that AI had been responsible for Boko Haram insurgency in the North East, militancy in the Niger-Delta and the separatist movement agitating for secession in the South East led by the leader of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

The National Coordinator of CFTJ, Charles Timothy, at a press briefing in Abuja, alleged that AI had intensified plots to destabilise Nigeria.

He therefore called on the Federal Government to expel AI from Nigeria “as they are backing separatists and extremists against the country’s legitimate authority and sovereignty.”

Timothy advised Nigerians and government to stop the final phase of destabilization from being fully activated.

He said, “We appeal to you, gentlemen of the press, to help amplify this message to the government and the populace because Nigeria and Nigerians cannot afford to be taken unawares by this latest destabilization plot.

“In its latest destabilisation plot, AI has started mobilising some questionable elements under the cover of civil society groups with millions of Naira in the last phase of its project to see to the final destabilisation of Nigeria. This last phase of operation is structured to unite and activate all the dormant terror NGOs and CSOs they have created and term their attack on the populace as “intellectual rebellion”, which is a cover to cause an uprising against the state. This must be taken seriously. This strategy has been employed several times in the past.

“A few CSOs run by true patriots that were approached to join the rebellion so that it can have a larger number have confided in us that as much N10 billion has been earmarked for this phase. In addition to paying for protest logistics, the funds would also be distributed to some senior lawyers in Lagos and Abuja to lead the uprising against the Nigerian state. This development was in response to Amnesty International losing faith in the ability of its assets to trigger the much-expected genocide which would allow it and its backers to label Nigeria as a failed state. On the strength of what we know, we would be lying to claim that all is well when we know that Nigeria is sitting on a primed bomb.”

Timothy said while Boko Haram insurgency in the North East of Nigeria, militancy in the Niger-Delta or the separatist movement by IPOB agitating for secession in the South East of the country were contemporary problems that urgently beg decisive responses, they were also mere symptoms, manifestations of the manipulations of agents of destabilization that are desperate to destroy Nigeria.

He said, “The core and forefront of this machination against the corporate existence of Nigeria is Amnesty International. It is on record that this so called international human rights non-governmental organization is at the root of Boko Haram, Niger-Delta militancy, secessionists in the South East and even unintended support for kidnappers, whose rights it fights for by claiming that their arrests and occasional death in exchange with security operatives are violations of certain rules.

“Several patriotic groups had taken on Amnesty International on over its role in these groups causing security incidents and breaches for the country. Its response has consistently been that of feigning ignorance, ignoring the indictment or out rightly blackmailing such accusers. It rides on its suppose international credential to ride roughshod on Nigerians whose country it is actively poisoning with the sole intention of destroying.

“The Arab Spring was launched on the heel of such CSO recruitment and training. This was why Egypt for instance clamped down on NGOs in the aftermath of the dislocations caused by Arab Spring. We are talking here about a government swept into power by the very Arab Spring going after the NGOs that collaborated with foreigners to upset the country. It always has to be about the sovereignty of the country and not the vested interests of a group of imperialists and unenlightened minions that do their biddings.

“The same scenario played out in Ukraine where CSOs and NGOs were used as a cover to hijack the legitimate grievances that the local population had about the affairs of their country. Again, even when the NGOs dominated protesters finally brought a new government into power the same government, knowing the treasonable roles they played, soon clamped down on them by introducing legislations that limit their influence.

“This is why we are issuing this timely warning that the Nigerian state must stop sacrificing the safety and wellbeing of citizens on the altar of political correctness. Amnesty International with the CSOs and NGOs it has recruited must not be allowed to push the country beyond the brink before the state decides to act.

“We therefore call on the government and the people to expel them as they are backing separatists and extremists against the country’s legitimate authority and sovereignty. Citizens and government must stop this final phase of destabilization from being fully activated. We appeal to you, gentlemen of the press, to help amplify this message to the government and the populace because Nigeria and Nigerians cannot afford to be taken unawares by this latest destabilisation plot.”

Cholera Still Kills Thousands EachYear – In Places Without Clean Water, It’s Far From History

Cholera is common in parts of the world where clean water sources are unreliable. Sudan has suffered multiple outbreaks since the onset of a...