World News & Breaking News II

SamuraiBlue said:

I never understand why some people comes up with these bland analogy that is completely blind to details which is the issue at point.
What happened to the agreement between the two parties ensuring the people involved the right to democracy ?

Click to expand...

WASHINGTON (CNN – Sept. 10, 2014) — It’s time to go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, President Barack Obama said Wednesday night in a nationally televised address intended to sell stepped-up military efforts to a war-weary public.

Obama said the United States would expand its airstrikes against the Sunni jihadists in Iraq to target them across the border in Syria.

“I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are,” he said. “That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.”

The declaration responded to calls from a growing number of U.S. politicians for such a step, with increasing public support.

Obama’s speech from the White House also sought to convince allies of a firm U.S. commitment to lead an international coalition to fight the Sunni jihadists who rampaged across northern Iraq from Syria this year. They are known as ISIS, ISIL and Islamic State.

“A steady, relentless effort”

“This counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground,” Obama said.

The President also announced another 475 American military advisers would go to Iraq, pushing the total figure to more than 1,000.

At the same time, he made clear the strategy differed from all-out war again in Iraq less than three years after he withdrew combat forces from the country.

“It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil,” Obama said.

Noting the formation of a new Iraqi government, which his administration has demanded, Obama announced that “America will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat.”

Objective: “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS

“Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy,” he said.

Also Wednesday, Obama shifted $25 million in military aid to Iraqi forces, including Kurdish fighters in the north combating the ISIS extremists. The aid could include ammunition, small arms and vehicles, as well as military education and training, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said.

U.S. diplomatic efforts this week seek to solidify the coalition. Secretary of State John Kerry left Tuesday to push Sunni leaders in Jordan and Saudi Arabia to join the United States and its allies in combating ISIS, while Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Lisa Monaco, the homeland security adviser, also will be in the region.

Obama has been criticized by conservatives and some Democrats for what they call a timid response so far to the threat by ISIS fighters. The recent beheading of two American journalists held captive by ISIS raised public awareness of the extremists and the threat they pose.

“We can’t erase every trace of evil from the world, and small groups of killers have the capacity to do great harm. That was the case before 9/11, and that remains true today,” Obama said.

ISIS poses a threat to the Middle East, including the people of Iraq and Syria, he said, adding: “If left unchecked, these terrorists could pose a growing threat beyond that region, including the United States.”

A senior administration official told CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger that Obama’s message was “the next phase is offense” against ISIS, and that the President sought international support before speaking publicly about his strategy.

“Until you have a coalition, it’s hard to explain how this will work,” the official said.

Congressional authority

Obama has insisted he has the authority to ratchet up airstrikes against ISIS under war power granted more than a decade ago to fight al Qaeda. ISIS formed from some al Qaeda affiliates but is separate from the central leadership of the terrorist organization behind the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

This week, he asked Congress for additional authority to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels to fight the ISIS extremists.

Such authority comes under Title 10 of the U.S. code, which deals with military powers, and Congress could vote on granting it next week. Approval also would allow the United States to accept money from other countries for backing the Syrian opposition forces.

Most voices in Congress back strong U.S. action against the ISIS fighters. However, any vote on military action can be risky, especially with congressional elections less than two months off.

The fraught politics of the issue were clear on Wednesday, when House Republican leaders put off a vote on a government spending measure set for Wednesday after pressure emerged to add the Title 10 authorization to it.

Obama initially rejected arming the Syrian opposition against President Bashar al-Assad more than two years ago to avoid getting mired in another Middle East conflict. U.S. officials also feared American weapons could end up in the hands of extremists, such as al Qaeda affiliates that eventually morphed into ISIS.

As the tide has turned against Syria’s opposition, which now finds itself fighting both government forces and ISIS, the United States began its covert aid to some rebel factions.

Until now, the U.S. strategy against ISIS has included airstrikes on the extremists in Iraq to protect several hundred American military personnel there while helping the Iraqis and providing humanitarian support.

Veteran diplomat: ISIS worse than al Qaeda

Calls for a more forceful campaign against ISIS have increased in recent months.

Former U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker, who served in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, told CNN on Wednesday that ISIS presents a bigger threat to America than al Qaeda.

“They are more numerous, they are better armed, they are far better financed, they are better experienced, and perhaps most critically there are several thousand of them who hold Western passports, including American passports,” Crocker said. “They don’t need to get a visa; they just need to get on a plane.”

He added: “If we don’t think we’re on their target list, we are delusional.”

After his meeting with top congressional leaders at the White House on Tuesday, Obama asked for their support to show the nation was united.He repeated that call in Wednesday’s speech.

Click to expand...

Nastasya Tay, reporting from Courtroom GD in Pretoria, South Africa, contributed to this report.

Oscar Pistorius has been found not guilty of murdering Reeva Steenkamp.

The stunning development was revealed as Judge Thokozile Masipa read her summation of the evidence Thursday in front of a packed courthouse in Pretoria, South Africa, and a worldwide television audience.

Masipa has yet to hand down her final decision, which will come Friday. She did reveal in the waning moments of Thursday's summation that she determined Pistorious to have been "negligent," which means he could still be found guilty of culpable homicide, a conviction that comes with a maximum of 15 years in prison but carries no mandatory jail sentence.

"He acted too hastily and used excessive force," Masipa said.

Pistorius also faces gun charges that carry potential prison sentences.

But a murder charge is out, for the time being anyway. The prosecution can appeal the decision and, if they do, Pistorius could still be convicted of murder, according to legal experts contacted by Yahoo Sports.

All along, the prosecution pressed for a conviction for cold-blooded murder. But the Blade Runner has always maintained it was a tragic accident, that he shot his girlfriend in the pre-dawn hours of Valentine's morning last year in a moment of terror, believing that he was protecting them both from an intruder locked behind a bathroom door.

In her summation, Masipa said the prosecution "failed to show requisite intention to kill the deceased, let alone premeditation."

Masipa called Pistorius a "very poor witness," saying he was "evasive" in the face of prosecution questioning. Still, in her opinion that did not warrant a guilty verdict on the charge of premeditated murder, or even dolus eventualis – the grey area between premeditated murder and culpable homicide.

Under dolus eventualis, if Pistorius should have foreseen that his actions could result in death, yet recklessly proceeded anyway, it still would have been considered murder in South African law. That would have come with a minimum sentence of 15 years.

Masipa ruled out any murder conviction based on several key factors:

• Phone records support Pistorius' timeline of events.

Relying on phone records and "objective evidence," including the timings of the Guard Track facility outside Pistorius’ home, Masipa appeared to accept the defense’s timeline of events, based on the athlete’s account of the evening.

• Witness testimony that Pistorius and Steenkamp were heard arguing prior to the shooting was not supported by the established timeline.

Masipa dismissed much of the testimony delivered by Pistorius' neighbors, saying that many witnesses "got things wrong," potentially because of media coverage of the trial and the fallibility of human memory. She determined that witnesses had been mistaken in their interpretation of sounds – confusing the sound of gunshots with the cricket bat breaking the toilet door, and Pistorius’ screams with those of a woman.


The interpretations of sound are crucial, as the state's case largely hinged on the sequence of events. If, as several neighbors claimed, they heard a woman scream, then clearly Pistorius would have known who was behind the locked bathroom door before firing his gun. However, if it was Pistorius screaming, as he contends, then it follows his version of events.

Based on the state pathologist’s report on Steenkamp's injuries, Masipa determined Reeva would have been “unable to shout or scream, at least in the manner described by the witnesses," especially given the rapidity of the shots. The screams were likely a distressed Pistorius, Masipa found, contradicting the prosecution's contention.

• Pistorius relayed his version of events – that he thought an intruder had entered his home – minutes after the shooting took place, and that his version did not waver later in questioning. Masipa agreed with the defense that it would be "highly improbable" for Pistorius to have made up this story so quickly, and that his version remained unwavered throughout questioning even without access to his original statement or evidence from the scene.

• The prosecution's case was built largely on circumstantial evidence.

Case in point, the series of WhatsApp messages the prosecution used to contend the relationship between Pistorius and Steenkamp was a rocky one.

"I'm the girl who let go with u, even when I was scared out of my mind to," Reeva Steenkamp wrote in a text message to Pistorius less than three weeks before he shot and killed her.

"I'm the girl who fell in love with u and wanted to tell u this weekend but I'm also the girl that gets sidestepped when you are in a [expletive] mood. When I feel you think u have me so why try anymore …"

Masipa wasn't buying this as evidence that Pistorius meant to kill Steenkamp.

"Relationships are fickle," she said Thursday. "None of this means anything.”

She was also unmoved by other bits of circumstantial evidence – that Steenkamp brought her phone with her into the toilet meant she was in trouble; that undigested food in her stomach contradicted Pistorius' timeline of events.

Masipa dismissed these arguments from the prosecution as "inconclusive," explaining as such the court cannot use them to make any "inferences."

Further, Masipa determined that Pistorius did not subjectively foresee killing whoever was behind the locked bathroom door, and that it is clear to her that he genuinely believed Steenkamp to be in bed, not in the toilet.

"To find otherwise would be tantamount to saying that the accused's reaction after he realized that he shot the deceased was fake, that he was play acting merely to delude the onlookers at the time," Masipa said.

Pistorius could still be convicted of murder if the prosecution chooses to appeal.

The main point of contention is the interpretation of the law around dolus eventualis. In her summation, Masipa said murder with dolus eventualis is when someone foresees they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway. It could be argued that it should be interpreted as when someone ought to foresee they could cause death, but recklessly proceeds anyway.

However, if Pistorius is convicted of culpable homicide and the judge hands down a stiff sentence, it's highly unlikely that the state will appeal. If she acquits him entirely, an appeal would be expected.

Click to expand...

bd popeye said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Equation said:

WhOa...that's a surprise to me.

Click to expand...

Miragedriver said:

China nabs burglary gang that preyed on ‘corrupt’ Communists

Burglars target the homes Communist Party officials, believing – correctly – that many would be too ashamed of their ill-gotten riches to file a police report

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I will now get back to bottling my Malbec

Click to expand...

Miragedriver said:

China nabs burglary gang that preyed on ‘corrupt’ Communists

Burglars target the homes Communist Party officials, believing – correctly – that many would be too ashamed of their ill-gotten riches to file a police report

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I will now get back to bottling my Malbec

Click to expand...