Inocente libertado após quase 25 anos na prisão

Nem sempre são derrotas. In memoriam de Troy Davis.

October 04, 2011 273 EXONERATED I’m writing with wonderful news. Just moments ago, our client Michael Morton walked out of a Texas courthouse a free man after serving nearly 25 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit.      (Above: Michael Morton with his sister, Vicky Warlick, and mother, Patricia Morton, moments after he was released today) Morton was convicted in 1987 in Williamson County, Texas, of the murder of his wife, based entirely on circumstantial evidence. DNA test results on a bloody bandana now prove his innocence and point to the involvement of another man. Prosecutors joined with the Innocence Project today in requesting that Morton’s conviction be overturned and he be released. Today’s release underlines the vast damage caused by Morton’s wrongful conviction. The DNA profile of the unnamed male found at the Morton crime scene is also linked to a later murder in nearby Travis County — a crime that might have been prevented if law enforcement had continued its investigation instead of building a case against Morton. For Morton, who has proclaimed his innocence throughout his long ordeal, today was a long time coming. He was embraced by family and friends upon being freed, and spoke briefly to media inside the Williamson County Courthouse. Prosecutorial misconduct and a complete disregard for the truth led to Morton’s conviction in 1987, and it’s likely that Morton would never have been convicted had prosecutors shared key evidence of his innocence with defense. Several critical documents were obtained through a Public Records Act request since Morton’s conviction, and they paint a startling picture of injustice. Among the evidence withheld from defense are an account from Morton’s three-year-old son that someone other than Morton committed the crime and reported use of a credit card and checks stolen from the Morton’s home. Read more about Morton’s case here. While we join with Michael Morton and his family in celebrating his freedom today, it’s also a somber day to reflect on the double injustice suffered by his family — and on a murder that possibly could have been prevented. We are committed to working to prevent wrongful convictions like Michael Morton’s in the future, and we’re honored to have you with us as a member of our community. Warm Regards, Maddy deLone Executive Director The Innocence Project Spread the Word Help spread the word about wrongful convictions by sharing this story via Email, Facebook and Twitter The Innocence Project 40 Worth St., Suite 701, New York, NY 10013 © 2011 The Innocence Project. All Rights Reserved.

Circulação e Acessos na Cisjordânia - Ficha informativa | OCHA Set 2011

Apesar de algumas melhorias na circulação dos palestinos entre os principais centros urbanos da Cisjordânia nos últimos anos, o sistema de restrições implementadas pelas autoridades israelitas (Poder ocupante) continuam a dificultar o acesso a meios de vida e serviços básicos, incluindo saúde, educação e abastecimento de água. 

Existem actualmente cerca de 70 aldeias e comunidades, com uma população total de mais de 200.000 seres humanos, obrigados a usar desvios que são, entre duas a cinco vezes, mais longos do que a rota directa para a cidade mais próxima, comprometendo o acesso aos serviços básicos.  

Algumas das principais artérias de tráfego foram transformadas em corredores rápidos utilizados pelos cidadãos israelitas para ir e vir todos os dias entre os colonatos e Israel, e, nalguns casos, entre diversas áreas dentro de Israel através da Cisjordânia.

From: UN OCHA oPt

Published: 2011-09-27     Movement and Access in the West Bank Fact Sheet | September 2011 Despite some improvement in the movement of Palestinian between the main West Bank urban centers in recent years, the system of restrictions implemented by the Israeli authorities continues to hinder the access to livelihoods and basic services, including health, education and water supply. There are currently some 70 villages and communities, with a combined population of over 200,000, compelled to use detours that are between two to five times longer than the direct route to the closest city, undermining access to basic services. Some of the main traffic arteries have been transformed into rapid corridors used by Israeli citizens to commute between the settlements and Israel, and, in some cases, between various areas within Israel via the West Bank. Arabic | English | Hebrew Send to friend

United Nations Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
Mac House
P.O.Box 38712
Jerusalemwww.ochaopt.org

---

Dia Mundial do Habitat 2011: "Quem carrega o peso da mudança climática? Os pobres, como de costume."

"Não há muito a comemorar no Dia Mundial do Habitat, quando cerca de um terço da população mundial continua a viver em bairros-de-lata e povoamentos não planeados, muitas vezes localizados em áreas expostas a graves riscos e perigos ambientais", afirmaram, ontem, 3 de Outubro,  os relatores especiais da ONU para a Habitação, Raquel Rolnik, e para as Pessoas Deslocadas Internamente, Chaloka Beyani.

"Ao observarmos o Dia Mundial do Habitat deste ano, apelamos aos Estados e organismos internacionais para reconhecer os povoamentos informais e os direitos humanos de seus habitantes, e para tratar das suas necessidades e vulnerabilidades como parte integrante e indispensável da redução do risco de desastres e dos esforços de recuperação."

Who bears the brunt of climate change? The poor, as usual – UN experts on housing and internal displacement

GENEVA (3 October 2011) – “Not much to celebrate on World Habitat Day, when close to a third of the global population continues to live in slums and unplanned settlements, often located in areas exposed to serious environmental risks and hazards,” said the UN Special Rapporteurs on Housing, Raquel Rolnik, and on Internally Displaced Persons, Chaloka Beyani.

“There is a dangerous combination of rapid urbanization, much of it to precarious, unplanned areas, and an increased frequency and intensity of climate change-induced disasters. This will likely affect many societies in a profound way,” warned the UN experts. “States and the international community can no longer afford to ignore the specific vulnerabilities of informal settlers to climate change-induced disasters, and the increasing risks they face.”

“Many poor urban populations live on sites unsuitable for housing, like mountain slopes, areas prone to flooding, sea surges or other environmental and weather-related risks,” they said on World Habitat Day, focused this year on ‘Climate Change and the Cities’. “Such locations are left to the poorest, who do not have access to other, safer, places.”

“Disasters magnify and deepen inequalities,” stressed the Special Rapporteurs. “People living in informal settlements are particularly affected by climate change induced disasters. After a disaster, they are more exposed to eviction and land grabbing as they lack legal protection and their rights to tenure are not recognized.”

Disasters also highlight the inadequate housing conditions and the precariousness of informal settlements. “From a human rights perspective, it is crucial to upgrade settlements and their grossly inadequate living conditions as part of disaster prevention and response”, said the UN experts.

Another worrying trend is the erosion of livelihoods, in part provoked by climate change, which is a key ‘push’ factor for the increase in rural to urban migration. “In situations of internal displacement, rapid assistance and protection is also necessary to prevent internally displaced persons from simply disappearing into urban slums and informal settlements”, they noted.

“In observing World Habitat Day this year, we call on States and international agencies to recognize informal settlements and the human rights of their inhabitants, and to address their unique needs and vulnerabilities as an integral and indispensable part of disaster risk reduction and recovery efforts.”

Os acólitos da AIPAC exigem o corte da ajuda dos EUA à Palestina

Um artigo interessantíssimo que vos recomendo.

Notas prévias: 

1. AIPAC - American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Comité de Assuntos Públicos Estados Unidos-Israel), um lobby sionista que age sobre a super-estrutura política dos EUA, através da corrupção e chantagem.

2. Os acólitos neste caso são 2 congressistas "democratas":

• Gary Ackerman [D-NY], democrata, membro da Subcomissão do Congresso para o Médio Oriente Médio e o Sul da Ásia;

• Nita Lowey (NY), a democrata que na subcomissão de afectação de verbas lida com a ajuda externa.

3. A preocupação de Lieberman e o seu desacordo com este corte é que parte desta ajuda financeira à Palestina segue directamente para Israel beneficiando a sua economia e ao que consta os negócios do próprio Liberman.

( Para que conste Lieberman foi formalmente acusado no passado dia 13 de Abril de 2011, pelo Ministério Público Israelita de fraude, lavagem de dinheiro, abuso de confiança e suborno de testemunhas.) 

AIPAC Acolytes Demand Palestine Aid Cutoff AIPAC acolytes in the House of Representatives are now demanding that the United States cut off aid to the Palestinians. The reason: Palestinians have sought redress for their grievances against Israel by turning to the United Nations rather than continuing fruitless negotiations with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. According to Haaretz, two influential members of Congress actually marched to the United Nations to tell the Palestinians "no soup for you." Rep. Gary Ackerman [D-NY], member of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, stressed that "There may need to be a total cutoff of all aid to the Palestinians for pursuing this course of action which is very dangerous and ill advised." "They should think twice, reverse course and get back to the negotiating table where Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu awaits them," he concluded. Ackerman was accompanied by Rep. Nita Lowey (NY), the ranking Democrat on the appropriations subcommittee  that handles foreign aid. Again, Haaretz: Congresswoman Nita Lowey called Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' actions a counter-productive publicity stunt, saying he is not interested in peace. "They [the Palestinians] have not been forced into this position, and the circumstances are not beyond their control. They have chosen to discontinue negotiations with Israel and pursue a counter-productive publicity stunt." she said. [...] Lowey suggested Abbas' actions warrant a strong U.S. response. "His action cross a line and should lead to a reevaluation of U.S. assistance for the Palestinian Authority," she said. The Palestinians currently receive $500 million from the United States, which the PA uses for a host of programs, including increasing it capacity to fight terrorism, paying government salaries, feeding its people and providing medical care. The following U.S. government chart shows precisely how the aid we provide is spent (needless to say, every dime comes under an exhaustive U.S. government audit): But Ackerman, Lowey and a host of their Democratic colleagues want to cut off the money. (Obviously, most Republicans do too, but since they oppose most foreign aid in general they are guilty only of the sin of greed, not hypocrisy.) It hardly needs saying that the Democrats who want to punish the Palestinian people for ignoring our request that they not go to the United Nations have never threatened to cut our $3.5 billion in aid to Israel by even a dollar. Israel has rejected repeated U.S. requests that it freeze settlements, ease the Gaza blockade and stop the abuse of Palestinians by settlers all without Congress murmuring a word of protest.  Even when General David Petraeus and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates warned that Israeli policies jeopardized U.S. interests (including our military personnel) in the region, Israel simply looked away and kept doing whatever it was doing. Congress most certainly didn't consider reducing aid; in fact, every budget proposal before Congress today exempts aid for Israel even while virtually all programs that benefit Americans are on the cutting block. But now Ackerman, Lowey and the rest want to eliminate aid to the Palestinians because are taking their case to the U.N. Please! Yes, the Palestinians are turning to the United Nations to achieve statehood, but Netanyahu has ignored repeated demands by the Obama administration to take action to facilitate negotiations. (Netanyahu's intransigence is the reason behind Abbas' U.N. push.) You didn't see Ackerman, Lowey and company criticize that, let alone suggest (heaven forbid) that aid to Israel be cut by even a nickel. In fact, both Ackerman and Lowey oppose linking aid to Israel to Israel's behavior. Ever. (This is AIPAC rule #1: No linkage.) Here is the craziest part of the Ackerman/Lowey initiative. Not only is the aid cut opposed by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, it is also opposed by the government of Israel. In fact, Avigdor Lieberman's Israel Foreign Ministry issued a report on September 18, which said: Israel calls for ongoing international support for the PA budget and development projects that will contribute to the growth of a vibrant private sector, which will provide the PA an expanded base for generating internal revenue. Israel maintains bilateral dialogues with the PA on a variety of matters, aiming to support the upgrade of Palestinian infrastructure in these areas, including: financial and customs services, water and sewage infrastructure, the legal system and the rule of law, the agriculture sector, and the electricity network. [...] These measures have been accompanied by intensified security coordination between the authorities on both sides, seeking greater security and improved institutional capacity. Israeli-Palestinian security coordination and the continuous relative security created have provided the necessary environment for business development and economic growth. So who supports cutting off aid?  Who is behind the Ackerman/Lowey effort? The answer is easy: AIPAC. It is supporting Senate and House resolutions that urge aid cutoffs and other punitive measures against the Palestinians. Not for the first time, AIPAC's cutouts in Congress are taking their cues from the lobby, not from their own government or even the Israelis. So much for their supposed devotion to Israel. After all, if it were Israel they were worried about (and not keeping AIPAC and its donors happy in an election year) they would follow Israel's lead, not AIPAC's. Of course, these usually progressive members of Congress don't believe a word they are saying. Ackerman, in particular, is so emphatically dovish in private that I laugh every time I read some hawkish statement from his office. And Lowey is pretty dovish herself. It's just that they have AIPAC breathing down their necks and it's AIPAC that directs the donors. Of course, none of this is surprising, though it is nausea-producing. Aren't the Palestinians people? Don't they have rights? And don't those rights include the right of self-determination in their own land, occupied for 44 years? Don't they have a say? According to our Congress, they don't. Here is what Mohammed Shtayyeh, a member of the Palestinian delegation to the U.N., told the The Independent: Mr. Shtayyeh suggested that the congressional block on the funds ... was particularly embarrassing for the US because even Israel was continuing, so far, to remit customs revenues it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority. He told the Maan news agency that the block had been imposed six weeks ago but he thought it was unlikely to be sustained. He added: "It is unbelievable that any parliament imposes sanctions on a people just because that people seeks self-determination and independence." Sad to say, it's not unbelievable. It is just the way the American legislature operates because U.S. legislators' primary, if not only, goal is financing their reelection campaigns. The Israeli-Palestinian issue, as played out in Washington by the president and Congress, is always about winning the next election. The good news is that as public opinion shifts (and it is shifting) donor attitudes will shift, too. Time is not on AIPAC's side. It reminds me of what the lobby likes to say about the Saudis: "What will they do when the oil runs out?" What will AIPAC do when a new generation moves to the fore and the money is directed elsewhere?   Foreign Policy Matters is updated daily. Check us out HERE.

Leonardo Boff discorda do aborto, mas defende legalização e recorda que o Brasil é laico e pluralista

É importante que na intervenção do Papa na política interna do Brasil acerca do tema do aborto, tenhamos presente este fato para não sermos vítimas de hipocrisia: nos catolicíssimos países como Portugal, Espanha, Bélgica, e na Itália dos Papas já se fez a descriminalização do aborto (Cada um pode entrar no Google e constatar isso).

Por Leonardo Boff*

Todos os apelos dos Papas em contra, não modificaram a opinião da população quando se fez um plebiscito. Ela viu bem: não se trata apenas do aspecto moral, a ser sempre considerado (somos contra o aborto), mas deve-se atender também a seu aspecto de saúde pública. No Brasil acada dois dias morre uma mulher por abortos mal feitos , como foi publicado recentemente em O Globo na primeira página. Diante de tal fato devemos chamar a polícia ou chamar médico? O espírito humanitário e a compaixão nos obriga a chamar o médico até para não sermos acusados de crime de omissão de socorro.

Curiosamente, a descriminalização do aborto nestes países fez com que o número de abortos diminuisse consideravelmente.

O organismo da ONU que cuida das Populações demonstrou há anos que quando as mulheres são educadas e conscientizadas, elas regulam a maternidade e o número de abortos cai enormente. Portanto, o dever do Estado e da sociedade é educar e conscientizar e não simplesmente condenar as mulheres que, sob pressões de toda ordem, praticam o aborto. É impiedade impor sofrimento a quem já sofre.

Excomunhão de Serra e FHC

Vale lembrar que o canon 1398 condena com a excomunhão automática quem pratica o aborto e cria as condições para que seja feito. Ora, foi sob FHC e sendo ministro da saude José Serra que foi introduzido o aborto na legislação, nas duas condições previstas em lei: em caso de estupro ou de risco de morte da mãe. Se alguém é fundamentalista e aplica este canon, tanto Serra quanto Fernando Henrique estariam excomungados. E Serra nem poderia ter comungado em Aparecida como ostensivamente o fez. Mas pessoalmene não o faria por achar esse cânon excessivamente rigoroso.

Mas Dom José Sobrinho, arcebispo do Recife o fez. Canonista e extremamente conservador, há dois anos atrás, quando se tratou de praticar aborto numa menina de 9 anos, engravidada pelo pai e que de forma nenhuma poderia dar a luz ao feto, por não ter os orgãos todos preparados, apelou para este canon 1398 e excomungou os medicos e todos os que participaram do ato. O Brasil ficou escandalizado por tanta insensibilidade e desumanidade. O Vaticano num artigo do Osservatore Romano criticou a atitude nada pastoral deste Arcebispo.

É bom que mantenhamos o espírito crítico face a esta inoportuna intervenção do Papa na política brasileira fazendo-se cabo eleitoral dos grupos mais conservadores. Mas o povo mais consciente tem, neste momento, dificuldade em aceitar a autoridade moral de um Papa que durante anos, como Cardeal, ocultou o crime de pedofilia de padres e de bispos.

Como cristãos escutaremos a voz do Papa, mas neste caso, em que uma eleição está em jogo, devemos recordar que o Estado brasileiro é laico e pluralista. Tanto o Vaticano e o Governo devem respeitar os termos do tratado que foi firmado recentemente onde se respeitam as autonomias e se enfatiza a não intervenção na política interna do pais, seja na do Vaticano seja na do Brasil.

Um abraço fraterno

Leonardo Boff

Fonte: informativo Rede de Cristãos