Wednesday, October 27, 2021

In Somalia, a rare female artist promotes images of peace

By HASSAN BARISE

Somali artist Sana Ashraf Sharif Muhsin, 21, sits with some of her paintings at her home in the capital Mogadishu, Somalia Friday, Oct. 15, 2021. Among the once-taboo professions emerging from Somalia's decades of conflict and Islamic extremism is the world of arts, and this 21-year-old female painter has faced more opposition than most.
(AP Photo/Farah Abdi Warsameh)


MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) — Among the once-taboo professions emerging from Somalia’s decades of conflict and Islamic extremism is the world of arts, and a 21-year-old female painter has faced more opposition than most.

A rare woman artist in the highly conservative Horn of Africa nation, Sana Ashraf Sharif Muhsin lives and works amid the rubble of her uncle’s building that was partially destroyed in Mogadishu’s years of war.

Despite the challenges that include the belief by some Muslims that Islam bars all representations of people, and the search for brushes and other materials for her work, she is optimistic.

“I love my work and believe that I can contribute to the rebuilding and pacifying of my country,” she said.

Sana stands out for breaking the gender barrier to enter a male-dominated profession, according to Abdi Mohamed Shu’ayb, a professor of arts at Somali National University. She is just one of two female artists he knows of in Somalia, with the other in the breakaway region of Somaliland.

And yet Sana is unique “because her artworks capture contemporary life in a positive way and seek to build reconciliation,” he said, calling her a national hero.

Sana, a civil engineering student, began drawing at the age of 8, following in the footsteps of her maternal uncle, Abdikarim Osman Addow, a well-known artist.

“I would use charcoal on all the walls of the house, drawing my vision of the world,” Sana said, laughing. More formal instruction followed, and she eventually assembled a book from her sketches of household items like a shoe or a jug of water.

But as her work brought her more public attention over the years, some tensions followed.





Somali artist Sana Ashraf Sharif Muhsin, 21, works on one of her paintings at her home in the capital Mogadishu, Somalia Friday, Oct. 15, 2021. Among the once-taboo professions emerging from Somalia's decades of conflict and Islamic extremism is the world of arts, and this 21-year-old female painter has faced more opposition than most. 
(AP Photo/Farah Abdi Warsameh)

“I fear for myself sometimes,” she said, and recalled a confrontation during a recent exhibition at the City University of Mogadishu. A male student began shouting “This is wrong!” and professors tried to calm him, explaining that art is an important part of the world.

Many people in Somalia don’t understand the arts, Sana said, and some even criticize them as disgusting. At exhibitions, she tries to make people understand that art is useful and “a weapon that can be used for many things.”

A teacher once challenged her skills by asking questions and requiring answers in the form of a drawing, she said.

“Everything that’s made is first drawn, and what we’re making is not the dress but something that changes your internal emotions,” Sana said. “Our paintings talk to the people.”

Her work at times explores the social issues roiling Somalia, including a painting of a soldier looking at the ruins of the country’s first parliament building. It reflects the current political clash between the opposition, she said, as national elections are delayed.

Another painting reflects abuses against vulnerable young women “which they cannot even express.” A third shows a woman in the bare-shouldered dress popular in Somalia decades ago before a stricter interpretation of Islam took hold and scholars urged women to wear the hijab.

But Sana also strives for beauty in her work, aware that “we have passed through 30 years of destruction, and the people only see bad things, having in their mind blood and destruction and explosions. ... If you Google Somalia, we don’t have beautiful pictures there, but ugly ones, so I’d like to change all that using my paintings.”

Sana said she hopes to gain further confidence in her work by exhibiting it more widely, beyond events in Somalia and neighboring Kenya.

But finding role models at home for her profession doesn’t come easily.

Sana named several Somali artists whose work she admires, but she knows of no other female ones like herself.

 

Opinion: It's well past time to free Julian Assange

A London court is set to rule on whether to overturn a decision not to extradite the WikiLeaks founder to the US. Rebecca Vincent from RSF argues if the UK and the US care about media freedom, Assange needs to be freed.

   

Julian Assange is still being held in London's high-security Belmarsh prison

Wednesday marks perhaps the most important momentyet in the case against WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange. From October 27-28, the High Court in London will consider the US government's appeal against the January decision opposing Assange's extradition to the US, where he would face trial on 18 charges that could land him in a supermax prison for the rest of his life — all for publishing information in the public interest.

The US government will be allowedto appeal on five specific grounds, following the High Court's decision to widen the scope of the appeal in a preliminary hearing on August 11, which now includes the US government's attempts to discredit a key witness who testified on the state of Assange's mental health, as well as other narrow, more technical grounds.

My organization, Reporters Without Borders (RSF), welcomed the decision opposing extradition, but criticized the substance of the ruling, which was based only on mental health grounds. We share the serious concerns about Assange's mental health, and for this reason have stated that his extradition to the US is a possible matter of life or death.

However, the court failed to take a strong position in favor of journalism and press freedom, which we fear leaves the door open to future similar prosecutions against publishers, journalists and sources.

Rebecca Vincent

Rebecca Vincent is director of international campaigns at RSF

Targeted for his contribution to journalism

We fully believe that Assange has been targeted for his contributions to journalism, as WikiLeaks' publication of thousands of leaked classified documents - the basis of the US charges - informed extensive public interest reporting by media around the world, exposing war crimes and human rights violations.

We continue to call for the charges against Assange to be dropped, and for him to be immediately released and certainly not extradited to the US. Assange's extradition and prosecution would have severe and long-lasting implications for journalism and press freedom around the world; the impact simply cannot be understated.

RSF is the only nongovernmental organization (NGO) that has monitored the entire extradition proceedings to date, but it has not been easy, due to severe restrictions on observation imposed by the court.

We were hoping to once again be present in court to monitor the historic extradition appeal hearing and analyze and report on proceedings. However, shortly before publication - the morning of the hearing - we were still fighting for court access.

 This, unfortunately, is par for the course in a case in which, as I keep repeating, nothing is normal.

During the first-instance proceedings - held for a week in February 2020 and a full four weeks in September 2020, with the decision given in a January 4 hearing - the district judge refused to recognize professional NGO observers as having any role different to the public.


Assange is wanted in the US on espionage charges and for leaking classified documents

It left us having to fight for very few spaces in the public gallery, which involved queuing for several hours each morning to even get into court, with a range of other ludicrous issues further impacting our ability to monitor — ranging from additional seats being held back for mysterious VIPs who never materialized, to a broken buzzing lighting fixture making it difficult to even hear proceedings.

Barriers to observation in UK courts

Even with COVID restrictions in place, I have been allowed into court in Malta to monitor proceedings connected to the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, and in Turkey to monitor the murder trial of Saudi columnist Jamal Khashoggi, without any access issues.

It is only in the UK that I have faced such extensive and constantly evolving barriers to observation — an experience shared by my RSF colleagues from other country offices who have also been involved in our monitoring efforts.

These access issues, along with the UK's continued detention of Assange in the high-security Belmarsh prison in London for no reason other than the fact that the US is pursuing its appeal, are only serving to tarnish the UK's international reputation.

If the UK government means what it says in its stated commitment to championing media freedom globally, it must lead by example, which it is failing spectacularly to do in this case.

US, UK should champion press freedom

Continuing to pursue the legal case against Assange also serves as a thorn in the side of the US government at a time when the Biden administration is actively seeking to reclaim a role for the US as an international leader on human rights and freedom of expression.


Protesters believe the UK and the US are compromising their position as role models for press freedom

RSF recently joined a coalition of 25 press freedom, civil liberties and international human rights organizations in calling again on the US Department of Justice to drop the charges and close the case once and for all.

It is our hope that this week's proceedings will serve as the end of the decadelong persecution of Julian Assange, and prevent further harm to his well-being, but also to journalism and press freedom globally.

For as long as this continues, a clear and damaging signal is being sent to those who wish to silence critical reporting around the world, that the very states who are looked to as standard-setters are also capable of such acts themselves. It's well past time to put a stop to this travesty.

Rebecca Vincent is director of international campaigns for Reporters Without Borders, known internationally by its French name, Reporters sans Frontieres (RSF).

Assange supporters gather in London as US challenges extradition block in UK court

Issued on: 27/10/2021 - 



The US government will on Wednesday appeal against a British judge's decision to block the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to face trial for publishing military secrets. At a two-day hearing, Washington will ask the High Court to overturn District Judge Vanessa Baraitser's January ruling that Assange is a serious suicide threat if extradited across the Atlantic. FRANCE 24's Bénédicte Paviot reports from London.

Hero or criminal? Who is Julian Assange and what does he stand for

Issued on: 27/10/2021 - 

Video by: Camille NEDELEC

Lawyers for the United States will launch a fresh attempt on Wednesday to have Julian Assange extradited from Britain, arguing that concerns around the WikiLeaks founder's mental health should not prevent him from facing US justice. The 50-year-old Australian is wanted in the United States on 18 criminal charges, including breaking a spying law, after his group published thousands of secret classified files and diplomatic cables in 2010.

Julian Assange: US pursues extradition at UK High Court

Washington has appealed a ruling that kept WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange from being sent to the US, where he faces espionage charges and potentially a lifetime in prison.

    

Supporters of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange say his charges are politically motivated

The US government on Wednesday launched an appeal against a British judge's decision to block the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Washington is seeking to bring Assange to the US to face trial for publishing military secrets.

Why is the Assange case back in court now?

UK District Judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled against extradition in January, after determining that it was unclear that the US would be able to ensure Assange's safety in its prison system, which she said was known for "harsh conditions."

She rejected US experts' testimony that Assange would be protected from self-harm, noting that others such as disgraced US financier Jeffrey Epstein had managed to kill themselves while in custody.

Washington expressed "extreme disappointment" with Baraitser's decision, saying the judge "didn't appreciate the weight" of expert evidence that Assange was not at risk of suicide. 

The US argued Baraitser was "misled" by Assange's psychiatric expert Michael Kopelman, who they claim concealed information such as that his client had fathered children while holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

Washington is now asking the UK's High Court to overturn the ruling during the new two-day hearing.

US says Assange would not face supermax jail

The US argued on Wednesday that Assange would not be held at a federal supermax prison.

Lawyer James Lewis, representing the US government, said Asssange would not be held either before or after his trial at the notorious prison.

He also said Assange "will receive any such clinical and psychological treatment as is recommended" and that he would eventually be able to apply for a prisoner transfer to his native Australia.

"There has never been a previous breach of an assurance," Lewis argued.

But Assange's team said those assurances could not entirely rule out the chance of him being detained at the facility, at a "comparable" federal prison or a state-level supermax jail. They also argued that Australia had not agreed to take him, and even if they did, the extradition process could take a decade, during which time he would be held in solitary confinement.

The US also argued that Assange did not meet the threshold of being so ill that he cannot resist harming himself.

Lewis said Assange did "not even come close to having an illness of this degree."

Assange's lawyers responded, accusing US lawyers of seeking to "minimize the severity of Mr Assange's mental disorder and suicide risk."

What does the US accuse Assange of?

The WIkiLeaks founder is wanted in the US on charges relating to the 2010 release by WikiLeaks of 500,000 secret files detailing information about the Afghanistan and Iraq military campaigns.

Assange was indicted for violating the US espionage act and for hacking. That was based on the alleged assistance he provided former military intelligence officer Chelsea Manning, who obtained the documents from secure military computer systems.

He faces a maximum sentence of 175 years in jail for the alleged crimes.

The 50-year-old Australian national had spent seven years inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faced allegations of sexual assault.

Ecuador had granted him citizenship to bolster his stay at the embassy but after several years, relations with Ecuadorian authorities became strained

Even though the Swedish charges were dropped, he was ultimately removed from the embassy and arrested in 2019 in the UK on charges of skipping bail.

Although his extradition has been blocked, he has been denied bail pending the outcome of the US appeal, after being considered a flight risk.

Rights groups on the Assange case

Journalism organizations and human rights groups have called on US authorities to drop the charges against Assange and urged British authorities to release him immediately.

Wikileaks supporters say claims the CIA spied on Assange during his stay at the embassy suggest he will not receive a fair trial.

Amnesty International highlighted an investigation by Yahoo News revealing that US security services considered kidnapping or killing Assange when he was living in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

Secretary-General Agnes Callamard said the report had "cast even more doubt on the reliability of US promises and further expose the political motivation behind this case." 

"It is a damning indictment that nearly 20 years on, virtually no one responsible for alleged US war crimes committed in the course of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars has been held accountable, let alone prosecuted, and yet a publisher who exposed such crimes is potentially facing a lifetime in jail," she added.

US says Assange could go to Australian prison if convicted
By JILL LAWLESS

1 of 15
A woman wears a Free Assange badge as supporters of Julian Assange stage a demonstration outside the High Court in London, Wednesday, Oct. 27, 2021. The U.S. government is scheduled to ask Britain's High Court to overturn a judge's decision that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should not be sent to the United States to face espionage charges. A lower court judge refused extradition in January on health grounds, saying Assange was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions.
 (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)

LONDON (AP) — U.S. authorities launched a new battle on Wednesday to make Julian Assange face American justice, telling British judges that if they agree to extradite the WikiLeaks founder on espionage charges, he could serve any U.S. prison sentence he receives in his native Australia.

In January, a lower U.K. court refused a U.S. request to extradite Assange over WikiLeaks’ publication of secret American military documents a decade ago. District Judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled that Assange, who has spent years in hiding and in British prisons as he fights extradition, was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions.

Appealing against that decision at the High Court in London, an attorney for the U.S. government on Wednesday denied that Assange’s mental health was too fragile to withstand the U.S. judicial system. Lawyer James Lewis said Assange “has no history of serious and enduring mental illness” and does not meet the threshold of being so ill that he cannot resist harming himself.

U.S. prosecutors have indicted Assange on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents. The charges carry a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison, although Lewis said “the longest sentence ever imposed for this offense is 63 months.”

Lewis said American authorities had promised that Assange would not be held before trial in a top-security “Supermax” prison or subjected to strict isolation conditions, and if convicted would be allowed to serve his sentence in Australia. Lewis said the assurances “are binding on the United States.”

“Once there is an assurance of appropriate medical care, once it is clear he will be repatriated to Australia to serve any sentence, then we can safely say the district judge would not have decided the relevant question in the way that she did,” he said.

The U.S. also says a key defense witness, neuropsychiatrist Michael Kopelman, misled the previous judge by omitting to mention that Stella Moris, a member of WikiLeaks’ legal team, was also Assange’s partner and had two children with him. Lewis said that information was “a highly relevant factor to the question of likelihood to suicide.”

Assange’s lawyer, Edward Fitzgerald, accused U.S. lawyers of seeking to “minimize the severity of Mr Assange’s mental disorder and suicide risk.”

Fitzgerald said in a written submission that Australia has not yet agreed to take Assange if he is convicted. Even if Australia did agree, Fitzgerald said the U.S. legal process could take a decade, “during which Mr. Assange will remain detained in extreme isolation in a U.S. prison.”

Assange, who is being held at London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison, had been expected to attend the two-day hearing by video link, but Fitzgerald said Assange had been put on a high dose of medication and “doesn’t feel able to attend.”

Assange later appeared on the video link at times, seated at a table in a prison room wearing a black face mask.

Since WikiLeaks began publishing classified documents more than a decade ago, Assange has become a flashpoint figure. Some see him as a dangerous secret-spiller who endangered the lives of informers and others who helped the U.S. in war zones. Others say WikiLeaks shone a light on official malfeasance that governments would like to keep secret.

American prosecutors say Assange unlawfully helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published. Lawyers for Assange argue that he was acting as a journalist and is entitled to First Amendment freedom of speech protections for publishing documents that exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Several dozen pro-Assange protesters held a boisterous rally outside London’s neo-Gothic Royal Courts of Justice on Wednesday, calling the prosecution politically motivated. They urged U.S. President Joe Biden to drop the legal proceedings, which were begun under his predecessor, Donald Trump.

The demonstrators included Chinese dissident artist Ai Weiwei, who said Assange’s case “relates to our society, it relates to our freedom of expression, it relates to our individual human rights, and we have to watch the government.”

WikiLeaks supporters say testimony from witnesses during the extradition hearing that Assange was spied on while in Ecuador’s embassy in London by a Spanish security firm at the behest of the CIA — and that there was even talk of abducting or killing him — undermines U.S. claims he will be treated fairly.

The two justices hearing the appeal — one is England’s most senior judge, Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett — are not expected to give their ruling for several weeks. The losing side could seek to appeal to the U.K. Supreme Court.

Assange, 50, has been in prison since he was arrested in April 2019 for skipping bail during a separate legal battle. Before that he spent seven years holed up inside Ecuador’s London embassy, where he fled in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed. The judge who blocked extradition in January ordered that he must stay in custody during any U.S. appeal, ruling that the Australian citizen “has an incentive to abscond” if he is freed.

Outside court, Moris said it was “completely unthinkable that the U.K. courts could agree” to extradition.

“I hope the courts will end this nightmare, that Julian is able to come home soon and that wise heads prevail,” she said.

___

Associated Press writer David Keyton contributed.


US to appeal British judge's decision to block Assange extradition


Issued on: 27/10/2021 -

The US is appealing against a decision by a UK court not to extradite the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange © Justin Tallis, AFP

Text by: NEWS WIRES

The US government will on Wednesday appeal against a British judge's decision to block the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to face trial for publishing military secrets.

At a two-day hearing, Washington will ask the High Court to overturn District Judge Vanessa Baraitser's January ruling that Assange is a serious suicide threat if extradited across the Atlantic.

The United States has said it was "extremely disappointed" at her decision, arguing the judge "didn't appreciate the weight" of expert evidence that said Assange was not at risk of suicide.

Its lawyers have argued Baraitser was "misled" in evidence from Assange's psychiatric expert Michael Kopelman, who they claim concealed things such as that his client had fathered children while holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

During a preliminary hearing in August, the High Court granted the US government's request to appeal against the ruling on five grounds.

Whatever the court's two senior judges decide, months if not years of further legal wrangling loom.

If the US appeal is successful, the case will be sent back to a lower court for a new decision. And whoever loses can also ask for permission for a further, final appeal to the UK's Supreme Court.

Indicted


Assange, 50, was arrested in Britain in 2019 for jumping bail after spending seven years inside the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden where he faced allegations of sexual assault. These were later dropped.

Despite his extradition being blocked, he has been denied bail pending the outcome of the US appeal, amid fears he would abscond.

He is being held at London's high-security Belmarsh Prison, which his fiancee Stella Moris -- a former member of his legal team who is the mother of his two young boys -- this week branded "a terrible environment".

Assange is wanted in Washington to face 18 charges relating to the 2010 release by WikiLeaks of 500,000 secret files detailing aspects of military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.

He has been indicted for violating the US espionage act and for hacking, based on the alleged assistance he provided former military intelligence officer Chelsea Manning in obtaining the documents from secure military computer systems.

If convicted in the US, he faces a maximum sentence of 175 years in jail.

Baraitser had said it was not clear that Washington would be able to ensure his safety in US prisons known for "harsh conditions" while he awaited trial.

She rejected US experts' testimony that Assange would be protected from self-harm, noting that others such as disgraced US financier Jeffrey Epstein had managed to kill themselves in custody.

'Not survive'


Australian national Assange has a vocal campaign of supporters, led by Moris and his legal team.

Moris said on Monday that she had visited Assange in prison last weekend and was shocked by how thin he looked.

"He was looking very unwell," she said. "The point was that Julian would not survive extradition, that was the conclusion of the judge."

Legal expert Carl Tobias, from the University of Richmond in Virginia, said there was "some chance" of the US winning its appeal.

"The US may be able to convince the High Court that Baraitser assigned too much weight" to the Kopelman report, he told AFP.

"However, even if the High Court agrees with the US contention that she accorded too substantial weight to the expert report, that may not be sufficient to warrant overruling her entire decision," he added.

Advocacy group Reporters Without Borders has urged President Joe Biden to drop the case, arguing the WikiLeaks founder has been "targeted for his contributions to public-interest reporting".

Assange sought, but failed, to obtain a pardon from Biden's predecessor Donald Trump, whose 2016 election campaign benefited from WikiLeaks' release of materials that damaged his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.

(AFP)




America 'on fire': Facebook watched as Trump ignited hate


By AMANDA SEITZ

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The reports of hateful and violent posts on Facebook started pouring in on the night of May 28 last year, soon after then-President Donald Trump sent a warning on social media that looters in Minneapolis would be shot.

It had been three days since Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kneeled on the neck of George Floyd for more than eight minutes until the 46-year-old Black man lost consciousness, showing no signs of life. A video taken by a bystander had been viewed millions of times online. Protests had taken over Minnesota’s largest city and would soon spread throughout cities across America.

But it wasn’t until after Trump posted about Floyd’s death that the reports of violence and hate speech increased “rapidly” on Facebook across the country, an internal company analysis of the ex-president’s social media post reveals.

“These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd and I won’t let that happen,” Trump wrote at 9:53 a.m. on May 28 from his Twitter and Facebook accounts. “Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts the shooting starts!”

The former president has since been suspended from both Twitter and Facebook.

Leaked Facebook documents provide a first-hand look at how Trump’s social media posts ignited more anger in an already deeply divided country that was eventually lit “on fire” with reports of hate speech and violence across the platform. Facebook’s own internal, automated controls, meant to catch posts that violate rules, predicted with almost 90% certainty that Trump’s message broke the tech company’s rules against inciting violence.

Yet, the tech giant didn’t take any action on Trump’s message.

Offline, the next day, protests — some of which turned violent — engulfed nearly every U.S. city, big and small.

“When people look back at the role Facebook played, they won’t say Facebook caused it, but Facebook was certainly the megaphone,” said Lainer Holt, a communications professor at Ohio State University. “I don’t think there’s any way they can get out of saying that they exacerbated the situation.”

Social media rival Twitter, meanwhile, responded quickly at the time by covering Trump’s tweet with a warning and prohibiting users from sharing it any further.

Facebook’s internal discussions were revealed in disclosures made to the Securities and Exchange Commission and provided to Congress in redacted form by former Facebook employee-turned-whistleblower Frances Haugen’s legal counsel. The redacted versions received by Congress were obtained by a consortium of news organizations, including The Associated Press.

The Wall Street Journal previously reported that Trump was one of many high-profile users, including politicians and celebrities, exempted from some or all of the company’s normal enforcement policies.

Hate speech and violence reports had been mostly limited to the Minneapolis region after Floyd’s death, the documents reveal.

In this June 3, 2020, file photo, a demonstrator stares at a National Guard soldier as protests continue over the death of George Floyd, near the White House in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

“However, after Trump’s post on May 28, situations really escalated across the country,” according to the memo, published on June 5 of last year.

The internal analysis shows a five-fold increase in violence reports on Facebook, while complaints of hate speech tripled in the days following Trump’s post. Reports of false news on the platform doubled. Reshares of Trump’s message generated a “substantial amount of hateful and violent comments,” many of which Facebook worked to remove. Some of those comments included calls to “start shooting these thugs” and “f—- the white.”

By June 2, “we can see clearly that the entire country was basically ‘on fire,’” a Facebook employee wrote of the increase in hate speech and violence reports in the June 5 memo.

Facebook says it’s impossible to separate how many of the hate speech reports were driven by Trump’s post itself or the controversy over Floyd’s death.

In this May 30, 2020, file photo, President Donald Trump speaks with members of the press on the South Lawn of the White House, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)

“This spike in user reports resulted from a critical moment in history for the racial justice movement — not from a single Donald Trump post about it,” a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement. “Facebook often reflects what’s happening in society and the only way to prevent spikes in user reports during these moments is to not allow them to be discussed on our platform at all, which is something we would never do.”

But the internal findings also raise questions about public statements Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg made last year as he defended his decision to leave Trump’s post untouched.

On May 29, for example, Zuckerberg said the company looked closely to see if Trump’s words broke any of its policies and concluded that they did not. Zuckerberg also said he left the post up because it warned people of Trump’s plan to deploy troops.

In this May 28, 2020, file photo, protesters and residents watch as police in riot gear walk down a residential street, in St. Paul, Minn. (AP Photo/John Minchillo, File)

“I know many people are upset that we’ve left the President’s posts up, but our position is that we should enable as much expression as possible unless it will cause imminent risk of specific harms or dangers spelled out in clear policies,” Zuckerberg wrote on his Facebook account the night of May 29, as protests erupted around the country.

Yet, Facebook’s own automated enforcement controls determined the post likely did break the rules.

“Our violence and incitement classifier was almost 90% certain that this (Trump) post violated Facebook’s ... policy,” the June 5 analysis reads.

That contradicts conversations Zuckerberg had with civil rights leaders last year to quell concerns that Trump’s post was a specific threat to Black people protesting Floyd’s death, said Rashad Robinson, the president of Color of Change, a civil rights advocacy group. The group also spearheaded a boycott of Facebook in the weeks following Trump’s post.

“To be clear, I had a direct argument with Zuckerberg days after that post where he gaslit me and he specifically pushed back on any notion that this violated their rules,” Robinson said in an interview with the AP last week.

In this April 11, 2018, file photo, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg takes a drink of water as he testifies before a House Energy and Commerce hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File)

A Facebook spokesperson said that its internal controls do not always correctly predict when a post has violated rules and that human review, which was done in the case of Trump’s post, is more accurate.

To curb the ex-president’s ability to stoke hateful reactions on its platform, Facebook employees suggested last year that the company limit reshares on similar posts that may violate Facebook’s rules in the future.

But Trump continued to use his Facebook account, which more than 32 million follow, to fire up his supporters throughout much of the remainder of his presidency. In the days leading up to a deadly siege in Washington on Jan. 6, Trump regularly promoted false claims that widespread voter fraud caused him to lose the White House, spurring hundreds of his fans to storm the U.S. Capitol and demand the results of a fair election be overturned.

It wasn’t until after the Capitol riot, and as Trump was on his way out of the White House, that Facebook pulled him off the platform in January, announcing his account would be suspended until at least 2023.

There’s a reason Facebook waited so long to take any action, said Jennifer Mercieca, a professor at Texas A&M University who closely studied the former president’s rhetoric.

“Facebook really benefited from Trump and Trump’s ability to draw attention and engagement through outrage,” Mercieca said. “They wanted Trump to keep going on.”


In this June 20, 2020, file photo, President Donald Trump arrives on stage to speak at a campaign rally at the BOK Center, in Tulsa, Okla. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)
___

See full coverage of the “The Facebook Papers” here: https://apnews.com/hub/the-facebook-papers


'Facebook Papers': Critics argue it's time to regulate the social media giant

Issued on: 27/10/2021 - 

Video by:Julia Sieger

Facebook was hit Monday by scathing reports from at least a dozen US news outlets based on internal documents. The social media giant has faced a storm of criticism after former employee Frances Haugen leaked internal studies showing the company knew of potential harm stoked by its sites, prompting US lawmakers' to renew a push for regulation. FRANCE 24's Tech Editor Julia Sieger tells us more.




PENTACOSTAL COLONIALISM
Ghana: Proposed bill threatens homosexuals with long prison terms


A rally was organised in New York against a controversial bill being proposed in Ghana's parliament that would make identifying as LGBTQIA or an ally a criminal offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. © AP

Issued on: 27/10/2021 

Text by: Bahar MAKOOI


Ghana's parliament began considering a bill that would criminalise homosexuality and make advocating for LGBT people a crime. Human rights activists have sounded the alarm at plans to prosecute the LGBT community in a country already experiencing a wave of homophobia.

The Ghanaian NGO Interfaith Diversity Network of West Africa (IDNOWA) has called the bill inhumane. “If this law is passed, all conversations with journalists will be banned and our very existence will be threatened,” an IDNOWA activist told FRANCE 24 by phone.

On Tuesday, Ghana’s parliament started studying the controversial draft legislation aimed at heavily penalising homosexuality, which is already prohibited in the country. If passed, the new bill would allow for up to 10 years in prison for LGBT people, penalise those defending them as well as penalise the publication of information that could be considered as encouraging homosexuality.

The bill also promotes gay “conversion therapy”, a controversial practice used in several countries on the African continent and parts of the United States. Sam Nartey George, a member of parliament from the opposition National Democratic Congress, is the architect of the draft bill, which was supported by seven other MPs when it was tabled in August. George described homosexuality as a “perversion”. “We need to protect our children who are the target of these LGBTQ+ people, who make them believe that this is a new way of life,” he told AFP.

Unprecedented wave of homophobia


According to several associations defending LGBT rights on the African continent, Ghana has seen an unprecedented wave of homophobia over the past several years.

In February, police evicted those working the reception desk at LGBT+ Rights Ghana, one of the few associations providing assistance to the LGBT people, barely a month after it opened.

Since then, the community has been the target of violent attacks by politicians, journalists and religious leaders in the Ghanaian media and on social networks.

“Homosexuals are not going to suddenly disappear with the appearance of a new law. It’s just that they'll be even more likely to hide,” Alexandre Marcel, director of the Idaho France Committee rights group, told FRANCE 24.

The Paris-based NGO was recently contacted by a 24-year-old Ghanaian who was kicked out of the family home after his uncle caught him with another man. “I haven't heard from him in three weeks,” Marcel said.

His is not an isolated case. In Ghana, a law dating from the colonial era prohibits homosexual relations. However, no one has ever been prosecuted under the law. Yet many LGBT people face discrimination and violence, often within the family.

The Guardian reported that 21 people were arrested in the city of Ho in March during a training session for paralegals and other professionals who support vulnerable groups. While they were released on bail, many had to flee to safehouses, fearing for their safety. Some were even disowned by family members and lost their jobs.

“More and more LGBT people have had to flee their homes and communities, or are being targeted by attacks. They are under intense pressure. The damage is also psychological,” IDNOWA activists lamented. The NGO believes that many cases go unnoticed because those facing discrimination do not have access to the Internet or the media.

The rejection of LGBT people in Ghana is linked to the conservatism of its highly religious society. According to a 2014 poll, 90 percent of Ghanaians support establishing law that criminalises same-sex relationships.

“But parliamentarians should not pass this law just because public opinion is in favour,” the IDNOWA activists said. They consider the legislation “harmful” to Ghanaian society as a whole.

“We hope that our elected representatives will perceive the danger contained in this law and that there will at least be amendments,” the NGO said, adding it does not understand this “relentlessness” when homosexuality is already prohibited.

According to Marcel, the reasons behind the persecution are to be found among religious leaders, especially the Ghanaian Catholic bishops. “They bear responsibility for this hate speech against homosexuals. How can the pope accept that his bishops support such a law?” Marcel asks.

IDNOWA emphasised that this type of homophobia has been “imported”, saying animosity toward LGBT people in Ghana was fuelled by the 2019 conference of the World Congress of Families, a US-based anti-LGBTQ organisation with strong ties to the religious right.

Rights organisations such as Human Rights Watch had previously warned of the dangers of this group's hateful propaganda in several African countries.

“These clerics are trying to impose views that do not reflect our diversity and rich cultural heritage. Parliamentarians should not be guided by their religious ideas. The agenda of our country should not be dictated by religion,” the IDNOWA activists said.

They are particularly concerned that if Ghana passes this anti-LGBT law other West African countries may follow suit.

The Ghanaian presidency is taking a cautious approach to the issue. Amid an economic crisis, the head of state, Nana Akufo-Addo – who would like to attract investments from African-Americans and the Ghanaian diaspora – wants to maintain an image of an open and tolerant country.

But that image may be undermined by this bill, which many believe has a good chance of getting passed.

This article was translated from the original in French.



EU climate chief: 'We need to be more ambitious'

The EU's chief COP26 negotiator Frans Timmermans spoke to DW ahead of climate talks in Glasgow. He called for all world leaders to be present, more ambitious climate policies and complete financing for poorer nations.

European Union climate chief Frans Timmermans told DW that he would have preferred to have all leaders present at the COP26, the landmark climate summit due to take place in Glasgow from October 31.

The presidents of Russia and China are among those intending or likely to send envoys to the conference instead of attending in person. Critics fear that other leaders may fail to strike a meaningful deal for the planet without them. 

"Of course, it would have been better to have everybody there present," European Commission Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans told DW's Marina Strauss in Brussels.

"But what is more important than the presence of the leaders is their commitment to tackling the climate crisis, their commitment to reducing their emissions," he said. "And all these leaders have made relatively bold statements in the last couple of months. So let's see what happens."

"It's the commitments that count, and not only the presence."


The COP26 climate summit is viewed as a make-or-break moment for the planet

Clarity on China's climate plans

Timmermans, who will act as the European Union's chief negotiator at the COP26, is due to hold discussions with China's special envoy on climate change in London on Wednesday.  

"I hope to get more clarity on China's plans," Timmermans said ahead of the meeting. "I hope that we can exchange information on the three main topics of the discussion — which is the ambition to reduce emissions, climate finance, and everything pertaining to the rules of the game.

"So I hope we can clarify China's situation — I'll certainly clarify the EU's situation, and hopefully together we can create the basis for a successful outcome at COP."


China has announced it plans to be carbon neutral by 2030, among the fastest timelines in the world

More action on climate finance

Plans published by the United Kingdom government on Tuesday suggest a pledge by developed countries to deliver $100 billion (€86.2 billion) per year in climate finance to poorer nations will not be fulfilled until 2023. The initial aim was to meet that target by 2020.

"I would have liked to see this happen earlier, but we will get there," Timmermans said. 

Pressed on whether Europe has let developing countries down, he defended the bloc's record.

"I think the EU has not failed," he said. "The EU is one of the major contributors to the financing, even beyond the percentage we have in the world economy. So the EU is the ally of the developing world."

Richer countries 'cannot ask more' without providing financing

However, Timmermans had a stark warning: "I have to be very, very clear: If we are not able to provide that financing, we cannot in all earnest ask of developing countries to do more."

"They need to be able to adapt and to mitigate their emissions, but especially to adapt to these new conditions, and they can't afford to pay for that all themselves. So we really need the $100 billion to make sure we assist the developing world do what is necessary for their population," he said.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has previously called out other countries for leaving a "gaping hole" in climate financing for poorer states, and urged the United States to "step up."

World 'not ambitious enough' on climate policies

United Nations (UN) report published Tuesday said countries' existing pledges were not enough to avoid catastrophic climate change and the "endless suffering" this would entail. 

Without urgent action, global temperatures could rise 2.7 degrees Celsius (4.86 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of this century, the report warned. 

"We're not ambitious enough," Timmermans said. "So at COP, we need to try and find a consensus that will take us to a situation where we stay well below 2 degrees [Celsius]."

"We need to do more. We need to be more ambitious."


A new report shows countries' current climate changes are insufficient

 UN urges G20 to ensure finance sector's

 climate pledges are credible

Issued on: 27/10/2021 - 


Angelita Imperio, a member of River Warriors, rakes through washed up trash from the heavily polluted Pasig River, at Baseco, Manila, Philippines, June 18, 2021. The "River Warriors" is a group of volunteers founded over a decade ago whose sole purpose was to pick up garbage in and around Manila's Pasig River. © Eloisa Lopez, Reuters

Text by: NEWS WIRES

The United Nations called on Wednesday for the world's biggest economies to ensure net zero commitments made by financial institutions were robust, backed by science and ended financing for new fossil fuel projects.

The call is the first time the UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) has directly given guidance to the G20 on the issue and comes days before the start of crunch climate talks in Glasgow, Scotland.

In a report for the G20 as it meets ahead of the talks, UNEP FI laid out 11 recommendations for policymakers as they consider how best to oversee the industry efforts to help cut greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century.

There are concerns some of the current pledges are too weak after a landmark report from a U.N. climate panel in August that issued a "code red for humanity", urging faster action from countries to curtail emissions.

"In the last two years we've just seen an incredible explosion of net-zero commitments," Jesica Andrews, investment lead at the UN EPFI, told Reuters.

"This is really the first time we've done a state of the art assessment and put forward really concrete recommendations on how a financial institution, specifically, sets a net-zero target that is credible."

Against that backdrop, the UNEP FI said financial institutions needed to align with a science-based scenario or scenarios and be transparent about which ones were used.

"What is challenging is how you define that science, and that's what this paper does; it lays out how the science should be applied to make sure that commitment is credible," Andrews said.

"If policymakers want to get behind this and they want to see more comparability, this is what we need to be asking financial institutions to do," she added.

Once the scenario was set, firms needed to begin aligning lending as soon as possible to have any hope of hitting the global target of capping global warming at no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius.

"This would include, for example, the immediate cessation of any new fossil fuel investments, and rapid decommissioning of remaining fossil fuel production as indicated by the scenarios," the report said.

Institutions should also set, ideally, five-year targets and report annually on progress, applying appropriate pathways to net zero that incentivise their underlying companies to act.

"We have a lot of portfolio level targets, a lot of commitments to net zero at the high level, but (they are) not drawing that down to the sector level, which is what's going to make a difference in the real economy," Andrews said.

(REUTERS)