Friday, November 13, 2009

Wikinews interviewed author Marc Headley about his new book Blown for Good, and asked him about life inside the international headquarters of Scientology known as “Gold Base“, located in Gilman Hot Springs near Hemet, California. Headley joined the organization at age seven when his mother became a member, and worked at Scientology’s international management headquarters for several years before leaving in 2005.

Friday, November 6, 2009

After two days of debate, the United Nations General Assembly has overwhelmingly endorsed a report from the Human Rights Council calling for domestic investigations into alleged war crimes committed by both Israel’s military and Palestinian armed forces during the Gaza conflict that began last December.

The controversial report concluded that Israel used disproportionate force in the war, deliberately targeted Gaza civilians, used them as human shields, and destroyed civilian infrastructure. One of the 31 chapters of the report discussed crimes by Hamas for firing rockets into Israeli towns.

The final vote was 114 in favor, 18 against and 44 abstentions. Strong support came from the Arab and non-aligned countries, many of whom co-sponsored the draft resolution.

Palestinian Ambassador Riyad Mansour welcomed the vote, saying the implementation of Justice Richard Goldstone’s report will now begin in stages.

Ali Treki, the General Assembly president, called the vote “an important declaration against impunity. It is a call for justice and accountability”. Without justice, there can be no progress towards peace. A human being should be treated as a human being, regardless of his or her religion, race or nationality,” he said.

“In three months we will come back to General Assembly to consider the report of the Secretary-General for further action, including in all parts of the United Nations, including in the Security Council,” said Riyad Mansour, a Palestinian-American diplomat.

The non-binding resolution requests the secretary-general report to the General Assembly within three months on the implementation of the resolution, with a view to considering further action, if necessary.

Israel’s deputy ambassador to the UN, Daniel Cameron said that the resolution, “endorses and legitimizes a deeply flawed, one-sided and prejudiced report of the discredited Human Rights Council and its politicised work that bends both fact and law”.

Of the countries abstaining or voting no, several said that although they agreed with the essence of the resolution – that the parties should conduct their own independent, credible investigations into alleged violations as called for in the Goldstone report – they could not vote in favor because they had difficulty with two specific items in the resolution.

Another point of some contention is that the resolution leaves the door open for future action in the UN Security Council. The Palestinians have made clear they plan to pursue that option, but most of the council’s five permanent members opposed the idea, saying the right forum for the Goldstone report is in the Human Rights Council in Geneva, where it started.

The United States was the only permanent Security Council member to vote against the resolution. Deputy Ambassador Alejandro Wolff said that although it opposed the resolution, the US strongly supported accountability for human rights and humanitarian law violations relating to the Gaza conflict.

“We believe that the Goldstone report is deeply flawed-including its unbalanced focus on Israel, its sweeping conclusions of law, the excessively negative inferences it draws about Israel’s intentions and actions, its failure to deal adequately with the asymmetrical nature of the Gaza conflict, its failure to assign appropriate responsibility to Hamas for its decision to base itself and its operations in heavily civilian-populated urban areas, and its many overreaching recommendations,” said Alejandro Wolff.

Israel, which did not cooperate with the Goldstone commission, voted against the resolution, saying that it legitimised a “deeply flawed, one-sided” report, and disregarded Israel’s right to defend its citizens.

“The results of the vote and the large number of member states who voted against or abstained, demonstrate clearly that the resolution does not have the support of the ‘moral majority’ of UN members,” read a statement on the website of Israel’s ministry of foreign affairs. “Israel rejects the resolution of the UN General Assembly, which is completely detached from realities on the ground.”

During the three-week-long Israeli military incursion into the Gaza Strip, at least 1,400 Palestinians died according to Palestinians and human rights groups, although Israel says 1,166, and 13 Israelis also died. The Goldstone Commission criticized both sides for violations of international humanitarian law.

Thursday, June 28, 2007

The World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation has today announced in Christchurch, New Zealand that the Sydney Opera House has been added to the World Heritage List of culturally significant sites.

It is the third time that a bid has been made to include the Opera House in the list, after failing to receive enough votes in 1981 and 1996. Roni Amelan, UNESCO spokesman said the decision to list the Opera House was unanimous.

“There was consensus that it was a truly outstanding, iconic building that was a defining moment in 20 century architecture,” said Mr Amelan.

The committee described the Opera House as daring and influential. “It is a daring and visionary experiment that has had an enduring influence on the emergent architecture of the late 20th-century,” claimed the committee. “The building is a great artistic monument and an icon.”

The Sydney Opera House becomes the youngest building to be listed on the register, being built in October 1973. It joins other landmarks such as the Taj Mahal, Statue of Liberty and the Egyptian Pyramids. The Opera House becomes only the second Australian building on the list, joining the Melbourne Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens, which were added in 2004.

As a result of the listing, a 2.5 kilometre buffer will be enforced around the Opera House to protect views to and from the building. If the World Heritage values of the site are breached, the site can be placed on an endangered list and removed from the register.

Australian Prime Minister, John Howard said the Opera House is treasured throughout the world. “The Opera House, and its setting at Bennelong Point on Sydney Harbour, is an iconic and treasured place, not just for Australians but also internationally,” he said.

An excited NSW Premier, Morris Iemma informed state parliament of the UNESCO’s decision.

Jorn Utzon, the architect of the Opera House gave a statement from his home in Denmark expressing the honour of having one of his buildings listed on the register.

“World Heritage listing gives the building … a completely new value,” Mr Utzon said. “It is a gift to the city of Sydney.” Mr Utzon said it was the vision of those who worked on the construction of the Opera House for it to be Sydney’s greatest landmark.

[edit]

Saturday, November 16, 2013

File:Paralympics 2014 stamp 30 RUB.jpg

On Thursday, with 110 days until the start of the 2014 Winter Paralympics in Sochi, Russia, Wikinews interviewed Assistant Professor in Educational Leadership, Sport Studies and Educational/Counseling Psychology at Washington State University Simon Li?en about attitudes in United States towards the Paralympics.

Licen has recently joined the Sport Management Program at Washington State University to develop its sport media and communication research and teaching contents. Originally from Slovenia, he served as the Director of Media and Communications of a WTA Tour event and was a member of the UNESCO Slovenian National Commission. He was also the Team Manager of the Slovenian wheelchair basketball national team.

((Wikinews)) : Why do you think the Paralympic movement has so little visibility in the US compared to other countries like Australia, the United Kingdom and even Canada?

Simon Li?en: Sports in the United States largely reaffirm existing relations of power in society. It emphasizes consumerism, the belief that success always goes to people who merit it due to their abilities, dedication and qualifications, and reinforces, rather than changes, existing ideas related to gender, ethnicity and nationality. Paralympic sport brings attention to athletes who are typically overlooked in American society because the majority of the population does not want to identify with people who are disabled. Although disability is not contagious, interest in disabled sports might put into question the masculinity of the males following it. Disabled athletes also challenge existing relations of power by displaying dedication, hard work and perseverance in different contexts than those most sports fans are accustomed to.

Other countries, including the ones you mention, have stronger social orientations in all aspects of society. Even though legislative support may be less strong than the one provided by the Americans with Disabilities Act, many social institutions including the media are more receptive to this form of diversity.

((WN)) : What do you think the impact will be for the Paralympic movement will be with the Games being televised live in the United States for first time?

Simon Li?en: The impact depends on a number of aspects. One of them is the channels that NBC as the broadcasting rights owner for the United States will use to air the Paralympic Games on. Will they be shown nationally or regionally, on NBC or on any of the company’s multiple cable networks? A second aspect is the parts or hours of the day the Paralympics will be shown. Remember that there is a nine-hour difference between Sochi and New York, and a 12-hour difference between Sochi and the US West Coast. So daytime events will be shown live in the United States in the middle of the night, and evening prime-time events will be shown — indeed live — in the morning U.S. time. So showing the Paralympics live on United States television might turn out to be less glamorous than it appears. A third important factor is the way the event will be mediated: will NBC have its best sports broadcasters following the event after having worked the Winter Olympics? Will they treat and announce the competitions as they do all others — for better and worse? Will they take it as an opportunity to educate viewers about disability and diversity while showing superb athletic performances without engaging in a discourse of pity? All in all, I think this is a terrific opportunity to improve sports coverage in a multitude of aspects; but we will have to wait until after the event to assess to what extent the broadcasters will meet these expectations.

((WN)) : What role should the media be playing in promoting the Paralympic Games? Why does the US media provide so little coverage of the Paralympics compared to other sports?

Simon Li?en: I don’t think the media should be promoting any sports event. I think the role of the media is to inform about the event and to cover it fairly. It is not just the Paralympic Games, or disable sports in general that yield very little media coverage; a recent study has shown that women’s sports only account for 1.3%–1.6% of televised news media. The situation improves considerably during the Olympic Games and prime-time Olympic coverage comes close to equal coverage of both men’s and women’s sport. Outside of that, however, U.S. media coverage is largely limited to the men’s four major leagues, college football and college basketball. Again, the media decide which sports to cover based on their perceived entertainment value and its potential of generating sponsor revenues. The Paralympic Games are complex to understand and its participants hard to identify with because there are less instances of dominating performances and long-standing rivalries, which are concepts that are understandable even to the casual fan.

((WN)) : What role does the fact that the Paralympics are about people with disability competing at sport play in the American public’s reception of the Paralympics?

Simon Li?en: I would speculate that the American public is largely indifferent to the event as it is currently represented in the media. The majority of people are oblivious of the Paralympic Games. They might greet an American medal winner as this would reaffirm the success, supremacy and tenacity of an American representative in a global field. In more general terms, however, the American public chooses to largely overlook disabled sports as the average able-bodied person likely does not want to be represented by, and thus identify with, a disabled person.

((WN)) : Is the fact the US Olympic Committee is the national Paralympic Committee a hinderance or help in the development of the Paralympic movement in the US?

Simon Li?en: In general terms, this is both an opportunity and a risk: it can activate its sizable financial, promotional and media influence to bring attention to the Paralympic movement, but at the same time might choose to push disabled sports to the side in order to accommodate influential sponsors. I am not familiar with the specific work done by the US Olympic Committee in terms of supporting, popularizing and expanding the Paralympic movement so I cannot speculate which way the actual work done by the USOC sways.

((WN)) : What conditions need to exist in the US for Paralympic athletes to get sponsorship similar to their Olympic counterparts?

Simon Li?en: Sport sponsorships are indeed strongly influenced by the media prominence of competing individuals. Individual disabled athletes have already been able to secure profitable sponsorship and endorsement contracts; perhaps the most notable example is Oscar Pistorius who was in this sense a true groundbreaker before falling off the pedestal due to his pending trial. This is even more true when one considers that not all Olympic athletes are able to secure profitable or even exaggerated contacts: an Olympic archery champion is less appealing than an Olympic champion javelin thrower, a female javelin thrower is less appealing than a male sprinter, and a Jamaican champion sprinter is less appealing than an American elite basketball player. Sporadic media appearances, such as those during the Paralympic fortnight, will hardly suffice to land disabled athletes major contracts; an athlete has to be in the constant media and popular spotlights to secure lucrative contracts. Until Paralympic athletes […] [are] able to achieve that kind of media presence, high sponsorships are likely to elude them.

((WN)) : Many countries provide federal money to support their Olympic and Paralympic athletes. Should the US consider this as a way of increasing visibility for the Paralympics, supporting increased opportunities for people with disabilities and increasing the US Paralympic medal count?

Simon Li?en: Focusing on the US medal count will successfully keep the Paralympic Games away from mainstream attention! A focus on the medal count as a means to establish supremacy is typical for American professional sports, and the Paralympics will never be able to beat the Olympic Games or the major leagues at their game. This is why the Paralympic Games should involve a different narrative.

Countries typically allocate governmental support to the more vulnerable groups in society because those who are strong can protect their interests through their vast financial and social means. In this sense, the United States should support participation in the Paralympic Games to promote adaptive sports in general and thus increase sports participation among people with disabilities. People with disabilities are among those who most benefit from participating in sports and physical activity due to their health and social advantage; however, they also have much fewer opportunities for sport participation and often require expensive adapted sports equipment. Public funds should contribute to their sport activity in general, and federal funding of Paralympic athletes could certainly provide an excellent example for local communities. Unfortunately, I fear that even the most progressive congresswomen and congressmen will be [reluctant] to increase that funding given the current federal budgetary situation.