I’m very proud to be a citizen of both Canada and the United States. I’m even prouder to call myself an American, even though I haven’t lived there in years. I’ll be back in the States in less then two years and I’m very excited.

But sometimes certain factions of the American population really anger me.

This time, unsurprisingly, it’s a few of the more conservative “pundits” and those who share their views.

Here’s why: Obama took some flack today from those conservative voices for bowing to the Emperor of Japan. Seriously.

He bowed to an EMPEROR. Apparently that’s a problem. Here’s a quote from a conservative who spoke on Fox News: “..it’s not appropriate for an American president to bow to a foreign one.”

Now, a conservative voice on CNN: “It’s ugly. I don’t want to see it…We don’t defer to emperors. We don’t defer to kings or emperors. The president of the United States — this coupled with so many apologies from the United States — is just another thing.” Apparently the U.S. president is King of the WORLD.

We actually still owe Japan an apology for nuking them. That deserves an apology. We’re assholes for doing that. No excuses for nuking.

Conservatives are comparing Obama’s bow to the last U.S. visit to Japan. Cheney was the last to go and he didn’t bow, he just shook Emperor Akihito’s hand.

First of all, how conservatives think using Cheney as an example of what TO do makes no sense. The man is the embodiment of Satan.

Second, how arrogant can you be? How can anyone think it wrong to adapt to a people’s reasonable customs? It was a sign of RESPECT. It does NOT symbolize apathy or a flaky attitude. It does NOT symbolize the U.S. being weak or too apologetic.

The only negative of Obama bowing is the reaction it got. And that’s not Obama’s fault. It’s not his fault that some of his countrymen are idiotic and arrogant.

I sincerely believe the majority of Americans are humble and not arrogant. So, World, don’t think us as such.

I’m glad Obama bowed and I hope he does it whenever appropriate.

Cannibals

Russian police recently arrested three homeless guys suspected of killing a man, eating part of his body, then selling the rest of the meat to a kebab vendor, BBC reports.

According to police, it is unclear when the incident occurred however the three men have been charged with murder. They are being held in Perm, about 870 miles east of Moscow.

The men attacked and killed the victim with hammers and knives. They then ate pieces of his body and sold the rest to a shop that sells kebabs and pies, a statement by the three men claims.

BBC reports it’s unclear whether any customers were served the human meat.

Meanwhile back in America…

A 25-year-old woman from Texas faked breast cancer just to get her breasts enlarged.

Trista Joy Lathern successfully fooled her husband and community by shaving her head to fake chemotherapy. She then hosted a fundraiser in which 100 people donated almost $10,000.

Lathern took the 10 grand and bought a brand new pair of $6,800 double D’s.

Apparently she needed them to save her seven-month old marriage.

On a related note…

Need a pick-me-up before a date? Two chefs in Columbia recently invented a dessert that combines passionfruit with an active ingredient found in….Viagra.

The pudding-like dessert, Canoe reports, is topped with whipped cream and chocolate and served in a parfait glass. One of the creators said they invented the dish in an effort to reinvent Viagra as a new kind of aphrodisiac, according to Canoe.

Of course, they can’t sell the dessert since Viagra is a prescription drug, but it doesn’t stop those in need from making it in their own homes. Or you can just pop the pill.

Blast takes time to remember Veteran’s Day — or Remembrance Day as it’s called in Sachin Seth’s home country Canada.

The Terra Blog reporter remembers the Christmas Eve truce during WWI. It’s a story that should be told as often as possible.

TORONTO — Here is the third edition of the Terra Podcast, where Blast’s world news reporter Sachin Seth visits a food bank and learns about the people who work and are served there.

Many Food Banks around North America are in dire straits. Since the recession set in, many are finding it harder and harder to secure donations from those hit hard by the global economic downturn.

In major cities like Toronto, food banks have seen close to a 30 per cent increase in clients, but no major increase in donations. Those in need of food are turned away near closing time because supplies run out.

William Shane, a board member at Fort York Food Bank, one of the largest in Toronto, says he’s seen an almost 200 per cent increase in food hampers requested in just five years. The majority of that increase has come since 2007 – the beginning of the recession.

Fort York is by no means a spacious food bank. It’s one of the largest in Toronto in terms of population served, however not in terms of space. Still, Shane tells me it costs more than $90,000 just to keep the lights and heat running. That money comes primarily from donations, save for a small stipend from their mother company that amounts to just a few thousand per year.

Almost one third of Toronto’s entire population visits a food bank every year, an astonishingly large number for a developed North American metropolis. But if you look around, numbers in other major cities across Canada and the U.S. aren’t far off.

I went to Fort York with many questions in an effort to find out how the food bank copes with such large demand. But instead of coming away with answers, I quickly fell in love with the men and women who work there. Their pasts, in some cases heartbreaking, and their ambition, in some cases inspiring.

This is the story of three of the selfless women I met who turned their lives around to give back to the community.

This is the story of Trudy, Janice and Liz.

Today Blast’s Sachin Seth talks about Israel denying water to Palestinians.

Your thoughts? Share them with us in the comments section below!

Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai apparently has no balls. Dr. Abdullah Abdullah called on Karzai to fire the head of the election commission for his inability to ensure a fair democratic election in August’s vote. Karzai rejected the call by Abdullah, obviously, because they are rivals.

But why did it even have to be demanded? Ideally, the man would have been sacked just after the U.N.-backed panel discovered and exposed widespread electoral fraud and ballot box stuffing. The whole Independent Election Commission in Afghanistan should see a major overhaul, but Karzai claims doing this just before a run-off would upset the order of things.

“The changes would not be helpful to the elections and the country,” he said, BBC reports.

Abdullah claims the IEC is full of rampant Karzai supporters. While that may be true, so is the rest of the world. Obama, Sarkozy, Brown, Kerry and even Ban ki-Moon have praised Karzai for accepting a run-off election. For doing basically what is required of a democratic president. That praise is not really necessary and just reinforces the fact that Karzai is a western-backed leader of a nation whose own people consistently questioning his governing ability.

Both leaders have also denounced the possibility of a joint government. I saw that reported as a possibility in some places and I couldn’t believe some saw it as a viable option.

The run-off is set to take place on November 7. I think we can predict the outcome.

Check back tomorrow for the second episode of Blast’s new podcast Your World in Focus, narrated by me. Also, take a listen to the first if you missed it. It’s about this very election.

Blast’s news department is starting up a weekly world news podcast to augment our Terra blog.

Our own Sachin Seth will be narrating the episodes, so don’t miss out!

Diwali’s roots vary throughout India. As one traverses India’s gorgeous landscape, one can uncover a plethora of different mythological tales to explain Diwali’s origins.

Many see it as a day to celebrate Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth, by adorning her alter at the temple with money or pictures of material goods. Some gamble on Diwali too, because, as the legend goes, the goddess Parvati played dice with her husband on Diwali and declared anyone who gambled on the same day would fair extremely well.

The most popular tale

The most widely told Diwali tale goes like this:

Prince Rama was chosen by his father to become the new king of Ayodhya. The Queen Kaikeyi however, though initially ecstatic, is poisoned by her servant and begins to fear for the future of Rama’s brother, Bharata. The servant leads her to beleive Rama will do terrible things to Bharata to keep power in the kingdom. Because Kaikeyi saved her husband’s life earlier, the king promises to comply with her wish that he banish Rama from Ayodhya.

Rama obeys and, along with his wife Sita, descends into the dark, gloomy and ominous forest. While there his wife is kidnapped by the demon Ravan, the ten-armed, ten-headed king from Sri Lanka. Rama, devastated and depressed, sets out on a mission to find his lost wife. When he eventually does, after conquering several emotional and physical obstacles over the course of years, he kills Ravan and retrieves his wife. Rama and Sita then journey back towards Ayodhya.

As the two near their kingdom, it is pitch black out. No moon and, of course, no street lights. Villagers hear of their approach and, to help them find their way, light candles outside their homes so they could safely find their way home.

When the two finally find their way back, with the help of kind villagers, Rama is crowned as king.

And thus began the celebration of Diwali; the festival of lights.

I’m off to celebrate. Happy Diwali!

The Palestinian Authority is urging the UN to reprimand Israel for the grave violations of international and human rights law it committed during the Gaza war in the winter of 2008. The Palestinians previously, by influence of the U.S., decided to defer action on the UN report that incriminated them as well.

Israel has publicly rejected the report as falsified and biased. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki however stands by the investigation as an accurate depiction of war crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza region.

“The world has for too long witnessed Israel’s impunity, knowing well that this has been repeatedly fuelled by the lack of punishment and accountability…we must break this obscene cycle” he said during a debate on Wednesday, the BBC reports.

Palestinian authorities had previously agreed, by way of U.S. pressure (no surprise), to defer action on the UN report. This led to, according to BBC correspondent Barbara Plett, a “public outcry.”

Gabriela Shalev, Israel’s envoy to the UN, stands by Israel’s claims that the report was heavily biased towards Palestinians and that Israel had a right to defend itself from repeated Hamas rocket fire last winter. “I regret to say that the Goldstone report is one-sided, biased and therefore wrong – just as the forum and mandate that established its mission,” she said, Al-Jazeera reports.

U.S. authorities, according to the BBC, also believe the report was biased, claiming blame was placed too heavily on Israel. That is why they urged the Palestinian Authority to defer action.

Grave violations

The 2009 report found that Israel had used unnecessary force and failed to protect civilians during the 22-day conflict in the Gaza strip last winter.

Hamas is also incriminated in the report for allegedly firing rockets at Israeli civilians, which is why Israel claims it went on the offensive – self-defense.

According to human rights groups, nearly 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the conflict. You can see the numbers there.

Judge for yourselves! I think some sort of UN action must be taken against Israel for this complete disregard of the well-being of a collective group of peoples. The U.S. needs to recognize that, too.

I thought it was an odd decision. Definitely. Especially given the other nominees which include the Cluster Munition Coalition, a group that strives to clean up cluster bombs and decrease accidental civilian war deaths and Dr. Denis Mukwege, an inspired young Conoglese physician who opened a hospital to treat female victims of sexual abuse.

Inspiring, to say the least. Deserving candidates, no doubt.

And then there’s the victor, Barack Obama, a Harvard law school graduate, community organizer, civil rights lawyer, law professor, junior senator and president of the most “powerful” country in the world. A stunning resume, but where are the accomplishments? The peace work, the advocacy, the results?

That’s what so many are asking. What so many are wondering. And while I, a supporter of Obama, do not think he deserved the award based solely on his accomplishments to date, I do believe the award was given for a reason, and a just, sane reason at that.

Innovative decision to award Obama prize

Now hear me out. Obama won the prize not just for what he has achieved in less than 10 months (which is quite a bit if you look at it with an open mind) but for how he changed the game and reshaped the face of a nation so hated and demonized for so many years. For the potential of peace on a plethora of fronts.

Obama is in the process of sewing together the gaping wound that is America’s international reputation; not an easy feat. It’s something that no other modern Democratic or Republican candidate could do in two terms, let alone a quarter of one.

The fact that the Norway-based committee stressed it made the prize decision based on Obama’s efforts to date was a little strange. I don’t really believe that to be the case, nor does anyone else, even the hardest and strongest Obama supporters. Obama doesn’t believe it either, rightfully so.

Strengthening the international reputation of the most “powerful”nation in the world contributes to peace in many ways. His efforts toward nuclear disarmament are commendable. His decision to end the missile-defense system in Poland led to strengthened ties with Russia, a nuclear powerhouse. His administration has striven for peace with India, another nuclear nation.

His efforts to strengthen relationships and mend ties between Americans and Muslims was politically risky, but so right and groundbreaking morally.

His confusion on Afghanistan is warranted, no one knows what the hell is needed there, and the answer given (”more troops”) isn’t a surprising one. But he’s taking his time and not rushing.

Some view him as the “do-nothing” president or the president of “inaction.” I view him thoughtful and rational, and I’d rather he take weeks to decide the fate of thousands of American soldiers than make a quick decision (like the last guy) and put so many soldiers in harm’s way just because of political pressure from both sides of the spectrum, without thinking it through and weighing the options. That’s called reasoning.

His no-nonsense discussions with Iran, without preconditions, a proposition he was so ridiculed for during his campaign, showed the world he is committed to nuclear disarmament and a more peaceful Mid-East.

His speech in Cairo, though predictable, reaffirmed that idea. His quoting the Qu’ran was a great way to connect with an overwhelmingly large global group so alienated by American ideological extremists.

We elected him for that reason. Because he’s intelligent, thoughtful, peaceful, multi-racial and ambitious. It’s been less than 10 months. How many ambitions are achieved in 10 months? None. But the path to realizing those ambitions has been laid.

Oz

Let me make it a bit clearer by using a crude but wonderfully applicable analogy.

Think of Obama as Dorothy and his path to peace as the yellow brick road. When Obama crash landed in the White House after a whirlwind electoral campaign, he was ambitious, excited and ready to overhaul the system. Soon he realized that that’s not possible, at least not as quick as he thought. There are hundreds, if not thousands of people to please and political and social hurdles to vault.

Just as the Afghanistan war became more brutal and a reassessing of the plan was needed (just as Dorothy tried to find out from the munchkins how she could get back to Kansas), Obama was given hope, something he’d given, in abundance, to millions around the world.

The Peace Prize committee are the munchkins, they are Glinda (the good witch). They gave Obama direction, thanked him for his bravery and pushed him, inspired him (as he inspired us) to continue his work. To keep on going. After all, he doesn’t want to be the guy who won the prize and did nothing to deserve it. And no, he’s not already that guy.

There will be obstacles (the wicked witch, the fake Wizard of Oz) however Obama/Dorothy prevail in the end, defeating the evils that stand in their ways. Yes you can think he was awarded prematurely, but only if you view the award as something given only for hard results. More results will come, the award is faith in that.

In fact, the award was given because he’s changed the world’s mood. He’s made global citizens happier and more tolerant in times of economic uncertainty, global racially charged fear, terrorism and war.

Uninspired criticism

Today I came across an article on the British website timesonline.co.uk written by broadcaster/writer Minette Marrin. She claims, wrongly in my opinion, that Obama should never have accepted the peace prize. That he is undeserving, and she compares his victory to that of Henry Kissenger’s in 1973.

Ms. Marrin, that’s cold. It’s unfortunate that you can’t see past the present day.

Marrin ventures another guess as to why Obama accepted the prize, a very odd one. She ventures that the president accepted the prize just because two fellow Democrats, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter, also boast the prestigious medal in their respective trophy libraries.

As if the award were some piece of trivial memorabilia, some baseball card, that an 11-year-old pines for just because his best buddies have the same one. She then quotes an “American commentator” who said “it is like accepting an Oscar now for being likely to make an Oscar-winning movie next year.” A degradation of the award that is insulting to past winners and childish, to say the least.

Marrin goes on to ask “Can it be that Obama is already intoxicated with the exuberance of his own celebrity? For that is all he is so far — a well-meaning super-celebrity.” Well-meaning? See the second section of this piece.

However there are many who wonder if Obama’s ego has been so inflated that he believes himself the savior of America and the world.

But to those of you who ask that, I ask why is he so “humbled” by the award? Why is it the man, the president, started off his acceptance and justification speech by talking about his two children? Yes, he has speech writers, but only he heard what his kids said that morning. And he remembered.

Yes Obama is a little egotistical, he is, after all, the president. But don’t forget, we gave him that ego (see: road to ‘08 election).

Finally, for those who believe Obama didn’t deserve this prize, you hold a valid view. I too believe Dr. Mukwege or the Cluster Munition Coalition deserve an award of recognition for peace work.

My argument is that Obama’s victory isn’t unwarranted or undeserving. His accomplishments to date are impressive, his future is full of possibilities and the peace prize was awarded to him by a panel “instructed to encourage international co-operation, arms reduction and acts of engagement” for his initiative and to ensure he keeps working towards his, and our, ultimate goal.

Peace.

The famed Louvre museum quickly resolved its quarrel with Egypt yesterday by agreeing to return the steles Egyptian antiquities chief Zahi Hawass accused them of purchasing on the black market, the New York Times reports.

French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand organized a special meeting to make a final decision on the fate of the five relics. The committee came to the conclusion that Egypt had provided sufficient evidence to prove the pieces were stolen and thus, made a unanimous decision to return them in good faith.

Mitterrand had previously told media that he was in favor of returning the pieces as long as proof that they were stolen was provided by Egypt.

Mitterrand also told media that the relics were not purchased on the black market. In fact, he said, four of the pieces were purchased from the Maspero gallery in France in 2000 and the other from an auction in Paris three years later.

The five estranged frescoes are believed to be from the tomb of Tetaki, a 3,200-year-old cleric who was laid to rest in the Valley of Kings near Luxor.

Egypt says it will resume relations with the museum after the relics are returned home. The French culture ministry is optimistic that the whole ordeal will be resolved in a matter of weeks.

“We made the decision to end any co-operation with the Louvre until they return [the works],” Hawass announced today, the CBC reports.

Hawass claims the museum has failed to return several pieces, namely steles (ancient engraved stone slabs) that were supposedly purchased on the black market after being stolen from a Valley of the Kings tomb near Luxor.

Hawass told AFP that he believes Louvre officials knew the pieces were stolen before making the secretive purchase. France’s Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand told the same news agency that they would indeed return the artifacts if proven to have been stolen, Voice of America reports.

Before returning anything however, the museum needs national approval and proof the pieces in question were smuggled out of Egypt.

In 2002, Egypt launched a sweeping campaign aimed at having countries return artifacts that had been stolen, smuggled or purchased suspiciously. Many of the objects Egypt’s Supreme Council is trying to retrieve are on display at some of the most well-known museums in the world.

A serious accusation made against one of the most famous and reputable museums in the world. Regardless of what happens with these specific artifacts, hopefully the feud between Hawass and the Louvre is resolved so the flourishing partnership between the two can live on.

It would be a real shame if there ceased to be any Egyptian artifacts and pieces at the Louvre from here on.

The four steles in question are still on display in Paris.

So again, excuse how sparingly I write here. When the computer comes back, you won’t be able to get rid of me. I promise.

The world is, as it should be, currently obsessed with the Indonesian earthquakes (plural, yes) and the nuclear talks with Iran. If you’re not following either, start following both. Yesterday I realized, for a blog that touts itself as one that reports on the lesser known international issues, I haven’t in a long, long while.

So, back to business. A couple of months ago I watched a short doc on Al-Jazeera English which, during its last few minutes, talked a bit about organ trafficking. Now organs, just like any other product, have a market. A particularly large and needy marke, in fact.

Those who need organs usually need tham as quick as possible and are willing to throw big sums of money at the vendor in return for extending the life of a family member or friend. The way in which trafficked organs are acquired varies from case to case and from vendor to vendor. Often, the means violate human rights.

In some extreme instances, the organs are forcibly removed from a human being. Some are forced to comply with surgery by penalty of death. Some are paid sums of money (small sums) to donate organs while still alive. Some are murdered and their organs harvested.

I hadn’t really thought about the story until today, when I noticed a piece in the Jordan Times about 11 locals who were charged with illegally trafficking human organs in Egypt, according to police there.

Ten others are thought to be connected to the trafficking ring, in a case that’s been under investigation for the past several months, according to the AFP.

In this particular case, the organs were obtained by paying humans to donate and by harvesting the bodies of the previously deceased.

The organs were then marked up by a significant margin. The kidneys, for example, sold at a price of $30,000 each to rich Arabs.

Organ trafficking has long been a problem in Jordan, so much so that they created a National Commission to Promote Organ Donation to encourage lawful donations and decrease unlawful trafficking.

If convicted, the eleven accused face 10 years in jail with hard labour. Tough break.

Anyway, this isn’t a tech blog or a blog where I complain about my own life so, let’s get back to it.

Of course, even when I’m not blogging, I’m keeping up with current affairs and international news as much as one can without a computer and with an iPhone. After a while, reading news on that tiny screen gives you a headache, but I really had no alternative so I powered through.

One of the big stories right now is the UN gathering in New York and the G-20 Summit in, of all places, Pittsburgh. I heard on NPRthis morning that Pittsburgians (?) are very excited to welcome leaders of all the nations, and are celebrating Oktoberfest a little early by sampling beers from about half of the 20 attending countries. Also, Moammar Gadhafi’s horrendously long, pointless, disorganized and disrespectful speech about how the Security Council has too much power of the other nations of the UN (which actually is a good point, he just didn’t say it too well) was a big story.

The ideas (more liberal and less insane) behind what Gadhafi said connect well with what Dr. Juan Cole, a history professor at the University of Michigan, said at Ryerson last night.  He spoke about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the history and the future, to a diverse audience. Diverse not only by race and culture, but age as well.

Dr. Cole spoke about citizenship and how his colleague, Margaret Somers, defines citizenship in her new book (a definition borrowed from former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren) as the “right to have rights.” We all have basic human rights, of course as guaranteed by universal declarations and the Lockean theory that everyone, as human beings, is entitled to the necessities of life and liberty. However, without a state or government or body to enforce these rights and protect them when they are violated, they are always out of reach.

Even in established nations, like Canada, some people have fewer rights than others, and therefore, as Dr. Cole put it, less citizenship. Aboriginals for example, cannot enjoy the same rights and protections from prejudice that others value. In the Jim Crow era, African-Americans were less valued as citizens, tricked out of voting by having to pass ridiculous literary exams, some of which required knowledge of Latin to pass, of all things.

Just as the peoples of some states are not, in reality, able to take advantage of some rights, so the members of the UN, those not on the Security Council, are not able to enjoy full membership.

The Security Council is necessary, but the power it has over other nations (vetoes and such) may be too much. There are more than five countries that could contribute to protecting the world, not just the U.S., China, Russia, France and the UK. There are ten elected non-permanent members; however they do not hold veto power.

More countries with strong economies and functioning democracies should be added to the council.

I, in no way, support Gadhafi and his psychotic behavior. But when dumbed down and explained properly, perhaps the SC could be a little more open to deserving nations, which, of course, doesn’t include the Gadhafi-run Libya.

Honestly, it sounds fictional. It sounds like a bad political novel. Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina’s 2^nd district has managed to catapult himself into the international spotlight by, as VP Joe Biden put it so eloquently, “demeaning the institution.” And that he did.

It takes guts to call out the President, especially when you are watching him give a speech firsthand. But being courageous, at the wrong time, has its consequences. Loudmouth Joe was immediately booed by hundreds of Democrats. Republicans lambasted the 5^th term representative for being disrespectful and breaking Congress rules.

Wilson had to apologize immediately after, and though he didn’t get to say sorry face-to-face with the President, Obama accepted the apology. To me, these apologies mean little anyway. Anyone can say “sorry” after the fact, but it take someone of real integrity not to make the mistake in the first place. Or, in this case, someone with with half a brain.

Many of the more vocal republicans have been quite outspoken when it comes to the issue of the new health care plan giving benefits to illegal immigrants. Obama has said time and time again that it won’t, but, apparently for Loudmouth Joe and many others, that hasn’t been enough.

Sadly, because the health care document is more then 1,000 boring, boring pages, no one will ever read through it to find the truth. Or, we could just listen to the President.

Even if you choose not to, just don’t take a page out of Joe’s book. We don’t need another Joe in the spotlight. That plumber was enough.

News reports out of Tripoli, Libya suggest al-Megrahi’s prostate cancer is worsening. Video footage of the 57-year-old convicted killer shows the man breathing through an oxygen mask, his head tilted to the side, his family members by his bedside.

In the background a reporter can be heard asking al-Megrahi a question. He appears too weak to respond.

Libyan Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Mohammed Siala described al-Megrahi as a “dying man,” according to AP.

Many questions have been raised regarding the seriousness of al-Megrahi’s condition. A video depicting him as an ailing man won’t put those theories to rest.

A London-based newspaper quoted al-Megrahi’s father as saying his son is not dying.

“I see he is improving day by day, and he is better than the day he returned,” he told Asharq Al-Awssat newspaper.

Testing by Scottish officials is the only confirmation of al-Megrahi’s cancer, however now, to many, the testimony of Scottish officials is no longer sufficient because of the controversy surrounding the bomber’s release.

Many believe al-Megrahi’s release was made in order to facilitate an enormously lucrative oil deal with Libya. British Petroleum (BP) signed a $900 million oil search deal with Libya in 2007, but their progress has been repeatedly stalled by superfluous rules on equipment imports by Libyan officials.

British and Scottish authorities have both denied such a connection.

I’m on vacation right now in England, currently staying across the University of Oxford, the alma mater of former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Blair is currently at the center of some controversy surrounding the reason behind the Lockerbie bomber’s recent release.

During a tour this morning I was reminded of an interesting fact. For those who don’t know, Blair, during his days at Oxford, co-founded, sang and played guitar for a band called the Ugly Rumours. Quite ironic that now he himself is the subject of some “ugly rumours” that may just prove to be true.

Those rumors, that Blair’s administration negotiated a deal with Libya to release Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi in exchange for access to Libyan oil, are at this point not based on any hard factual evidence.

Blair and Britain have denied any such deal.

I’m sure Blair, while imitating Mick Jagger on stage at Oxford, never thought such an irony would arise.

End thought.

Despite the killings, voter turnout only grew as the day went on, and officials extended voting time by one hour to accommodate the crowd.

Hamid Karzai, the front-runner of the 30 presidential candidates, praised the courage of the Afghan people. “The Afghan people defied rockets, bombs and intimidation and came out to vote, that is great,” he said.

He also added that 73 attacks were conducted in 15 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces. Security forces, according to Afghan officials, stopped five suicide attacks.

Scared to vote

In the morning, all over the country, polling stations stood empty. “Maybe everyone is drinking tea, or sleeping,” said Abdul Mubir, manager of a polling centre in Kabul, Global Post reports.

By the afternoon it seems people emerged from their shells. Officials say more citizens began filing in around lunchtime and lines began to form outside official polling stations. By the end, turnout was apparently so strong that voting time had to be extended by one hour. In contrast, Al Jazeera reports that during the last hour of voting, a station being monitored in the capital by correspondent James Bays saw only one voter go in and out.

Despite the fairly small voting population (in comparison to larger countries) the results are not expected for several days. The deadline for the release of preliminary results is Sept. 3.

Exit polls give no indication of which candidate leads, mostly because voters are reluctant to reveal their choices so candidly. Opinions polls however suggest the possibility of a runoff election between Karzai and his main opposition Dr. Abdullah Abdullah.

Fraud

Many are already predicting fraud and fixing. Several voters, who mostly chose to remain unnamed, told reporters they have no faith in the electoral process in their country, a country heavily affected by U.S. presence and the Taliban insurgency.

Many analysts predict a win for the incumbent Karzai. His endorsements from former presidential candidates and the advances he’s made in his campaign in the past weeks have all but ensured victory.

However because Karzai needs 50 per cent of the vote for an outright victory, it is likely he will face a runoff election against Abdullah in the near future.

But now, just two days before the election, Karzai has emerged as the unquestioned front-runner and will seemingly sprint back into his governing chair, a seat in which he will remain for another five years.

On Monday 10,000 supporters rallied at Ghazi stadium in Kabul, wearing blue caps, waving blue flags, holding signs depicting the Abdullah’s smiling visage. But despite the doctor’s prominence and reputation, despite his reformist ideals and want for change, he will lose.

As much as his campaign’s support parallels that of Iran’s Mir Hossein Mousavi, unlike Mousavi, this candidate has no chance of winning (neither did Mousavi, if you think about it).

Karzai will be back.

Polling day violence

What the people must worry about now, besides being ruled by Karzai for another five years, is what will happen on August 20^th. Violence at the polling stations is almost a certainty, especially now that the Taliban has vowed to disrupt the voting process.

“The election is propaganda from America and its allies,” said the Taliban in a statement, according to Al Jazeera.

On Tuesday, Kabul was hit by a blast that killed seven. It is highly likely that Thursday will see much of the same type of blasts scattered across the highly vulnerable country.

Voter turnout is already expected to be low, according to a local Afghan man interviewed by Al Jazeera. He told the interviewer that he was afraid to go out and vote because of what the Taliban had promised. He knows what they are capable of, he said.

We all know.

Peaceful election

Unfortunately, even from the beginning, these elections looked bleak. None of the candidates offer any real solutions to any of the country’s most dire issues. Also, the Afghanistan itself is not stable enough to hold a proper democratic election for two reasons: because the country is so often bombed by the Taliban that setting up secure, safe polling stations is not a reality, and because the parties involved have a history of engaging in bribery and intimidation tactics to gain desirable results.

According to several news outlets, entire villages have been threatened with violence if their population refuses to vote for a certain candidate.

Of course, internationally we are all hoping for at least one peaceful, democratic election to be completed in the Mid-East in the near future.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the one we should look to to satisfy that want.

ZTE Coral-200 Solar. Credit: Flickr/techfever

ZTE claims its Coral-200 phone can recharge using the sun’s rays and has a talk time of a little over two hours. In a country like Kenya, the phone is a perfect addition to current cell options.

While there are more than 17 million cell phone subscribers in Kenya, only 1.3 million have access to constant electricity. Many people have to go into major metropolises just to charge their phones, a major inconvenience.

While the ZTE Coral isn’t the glitziest solar phone on the market, it serves a great purpose to people in Kenya.

Samsung Blue Earth

Earlier this year Samsung also introduced a solar phone with spectacular specs. The phone is made of recyclable plastic and boasts a pedometer, MMS capability and a touch screen. LG and Sharp have also manufactured solar phones. None of phones are, however, slated for a U.S. release. What a waste.

Samsung Blue Earth. Credit: Flickr/uriondo

Cell phone carriers in North America should look to these phones as options for at least the outdoorsy-types. Solar-powered phones give campers the ability to stay connected while in the wilderness, just in case something happens.

As low-cost options with GSM networks, consumers could purchase the phones as at least backups to their iPhones or smart phones until solar phones can boast more impressive features, more along the lines of those offered by smart phones.

I know I’d love to have one.

The word “kill”, “die”, “death” and “dead” are thrown around in mainstream media these days as if they have no meaning. Those who read the news regularly need only a few months to become completely desensitized, I for one find it hard to associate the words with anything unless I see the actual killing or death occur.

It’s like that feeling you get when you look at the same word for a really long time. After a little while it just looks like odd scribbles on a page.

It’s horrible, I know. But so many of us are now like this. Death and destruction are commonplaces in our modern world, wars happen, they come and go like anything else, kids starve and die. It’s a fact of life.

The word “death” is used so often in the media that it has been stripped of everything except its literal meaning: to cease to exist. Really, depending on the context, the word can suggest a plethora of possibilities surrounding the death itself. War (whether founded or unfounded), corruption, greed, lust, hate, torture or worst of all, the most egregious crime man can commit: murder.

Before becoming interested in journalism these words meant something to me. But now, after having studied the craft for a few years and being the media monitor that I now am, they’ve lost everything but their literal meanings.

It’s not that I hate journalism for desensitizing me; I actually thank it for teaching me that these things happen. Murders, killings, deaths, destruction, bombs, war, hate, greed, corruption – all of it is part of life, our society’s gritty underbelly that isn’t hidden under the belly, thanks to journalism.

So, perhaps until I (fingers crossed) succeed in the field and become the traveling international reporter I so desire to become, I will see these words, this language, as representative of normal, everyday occurrences. After I see it firsthand, I know my opinion is likely to change.

Until then.

Personally, I don’t very much enjoy writing about this sort of thing. It’s heartwrenching to read and even worse to imagine. But this story isn’t about a mother who killed her own child, rather about a family fooled into thinking a baby was really theirs. Murder, sadly, is involved.

Julie Corey, 35, allegedly fooled her boyfriend, Alex Dion, 27, and his family into believing she gave birth to a child she stole. The kidnapped child, who was eight months developed, was cut from her dead mother’s womb. The mother, Darlene Haynes, 23, was found brutally slain in a hotel room in Massachusetts last year. Police had been searching for the missing fetus until now.

“It’s killing me. I’ve got a hole in my heart,” said Cindy Dion, Alex’s mother, after finding out the baby is not her granddaughter.

According to The Associated Press, Corey was definitely a poor liar. She duped her boyfriend and his parents into thinking she was pregnant, four months along one month, eight months the next. The family quickly got suspicious, but the arrival of a new baby girl pushed those suspicions to the back of their collective minds.

According to police, Corey took Haynes’ baby and went to a homeless shelter in New Hampshire. The infant was later found alive and well in a N.H. hospital, and will be released into state custody while family custody battles are settled.

Police arrested Corey and Alex Dion in Plymouth, N.H. after their friends reported the couple introduced their new “daughter,” even though no one knew Corey had been pregnant. Dion was later released, according to ABC News.

It gets worse. Public records show Dion and Corey lived at 94 Southgate Dr. in Worcester, Mass., the same building where Haynes’ mutilated body was found wrapped in a sheet and stuffed in a closet, her womb missing a baby girl. Haynes was a mother to three other children, aged five, three and 18 months.

Corey is being held on $2 million bail for the suspected kidnapping of Haynes’ child. No one has yet been charged for Haynes’ brutal murder, though members of Haynes’ family believe Corey killed Haynes, with the help of someone else.

San Antonio police claim that a woman accused of gruesomely killing her 3-week-old infant also ate some of the baby boy’s body parts. Authorities claim Otty Sanchez ate three of the baby’s toes, part of its brain, then stabbed herself twice.

Police say they found the baby with “three of his toes chewed off, his face torn away and his head was severed,” USA Today reports.

Sanchez’s husband, Scott Buchholtz, told authorities his wife, who was was diagnosed with post-partum depression and was going to be admitted to a hospital to treat her depression, should be executed to pay for her crimes.

“She was a sweet person and I still love her, but she needs to pay the ultimate price for what she has done,” Buchholtz told the San Antonio Express-News. “She needs to be put to death for what she has done.”

Family members told authorities Sanchez’s health had been suffering in the week leading up to the death of her baby. Sanchez told police she’d been hearing voices and killed her baby at the request of the devil.

Sanchez has been charged with capital murder and is being held on $1 million bail. She is also being treated in hospital for her self-inflicted stab wounds. If convicted, Sanchez could be given the death penalty.

Even police were struck by the heinous degree of the crime, reportedly barely speaking to one another while searching the accused’s home.

The disappearance of Neanderthals is odd. A whole species, Homo neanderthalensis, living in modern day Asia and Europe for nearly 200,000 years disappears thousands of years after modern humans, Homo sapiens, evolve.

Many theories have been formulated over the years, some outrageous, some founded in environmental and evolutionary fact. Some say extreme climate change knocked out the Neanderthals’ main food supply: bison and large deer. The Neanderthals, who hunted using very primitive spears, could not catch up with smaller game and thus died of hunger, or so the theory goes.

Another theory flatters modern humans, some believe the Neanderthals were not as smart as or as good at making tools as Homo sapiens and thus went extinct as they competed for land and food, according to Discover Magazine.

Many theories have been ventured, but one remains the most popular. It implies a brutal war and old-fashioned ethnic cleansing on the part of modern humans. Did we, Homo sapiens, slaughter the Neanderthals?

It seems like something we’d do. After all, humans have taken to killing indigenous populations that inhabit land they desire. Humans and Neanderthals were competing for land, food and, ultimately, survival and as the smarter species it is highly likely that we waged war against them and won.

A piece of evidence, discovered in modern day Iraq, suggests at least one case of prehistoric murder. A skeleton found with a deep slice below its ninth rib.

The skeleton, one of nine Neanderthal bodies discovered between 1953 and 1960 in a cave in Iraq, belonged to a 40- to 50-year-old Neanderthal named Shanidar 3.

Duke evolutionary anthropology associate professor Steven Churchill believes a Homo sapien launched a projectile weapon at the Neanderthal, causing the deep cut. “We think the best explanation for this injury is a projectile weapon, and given who had those and who didn’t, that implies at least one act of inter-species aggression,” he said, according to Live Science.

A Neanderthal skull was found in France a while ago, suggesting another case of murder. Scalp injury caused by a sharp object hitting the head, an act quite possibly inflicted by a human.

“If the Shanidar 3 case is also a case of inter-specific violence and if Shandiar 3 overlaps in time with modern humans, we’re beginning to get a little bit of a pattern here,” said Churchill, according to Live Science.

Scientific analysis showed Shanidar 3 died as his wound was healing, suggesting the weapon pierced his lung or caused lethal internal bleeding. Without any medicine, Shanidar 3 is thought to have died within weeks of sustaining the injury.

Does this solve the debate? No. Is it a useful clue? Yes.

Would it make a badass movie? Hell yes. Hollywood, get to work.

How can you get help? How can you be freed or given access to your lawyer or your family to tell them you’re OK?

This exact story is currently unfolding in Uganda. The Human Rights Watch is demanding the Ugandan government charge or release the five detainees.

The physical location of the four men and one woman is unknown, which, according to the HRW, make it a case of enforced disappearance, illegal under international law and in violation of the Ugandan Constitution. Some former detainees say the five missing may be being held at Joint anti-Terrorism Task Force (JATT) headquarters in Kololo, a rich suburb of capital city Kampala.The former detainees also said the five missing were tortured and may now be in poor health, the HRW reports.

According to a report released by the HRW, the task force has heavily abused its power on many occasions resulting in multiple killings, enforced disappearances and allegations of torturing terrorism suspects.

Recently, the chief of military intelligence in Uganda wrote a report to the HRW outlining the reason for the five arrests in an attempt to justify the imprisonment of the missing. According to the report, Abdulrahman Kijjambu and Ismail Kambaale, two of the five, were arrested in July 2008 on suspicions of planning terrorism acts.

The third detainee, Abdul Hamid Lugemwa, was arrested in March 2008 for being involved in an “urban hit squad.” The letter also claims the military task force has no knowledge of the whereabouts of the fourth prisoner, Mohamed Sekulima.

HRW reports however that four former detainees say they say Sekulima in JATT custody on several separate occasions. The circumstances of the arrest of fifth detainee, Fatuma Nantongo, are unclear. Witnesses told the HRW that she was arrested in December of 2008 and was seen in JATT custody in Kololo in January 2009.

The letter from military intelligence unfortunately provided no insight into the exact whereabouts of the five missing. All five detainees are being denied the right to habeas corpus, which is mandatory under both international and Ugandan law.

Still, no charges have officially been filed.

Stick with Blast for updates on the story.

Empty threats were issued toward political powers in Iran. The very foundation of democracy is threatened in the divided country, but the world’s “saviors” offered nothing.

The strong foundation of the worldwide economic recession shook not one bit; no economic plans were laid out. In the worst economic crisis in about 80 years, the richest offered no solutions.

In perhaps the largest disappointment of the summit the leaders made such a wavering, uncommitted “commitment” to climate change, simply declaring that the eight superpowers had agreed to “substantially reducing global emissions by 2050.” Weak. Those who have been lambasted and forced to be environmentally-friendly were flipped off by their own leaders.

The plan drafted in L’Aquila, according to the LA Times, specifies no real interim targets either, just that global emissions reduction progress will be reviewed every so often.

Sadly enough, the recession will hinder climate control progress as well as the ability of developing countries to adapt to changes that have already occurred. Some groups predict that as much as $150 billion is needed every year to aid regions in developing countries that have already been affected by climate change. No one has that money, and may not any time soon since no solid economic revisions were drafted.

Other countries have demanded the G8 dramatically reduce their emissions by as much as 40 per cent. From these eight leaders however, there was no urgency. No commitment. No sense.

In 2010, the leaders meet in Muskoka, Ontario. By then, even more criticism will be launched their way. Hopefully it knocks some sense into them.

He, in partnership with a 20-year-old accountant, opened a 14-room brothel in his homeland, which decriminalized prostitution in 2003. Campbell’s “gentleman’s club” will ultimately make him the money he needs to fund his training, however, New Zealand Olympic officials say that his business venture could work against him when applying to be a 2012 team member.

“Selection takes into account not just performance but also the athlete’s ability to serve as an example to the youth of the country,” funding manager John Schofield told New Zealand’s Sunday Star Times newspaper.

Campbell says his mother didn’t initially approve of the idea, however, decided to go along with it after meeting with some of the whores fine young women.

Campbell will work as a full-time pimp “escort agency” owner  until 2011. He’ll then hit the gyms for a full year before the 2012 games.

Beijing 2008

In the 2008 Beijing Olympics, Campbell, who competes in Tae Kwon Do, made the Top 16 before losing to Sung Yu-Chi of Taiwan, who eventually went on to win the bronze.

Leading up to those games Campbell’s parents were the ones who footed his $95,000 training bills.

This time, that bill will go to the lonely men of New Zealand. Campbell hopes the brothel will help him raise double the amount needed to train for the 2008 Olympics.

At least the customers will feel like they are doing a good deed.

A power struggle between Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Hashemi Rafsanjani, head of the Assembly of Experts, which, theoretically, has the power to remove the Ayatollah from power. That’s the key.

If any reform to Iran’s current Islamic Republic is to happen, it would have to take place with the help of both religious and political leaders.

This past week, religious leaders from the Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qum called the current government illegitimate. This declaration may signal the beginning a domino effect.

Perhaps other religious leaders with even more political power, such as those on the Assembly of Experts or the Expediency Council, may be inspired to voice their opinions regarding Ahmadinejad’s “victory” and what role Ayatollah Khamenei played in ensuring it.

The Association’s move is highly rebellious. It’s a group of religious clerics opposing election results verified by the Supreme Leader. It’s real opposition.

In 1979, when the people of Iran rebelled and organized a revolution to overthrow the Shah and his monarchy and install the current Islamic Republic under, at that time, Ayatollah Khomeini, this is not what they had in mind. This life full of oppression was not their ideal.

Soon after the revolution, all western media influence was banned. The freedom of the people was severely hampered, and women especially felt the Ayatollah’s strong arm of oppression come crashing down from his pedestal.

According to Jian Ghomeshi, a prominent Iranian-Canadian broadcaster with the CBC, people have been unhappy with their government since that revolution. Though they were victorious in overthrowing the Shah, they failed to secure the freedoms they so sorely desired.

So it was back to square one, and now 30 years later, a revolution is brewing again. But this time, more work needs to be done behind the scenes. The people will fight, but religious leaders and Hashemi Rafsanjani need to challenge the legitimacy of this government before it gets out of hand.

Watch the short AlJazeera English documentary, “Mousavi and the Masses” below to learn more about Mousavi’s past as Prime Minister during the early years of the Islamic Republic and how his political ideologies have seemingly changed so much since the 1980s.

Many however have quite the negative view of AlJazeera, especially the Arabic network. They’ve been accused of giving a “voice to terrorists” and have, in the past, aired some seriously anti-Semitic programming.

But AlJazeera English is the station that’s on its way to Canada, not AlJazeera Arabic. AJE was established just three years ago and even though it is, like Aljazeera Arabic, owned by the Qatari government, it operates independently from its big sister station.

I watch AlJazeera English regularly on Livestation. It’s a quality all-day news channel that reports on issues much like CNN does, but from a differing, more localized and internal perspective.

CNN’s coverage of American politics is hard to match. It’s comprehensive and seen from all angles. It’s quality. Why? Well it operates from the area on which it reports, the U.S. Atlanta, Washington D.C., Los Angeles and New York City. Everything is covered. Here.

So, naturally, a news channel operating out of the Middle East would give the world a more authentic idea of what is going on there than, say, CNN, whose headquarters are a long way from the Mid-East.

You wouldn’t rely on the BBC for American political news, so why are we forced to watch CNN to learn about the Middle East? After all, CNN’s global sister stations aren’t available to us here in the U.S. and Canada.

The current vast news landscape is made up largely of Middle Eastern issues. AlJazeera’s main headquarters are right smack-dab in the middle of the Middle East: Doha, Qatar, just off the eastern coast of Saudi Arabia. They also have broadcast stations in Kuala Lumpur, London and Washington D.C. They air at least one 30-minute news show from each base everyday.

In addition to the four headquarters, AJE has 69 bureaus set up all over the world, many of which are in the southern hemisphere. They also employ 1,200 staff of more than 45 ethnicities.

That doesn’t sound too oppressive to me. These stats make them the most diverse news network in the world.

If you watch the channel you’ll know their anchors, reporters and weathermen come in all colors. As a person of color, that’s a nice thing to see on TV. Finally.

Many of their staff is also women.

I admit I’ve never watched AlJazeera Arabic, aside from all the terrorist videos that have become infamous in the West. I’ve heard the negative criticism and the allegations of anti-Americanism toward the AJA. I’ve also seen some of the proof.

But that doesn’t mean AJE isn’t a quality, unbiased organization. It operates independently from AJA and caters, purposefully, toward a Western audience.

You only have to watch programs like “Witness” and “People & Power” to understand the quality of AlJazeera English. Seriously, download LiveStation and watch those programs. They are phenomenal examples of how AJE brings attention to important issues that get either get lost in Western mainstream media filters or go undetected on news radar.

About 80 per cent of AJE’s stories relate to the Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, about twice as much as the BBC and CNN.

AJE’s reporting of not only Middle Eastern issues but also those issues that affect the forgotten areas of Latin America, Africa and Asia are without a doubt superior to those few pieces produced and released by CNN and the BBC.

The rest of the world needs a voice. AlJazeera English is it. So please come on down to Canada.

It was pretty obvious that the GC would say no to a re-election. Just a few days ago Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said, in a news conference, that these protests would not push the ruling elite into a corner. He said the rallies wouldn’t force his government to re-examine the election results. He stayed true to his word.

Khamenei also ordered Iranians to stay off the streets. But, thankfully, that didn’t happen. The street revolution continues, the Twitter revolution continues and the government, hiding behind the cloak of a loose interpretation of Islam, must be feeling a bit apprehensive.

The news that these results won’t be annulled will likely anger opposition supporters. It is however important that peace in the streets is maintained. Violent protests won’t solve anything.

And violence as a reaction to peace is not a true democratic response. But that’s what the people in Iran are fighting for. Democracy, freedom, human rights and equality, which many believe can only be achieved through a separation of Mosque and state.

Of course, no one wants to relive Neda’s tragic death. Her murder and bravery now serves as a symbol of how brutal a government that receives its mandate from the cosmos can be, and how oppressed the men and women of Iran are. She will never be forgotten.

In response to all the deaths, Reform candidate Mehdi Karroubi recently called for mourning days across Iran. I wonder whether it will play out like it did in 1978, when every 40 days the death of a fellow revolutionary was mourned publicly.

The parallels between the ’09 and ’79 demonstrations are great. The fact that about 70 per cent of Iran’s population was not alive in ’79 is telling in itself. The ultimate goal of both revolutions is the same. Freedom. History can repeat itself.

The ’79 revolution was horrendous, though. Many were killed, beaten and tortured. And as Samira Moyheddin Mohyeddin, a young woman at a solidarity rally in Toronto, put it, speaking of the youth in Iran “we did not bring this government to fruition, this is not the type of system that we want.”

She is calling for a free democratic society. To sever the unwanted and now frayed ties that bind Mosque and state in Iran.

The youth in Iran have yearned for freedom and real democracy, not theocracy, for a long time. And now, as Iranian-Canadian CBC broadcaster Jian Ghomeshi put it “the floodgates have opened.” The youth are spilling out in are numbers, previously held back by arbitrary laws forbidding the right to assembly and free speech.

Only time will tell if this generation is successful in their fight. Many have already vocalized their willingness to die for their brothers and sisters. Death for democracy, death to ensure their brothers and sisters are not killed.

But now, no matter what happens this historically brave and rebellious collection of youth will never let Iran trip and fall back into the oppressive and suppressive society it once was.

The fight for democracy is on. The question now is not IF it will be won, but WHEN it will be won.

It’s a revolution against an Islamic Republic that puts its own needs and wants in front of the people that it governs, or so the Ph.D student put it.

Saturday’s protests in Iran were full of violence. People were shot, beaten and tear gassed in the streets. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told the public in his speech Friday that more demonstrations were prohibited. He said that if the people continued to revolt, Mousavi and the opposition would be responsible for what happened to them.

He also said these protests won’t force the ruling regime into a corner. He said, basically, these outbursts are useless.

The people are however challenging the very foundation of not only the supreme leadership, but the Islamic Republic as well.

Protests turn deadly

Some sources say a bomb went off outside a mosque and killed three or four people. Other say people were being shot dead in the streets. Some claim military tanks were deployed. Reports of helicopters landing at universities are coming through via Iranian twitter accounts. More twitter accounts claim Basiji are ntering homes and attacking civilians.

CNN reports hospital officials say 19 died today during the demonstrations. The death toll could be as high as 150.

According to this video, one woman was shot and killed by Basiji during the protests.

WARNING: THE VIDEO CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGES.

In terms of severity and risk, the situation may be getting out of hand. The woman killed is now being used as a rallying point for Iranians, an example of horrid government brutality. Her name was Neda, which, so fittingly, means “voice” in Farsi.

If Iran were to give in and approve a re-election, it could start a dangerous trend across the Middle-East. As Obama said, “the world is watching.” An Islamic Republic that gives in to the demands of the people could set a precedent for the citizens of other Islamic countries.

Countries that are successfully oppressing their people. These protests could mean widespread unrest throughout the Middle-East.

Thoughts of an Iranian student

But what does all this mean for Iran? What are these people fighting for? When will these protests end? How far will the supreme leader go to ensure his republic maintains some degree of control?

Yesterday I spoke to an Iranian exchange student, Mahdi Takaffoli, about the protests, the election results and the behind-the-scenes power struggle between Ayatollah Khamenei and Assembly of Experts Chairman Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president.

Takaffoli could not comment on the specifics of some issues since his media access is like ours. Restricted. Living outside of Iran during a period of extreme internal turmoil summons feelings of guilt within him. He said on one hand he’s glad he’s not there. His life, in Canada, is not in danger.

“But then I thought about it and I think I would like to be in Iran so I can show I have the courage to speak out against Khamenei,” he said.

Even though he can’t be in Tehran, Takaffoli is showing his support.  He attended a protest in Toronto last week, which drew a crowd of more than 1,000. He and I also attended a candlelight vigil on Friday night for those who died during the protests in Iran. He also plans to attend a rally in Toronto on Sunday.

Takaffoli even took a five-hour bus ride to Ottawa to vote at Canada’s only polling station. He voted for Mousavi, as did 85 per cent of the nearly 3,000 Iranian-Canadians who made the trip to the nation’s capital, he says.

After the interview Takaffoli expressed some regret over the harsh words he spoke against Khamenei. Not because he believed them to be untrue, but because his family still lives in Iran. “I am not afraid though,” he said.

Takaffoli spoke of his devotion to Iran and his allegiance to the reformist party and Mousavi. He admitted that when the election began he did not know much about Mousavi, but after watching the debates and reading about his policies, he decided Mousavi, as an artist, would be a good stepping stone to reform Iranian politics and help promote freedom of expression.

He says there’s been a reformist movement brewing for a while, especially among the educated youth. He’s happy that this movement now has a leader, though he did acknowledge that while Mousavi may not be everyone’s ideal candidate, he is a figure people can rally behind to look for real change. He criticized Ahmadinejad for acting like he works for the people.

He believed, along with his friends in Iran, that an election was the best way to have their oppressed voices heard. Now that may have been taken away from them, too.

Now, with a tainted, corrupt democracy, he doesn’t know what the future of his country will bring.

Takaffoli said there’s no way he could believe Ahmadinejad won so much of the public’s vote when so many citizens wanted reform.

He doesn’t believe in toppling the entire Islamic Republic though. He wants to achieve reform through the system because, as he put it, overthrowing the entire regime would result in the deaths of too many Iranians. Throughout our talk he made it clear he was against violent revolution of any kind, no matter what it could achieve.

Takaffoli doesn’t know what these protests will bring, but he is extremely proud and hopeful that his countrymen and women will force the republic to reform.

But that won’t happen if Khamenei has his way.

On June 20, we honor these people, their courage and quick-thinking in situations of extreme peril and terror. In 2000, the United Nations General Assembly decided the need for an international refugee day was imminent. To show solidarity with the plight of African refugees, they decided to have World Refugee Day coincide with African Refugee Day.

The day is extremely important, especially now. Along with several African nations, countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan are seeing their citizens run for solace, finding it in countries in Europe and North America.

Sometimes, they can’t even get out of their country, forced to make refugee camps, large open spaces equipped with just tents for shelter, their homes. The conditions are dirty and unsanitary. Debilitating diseases and illnesses spread quickly.

Recent wars in Pakistan and Sri Lanka have displaced millions of people. In Sri Lanka, many are still living in poorly kept refugee camps. In Pakistan, many will never be able to return, their homes destroyed by Taliban forces.

It is hard to comprehend, perhaps for many in North America, what it truly would feel like to have to flee your home to protect yourself or your family.

Imagine a war is taking place right outside your door. Opposition forces enter your home to use it as shelter against their enemy, killing you if you try to protect it, giving you just a short window to flee.

But war isn’t the only problem for refugees. Extreme poverty and governmental neglect can make surviving in your home country nearly impossible.

How can the children of Uganda, where it was recently discovered countless kids are being used and are at risk of becoming child soldiers or child laborers, leave? Today is not only a day to honor those who made it out, but also those who need to leave.

Events to honor the distressed are being held around the world. A dance event in Nairobi. A mini-marathon in northern Sri Lanka. A concert in Washington D.C. A symposium in Tokyo.

Take a minute today to research and learn more about the world’s refugees and the conflicts they face. Donate. Attend an event. Help our world’s refugees.

Oddly enough, it was Khamenei who congratulated Ahmadeinjad while both he and Mir Hossein Mousavi were claiming victory. The call for investigation will progress tomorrow.

The request comes amid reports of a leaked interior ministry file that shows Ahmadinejad finished third in the election with just 5.7 million votes. Mousavi, according to the report placed on countless blogs and news sites, finished first with 19.7 million votes and reformist Mehdi Karoubi finished respectively second with 13.7 million.

For the past three days Iranian citizens have been parading down streets protesting the results of the June 12 election and the victory it brought for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Millions of Iranians, both home and abroad, are convinced the election was fixed. Some believe the result was set before the election took place.

Why? Well, the results were announced after 30 minutes or so. Odd, since more than 40 million votes were cast. The ballots, by the way, were hand counted. The turnaround on that seems quite suspicious.

Many voters and international media personalities say they were skeptical before the vote even took place. I’d say there was some foreshadowing, for example the lax rules on political rallying for a liberal opposition candidate before the election.

Some in Iran may have thought the allowance of public support and rallies for Mousavi signaled the end of an oppressive government and the start of a government of the people, for the people and by the people.

But that was of course not the outcome of what seemed like the end of Ahmadinejad. He supposedly won the election, according to tallies released by the government, by more than 13 million votes, carrying regions with strong Mousavi support bases, such as Mousavi’s hometown.

And now, with the looming prospect of four more years under the oppressive Ahmadinejad, the people are fighting back. Not since the 1979 Iranian Revolution to overthrow the monarchy has such a public distaste for the ruling class taken place. But people are inspired and angry, both in Iran and outside.

Millions are following along on twitter, thousands are attending protests and rallies in their hometowns.

But the Iranian government isn’t happy about it, either. Reports have surfaced that some candidates were put under house arrest and some students were shot and killed at a rally Monday. Police open fired at citizens during a protest in Tehran on Monday as well, as supporters rallied despite government order prohibiting such demonstration. At least one person was killed.

In the video below you see men carrying a man who has been shot, possibly dead.

Secret police are trying to arrest protesters, an attempt greeted by contempt and violence by young Iranians. Some riot police were beaten bloody by protesters. But some police, as you’ll see in the video below around 2:47, are being helped by citizens. Possibly united by there lack of free expression and voice, the police simply doing their job.

A particularly gripping photo, seen here, shows a protester helping a riot policeman after he was beaten.

Mousavi appeared at a rally and spoke to his supporters today. Obama ensured Iranians today that the “world is inspired” by their actions. He also said it is up to Iranians to decide their leaders, signaling their will be no intervention from the United States. Many believe, as a democratic model and world power, the U.S. should intervene.

Protests will continue until something happens. Hopefully soon to minimize more possible deaths.

In the video, Ahmadinejad compares the rioting to misplaced passion by fans of the losing team after a soccer match. Degrading.

Ahmadinejad presser video on CNN

The protests went deep into the night. Journalists and citizens were arrested and beaten, police cars and bikes were set on fire, windows were broken – it was complete chaos, not seen since the 1979 Iran Revolution.

Protesting is not something Iranians normally do, so it’s a good sign of the people fighting for what they believe is rightfully theirs – a democratically-elected and coherent government that will represent the people in the way they want to be represented.

For up-to-the-minute updates on what’s happening in Iran, follow @LilyMazahery, a human rights activist and lawyer getting updates from friends in Iran, @tehranelection, a student living in Tehran, and @Change_for_Iran, a man named Farhad, who is, according to his tweets, taking part in the riots.

Seriously, follow these people. The two Iranians are really risking a lot by updating the world on what’s happening inside their country, since Twitter, Facebook and other sites were banned for a long time yesterday.

“I personally strongly protest the many obvious violations and I’m warning I will not surrender to this dangerous charade,” said Mousavi, according to Reuters.

The possibility of a re-run is very slim so Iranians, unfortunately, must come to terms with the reality of four more years under Ahmadinejad, a man whom many have called a “dictator.”

But the people just wont have it. To many of Mousavi’s supporters 62.6 per cent is suspiciously high. After all, before the election the two candidates were apparently locked in a head-to-head battle.

Mousavi’s supporters and supporters of free vote and democracy have taken to the streets in anger. Yelling “down with the dictator” and “freedom freedom freedom” they are vocally expressing their extreme distaste at the prospect of four more years under the tyrannical Ahmadinejad.

The protest has turned violent now, with many angry voters breaking windows, breaking into shops and setting fire to various objects across the crowded city. Police isn’t responding well, they’re using tear gas and batons in an attempt to discourage and stop protesting, which is, despite these attempts, still going strong. Reports of deaths are now coming in.

Click here to see photos of street violence in Iran.

Many of the protesters are urbanites who voted for Mousavi or Karoubi and feel betrayed by their government. A government who they say, perhaps frightened by the prospect of losing power, rigged the election to guarantee victory.

Mousavi said it. The citizens have said it. It’s popular belief among westerners, too.

If the election results are correct, Ahmadinejad apparently won handily in Mousavi’s heartland. That’s hard to believe.

What it means for society

Speculating about a possible election rigging won’t solve the problem however, because Ahmadinejad is now president and is unlikely to relinquish power or allow any sort of re-run. He’s never been one to give into public demands, and this isn’t an exception.

So what does Ahmadinejad’s election mean for Iran? Well, any hope for peaceful social reform is now defunct. The state-owned media will continue to dominate, private and liberal media companies will still be outlawed, and the government will still own the communications system.

The young will continue to be oppressed; freedom of expression will not become a real right for citizens.

Unemployment will stay around 30 per cent, yea, 30 per cent. No joke. Inflation will remain in double digits and the economic problems of the nation will go ignored, just as they have been for a while now.

For the U.S.? This term will serve to increase tensions between the two nations, largely at odds because of Ahmadinejad’s thirst for advancing his country’s nuclear program and his hate for Israel.

Mousavi has the same view on Iran’s nuclear program and Israel, though he claims he wants to advance the program for peaceful purposes.

No one really believes that, though the moderate reformist did say he wanted to increase positive relations between his country and the U.S. and middle-east. However, while he was prime minister in the 1980s, many horrible human rights violations did take place.

Still, he would have been easier to deal with, and most likely better for Iran. But that dream is dead. And for Iran, it’s worse. Their people will continue to be oppressed, humiliated on an international stage and controlled by their government.

The country’s 42.5 million-strong voting population is turning out in record numbers, sparked by the political agenda of reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and a public distaste for incumbent Ahmadinejad.

We all know Ahmadinejad is a little wired. He’s essentially alienated his country because of his vampire-like blood thirst for nuclear weapons and hate for Israel.

But Mousavi also favors continuing the nuclear program and doesn’t recognize Israel as a state. Neither do conservative Mohsen Rezai and reformist Mehdi Karoubbi, the other two candidates currently in the running.

What’s the difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad then? Well, Mousavi has publicly criticized Ahmadinejad’s incompetent, foolish and irresponsible behavior on the international stage. He says he wants to increase positive relations with neighboring countries and the United States. Mousavi also claims his effort to advance the nation’s nuclear program will be for “peaceful purposes.”

He’s promised to battle Iran’s “extremist” image. He’s advocated more personal freedoms in Iran and wants to reverse the ban on private television channels.

He has experience too; he served as prime minister from 1981 to 1989 and presidential adviser from 1989 to 2005, leaving just as Ahmadinejad was elected.

Mousavi is taking an Obama-like approach to Iranian politics, promising a reform of current political agenda that has so severely restricted Iran’s young electorate from freely expressing themselves. As an architect, a painter and president of the Iranian Academy of Arts, Mousavi is a strong advocate for freedom of expression.

However Mousavi was prime minister in the 1980s, during a time when some horrible human rights violations were taking place in the country.

Still, his followers are mainly young voters and the more educated elderly. His young supporters, as Obama’s did, openly support him in the streets, but instead of donning branded merchandise they dress head to toe in brilliant green. Some even paint their faces.

But this election represents the need for freedom in Iran. Freedom of a tyrannical government and freedom under an oppressive leader.

At this point, many believe anyone would be better that four more years of Ahmadinejad.

Ahmadinejad’s woes

Ahmadinejad’s public support is slipping. At home, he has been lambasted for largely ignoring the economic woes of the country. He’s also been criticized for what many see as an attempt to provoke the U.S.

“Our nation’s dignity has been harmed. We’ve been degraded. There has been increasing tension…is it in our interests?” Mousavi said to Ahmadinejad during a televised debate. He also criticized Ahmadinejad’s questioning of the Holocaust and accused him of moving the country toward “dictatorship.”

Ahmadinejad has accused his rivals of spreading unfounded lies and insults.

Internationally, we all know of Ahmadinejad’s antics. Most recently, his Israel-based racist rhetoric caused a 30 country walkout during a UN meeting in April of this year.

Despite all of this, BBC reports Ahmadinejad has a strong support base in the country’s military and state-owned media, which would make him hard to overthrow.

Will there be change?

The CBC reports that even though the two candidates draw largely different support bases at home, it’s expected international relations with the country will go largely unchanged no matter who is victorious, despite Mousavi’s claims of intending to increase positive relations with the U.S. and neighboring middle-eastern nations.

On a domestic level however Mousavi will, as a reformist, change many of Ahmadinejad’s freedom-preventing policies. His candidacy and professional background has sparked hope within millions of Iranian youth.

Just days ago, supporters of the two candidates gathered in scores in the streets of Tehran. In an example of free expression, angry young Mousavi supporters accused Ahmadinejad of creating a negative worldwide view of the country and for running the economy into the ground.

Mousavi’s supporters communicate largely through text messaging, a service which was down on voting day. Mousavi accused Iran’s government-owned communications system of purposefully shutting the system down in an effort to decrease conversation between young voters. An example of, if the allegation is true, Ahmadinejad’s free expression restriction.

Mousavi also claims some of his representatives were blocked from entering polling stations to oversee voting, CBC reports. Many fear the election could be rigged to ensure Ahmadinejad’s victory.

Voting time for Iran’s direct vote election has been extended by two hours to 11:30 a.m. EST. If none of the candidates achieve a 50-plus per cent majority, a runoff election will be held on June 19 between the top two candidates.

Anyway, this isn’t about abortion, though I think Veronique Courjault should have gotten three abortions instead of having her kids.

Courjault, the infamous Frenchwoman who confessed to killing three of her own babies and hiding two of them in the freezer of her home in South Korea, now stands trial in Tours, France.

The trial began Tuesday. The judge will have to determine whether Courjault is psychologically impaired or was aware of her actions, which took place between 1999 and 2003. She faces life imprisonment.

Strangely enough, Courjault’s husband, Jean-Louis, said he wasn’t even aware his wife was pregnant between 1999 and 2003. He also said he didn’t know she was killing the babies he didn’t know existed. Confusing. He has, however, been cleared of any involvement.

BBC reports investigators said Jean-Louis, an engineer, was often away on business, and his wife managed to hide all three pregnancies from him. Crafty.

Jean-Louis did however stand by his wife during her imprisonment. Courjault was jailed in 2006 after confessing to the murders, and Jean-Louis visited his ailing wife in prison regularly. He says she is “psychologically distressed.” Till death, they will not part.

Jean-Louis arrived in the court room Tuesday and told AFP “I am very, very tense. I am here to support the woman I love,” according to BBC.

It was however Jean-Louis who alerted the police after finding two baby corpses in the freezer in July of 2006. He and his wife had been living in Seoul, but the woman’s French heritage has made this a particularly disturbing local case of infanticide.

According to Courjault’s confession, she strangled one baby in France in 1999, later burned its body in the chimney of her house. She then gave birth to two children between 2000 and 2003, alone, and suffocated the two newborns in Seoul.

But wait, it gets worse. After Jean-Louis alerted the police, they took a sample of his DNA and allowed him to travel back to France and meet his wife, who was vacationing there with their two sons, then-aged nine and 11. Yea, she has more kids.

Courjault’s two surviving children were quite young when she was pregnant with the other three babies. Maybe they didn’t notice or were too young to remember and ask their father. Maybe they asked their mother and she lied to them. Who knows.

At first the couple protested accusations, claiming they had no idea whose babies were discarded in their freezer.

But that didn’t last for long. DNA tests confirmed the bodies belonged to the couple. Later, Courjault confessed to the crime, citing her reason for the murders as not wanting to have more children. Like it’s their fault.

Following the admission, BBC reports South Korea requested the woman and her husband return to face questioning. The couple denied and opted to be tried in France.

Despite having a legal co-operation pact with South Korea, France does not, in most cases, extradite its citizens.

How a mother, in her right mind, can kill her children is beyond my comprehension.

The women were arrested in March after apparently crossing the China-North Korea border. Some believe the two, who were working on a refugee story for California-based Current TV (led by Al Gore), were arrested on China’s side of the border.

“We are deeply concerned by the reported sentencing of the two American citizen journalists by North Korean authorities, and we are engaged through all possible channels to secure their release,” said a statement from the U.S. State Department.

Many believe North Korea, during this period of increased global tensions as a result of their nuclear and missile testing, are using the two women as “bargaining chips” with the United States.

What bothers me the most about this, and I’m sure the families of Euna Lee and Laura Ling, too, is the certainty that these two women didn’t and probably weren’t even able to commit a grave crime, hostile act or espionage.

They were journalists armed with nothing but cameras and the resolve to file a story for Current TV.

The sentence is more about North Korea being angry with the world because the world is angry with them. They will no doubt use the women as bargaining tokens because they know the U.S., rightfully so, would never allow two of their citizens to be prosecuted and subjected to more than a decade of “reform through labor” in a foreign, unstable nation for no solid reason.

North Korea hasn’t even specified what the supposed “grave crime” and “hostile act” is.

Why? Because the women most likely didn’t do anything grave or hostile.

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is considering sending an envoy to negotiate Lee and Ling’s release over what she calls a “baseless” detention, the BBC reports.

CNN reports senior administration officials are weighing their options, currently thinking about sending former Vice President Al Gore, who leads the independent media company for which Ling and Lee work, or New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who served as ambassador to the UN during the Clinton administration, to negotiate release.

“What we would try to seek would be some kind of political pardon, some kind of a respite from the legal proceedings,” said Richardson, the Taipei Times reports.

North Korea is expected to allow a visit from one of the men, according to CNN.

Humanitarian aid

What can we really offer them that won’t end up hurting us?

Humanitarian aid is perhaps a good option; North Korea is a poor nation. But they’ve routinely put the strength and welfare of their public image above that of their people, something that may again happen. Hopefully not, since they need the aid bad and have repeatedly demanded it when in situations where they have “bargaining chips.”

They closed their nuclear facilities during the six-party talks in exchange for humanitarian aid.

North Korea is  a strong but rusty machine, they never waver, though sometimes weakness emerges from beneath their guise of absolute strength. That weakness is their lack of money.

This isn’t just the U.S.’s problem either, it’s the world’s. It’s really North Korea that has committed the “hostile act” and “grave crime” by thinking this is OK.

We all wish for the safe return of  Euna Lee and Laura Ling. I can’t imagine a situation where the U.S. would allow North Korea to keep them.

You can do your part by signing the petition to Free Euna Lee and Laura Ling, or follow @liberatelaura on Twitter for all developments.

The Taliban is bombing mosques and the civilians, until now, were standing idly by.

For a long time it was difficult for civilians in Pakistan to publicly show their disloyalty to the Taliban. After all, Pakistan supported the Taliban organization for nearly seven years with arms and aid, while the Taliban imposed very, very strict Sharia law on all under them, in Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan.

Then they were ousted in 2004 by NATO forces and have been regaining muscle ever since.

Now the Taliban is waging war on Pakistan, a former provider and new enemy. They are attacking civilian establishments in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), most recently suicide bombing a mosque and killing at least 40 people.

So as you can imagine by having read all that has been happening to the residents of Swat Valley and NWFP, and the displacement of millions and the deaths of thousands, the civilians have had enough.

On Saturday, nearly 500 residents of the Upper Dir district (near Swat Valley, where the suicide mosque bombing took place) banded together to form a small but determined civilian army, known as a “lashkar,” and attacked the Taliban.

The angry, armed mob attacked five villages and destroyed 20 houses suspected of belonging to Taliban forces. Seven Taliban fighters were killed in the surge and the villagers now occupy three villages and are attempting to push the Taliban out of the other two.

“We are Muslims, we pray regularly and read the Koran. We don’t want them, they have to go,” said Upper Dir resident Samiullah Khan, Reuters India reports.

“Attacking a mosque is not Islam. They’re not Muslim,” he said.

The U.S. is hoping for sustained fighting from the Pakistani army to help push out the Taliban and neutralize their forces. By doing this, support for the insurgency in Afghanistan will be cut off, potentially leading to the defeat of al Qaeda and the war in Afghanistan.

It’s safe to say the residents are rising up. They are angry with their army for taking so long to act and for allowing the displacement of so many of their own people. They are angry with the Taliban for thinking they can act in any way and claim Islam as their defense.

They are angry that their way of life has been so disrupted. Now they are taking it back.

I did not. But luckily we have this glorious internet that allowed me to catch the whole thing just a half hour ago. Thanks to Al Gore for that invention.

Most of you won’t be surprised to hear that I liked the speech. I thought it was really effective in its own way and for its own purpose, which was to get Muslims and Americans thinking about their attitudes toward one another and to show the Arab world that America’s new government is committed to mending international relationships that have been negatively affected by Muslim extremists.

He acknowledged “no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust,” a message to those who believe he can solve this problem quickly and easily.

Early on, Obama spoke of an urgent issue, the Israel-Palestine conflict and the need for a two-state solution.

“If we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth. The only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security,” he said.

Obama’s goal is to get the two parties talking about a possible amicable parting of ways. A good approach, since he isn’t advocating a certain methodology. He’s just asking them to sit and talk to see where it leads.

While past presidents, like Bush, have shown no shame in taking sides in the conflict Obama is trying to be neutral and satisfy both parties at once. So far it’s going over well, he’s chosen his words wisely.

In his speech he said that the bond between the U.S. is permanent, however the situation and the treatment of Palestinians is “intolerable.” See? Wise.

The president spoke about the attitude of Muslims in regard to America and vice versa. Of the Muslim attitude, Obama said that the U.S.’s past efforts to advocate their way of life abroad has hampered relations between the two sides.

“…the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam,” he said, and added that the “cycle of suspicion and discord” must come to an end.

In regard to America’s view of Muslims, he said what I predicted he would in my last post, that extremist Muslim groups have soiled the foundation of an otherwise peaceful religion.

“Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11, 2001, and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile,” he said.

He also repeated that the U.S. is not at war with Islam, but added that they would continue to battle extremism in all parts of the world “because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women and children.”

Obama added that the U.S. does not want to keep its troops in Afghanistan, but would not bring them home until he was confident extremism had been defeated there and in Pakistan, where the Taliban is now running rampant.

He also talked about tensions surrounding Iran and their mission to become a nuclear power. “Any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,” he said. Iran would obviously not be OK with that.

Obama spoke of one issue that, surprisingly, resonated particularly well with everyone in the audience: women’s rights. He rejected the stereotypical attitude some of the West throws at Muslim women.

“I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality,” he said. “Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential.” Amen.

Obama made many references to the Qu’ran and at the end received a standing ovation from the crowd. He gave his speech at the University of Cairo where his crowd was full of a mixture of the young (among whom he has a sweeping popularity) and the old, more traditional men and women who listened to his speech with an apparent open mind and open heart.

Obama will travel to Germany and France before heading back to D.C. on June 7.