Safari time in Africa for first lady, family
After nearly a week of public diplomacy and outreach in Africa, U.S. first lady Michelle Obama and her family went on safari on Saturday and had an encounter with an elephant.
Obama, who is traveling on her second official solo trip abroad, went to see wildlife at Madikwe Game Reserve in South Africa, roughly an hour away from Gaborone, Botswana, where she spent the previous night.
Together with her daughters, niece, nephew and mother, the first lady roamed the game park in an open-air vehicle, spending her final full day on the African continent engaging in a little touristic fun.
The elephant encounter happened toward the beginning of their tour, while reporters were waiting nearby for the one photo opportunity with the first lady in the park.
As her vehicle approached the spot where the press waited, it stopped and the family — with mouths gaping — turned their heads to see an elephant.
Journalists, not realizing what was happening nearby, walked toward the vehicle to get a picture, before a guide said it was not safe for them to be walking around.
Elephants, apparently, are the most dangerous animals in the park. Reporters scrambled back to their vehicle and got the picture of the first lady — without wildlife — a little later.
Clinton sees diplomats of the future in cargo pants as well as pinstripes
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has urged Congress to finance a major new U.S. push on overseas development aid, arguing that only by building up a global middle class will the United States increase its own national security.
Clinton, in an article in Foreign Affairs magazine which previews a pending State Department report on diplomacy and development, says it is essential for Congress to keep the money flowing even as the United States grapples with its own financial problems at home.
“The American people must understand that spending taxpayer dollars on diplomacy and development is in their interest,” Clinton wrote, saying it was time to put to rest “old debates on foreign aid.”
“It is time to move beyond the past and to recognize diplomacy and development as national security priorities and smart investments in the United States’ future stability and security,” Clinton said. “These missions can succeed, but only with the necessary congressional leadership and support. Congress must provide the necessary funding now.”
Clinton’s article comes ahead of the expected release of the State Department’s first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), a study launched in July 2009 which aims to set the framework for how U.S. diplomacy and overseas aid efforts will work together in coming years.
As with so many things in Washington, it will essentially be a plea for more money — a sore spot for Clinton, who frequently contrasts the relative ease the Pentagon has in pushing funding requests through with the much tougher sell she must make for diplomatic and development projects.
The First Draft: Hillary Clinton’s bad day
Some days, you really have to feel for Hillary Clinton. And this could be one of those days.
Secretary of State Clinton’s bad day started Monday in Kinshasa, in the middle of a grueling African trip, when a translator goofed and made it sound as if a questioner wanted to know what Clinton’s husband Bill thought of a particular issue. While on this tour, she’d already had to comment on the former president’s humanitarian mission to free to U.S. journalists from North Korea, and basically, she’d had about enough.
Read a just-the-facts Reuters story on what happened here and watch the video below.
But because the Clintons are the Clintons, with a long history in the public eye, that was hardly the end of it. Tuesday morning television — CNN, ABC, NBC, others — replayed the video of Hillary Clinton snapping at the student questioner: “You want me to tell you what my husband thinks? If you want my opinion, I will tell you my opinion, I am not going to be channeling my husband.” It was a five-star video on YouTube.
Back at the State Department, Assistant Secretary P.J. Crowley acknowledged that the question, however poorly it was translated — the questioner wanted to know what President Barack Obama thought, not former President Clinton — struck a nerve. Crowley told CNN that her reaction had to be taken in the context of her African trip, where she has worked to draw attention to the plight of women who are victims of rape as a weapon of war in Congo.
“If Africa, if Congo is going to advance, women have to play a more significant role. She was in the setting of a town hall, and the questioner was interested in what two men thought, not the secretary of state,” Crowley said.
What was the original question? So far I have neither seen nor heard it nor been able to find it. Would someone, please, just publish, audio or text, a complete, verbatim, in French, copy of the original question? Then we’ll know whether or not it was an error in translation, without having to rely upon journalists or “spokespersons”.
Btw, Mrs Clinton’s response to the question as put to her was perfectly justified. Error in translation or not, the question, as put, was idiotic.
from FaithWorld:
Can the United States fix Durban II?
The United States has decided to participate in planning meetings for the United Nations Conference on Racism in April in order to influence its final declaration. The conference, a follow-up to the 2001 meeting in South Africa that the U.S. and Israel walked out on because the draft declaration called Israel racist (that language was later dropped). Israel and Canada have already announced they would boycott "Durban II," as the conference is being called, and the Bush administration was opposed to the conference. But the Obama administration has decided to wade into the debate in the hopes of getting a better result.
Apart from the expected criticism of Israel, this conference in Geneva is also due to be a showplace for a drive by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to have the U.N. condemn defamation of religion. The U.N. General Assembly voted for just such a condemnation last December, for the fourth year running. While the non-binding resolution urged member states to provide "adaquate protection against acts of hatred, discrumination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general," the only religion it mentioned by name was Islam. Western countries opposed that resolution as contrary to the basic rights of free expression and opinion.
In statements in December, the freedom of expression rapporteurs of the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Organisation of American States (OAS) and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) have called on the United Nations not to issue any such resolution.
President Barack Obama wants to reach out to Muslims and foster better relations between Washington and the Muslim world. Should he show this by softening the U.S. stand on defamation of religions?
UPDATE: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that "the U.S. State Department set off alarm bells Sunday in the Jewish community by announcing that it would be taking part in consultations this week ahead of the conference" and the administration held a conference call with Jewish leaders to discuss the issue. Read the full story here.
My question is, why are they only focusing on Islam? Why not Christianity too? This seems to be always the case and I am tired of hearing, how Islamics are always being discriminated against. Anytime you talk bad about Islam, they riot and protest. Christians are persecuted all the time and that is never mentioned in the media. I believe, that the government is going to sell us down the river and this will only be the beginning of the “Racisim” card being played.
