Connect with us

Image copyright
Getty Images

Supporters of the president spent hours outside the hospital where he is being treated, and they were rewarded when he drove past on Sunday evening. Before that, they told the BBC’s Lebo Diseko why it was important to be there.

“We love Trump!”

“Four more years!”

“Donald Trump FOREVER!” shout his supporters gathered outside Walter Reed military hospital where the US president is being treated.

As passing cars and trucks hoot support, there are cheers and whoops from the the crowd of MAGA-hat wearers and Trump-Pence 2020 flag-wavers.

The crowd and the hooting seem to grow every hour – as the world’s media stand across the road.

A convoy of cars and trucks honking their horns and waving US flags streams past us.

“This feels like a soccer parade after a win!” my colleague remarked.

It’s just a couple of hours since Donald Trump’s medical team gave an update on his health, and said that they hope he will be back at the White House on Monday. The crowd and their convoys have grown steadily since.

“We’re cheering for his good health,” says an African-American supporter called Barbara. “We want him back as soon as possible, so we’re here to tell him that we love him, we’re praying for him and we need him in America.”

“In America and the WORLD!” her friend Wanji chips in.

Image caption

Barbara and Wanji show their love for Trump

She says the president’s critics are persecuting him because he stands up for Christians. “He has been taking all the stress of America and the world.”

His sickness just shows the country is sick, she adds, and like him it is recovering.

No-one has done as much for African Americans as Donald Trump, they say. That’s echoed by a Latino gentleman standing next to them.

Waving two flags – a blue one, which is his and a pink one belonging to his wife, Maurio says: “I’m very much for such a good president – he’s done a lot of stuff for the Spanish people.”

A little further down the line are a couple who say they flew in from Arizona – a journey of about 2,400 miles, which took them more than four hours. “We support our president 100%” says Danny Carroll, who adds they would have travelled even further if they needed to.

“That’s our president – we’re all in it together, red, yellow , black and white – we’re all precious in his sight.”

His wife Jeanie says she doesn’t always like the way the president expresses himself but she appreciates his results. She says the couple drive across the country a lot and six years ago, the country was dying economically but now he’s brought it back. They plan to stay until he’s back at the White House – then make the long journey home.

Image caption

Mauro and Jeanie travelled all the way from Arizona

Of course, the president is no ordinary patient, and when he does go home he will be monitored by his medical team 24/7. But there are still questions left unanswered after Sunday’s briefing from his medical team.

They admitted he his oxygen levels had dipped twice in the last few days – Friday and Saturday – but pressed for details on the second round of oxygen Dr Sean Conley said he would have to check with the nurses.

And when it came to possible damage to the president’s lungs. Dr Conley said there were some “expected findings” but didn’t expand on that.

This comes a day after mixed messages from the medical team and his chief of staff on Saturday.

He admitted the was trying to present an “upbeat attitude”.

1601860265 945 Trump in hospital Were here to tell him that we

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionPresident Trump pays “surprise visit” to supporters outside hospital

“I didn’t want to give any information that might steer the course of illness in another direction and in doing so, you know, it came off that we were trying to hide something, which wasn’t necessarily true.”

The fact that last sentence was considered necessary shows an awareness that for at least some Americans, there is a trust gap when it comes to the president’s medical team.

But that’s certainly not the view of the crowd gathered here.

Families with children joined senior citizens in the festival of we’ll wishers .

The president knows they’re there and rewarded them with an unexpected appearance. His supporters know he appreciates them and they appreciate him.

Source link

0
Continue Reading

Politics

France terror attack reignites a national debate on the right to offend

201029135736 15 france nice attack 1029 super tease

On Thursday, three people were stabbed to death at a church in the French city of Nice. While the investigation is still underway, French President Emmanuel Macron said after the incident that the country was under attack by “Islamist and terrorist madness.”
Thursday’s killings follow the murder on October 16 of Samuel Paty, a teacher in the northern Paris suburb of Éragny. He was beheaded after showing cartoons published in the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo depicting the Prophet Mohammed to students in his class. An 18-year-old Chechen refugee admitted to the killing in a social media post before being shot dead by police.
The name Charlie Hebdo will be familiar to anyone who remembers the terror attacks that took place in 2015, when gunmen forced their way into the magazine’s offices in Paris and murdered 12 people. The attackers allegedly said they were avenging the Prophet Mohammed. Charlie Hebdo, a small magazine known for provocative and often offensive images and articles, had published caricatures of the Prophet in 2012. Many Muslims consider images of the Prophet Mohammed to be highly offensive.

The recent attacks are reminders of the tensions in France’s secular society, which frequently extols the values of free speech and freedom to practice religion. France is home to 5 million Muslims, many of whom live in poorer areas and are often marginalized in politics and media. The vast majority of those do not support Islamic extremism, but often face unfair stereotypes, experts say.

“I believe there’s been an attempt to Islamize poverty in France by the far-right which had bled into mainstream politics and media, making people see crime in suburbs as a Muslim problem, rather than a socio-economic problem,” says Myriam Francois, a research associate at the Centre of Islamic Studies, SOAS, University of London. ”

The fact that there’s an audience for anti-Muslim rhetoric in the country will not come as news to anyone who remembers the French election of 2017, which came down to a second-round run-off between now-President Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen, who then led the far-right French National front.

Macron may have won comfortably, but over 10 million French voters went with Le Pen, an anti-immigration candidate who claimed that France was “being attacked by radical Islam.” The rising popularity of Le Pen’s party pushed concerns about Islam into the mainstream, with French politicians introducing controversial laws in 2010 which prohibited Muslim women from wearing niqabs and burqas in certain settings.

Both far-right attitudes and France’s long tradition of secularism may play into decisions by public figures in French media and in politics to criticize Islam in sometimes sweeping and derisive ways. The University of Bath’s Aurelien Mondon, who specializes in right-wing populism, describes this as “punching down” on an already struggling minority.

“France has a long history of satirical media, and it traditionally punches up as Charlie Hebdo once did. In recent years, it has started punching down, particularly when it comes to Muslims. When you do that in a country where there is structural Islamophobia, there is a real risk to create more stigma and exclusion,” says Mondon.

Mondon believes that some are misinterpreting France’s historic principle of secularism. “The law of 1905, which separated Church from state, clearly stated you would face penalties if you force someone to follow a religion and equally if you prevent someone from following their religion. In the context of modern France, what we are seeing is the latter with women and girls being forced to remove their hijabs, niqabs and burqas.”

France has a long and cherished tradition of freedom of expression, and there can be no justification for attacking cartoonists or journalists for what they say or draw.

After the Charlie Hebdo attacks, many French people signaled their support for its unconditional exercise of free speech with the slogan #JeSuisCharlie. But hateful speech should not be mistaken as an integral part of French identity, says Francois. “It’s entirely possible to be horrified at the murders that have taken place while also believing what Charlie Hebdo does is offensive,” she says.

“The problem for France is when people start pretending that Charlie Hebdo’s right to offend is a barometer of national identity. It basically prohibits a point of view and implies that if you don’t support Charlie Hebdo, you are not fully French.”

Things get even messier when the state appears to back a particular side. Macron has publicly supported Charlie Hebdo’s right to publish whatever it wants. The images Paty showed were in a class about freedom of expression backed by the French education system. And a Charlie Hebdo front page was projected onto public buildings in Toulouse and Montpellier, which both have substantial Muslim populations, last week.

Leaders in the Muslim world have also taken sides this time. Turkish President Erdogan has accused Macron of discriminating against Muslims, questioned if he needs “some sort of mental treatment” and encouraged a global boycott of French goods. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan also also accused Macron of attacking Islam.

A spokesperson at the Elysée Palace, home of the French presidency, told CNN that Erdogan’s attacks are “dangerous in every way.”

And this is the seemingly impossible problem France faces once again. On one hand, freedom of expression — even the right to offend — is a cornerstone of French society. On the other, when the state champions crude, provocative or hateful expressions of opinion, it risks encouraging bias against the majority of French Muslims, who are not extremists and do not support terrorism.

Mondon says, “If we don’t start discussing the broader societal issues facing France, we allow the narrative of two Frances: Muslims on one side; French people on the other. And that sort of division is not only incorrect but exactly what terrorists want.”

Source link

0
Continue Reading

Politics

Keir Starmer Says There Is “No Need For Civil War” After Jeremy Corbyn’s Suspension Triggered A Major Party Split

keirjez b4o9g6 hp9gwr

Sir Keir has said he was “very disappointed” by Jeremy Corbyn’s response to the EHRC report


4 min read

Keir Starmer has insisted he doesn’t want to be drawn into a “civil war” following a major backlash to Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension from the party.

The Labour leader has called on the party to “unite” following warnings from senior party figures that Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension would create “chaos” and cost them the next election.

Mr Corbyn was suspended by Labour General Secretary David Evans after he rejected the findings of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission report into anti-semitism, saying the level of anti-Jewish hatred was “overstated” by his political opponents and the media.

But the decision has triggered a major internal row, with Unite leader Len McCluskey claiming it was an “act of grave injustice”.

Speaking to the Daily Mail, Mr McCluskey, whose union is Labour’s largest donor, said that unless Mr Corbyn was reinstated the party would be “doomed to defeat” at the next election.

“This was a day for our party to move forward as one to defeat the evil of anti-Semitism. However, the decision to suspend Jeremy Corbyn has threatened that opportunity,” he said.

“The suspension appears to fly in the face of one of the important recommendations made by the Equality and Human Rights Commission – and which Keir himself said he would implement in full and immediately – which is to remove the leader’s office from party investigations.

“But it is also an act of grave injustice which, if not reversed, will create chaos within the party and in doing so compromise Labour’s chances of a general election victory. A split party will be doomed to defeat.”

Mr Corbyn has already vowed to fight his suspension, hitting back at what he claimed was a “political intervention” to have him removed.

Meanwhile, a raft of senior figures on the left of the party also lined up to criticise the decision, with former shadow chancellor John McDonnell saying it was “profoundly wrong”.

He tweeted: “On the day we should all be moving forward & taking all steps to fight anti-semitism, the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn is profoundly wrong. In interests of party unity let’s find a way of undoing and resolving this.

“I urge all party members to stay calm as that is the best way to support Jeremy and each other.”

Former shadow home secretary Diane Abbott added: “Divided parties don’t win elections. I oppose the decision to suspend Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party and will work for his reinstatement.”

But Sir Keir, who said he was “very disappointed” by Mr Corbyn’s comments, insisted there was “no need for a civil war”.

“What Len McCluskey is concerned about is that there shouldn’t be a split in the Labour Party and he is right about that,” he told Sky News.

“I don’t want a split in the Labour Party. I stood as leader of the Labour Party on the basis that I would unite the party but also that I would tackle anti-semitism.

“I think both of those can be done. There is no need for a civil war in our party, but I am absolutely determined to root out anti-semitism.

“I don’t want the words Labour Party and anti-semitism in the same sentence again. That is about building trust. That is my job, that is the job of the Labour leadership now, I know that now.

“The Jewish communities are looking at me and they are saying very clearly that we will judge you by what you do and not by what you say and they are right about that. I am determined to restore that trust and we can have a united Labour Party around that.”

He added: “I’m not purging anybody or any group within the Labour party.

“What I’m being very clear about is the Labour Party I lead will not tolerate anti-Semitism, full stop.

“Nor will it tolerate those who say anti-Semitism in the Labour Party doesn’t really exist, it’s exaggerated, or it’s just a factional war whipped up in or outside the Labour Party, including by the media.”

Source link

0
Continue Reading

Politics

Armenians on the front line in Nagorno-Karabakh

p08ww28q

Armenia and Azerbaijan have been at war for more than a month now – and both sides have suffered heavy losses.

The conflict, which dates back 30 years, is over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, run by ethnic Armenians in what is internationally recognised as Azerbaijan.

As the fighting continues, the Armenian mothers of those sent to the frontline have spoken of how their families have been torn apart – and not for the first time.

Film by Gabriel Chaim and Daisy Walsh

Source link

0
Continue Reading

Trending