Activists: Assad Forces Kill 60 in Syria's Homs, Hospitals Overwhelmed - Voice of America

Activists: Assad Forces Kill 60 in Syria's Homs, Hospitals Overwhelmed | Middle East | English /* Inside VOA|Contact VOA News

February 10, 2012 Activists: Assad Forces Kill 60 in Syria's Homs, Hospitals Overwhelmed Israel Debates Possible Fallout From Attack on Iran Deal Reached in Massive US Foreclosure Case China Shows New Assertiveness as VP Prepares For US Visit US Drone Kills Top Militant in NW Pakistan Select Your LanguageAfan OromoAlbanianAmharicArmenianAzerbaijaniAzeriBanglaBosnianBurmeseCantoneseChineseCreoleCroatianDariEnglish WorldwideFrenchGeorgianGreekHausaIndonesianKhmerKhmer (English)KinyarwandaKirundiKoreanKurdiKurdishLaoLearning EnglishMacedonianMandarinNdebelePashtoPashto - DeewaPersian PortugueseRussian SerbianShonaSomaliSpanishSwahiliThaiTibetanTibetan (English)TigrignaTurkishUkrainian UrduUzbekVietnameseZimbabwe - EnglishNewsProgramsVideoLearning EnglishLive Streams:Latest Newscast|Africa Live|Global Live News USA Africa Americas Asia EuropeMiddle EastIsrael - PalestiniansIranIraqHuman RightsMiddle East In TransitionEconomy and Business Arts and Entertainment EconomyMore TopicsEducationEnvironmentHealthNews AnalysisReligionScience and Technology Web FeaturesSpecial ReportsPhoto GalleriesInteractive YouTubeFacebookTwitter Web ServicesPodcastsRSSMobileNewsletterWebcastsLinks About the USEditorialsRFE/RLRFAPronunciation Guide News|Middle EastMiddle EastRSS Feed  February 09, 2012Activists: Assad Forces Kill 60 in Syria's Homs, Hospitals Overwhelmed Edward Yeranian| Cairo

Photo: Reuters Wounded men are seen in the Sunni Muslim district of Baba Amr in Homs, Syria, February 8, 2012.

Syrian rights activists say government forces have bombarded the rebellious central city of Homs for a sixth day, killing at least 60 people and leaving makeshift hospitals overwhelmed as divided world powers struggled to end the violence.

The activists said Thursday relentless government shelling and rocket strikes on Homs were creating a worsening humanitarian crisis, with rebel-dominated neighborhoods lacking water and electricity and running low on basic supplies. They said the onslaught that began early Saturday has killed hundreds of people, making it the deadliest attack on Homs of the 11-month uprising against President Bashar al-Assad's autocratic rule.

U.S.-based rights group Human Rights Watch said those responsible for "horrific attacks" on residential neighborhoods "will have to answer for them."

VOA spoke with a Syrian activist in Homs who goes by the alias Abo Emad to conceal his identity. He said Syrian security forces are not letting up on their assault, adding that even walking one block from the building where he is hiding can be deadly.

“Everyday is worse than the day before," he said of the government assault. "More deaths, more casualties, more injured people, more destroying buildings every day.”

Abo Emad said there is very little access to mobile phones or land lines. He added that hospitals are overflowing with injured people and there are not enough doctors or medical supplies to care for the wounded.

Rami Abdel Rahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights in London told Alhurra TV that sporadic shelling is affecting parts of Homs, including Khaldiyeh and Bayadah, but that the heaviest onslaught is on the Baba Amr district, where conditions are extremely difficult.

Government forces are focusing on Baba Amr as it has been a center of the opposition.

In an opposition video, Muhammad al Muhammad, a doctor who is treating the wounded in Baba Amr, urged Syrians and the world community to protest the shelling attacks. He pointed to five children who appear to be wounded and called on Syrians to take to the streets to protest.

VOA cannot independently confirm the authenticity of the video's contents.

U.S. President Barack Obama called for an end to "outrageous bloodshed" in Syria in his latest condemnation of Mr. Assad's crackdown on the revolt. He was speaking Thursday after talks with visiting Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti.

Mr. Obama has agreed to work with Washington's European and Arab allies to organize a group of nations known as Friends of Syria to explore ways of further isolating and pressuring the Assad government to stop the violence. Western and Arab nations decided to try to form the group after seeing Russia and China block their efforts to pressure Mr. Assad through the U.N. Security Council.

Moscow and Beijing vetoed a Western and Arab-backed Syria resolution on Saturday, the second time they have done so since October. Both powers said they do not want the Council to take sides in a domestic conflict and create a possible pretext for foreign intervention in Syria.

Video footage from Homs

Arab League foreign ministers were preparing to meet in Cairo on Sunday to discuss their next moves in the crisis. Officials said the ministers will discuss whether to recognize the opposition Syrian National Council as the legitimate representative of Syria and whether to send a joint Arab League-United Nations observer mission to the country.

In other developments Thursday, Libya said it ordered Syria's top envoy and embassy staff to leave the country within 72 hours. Germany also said it is expelling four diplomats from the Syrian Embassy in Berlin after authorities arrested two men suspected of spying on Syrian opposition groups.

Rebel Colonel Riyadh al-Asaad, who heads the loosely-knit Free Syrian Army that is fighting government forces, called the Syrian regime a tyranny and asked for help to defeat it.

Hilal Khashan, who teaches political science at the American University of Beirut, says the Syrian government is trying to retake Homs in hopes of crushing the popular revolt at a key hub.

"They have been bombarding the city for the past six days," he said. "The bombarding is so heavy that it is clear that it is setting the stage for a ground offensive. The regime has made up its mind on conquering Homs, because they feel that if they conquer Homs, much of the uprising in the country will abate.”

Wire services and VOA reporter JulieAnn McKellogg contributed to this report.

 

Join the conversation on our social journalism site - Middle East Voices. Follow our Middle East reports on Twitter and discuss them on our Facebook page. Related Articles Activists Say Syrian Troops Kill 50 in Homs

They say troops loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad attacked Homs with gunfire, rockets and shells

Turkey Wants International Conference on SyriaUN Chief: Arab League Mission to Return to Syria Comments  (9) Sort by: Newest to Oldest | Oldest to Newest Post Your Comment * Required Your Name (Optional)
Your Country (Optional)
Your Message (Limit 500 characters)*
By using this form you agree to the following: All comments will be reviewed before posting. Be aware - not all submissions will be posted. VOA has the right to use your comments worldwide in any VOA produced media. Terms & Conditions window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({appId: '173332546055825', status: true, cookie: true, xfbml: true,oauth: true // enable OAuth 2.0}); }; (function() { var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = document.location.protocol + '//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js'; document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e); }()); Watch: Watch JulieAnn McKellogg's Skype Interview With Syrian Activist in Homs
Watch: Video of Assault on Homs
PollShould the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council be revoked? Yes No Not sureSee how others have voted »Listen to Podcasts and Join Us on

 

 

 

Follow Unrest in Middle East, North Africa

  VOANews:NewsProgramsVideoLearning EnglishArchiveWeb Services:PodcastsRSSMobileNewsletterWebcastsAbout VOANews.com:Terms of Use and Privacy NoticeBroadcasting Board of GovernorsInside VOAFAQsContact VOANewsJob Opportunities

View the original article here

Pittsburgh weather forces NHL to move Winter Classic to night - USA Today

PITTSBURGH — When it comes to NHL games, you win some, lose some and now some get postponed by rain.With weather forecasts calling for rain all day on New Year's Day, the NHL has moved the fourth annual Winter Classic outdoor game between the Pittsburgh Penguins and Washington Capitals from 1 p.m. to 8 p.m. ET at Heinz Field. It will still be televised by NBC

"I don't care if they play at midnight," Washington coach Bruce Boudreau said. "Let's get going."

The AccuWeather.com forecast calls for a cloudy New Year's evening, with a gametime temperature of 41 degrees. There is no rain in the evening forecast.

That's a sharp contrast from the daytime forecast, which calls for rain from 4 a.m. until 6 p.m. There's a 24% chance of a thunderstorm.

A light rain will freeze quickly on the 22-degree ice, but a steady rain is dangerous because it creates pools of water and because it limits player visibility.

"It's the same risk for both teams," Boudreau said. "So if it was a gravel (surface) it wouldn't matter."

The decision on when to play is an important one for the NHL because the Winter Classic has become its best marketing day. The first three Winter Classics have drawn an average of 4 million television viewers. The game between Detroit and Chicago on Jan. 1, 2009, drew 4.4 million viewers, which made it the most watched NHL regular-season game in 35 years.

This will be the first primetime airing for the Winter Classic

"It would be a shame not to have a game this weekend," said Pittsburgh Penguins owner Mario Lemieux.

The NHL wanted the Washington vs. Pittsburgh matchup because the teams have a rivalry and Pittsburgh's captain Sidney Crosby and Washington's Alex Ovechkin are considered the NHL's top two players. The HBO reality series "24/7" has added more hype to the game.

"When you walked in here today. You saw thousands of people in the stands," Boudreau said. "You look at the enormity of the building and you go, 'Wow, this is going to be a real cool event.' "

Added Boudreau: "We're thinking in the room, when they have the Super Bowl and they've got a week of this before the buildup, I can't imagine."

Should the NHL not be able to hold an official game (at least two full periods) Saturday, the Winter Classic will be held Sunday (noon, NBC). The stadium is available because the Pittsburgh Steelers are playing in Cleveland.

But the Sunday scenario is far less appealing because the NHL would have to compete against NFL games instead of bowl games for viewers.

"Whatever the scenario is, we have all been pretty open minded to whatever happens," Crosby said. "We should be all enjoying ourselves not matter what scenario."

The teams will switch ends in the middle of the third period to assure fairness in dealing with the weather conditions.

Said Crosby: "I think everyone is ready for whatever comes."

An alumni game, plus Capitals and Penguins practices, were all held on the ice Friday with temperatures around 50 degrees.

"The ice was great," said Lemieux, who played in the alumni game. "A couple times in the neutral zone there was a little puddle, but they came out and fixed it."

The ice actually received mixed reviews. "Not too bad, what you would expect on a sheet on a football field," said Pittsburgh defenseman Alex Goligoski.

Pittsburgh coach Dan Bylsma said the ice was soft, but the puck moved surprisingly well on it.

"The guys commented that, given the conditions, it was better than we thought it would be," Bylsma said. "… they were passing it fine."

Bylsma did note that goalie Marc-Andre Fleury said his slide across the crease was different because of the weather conditions.

But Bylsma said he felt like the conditions were good enough to play.

"It was an exciting day," he said. "I put it up there with a lot of my best experiences in hockey."

The Caps practiced last and found the conditions less than ideal. "The ice was not that good, but we have 24 hours," said Washington's Alex Ovechkin.

In the only competition news of the day, Bylsma said Jordan Staal's status will be a gametime decision. Staal has been practicing, but hasn't played this season because of injuries.

Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more.

View the original article here

Dot Earth: Scientists Join Forces in a Hostile Climate - New York Times

They’re not going to take it.

.
In the face of probes by a state attorney general, hints of hostile congressional hearings and assaults from critics in the blogosphere, hundreds of members of the American Geophysical Union are forming a rapid-response team aiming to challenge disinformation and misinformation deployed in the policy wars over global warming. The news was first reported by Neela Banerjee of the Los Angeles Times (a former colleague).

I sent a query about the plan to some of the scientists involved in the effort. The first response is from Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of earth science and international affairs at Princeton University and former chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund. Oppenheimer stressed that the “rapid response” effort will be focused on science, not on policy options (a wise delineation):

What’s true is that A.G.U. asked members who among them would volunteer for various outreach activities. This would be about science, of course. Whether it’s 700, I do not know. I only know that I volunteered, and by the way, am on the outreach committee for A.G.U. right now.

There’s plenty of worry about Issa, Barton, Inhofe, et al, but it may be that with the legislation dead for now, these fellows will turn their efforts elsewhere. But it doesn’t hurt to be ready and, in any event, the scientific ideas need to be explained and defended.

In my view, lots of people, particularly the philanthropic community, erred seriously in deciding that the scientific case was firm enough in the public’s and leaders’ minds so that they didn’t need to worry about it. The fact is the science is organic, and so is its opposition. It’s always a weak underbelly because the average person or political leader or business leader doesn’t have a firm grasp on it (in the case of the first category, why should they?) and the science is always evolving, so it’s always easy to generate confusion (see Merchants of Doubt). It will happen again. So what’s needed now is a serious effort to understand how expert information is taken up by the public (and key opinion leaders) and how to best inform them. The professional societies, the National Academies, the [nonprofit groups], the philanthropy community, and individual natural and social scientists all need to do more. Regardless of the particulars of the ultimate policy response, clearer, more reliable, trusted sources of organized information is needed.

I’m on the board of Climate Central, one such effort. We need many in different niches.

In recent weeks I’d been in touch with two of the organizers, John Abraham of St. Thomas University, and Scott Mandia of Stonybrook University, as they pondered various responses to the rightward shift in politics and the intensifying challenges to the vast body of science pointing to a human-heated planet.

Both have already jumped to the public debate, so they know what they’re facing.

Abraham is perhaps best known for posting a long rebuttal to the arguments of Christopher Monckton, a flamboyant critic of climate alarm whose pedigree, style and assertions would make him a great character for a climate-focused variant of the film “Thank You for Smoking.”

Here’s Mandia’s explanation for his activism:

The science of climate change and even the scientists themselves are under attack from a well-orchestrated and well-oiled misinformation campaign.  The best defense against this anti-science offensive is to make sure that the correct message reaches a wide audience.  Chris Mooney & Sheril Kirshenbaum in their book Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future explain that scientists have failed to get their message across for a variety of reasons but mostly because we are not engaging the public on their turf.  After reading that book, I became a climate change evangelist with my Global Warming: Man or Myth? Website, this blog, and more recently a Facebook Fan Group called Global Warming Fact of the Day.  I have two small children and I do not like the future that I see for them or for their children in a human-driven warmer world. [Read the rest.]

In an appearance last week at Purdue University I was on a panel with Roger Pielke, Jr., of the University of Colorado and Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology exploring the heated state of the debate over climate science and policy. Three questions were posed, one being: “Moving forward, is there a better role for climate scientists in political and policy debates, and if so, what would it look like?”

My answer was that it’s important first to specify the question at hand. There’s a big difference, for instance, between, “Are humans warming the world?” and “How fast should emissions of greenhouse gases be cut?” One is science, the other (because of the word “should”) is policy.

Scientists are wise to explain and defend their science, and if this effort by the geophysical union focuses on that, so much the better. The group has made other moves in this direction, including the creation of a blog network, the AGU Blogosphere.

They can feel free to get into the policy debate, as well, but there it’s vital (to my mind as a 25-year observer of fights over climate policy) to distinguish when one’s wearing the scientist hat and the citizen hat (as parent, homeowner, taxpayer).

This came up when I taught a graduate seminar at Bard College on communication and environmental policy in 2007, the year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change rolled out its fourth report.

I divided the class into two groups. One had to defend the presentation style of Susan Solomon, the co-leader of the climate panel’s science report team. Solomon rebuffed reporters trying to get her to interpret the findings and said her job was to lay out the science, not discuss how to respond. The other group defended James Hansen, the NASA climatologist who has become a passionate advocate for a quick end to coal combustion.

When not playing their roles, the students nearly unanimously supported Hansen, but after the debate, in which the pitfalls of both advocacy and silence were revealed, they ended up split and somewhat confused.

They should have been. As I said at Purdue, there’s no simple answer for a scientist — particularly a young one — when his or her work becomes deeply consequential.

Richard Somerville, a climate scientist at the University of California, San Diego, provided his explanation for his advocacy here. Jim Hansen did so recently, as well. But they’re both near the end of long successful careers.

If a scientist wants to join the policy fray and retain credibility, a vital step is to distinguish between assertions supported by data and those framed by personal values.

Nobody explained this better than Stephen H. Schneider of Stanford University, who passed away this year after decades of work on climate science, communication and policy.

In a 2006 e-mail message, part of a trove I call my personal “Schneidergate” files, this is how Schneider made the point:

To be risk averse is good policy in my VALUE SYSTEM — and we always must admit that how to take risks — with climate damages or costs of mitigation/adaptation — is not science but world views and risk aversion philosophy.

There’ll be more from my Schneider files on uncertainty and climate down the line.

View the original article here