 | Find great prices for amazing hotels wherever your next destination may be. It's simple to search 100+ sites at once! From our sponsors |
| CNN.com - Top Stories |
| CNN.com delivers up-to-the-minute news and information on the latest top stories, weather, entertainment, politics and more. |
Is American democracy dead?
4/27/2014 12:03:40 PM
- A new study shows that the wealthy have far more influence than the average American
- Julian Zelizer says study raises disturbing questions about power of campaign money
- If wealthy shape policy, the inequality divide in America will only get worse, he says
- Zelizer: It may take a constitutional amendment, and state action, to reform system
Editor's note: Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. He is the author of "Jimmy Carter" and "Governing America." The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- American democracy faces a very real threat. The power of money is overwhelming the power of average voters to influence government decisions. While this is an old lament in politics, social scientists are now finding very concrete proof about the damage being done.
The problem revolves around the way in which we fund our political campaigns. Opponents of campaign finance reform are having a field day. Over the past few years, they have watched with delight as the political parties and Supreme Court have slowly eviscerated the Watergate-era campaign finance reforms.
When the Supreme Court issued decisions citing constitutional barriers to the regulation of campaign finance and independent organizations have figured out new ways to influence politicians, opponents of reform proclaim that the system is better off. At a minimum, they argue that money and lobbying has always been part of this nation's politics: There is nothing much to do about it and the republic has survived.
Their arguments ignore the horrendous consequences that the influence of private money has on our democratic system.
The opponents of reform turn a blind eye toward the substantial evidence of how the nation is creating an unequal playing field that leaves many citizens virtually disenfranchised even when they retain the precious right to vote. Policies such as the tax system are skewed toward wealthier Americans, thereby worsening the cycle of inequality from which the nation can't seem to escape. As Elizabeth Warren recounts in her new book, the big banks had overwhelming influence as policymakers handled the crash of 2008.
At the most obvious level, the constant stories about the influence of money and lobbyists fuel public skepticism about the democratic process. The disillusionment caused by the role of money in politics discourages political participation.
But the effects are even worse than we might think. In an academic article that will make heads turn, the political scientists Martin Gilens (Princeton) and Benjamin Page (Northwestern) have found that as a result of our political processes, wealthier Americans have disproportionate influence on the kinds of public policies the government enacts. Average citizens matter, but only when they are in agreement with wealthier Americans. If not, they tend to lose.
Based on a sizable database of public opinion and a study of 1,779 policy initiatives over 20 years, Gilens and Page report that a majority of Americans have little or no influence on the kinds of policies that the government produces. "When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose." Because of the way our system works, wealthy interests have the ability to block changes that they oppose.
Wealthy interests were almost 15 times as likely to obtain their preferences from policymakers on issues like tax policy as were ordinary citizens.
This is the culmination of changes that have been taking place for several decades. The mobilization of business interests and wealthier Americans accelerated in the 1970s after the role of the federal government had expanded.
As Paul Pierson and Jacob Hacker showed in their outstanding book, "Winner Take All Politics," the strengthening and thickening of the organization of the corporate and financial communities in Washington resulted in highly sophisticated lobbying operations and campaign donation techniques that enhanced their ability to influence policymakers.
Over the next few decades, the result was congressional decisions such as regressive tax cuts that favored wealthier Americans (starting with Ronald Reagan's 1981 tax cut) and economic deregulations that have favored their interests, such as freeing up the financial sector in the 1990s.
At the same time that wealthier interests were mobilizing to fight against campaign finance regulations put into place after Watergate, presidential candidates in both parties, including George W. Bush (in 2000, for the primary elections) and Barack Obama (in 2008, for the general election), ultimately decided to reject the publicly financed campaign system that had required them to accept spending limits.
The political parties introduced new mechanisms, such as soft money, to get around regulations while the Supreme Court dismantled the 1974 reforms through a series of historic decisions.
One of the most damaging results of these changes has been that the political benefits flowing to those with greater financial means worsens the economic inequality that has become such a defining part of modern times.
These kinds of findings should be shocking to Americans and offer more than enough evidence about the dangers we are unleashing through the continued dismantling of the campaign finance laws and the failure to impose serious regulations on lobbying.
For all the arguments about free speech and the need to compete, we should take a close look at a political system in which most Americans don't have a voice in the process and where, even worse, the outcomes are biased toward certain segments of the nation who can pay to play. This is one issue where the left and right, as well as the slim center, can find agreement.
Given Supreme Court decisions such as FEC v. Citizens United and FEC v. McCutcheon, a constitutional amendment might be necessary if there is to be any possibility of limiting contributions and spending. In the meantime, states might become the central arena for experimenting with new reforms.
Unless reform takes place, Gilens and Page have shown us that the nation is allowing money to slowly undercut the democracy that built America.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
Why should you care about saints?
4/27/2014 8:33:24 AM
- Pope John Paul II and Pope John XXIII were canonized as saints
- David Perry: This is significant for Catholics, but non-Catholics should care too
- He says both men offer a model of risk-taking based on a strong sense of moral purpose
- Perry: Canonization is an attempt to turn the church away from decades of infighting
Editor's note: David M. Perry is an associate professor of history at Dominican University in Illinois. He writes regularly at his blog: "How Did We Get Into This Mess?" Follow him on Twitter: @Lollardfish. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- On Sunday, Pope John Paul II and Pope John XXIII were canonized as saints of the Roman Catholic Church. This event clearly has intense significance for Catholics, but what about everyone else? Why should non-Catholics even care?
Both men are widely popular among the laity, and the ceremony drew an enormous crowd. Both men also have critics. Some conservative Catholics still work to roll back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council called forth by John XXIII. Many Catholics strongly critique John Paul II's centralizing tendencies and catastrophic response to all the sex abuse scandals.
For Catholics, however, saints don't have to be perfect. In fact, Catholics are inspired by the ability of saints to do good despite their human flaws. The process of canonization concentrates devotion on the best features of a historical person.
In 1903, long before John XXIII was elected Pope, he wrote about each saint being "holy in a different way." These differences enhance, rather than detract, the importance of saints.
So what might non-Catholics take away from this?
First, both saints offer a model of risk-taking based on a strong sense of moral purpose. Second, one could learn a lot about what's going on with the billion or so Catholics in the world today.
The dual canonizations, it turns out, symbolize an attempt to turn the church away from decades of infighting and turf wars and toward a mission for the common good.
David O'Hara, associate professor of philosophy of religion at Augustana College, said, "It should matter to us when our neighbors announce that they have designated new moral exemplars." If our neighbors tell us a new story about their ideals, heroes and models for their own lives, then "we have an interest in watching and even in helping our neighbors to tell that story in a way that is beneficial."
Beneficial -- but how?
Claire Noonan, vice president for Mission and Ministry at Dominican University in Illinois, suggested that we all might be inspired by their risk-taking. Both men, she said, "moved through the world discerning where, when and how to act without fear. The possibilities of their lives were not constricted by desires for wealth, power or honor. That freedom makes way for the pursuit of truth, justice and love." Noonan cites John Paul II's work against communist oppression in Poland and John XXIII's efforts to "free the entire church from the fear of modernism."
Nonbelievers can, if they choose, admire these examples of courage and action without believing that the two men have a special status in heaven or endorsing everything that they did. In that framework, the process of canonization crystallizes the memory of the two popes around their best deeds.
The canonizations, though, do more than provide strong examples of moral courage. They reveal something very important about the aspirations of Pope Francis for the role of the Catholic Church in the world.
According to Catholic belief, popes do not make people into saints; God does. Canonization, an all-too human practice, is the process of recognizing divinely given sanctity. As John Allen Jr. has written, ideally this is a deeply democratic process, with devotion to a holy person flowing upward from the laity to the hierarchy.
Canonization provides an opportunity to shape memory.
People become recognized as saints, in part, through storytelling, a topic I study as an historian of the Middle Ages. When we choose what stories to tell about a person, we reveal a lot about ourselves, our hopes and fears, the ways in which we might try to do better personally, and the kinds of changes we'd like to see in the world.
That's been true since the early centuries of Christianity, a period in which sainthood was generally bestowed by local and regional communities without any broader oversight from church authorities. If a group of people believed that someone was a saint, and they set up shrines, venerated relics, developed rituals and told stories about miracles -- then that person was a saint.
During the Middle Ages, the papacy asserted ever-increasing control over the process of who got to tell the stories of saints. While the vox populi still matters, next Sunday is Pope Francis' show. The symbolism of the twin canonizations is so powerful, in fact, that the editorial board of the New Catholic Reporter reacted to the announcement last July by declaring that truly "the pontificate of Francis has begun."
Robert Ellsberg, author of several popular books about saints, suggested that by linking the canonizations, Francis is trying to start a new narrative. Ellsberg said, "The internal Catholic cultural wars and polarization have increasingly embittered a lot of the internal life of the church. Overcoming some of those divisions and synthesizing some of the best and noblest features of these two popes by joining them, is a hopeful sign for anyone who is concerned about the future of humanity."
If the canonizations of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II can inspire more of us, as individuals, to find a moral purpose and take risks, our lives will be better for it.
If the canonizations can help lead the Catholic Church away from bitter division and toward taking powerful moral positions on the world stage, especially following Francis' focus on poverty and inequality, we'll all be better for it.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
Dad: Teen jet stowaway 'a good kid'
4/28/2014 12:00:30 AM
- Abdulahi Yusuf releases a statement through a San Francisco-area Islamic group
- He says his son, Yahya Yusuf, has had trouble adapting to life in the United States
- He plans to escort his son back to California from Hawaii
(CNN) -- The father of the teen who survived a flight to Hawaii in the wheel well of a jetliner says his son is "a good kid" who has struggled to adjust to life in America.
In a statement released through a San Francisco-area Islamic group, Abdulahi Yusuf said he and his family came to the United States from war-torn Somalia. He identified his son as Yahya Yusuf and said he plans to escort his son back to California from Hawaii.
The 15-year-old Yahya told authorities that he crawled into the wheel well of the Hawaii-bound Boeing 767 and lost consciousness when the plane took off. He survived the nearly five-hour flight in subzero temperatures at oxygen-depleted heights as high as 38,000 feet, authorities believe.
"Our family was deeply concerned when my son went missing, and we were relieved to hear of his safety considering the circumstances of his trip," Abdulahi Yusuf said in a statement issued by the Bay Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
"My son, like many immigrant children, is struggling adjusting to life in this country," he said. "Our situation was aggravated by our displacement in Africa for many years after fleeing our home country of Somalia because of war conditions. As a result, my son was not able to receive any formal education before we immigrated to the United States. Yahya is a good kid who I love dearly."
Discovered after he apparently regained consciousness on Maui, the teen has been recovering at a hospital and is in the custody of the state's child welfare agency, officials there said. He told investigators that he was trying to get to Somalia to see his mother, and had no clue which plane went where, a law enforcement official told CNN last week.
He is said to have hopped a fence at San Jose International Airport shortly after 1 a.m. April 20 and stayed on the grounds for six hours without getting caught, a government official said.
Yusuf said he's headed to Hawaii soon, "and am excited to bring him back home to his family in California. We thank everybody for their concern and support, and ask that people continue to respect our privacy during this incredibly difficult time."
Teen stowaway was tired, quiet and hungry after plane's landing
Two Popes sainted at the Vatican
4/28/2014 10:15:52 AM
- NEW: Estimated 800,000 watch ceremony in St. Peter's area, 500,000 more around Rome
- Pope Francis hails John XXIII and John Paul II as "men of courage" in his homily
- "They were priests, bishops and popes of the 20th century," Francis says
- The presence of two living popes for a canonization ceremony is historic
Rome (CNN) -- John XXIII and John Paul II were canonized Sunday by Pope Francis in an unprecedented ceremony witnessed by huge crowds gathered in St. Peter's Square in Vatican City.
Millions more around the world watched as two former pontiffs were for the first time installed as saints in a dual canonization.
The faithful and the curious packed the streets of Rome around the Vatican before dawn, hoping to gain entry to St. Peter's Square and catch a direct glimpse of church history in the making.
Vatican Radio put the crowds at some 800,000 in the St. Peter's area, including the square and the roads and gardens around it. Another 500,000 followed the proceedings on giant screens set up around Rome, according to estimates based on police aerial shots.
In another first on a historic day, two living popes were present for the ceremony.
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who resigned from the papacy a year ago citing health reasons, was not at the altar but was greeted warmly by Francis both before and after the event.
Many of those gathered in the square for the solemn open-air ceremony carried flags and banners. The red and white Polish flag was prominent among them, a reflection of the affection felt for John Paul II in his homeland, Poland. Another read simply, "Thank you."
With the canonization, a holy relic for each of the popes was formally presented to the altar before the crowds. Giant banners showing the faces of the two late popes hung on the facade of St. Peter's Basilica.
In his homily, Francis described the pair as "men of courage" who bore witness to God's mercy.
"They were priests, bishops and popes of the 20th century," he said. "They lived through the tragic events of that century, but they were not overwhelmed by them. For them, God was more powerful, faith was more powerful."
He paid tribute to the efforts of John XXIII and John Paul II to renew and strengthen the church.
The landmark Second Vatican Council called by John XXIII was of great service to the church, he said. That council helped to bring the church to the people, for example by allowing languages other than Latin to be used for Mass.
John Paul II, who served for nearly 27 years, is seen as the "pope of the family" and wanted to be remembered that way, Francis added.
Popemobile progress
After greeting visiting dignitaries, Pope Francis climbed into the Popemobile, a chance for him to get closer to some of the many faithful who have flocked to Rome.
The joyful crowds waved and screamed as he passed through their midst in the open-sided vehicle, with Francis waving and smiling back.
One American pilgrim, Hector Alicea of Maryland, told CNN it was "a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" for him and his two children to be there for the event.
"It was very exciting," he said. "We didn't get a lot of sleep and it's very, very crowded, but all in all it was an incredibly cheerful environment."
The event has a special significance for him because his faith was revitalized after he heard John Paul II preach a sermon in Baltimore in 1994, he said. "What we are seeing today is the kind of youth who grew up in the John Paul generation."
He was impressed by the diversity of the crowds, he said, as well as the numbers of young and old among them.
Applause greets Benedict
Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said beforehand that as many as 150 cardinals and 1,000 bishops would attend the canonization ceremony, as well as some 6,000 priests.
Benedict, looking frail in his white robes, was greeted with applause as he took his place among the bishops and cardinals.
Delegations from more than 100 countries around the world were expected to be present, the Vatican said, including at least 24 heads of state. A large Jewish delegation was also to attend, reflecting the efforts of both popes to reach out to the Jewish faith.
Sunday evening also marks the beginning of Holocaust Remembrance Day.
The two popes canonized are:
John XXIII (1881-1963) -- known as Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli before he became pope -- was one of 13 children born into a family of Italian peasants, farmers from a tiny village in the country's north. He was sent away to study for the priesthood at age 11.
John Paul II (1920-2005), born Karol Jozef Wojtyla, was brought up in a grimy industrial town in Poland and raised by his soldier father after his mother died when he was just 8 years old. He spent his formative years living under first Nazis, then Communists.
His beatification is the quickest in modern times, made possible because Benedict -- who succeeded John Paul in 2005 -- waived the normal five-year waiting period after death to get someone's beatification rolling.
Tomb visits
Vatican observers see the decision to canonize both popes together as a masterstroke designed to invite unity within the Roman Catholic Church, since it brings together a conservative and a reformer.
The day chosen for the ceremony, the first Sunday after Easter, is significant because in the church calendar it is Divine Mercy Sunday. Mercy was a theme important to both popes -- and to Francis.
After the Mass, the Basilica of St. Peter will be open into the evening to allow pilgrims the opportunity to visit the tombs of the two new saints, Vatican Radio said.
John Paul II's relic, a vial containing his blood, is the same one used for his beatification ceremony in 2011. John XXIII's relic is a piece of skin removed from his body when it was exhumed -- in order to move his body from the crypt under St Peter's Basilica to the main Basilica -- for his 2000 beatification ceremony.
After the Eucharistic service, their names were included for the first time in the chanting of the litany of the saints.
The huge crowds present in Rome reflect the fact that both men were popular in life and known for their efforts to reach out to ordinary people, a path which Francis also seems determined to follow.
The event is the biggest in Vatican City since the election of Pope Francis last year.
The Vatican's official website said civil security forces were prepared and the subway system would run nonstop through the weekend to accommodate the influx of pilgrims for the ceremony.
READ: The superstar popes: Why they're being canonized
READ: Five things you need to know about Pope John XXIII
CNN's Ben Wedeman and Delia Gallagher reported from Rome and Laura Smith-Spark wrote and reported in London. CNN's John L. Allen Jr., Ralph Ellis and journalist Livia Borghese contributed to this report.
Will Egypt carry out death sentences?
4/28/2014 9:46:32 AM
- On March 24, an Egyptian court sentenced 529 people to death over violence in the city of Minya
- Last August, a policeman was murdered in riots after a crackdown on pro-Morsy sit-ins
- The sentences need to be approved by Egypt's Grand Mufti and can be appealed
- The length of the trial and severity of the sentences have sparked criticism
(CNN) -- A court in Egypt has sentenced to death more than 500 supporters of the now-banned Muslim Brotherhood following violence that broke out in the southern city of Minya last August. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry puts the number of those sentenced at 529.
A single policeman was killed.
Only 147 of the defendants were reportedly in court Monday. Sixteen people were also acquitted at the hearing. Another 683 defendants -- including the Muslim Brotherhood's spiritual leader Mohamed Badie -- appeared before the same judge Tuesday in relation to the unrest. Their case was adjourned until April 28.
CNN spoke to its correspondent in Cairo, Ian Lee, independent Egyptian journalist Shahira Amin and Egyptian legal historian Khaled Fahmy about Monday's mass sentence.
What happened in Minya?
A police officer was murdered during the pro-Morsy riots in Minya last August.
The violence followed a deadly crackdown by security forces on two Cairo sit-ins being held by supporters of former Islamist President Mohamed Morsy.
Morsy, Egypt's first democratically elected president, had been toppled in a military coup in July 2013.
Defense lawyer Khaled El-Komi told CNN the charges against the defendants appearing Tuesday include breaking into a police station, attempted murder, disturbing public peace and public order.
The death sentence imposed on 529 people -- will it be carried out?
Lee said it was "highly unlikely" that all those sentenced to death would be executed. He said Egypt had a large appeals process and the country's chief Islamic authority -- the Grand Mufti -- also had to approve the death sentences.
Many death sentences in Egypt are later reduced, or overturned, Lee said. "When you hear something like this, well it is shocking, but you do have to step back and say there's a lot between the sentencing and the execution."
Fahmy also said it was most likely the sentences would be appealed and revised.
"With regard those on the run, they automatically have the right for an entire new trial, in addition to the right of appeal following the issuance of the sentence," he said.
Ahmed Shabib, a lawyer representing some of those sentenced to death, said that they would appeal the verdict after the Grand Mufti had made his decision allowing the court to announce its final ruling -- set for April 28.
How was the trial conducted?
The Minya court has been criticized for taking just two sessions to reach its verdict against the 529 people convicted.
"Never before has a court issued such a large number of death sentences in such a short period of time -- only two sessions," Fahmy said.
The Egyptian news organization Ahram Online said the court had issued its verdict "-- the biggest capital punishment verdict in the history of the Egyptian judiciary -- without hearing the defense arguments."
El-Komi told CNN his team of lawyers weren't allowed inside the courtroom.
He said they didn't have any time to plead the case or review the evidence as the first procedural session was on Saturday, before being postponed until Monday -- when the verdict was issued.
One defendant told CNN he hadn't been summoned for questioning by the prosecution or by the court for the trial.
The man, who requested anonymity, said he hadn't been in Minya during the incident.
The verdict was "unjust" he said and the accusations "invalid." Another defendant -- who also asked not to be named -- told CNN he had been at home during the violence.
He said he believed he had been added to the list of defendants just because he was a member of the anti-coup alliance. Ten members of the alliance had also died that day, he claimed, and no one had been held accountable.
How does the sentence compare to others?
Fahmy said the court's ruling made a "mockery of the entire Egyptian legal system."
"As a historian of the Egyptian legal system, I can confidently say that this court ruling is a travesty of justice," he said.
"Never before in Egypt's long history has there ever been a ruling so obscene in its contradiction of the very principles of justice."
Fahmy described the ruling as "particularly perverse" as it handed down death sentences against 529 defendants accused of killing a single police officer.
Journalist Amin said the sentence was "ridiculous and a grave injustice."
"Ridiculous because it's not possible that 529 people can murder a police officer -- which was one of the charges against the defendants. The other charge is less serious of course -- destruction of public property -- and doesn't deserve a death sentence."
Amin said the judiciary was displaying double standards. She pointed to the death of Khaled Said in 2010, whose alleged brutal beating by security forces is said to have been one of the factors behind the 2011 revolution that led to the ousting of then-President Hosni Mubarak.
"The killer of Khaled Said got a 10-year prison sentence," she said.
Meantime, Ahram Online pointed to the sentencing of a police officer to 10 years imprisonment for the deaths of 37 Islamists in a police van last year as a "sharply contrasting verdict."
How has the Egyptian public reacted to the verdicts?
Amin said the verdict had been received with shock.
"The harsh sentence came as a big shock to me and many others including Egypt's liberals, many of whom oppose the Muslim Brotherhood," said journalist Amin.
"Morsy's supporters are calling it a 'death penalty for the judicial system in Egypt'," she said.
"You still find supporters of the military who say that they deserve it, these are terrorists. That's because the country is extremely and deeply polarized and anyone seen to show sympathy -- even remotely -- for the Muslim Brotherhood is labeled a traitor and accused of being one of them," she said.
Fahmy said he had little doubt that the ruling was politically motivated.
"It is as if the judge wanted to appease the military rulers of the country who decided to wage a 'War on Terror' and have declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization," he said.
Fahmy claimed the sentence had made "a mockery of the entire Egyptian legal system," and in the process undermines a fundamental pillar of society -- the very principle that the regime is accusing the Muslim Brotherhood of doing.
"In other words, if there is anyone who is undermining the stability of the Egyptian state, it is the judiciary and its incessant desire to appease the military and the police," he said.
Amin said it was "clear that courts are being used to settle political scores."
"The courts are one more battleground for the political standoff between the military backed authorities and the Islamist group," she said. "So basically, the verdict is a threat to Muslim Brotherhood supporters -- and also to opponents of the regime in general -- that there's zero tolerance for dissent."
Lee said the verdict can be seen as part of the ongoing crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood and their supporters in which hundreds have died and thousands arrested.
The irony, he said, is that while 529 people were sentenced to death over the killing of one police officer and attempted murder of another, no one has been held accountable for the deaths of hundreds of protesters.
How has Egypt's government responded?
Egypt's government, through its foreign ministry, stressed the independence of the country's judiciary in a statement to CNN.
"The Egyptian government would like to affirm that the Egyptian judiciary is entirely independent and is not influenced in any way by the executive branch of government, as dictated by the democratic principle of separation of powers," the ministry said.
The ministry pointed out that the Minya sentence had been issued by an independent court "after careful study of the case; that it was only the first verdict in the trial process; and that the defendants would be able to contest the verdict in the Court of Cassation."
What about the Muslim Brotherhood?
The Muslim Brotherhood issued a statement saying the sentence "violates judicial norms."
"The shocking and unprecedented sentencing of 529 Muslim Brotherhood supporters without due process is evidently inhumane and a clear violation of all norms of humane and legal justice," it said in a statement on its website.
"The verdict is yet another clear indication that the corrupt judiciary is being utilized by the coup commanders to suppress the Egyptian revolution and install a brutal regime which has already surpassed decades long of oppression and tyranny in Egypt's history."
In December, Egypt's interim government officially declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
It said anyone who was a member would be punished, as would those found to be giving the group financial support.
What's happened to Mohamed Morsy?
Morsy, the former head of the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm, was elected president in 2012.
Shortly after winning, he resigned from the Muslim Brotherhood and its Freedom and Justice Party in an effort to show that he would represent all Egyptians.
But he was ousted in a coup in July 2013 amid widespread protests against his rule, with opponents accusing him of pursuing an Islamist agenda and excluding other factions from the government.
Morsy and other Brotherhood leaders were rounded up after the coup and now face a variety of counts, including organizing attacks on Egyptian troops in the Sinai Peninsula and fueling "sectarian sedition with the aim of igniting civil war in Egypt."
529 sentenced to death in Egypt
Muslim Brotherhood banned
What is the Muslim Brotherhood
Lawyers in Muslim Brotherhood case seek new judges
5 ways Ukraine crisis could end
4/26/2014 8:55:56 AM
- Ukraine's government is running out of options for restoring its control of eastern regions
- Many government and police buildings are still held by pro-Russian protesters
- Constitutional reforms are still being thrashed out
- CNN looks as possible scenarios that could unfold between now and the May 25 elections
(CNN) -- Ukraine's young government is running out of viable options for restoring its control of eastern regions and preserving the country's territorial integrity. Government and police buildings in more than a dozen places are still held by pro-Russian protesters, sometimes led by masked and well-armed men in uniform. The response from Kiev to this assault has been inconsistent and hesitant.
Amid a war of words between Washington and Moscow, the "agreement" reached in Geneva last week for resolving the crisis looks dead in the water. Russia and Ukraine accuse each other of bad faith, and on the ground there is a growing sense of stalemate, interrupted by episodes of violence that only harden views.
Just one month before the Ukrainian presidential election, constitutional reforms that might mollify the pro-Russian protesters are still being thrashed out.
The Geneva agreement called on the protesters to relinquish the buildings they hold and promised amnesty for those who do. But the immediate answer from behind the barricades was defiant.
As one of the leaders of the occupation in Donetsk put it to CNN, "We have not come this far just to leave without our demands being met. It is the Kiev government that is illegitimate. They have to give up the buildings they have seized." There was a similar response from protest leaders in the southern city of Mariupol.
So how might events in Ukraine unfold between now and the May 25 elections? Here are some of the scenarios that could play out, but events are moving swiftly and unpredictably.
Peace breaks out
The Geneva agreement offered what U.S. President Barack Obama called "a glimmer of hope." But John Kerry, his top diplomat, cautioned after the talks: "None of us leave here with the sense that the job is done because the words are on the paper."
The job of implementing the agreement has fallen to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) which already has about 100 monitors in eastern Ukraine and is tasked with negotiating the surrender of occupied buildings.
In Kerry's words, "what is vital is that the OSCE needs to get to work immediately to de-escalate the security situation in Luhansk, in Donetsk, in Slavyansk and all the other towns that have been destabilized."
But the OSCE monitors have no powers of enforcement - and the visceral hatred of the pro-Russian groups for both the U.S. and Europe makes their task a daunting one. CNN met a team of observers in Slavyansk on Monday after they'd spent two hours with the self-declared mayor. They confined themselves to a brief statement that gave no indication of progress, and the Organization later acknowledged problems in gaining access to the town.
Put simply, the occupiers don't see themselves as behaving illegally. Denis Pushilin, who's become the political voice of the so-called "Donetsk People's Republic," turned the tables on Kiev, saying the government (or junta, as pro-Russian groups prefer to call it) had come to power through a coup and was itself illegally occupying public buildings. Pushilin insisted that plans for a local referendum on Donetsk's future -- organized by the protesters -- would proceed. We heard the same message in Slavyansk, Luhansk and Mariupol.
Much hinges on what sort of constitutional reform emerges. Kerry said Thursday that the Ukrainian government had gone "to extraordinary lengths to address regional demands for more autonomy, for local self-government, for the protection of minority rights." Visiting Donetsk recently, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk promised far-reaching devolution to the regions, including greater control over their finances. But Russia wants more - a guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO and direct elections in the regions to both legislative and executive office. One of the most centralized states on earth is demanding sweeping decentralization next door.
As William Partlett, a lecturer at Columbia University's School of Law, writes in the magazine Jurist: "The 'framers' of the new Ukrainian constitution therefore are likely not to just be Ukrainians-and the bargaining is just as likely to take place in Geneva rather than Kiev."
The government's attitude toward a referendum has been ambivalent. Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov has said he is "not against" a national referendum on the country's form of government, perhaps in tandem with the presidential vote.
But the protesters say they will accept nothing less than a regional referendum that gives Donetsk and other eastern regions the option to secede from Ukraine. They have set up committees in Luhansk and Donetsk to plan a vote on May 11, though how it would be organized in an area with a population of more than 6.5 million people is open to question. Few of the protesters have any government experience: 32-year old Pushilin is a former security guard turned businessman and Irina Voropayeva, the spokeswoman in Mariupol, a housewife. And whether it would be seen as free and fair, without an independent election body or international observers, is questionable.
The irony is that several polls conducted by Ukrainian NGOs in recent months suggest the supporters of unification with Russia are in a minority. The Institute for Social Studies and Political Analysis in Donetsk reported in March that two-thirds of respondents were not in favor of joining Russia. But a majority also thought Ukraine was going in the wrong direction.
Ukraine's government recovers control of the east
On the evidence of the past few weeks, that seems very improbable. Pro-Russian groups control buildings from Slavyansk in the north to Mariupol on the Sea of Azov. They are often led by "men in green," as the uniformed groups have become known. They are now the effective authority in swathes of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Local police have either vanished or cut a deal with them.
The army's first attempts to assert a presence in the east have been disastrous. South of Kramatorsk last Wednesday, CNN encountered a column of a dozen armored personnel carriers stranded either side of a railway line. Some 100 soldiers of the 25th Airborne Brigade, exhausted and dejected, were being harangued by local people, as the leader of a pro-Russian group negotiated terms for their release. Eventually they gave up much of their equipment and were allowed to leave, and the next day, Turchynov disbanded the unit. Six armored personnel carriers (APCs) from another unit were seized and paraded in Slavyansk.
CNN followed one military convoy of some 70 vehicles for two hours across a rural swathe of Donetsk region. Several of its vehicles broke down; most were of Soviet vintage and in poor repair. Stragglers were left behind. Morale seemed brittle at best.
Ukrainian police have been largely invisible as the crisis has unfolded. Riot police virtually surrounded a pro-Kiev rally in Donetsk to prevent clashes last week, but elsewhere local police have stepped aside whenever trouble has surfaced. At one roadblock, between Donetsk and Slavyansk, they have stood across the road as pro-Russian protesters check traffic.
Civil war
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war, but it doesn't look like that. The pro-Russian protesters are often in dozens rather than hundreds and there is very little pro-Kiev sentiment on display. The pro-Kiev rally in Donetsk last week attracted about 1,000 people.
There have been no large rallies or street clashes. Traffic streams down Artyoma Street in Donetsk, oblivious or used to the barricades of tires and Russian flags outside the regional government building, and children play on swings within sight of the coils of razor-wire.
It seems many people here don't want to get involved. Some fear that they will be attacked if they show their colors. But the great majority are going about their daily business as normal, too preoccupied with making ends meet as the economy worsens and the value of the hryvna (Ukraine's currency) slides. It's down nearly 30% against the dollar this year. The last thing they want is violence.
Katerina, a young mother out with her son in a Donetsk park last Friday, expressed the exasperation felt by many here.
"If my son asks me about what happened, we ourselves don't understand. Who is in power? Those people who are right? Or those who are not?" she said.
In the countryside, life goes on slowly. Cows are led to pasture, elderly women sit on benches and gossip. The barricades seem a long way distant.
There is a risk that ultra-nationalists in Kiev - known as the Pravy Sektor or Right Sektor - will organize groups to confront the enemy in the east. Pro-Russian leaders in Slavyansk accused the group of being behind a shooting at a rural roadblock on Sunday, and paraded ID tags allegedly identifying the assailants as members of the Sektor.
Moscow chimed in, accusing Kiev of being "unwilling to put in check and disarm nationalists and extremists." Right Sektor swiftly denied it had any members in the area, and the incident seemed to raise more questions than it answered. But a rash of such incidents, however caused, could bring Russian intervention closer.
A Russian invasion
Both Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have said repeatedly that Russia has no plans to invade or annex eastern Ukraine, despite the presence of some 40,000 Russian troops close to the border. Such an incursion would lead to far more stringent sanctions against Russia by the West; and the use of conventional forces in an occupation would be a dangerous and expensive move at a time when the Russian economy is stuttering. In any case, Russia's interests are already being served by the "men in green," some of whom have come to eastern Ukraine from Russia, Crimea and Belarus, and who are chipping away at Kiev's authority in the region.
But should the Ukrainian government try to reassert its authority in the east or Ukrainian nationalists arrive in numbers, leading to casualties among the protesters, Moscow's calculations might change. It has consistently promised to protect Russian "compatriots" in Ukraine, and during his lengthy news conference last week said: "I remind you that the Federation Council (the upper house of the Russian Duma) has given the president the right to use armed forces in Ukraine."
He also used the term "Novorossiya" to talk about parts of Ukraine -- a word used during the 1700s to describe the Tsarist expansion of Russia's borders southward to the Black Sea. To those in the former Soviet republics who believe Putin's ambition is to restore a Greater Russia, it was a telling moment.
Pro-Russian protesters in Ukraine call for Russian help on an almost daily basis, begging for protection from the "fascists." The self-declared mayor of Slavyansk, Vyacheslav Ponomarev, appealed to Putin directly Sunday, saying: "If you can't send peace-keeping troops, please help with food, weapons, whatever you can. Our people are ready to fight to defend our land from the fascist invasion."
If these sporadic cries for help gather pace, with or without Moscow's encouragement, a full-scale Russian intervention cannot be discounted.
The messy status quo
To many observers, that seems the most likely scenario - a stand-off between Kiev and pro-Russian groups in the east. The young and largely inexperienced Ukrainian government has shown itself incapable of dealing with the pro-Russian groups, who in turn don't have (as yet) the muscle to turn protest into outright secession.
Ukrainian security forces even appear to be trying to lock in the contagion, with military and police checkpoints springing up on the borders between Kharkiv and Donetsk regions, and checkpoints around Donetsk city beefed up.
There is growing coordination between the protesters in different cities, and the small groups of unknown uniformed men have shown it doesn't take much to seize buildings that are largely unguarded. A CNN team observed several vehicles with masked men leaving Slavyansk on Monday; two hours later they were involved in the seizure of the police station in nearby Kramatorsk. But the pro-Russian protesters don't appear capable of governing. Many of those milling about the regional government building in Donetsk wearing balaclava masks are teenagers. No political leader has yet emerged as a figure with whom the government (or the OSCE) could negotiate.
The next steps will be the publication of a new draft constitution, and the May 11 vote organized by pro-Russian groups in the east. Turchynov, the acting President, insisted Tuesday that the "majority of Ukrainian citizens are for a united unitary democratic Ukraine with greater powers given to the regions."
READ: Ukraine: Pro-Russian militants to be targeted in renewed security operation
READ: Ukraine: Photos show undercover Russian troops
READ: Opinion: Why Geneva accord on Ukraine is tactical victory for Russia
Perry: What saints can teach us
4/27/2014 1:40:02 PM
- Pope John Paul II and Pope John XXIII were canonized as saints
- David Perry: This is significant for Catholics, but non-Catholics should care too
- He says both men offer a model of risk-taking based on a strong sense of moral purpose
- Perry: Canonization is an attempt to turn the church away from decades of infighting
Editor's note: David M. Perry is an associate professor of history at Dominican University in Illinois. He writes regularly at his blog: "How Did We Get Into This Mess?" Follow him on Twitter: @Lollardfish. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- On Sunday, Pope John Paul II and Pope John XXIII were canonized as saints of the Roman Catholic Church. This event clearly has intense significance for Catholics, but what about everyone else? Why should non-Catholics even care?
Both men are widely popular among the laity, and the ceremony drew an enormous crowd. Both men also have critics. Some conservative Catholics still work to roll back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council called forth by John XXIII. Many Catholics strongly critique John Paul II's centralizing tendencies and catastrophic response to all the sex abuse scandals.
For Catholics, however, saints don't have to be perfect. In fact, Catholics are inspired by the ability of saints to do good despite their human flaws. The process of canonization concentrates devotion on the best features of a historical person.
In 1903, long before John XXIII was elected Pope, he wrote about each saint being "holy in a different way." These differences enhance, rather than detract, the importance of saints.
So what might non-Catholics take away from this?
First, both saints offer a model of risk-taking based on a strong sense of moral purpose. Second, one could learn a lot about what's going on with the billion or so Catholics in the world today.
The dual canonizations, it turns out, symbolize an attempt to turn the church away from decades of infighting and turf wars and toward a mission for the common good.
David O'Hara, associate professor of philosophy of religion at Augustana College, said, "It should matter to us when our neighbors announce that they have designated new moral exemplars." If our neighbors tell us a new story about their ideals, heroes and models for their own lives, then "we have an interest in watching and even in helping our neighbors to tell that story in a way that is beneficial."
Beneficial -- but how?
Claire Noonan, vice president for Mission and Ministry at Dominican University in Illinois, suggested that we all might be inspired by their risk-taking. Both men, she said, "moved through the world discerning where, when and how to act without fear. The possibilities of their lives were not constricted by desires for wealth, power or honor. That freedom makes way for the pursuit of truth, justice and love." Noonan cites John Paul II's work against communist oppression in Poland and John XXIII's efforts to "free the entire church from the fear of modernism."
Nonbelievers can, if they choose, admire these examples of courage and action without believing that the two men have a special status in heaven or endorsing everything that they did. In that framework, the process of canonization crystallizes the memory of the two popes around their best deeds.
The canonizations, though, do more than provide strong examples of moral courage. They reveal something very important about the aspirations of Pope Francis for the role of the Catholic Church in the world.
According to Catholic belief, popes do not make people into saints; God does. Canonization, an all-too human practice, is the process of recognizing divinely given sanctity. As John Allen Jr. has written, ideally this is a deeply democratic process, with devotion to a holy person flowing upward from the laity to the hierarchy.
Canonization provides an opportunity to shape memory.
People become recognized as saints, in part, through storytelling, a topic I study as an historian of the Middle Ages. When we choose what stories to tell about a person, we reveal a lot about ourselves, our hopes and fears, the ways in which we might try to do better personally, and the kinds of changes we'd like to see in the world.
That's been true since the early centuries of Christianity, a period in which sainthood was generally bestowed by local and regional communities without any broader oversight from church authorities. If a group of people believed that someone was a saint, and they set up shrines, venerated relics, developed rituals and told stories about miracles -- then that person was a saint.
During the Middle Ages, the papacy asserted ever-increasing control over the process of who got to tell the stories of saints. While the vox populi still matters, next Sunday is Pope Francis' show. The symbolism of the twin canonizations is so powerful, in fact, that the editorial board of the New Catholic Reporter reacted to the announcement last July by declaring that truly "the pontificate of Francis has begun."
Robert Ellsberg, author of several popular books about saints, suggested that by linking the canonizations, Francis is trying to start a new narrative. Ellsberg said, "The internal Catholic cultural wars and polarization have increasingly embittered a lot of the internal life of the church. Overcoming some of those divisions and synthesizing some of the best and noblest features of these two popes by joining them, is a hopeful sign for anyone who is concerned about the future of humanity."
If the canonizations of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II can inspire more of us, as individuals, to find a moral purpose and take risks, our lives will be better for it.
If the canonizations can help lead the Catholic Church away from bitter division and toward taking powerful moral positions on the world stage, especially following Francis' focus on poverty and inequality, we'll all be better for it.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
Gadhafi's son faces charges of killing
4/28/2014 12:35:33 AM
- Saif al-Islam Gadhafi was the heir apparent before father, Moammar, was ousted
- Gadhafi, other former officials face charges, including killing protesters, in 2011 uprising
- Human Right Watch questions Libya's ability to conduct a fair trial
Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- The second son of former Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi appeared via a video link Sunday at his trial at a court in Tripoli, where he and dozens of former senior regime officials face charges for crimes they are accused of committing during the 2011 revolution.
Saif al-Islam Gadhafi, once his father's heir apparent, has been held in the western mountain city of Zintan by the militiamen who captured him in 2011. The group has refused to hand him over to the central government, citing security concerns and lawlessness in the capital.
The trial was held under tight security with roads leading to Tripoli's al-Hadba prison blocked off by security forces and gunmen positioned on the building's rooftop.
The judge read the charges against the defendants, which included the killing of protesters -- a crime punishable by a death sentence -- and other alleged crimes to try and suppress the 2011 uprising.
Among the 23 defendants present at the hearing were Abdullah al-Senussi, the elder Gadhafi's brother-in-law and former spy chief, former Prime Minister al-Baghdadi al-Mahmoudi and the regime's head of foreign intelligence, Buzeid Durda. Eight other defendants held in the city of Misrata also appeared via video link at the trial.
After more than two years in prison, Senussi, who was extradited from Mauritania, appeared frail and had lost weight.
Gadhafi seemed relaxed and frequently smiled during the two-hour proceeding. In response to the judge's question on whether he had a lawyer, Gadhafi responded twice, saying, "I have God". He later said he did not have a lawyer, and the court ordered one to be appointed for him.
The International Criminal Court in the Hague indicted Gadhafi and Senussi on war crimes, but Libya refused to hand them over, arguing they had to face justice in their own country.
Although the international court granted Libya the right to try Senussi last year, his ICC-appointed lawyer was appealing the ruling.
Some defendants complained about not having enough access to their lawyers, and Senussi asked the court to allow foreign lawyers to represent him because Libyan lawyers, he said, were not able to do so.
Rights groups have raised concerns about Libya's ability to provide the defendants with a fair trial.
"The case of 30+ former Gadhafi officials has been problematic from a procedural point of view from the onset as some defendants, including Saif al-Islam Gadhafi and Abdullah Senussi, both held in isolation in different locations, still do not have access to a lawyer and were not able to review court documents," said Hanan Salah, a Libya researcher for Human Rights Watch. "In cases involving the death penalty, it is more important than ever to adhere to fair trial standards."
There have also been concerns about the use of the video link in this trial.
"Every defendant should have the right to communicate and consult without delay and in full confidentiality with their lawyers before and during a trial. The current arrangements in which some defendants are physically separated from the court and their lawyers cast doubt over respect for these rights and some defendants risk being mere spectators in their own trial," said Salah, who was observing Sunday's proceedings in Tripoli.
The judge adjourned the trial to May 11.
Israeli PM: 'Tear up deal with Hamas'
4/27/2014 2:12:55 PM
- NEW: Netanyahu was never serious about peace talks, Palestinian official says
- Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel won't take part in negotiations backed by Hamas
- "I call on President Abbas: Tear up your pact with Hamas," Netanyahu says
- Netanyahu says he will "seek other ways" to achieve peace if necessary
(CNN) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday that Israel cannot negotiate with the government of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas while it is backed by Hamas.
"I call on President Abbas: Tear up your pact with Hamas," Netanyahu said on CNN's "State of the Union."
"We're not going to negotiate with a government backed by Hamas unless Hamas changes its position and says it's willing to recognize Israel," he said.
Netanyahu's comments come four days after the Abbas-led Palestinian movement Fatah, which controls the West Bank and dominates the Palestinian Authority, said it would attempt to form a unity government with Hamas, the militant Islamic group that controls Gaza. Hamas hasn't recognized Israel's right to exist, and Israel canceled scheduled peace talks after Wednesday's announcement.
Netanyahu said that if Israel cannot reach peace with Palestinians through an agreement, "we'll seek other ways" to achieve peace. "I'm not going to accept a stalemate," he said.
But Palestinian lawmaker Hanan Ashrawi swiftly criticized Netanyahu's "extremely cynical" declaration. Ashrawi accused the Israeli leader of trying to torpedo the peace process by expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank, where most of a projected Palestinian state would be located, and maintaining the Israeli blockade of Gaza.
"He did everything possible to undermine the talks, and now he is using the pretext of reunification in order to say 'You don't qualify,'" Ashrawi said. She dismissed Netanyahu's assertion that he remained interested in a settlement of the decades-old conflict as "lip service."
"We judge by his actions," she said. "He has been systematically dismantling the process, systematically destroying its very foundations and systematically destroying the very objective, which is a two-state solution, by stealing the land of the Palestinian state. Very simply, if he is serious then he will act in a way that will demonstrate his seriousness."
In the interview Sunday, Netanyahu praised the efforts of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry over the past nine months, saying the United States has been "indispensable" in pushing for peace.
"I appreciate Secretary Kerry's unbelievable efforts," he said. "They don't always succeed -- unfortunately, President Abbas made sure of that by embracing Hamas. But I have to credit John Kerry for his efforts."
Netanyahu also voiced skepticism over comments by Abbas released Sunday in which the Palestinian leader called the Holocaust the most heinous crime in modern human history.
Abbas "can't have it both ways," by calling the Holocaust the most heinous crime in modern history while embracing Hamas, a "terrorist organization that openly denies the Holocaust," Netanyahu said.
He suggested Abbas' remarks, released by his office, were an attempt to placate Western public opinion in the wake of Fatah's step toward Hamas.
The Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank have been run separately for seven years. The split began taking shape in 2006 when Hamas, participating in Palestinian polls for the first time, won a majority in the Palestinian parliament.
The Palestinian Authority formed a coalition government with Hamas that year, with Abbas retaining the presidency and Hamas member Ismail Haniya becoming prime minister. But when Abbas dissolved the government in 2007, Hamas seized control of Gaza, and Haniya became Gaza's de facto political leader.
The West for years has shown support to Fatah and warned it not to join hands with militant Hamas, which several countries, including the United States, have deemed a terrorist organization.
READ: Palestinian leader Abbas calls Holocaust most heinous crime of modern era
CNN's Michael Schwartz contributed to this report.
South Korean PM resigns over ferry
4/27/2014 1:35:05 PM
- NEW: Rescuers meet with families to discuss new tactics to reach difficult areas of ship
- Prime Minister Chung Hong-won announces: "I should take responsibility for everything"
- Parents of a missing girl call PM's resignation "meaningless," call for President to resign
- 188 bodies from the ferry have been found, 114 are still missing
Jindo, South Korea (CNN) -- South Korea's prime minister announced his resignation Sunday morning, taking responsibility for the slow initial reaction to a ferry's sinking that has left nearly 200 dead and scores more still missing.
Prime Minister Chung Hong-won explained his decision on national television. He apologized "on behalf of the government for the many problems that arose during the first response and the subsequent rescue operation," in addition to "problems that existed before the accident."
"During the search process, the government took inadequate measures and disappointed the public," Chung said. "I should take responsibility for everything as the prime minister, but the government can assume no more. So I will resign as prime minister."
Chung urged South Koreans to stand united, rather than divided.
"This is not the time for blaming each other but for finishing the rescue operation and dealing with the accident," he said. "In order to get over these difficult times, I ask the citizens for help."
Chung becomes the highest-profile public figure to fall after the April 16 capsizing of the Sewol ferry that carried more than 300 South Korean high school students. Many in the country have lambasted the government's response to the disaster. Searchers continue to still look for passengers and crew, and so far have retrieved 188 bodies. Another 114 people are still missing.
A father of a missing ferry passenger -- a girl -- called Chung's resignation "meaningless."
He and the girl's mother and sister are outraged at the government about what they say is a disorganized rescue operation.
Chung "doesn't want to take responsibility for this mess," the mother told CNN's Nic Robertson.
She felt that if President Park Geun-hye were to resign "that might actually do something."
The prime minister's role is to coordinate other ministries within government, say experts in South Korean politics. The president appoints the prime minister, and Park will choose the next prime minister.
Though the legislature can question that person before he or she takes the job, ultimately the president alone has the power to choose who gets the job, said Nicholas N. Eberstadt with the American Enterprise Institute, who has written extensively about North and South Korea.
Chung wasn't "a beloved figure, but he wasn't especially unpopular," Eberstadt said.
The capsizing of the ferry is the biggest disaster in recent South Korean history, and it's a huge story there, occupying hours and hours of news coverage, said David Straub, the associate director of the Korean Studies Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University.
Park is very popular, he said.
"I'm sure she and the people around her are concerned about (how the ferry disaster has unfolded)," Straub said.
Both experts said they thought it was inconceivable that the president would resign.
A single body
South Korea's joint task force in charge of the search and rescue mission told CNN on Sunday that a closed-door meeting between rescuers and families was held to discuss possible new search tactics.
Rescuers explained that divers are having difficulty trying to reach the Sewol ferry floors close to the seabed, so officials are considering two options. They might use a special metal tool to cut through steel and other materials, or use small explosives to break down the wall. But the second option brings risk that some of the bodies could be damaged.
CNN is trying to get obtain reaction from the task force and the families to this meeting.
The talk comes 11 days after the ferry capsized. The search Sunday was suspended due to bad weather that made diving through the murky waters especially dangerous, but divers made an exception and went down to recover a single body.
A day earlier, divers found the bodies of 48 girls -- wearing their life jackets -- pressed into a room too small for so many people.
Divers believe that they will face the same scene again. There may be a second, similar room, where 50 more girls are believed to have been trapped when the ferry rolled over.
South Korean coast guard diver Kim Dong-soo said he had tears in his eyes when he heard about the accident.
"Even now, I'm searching as if I'm looking for my own children -- and other coast guards feel the same way," he told CNN. "I have two medical patches on me, have difficulty breathing and my head hurts. But it hurts the most in my heart, knowing those children are still in the cold water."
Those still diving face a search that is getting harder and slower.
Now they will head down deep for cabins near the seabed.
In the cramped spaces, divers have been battling a forest of drifting objects and doors forced shut by tremendous water pressure. Currents tug at the breathing tubes that keep them alive as they look for the dead.
There may be fewer bodies to retrieve, but divers have already searched the easily accessible places, said South Korean navy Capt. Kim Jin-hwang, commander of the rescue operation.
"But the navy will not stop until the last body is found," he said.
Ferry disaster's toll on South Korea's national psyche
Fisherman: Disaster haunts his sleep
Fisherman Kim Hyun-ho finds no peace when he lies down at night. The hundreds of dead or missing passengers from the Sewol ferry disaster haunt his sleep.
Their screams ring in his head. He has vivid memories of his rush to save them in his modest fishing boat off South Korea's coast 11 days ago.
Kim thinks he may have pulled 25 people from the frigid waters of the Yellow Sea, he said Saturday. But the man from a nearby tiny island of just 100 people feels no pride, only torment.
"It was hell. Agonizing. There were a lot of people and not enough boats, people in the water yelling for help. The ferry was sinking fast," he said.
He watched people trapped inside go under with the vessel yards in front of him. Then he heard on television how many people were sealed up in the ship.
The father of two grown children is heartbroken for the hundreds of parents who have lost theirs, those he could not save.
He's trying to fish again, but he's a changed man, he says.
Legal ramifications
As the effort inside the ship continues, South Korean authorities are pressing a criminal investigation into the sinking.
It's resulted in the arrests of the ship's captain and 14 other members. Prosecutors in Mokpo, South Korea, who are leading the ferry investigation, tell CNN that all the 15 crew members in charge of sailing and the engine room have been indicted and are being held in the Mokpo prison.
Yang Joong-Jin, the senior prosecutor for the investigation task force, said they all face charges of "causing death by abandoning (ship), and violation of the country's marine law, the Rescue and Aid at Sea and in the River Act."
Investigators also searched the company that owned the ferry and the home of the man whose family controls it, and conducted a wide-ranging probe into the country's marine industry.
Prosecutors have said that authorities have yet to determine what caused the sinking.
Leading theories include changes made to increase the ferry's passenger capacity, and shifting cargo.
On Friday, investigators checked out the Sewol's sister ship, the Ohamana, and said they found 40 of its life rafts weren't working, emergency slides to help evacuate passengers were inoperable, and equipment to tie down cars and cargo either was nonexistent or didn't work very well.
Like the Sewol, the Ohamana had been modified to add more passengers, the prosecutor's office said.
Investigators are looking into whether those modifications could have contributed to the Sewol's fate.
Kim Yong-rok, an opposition lawmaker who represents Jindo, an island near where the ship sank, told CNN that modifications to add 117 more passenger cabins to the ship raised the ferry's center of gravity.
On Friday, the South Korean Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries announced it would ask lawmakers to consider legislation prohibiting modifications to ships to increase passenger capacity.
Young crew member hailed as heroine
In recent disasters, captains didn't hang around
Students remember vice principal who took own life
Murky waters cloud the horror facing rescue divers
CNN's Nic Robertson reported from Jindo, South Korea. CNN's Ben Brumfield and Greg Botelho reported and wrote from Atlanta. CNN's Neda Farshbaf, Steven Jiang, Bradley Olson and Elena Kim also contributed to this report.
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at feedmyinbox.com
If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
No comments:
Post a Comment