Categories
Politics

Barack Obama points assertion on Kabul assault: ‘Heartbroken’

Former United States President Barack Obama is hosting a drive-in rally for Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden on October 27, 2020 in Orlando, Florida.

Eva Edelheit | Reuters

WASHINGTON – Former President Barack Obama made a formal statement on Afghanistan on Friday, his first since the U.S. military entered the final stages of its withdrawal from the country two weeks ago.

Obama said he and former first lady Michelle Obama were “heartbroken when they heard of the terrorist attack outside Kabul airport that killed and wounded so many US soldiers and Afghan men, women and children.”

“As president, nothing was more painful than mourning with the families of the Americans who gave their lives for our country,” he said.

Obama continued, “As President Biden said, these soldiers are heroes who have dangerous, selfless missions to save the lives of others.”

That line served as a rhetorical nod to Obama’s former vice president and essentially confirmed that Biden is now in charge.

Obama’s testimony came the same day that Navy Corpsman Maxton Soviak’s family confirmed he was one of the dead.

“We also think of the families of the deceased Afghans, many of whom stood by America and were ready to risk anything for a chance for a better life,” said Obama.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

Obama is the last of the four US presidents who led the US 20-year war in Afghanistan to comment on the situation.

He is also the president who ordered an additional 30,000 US soldiers into the country in late 2009, a decision that his then Vice President Biden firmly opposed.

At the time, Obama believed that US firepower could sustain Afghanistan’s fragile, corrupt post-Taliban government.

Eleven years later, that government collapsed within hours when the Taliban retook Kabul on August 15 without firing a single shot.

Obama did not mention the entire evacuation effort in his statement on Friday. But earlier this year he said he strongly supported Biden’s decision to end America’s longest war.

“After nearly two decades of putting our troops in danger, it is time to recognize that we have accomplished all we can militarily and that it is time to bring our remaining troops home” Obama said on April 14th.

The two Republicans who led the war, George W. Bush and Donald Trump, have both openly opposed Biden’s decision to withdraw American troops – albeit in different ways.

Bush, who started the war shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, said he feared for the country’s women and girls who are facing almost certain repression due to the Taliban’s fundamentalist interpretation of Islamic law.

Bush in July also painted a bleak picture of what awaited Afghans who had worked for the US-led coalition over the past two decades.

“I think of all the interpreters and people who have helped not only the US forces but also the NATO forces, and they are simple, it seems like they are just being left behind to be butchered by these very brutal people and it breaks my “heart”, Bush told Deutsche Welle.

Trump has taken a different path, making a number of statements over the past few weeks that skew his own record and falsely accuse Biden of withdrawing American troops in front of US civilians. Trump has also tried to label refugees evacuated from Afghanistan as “terrorists”.

Categories
Business

H&M Faces a Boycott in China Over Assertion on Uyghurs

Fashion retailer H&M faces a possible boycott in China after a statement by the company last year expressing deep concern over reports of forced labor in Xinjiang sparked a social media storm this week.

A similar statement by Nike was also criticized on Wednesday, a sign that Western apparel manufacturers in China may face growing hostility over their public stance against forced labor in Xinjiang and the cessation of cotton sourcing from the region.

The H&M statement, which can be found on the Swedish retailer’s website, was released in September after global control over the use of Uyghurs in forced labor in Xinjiang increased.

In it, H&M said it is “deeply concerned about reports from civil society organizations and media containing allegations of forced labor and discrimination against ethnic-religious minorities” in Xinjiang and that it has stopped buying cotton from producers in the region.

More than eight months later, following Western countries sanctions China for treating Uyghurs, H&M is facing online backlash from Chinese consumers. The outrage was fueled by comments on platforms such as the microblogging site Sina Weibo from celebrities and groups such as the Communist Youth League, an influential Communist Party organization.

“Would you like to make money in China while spreading false rumors and boycotting Xinjiang cotton? Wishful thinking! “Said the group in a contribution, repeating one of the statements of the People’s Liberation Army, in which the attitude of H & M was described as” ignorant and arrogant “.

On Monday, the UK, Canada, the European Union and the United States announced an escalating series of sanctions against Chinese officials for treating Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Roughly one in five cotton garments sold worldwide contains cotton or yarn from the region where the authorities have implemented forced labor programs and mass internment to turn up to a million Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other largely Muslim minorities into model workers who obey the Communist Party.

Nike could be next. The company posted a statement on its website expressing concerns about “Reports of Forced Labor in and Related to” Xinjiang. “Nike does not source any products” from the region and “we have confirmed with our contract suppliers that they do not use any textiles or spun yarn from the region.”

On Wednesday, Nike was at the top of Weibo’s “Hot Search” list. Some users were angry that Nike had joined the boycott of cotton from the area. The company declined to comment.

Huang Xuan, a Chinese actor who had a men’s clothing deal with H&M, issued a statement saying he would cancel the deal, adding that he opposed “defamation and rumors” as well as “any attempt at that To discredit land “. Singer and actress Victoria Song, who previously supported H&M, also released a statement saying she has no relationship with the brand and that “national interests are paramount”.

By Wednesday evening, at least three major Chinese e-commerce platforms – Pinduoduo, Jingdong and Tmall – had removed H&M from search results and taken their products off sale. The measures underscored the pressures of foreign companies doing business in China as they navigate political and cultural debates such as the country’s sovereignty and its checkered human rights record.

On Wednesday evening, H&M China responded by posting on the Sina Weibo microblogging website that the company “does not take a political position”.

“The H&M Group respects Chinese consumers as always,” the statement said. “We are determined to invest in China in the long term and to develop further.”

H&M is the second largest fashion retailer in the world after Inditex, the owner of Zara, and China is the fourth largest market.

State broadcaster CCTV criticized H&M, saying it was “a misconception to try to play a righteous hero”. H&M, it said, “will definitely pay a heavy price for its wrongdoing.”

Claire Fu contributed to the research.

Categories
Health

Fauci says AstraZeneca will seemingly concern modified assertion

Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases at the NIH, speaks about the daily press conference at the White House in Washington on January 21, 2021.

Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

AstraZeneca is likely to release a modified statement on its Covid-19 vaccine after questioning the accuracy of the company’s clinical trial results earlier this week, said Dr. Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Advisor of the White House, on Wednesday.

The company announced on Monday the long-awaited results of its Phase 3 clinical trial of the Covid-19 vaccine it was developing at Oxford University. It is 79% effective in preventing symptomatic diseases and 100% effective against serious illness and hospitalization.

The next day, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases released an unusual statement informing it from the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) overseeing the study that the UK-based company may have included information in its US results which provided an “incomplete view of the efficacy data”.

Fauci, director of NIAID, said the DSMB has raised concerns with the U.S. agency because it believes the results in AstraZeneca’s press release are more favorable than more recent data from the vaccine study showed, according to STAT News.

The company is now working with the DSMB and “is likely to make a modified statement,” Fauci told reporters Wednesday during a White House press conference on the pandemic.

Public health and vaccines experts told CNBC that AstraZeneca’s data problem is just the latest example of a series of mistakes by the company that could affect people’s willingness to take the vaccine, which may be approved in the US as early as next month becomes.

President Joe Biden’s senior advisor on the pandemic, Andy Slavitt, attempted to reassure Americans about the vaccines on Tuesday, telling CNN: “The public should be confident that nothing will be approved if the FDA gets this data not thoroughly analyzed. “

When the AstraZeneca vaccine is reviewed by the FDA, the agency will “judge what the data says or what it says and whether or not it is approved. Until then, this is all just stuff that will do it.” happen in the background, “said Slavitt.” We believe this transparency and scientific independence are critical to public trust.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine is already approved for use in other countries. The company said in a statement Tuesday that it intends to release results of its primary analysis of the Covid-19 vaccine “within 48 hours”.

Categories
Politics

In Uncommon Public Assertion, Congressional Aides Name for Trump’s Conviction

WASHINGTON – More than 370 Democratic congressional assistants will launch an unusual public appeal Wednesday to the Senators – in some cases their own bosses – to condemn former President Donald J. Trump for inciting a violent “assault on our workplace”, the the peaceful transition threatens power.

In a very personal letter, the employees describe how they duck under office desks, barricade themselves in offices or watch as they watch marauding groups of rioters who have “smashed” their way through the Capitol on January 6th. The responsibility, they argue, rests directly with them on Mr. Trump and his “unfounded, months-long attempt to reject legitimately cast votes by the American people.”

“As Congressional officials, we do not have a vote on whether to convict Donald J. Trump for his role in inciting the violent attack on the Capitol, but our senators do,” they wrote. “And for our sake and for the sake of the country, we ask that you vote to condemn the former president and prevent him from ever assuming office again.”

A copy of the letter, including the names of the signatories, was provided to the New York Times prior to its publication on Wednesday, four weeks after the attack and days before the Senate impeachment proceedings.

The letter, while not binding in any way, underlined the remarkable dynamism of the trial of Mr. Trump, in which many of the witnesses and victims of the “incitement to rebellion” he accused are among the closest advisers to lawmakers who will decide his trial political fate. Congressional assistants often advise the elected officials they serve behind closed doors, and many are empowered to speak on behalf of those officials. But extremely rarely do they express their own views in public – let alone press for such a powerful political and constitutional means as impeachment.

Signatories included press officers, planners, committee staff, and advisers to the House and Senate, although relatively few were from the senior level of the committee’s chiefs of staff or directors. These included Drew Hammill, assistant chief of staff to Spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, as well as communications assistants closely associated with lawmakers involved in Mr Trump’s impeachments, such as Shadawn Reddick-Smith, who works for the Democrats in the House Justice Committee; Gabby Richards, communications director for Representative Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania; Anne Feldman, director of communications for Jason Crow representative of Colorado; and Daniel Gleick, communications director for Val Demings representative of Florida.

The organizers of the letter asked Republican aid workers for assistance and offered to record a language to allay their concerns about boss retaliation or social media harassment. But despite the preliminary interest of some, those familiar with the effort said no Republican aid workers had signed up in the end.

While public attention has focused on the stories of their better-known bosses, congressional assistants who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6 have privately struggled for weeks to make sense of what they saw in the building’s normally silent halls. Unlike their superiors, they usually have few outlets to publicly share these experiences.

In the letter to the Senators, the aides refer to Brian D. Sicknick, a Capitol police officer who died after meeting the mob, as “one of our staff who watches and greets us every day.” The letter also states that in the age of mass shootings at the post-Columbine school, many of the signatories had come of age and had been trained to respond.

“When the mob broke through the barricades of the Capitol Police, broke doors and windows and stormed into the Capitol with body armor and weapons, many of us hid behind chairs and under desks or barricaded ourselves in offices,” they wrote. “Others watched on television, desperately trying to reach bosses and coworkers as they fled for their lives.”