Monthly Archives: March 2021

Dancehall artist Popcaan was apparently up to his usual antics, over the weekend, when he removed his mask and mockingly shouted mi nah wear nuh mask! on his Instagram Story, in reference to Buju Bantons viral anti-mask rant last year.

Buju, however, finds no humor in the situation in Jamaica and unleashed yet another Instagram video on Sunday, expressing disappointment in his fellow rich Jamaicans for ridiculing those, like himself, who have been speaking out. He also, again, declared his opposition to the Governments COVID-related restrictions and policies.

In an almost 5 minute clip, Banton is seen reading the updated mandates and the consequences for breaching the Disaster Risk Management Act, citing them as oppression and tyranny.

Bujus video comes after the recent viral video and arrest of a St. Catherine man, who was later charged with breaches of the Disaster Risk Management Act, disorderly conduct, indecent language, obstructing the police, and using abusive and calumnious language, according to the Jamaica Gleaner.

The Jamaican constitution does not allow the Government of Jamaica to use the Office of the Prime Minister or any other office to oppress and pressure any citizen, any citizen at all. You Jamaicans better wake up before them come kick oonu door one one and do like what dem a do all ova di place, Buju said in the video.

Despite the backlash that he received for his initial rant of rebellion from his colleagues, Ministers, and even daughter and social media influencer Abihail Myrie, Banton is still standing firm behind his beliefs. Mi notice a thread, mi notice everybody weh come out inna Jamaica and vent the way dem feel either the Jamaican populace come down pon dem like we suppose to be sheep, he said.

He moved onto address Jamaican politicians.

Memba ah we vote oonu in, oonu supposed to run the country fuh we, dont gwaan like oonu wan switch it pan weand have the people dem think dem work for politicians. No! Politicians work for the country

Do not use the office of the Prime Minster or the office of whichever politician it is..to pressure the citizens. You are creating tyranny. You are tyrannical.

Buju accused those in power of not setting the example as it pertains to vaccinations. Oonu a tell we bout shot and none a oonu na tek no shot, a who oonu a try fool bout ya. Here what guh gwaan, we want see oonu a tek what oonu want the people to get.

The Jamaica Gleaner reported on Friday that Prime Minister Andrew Holness and Health and Wellness Minister Dr. Christopher Tufton are not scheduled to take the COVID-19 vaccine until April 2021, unless the pace of the current roll-out significantly improves.

Buju is not the only disgruntled deejay voicing his concerns, as the internationally known King of Dancehall Beenie Man took to his Instagram to share his own personal grievances.

Buju do a ting todeh weh mi respect, Beenie said while on a family vacation at the Pegasus Hotel. Mi nuh like how dem a deal wid d law a Jamaica, because police ketch yuh 9 or 10 you haffi pay them. he shared about his resentment for the latest lockdown directives.

Last month, Beenie Man pleaded not guilty to charges that he breached the COVID-related Disaster Risk Management and Noise Abatement Acts in Jamaica. His trial will begin on April 19.

Meanwhile, Jamaican actor/comedian @slick_whiteline has made light of Bujus comments in a video making the rounds.

Go here to read the rest:

Buju Banton Calls Out Jamaican Government For Oppression And Tyranny - DancehallMag

Rep. Deb Haaland, D-N.M., is sworn in before her Senate confirmation hearing to be interior secretary last month. Her confirmation makes her the United States' first Native American Cabinet secretary. Jim Watson/AP hide caption

Rep. Deb Haaland, D-N.M., is sworn in before her Senate confirmation hearing to be interior secretary last month. Her confirmation makes her the United States' first Native American Cabinet secretary.

Deb Haaland, a member of New Mexico's Laguna Pueblo, has become the first Native American Cabinet secretary in U.S. history.

The Senate voted 51-40 Monday to confirm the Democratic congresswoman to lead the Interior Department, an agency that will play a crucial role in the Biden administration's ambitious efforts to combat climate change and conserve nature.

Her confirmation is as symbolic as it is historic. For much of its history, the Interior Department was used as a tool of oppression against America's Indigenous peoples. In addition to managing the country's public lands, endangered species and natural resources, the department is also responsible for the government-to-government relations between the U.S. and Native American tribes.

"Indian country has shouted from the valleys, from the mountaintops, that it's time. It's overdue," Sandia Pueblo tribal member Stephine Poston told NPR after Haaland was nominated.

It's not the first time Haaland has made history. In 2018, she became one of the first two Native American women elected to Congress. Her nomination by President Biden to lead the Interior Department was celebrated by tribal groups, environmental organizations and lawmakers who called the action long overdue. But her nomination faced opposition from Republican lawmakers and industry groups that portrayed Haaland's stance on various environmental issues as extreme.

"I'm deeply concerned with the congresswoman's support on several radical issues that will hurt Montana, our way of life, our jobs and rural America," said Republican Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, who worked to block Haaland's confirmation.

As a congresswoman, Haaland was a frequent critic of the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda and supported limits on fossil fuel development on public lands. She opposes hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. She was also one of the first lawmakers to support the Green New Deal, which calls for drastic action to address climate change and economic inequality.

Republican lawmakers grilled her over those stances during her confirmation hearing in an effort to portray her as a radical choice to manage the nation's public lands, but Haaland struck a moderate tone, repeatedly saying that as interior secretary she would aim to accomplish Biden's environmental goals not her own.

Biden has not supported the Green New Deal or bans on fracking, and he has taken a more balanced approach to fossil fuel development on public lands. He put a temporary pause on new oil and gas leases on federal lands while his administration reviews the broader federal leasing program.

"There's no question that fossil energy does and will continue to play a major role in America for years to come," Haaland said during her confirmation hearing, before adding that climate change must be addressed.

Haaland has called the climate crisis the "challenge of our lifetime," and as interior secretary, she'll play a key role in the Biden administration's efforts to address it. Biden has pledged to make America carbon neutral by 2050, an effort that would require massive changes to the industrial, transportation and electricity sectors.

The Interior Department manages roughly one-fifth of all land in the U.S., as well as offshore holdings. The extraction and use of fossil fuels from those public lands account for about one-quarter of the country's greenhouse gas emissions.

"The department has a role in harnessing the clean energy potential of our public lands to create jobs and new economic opportunities," Haaland said during her confirmation hearing. "The president's agenda demonstrates that America's public lands can and should be engines for clean energy production."

Read more:

Deb Haaland Confirmed As 1st Native American Interior Secretary - NPR

On March 15, 2011, the people of Syria began marching in the streets demanding an end to the government's oppression. Three days later, President Bashar al-Assad's regime killed five protesters at a march in Daraa. Nobody knows how many have been killed since then. The most recent estimate from a U.N. official was 400,000. It was a number that Staffan de Mistura, the U.N. special envoy for Syria, had come up with on his own it was a guesstimate. That was five years ago.

The story of Syria has been one in which everything that could have gone wrong did. Hindsight is meant to be 20/20; with enough distance, it's supposed to be easy to see the path that should have been taken or the wisdom of the choices that were made. Looking back at just a small sample of the "what ifs" of Syria doesn't lend much credence to that idea.

For example, what if the NATO air campaign that would help oust Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi hadn't begun four days after the first Syrian protest? Maybe the Russians wouldn't have dug in their heels so hard to defend Assad. And maybe the U.S. wouldn't have hesitated to turn its military attention to stopping Syria's atrocities including forced disappearances, rape and torture had it not still been defending the intervention in Libya domestically.

Or what if the Gulf states hadn't sent money and guns to jihadi groups? Would there have been less concern about what Syria post-Assad would look like? And then maybe if the rise of ISIS hadn't provided the perfect cover, the Russians wouldn't have militarily intervened in 2015 against the militants and the remaining Syrian protesters.

What if the U.S. had armed the rebels sooner, rather than give space for the Assad government to wipe out any moderate opposition? Maybe Assad would have been forced to resign. Or then again, what if the U.S. had never tried to arm them at all? Assad still would have remained in power but without so high a death toll, as the hope of intervention may have prolonged the fighting.

Looking back at just a small sample of the "what ifs" of Syria doesn't lend much credence to the idea of hindsight being 20/20.

What if the Obama administration had followed through on its threats after a chemical weapons attack killed 1,400 men, women and children in Ghouta? Could Assad have been cowed into ending his war on his own people? Or was there really no combination of diplomatic pressure and military force that the U.S. would have been willing to exert in the name of protecting civilians?

The only thing that's clear is that there have been no winners after all these years, only those who have lost less. And nobody has lost more than the Syrian people. The U.N. may have stopped counting the dead, but it still keeps track of the living. And as of today, 5.5 million Syrians are refugees, decamped to neighboring countries like Turkey and Lebanon. Another 6.2 million Syrians are internally displaced within Syria. Together, that's over half of Syria's 2011 population, scattered and driven from their homes. And of those still in the country, 80 percent live in poverty. Over 12.4 million Syrians are food insecure, and a further 1.8 million are at risk.

As the war seems nearly won, the question is turning to what to do with the next 10 years. I spoke with Kieren Barnes, Mercy Corps' country director for Syria, about how the NGO is looking to that future. While previously the focus has been on providing immediate humanitarian needs, Barnes told me, now the question will be how to help local partners get the economy back up and running so Syrians can provide for themselves and their families.

Barnes lavished praise on the Syrians whom Mercy Corps works with "'you give us the chance, we will then deliver,' and I've seen that proven time and time again" while still being clear about the difficulties that remain, given the pandemic and the global economic downturn it has caused.

Despite that cautious optimism, it's hard not to feel cynical as we hit this milestone year. I've been covering this war since before it was a war my early days of blogging in 2011 were spent tracking the U.N. Security Council's movements on Syria, parsing draft resolutions in hope of finding the key to the end of the crisis. That day never came, not through years of declining interest, not after Ghouta, not after ISIS's rise and fall.

Maybe this isn't the darkest timeline maybe the alternative choices, the other possible futures for Syria, were worse. Maybe the U.S. would be struggling with another occupation, like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe skirmishes with the Russians would have escalated into a full-on war. Maybe ISIS would still be in control of Syrian territory.

But there's no way to know that for sure. It's the not knowing that's going to eat at me.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MSNBC Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.

Go here to read the rest:

Syria's 10 years of crisis offer little optimism and fewer lessons - MSNBC