LIFLEA Condemns Assault on Female Police Officer

first_imgThe Liberia Female Law Enforcement Association (LIFEA) has strongly condemned the alleged mal-handling, insulting and physical assault mounted against traffic female police officer, Beauty A. Mulbah.Speaking to newsmen Thursday, September 25, LIFEA media consultant Lawrence M. Fahnbulleh, said it was very sad for and Assistant Minister to assault officer Mulbah while discharging her national duty.Fahnbulleh stated that while the government is encouraging the recruitment and involvement of females in the security sector, the act by the assistant minister has the propensity to undermine this effort.“We do not need any form of assault on any officers, including male in order to encourage more people. We must continue to encourage people who are helping to protect lives and properties.”He lauded the Liberia National Police (LNP) for the timely investigation into the matter.Assistant Min. Krah, according to the police, assaulted the traffic officer when she requested the documents of the vehicle he was operating, “at which time he refused on grounds that he was rushing for a meeting.”LIFEA is calling on the Ministry of Gender and Development, the Female Lawyers Association of Liberia and all meaning Liberians to join not only condemning but to leave no stone unturned in pursing this matter to its logical conclusion.   The incident which occurred at the intersection of Board and Buchanan Streets in Monrovia, Tuesday, September 23, drew several onlookers as the Asst. Minister Krah was heard shouting that “noting will come out of his action,” according to the police.Meanwhile, the police said, Asst. Min. Krah told police investigators that he regretted his action and pleaded for mercy, stressing that he was misled by the devil to flog the officer.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more

GECOM creating “fed up” environment amongst citizens

first_imgDear Editor,The negative misguided statements that consistently emerge from key players in the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) have created a fed up environment amongst citizens. It is time President Granger’s quartet recognise that they have become a local and international laughing stock and they must desist from trying to fool this nation.They have been interchangeably using the terms Official List of Voters (OLV) and Official List of Electors (OLE) in statements of convenience in advancing the interest of the APNU/AFC cabal. The proven purpose is an effort to kerfuffle and deceive unfamiliar persons with their baseless and spurious attempts at delaying the readiness of GECOM for elections. The term OLV is the Official List used for Local Government Elections, while the OLE represents the List for the Regional and National Elections.It is clear that GECOM has a database that the organisation uses as the repository of registered persons or the Register of Registrants. It is from this ‘Register of Registrants’ that the 2015 Official List of Electors was extracted after the APNU/AFC moved the No-Confidence Motion against the People’s Progressive Party/Civic. President Donald Ramotar thereafter prorogued Parliament and with a very short period of continuous registration, followed by only a few days of Claims and Objections; GECOM produced the Official List of Electors, which was used to conduct the Regional and National Elections within the ninety-day period.The APNU/AFC coalition parties at the time, advanced in the National Assembly and used the same Continuous Registration and Claims and Objection accepted formula to extend the life of the list from three months to six months. Further, they hurriedly held Local Government Elections in 2016 in an effort to test their strength. APNU and AFC individually used the same Register of Registrants along with a short period of Continuous Registration and simultaneously did the Claims and Objection in order to prepare the Official list of Voters.It is of significant note that in the process of holding two Local Government Elections, the Government, through its Ministry of Communities, introduced eleven new Local Authority Areas (LAAs), with changes in several Neighbourhood Democratic Councils’ boundaries. In these instances, the same cycles of the periodical Continuous Registration and the Claims and Objection were repeated and it cannot be made clearer that these are the acceptable methods for GECOM to keep the OLV and the OLE in a state of readiness for any election. With the passing of the No-Confidence Motion, GECOM Chief Executive Officer, Keith Lowenfield and GECOM Public Relations Officer said that GECOM is ready for Elections.It is also useful to observe that at the recent Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) case to which GECOM was a party, the entity failed to make a timely submission for obvious reasons. They simply do not have any rational candour in the face of the facts. However, they later said that GECOM could not hold Elections within the three-month period specified in Article 106 of the Constitution because the matter was the subject of court cases. Secondly, because President David Granger did not name a date for elections and that GECOM did not have the necessary funding.It is even clear that through the constitutionally approved method of the No-Confidence Motion, the Opposition legitimately booted the APNU/AFC coalition Government on December 21, 2018. In keeping with the Constitution, we should have had National and Regional Elections before March 21, 2019. Ms Excellence Dazzell, the Attorney contracted by GECOM, recently provided her legal opinion on the issues which give greater clarity and exposes the lack of prudence and alacrity of Granger’s quartet at GECOM to hold elections.In her advice dated May 13, 2019, to Commissioners and the Chief Election Officer of GECOM at a statutory meeting, she made reference of the illegality of the need for house-to-house registration to create a new list of electors. Instead, she said the current list, which expired at the end of April, should be updated. Further, the opinion refers to The Election Laws (Amendment) Act 15 of 2000, section 7 (1) which states that “where there is an interval of more than six months after the qualifying date…which the official list of electors…is prepared under section 5 (1) and the day appointed for the next election after that date, the Commissioner shall cause the Official List of Electors to be revised, in accordance with the procedure established by the Commission by regulations”.In the 1985 Regional and National Elections, Catholic Bishop Benedict Singh, Anglican Bishop Rudolph George, along with representatives of the Bar Association, categorically described the massive Fraud perpetrated against the nation by the PNC agents, while the Human Rights Association issued a joint statement in which they condemned the Elections as dishonest.The groups made reference to “the familiar and sordid catalogue of widespread disenfranchisement, multiple voting, ejection of polling agents, threats, intimidations, violence, and collusion by police and army personnel,” The reactions of GECOM’s Commissioner have trended similarly but these dark and nasty days must never be returned to Guyana.Sincerely,Neil Kumarlast_img read more

Jagdeo calls on ERC to probe arrest of party member

first_img…accuses AFC of being vindictiveOpposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo is calling on the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) to look into the recent arrest of People’s Progressive Party (PPP) candidate Shafraz Beekham, as he accused the Alliance For Change (AFC) party of being vindictive.Opposition Leader Bharrat JagdeoBeekham was arrested by Police about an hour after there was an alleged fire at the home of an AFC member in Berbice on Wednesday evening; a move, which Jagdeo believes is an act of vindictiveness on the part of the AFC.The Opposition Leader posited that if there was indeed an arson attempt then the matter must be condemned. He however urged that there be a full investigation into the incident, since Beekham was the one who mounted a legal challenge against the AFC’s Whim/Bloomfield list of candidates for the upcoming Local Government Elections (LGE).Further, Jagdeo pointed out that when the case was filed several weeks ago, the Chairman of the AFC, Khemraj Ramjattan, who is also the Public Security Minister, went on television in Berbice threatening to deal with the litigant.ERC Chairman John Smith“[So] we believe that it is all contrived by the AFC to gain sympathy and to act as an intimidation as they know now that an appeal has been filed – that will go probably all the way to the CCJ (Caribbean Court of Justice) – that will expose the shenanigans of the AFC in that area and therefore, they have to go, we believe, against the person who filed it. And compounding this, the Minister of Public Security threatened this gentleman to deal with him weeks ago on television. All this must be fully investigated because it smacks of political gimmickry again by the AFC,” the Opposition Leader contended.The legal challenge was dismissed last week by High Court Judge, Justice Navindra Singh, who found that there was no evidence of fraudulent names on the AFC’s list. As such, Beekham, through his attorneys, have since appealed the High Court decision.Independent reviewNevertheless, Jagdeo is of the view that the issue should be looked into by an independent agency. In fact, he noted that efforts should be made to get the tape from Ramjattan’s appearance on television where he made the threat against Beekham.“We need someone to commandeer this tape and it cannot be the GNBA (Guyana National Broadcasting Agency) and it can’t be the Police because they will take instructions, Ramjattan will bully them,” Jagdeo asserted, adding that Opposition Members of Parliament (MP) overheard the Minister giving certain instructions while at Parliament on Wednesday night that probably lead to the arrest of Beekham.To this end, he called on the ERC to probe this act of vindictiveness by the minority party in the coalition Government.“Imagine the other people may never want to come forward because they fear victimisation. We believe its victimisation [because] an hour after this event allegedly took place, they picked up this guy. So we have to get an outside investigation into this… In fact, the only body I can think about right now is the Ethnic Relations Commission, to look urgently into this matter,” the Opposition Leader stated.Woman’s claimsMeanwhile, the AFC member, Rashree Permaul, is claiming that the PPP activist attempted to set fire to her Bloomfield home on Wednesday night at about 21:45h.The woman, told Guyana Times that she is a candidate of the AFC for the Whim/Bloomfield Neighbourhood Democratic Council. However, a check of the list reveals that she is not one of the seven candidates the AFC has advertised for that NDC.The 35-year-old woman said she smelt what seemed at be a lighted cigarette but added that, “a couple seconds after I saw a big flame outside through the window and I smelt like something burning…” She said she rushed to the upper flat of the house and woke her eldest daughter. When they ran out of the house, she said she saw a lighted carton box next to a concrete post and also discovered that kerosene was thrown on two wooden posts.Permaul admitted that she did not see anyone in her yard. The man was released from Police custody at about 18:00h after Permaul never showed up at the Police Station when a confrontation was arranged by the Police. However, Beekham was asked to return to the station on Monday.Only recently, Public Security Minister Khemraj Ramjattan appeared on a public televised programme aired in Berbice, entitled “Alliance on the move” and threatened Beekham saying that he will “fix” him.On the programme, the Public Security Minister said Beekham had several fish pounds and he was going to, “give him trouble”.last_img read more

Protection of environment high on Guyana’s UN agenda – President

first_img…as Granger meets ExxonMobil head, other leadersA meeting between President David Granger and ExxonMobil Exploration Company President Stephen Greenlee was held on Monday on the sidelines of the 72nd Regular Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the Office of the Presidency has reported.Greenlee in early 2017 had revealed that the company was excited by the results of a production test on the Liza-2 well, which confirmed the presence of high-quality oil from the same high-porosity sandstone reservoirs that were discovered in the Liza-1 oil well completed years before in Guyana.President David Granger during his discussion with Costa Rican President Luis Guillermo SolísExxonMobil first discovered major reservoirs in Guyana in 2015. After its initial huge discovery of the Liza oil field two years ago, ExxonMobil had later announced that it had discovered more oil in the Payara reservoir off the coast of Guyana, increasing the total discovery to about 500 million barrels.It is not clear what was discussed by President Granger and Greenlee. However, in late April, a team comprising Ministers Raphael Trotman, David Patterson and Dominic Gaskin engaged in extensive discussions with high-level ExxonMobil officials and executives over a two-day visit at ExxonMobil headquarters.During that meeting, members of the delegation were updated about ongoing and planned exploratory activities following the significant discovery of the Liza-1 well, and engaged in interactive sessions that covered important topics such as an exploration update, development of the well for production, and capacity building to ensure Guyanese involvement and ownership of the industry’s development.Meanwhile, besides meeting Greenlee, the President also had two bilateral meetings on Monday – the first with Costa Rican President Luis Guillermo Solís and the second with a delegation from the Republic of Malta led by that country’s Prime Minister Joseph Muscat.The Guyanese Head of State also attended the UN’s Private Sector Forum and a High-Level meeting on the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse. Granger is also slated to meet with UN Secretary General António Guterres and his personal representative in the border controversy issue between Guyana and Venezuela, Dag Halvor Nylander.Meanwhile, President Granger said that his main message to his fellow Heads of Government was the need for a more tangible demonstration of commitment to protecting the planet. He made this comment during an interview at the UN, according to a statement issued on Monday by the Ministry of the Presidency.“Guyana has committed itself to becoming a ‘green state’; Guyana has committed itself to contributing to the adaptation to measures to deal with global warming and climate change… Guyana is ideally suited because of its presence in the Guiana Shield, because of our commitment to the conservation of our forests and our commitment to introducing green measures, so that is important,” he explained.Speaking of the climatic catastrophes facing the Caribbean, particularly small-island states, the Head of State said that this was a direct result of global warming and noted that the UN was perhaps the most influential place where the cause of environmental protection can be advanced.The issues of climate change and environmental protection were also high on the agenda during the bilateral engagements between Granger and President Solís and Prime Minister Muscat.President Granger said that it was prudent for Guyana to seek greater cooperation and partnerships with like-minded states such as Malta, which has a strong commitment to the environment.CaricomMeanwhile, President Granger said that while Heads of the Caribbean Community (Caricom) would have to deliberate on the reforms for the UN that were proposed by United States President Donald Trump, he was confident that the call for such reforms for the 72-year-old body might garner support among Caribbean States.Speaking during an interview in New York, the Head of State is quoted by the Ministry of the Presidency as saying, “Guyana is a member of the Caribbean Community and we would like to ensure that any initiative that we take enjoys the support of our Caribbean colleagues…I would prefer to wait until the Member States of the Caribbean Community come up with a single collective position before I make my announcement, but I feel that there is going to be a wide measure of agreement among Caribbean States about the reform of the United Nations.”During his debut UN address, President Trump called on the UN Secretary General to take steps to remove bureaucracy and introduce reforms to what he referred to as an “outdated” UN system.Having recognised the importance of the UN as the principal international organisation for the maintenance of international peace and security, President Granger noted that he would like to see better governance as it relates to the UN system.“Our being here is a demonstration of our faith in the United Nations…We feel that our participation in United Nations initiatives is important to the protection of people; the reduction of poverty and to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs]. And, as far as peace is concerned, again the United Nations is critical,” the Guyanese Head of State said.last_img read more

August 6th, “Hey Man, Whats Under Your Hat?” winner.

first_img                                                                                              Picture: Karen DavyCongratulations to Michelle Jackson, who won $300 worth of gift certificates and a lanyard by playing, “Hey Man, What’s Under Your Hat?”. These gift certificates are good to M&M Meat Shops, Home Hardware, Sobeys, and the Lakepoint Golf & Country Club. Your next chance to play will be Friday, August 14th at Trail Blazin’ Power between 12pm-1pm.- Advertisement –last_img read more

Dismissal of PSM staff by Minister unlawful – BoI report reveals

first_img…staff reinstated, no disciplinary action against MinisterThe Board of Inquiry (BoI) into the dismissal of Public Service Ministry (PSM) staff has been completed, with the inquiry finding that the letters of dismissal to the public servants were unlawful and recommending their reinstatement.This was revealed by Director General of the Ministry of the Presidency, Joseph Harmon, during a press conference earlier today. According to Harmon, the inquiry made these findings and completed its report, which was then forwarded to President David Granger.Harmon noted that the reinstatement of the three staff from the personnel and accounts department: Andrew Grant, Gail Williams and Andrea Dazzel retroactively takes effect from July 25, 2019 – the date they were originally dismissed.“The President agreed with the recommendations… the Board found that the letters to the three public servants were unlawful and having regard to its determinations and findings, recommended that the letters be immediately withdrawn”.“The public servants will be reinstated immediately and be restored to their respective positions within the Department of Public Service and will continue to enjoy all benefits they previously enjoyed prior to their termination,” Harmon added.According to Harmon, the report also recommended that Public Service Minister Tabitha Sarabo-Halley be advised of the need for due process and of policies relating to disciplining staff.“I believe that the three public servants have been called and of course they will have to be debriefed. The issue of course was the actions that were taken ought to have been taken by a permanent secretary in the Ministry”.“The Ministry was without a permanent secretary for some time. A permanent secretary was appointed on August 1 of this year and the new Permanent Secretary is now following up on these actions to ensure a speedy implementation of these decisions of the CoI,” Harmon said.This publication was unable to access the report. However, the former Minister of State made no mention of disciplinary measures against the Public Service Minister.Sarabo-Halley was sworn in as a minister on April 26, 2019. By June 3, it was reported that she had sent the aforementioned staff packing. After initially denying that the dismissals ever happened, the Government subsequently confirmed that the workers were sent home and an investigation was launched.Several staff members were said to have also received similar letters. Employees who have been removed were called PPP “moles” by political activist David Hinds, who is said to have a close relation with the subject Minister.Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, at one of his press conferences, had alluded to the fact that those workers were initially targeted and arbitrarily dismissed by Minister Sarabo-Halley after he blew the whistle on transactions at the Ministry of the Presidency which he claimed saw the children of a Government Minister receiving payments amounting to over $20 million in the last two years.The Opposition had at the time been revealing information about alleged corrupt practices within the Government. One of those revelations is that the children of a senior Minister allegedly received over US$86,000 in 2018, monies that were transferred from the Department of Public Service, followed by another transfer this year.Jagdeo had noted that the staff at the PSM were sent packing shortly after his first disclosure because the Government believed that those workers had leaked information to the Opposition about corrupt actions by the administration.The dismissals touched of a barrage of criticism, resulting in the Government appointing Guyana Oil Company (GuyOil) Chairman and former People’s National Congress (PNC) Executive Lance Carberry to carry out the inquiry.last_img read more

Pochettino unfazed by Spurs’ quiet transfer window

first_img0Shares0000Mauricio Pochettino is unfazed by Tottenham’s lack of success in the transfer market © AFP / Ian KINGTONLONDON, United Kingdom, Aug 9 – Mauricio Pochettino insists Tottenham’s lack of activity in the transfer window isn’t a problem because it was just as important to hold onto the club’s key players.With the Premier League transfer market closing at 1600 GMT, Tottenham are set to be the only top-flight side not to make a signing since the end of last season. Pochettino had been linked with several players and a fresh approach for Aston Villa midfielder Jack Grealish was rebuffed by the Championship club earlier this week.The Tottenham manager had challenged his club to be “brave and take risks” when asked what Tottenham needed to do to improve their squad.But, although the Argentinian on Thursday conceded the transfer window would probably close without a fresh face arriving, he was adamant it was still a good period for his team.The reason for his optimism? — England striker Harry Kane, Denmark playmaker Christian Eriksen, South Korea forward Son Heung-min and England defender Kieran Trippier have all signed new contracts since May.“We have a very good squad, with very good players and it is very difficult to add players to that,” Pochettino said.“We didn’t sell players and with 25 players in the squad it is difficult to add players.“It’s not about adding because it’s fashionable to sign players. It’s about if you really need them or not and then if you can get your target or not.“It’s true our targets are always the same level as Manchester United, Manchester City or Real Madrid but for different circumstances we can’t achieve that.“I am not worried, I am not sad, I am so happy. To keep our best players was our objective and goal and we have achieved that – at the moment, we will see what happens in the next 20 days in Europe.“If you can’t add a player that can improve your squad, the most important thing is to make sure you do not lose your best players and I think that was a great job from the club to keep the best players and the manager.”Some Tottenham fans fear their club’s lack of activity might force Pochettino to consider leaving, but the former Southampton boss is happy with the club’s vision.“Of course it’s difficult to understand for people in football that Tottenham didn’t sign or sell players, but sometimes in football you need to behave differently,” he said.“If we are happy with our squad and cannot improve our squad, sometimes it’s better to keep our squad together.”0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)last_img read more

Lingard stunner propels Man Utd to FA Cup win

first_imgUnited had lost just one of their previous 35 FA Cup games against lower-league sides but were heading for a replay until one-time Rams loanee Lingard, with his eighth goal in 10 games, smashed home a swerving volley, with Lukaku then adding a second having broken from the halfway line.“I was feeling that we were close to scoring and we never stopped trying,” said United boss Jose Mourinho, who said the Championship was approaching Premier League quality.“But when you get past 80 minutes and the goal hasn’t come, you fear the second match. But the team kept trying so I knew the goal could arrive.“It was a great shot by Jesse Lingard in the top corner, he’s in a moment of confidence where things go well for him. He’s a good professional and a fantastic kid in the dressing room.”Last month’s League Cup exit and a 15-point deficit to Manchester City in the Premier League had placed extra importance on this competition, and that was evident with the strong line-up Mourinho deployed.Lingard, Paul Pogba and Marcus Rashford could all have scored inside an entertaining 19 minutes that suggested the television executives might have been wrong to snub the match.Derby were encouraged by a couple of runs from former United youngster Tom Lawrence, while Marcus Olsson forced Sergio Romero to tip his header over the crossbar, with Alex Pearce heading the resulting corner into the Stretford End.That was a good opening but nothing like the one Rashford spurned 10 minutes before the break.For once Henrikh Mkhitaryan’s delivery was perfect and an unmarked Rashford glanced a header onto a post from six yards out.It was the type of miss that epitomised why Mourinho is reluctant to consider him as a central-striking alternative to Lukaku, whose arrival for the disappointing Mkhitaryan would soon come.Before the interval there was still time for Rams stopper Scott Carson to make two saves, one a routine stop from another Rashford header and the other a palm over the top from a Pogba free-kick destined for the top corner.– Lukaku on –Half-time substitute Lukaku’s first significant act was to close down Tom Huddlestone as the midfielder struck an effort that flew wide via an unsuspecting Luke Shaw.Rashford’s confidence, like Mkhitaryan’s, looked shot and a free-kick that failed to get beyond a one-man wall was proof of that.Pogba and Lawrence traded shots from distance that Carson and Romero pushed out before Mourinho sent for Anthony Martial.After Pogba had placed an attempt just wide, Rashford was once again denied by the woodwork.Martial’s introduction had seen Rashford shift to the right and the England international collected a pass from Lingard and unleashed a well-struck attempt that beat Carson but came back off the base of a post.There was a growing sense it was not going to be United’s night. A Lukaku header came back of the other post, albeit after the offside flag had been raised, and Pogba scuffed a rebound wide after Carson repelled Lingard’s attempt.Yet Lingard would finally break the visitors’ resistance, collecting a lay-off from Lukaku, teeing himself up and dispatching a swerving attempt into the corner of the net.His 11th of the season was every bit as special as the efforts against Watford, Burnley and Everton.Lukaku got in the act in the 90th minute, controlling Pogba’s long clearance on his chest in midfield before playing a one-two with Martial and beating Carson with a powerful strike to wrap it up.0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today) 0Shares0000Jesse Lingard celebrates scoring the opening goal during Manchester United’s FA Cup match against Derby County at Old Trafford © AFP / Lindsey PARNABYMANCHESTER, United Kingdom, Jan 6 – Jesse Lingard’s latest wonder strike and substitute Romelu Lukaku’s late effort secured Manchester United a 2-0 victory over Championship high-fliers Derby in the third round of the FA Cup on Friday.Both attempts, which came in the final six minutes, were worthy of a highlights package in the first FA Cup tie involving Premier League giants United in 13 years not to be televised live.last_img read more

Who Explains Whom?

first_imgPicture an evolutionary anthropologist and a Biblical theologian sitting on a park bench having a lively discussion.  The theologian claims the scientist believes in evolution because of pride that came through sin at the Fall.  “Your conscience and innate knowledge of God has been corrupted,” he asserts, “therefore you choose belief systems that rationalize your desire to live autonomously from your Creator.”  The scientist counters that the theologian only believes in God because religion was naturally selected in a primitive ape-like ancestor.  “Deep in prehistory, early hominin populations reinforced beliefs in supernatural beings that provided comfort against natural mysteries,” he claims.  “But now science is shedding light on those mysteries and undermining those primitive beliefs.”  Whose position should have privileged status in a society?  Should the scientist’s explanation automatically be granted epistemic privilege by a culture simply because he is a scientist?  Perhaps some recent examples of evolutionists at work trying to explain human behavior can inform the discussion.Altruism:  PhysOrg printed a press release from UC Davis debating which kind of evolution – cultural or genetic – explains the human propensity for altruism (sacrificial charity).  “Why do people willingly to [sic] go to war, give blood, contribute to food banks and make other sacrifices often at considerable risk to themselves and their descendents?  Evolutionary explanations based on both genes and culture have been proposed for this human behavior, which is unique among vertebrates.”  The article went on to argue for social vs. genetic causes, but the statement makes it clear that non-evolutionary explanations were completely off the table for consideration.  The report in Science Daily spoke of an “equation… that describes the conditions for altruism to evolve.”  Sometimes the explanation mixes causes and results in a “gene-culture coevolution of human prosocial propensities.”  Similarly, National Geographic News tried to show chimpanzees expressing a form of altruism, saying “this adds to evidence that chimps are more similar to humans than previously thought.”  Altruism even applies to amoebas, wrote Science Daily: “In Amoeba World, Cheating Doesn’t Pay.”  It becomes clear looking at their explanation that altruism has no external essence, but is a mere manifestation of selection pressures – a “characteristic” that can be observed from ameba to man.  They did not consider the converse hypothesis.  Is it possible that the scientists are imputing human moral characteristics on non-sentient beings and interpreting animal actions in terms of internally-assumed abilities?  If altruism is a physical trait, why is not the act of explanation?  Why aren’t chimpanzees and amoebas writing papers on human behavior?Leadership:  Science Daily reported on a paper from Current Biology called “The Origins and Evolution of Leadership” that puts Darwin in the lead.  The authors “argue that due to ‘a hangover from our evolutionary past’ factors like age, sex, height and weight play a major part in the determining [sic] our choice of leaders.”  Here’s what Dr. Andrew King (Zoological Society of London) had to say:Evolution has fashioned principles governing leadership and followership over many millions of years.  We need to ground the complex, even mystical, social phenomenon of leadership in science.  Through empirical observation, theoretical models, neuroscience, experimental psychology, and genetics, we can explore the development and adaptive functions of leadership and followership.  This analysis of data, combined with an evolutionary perspective on leadership, might highlight potential mismatches so we can see how evolved mechanisms of leadership are possibly out of kilter with our relatively novel social environment.Dr. King failed to explain how science escapes being an evolved mechanism or gains any power over evolutionary “principles.”  His co-author Dr. Dominic Johnson (University of Edinburgh) thinks it’s about time evolutionary biology tackles this overlooked question, “arguably one of the most important themes in the social sciences.”  He sees overlap between human and animal leadership behaviors that point to evolutionary origins.  He said, “By identifying such origins and examining which aspects are shared with other animals offers us [sic] better ways of understanding, predicting and improving leadership today.”  His evolutionary approach goes beyond explanation, therefore, and advocates social action.1 Sex and war:  In Science this month,2 Hillard Kaplan, an anthropologist at University of New Mexico, reviewed Sex and War: How Biology Explains Warfare and Terrorism and Offers a Path to a Safer World by Malcolm Potts and Thomas Hayden (BenBella, Dallas, 2008).  The book explores the “phylogenetic origins of human warfare” and describes armed conflict, no matter the players or their causes, in strictly evolutionary terms.  The scope of their explanatory project must be considered when evaluating every conflict from withstanding playground bullies to decisions to liberate Nazi Germany.  Kaplan opened, “They argue that group aggression by males is a fundamental feature of human evolutionary history, whose roots are well developed in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee.”  This would seem to eliminate any rationality for the concept of a “just war,” e.g., an altruistic rescue of an oppressed people (since altruism also falls within the domain of evolutionary explanation).  One can sense the tension between morality and determinism in their explanation:The book begins with Potts’s own experiences in 1972, attending to (and providing abortions for) women who had been raped and abused during the war in Bangladesh.  He recounts the cruelty enacted by groups of men, united in an armed struggle for power, on thousands of women.  He then presents the book’s main thesis: such acts of violence are far from isolated incidents and modern aberrations due to extreme conditions—rather they are the norm for our species.  What Potts calls “behavioral propensities to engage in male coalitional violence” are products of a long evolutionary history, in which males who engaged in such behavior produced more genetic descendants than males without such propensities.  He further argues that coalitional violence by groups of males evolved at least as far back as the common ancestor before the chimpanzee-human divergence and is a direct manifestation of sexual selection on male-male competition.  Such behavioral propensities did not evolve in females of either species.    The term “behavioral propensity” is used throughout the book to highlight the idea that a propensity can be controlled by cultural and social means.  Propensities to form coalitions among males against other males are in some sense genetically programmed into chimpanzee and human psychology, but there are also norms for culturally appropriate behavior as well as social institutions that can serve to counteract those propensities.  In fact, the solution to decreasing violence and warfare in modern times comes from the recognition that our biological heritage has produced very different behavioral propensities in human males and females.The book makes the point that the males’ evolutionary propensities to be violent can be restrained by “empowering women to be leaders in cultural, social, and political spheres.”  This seems to beg the question of the origin of morality.  Why would the products of an evolutionary process restrain what the process produced?  The reviewer and the authors differed only on the methods likely to be most effective.  Kaplan said, “We still lack a definitive understanding of group-level violence and its variation in different societies and during different historical periods.  But I agree with Potts that such an understanding will likely require a joint theory of our biology and social history.”  In evolution, though, is there a difference?PhysOrg also reported on “When Being a Cuckold Makes Evolutionary Sense.”  We’ll leave it as an exercise whether or not “evolutionary sense” is an oxymoron.1.  Science can say, “The earth appears to be warming.”  Explanation says, “The earth is warming because of human industry.”  Activism says, “Because humans are warming the earth, we need to redistribute the wealth and start a depression.”2.  Hillard Kaplan, “Anthropology: Sex and War (and Ecology),” Science, 9 October 2009: Vol. 326. no. 5950, pp. 232-233, DOI: 10.1126/science.1176071.These three examples (plus one) can be considered representative of a long history of evolutionary speculation about why we act the way we do.  A strong underlying assumption is that these evolutionary explanations are somehow better than the old Biblical ones because they fall within the domain of “science,” and only “science” leads to “understanding.”  The gaps don’t matter; though we “still lack a definitive understanding” of this or that aspect of a phenomenon, someday we will, because “science” is in the business of explaining.  Science explains everything.  When you hear about the evolution of war, the evolution of leadership, or the evolution of altruism, you “understand” it.  Now, using your rationality, you can “control” it.    The inherent tension and contradiction in that mindset should be evident in the above examples.  As we have pointed out numerous times, these scientists are plagiarizing Judeo-Christian presuppositions to engage in the act of explanation.  Rationality refers to concepts that lie outside of naturalism.  Naturalism is impossible.  To explain something, you have to believe that your sensations correspond to external reality.  You have to assume that your explanation contains the possibility it may be true.  How can anyone believe anything, including one’s own brain, that is the product of an unguided process like evolution?  To believe in truth, furthermore, you have to exercise morality – the assumption that truth is good.  None of these things come with the evolutionists’ explanatory toolkit.  If they are there, they were stolen.  In fact, the whole toolkit was stolen.  Using stolen implements, they construct impossible arts and humanities: tales of millions of years of monkey screeching and pounding morphing into Bach (10/17/2009), opera extolling a world without violent males, with moral leaders, with charity for all.  (They forget that Milton wrote the libretto to Paradise Lost, not Darwin.)    Here again we find that explanation is the domain of theology.  The bigotry of modern science is to exclude the contractors who own the tools.  Theologians have answers to why males tend to be violent, why we share traits with chimpanzees, why we are attracted to strong leaders, and why we care about the suffering of our fellow human beings.  None of these phenomena have escaped the notice of great theistic scholars.  None of them lie outside the domain of Scripture.  In our day, imposters have usurped the role of theology.  Evolutionary scientists presume to engage in explanation using tools they did not and could not manufacture.    It’s not clear from any philosophy of science if scientists can, or should, try to explain anything, or how they would do so.  Bas van Fraasen rejected explanation as a function of science.  It should be noted that “folk psychology,” the common-sense version we all practice that attributes reasonings and feelings to our fellow human beings as causes of their actions, works just as well, if not better, than any advanced scientific explanation – thus the popularity of Dr. Laura Schlesinger (who, by the way, advises from an Old Testament presuppositional foundation).  We all assume explanation is what scientists do because we were taught simplistic positivism in middle school.  It’s time to graduate to the real world.  Science does best trying to cure cancer, imitate design in nature, predict earthquakes and the weather, explore space, measure, observe, study, classify, organize, falsify, predict, learn, find relationships, derive equations, and inform technology.  Anyone presuming to explain nature without a theological premise is engaging in self-refuting nonsense.  Go re-read those three entries above in that light.  Now it all makes sense.  They engage in counterfeit explanations because they are prideful, irrational sinners, in rebellion against their Creator.    If scientists really want to understand human nature, if they want to do something about war and brutality, and increase levels of charity, nothing can beat the record of transforming lives by the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ: Example 1: from gang banger to soulwinner; example 2: from proud evolutionary biologist to joyful Christian; example 3 from terrorist to liberator of souls; example 4: from genocide torturer to repentant follower of Christ.  Don’t look to science for results like this.  Open the Operations Manual and get people back on track, one life at a time.(Visited 7 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Wage subsidy targets youth unemployment

first_img4 November 2013The Employment Tax Incentive Bill, which was passed by Parliament last week, aims to reverse the high levels of youth unemployment in South Africa by using tax incentives to encourage employers to take on young trainees.The draft law proposes a youth wage subsidy aimed at paving the way for on-the-job training and the development of soft skills through work experience for people aged from 18 to 29 years.The subsidy is one of many programmes forming part of the government’s youth employment strategy, including the National Youth Accord.“The implementation of the Bill will expose the youth to obtain workplace skills that will position them for better job opportunities,” Phumla Williams, acting CEO of the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS), said on Monday.Williams said thorough consultation processes had been followed in drafting the law, and the government was confident that the concerns raised had been responded to.“The Bill makes clear provisions to correct potential abuse by employers and has no impact on current labour relations or legislation, and will by no means weaken the rights of the workers.”The government would ensure that the implementation of the Bill would not lead to a potential hiring bias towards younger people, where older employees could easily be replaced, Williams said, adding that South Africa’s labour laws catered for the protection of employees regardless of age.The government, in particular the National Treasury and SA Revenue Service, would closely monitor and evaluate the Bill’s implementation to ensure that there was no abuse of the incentive, she said.The final leg to the implementation of the Bill will be its sign-off into law by President Jacob Zuma.Source: read more