Monday, November 14, 2016

Kunduz - attack of medical facility in Afghanistan in October 2015

https://www.bma.org.uk/connecting-doctors/doctors-as-volunteers-forum/b/blog/posts/remembering-kunduz-the-aftermath-and-the-future

Remembering Kunduz: The aftermath and the future

The attack on a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) hospital in Kunduz Afghanistan last year led to the deaths of 42 patients and staff.
In the run up to a memorial event commemorating one year since the attack, the BMA is reproducing an account of the bombing written by Australian intensive care specialist Dr Kathleen Thomas, who witnessed the attack.
Click here to read Parts one and two.
Part three: The aftermath of Kunduz & attacks on the medical mission
The repercussions of the attack in Kunduz were to reach far beyond the lives lost and those injured.
As a result, all of northern Afghanistan was left without any trauma facility. The injured now had to make their way all the way to Kabul, way too far for many trauma victims.
In 2015 alone, 75 MSF hospitals, predominately in Syria and Yemen, but also in Ukraine and Sudan, were attacked. 
Only some of these attacks attracted media attention because of their international profile and NGO status.
The reality is that medical care is under fire, our colleagues around the world are under fire. We are under fire.
Where once a red cross would ensure protection in warzones, now hospitals in both Syria and Yemen are built underground, staff disguise themselves to hide their occupation, and their GPS coordinates are kept secret.
International humanitarian law clearly protects hospitals and medical personnel in any armed conflict.
Despite calls from NGOs such as MSF and even a UN Security Council resolution, hospitals continue to be bombed with impunity.
Why is this the case?
In regards to Kunduz – accountability for the attack is complicated. But enforcement of International Humanitarian Law is inherently problematic and when four of the five permanent UN security council members are involved to varying degrees in these attacks, it is easy to imagine the barriers to enforceability.
Just before being evacuated to safety after the bombing, leaving behind my surviving colleagues in the ruins of the hospital in a city still in the midst of war, the last thing that was said to me was: ‘Please, please tell the world our story.’
As I have watched hospital after hospital bombed in Syria and Yemen, I realise that it is not just the story of the Kunduz hospital attack that I must tell.
It is the story of countless patients and medical staff attacked in hospitals around the world.

https://www.bma.org.uk/connecting-doctors/doctors-as-volunteers-forum/b/blog/posts/remembering-kunduz-the-week-leading-to-the-attack

Remembering Kunduz: The week leading to the attack

For the past 45 years, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) aka ‘Doctors without Borders’ have seen doctors and medical staff from around the world volunteer to care for patients in war zones around the world.
Under article 18 of the Geneva Convention, hospitals are designated protected status meaning that ‘in no circumstances’ can they be targeted by any parties involved in a conflict.
Despite this, in the early hours of 3 October 2015, a MSF hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan came under repeated attack by the United States Air Force.
The attack, which went on for more than an hour, resulted in 42 patients, care givers and staff being killed.
Tragically, almost a year on from the attack at Kunduz, hospitals and medical facilities in conflict zones around the world have continued to come under attack, including the bombing of an MSF hospital in Yemen on 15 August this year.
The BMA and MSF will be holding a special memorial evening at BMA House on 3 October to mark the first anniversary of the attack, as well as explore the efforts being taken to prevent future such tragedies.
As part of this memorial, the BMA is reproducing an account of the Kunduz hospital bombing, including the lead up and aftermath by Dr Kathleen Thomas, an Australian intensive care specialist present on the night of the attack.
The names of patients and some staff have been changed to protect their privacy.
Part one: The week leading to the attack
It was about two in the morning when I was woken from sleep by the sounds of intense fighting.

Having been in Kunduz for five months of the “fighting season” I had grown accustomed to the sounds of war, but this was different. It was close, heavy, and coming from all directions.
So, as had also become a habit when fighting became audible, I waited for the phone call from the ER announcing the onslaught of patients and the request for help.
It took hours for that phone call to arrive – the fighting was too heavy for anyone injured to actually get to the hospital… but then, as the sun rose on Monday, 28 September, the fighting slowed momentarily, the call came, and began what would be the longest week of my life.
The Kunduz Trauma Centre was an MSF-run, 92 bed hospital in Northern Afghanistan providing emergency surgical care for victims of accidental and violent trauma, and was staffed mostly by local Afghanis. 
As one of 18 expats, my role was as supervisor of both the hospital’s emergency department which saw about 100 patients per day, and the eight-bed, four-ventilator, intensive care unit (ICU).
My first day was chaos – over 130 patients poured through our doors in only a few hours. Despite the heroic efforts of all the staff, we were completely overwhelmed. Most patients were civilians, but some were wounded combatants from both sides of the conflict. 
Reflecting on that day now, brings back so many memories.
The smell of blood that permeated through the emergency room (ER) and the touch of desperate people pulling at my clothes to get my attention begging me to help their injured loved ones.
The wailing, despair and anguish of parents of yet another child lethally injured by a stray bullet whom we could not save.
My own sense of panic as patient after patient was carried in and laid on the floor of the already packed emergency department.
Rising above all this in the background the tut-tut-tut-tut of machine guns and the occasional large boom from explosions that sounded way too close for comfort.
The hospital swelled far beyond our capacity that week.
Dr Osmani was my right hand man in ICU, a bright, young, open-minded doctor full of infectious energy.
He took great interest in his country and the rest of the world. A few weeks earlier he had mentioned the new Australian Prime Minister to me, before I had even heard the news of the changeover.
Having actually resigned from the hospital several months earlier to start Ophthalmology training in Kabul, he had generously agreed to return to Kunduz every weekend to work in ICU, helping us to train the new doctors hired to replace him.
He had told me: ‘MSF has given me so many opportunities and I have learnt so much, now I wish to give back to them.’
The persistent fighting took its toll on all of us. By the end of the week we were physically, mentally, and emotionally exhausted.
There were moments when a sense of hopelessness overwhelmed us.
Dr Osmani expressed these sentiments on the final day, following a tragic incident where a family trying to escape Kunduz was caught in crossfire, killing several children at the scene, with two more dying in our ER and operating theatre (OT).
With the remaining children being treated for severe injuries, he stated: ‘the people are being reduced to blood and dust. They are in pieces. Oh God, is there anybody who can hear their cries?’

https://www.bma.org.uk/connecting-doctors/doctors-as-volunteers-forum/b/blog/posts/remembering-kunduz-the-attack-on-the-hospital

Remembering Kunduz: The attack on the hospital

The attack on a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) hospital in Kunduz Afghanistan last year led to the deaths of 42 patients and staff.
In the run up to a memorial event commemorating one year since the attack, the BMA is reproducing an account of the bombing written by Australian intensive care specialist Dr Kathleen Thomas, who witnessed the attack.
The names of patients and some staff have been changed to protect their privacy.
Click here to read Part one
Part two: The attack on Kunduz Trauma Centre
During the week leading up to the attack, the expats had set up camp in the hospital meeting room. This room was located in the office complex about 50 metres from the main building which housed the ICU, ER, OT and outpatient departments (OPD).
This is where I was when, as I slept, on 3 October at 2.08am, I was ripped awake by the first explosion. I could feel the vibrations in my chest and I instinctively covered my ears to protect my eardrums from rupture.
This was a totally different type of sound to anything previous and much, much closer. I had hardly managed to sit upright before the next explosion. I felt adrenaline pumping through my body – my legs tingled, my mouth was so dry, my hands shook.
I scrambled to put on my jacket and headscarf while looking at the terrified expressions of the three expat nurses with whom I shared the room. ‘It sounds like they’re bombing the hospital.’
More explosions followed in quick succession. We had no idea what was going on. It was dark in the room but we didn’t dare turn on any lights.
One of the nurses tried to look outside on several occasions, but every time he opened the door, heavy debris would hit the walls. I tried phoning everyone that wasn’t in the room with us, unsuccessfully – the ICU and ER staff and all of the other expats.
We scurried around the room like rats in a cage trying to figure out the safest place to be in case we took a direct hit. But we knew by the magnitude of the sounds - in a direct hit, there was no safe place. We were overwhelmed with this gripping fear.
The explosions continued, one after the other, separated every now and again with a short pause, presumably while the AC130 Gunship circled around. Every now and then we also heard heavy machine gun fire.
The message, as to what was going on, was delivered with our first patient.  We heard a voice outside calling for help. Jecs, one of my colleagues with me in the room, opened the door to the sight of one of our ER nurses. All four of us froze as we absorbed a scene from a horror film.
He looked like a zombie; backlit, his left arm hanging by a small piece of skin and coated in thick grey dust. His bloody clothes were shredded. Several large wounds gaped and a piece of metal stuck out of his back. His right eye streamed blood. Then he collapsed.
We pulled him inside by his feet. Panic welled up inside me as I leant over to ask: ‘Where were you when you were hit?’
‘I was in ER.’
I was struck with disbelief. Did he misunderstand my question? He couldn’t have been inside the ER.  ‘No, no, no. You must have been outside ER!’
‘No. I was inside the ER. Inside.’
This was the moment reality hit. It really was the worst case scenario. They really are bombing the hospital.
Soon after, our meeting room and the three surrounding rooms filled with injured people bringing absolute chaos. Most of them colleagues, friends and some patients, all covered in the same thick dust.
The injuries were the same as what we had been treating in patients all week – penetrating chest wounds, open fractures with extensive soft tissue wounds, traumatic amputations.
At first there was just me, three nurses, and a basic first aid kit. It’s hard to describe being surrounded by friends and colleagues, with life threatening injuries, calling out your name begging for help that you have no capacity to give them. It was horrendous.
Dr Osmani, Dr Ramakee, a training ICU Doctor, and two cleaners, were all in the ICU isolation room. Dr Osmani and one of the cleaners, Nasir, suffered devastating injuries and were killed.
Dr Ramakee, suffering blast injuries to the eyes and ears, managed to run out of the room literally dodging shells that rained down through the ceiling. One of those shells landed right in the middle of the ICU hitting and killing two of our nurses instantly. 
He then hid in the laboratory until it caught on fire then escaped through a window. He recalls hearing Dr Osmani's cries for help fade into silence over about 20 mins, but was unable to get back to him. 
We had seven patients in ICU at the time of the attack. Three were on ventilators. One was our injured Head ER nurse Lal Mohammed, the other two were chest and spinal cord injured patients.
I hope with all my might that Lal Mohammed was sedated enough to be unaware of the situation, but I know the other two were awake. Even if they’d been able to rip themselves off the ventilators, their paralysis would have prevented escape. 
When the shells ripped through the ceiling in ICU, and the whole unit went up in flames, all those patients were killed, witnessed burning in their beds. 
Our final intubated ICU patient was in theatre at the time of the attack, found dead on the operating table.
The only surviving patient in ICU was a three-year-old girl named Shaesta who had suffered horrific blast injuries yet was recovering in ICU.
The rest of the main building suffered the same fate including the ER, theatres, OPD where many staff were sleeping that night.
People fleeing the main building, like Tahseel, were picked off by machine gun fire. Forty-two people were killed, 14 of them were our staff. Countless others were injured, many suffering injuries making them unemployable in Afghanistan.

Friday, October 28, 2016

'May’s student deportation programme in tatters as legal appeal falls apart'

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/mays-student-deportation-programme-in-tatters-as-121457183.html



May’s student deportation programme in tatters as legal appeal falls apart

Ian Dunt
Politics.co.uk
A long-running programme to deport foreign students from the UK on the basis of hearsay evidence was in ruins today, after the appeal court ruled against the Home Office.
The decision to quietly shelve the legal challenge is a damning moment for Theresa May, who presided over the department when it used flimsy evidence to threaten tens of thousands of foreign students with detention and deportation.
The Home Office argued in a court case that the students had fraudulently completed English language tests, but was unable to point to any expert evidence substantiating its accusations. Its own officials, whose testimony it had put forward as proof of student fraud, were dismissed by the court as lacking “qualifications or expertise, vocational or otherwise, in the scientific subject matter of these appeals”.
The department appealed that ruling but today its case was dismissed as “fundamentally misconceived”.
The Home Office appeal originally claimed that the case was unfair, that the deputy judge was biased, that witnesses had not been given an opportunity to explain evidence properly, and that the tribunal had misunderstood expert evidence.
But lawyers for the student in the case say they received a surprising letter from the Home Office suddenly capitulating and admitting there were “no compelling reasons to pursue the appeal”. It also offered to pay costs if the appeal was withdrawn.
In a hearing today, the court decided to pass a judgement, regardless of the Home Office’s attempt to withdraw its own appeal.
It is currently unclear whether other students accused of fraud under the programme will be able to use the judgement in their cases.
Some cases will certainly be conceded while others are likely to be offered settlements, but that may still leave thousands of students uncertain about their legal status.
The court today asked the Home Office to come up with a policy detailing what it will do in these cases.
There is a stark divide in the deportation cases between those students offered a right of in-country appeal and those told they had to appeal out of country.
The students forced into the out-of-country appeal route often suffered dawn raids by immigration enforcement, followed by an indefinite period of detention, followed by deportation - all on the basis of evidence the courts then found to be worthless. Their only legal redress was in a court case in their home country, which would have seen their existing British student visa expire regardless of whether they won or lost.
For many students, who had spent thousands of pounds coming to the UK to study, the sudden threat of deportation and subsequent costly legal battle left them without money or the qualification they originally came to the UK to pursue.
A Home Office spokesperson said:

“We will review the full determination in due course. It would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.”

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

'The racist ideas of slave owners are still with us today'

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/26/racist-ideas-slavery-slave-owners-hate-crime-brexit-vote

The racist ideas of slave owners are still with us today


The surge in hate crime since the Brexit vote is one legacy of an overlooked period of British history
Monday 26 September 2016 


A 19th-century print of a slave ship

 A 19th-century print shows captives being brought on board a slave ship on Africa’s west coast. Photograph: Print Collector/Getty Images
On Sunday evening, the ITV series Victoria imagined Prince Albert addressing the great anti-slavery convention at Exeter Hall, on the continued existence of the slave trade and slavery. It went so far as to show an encounter between Albert, a freed African-American and American feminists attending the convention.
It was engaging television. But don’t be fooled. People of colour and women were in reality marginalised at this famous 1840 event. And while Albert supported anti-slavery causes, other significant royals, including Victoria’s uncle the Duke of Cumberland, opposed the ending of the slave trade and slavery.
In fact, between 10% and 15% of the 19th-century British elite had connections with slave ownership. Such connections survive today. For example, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice are descended through their mother, Sarah Ferguson, from Sir Henry Fitzherbert, who in the 18th century owned sugar plantations and more than 1,000 enslaved men, women and children, in Jamaica and Barbados.
Since 2009 I have been working with a team of historians on the Legacies of British Slave Ownership project at University College London. Our initial research was compiled from the records of the compensation paid to slave owners following slavery’s abolition in 1833. This was significant because the compensation paid by British taxpayers contributed in important ways to the making of modern industrial Britain and its empire.
We chose to work on the slave owners – English, Scots, Irish and Welsh, mostly men but also women – as a way of demonstrating the extent to which thousands of white Britons were directly implicated in the exploitation of enslaved Africans. The project has attracted a great deal of attention, and was made into two Bafta-winning TV documentaries.
The key driver of the slave trade was, of course, the desire to make money. But its longer-term legacy runs well beyond that. For in order to make money the traders had to create a new discourse on “race”; and the impact of those ideas needs to be remembered too.

By studying pamphlets, wills, correspondence and other papers kept by slave owners, we can explore how they understood race and attempted to justify their ownership of other people. This week sees the launch of a major new data set and the start of the next phase of work at the Centre for the Study of the Legacies of British Slave Ownership at UCL, supported by the Hutchins Center at Harvard.
The processes by which Africans became “negroes” who became “slaves”, took place across the African coast, on the slave ships, and on the plantations of the Caribbean. The slave owners’ insistence on skin colour as a marker of identity continues to haunt us. Edward Long’s celebrated History of Jamaica, a key text for pro-slavers and racists who believe in the natural and essential differences between black and white, was first published in 1774 and is still in print today.
Ideas about racial difference that began with slavery were recalibrated across the centuries to encompass other colonised subjects – whether Indian, Aboriginal or east Asian. All were defined as racialised others, inferior to white Britons, and this process was central to imperial rule.
A British history that told this story of exclusion would help us to understand the present. “The great force of history,” wrote the African-American activist and writer James Baldwin, “comes from the fact that we carry it within us, are unconsciously controlled by it in many ways, and history is literally present in all that we do.” The structures and practices that underpin black inequality are not new.
Britain likes to tell a story about itself as a tolerant and inclusive nation, the first to abolish the slave trade and slavery: in essence, of a long slow march from Magna Carta to our contemporary, democratic society. This remains powerful and attempts to challenge or question it are strongly resisted.
History, however, provides us with the means to pursue that questioning. Britons need to grasp a history that takes responsibility for the debt – moral, political and economic – owed to others, to give us a much stronger understanding of the benefits that we at the imperial centre have reaped. One such example is thecurrent campaign by Caribbean nations for reparation, which demands an exploration of the continuities between Atlantic slavery and the present day.
My work as a historian has convinced me that ways of thinking about race are the most destructive legacy of Britain’s imperial past. In the wake of the Brexit vote we have witnessed a deeply disturbing increase in the number of hate crimescommitted against Poles, Muslims and racial minorities. Globalisation, with all the losses it has brought for so many, has clearly acted as a trigger for this upsurge of rage and resentment, the wish to “take back control” and “secure our borders”.
The legacy of slavery is the dehumanisation of others and assumptions of white superiority, as well as terrible disparities of wealth and power. These could not be starker than they are today.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Yemen on the brink of starvation- humanitarian crisis



The politics behind the crisis:


careers advice from the whitehouse

http://uk.businessinsider.com/heres-the-career-advice-president-obama-gives-to-his-summer-interns-2016-6?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=hks-twitter&utm_source=twitter?r=US&IR=T

Here's the career advice President Obama gives to his summer interns


Sitting in intern orientation just steps away from the Oval Office, I surveyed the crowd of bright, ambitious, but inexperienced 20-year-olds and couldn't help but feel a little too old to be an unpaid DC intern.
At 27, I had just finished five years of active duty service as an Officer in the United States Navy, the majority of which was spent deployed in some of the world's most challenging flashpoints.
I was fascinated by the way America's national security strategy was crafted and applied to the White House Intern Program the summer before I started business school.
So, I was now in the literal halls of power, but what professional lessons could a military officer like me possibly learn at an unpaid internship like this?
It turns out quite a few. Through the White House Internship’s Speaker Series, I was privileged to hear senior government officials, from the President on down, address the intern class and share lessons they learned from careers that landed them at the pinnacle of political success.
Below are the top five pieces of advice I’ve taken with me that I believe interns everywhere can learn from.

President Barack Obama: "Worry less about what you want to be and more about what you want to do."

pres obama largePresident Obama. Alex Wong/ Getty Images
Washington is full of people thirsting to become a senator or president. At elite colleges and graduate schools, many students fight their way through corporate recruiting to become a management consultant or corporate financier. Both groups talk a lot about the power, prestige, and compensation of their desired jobs, but rarely about the work — what make it enjoyable, interesting, or impactful.
By focusing your career on a particular challenge rather than job title, you open up a much wider definition of success. Those who dream of working as a Product Manager at Google only have a 0.2% chance of being hired. If you find yourself among that unfortunate 99.8%, that's the end of the road. On the other hand, if your goal is to advance self-driving car technology, you can work at other technology firms, automobile companies, startups, government regulatory agencies, and advocacy groups, and know that you're achieving satisfying levels of impact at each step in your career.

Vice President Joe Biden: "Know which issues you are prepared to lose over."

joe biden largeVice President Biden. Joe Raedle/ Staff

Every vote cast in Congress is a decision between principled stands and political expediency. Those who compromise every time fail to achieve anything with their power, while those who refuse to compromise fall on their swords so much that they dull their blades. Effective leaders stake out battle lines in advance by identifying which issues are worth fighting for — that way, even if they lose an election over their views, it will only be for their most important and principled ones.
Far lower down the totem pole, we all face similar dilemmas. For example, do you risk straining relationships with a coworker in order to confront him for telling sexist jokes? In high-stress jobs with long hours, ask what you're willing to "lose" in you career in order to have dinner with your family every night, be close to a loved one, or achieve a higher level of impact. If you don't identify your "losing issues" in advance then nothing you "win" will be of much consequence.

First Lady Michelle Obama: "Live so you can afford public service."

first lady largeFirst Lady Michelle Obama Win McNamee / Staff
Public service is expensive, just ask the Obamas. Before they pivoted careers, both of them were earning great salaries at high-powered law firms. Taking those lower public servant salaries meant smaller homes, cheaper schools for the children, and fewer vacations. Plus, had they not kept their savings high and spending low when they were earning good salaries, it is very likely that profligate lifestyles would have chained them, like golden handcuffs, to work that wasn’t their true calling.

Chief of Staff Denis McDonough: "The most important qualification for any staffer is the trust of the principal."

chief of staff largeChief of Staff Denis McDonough Chip Somodevilla/ Staff
If leaders had the time and brain power to make every decision in their organizations, they might want to. Instead, each employee hired pushes the boss further away from the work that drives her business. Competence can be gauged by prior work experience and sterling academic credentials, but a boss also needs to trust that the decisions she delegates will be made in the way she wants. Washington is full of absurdly young people advising top decision-makers and leading executive agencies because their principals – the nation’s elected leaders – trust their judgement and loyalty to make the same decisions they would.
As soon as you arrive at your internship, strive to earn your boss's trust by, first, over-delivering on prominent difficult assignments, and second, developing an intuition for how your boss would perceive and react to a problem.

Vice President Joe Biden: "It's always appropriate to question another man's judgment, but never appropriate to question his motives."

Early in his career, Biden found himself in conflict with the conservative Senator Jesse Helms over Helm's opposition to the Americans with Disabilities Act. When Biden complained that Helms had "a disregard for the disabled," a colleague told Biden about an advertisement Helms and his wife read in the newspaper. In it, an orphaned 9-year-old boy with cerebral palsy stated that all he wanted for Christmas that year were parents to love and adopt him. His colleague looked Biden in the eye. "They adopted him, Joe."
When you believe that someone is acting out of evil, self-interest, or corruption, it becomes impossible to work with them. But when you see disputes as honest disagreements, compromise and cordiality is still possible. Remember: no one is the villain in their own story.
Nathan Bruschi is a Navy Veteran and a student at Harvard Business School and Harvard Kennedy School.