Suu Kyi slams 2-child limit for Muslims in Myanmar

In this May 13, 2013 photo, internally displaced Rohingya children play in the foreground of makeshift tents at a camp for Rohingya people in Sittwe, northwestern Rakhine State, Myanmar. Authorities in Myanmar's western Rakhine state have imposed a two-child limit for Muslim Rohingya families, a policy that does not apply to Buddhists in the area and comes amid accusations of ethnic cleansing in the aftermath of sectarian violence. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)

Myanmar Opposition Leader Aung San Suu Kyi, center, talks to journalists as she attends Central Executive Committee (CEC) meeting of her National League for Democracy party at a restaurant in Yangon, Myanmar, Monday, May 27, 2013. Suu Kyi, rights groups and Islamic leaders expressed dismay over plans by authorities in western Myanmar to revive a two-child limit on Muslim Rohingya families. (AP Photo/Khin Maung Win)

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) — Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyiand Islamic leaders expressed dismay over decisions by authorities in western Myanmar to restore a two-child limit on Muslim Rohingya families, a policy that does not apply to Buddhists and follows accusations of ethnic cleansing.

Some Buddhists, however, welcomed the plan for addressing their fear of a Muslim population explosion.

Authorities in strife-torn Rakhine state said this past weekend that they were restoring a measure imposed during past military rule that banned Rohingya families from having more than two children. Details about the policy and how it will be enforced have not been released, sparking calls for clarity and concerns of more discrimination against a group the U.N. calls one of the world's most persecuted people.

"If true, this is against the law," said Suu Kyi, the opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Suu Kyi has faced criticism for failing to defend the Rohingya following two waves of deadly sectarian violence last year. She told reporters Monday that she had not heard details of the latest measure but, if it exists, "It is discriminatory and also violates human rights."

The policy applies to two Rakhine townships that border Bangladesh and have the highest Muslim populations in the state. The townships, Buthidaung and Maungdaw, are about 95 percent Muslim. Nationwide, Muslims account for only about 4 percent of Myanmar's roughly 60 million people.

The order makes Myanmar perhaps the only country in the world to level such a restriction against a particular religious group, and is likely to bring further criticism that Muslims are being discriminated against in the Buddhist-majority country. The central government has not made any statement about the two-child policy since Rakhine state authorities quietly enacted the measure a week ago. Calls seeking comment from government spokesmen have not been returned.

Longstanding antipathy toward the Rohingya erupted last year into mob violence in which Rakhine Buddhists armed with machetes razed thousands of Muslim homes, leaving hundreds of people dead and forcing 125,000 to flee, mostly Muslims. The New York-based group Human Rights Watch has accused the government and security forces in Rakhine of fomenting an organized campaign of "ethnic cleansing" against the Rohingya, who are regarded as aliens.

Since the violence, the religious unrest has expanded into a campaign against Muslim communities in other areas, posing a serious challenge to President Thein Sein's reformist government as it attempts to implement democratic reforms after nearly half a century of harsh military rule.

Rakhine state spokesman Win Myaing said over the weekend the policy was meant to stem population growth in the Muslim community, which a government-appointed commission last month identified as one of the causes of the sectarian violence. He said authorities have not determined how the measure will be enforced, but it will be mandatory.

"This is the best way to control the population explosion which is a threat to our national identity. If no measure is taken to control the population, there is a danger of losing our own identity," said National Affairs Minister for the Yangon Region Zaw Aye Maung, an ethnic Rakhine member of parliament. He said restricting the number of children in the poorer Muslim community will benefit them because smaller families are better able to feed, clothe and educate their children.

A Buddhist monk in Maungdaw township was also enthusiastic.

"It's a good idea. If the government can really control the Bengali population in the area, the other communities will feel more secure and there will be less violence like what happened in the past," said monk Manithara from the Aungmyay Bawdi monastery, using the name "Bengali" that most Buddhists prefer to "Rohingya." ''It's also a good step to develop the living standards of the people in the region. China also has this kind of policy."

China has a one-child policy, but it is not based on religion and exceptions apply to minority ethnic groups.

"This restriction violates human rights," said Nyunt Maung Shein, head of Myanmar's Islamic Religious Affairs Council. "Even if it existed under the military regime, it should be considered inappropriate under the democratic system."

"The authorities should be very cautious," he said. "If this is a step to ease tension between the communities, it will not produce the desired effect."

Myanmar's government does not include the Rohingya as one of its 135 recognized ethnic minorities. It considers them to be illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and denies them citizenship. Bangladesh says the Rohingya have been living in Myanmar for centuries and should be recognized there as citizens.

For years, the Rohingya in Myanmar have faced a variety of heavy-handed restrictions. They needed permission to travel outside their villages, couples were required to have permission to marry, and were then limited to having two children. Any offspring that exceeded the regulation were "blacklisted" and refused birth registrations, and denied the right to attend school, travel and marry, according to a report by the Arakan Project, a Thailand-based advocacy group for the Rohingya.

Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch called the development "outrageous," noting that the commission's report stated that any form of population control must be "voluntary" and conform to human rights standards.

"This is a step precisely in the wrong direction — going exactly the wrong direction from reconciliation and respect for human rights," he said.

NOTE: This was an update, you may view the original report in page 913 of this thread.

Will justices take note of new gay marriage laws?

FILE – In this May 14, 2013, file photo Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton signs the gay marriage bill in front of the State Capitol in St. Paul. Minnesota became the 12th state to legalize gay marriage. Three states and three countries have approved same-sex unions in just the two months since the Supreme Court heard arguments on the issue. Close observers on both sides of the divide are wondering whether such developments might affect the justices' consideration, particularly that of Justice Anthony Kennedy, which is likely to be decisive. Sponsors of the bill, Sen. Scott Dibble, second from left, and Rep. Karen Clark, right, both gay lawmakers, watch. (AP Photo/Jim Mone, File)

FILE - In this May 2, 2013, file photo two men embrace after a gay marriage was signed into law outside the State House in Providence, R.I. Three states and three countries have approved same-sex unions in just the two months since the Supreme Court heard arguments on the issue. Close observers on both sides of the divide are wondering whether such developments might affect the justices' consideration, particularly that of Justice Anthony Kennedy, which is likely to be decisive. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Three U.S. states and three countries have approved same-sex unions just in the two months since the Supreme Court heard arguments over gay marriage, raising questions about how the developments might affect the justices' consideration of the issue.

In particular, close observers on both sides of the gay marriage divide are wondering whether Justice Anthony Kennedy's view could be decisive since he often has been the swing vote on the high court.

It is always possible that Justice Kennedy is reading the newspapers and is impressed with the progress," said Michael Klarman, a Harvard University law professor and author of a recent book on the gay marriage fight.

In earlier cases on gay rights and the death penalty, Kennedy has cited the importance of changing practices, both nationally and around the world.

The court is expected to rule by late June in two cases involving same-sex marriage. One is a challenge to California's voter-approved Proposition 8 that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The other seeks to strike down a portion of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that denies to legally married same-sex couples a range of benefits that generally are available to married heterosexuals.

The justices took an initial vote in the days after hearing arguments in the two cases in late March. The senior justice on the winning side and the senior justice in dissent assigned opinions based on those votes. But while that first vote is important, it is not the end of the process; justices' assessments of a case can shift subtly or, in some cases, dramatically.

In 1992, Kennedy initially drew the assignment to write a majority opinion for five justices allowing prayers at public school graduations. In the end, he ended up writing the opinion for a different five-justice majority striking down the graduation prayers. According to several accounts, Kennedy simply changed his mind during the writing process.

Current events also can find their way into opinions. Last year, Justice Antonin Scalia's fiery dissent from a court ruling that watered down Arizona's crackdown on immigration included a reference to comments President Barack Obama made at a news conference that took place between the argument in the case in April and the announcement of the decision in June.

There is no way to know at this point whether anything similar will happen in the gay marriage cases, either of which could be decided on technical legal grounds that would say little about the court's view of the issue. But there has been no shortage of action.

In a 10-day span earlier this month, lawmakers in Delaware, Minnesota and Rhode Island gave final approval to bills to legalize same-sex marriages. Minnesota was the last of the three to act, on May 13, and when Gov. Mark Dayton signed the bill into law the following day, Minnesota became the 12th state, plus the District of Columbia, to approve same-sex unions. The other nine are: Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont and Washington.

Internationally, French President Francois Hollande signed a law this month making France the 14th country to recognize gay marriages. Uruguay and New Zealand took similar steps in April.

And further change could come soon. The Illinois Senate has approved a gay marriage bill that now is pending in the state House in advance of the May 31 end of the legislative session. Gov. Pat Quinn has said he would sign it.

In Great Britain, a bill to legalize same-sex weddings in England and Wales easily cleared the House of Commons and will be debated in the House of Lords beginning in July.

Both sides in the high court gay marriage debate say the recent events reinforce arguments they made to the court in March.

Defenders of limiting marriage to heterosexuals say the justices need only look at the change in marriage laws to see that there is no reason for them to step in and declare a national rule in favor of gay marriage that would upend constitutional bans in 30 states and laws prohibiting same-sex unions in roughly half a dozen others.

"These developments provide yet further evidence...that the claim that gays and lesbians are politically powerless and that the courts therefore have some special role in subjecting classifications affecting them to strict scrutiny is baseless," said Ed Whelan, an opponent of same-sex marriage who is president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Jim Campbell, a lawyer for Alliance Defending Freedom, said the court should not short-circuit a vigorous national debate.

"The vast majority of the states have decided to retain the traditional view of marriage that has existed throughout Western civilization. This decision belongs to the people and should be decided by the people," Campbell said.

Mary Bonauto, the director of the Civil Rights Project at Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said the assessment of the political clout of gays and lesbians is misleading. The number of states allowing same-sex weddings has doubled in less than a year and now represents 18 percent of the U.S. population. If Illinois joins in and the court were to affirm a lower court decision that struck down the California ban, just over a third of the population would live in 14 states and the District of Columbia where gay marriage would be legal.

That's not nearly enough, especially in the context of a decades-long struggle by gays and lesbians to win the right to marry, Bonauto said. "These states moving in the direction of marriage is a far cry from all states doing it," she said.

Klarman said gays and lesbians have made huge political strides in "deep blue" Democratic states.

"It is absolutely true that the political process continues to work and it is working with extraordinary rapidity," he said. By some estimates, in roughly 10 years majorities in all but a handful of Southern states will favor gay marriage.

"The only argument against this position is, what about the gay couple in Mississippi?" Klarman said, pointing to a state where the prohibition on same-sex unions is likely to endure.

The same argument could have been made, and was, during the court's deliberations over the Brown v. Board of Education case that outlawed segregation in public schools, he said.

Justice Stanley Reed, a Southerner, suggested that the court "let things play themselves out," although he eventually joined in the unanimous opinion in Brown.

During argument in the California case, Kennedy strongly suggested that he was not about to give gay marriage proponents what they are asking for, a decision that would allow same-sex couples to wed everywhere in the United States.

But Klarman wonders whether Kennedy might consider his legacy and the fact that at 76 years old, he might not be on the court for the next big gay marriage case. "He knows that today, he can write the opinion that would be the Brown of the gay rights movement," Klarman said.

___

Follow Mark Sherman on Twitter at www.twitter.com/shermancourt

Shoelaces Foil Man's Plan to Open Airplane Door During Flight

Shoelaces Foil Man's Plan to Open Airplane Door During Flight

Well, be thankful you weren't flying from Anchorage, Alaska to Portland, Oregon Monday morning. Passengers on Alaska AirlinesFlight No. 132 had to restrain a very large man who tried to open the emergency exit door while the plane was the plane was descending.

RELATED: Suspicious Mail Appears on Alaskan Politician's Doorsteps

Passenger Ryan Oelrich told ABC News he awoke to a "loud hissing noise" and people screaming during the flight. What was happening around him? Passengers were fighting to stop the roughly 200 pound, 23-year-old Alexander Michael Herrera from opening the emergency exit door right as the plane was to make its descent. FBI spokesperson Beth Anne Steele said Herrara made some "unusual statements" before setting off an alarm when he pulled the lever on the emergency door.

RELATED: What Exactly Did the Grounded JetBlue Captain Say?

Thankfully, a group of passengers was able to bring Herrera down. "I put him in a choke hold and brought him down to the ground," Henry Pignataro told KGW-TV. With two men holding Herrera still, the crew set out to find supplies on the plane to restrain him further so the plane could complete its descent relatively drama-free. This is what they came up with, KGW reports:

He said they brought three sets of shoelaces, which Pignataro and the other man used to bind Herrera's legs.

The flight attendants then brought extra seat belt extensions and the witnesses used those to further restrain Herrera, Pignataro said.

They eventually put Herrera in a seat "surrounded by big guys" while the plane landed. He was arrested by the FBI once they landed on the ground. He's being charged with interfering with a flight crew and his first court date should be on Tuesday.

Israel warns Russia against giving Syria missiles

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel's defense minister on Tuesday signaled that his military is prepared to strike shipments of advanced Russian weapons to Syria, in a rare implied threat to Moscow.

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon issued his warning shortly after a top Russian official said his government reserves the right to provide Syria with state-of-the-art S-300 air defense missiles.

Israel has been lobbying Moscow to drop the sale, fearing the missiles would upset the balance of power in the region and could slip into the hands of hostile groups, including the Lebanese militant Hezbollah, a close ally of the Syrian regime.

"As far as we are concerned, that is a threat," Yaalon told reporters when asked about the S300s.

"At this stage I can't say there is an escalation. The shipments have not been sent on their way yet. And I hope that they will not be sent," he said. But "if God forbid they do reach Syria, we will know what to do."

Since Syria's civil war erupted in March 2011, Israel has repeatedly voiced concerns that Syria's sophisticated arsenal, including chemical weapons, could either be transferred to Hezbollah, a bitter enemy of Israel, or fall into the hands of rebels battling Syrian President Bashar Assad. The rebels include al-Qaida-affiliated groups that Israel believes could turn their attention toward Israel if they topple Assad.

Israel has carried out several airstrikes in Syria that are believed to have destroyed weapons shipments bound for Hezbollah. Israel has not confirmed carrying out the attacks. The delivery of the Russian missiles to Syria could limit the Israeli air force's ability to act.

In Moscow, Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, wouldn't say whether Russia has shipped any of the long-range S-300 air defense missile systems, but insisted that Moscow isn't going to abandon the deal despite strong Western and Israeli criticism.

"We understand the concerns and signals sent to us from different capitals. We realize that many of our partners are concerned about the issue," Ryabkov said. "We have no reason to revise our stance."

He said the missiles could be a deterrent against foreign intervention in Syria and would not be used against Syrian rebels, who do not have an air force.

"We believe that such steps to a large extent help restrain some 'hotheads' considering a scenario to give an international dimension to this conflict," he said.

Russia has been the key ally of the Syrian regime, protecting it from United Nations sanctions and providing it with weapons despite the civil war there that has claimed over 70,000 lives.

It is unclear if Moscow has already provided Damascus with any of the S-300s missiles, which have a range of up to 200 kilometers (125 miles) and the capability to track and strike multiple targets simultaneously.

Ryabkov's statement came a day after European Union's decision to lift an arms embargo against Syrian rebels. He criticized the EU decision, saying it would help fuel the conflict.

Israel's defense chief spoke at an annual civil defense drill to prepare for missile attacks on Israel. This year's exercise comes at a time of heightened concerns that Israel could be dragged into the Syrian civil war.

A number of mortar shells from the fighting in Syria have landed in the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. While Israel believes most of the fire has been errant, it has accused Syria of firing intentionally at Israeli targets on several occasions, and last week the sides briefly exchanged fire.

Israel's civil defense chief, Home Front Minister Gilad Erdan, said this week's drill was not specifically connected to the tensions with Syria.

"But of course we must take into consideration that something like that might happen in the near future because of what we see in Syria, and because we know that chemical weapons exist in Syria and might fall to the hands of radical Muslim terror groups," he said.

Much of Red Cross fund for Sandy aid still unspent

In this May 7, 2013 photo, Gregory Hylton, right, speaks with Councilman Donovan Richards while taking him on tour of his basement, in New York. Hylton's basement is covered in mold, a development he says resulted in the aftermath of Sandy storm damage. Seven months after Superstorm Sandy, the Red Cross still hasn't spent more than a third of the $303 million it raised to assist victims of the storm, a strategy the organization says will help address needs that weren't immediately apparent in the disaster's wake. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews)

NEW YORK (AP) — Seven months after Superstorm Sandy, theRed Cross still hasn't spent more than a third of the $303 million it raised to assist victims of the storm, a strategy the organization says will help address needs that weren't immediately apparent in the disaster's wake.

Some disaster relief experts say that's smart planning. But others question whether the Red Cross, an organization best known for rushing into disasters to distribute food and get people into shelter, should have acted with more urgency in the weeks after the storm and left long-haul recovery tasks to someone else.

"The Red Cross has never been a recovery operation. Their responsibility has always been mass care," said Ben Smilowitz, executive director of the Disaster Accountability Project, a nonprofit group that monitors aid groups. "Stick with what you're good at."

Storm victims could have used more help this past winter, said Kathleen McCarthy, director of the Center for the Study of Philanthropy and Civil Society at the City University of New York.

"People were cold. Homes mildewed. There wasn't enough decent housing," she said. "Given the lingering despair, it's hard to understand the argument that 'We are setting that money aside.'"

As Americans open their wallets to assist tornado victims in Oklahoma, the Red Cross is again emerging as one of the most important relief organizations on the ground and also one of the most prodigious fundraisers for victims. As of Thursday, it had raised approximately $15 million in donations and pledges for the tornado response, including a $1 million gift from NBA star Kevin Durant and numerous $10 donations, pledged via text.

The Red Cross was also the No. 1 recipient of donations after Sandy. The organization said it still had $110 million remaining from its pool of storm donations as of mid-April, which were the most recent figures available.

Red Cross officials pledged that all the money in its Sandy fund will eventually be spent on the storm recovery and not diverted to other disasters or used to support general Red Cross operations.

Over the next few months, the Red Cross expects to spend as much as $27 million of its remaining Sandy donations on a program providing "move-in assistance" grants of up to $10,000 to families displaced by the storm. About 2,000 households have been assisted by the program so far, with an additional 4,000 waiting for an eligibility determination.

Part of the delay in spending, officials said, is to wait to see how the hardest-hit states allocate a $60 billion pot of federal relief dollars and address gaps in the government aid package.

"We are waiting to see where the greatest need is going to be over time," said Josh Lockwood, CEO of the Red Cross Greater New York Region. "We are more concerned with spending our resources wisely rather than quickly."

Some disaster relief experts said holding funds in reserve was indeed a smart move.

Much of the toughest and most expensive relief work after a natural disaster comes not during the initial months but during the long-term rebuilding phase after the public's attention has waned and new donations have stopped flowing, said Patrick Rooney, associate dean at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy.

"It would be splashier, perhaps, to spend the money right away while the media is still there and the donors are still looking," he said. "But the important needs, from the cost perspective and the recipient perspective, take place after the headlines are gone and after the cameras are gone."

Red Cross officials noted that a year after a tornado killed 158 people in Joplin, Mo., it found itself providing a new round of mental health services to survivors. The cholera epidemic that killed thousands of people following a massive earthquake in Haiti, where the Red Cross was also criticized for not spending donations faster, also didn't start until nearly a year after the disaster.

The Red Cross says it is planning substantial grants to other nonprofit groups doing Sandy recovery work and is doing much of its current work in conjunction with charitable partners with local ties.

Red Cross volunteers working in conjunction with the organizing group New York Cares are going out several days a week to muck and clean flooded homes and remove mold. Red Cross staff and caseworkers have been holding "unmet needs roundtables" in hard-hit communities, trying to identify victims not covered by traditional aid programs.

"Our experience shows that as the recovery goes on, the needs of survivors will evolve," said Roger Lowe, Red Cross senior vice president. "It's important to make sure some money is available for those needs no one can predict right now."

Other organizations that raised large sums for the relief effort have also held back money while they evaluated the wisest way to spend it.

The Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund, led by Mary Pat Christie, the wife of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, raised $32 million after the storm but didn't begin awarding grants on a large scale until April. So far, it has given about $11 million, with the biggest grants going to local organizations building or repairing housing.

The United Way, which raised $9.7 million in a Sandy recovery fund for New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and some parts of Pennsylvania, said it has spent about $4 million of that total to date, though another $2.5 million is set to go out soon.

"We always knew, from the very beginning, that our fund and our resources would be for longer-term strategies," said United Way of New York City President Sheena Wright. "We feel good about the timeframe."

That strategy of holding some cash to spend later contrasts with the approach taken by the Robin Hood Foundation, which was in charge of distributing more than $70 million raised by a Dec. 12 benefit concert by Bruce Springsteen, The Rolling Stones and other music royalty.

That fund was depleted entirely by April, with grants given to 400 relief organizations ranging from food banks to legal services to volunteer rebuilding groups.

Robin Hood spokeswoman Patty Smith said the foundation moved as fast as it could because it believed that delays in government aid were leaving big gaps in services.

Red Cross officials say they have the ability to meet both long-term and short-term needs, noting the organization has served 17 million meals and snacks, distributed 7 million relief items, mobilized 17,000 workers and volunteers, and provided 81,000 overnight stays.

Its efforts won over early critics like Staten Island Borough President James Molinaro, who assailed the Red Cross response in the days immediately after the storm but now praises it as having provided vital help.

"They've come a long way since Day One," Molinaro said.