Tim Daniels@TimDanielsBRTwitter LogoFeatured ColumnistSeptember 19, 2018

Tim Warner/Getty Images

Minnesota Timberwolves shooting guard Jimmy Butler has reportedly requested a trade ahead of the 2018-19 NBA season.

On Wednesday, Shams Charania and Jon Krawczynski of The Athletic reported Butler has provided the T-Wolves with a list of the “one to three teams” with whom he’d be willing to sign a contract extension.

This article will be updated to provide more information on this story as it becomes available.

Get the best sports content from the web and social in the new B/R app. Get the app and get the game.

Warriors Owner: ‘Of Course’ We Have to Re-Recruit KD Next Year



via Bleacher Report

Waiting on Butler



via Canis Hoopus

Lonzo (Knee) Still Not a Full Participant in Practice



via Bleacher Report

Woj: Sixers Hire Elton Brand as GM



via Bleacher Report

Bogota – Carmenza Gomez was planning a surprise Christmas dinner in the winter of 2008 to celebrate having her eight children back together under one roof in their home in an impoverished suburb in Bogota, the capital of Colombia.

That summer, the family had finally been reunited after years apart due to the sons’ military service. It was months away, but Carmenza wanted to throw an elaborate dinner to share their first Christmas together in years.

But just days after the last of her sons arrived home, 23-year-old Victor Fernando, her third youngest, disappeared.

“I didn’t tell any of them what I was planning [for Christmas],” Carmenza recalled nearly a decade later. “It turns out my wishes were never fulfilled,” she said between heavy sighs. “That’s when they took Victor and killed him.”

On the evening Victor disappeared, he told one of his brothers he was leaving town to take a temporary and lucrative job opportunity on the coast. But two days later, the young father of one was found dead, along with two other young men from Soacha. At least eight other bodies were also found in the area. 

According to initial official reports, Victor was killed in combat with the Colombian military and dressed in uniform belonging to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebel group. But the family maintained Victor wasn’t a rebel fighter.

The mysterious deaths of Victor and other young men from Soacha led to a government investigation in September 2008 that uncovered what is widely considered one of the worst human rights abuses in Colombia’s history.

It was revealed that the Colombian military lured, killed and falsely reported civilians as “combat kills” to boost body counts in the war against the FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia). The military committed at least 2,248 of these extrajudicial killings, known as “false positives” between 1988 and 2014, according to a report from Colombia’s prosecutor’s office, but rights groups say the number may be much higher. The victims were generally young men between the ages of 18 and 30 and many worked as farmers or informal labourers in the peripheries of the city.

In April 2017, 21 members of the military were sentenced to 37 to 52 years in prison for killing Victor and four other young men as part of the false positive scandal.

Although the conviction seemed to initially bring some justice and closure to the Gomez family, Carmenza, along with other victims’ mothers, now fear those convicted may receive impunity or less harsh sentences after the military men requested their cases be heard as part of a transitional justice system, which was set up under the 2016 peace deal between the FARC and the government.

‘Accept charges and confess the truth’

The Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) began operations earlier this year to investigate and serve justice in cases of human rights violations committed in relation to Colombia’s 52-year-old armed conflict.

In July, the JEP announced it would prioritise cases of extrajudicial killings falsely presented as combat kills. According to the prosecutor’s office, about 90 percent of the 1,944 members of the armed forces who had submitted their cases to the transitional justice system were implicated in cases of extrajudicial killings. About 965 military members were released from prison and granted freedom in return for their commitment to tell the truth in the JEP. Another 134 were also released but were ordered to stay within military or police barracks while their cases are heard.

“These benefits were granted because these cases are prima facie [under initial examination] considered to be related to the armed conflict,” Catalina Diaz, one of the 38 magistrates that make up the JEP, told Al Jazeera.

As outlined by the peace deal between the FARC and the Colombian government, the JEP offers benefits such as conditional liberty, lighter sentences, and alternative sanctions to armed actors who submit their interest of being tried by the JEP and fulfill a series of requirements, including an obligation to contribute to the truth, the non-repetition of the crimes and presenting reparations to the victims.

I didn’t tell any of them what I was planning [for Christmas]. It turns out my wishes were never fulfilled. That’s when they took Victor and killed him.

Carmenza Gomez, member of the Mothers of Soacha

For the victims’ mothers, including Carmenza, who waited nine years for a conviction in the ordinary justice system, seeing the men convicted for her son’s death receive such benefits is difficult to accept.

But what concerns Carmenza the most is that if the JEP presides over the cases of those already convicted, they may receive shorter sentences and still not tell the entire truth. The maximum sentence in the JEP is 20 years.

“How are they going to appeal to the Special Peace Jurisdiction if they didn’t accept charges [in the ordinary justice system]?” Carmenza asked. “Now they need to accept charges and confess the truth because if they don’t, what is the point? How will there be justice?”

‘We want to know who ordered the killings’

Carmenza and others who are part of the Mothers of Soacha (MAFAPO), an organisation formed in 2008 by the families of false positive victims in Bogota, want the JEP to not only hand out justice but uncover the “greater truth” behind the killings.

“The military men who shot our family members say this is what happened, I shot him, but beyond that, they can’t tell us anything else. We need to know who ordered these crimes. That’s the greater truth and that’s what we want to know now,” Jacqueline Castillo, a member of the Mothers of Soacha whose brother was killed in 2008, said.

On Friday, the Mothers of Soacha called on retired general Mario Montoya to tell the entire truth during a presentation to the JEP on false positive killings of youth from Bogota. A day earlier, Montoya appeared in front of the JEP magistrates to officially submit his case to the transitional justice system. At the hearing, the retired general, who is the highest ranking officer to appear before the JEP to date, claimed he had no knowledge of the actions of the crimes of his subordinates.

Montoya is under investigation by the prosecutor’s office for his alleged role in 44 extrajudicial killings reportedly committed during his time as commander of the 4th Brigade troops. He also served as top commander of the Colombian Army at the height of the extrajudicial killings from 2006 to 2008.

For Castillo, Montoya’s testimony is imperative to understanding why her brother and thousands of civilians were killed and how high up the command chain knowledge or responsibility for these killings reached.

“We consider [Montoya] to be the person who can truly tell the truth,” Castillo said. “Mario Montoya will have to tell us if the order to commit these crimes came from Juan Manuel Santos, who was minister of defence at the time, or Alvaro Uribe Velez, who was president of Colombia at the time.”

The JEP will decide whether it will hear Montoya’s case and those of others allegedly involved in the false positive scandal in the coming months.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has indicated “ambiguities and loopholes” in the implementing legislation of the JEP “could allow senior officers responsible for ‘false positive’ killings to escape meaningful justice,” said Juan Pappier, Americas researcher for HRW, in a statement to Al Jazeera.

“These include a definition of ‘command responsibility’ that distorts the definition under international law in a manner that could allow army generals to evade accountability for the hundreds of killings committed by army soldiers under their watch,” he said.

We’re here. And here, we expect to hear the greater truth.

Jacqueline Castillo, member of the Mothers of Soacha

At least 900 members of the armed forces have been convicted for homicides committed by state agents, a representative of the Attorney General’s Office told the Colombian newspaper, El Colombiano, in 2016. Still, victims, lawyers’ collectives, human rights organisations, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) point out most senior officers have yet to be convicted or charged. Last year, the ICC identified 23 generals and six active and retired colonels, including the current top commander of the Army, whose cases could be taken up by the international court if the ordinary justice system and the JEP are found unwilling or incapable of serving justice.

“We will do our best efforts for justice to be served,” Magistrate Diaz told the Mothers of Soacha during their presentation. “And we’re not going to remain complacent with knowing who pulled the trigger… Instead, we are going to also investigate who gave the orders.”

As the Mother of Soacha’s presentation wound down on Friday at the JEP, Castillo, dressed in a white T-shirt that read “10 years alive and united for the truth,” reminded Montoya and the rest of the members of the armed forces that, just as they have done before, the victims’ families will continue to demand their rights as another chapter in their search for justice and truth begins.

“We’re here,” Castillo said. “And here, we expect to hear the greater truth.”

President Donald Trump has largely tried to avoid opining on Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in high school, but in 2015 he sided with Justice Clarence Thomas in the decades-old fight that has drawn comparisons to the current moment.

Shortly after launching his presidential campaign, Trump told Bloomberg in an interview that he believed Thomas when he denied in 1991 that he sexually harassed Anita Hill when he was her supervisor at two federal government agencies.

Story Continued Below

“I really have a lot of respect — I like Clarence Thomas a lot, and I will go with Clarence Thomas,” Trump said. “In terms really of conservative decisions, he is probably about the best there is on the Supreme Court, certainly one of them.”

“What do I know? I just respect Clarence Thomas,” Trump said. “I don’t know Anita Hill. I’d met Clarence Thomas on a number of occasions. I thought he was terrific. I think he’s a terrific person. So what do I know?”

Trump has backed Kavanaugh since Ford came forward this weekend as the woman behind an accusation of assault when they were both high school students in the Washington area. Trump said it would be “hard for me to imagine that anything happened.”

But he has also steered clear of forcefully denying Ford’s allegations or criticizing her, saying on Wednesday that he wanted to hear what she had to say.

“Look, if she shows up, and makes a credible showing, that will be very interesting,” Trump told reporters. “We’ll have to make a decision.”

Hill, meanwhile, wrote in the New York Times this week that it is up to Kavanaugh to convince senators that he did nothing wrong.

“As Judge Kavanaugh stands to gain the lifetime privilege of serving on the country’s highest court, he has the burden of persuasion. And that is only fair,” she wrote.

Image: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Ronaldo’s Incredible Scoring Record Against Valencia

via Goal

Real Madrid Begin UCL Title Defence vs. Roma

via Bleacher Report

Madrid Already Have Their Ronaldo Replacement in Superstar Asensio

via Goal

Aguero Fit to Face Lyon in Champions League Opener

via BBC Sport

Mourinho: Artificial Pitch Will Be No Excuse Against Young Boys

via Bleacher Report

Who Are Young Boys? Novice Coach and a Solar-Powered Stadium

via Goal

Ajax Look to Rekindle Former Glory When They Host AEK

via Futbolgrad

Bayern Kickstart UCL Campaign Against Benfica

via Bayern Strikes

Marcelino: Valencia Don’t Fear Ronaldo

via Football-italia

Hoffenheim Make UCL Debut vs. Table-Toppers Shakhtar

via bundesliga.com – the official Bundesliga website

Hungry Robben on Quest for Another Champions League

via Goal

CSKA’s Boyband Is Ready to Rock Against Viktoria Plzen

via Futbolgrad

Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan’s government has launched an ambitious $12.4bn crowdfunding drive to build two major hydroelectric dams, a move analysts say is unlikely to succeed and could leave citizens with no recourse to recoup donations if the goal isn’t met.

The drive, launched by populist Chief Justice Saqib Nisar in July, has so far gathered $29.1m. If donations continue at this rate, it will take 87 years for Pakistan to reach the initial cost estimates.

Large multi-purpose dams tend to overrun cost estimates by an average of 63 percent, according to a study by the World Commission on Dams.

Nevertheless, donations have been pouring in, buoyed by the backing of newly elected Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has supported the campaign and called on citizens at home and overseas to donate heavily.

“It will succeed because we finally have a person who has proved himself,” said Momina Aslam, an Islamabad resident who said she voted for Khan and has donated to the dam fund.

Pakistan’s powerful military – which has ruled the country for roughly half of its 71-year history – has also backed the drive, with army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa handing over a cheque worth $8.1m to the chief justice earlier this month.

The dams in question, the 4,500MW Diamer-Bhasha hydroelectric project and the 800MW Mohmand hydroelectric dam, are both located in northern Pakistan.

Construction on the $2.5bn Mohmand project has been under way since 2012, funded so far by the Pakistani and French governments.

Work on Diamer-Bhasha, by far the larger project at a cost of $9.9bn (about four percent of Pakistan’s GDP), has yet to begin.

‘Not feasible’

Across Pakistan, messages imploring one to donate to the dam bombard citizens at every corner.

Banners fly outside bank branches, which have been ordered by the Supreme Court to set up accounts to accept funds from the public. Donations are also accepted by SMS via mobile phone service providers.

On television, news channels have been instructed to run government-produced advertisements and telethons promoting the drive. In one advertisement, a child’s voice makes an emotive plea, as images show a dried-out river bed.

Criticism of the funding drive, meanwhile, is tantamount to sedition, according to Nisar, who said last week he will charge those who publicly oppose the project with “high treason”.

Pakistan’s media regulator, too, has warned channels not to criticise the effort.

Questions, however, persist, particularly on whether the drive is a feasible way to fund a major infrastructure project.

“This is not really feasible at all,” said Khurram Husain, an economic analyst, and one of the first journalists to raise the alarm at the potential folly of the donation drive.

“The amounts involved are far too large, and raising them through donations is far too slow a process and likely to take too long to get to even initial targets.”

Husain said the government should have undertaken a more thorough review of options available for infrastructure finance, including the issuance of bonds, redirecting existing expenditures or approaching international donor organisations.

In 2011, Ethiopia launched a similar public drive to construct the $5bn Grand Renaissance Dam on the River Nile.

While it reached its target, the majority of funds were generated from a mix of bonds and Chinese infrastructure financing.

It is also unclear what the fate of the money donated will be if the targets to build the dams are not met.

“What happens to the funds is something we don’t know,” said Husain. “We don’t even know how they intend to spend this money.”

A Supreme Court spokesperson did not offer comment when asked how the fund is being administered.

Crowdfunding infrastructure?

In the realm of crowdfunding civic infrastructure, what Pakistan is attempting has never been successfully done before, analysts say.

“If they want it to be strictly crowdfunded, and are not incentivising to bring in [international aid organisations] for more than 70 percent of it, it is very, very difficult,” said Kate Gasparro, a researcher at Stanford’s Global Projects Centre who studies initiatives aimed at crowdfunding civic infrastructure.

Successful crowdfunding of civic infrastructure projects, she says, tends to be aimed at specific aspects of a project, and is usually undertaken in the design phase, not for actual construction.

“This is very atypical,” she told Al Jazeera. “Usually civic crowdfunding is used just for the design aspect of a project. It is used for financial and social support at the early stage so you can understand what the community wants.”

Civic infrastructure projects that have been successful at raising the required capital tend to be in a range between $30,000 to $70,000, she said, and are usually much smaller in scope, such as funding bicycle lanes on existing roads, or renovations of community centres.

One of largest such projects was the renovation of the Madeira terraces, in the United Kingdom town of Brighton, where citizens donated more than $600,000 for the partial renovation of a seaside boardwalk.

Pakistan’s Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand dams, however, require more than 20,000 times that amount.

Moreover, most civic infrastructure crowdfunding initiatives in other countries work through an intermediary, such as Spacehive and ioby. Pakistan’s approach of soliciting donations directly from citizens leads to inherent risks, Gasparro says.

“It creates a risk for what happens to the money if they don’t reach the goal, or even how the money will be released at all.”

Why donate?

So, given the risks and the unlikelihood that the drive will ever reach its goal, why are citizens giving at all?

“It is not just about the money, it’s about creating a sense of togetherness, that we all need to do something for the country, together,” said Suhela Asif, 39, an aid worker from Islamabad.

Asif says she was aware the fund was unlikely to ever reach its goal, but she intended to donate anyway.

Seen from that perspective, analysts say it makes sense why citizens would want to contribute, regardless of the risk.

“People are contributing because there is a national fervour for a project that attempts to address a problem [a countrywide water shortage] that people have obviously realised is a serious one,” said Umair Javed, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Sciences.

“It’s like any patriotic fervour, so the arguments against it can be dismissed as scepticism or cynicism and … people aren’t really interrogating their decision to donate.”

‘Dark side’ of donations

There is, however, a potentially darker side to the donation drive.

Last month, the chief justice ordered a litigant to pay 1m Pakistani rupees ($8,115) into the dam fund if he wanted his request for an adjournment to be granted.

In another case, a group of chiefs of medical colleges – whose case was being heard by the Chief Justice – made a donation of nearly 17m Pakistani rupees ($137,500) to the fund. Soon after, that case was disposed of, with the Chief Justice reversing his previous opposition to a fee hike.

Major donors to the fund so far have included banks, an association of foreign exchange dealers and a major real estate developer, many of whom have cases pending before the Supreme Court, or are in negotiations with the government.

“One hopes that various litigants are not seeing their contributions to the dam fund as ways of softening their image before the court,” said Husain, the economic analyst.

Not every citizen, meanwhile, is on board with the drive.

“Why is it that every time a catastrophe happens, the people have to pay for it?” says Meher Azmat, 34, an architect from Lahore who voted for Khan, but opposes the donation drive.

“I think the public has suffered enough over the years, this government needs to come up with sustainable solutions. This is just stupid.”

Asad Hashim is Al Jazeera’s digital correspondent in Pakistan. He tweets @AsadHashim

Image: Shutterstock / Lisovskaya Natalia