Team West’s Ilya Kovalchuk, left, and Alexander Radulov before the 2013 Kontinental Hockey League All-Star Game between Team West and Team East.(RIA Novosti / Alexey Kudenko)

(55.9Mb) embed video

The Eastern Conference have won for their third All-Star Game in a row, beating the West by 18-11 in Chelyabinsk, with local boy, Evgeny Kuznetsov, netting four goals and Ilya Kovalchuk adding thee more for the winners.

­It’s been a long time coming but, finally, the league’s cream of the crop headed East.

Chelyabinsk — one of Russia’s biggest industrial cities, at the foot of the Urals — had the privilege of hosting the fifth edition of the KHL All-Star Game.

The conditions outside were certainly frosty, but inside this couldn’t have been further from the truth.

The fans turning out in their thousands to see some of their favorite stars take to the ice, in the hockey mad city.

Despite the NHL finally being ‘unlocked’ and some of Russia’s biggest stars already back across the Atlantic, it was a fantastic occasion for Ilya Kovalchuk and Pavel Datsyuk — two names, which need no introduction to any hockey fan — who realized their dream of playing an All-Star game in front of their home crowd.

Both got special permission from their respective New Jersey Devils and Detroit Red Wings teams to appear in this game, and they were delighted to give something back.

“It’s my first time here — and I’m pretty excited. It’s not an ordinary or routine event, and the fans expect a lot,” Datsyk told RT.

It is very rare that hockey pros are able to relax when playing in front of a packed arena.

However, this is the beauty of All-Star Games — and this is why they are so loved by the players, just as much as the fans.

All Star games are high scoring affairs, and the Chelyabinsk encounter was no exception. There was no checking — and the match was more like a pre-season friendly — given that the players didn’t want to pick up any injuries with the KHL play-offs just a couple of months away.

The home crowd was firmly on the side of the East since Traktor Chelyabinsk play in the Eastern Conference.

The biggest reception was given to Mike Garnett, Deron Quint and Evgeny Kuznetsov, who is one of the brightest talents to emerge from Russia since Aleksandr Ovechkin and Ilya Kovalchuk.

Defensemen and goaltenders rarely come out of All Star games with much credit, such was the emphasis on scoring.

“All-Star Games are always hard for goaltenders because everyone else can relax on the ice, while we still have to work,” goalkeeper Konstantin Barulin said.

However, Quint notched up a brace, but he just as everyone else was outshone by the prodigy that is Kuznetsov.

The 20-year-old leads his club in scoring in the KHL and he notched up a game high four goals.

And Garnett, whose goals against average took quite a hit in the game, was full of praise for his teammates.

With 29 goals scored in 60 minutes — it might seem difficult to choose the best of the lot.

But in the end that wasn’t too much of a problem thanks to Sibir Novosibirsk forward, Jori Lehtera.

The Finn scored an outrageous penalty shot, which completely wrong-footed the Western Conference’s net minder.

Ilya Kovalchuk had a memorable debut All-Star Game as well, netting a hat-trick. It’s almost certain that this was his final game on Russian ice for a while as he’s set to return to North America to play for the New Jersey Devils.

The East cruised to a 18-11 victory in the end, topping their Western rivals in the third All-Star Game in a row.

It was a great day for the fans, with some traveling further than others. A group from Yamal in the far north of Russia drove for over 1800km just to see their hero Konstantin Barulin, and it was certainly worth the wait for them.

This was the fifth KHL All-Star Game and the first in a city where hockey is undoubtedly the number one sport. And with every year, the event continues to go from strength to strength.

Team West and Team East players pose for a group photo after the 2013 Kontinental Hockey League All-Star Game.(RIA Novosti / Alexey Kudenko)

Team East’s Yevgeny Kuznetsov, left, against Team West’s goaltender Rastislav Stana in the 2013 Kontinental Hockey League All-Star Game.(RIA Novosti / Alexey Kudenko)

Team East’s Alexei Morozov before the 2013 Kontinental Hockey League All-Star Game between Team East and Team West.(RIA Novosti / Alexey Kudenko)

The only thing greener than Nick Clegg’s onesie is David Cameron’s envy for the must-have fashion item.

The prime minister has revealed that he does not own a onesie, unlike his deputy, but added that he is “jealous” of the ones his children have.

Cameron was asked if he had one of the popular all-in-one leisure suits after Clegg admitted being given one during a radio phone-in last week.

Not even the furore over the EU has made Cameron as sad as this

Speaking on ITV’s Daybreak, Cameron said he had not joined in with the trend, which has seen grown men and women wearing the romper outfits.

He said: “My children have onesies. I often say that I’m very jealous that they didn’t get me one.”

Last week Clegg told London’s LBC 97.3 radio that he had been given a “big green onesie” in Sheffield but said he had not worn it and it was still in its packaging.

Related on HuffPost:

At least 20,000 Russian opposition supporters rally on January 13, 2013.(AFP Photo / Aadrey Smirnov)

Russia’s Lower House has refused to take action on the public petition to cancel the amendment to the Dima Yakovlev Law that bans US adoptions of Russian children.

The head of the State Duma’s Constitutional Committee, Vladimir Pligin, explained to reporters that though Russia currently has a rule that obliges parliament to treat any petition supported by at least 100,000 citizens as a legislative initiative, the law lacks detail and cannot be carried out. The parliamentarian added that he and all his colleagues respected the request nevertheless.

Pligin also noted that as the submitted signatures were collected in electronic form through the internet there were problems with verifying them and the procedure rules on such documents were simply absent. The official promised, however, that his committee would start working on the necessary rules so that the consideration of public initiatives would no longer be a problem.

The petition with the demand to cancel the amendment banning the US adoptions was submitted to the Lower House in late December on the day when the Dima Yakovlev Law passed its third reading. Journalists from the Novaya Gazeta daily, who managed to collect the 100,000 signatures in support of the request, initially claimed the State Duma office somehow lost their petition but this was quickly refuted as the Duma chairman ordered the profile parliamentary committees to consider the document and prepare suggestions on possible legislative action.

Some Russian media also suggested that a large part of 100,000 signatures were duplicates and fakes, but given that the Constitutional Committee treated the document as valid, these were simply rumors.

Despite protests from the public, media and even officials, such as the Foreign Minister and Minister of Science and Education, the Dima Yakovlev Law was approved by Parliament, signed by the President and came into force on January 1 this year.

At the same time, Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters that the Russia-US adoptions agreement will remain in force for another year and those orphans whose adoption procedure had already started still had a chance to find new families in America.

On January 13 several thousand protesters marched through Moscow saying they wanted the parliament that drafted and approved the adoptions ban dissolved. The same was suggested in another petition that Novaya Gazeta had prepared which has already collected another 100,000 signatures, according to the daily.

However, the protests and the second petition received a much colder reception from the authorities.

While commenting on the subject in a televised interview, Dmitry Peskov said that the calls to dissolve the parliament deserved neither attention nor respect. He stressed that the government had “nothing to talk about” with the people who disrespect the country’s legislative branch of power. Peskov added that recent opinion polls showed that the majority of Russians supported the ban.

Putin’s spokesman also noted that the people who expressed concern over the fate of Russian orphans were absolutely right. But he called upon them to understand that the legislative measures were not limited to a simple ban, but also included a whole package of measures seeking to simplify domestic adoptions and increase the state aid and tax bonuses for the adoptive parents.

Columnist Julie Burchill should be sacked for her “disgusting rant” against transsexuals, a coalition minister said on Sunday.

Liberal Democrat Lynne Featherstone condemned an Observer piece in which the journalist made a series of cutting comments about “bedwetters in bad wigs” and “shemales”.

The article was penned in defence of Burchill’s fellow writer, Suzanne Moore, who came under fire on Twitter after suggesting that women were expected to look like “a Brazilian transsexual”.

Featherstone has called for the Observer columnist to be fired

Burchill wrote that “screaming mimis” had accused her friend of “white feminist privilege” and forced her to leave the social networking site.

Transsexual, Roz Kaveney, wrote a Guardian blog in reply on Sunday.

She wrote: “It’s hard to know where to begin with Burchill’s defence of Moore — with ‘Black and White Minstrel Show’, ‘bed-wetting’, or her odd assumption that all trans people are middle-class and overeducated.”

“What I would ask Moore and Burchill is this: do you think that what you’ve written makes it more or less likely that an elderly trans woman living on a housing estate will get jostled on the stairs by her neighbours?

“Or that a teen trans man will be punched in the street? It’s not anger-fuelled tweets, but that provocation, done with malice by people who should know better, that is the real bullying.”

A note from the Observer readers’ editor, Stephen Pritchard, was later added to the article on the newspaper website.

“As you might imagine, I have received many emails protesting about this piece this morning,” the note said. “Thank you to those who have written. I will be looking at this issue and will be replying to all in due course.”

Posting on Twitter last night, Featherstone – a former equalities minister currently at the Department for International Development – wrote: “Julie Birchill (sic) rant against transgender community is absolutely disgusting – a bigoted vomit for which the Observer should sack her.”

A Guardian News & Media spokeswoman said: “We acknowledge the strong reaction to Julie Burchill’s piece published in The Observer.

“As indicated by Observer editor John Mulholland on Twitter, we are taking such reactions extremely seriously and we have asked our independent readers’ editor to urgently investigate the matter.”

David Cameron held out the prospect of a referendum on Britain’s relationship with the European Union today – but only when it has been “fundamentally” changed.

The Prime Minister dismissed the idea of an immediate in/out referendum, insisting that would be putting a “false choice” in front of voters.

But he said he is “not against a referendum” altogether and is in favour of one “in some cases”.

“The principle, I think, should be this: if you are fundamentally changing the relationship between Britain and Europe, then you should be having a referendum,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Asked whether it should be a straightforward question of in or out, Cameron said he would set out more detail in a highly-anticipated speech on the subject he is due to deliver in the Netherlands this month.

“You will have to wait for the speech for the full details but obviously I want to give people a proper choice,” he said.

“What I don’t favour, I think if we had an in/out referendum tomorrow or very shortly I don’t think that would be the right answer, for the simple reason I think we would be giving people a false choice, because right now there are a lot of people who are saying I would like to be in Europe but I’m not happy with every aspect of the relationship so I want to change.

“That is my view, so I think an in/out referendum is a false choice.”

Amid claims from some in his party that it might be in Britain’s interests to leave the EU, the Prime Minister said: “I’m in favour of our membership of the European Union and I’m optimistic and confident that we can achieve changes in the European Union to make sure that Britain feels more comfortable with our relationship with Europe.

“I’m confident we can do that.”

The Prime Minister dismissed warnings that question marks over Britain’s position in the EU are damaging for business, insisting that the debate is unavoidable.

“Europe is changing and the opportunity for us to lead those changes and make changes that make our relationship with Europe more comfortable, I think, are absolutely there, so I’m confident we can do that and then, as I say, a fresh settlement, and then fresh consent for that settlement, I think that’s the right approach,” he said.

“Those who say this is very dangerous, you are putting at risk the relationship with Europe, you are putting at risk our position with regard to business, I don’t agree with that, because this debate is happening anyway.”

Peter Kellner: Britain, Europe and the Fear Factor

His comments came as Communities Secretary Eric Pickles became the second Cabinet minister in recent days to raise the prospect of Britain leaving the European Union.

Amid deepening divisions in the Conservative Party over the issue, Pickles said the UK should not remain a member “at any price”.

“If it’s in our clear national interest that we should remain in the European Union – and I sincerely hope that is the case – then we should stay, but we shouldn’t stay at any price,” he told BBC Radio Five Live.

His intervention echoed that of Chancellor George Osborne, who said last week that the EU “must change” if Britain is to remain a member of the EU.

Asked about the Chancellor’s comments today, Cameron said he agreed with Osborne. “Yes, I think it does need to change, and it is changing.”

The Prime Minister said his speech, which has been expected for several months amid growing speculation about his stance on the EU, was “finished and ready to go”.

Cameron is caught in the middle of an increasingly ill-tempered row over the issue as some in his party warn that leaving the EU would be highly damaging.

Cabinet minister Ken Clarke is to share a platform with Labour peer Lord Mandelson later this month to stress the benefits of remaining in the union.

The pair are launching a new cross-party organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe (CBIE), to make the “patriotic” case for British engagement.

And around 20 Tory MPs have also apparently signed a letter, due to be published this week, warning of “massive damage” if the UK leaves the EU.

Cameron is also under pressure from his Liberal Democrat coalition partners and Labour to avoid leading Britain towards the EU exit door.

Business leaders including Sir Richard Branson have warned that uncertainty about the UK’s place in the EU is harmful and, in an unusual intervention last week, senior US diplomat Philip Gordon openly stated that America wanted Britain to remain in the EU.

Douglas Alexander MP, Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary, said the prime minister’s comments this morning “raised more questions than they answered”.

“On Europe he’s not in control of the agenda or even his party. The gap between his back benchers and our EU partners remains un-bridgeable,” he said.

Related on HuffPost:

Plans for a radical shake-up of state pensions are due to be announced by the Government amid warnings that it will be little more than a “con trick” and could affect a hard-fought deal on public sector pensions.

The coalition’s proposals include a single flat rate state pension, equivalent to around £144 in today’s money, to be introduced for new pensioners from 2017 in a bid to simplify the system.

Ministers said the reform will create a simple flat rate pension set above the means test (currently £142.70) and based on 35 years of National Insurance contributions and will “hugely benefit” women, low earners and the self employed, who under existing rules find it almost impossible to earn a full state pension.

Around six million workers will face higher national insurance payments in future as the practice of “contracting out” the state second pension to employers is ended. Those affected are expected to include more than a million private sector staff enrolled in final salary schemes, and an estimated five million public sector workers.

The GMB union said there could be “very serious consequences” which could affect an agreement on public sector pensions, while the National Pensioners Convention described the White Paper as little more than a “con trick” for future generations, by offering them less than they get now, asking them to pay more and work longer before they can get it back.

But ministers will argue that by replacing today’s complex system of add-ons and means-testing the single tier will provide certainty to people about what they will get from the state and provide a better platform for them to save for their retirement.

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Iain Duncan Smith said: “This reform is good news for women who for too long have been effectively punished by the current system. The Single Tier will mean that more women can get a full state pension in their own right, and stop this shameful situation where they are let down by the system when it comes to retirement because they have taken time out to care for their family.”

Pensions Minister Steve Webb said: “The current state pension system is too complicated and leaves millions of people needing means-tested top-ups. We can do better. Our simple, single tier pension will provide a decent, solid foundation for new pensioners in an otherwise less certain world, ensuring it pays to save.”

Brian Strutton, national officer of the GMB union, said a new flat rate pension should be fairer than the present arrangements, but warned of a “very serious consequence” from the coalition’s plans. He said: “That is the increase in National Insurance contributions that employers and employees in defined benefit pension schemes will have to pay. For employers that is 3.4% of the NI ranking earnings and for the six million employees affected it will be an extra 1.4%. Most DB scheme employers and members will find this unaffordable so will need to renegotiate their schemes.

“A good example is the Local Government Pension Scheme which has just been reformed by unions and government and would face an unaffordable extra NI bill of several hundred million pounds. Just as the Treasury legislation to reform public sector pensions is going through parliament, the Department for Work and Pensions is proposing to blow it all out of the water by completely rewriting the state and occupational pension landscape.”

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Transcript

Hassan Ghani

Another year, and another sombre vigil outside the US embassy in London. A somewhat eclectic gathering in near freezing temperatures ensured that 11 years of Guantanamo did not go unmarked.Aisha Maniar, London Guantanamo Campaign“It’s down to the public now. President Obama broke his promise four years ago to close Guantanamo Bay. The argument with so-called terrorists, is that terrorists act outside of the law; but what we actually see is governments acting like mafia, like terrorists themselves, and they too are acting outside the known confines of the law. There’s no exceptions for the use of torture, there’s no reason for arbritrary detention — if people have committed crimes then try them, in a normal court of law. Try them and then lock them up. Don’t lock them up and then hold them for eleven years and say ‘oh these people are bad because we say so’.”Alice, Student Activist“It’s just unintelligible that it would still be open. And especially the inhumane treatment to people that have been proven innocent.”Hassan GhaniOf the nearly 800 men and children held in Guantanamo over the years, today 166 still remain. More than half of them have also cleared for release, some many years ago. But despite having come out clean after years of detention without trial, interrogations, and torture – or what the US department of defence called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, they remain trapped in this legal blackhole.Staff at ‘Reprieve’, the legal action charity, have been working on some of the cases.Hilary Stauffer, Deputy Director of Reprieve“The US Congress in 2010 passed a law called the National Defence Authorisation Act — that is the defence bill for the year, that’s just the spending bill that manages the budget for the army. But they also tacked on a provision in there that had a lot to do with Guantanamo.It said that no US funds could be used to transfer detainees. It said that detainees could never be transferred or resettled in the United States, even the ones that are completely innocent. And it said that if they were going to be released, the Secretary of Defence, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence all had to agree. And that the country he went to had to certify that he would never commit an act of terrorism again, certify that he would never pose a threat to the United States ever again, and had to certify that they would watch him in perpetuity. And it’s very difficult to meet those, no one’s been released since the NDAA came into effect, except through political deals behind the scenes.”Hassan GhaniAmong those cleared for release several years ago is the last remaining British resident in Guantanamo, Shaker Aamer. His family have been campaigning on his behalf. But, for the moment, there doesn’t seem to be any light at the end of the tunnel.Hilary Stauffer, Deputy Director of Reprieve“In many cases these men don’t want to go back to where they are from. Shaker is a British resident, he’s married to a British citizen, has children who are British citizens, but he’s originally from Saudi Arabia. If he went back to Saudi Arabia he’d probably be very very mistreated or tortured, because that happens in a lot of places, these guys go back to countries that are less democratic than others, and it’s guilt by suspicion. So they don’t want to go back to their country of origin, they want to be resettled to a third country. But in many cases these countries say ‘if the US wont take them, why should we?’”Hassan GhaniFor those who’ve survived rendition, torture and detention without trial, and have begun rebuilding their lives, the mental scars are enduring. And the anniversary brings with it a reminder of those left behind.Bisher al-Rawi, Guantanamo Detainee 2002-2007“We write them letters, we keep in touch with their families, we try to send them news. And although it’s extremely important to work, it’s extremely painful. Every day is a reminder. I look in the faces of my children and I think of the brothers who have left their children behind, the brothers who have not had families — people who got married and never had kids.”Hassan GhaniOmar Deghayez was held in Guantanamo for five years. At one point he was beaten so badly, that he lost the use of one of his eyes.Omar Deghayes, Guantanamo Detainee 2002-2007“They were holding my head back and holding me down, and then he pushed his fingers into my eyes. I didn’t understand what he was doing so I had my eyes clearly open, until I felt the pain of his fingers coming wholly inside the eyes, and he was pushing harder. So I closed my eyes but it was too late when his fingers were already inside. And the officer kept saying to him ‘more more’, and the guard was screaming, because he was I think frightened himself, saying ‘I am I am’.I think they wanted to make an example of us, we were in a ‘Oscar’ block where they thought we were rebellious, because they did that to me and then they went to the next cell and the next cell, and they did it to all of them. It was one night they did that. Several people lost their eyes.The mistreatment in Guantanamo will last with you, I think, forever. It’s a grave wound, probably it will stay in the heart, in the psyche, of the person.”Hassan GhaniLike other former detainees, he too feels a sense of guilt at being free when others remain inside.Omar Deghayes, Guantanamo Detainee 2002-2007“There are still people who were with us, comrades, people who are inmates, friends of ours, people who we lived with and we promised that when we go out.. they had expectations that we would be able to speak about them — especially us in the United Kingdom, because many who are released to Saudi Arabia, Yemen and others are gagged, imprisoned, sometimes silenced by force.When they heard the announcement in Guantanamo that I was going to be released, people were celebrating as if they were going to be released. Because they know my background, I’m a lawyer, a human rights lawyer, and on top of that I speak English, on top of that I’m in the UK.”Hassan GhaniBut while media attention is generally drawn to Guantanamo, the US administration and the CIA hold prisoners in even more controversial facilities in other countries around the world, known as black sites, where few know what really goes on. And now, with drone strikes, human rights organisations say the Obama administration has completely bypassed the whole legal process.Hilary Stauffer, Deputy Director of Reprieve“It’s a controversial policy, but instead of capturing terrorism suspects he’s often just killing them abroad through drone strikes, so that you negate the need for a prison if you’re not even bringing people to any kind of trial, or you’re just killing them on the ground. Generally, the vast majority of them are just unnamed alleged terrorists abroad, but nobody has any idea what they’re being charged with. And drone strikes are particularly problematic because Obama has said that his justification is basically anybody in military age, between 18 and 65, is a target, a potential militant, and it’s up to them to prove after the fact that they weren’t a militant. But if they’re dead, it’s very difficult to prove that.”Hassan GhaniFor protestors outside the US embassy in London, Guantanamo remains a powerful symbol of a wider unjust system, and they say they know their work isn’t over if the prison closes tomorrow.“It’s likely that opponents of the US government’s network of renditions, black sites, and drone killings will be meeting here for many more years to come. The US administration says that some of the detainees it currently holds can be held indefinitely, without charge or trial, pending an end to hostilities, as prisoners of war. The seemingly never-ending, ever-expanding, war on terror. Hassan Ghani, for the Real News, London.

Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Hosni Mubarak.(Reuters / Stringer Egypt)

An Egyptian court has granted ousted President Hosni Mubarak the right to appeal against his life sentence for the deaths of protesters. A retrial has also been ordered.

The latest verdict has also granted the appeal to Mubarak’s security chief Habib el-Adly, who is also serving a life sentence after his conviction on the same charges. A retrial is set to take place for him as well.­

The former leader was convicted and sentenced to life behind bars in June for failing to prevent the killing of some 900 protesters during the 2011 uprising, AP reported. He spent nearly a month in hospital having fallen unconscious shortly after his transfer to prison, with state media declaring him clinically dead on arrival. But medical sources said he appeared to have suffered a temporary coma. Since then, there were numerous scares connected with the ex-leader’s health. The last time Mubarak was taken to hospital was in mid-December.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

The ten things you need to know on Monday 14 January 2013…

1) ARE YOU IN OR OUT?

The prime minister David Cameron has been on the Today programme this morning, telling John Humphrys that he agreed with George Osborne’s comments that the EU had to change if the UK was going to stay inside the Union.

Would it be ‘mad’ to leave the EU, asked Humphrys (referring to yesterday’s Mail on Sunday splash)? “I choose my words carefully,” replied DC, dodging the question, adding that the UK would not “collapse” outside the EU. And he said: “The idea that everyone in Europe has to do everything at the same speed, in the same way, is wrong.”

Nonetheless, he criticised the ‘Norway model’ – which has to implement EU laws – “by fax” – without being part of the EU. But it is in the end “for our country, for our people” to decide on our future inside the EU.

But he told the BBC that his long-awaited “speech is finished…and largely ready to go”. He repeatedly refused to comment on whether he’d be offering the public an in/out referendum, as suggested by Eric Pickles yesterday (see below).

The papers, meanwhile, yet again, are full of Europe/Cameron/Tory headlines. As I said yesterday, it feels like the early 1990s again.

“Pressure mounts on Cameron,” says the headline in the Financial Times this morning, referring to the Tory leader’s forthcoming speech on the future of the UK’s relationship with Europe.

Cameron’s cabinet colleagues don’t seem to be helping, though – Eric Pickles gave an interview to Pienaar’s Politics on BBC Radio 5 Live yesterday evening which seemed to pre-empt the PM’s much-heralded EU speech.

From the front of the Daily Telegraph:

“David Cameron is preparing to offer British voters a referendum on whether it is ‘in our interests or not to remain in the European Community’, a senior Cabinet minister disclosed on Sunday night.

“Eric Pickles, the Local Government Secretary, said that Britain should not remain in the EU ‘at any price’ and pledged to cast his vote in the referendum based on his judgment of the “national interest”.

“.. Asked whether the referendum would be about ‘accepting or rejecting’ Britain’s EU membership, Mr Pickles replied: ‘In the interests of Britain it will be about whether or not it’s… in our interests or not to remain in the European Community. And I tell you, I won’t be voting on party lines, I’ll be voting on what I think is the interest of the country.'”

I wonder how many other Tory cabinet ministers will decide to give their two cents’ worth on Europe between now and next Tuesday’s ‘tantric’ speech by the PM in the Netherlands.

Meanwhile, the Times reports:

“A chasm between David Cameron and the overwhelming majority of Conservatives over Europe is starkly illustrated in a new poll today.

Seventy-eight per cent of Tory members want to quit the European Union, either altogether or to replace it with a common market relationship, according to the survey by the ConservativeHome website.

“Only 16 per cent want the kind of future that is expected to be the central vision of the Prime Minister’s landmark speech on Europe next week, in which some powers would be repatriated to the UK from Brussels.”

2) PENSIONS BOOST OR ‘CON TRICK’?

From the Press Association:

“Plans for a radical shake-up of state pensions will be announced by the Government on Monday..

“The Coalition’s proposals include a single flat rate state pension, equivalent to around £144 in today’s money, to be introduced for new pensioners from 2017 in a bid to simplify the system.

“Ministers said the reform will create a simple flat rate pension set above the means test (currently £142.70) and based on 35 years of National Insurance contributions and will ‘hugely benefit’ women, low earners and the self employed, who under existing rules find it almost impossible to earn a full state pension.”

The centre-right newspapers are very excited:

“£155 Pension Boost For Stay-Home Mothers,” says the Daily Mail splash headline.

“Pensions To Soar By 25%,” says the Daily Express on its front page.

“£500 Bonus For Women In Pension Reform,” reads the headline on the front of the Daily Telegraph.

But the Guardian reports that

“..the government announcement, due to be unveiled in a white paper, was immediately condemned by the National Pensioners Convention as a “con trick” for future generations.

“The convention directly challenged Duncan Smith’s claim, saying that women will suffer because pensioners will have to make national insurance contributions for 35 years, rather than the current 30, to benefit from the new pension.”

3) TAX AVOIDERS VS THE THE TWO EDS

UKUncut, meet your newest allies! From the Guardian:

“A Labour government would stop ‘scandalous’ tax avoidance by multinational companies operating in Britain by ending secrecy over tax rates, Ed Miliband has said.

“.. The Labour leader told the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1: ‘We’ve got a situation where many British companies and many individuals are paying their fair share of tax and they look in horror at a system where multinational companies, some multinational companies from other countries, can make huge profits in Britain and not pay taxes in Britain. This is scandalous, it’s got to change. The next Labour government will change it.'”

In an exclusive blog for the Huffington Post UK, shadow chancellor Ed Balls lays out how:

“First on ending tax secrecy, multinational groups should have to publish a simple, single figure for the amount of corporation tax they pay in the UK.

“.. But this isn’t just about individual companies. So second we’re going to have to reform the current rules that allow companies to make profits in Britain but pay no tax. That means reform of our corporation tax system.. The rules need to be clearer, tighter and properly enforced.”

4) ‘NO, MINISTER’

The Times splashes on the ‘cold war’ between Sir Humphrey and the coalition’s finest:

“An increasingly bitter power struggle between ministers and mandarins is poisoning relations across Whitehall and threatening to derail David Cameron’s reforms, The Times has learnt. Tension over the pace and scale of coalition policy has given way to outright mistrust in some departments with ministers feeling blocked by an unwieldy and unwilling Civil Service.

“One Tory Cabinet minister said that the working relationship was akin to both sides waging a permanent ‘cold war’.

“Theresa May, the Home Secretary, Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary and Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office Minister, are among those to have grown exasperated with their staff.

“.. Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield, the constitutional historian and Whitehall chronicler, said: ‘It’s as bad as I’ve ever known it. The ‘governing marriage’ between the Civil Service and the politicians is in real trouble.'”

You could argue that ministers’ decision to brief the Times will only make the marital difficulties much worse. Time to book an appointment with Relate, perhaps.

On a side note, my two favourite factoids from the piece are these:

(i) “Members of the Government’s digital service go to meetings with a suitcase holding £1 million of fake banknotes so as to try to focus the minds of civil servants on not wasting taxpayers’ money.”
(ii) “Mr Cameron and Mr Blair both refer to the satire Yes, Prime Minister as a documentary rather than a comedy.”

5) ‘HOLLANDE’S WAR’

That’s the headline to a rather interesting ‘analysis’ piece in the Guardian on France’s Mali intervention. Angelique Chrisafis writes:

“Already commentators in France are saying Mali could transform Hollande’s political image. Unpopular in the polls and accused by critics of dithering on the economy, Mali has shown Hollande in decisive mode. ‘If Sarkozy had Libya, Hollande will have Mali,’ said Le Parisien, referring to Sarkozy’s personal investment against Gaddafi. But ‘Sarkozy’s war’, as Libya was termed, never boosted the former rightwing president’s poll ratings and failed to get him re-elected.

The UK has a role in all this too, as the Independent reminds us on its front page:

“The first British war planes sent to assist French military strikes against Islamist rebels in Mali arrived in France last night, where they will be loaded with equipment before flying to Africa today.”

And the BBC reports this morning:

“On Sunday, French warplanes bombed the town of Gao in eastern Mali, extending their raids deep into rebel territory.

“France’s military has been in action against Islamist militants in Mali since Friday, helping government forces recapture the central town of Konna.”

BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR…

Watch this video of a cat getting terrified by Nicky Minaj’s face. Yep. You read that right.

6) GETTING HIGH

From the Times:

“Cannabis, Ecstasy and other ‘lowharm’ drugs should be licensed for sale in chemists to lure young people off alcohol and dangerous legal highs, a group of peers and MPs say today.

“Such drugs should fall into a new ‘class D’ category that would allow them to be sold legally subject to rules on content, labelling and age restrictions, in a way similar to tobacco and alcohol, according to a report from the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy Reform, which includes former Cabinet ministers from the Conservative and Labour parties.

“.. The use of more harmful drugs, such as heroin, should be decriminalised and supplied through government clinics that would focus on treatment, Baroness Meacher, the chairwoman of the group, says. The plans, the most radical yet suggested for drug reform, follow suggestions last month from the Commons Home Affairs Committee that a royal commission be set up to look at far-reaching changes to the drug laws, including decriminalisation.”

But will anyone in government actually pay attention to yet another report stating the bleedin’ obvious on drugs and the failure of the drug war? Or will ministers just stick it up a high shelf to gather dust with its predecessors?

7) PRIVATISING THE NHS, PART 64

Is this the latest step on the road towards full privatisation of the National Health Service? From the Guardian splash:

“Private companies providing NHS services could be exempt from paying corporation tax on their profits under proposals being considered by a government-commissioned review of competition in the health service, the Guardian has learned.

“Monitor, the NHS’s economic regulator, argues that as public sector hospitals do not pay corporation tax and VAT on supplies, whereas private firms do, the result is an ;unfair playing field’ in healthcare.

“.. Academics say the regulator has been ‘captured’ by industry. Andrew Street, professor of health economics at the University of York, told the Guardian Monitor had ‘been influenced by industry. This looks like pandering to special interests to me. If companies wanted to provide NHS hospital services and not pay tax then they could do so by becoming charities.'”

8) WAR ON THE DISABLED?

More news from the world of welfare ‘reform’; from the BBC:

“Thousands of disabled people could lose some benefits because of last-minute changes to the new system of Personal Independence Payments, campaigners say.

The group, We Are Spartacus, says tougher rules to assess how far people can walk mean many claimants will lose help with transport from April.”

9) WAR AGAINST THE SHIAS?

From the FT:

“Protests against attacks on Shia Muslims spread across Pakistan yesterday as the prime minister flew to Quetta, where mourners are refusing to bury 96 victims of a bomb attack until they gain protection from Sunni militants.

“The protests were triggered by twin bombings on Thursday targeting Shia ethnic Hazaras in Quetta, capital of Baluchistan province. The Lashkar-e-Jhangvi militant group claimed responsibility for the attacks.

“The group, whose roots are in the heartland Punjab province, wants to expel the Shias, who make up about a fifth of the population of 180m people.

“Human Rights Watch says more than 400 Shia were killed in sectarian attacks last year.”

10) NEWS FROM THE ‘VAMPIRE SQUID’

From the FT’s splash:

“Goldman Sachs is among a handful of banks considering delaying UK bonus payouts until after April 6 when the top rate of income tax falls from 50 per cent to 45 per cent.

“The bank’s plan, which relates to bonuses deferred from 2010, 2011 and 2012, rather than new awards, is expected to prove controversial despite being legal.”

Nice move guys..

PUBLIC OPINION WATCH

From yesterday’s Sunday Times/YouGov poll of the year:

Labour 44
Conservatives 31
Ukip 11
Lib Dems 8

That would give Labour a majority of 124.

140 CHARACTERS OR LESS

@DanHannanMEP Imagine Eric Pickles had said we should stay in the EU even if it were against our national interest. That WOULD have been controversial.

@ShippersUnbound Cameron again using his ‘don’t believe everything you read in the papers’ for: things I said that I wish the papers hadn’t found out about

@you_twits Did that guy on BBC News just say “The conflict in Mali has become a Mecca for Islamic extremists” ??? Errrrrrrr try again.

900 WORDS OR MORE

Gaby Hinsliff, writing in the Guardian, says: “Britain’s new working-class pride could be a bonus for Labour.”

Steve Webb MP, writing in the Daily Telegraph, says: “The system we launch today will give workers the help they need in planning for retirement.”

Damian McBride, writing in the Independent, says: “Sorry Steve Hilton, there’s no excuse for Cameron not to know what his own policies are.”

Got something you want to share? Please send any stories/tips/quotes/pix/plugs/gossip to Mehdi Hasan (mehdi.hasan@huffingtonpost.com) or Ned Simons (ned.simons@huffingtonpost.com). You can also follow us on Twitter: @mehdirhasan, @nedsimons and @huffpostukpol

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.(AFP Photo / Spencer Platt)

Corporate results — both Russian and foreign — will be have a major impact on markets on Monday. Economic data from overseas will add to the trading mix, analysts say.

In corporate Russia, coal miner Raspadskaya and Uralkali, the world’s largest potash producer, are set to produce their 4Q 2012 operational results. Both companies suffered from lower prices for their produce in the previous periods.

On Wall Street, the Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup , Goldman Sachsand Morgan Stanley are all on tap to report this week, following the period of corporate reporting in the US.

Among foreign news due out on Monday is the December index of wholesale prices in Germany, which is expected to add 0.5% to November’s result. November industrial production figures for Italy will also have its say in market movements on Monday, with the figure expected to lose about 0.1% from the previous month. However, November industrial production in the eurozone as a whole is set to go up 0.2%, according to Julia Voitovich of Investcafe.

Given all the above, “I expect the Russian share market to open slightly higher,” Voitovich said.

On Friday Russian floors closed trading mixed. The RTS was down 0.02% to 1, 571.73, with the MICEX adding 0.24% to 1,510.84.

Asian markets are higher today as Chinese and Hong Kong shares show gains. The Shanghai Composite is up 2.06% while the Hang Seng is up 0.68%. The Nikkei 225 is not trading.

European markets finished higher on Friday with shares in London leading the region. The FTSE 100 was up 0.33% while Germany’s DAX added 0.09% and France’s CAC 40 increased 0.08%.

In the US, the Dow and the Nasdaq rose 0.1%, while the S&P 500 shed less than 1 point. In weekly terms, all key indices were up for the second consecutive week, with the Dow and S&P 500 adding 0.4% for the week, and the Nasdaq rising 0.8%. That’s after Wells Fargo, the first major bank to report quarterly results, produced a profit during the period, exceeding expectations.

Britain is to transport foreign troops and equipment to Mali amid efforts to halt an advance by rebels, it has been revealed.

The help was agreed in a phone call between David Cameron and President Francois Hollande, after France sent in forces to support the Malian government.

Downing Street stressed that no UK troops would engage in combat operations in the country, but two transport planes are expected to be deployed within 24-48 hours.

“The Prime Minister spoke to President Hollande this evening to discuss the deteriorating situation in Mali and how the UK can support French military assistance provided to the Malian Government to contain rebel and extremist groups in the north of the country,” a spokeswoman said.

“The Prime Minister has agreed that the UK will provide logistical military assistance to help transport foreign troops and equipment quickly to Mali.

“We will not be deploying any British personnel in a combat role. They also agreed that the peacekeeping mission from West African countries needs to be strongly supported by countries in the region and deployed as quickly as possible.

“Both leaders agreed that the situation in Mali poses a real threat to international security given terrorist activity there.”

An Inequitable Housing Recovery

Darwin Bond-Graham

 The financial crisis of 2008 was terrible for homeowners saddled with heavy mortgage payments, especially the millions of low-income, first-time buyers who were tempted to buy in with deceptive loans during the height of the housing bubble. About 4 million foreclosures have been completed since the financial crisis of 2008, according to CoreLogic, a data provider to the real estate industry. Since 2006, when subprime loans first began to default in large numbers, there have been 9.4 million foreclosures initiated, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (US Fed). To a select group of hedge fund and investment bankers the financial crisis that pivoted on these foreclosures was the opportunity of a lifetime. They made billions from the crash by wagering against the stability of the US housing market.

Now some of the same elite investors are tacking backward and betting on a recovery of the housing market. It’s a strange recovery though, propelled not so much by families seeking their own piece of the American dream, but instead by the US Fed’s monetary policies. Low-interest rates fostered by the Fed are causing big-money investors to purchase foreclosed single-family homes in blocks of hundreds, even thousands. Expected gains in home prices are also leading hedge funds and investment bank traders to gamble on housing derivatives.

Like the so-called jobless recovery, characterized by rising business earnings in the midst of high unemployment, the nascent housing recovery is not propelled by a rise in homeownership rates, employment and incomes. Instead, foreclosure rates remain high, as does do unemployment figures, and there’s a big backlog of bank-owned properties that have yet to hit the market. Meanwhile, many former homeowners have been relegated to the status of renters. If home prices are truly embarked on a sustained rise, the big gains in any new equity created will likely accrue to a smaller number of owners, many of them corporate investor-landlords, and to a few elite financial speculators positioned to make complex derivatives bets on housing bonds. That’s how it’s playing out so far.

2007’s “Big Short”

To understand the current dynamics in the housing market, it helps to go back in time just before the crash. The collapse of the US housing market was the catalyst of the global financial crisis of 2008, and the root source of the last five years of economic stagnation. It was skyrocketing real estate prices that facilitated the inflation of the largest debt bubble in history, allowing Americans to take out unsustainable consumer loans so long as the equity in their homes grew. The bubble burst because real wages continued to decline, total consumer debts continued to grow, and many of Wall Street’s derivative innovations turned out to be cynical products designed merely to package up unsustainable obligations and offload them onto some other sucker’s books. The rest is history. Millions were foreclosed on, and the economy hemorrhaged jobs.

[Insert graph of delinquent debt balances by loan type]

A few prescient investors saw it coming and wagered that the US housing market would collapse. They made billions on that bet, literally sucking money from the accounts their counterparties – banks and insurance companies who believed that a decline in home prices across all US regions was impossible.

The mechanics of the bet were conceptually simple, if technically complex: Bearish speculators identified mortgage bonds they thought were toxic, comprised of thousands of individual home loans that were sure to default if interest rates rose or if the unprecedented rise in home prices even just slowed a little. These few contrarian investors then purchased credit default swap (CDS) contracts, synthetic derivative products created to insure an investor against the possibility of defaulting mortgage bonds.

CDSs had two sides, the buyer and seller, and involved a zero sum wager. If homeowners continued to make payments on subprime mortgages, then the buyer of CDS insurance merely paid out a small premium each year. However, if the market stumbled and mortgages within the bonds that comprised larger mortgage-backed securities began to default in large numbers, then the seller of the CDS would owe huge sums of money to the buyer.

Author Michael Lewis called this the “Big Short” in his book of the same title because it involved a monumental short-selling strategy. Derivatives made short-selling a strategic possibility with the new multi-trillion-dollar global market of US mortgage credit. Investors had no need to actually own subprime mortgaged bonds, or to borrow these assets, as is traditionally required in the short-selling strategies of the pre-derivatives revolution. Instead, an investor could “synthetically gain exposure” to subprime risk, as they say in Wall Street parlance, simply by entering into a free-standing swap contract with a willing counterparty.

Another popular means of shorting housing was to make directional bets on the price of subprime mortgage-backed securities through the ABX.HE Index. “ABX” stands for asset-backed security, and “HE” stands for home equity, denoting to an investor that the index tracks the value of credit default swaps tied to subprime mortgage bond securities. The biggest investment banks involved in creating subprime mortgage-backed securities like collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) created the ABX.HE Index in 2006, just in time for short-sellers to game it to their advantage.

A managing director at Goldman Sachs, one of the firms instrumental in launching the ABX.HE Index, explained that it was designed to provide investors with “a simple and efficient way to gain or hedge exposure to home equity asset-backed

Like other derivatives, however, the ABX.HE would actually become a tool for highly leveraged speculation by hedge funds, many of which had no real holdings of the housing assets from which the indices’ value and cash flows derived. One could simply enter into a trade requiring the exchange of cash flows that changed depending on the value of referenced securities, in this case, the value of credit default swaps tied to subprime debt that was only financially viable if home prices continued to rise and create homeowner equity.

According to Richard Stanton and Nancy Wallace, scholars at the UC Berkeley Haas Business School who have studied pricing and trade patterns of credit derivatives, “trading in the ABX.HE index CDS delivered two of the largest pay-outs in the history of financial markets: The Paulson & Co. series of funds secured $12 billion in profits from a single trade in 2007; and Goldman Sachs generated nearly $6 billion of profits (erasing $1.5 to $2.0 billion of losses on their $10 billion subprime holdings) in 2007.”

[Insert graph of the ABX.HE Index collapse] 

NOTE: “Markit” appears to be misspelled in graph. Should be “Market”; also should be comma after “January 9, 2006″/ pmf

Goldman Sachs’ and Paulson & Co.’s earnings became the source of an investigation by the SEC. The bank created subprime mortgage-backed securities and sold them to several German banks, but then, along with the Paulson & Co. hedge fund, bet against these very same securities. The SEC fined Goldman Sachs $550 million (a mere fraction of the profits). Paulson & Co. paid no such fine and admitted no wrongdoing.

Other beneficiaries of the foreclosure crisis included Kyle Bass, the Dallas hedge fund manager who also shorted subprime mortgage-backed assets using credit default swaps. Bass’s Hayman Capital reportedly reaped half a billion dollars.

Greg Lippman, a trader with Deutsche Bank in 2006, pestered dozens of hedge funds and other wealthy investors in a sales blitz to convince clients on his similarly designed bet to short US home prices. According to Michael Lewis, who interviewed dozens of people who put on the “Big Short” trade, Lippmann had distilled his strategy into a data-rich presentation titled “Shorting Home Equity Mezzanine Tranches.”

All of the derivative tools used by speculators to short the market before the financial crisis still exist. Few regulatory changes were made to reign in this kind of high-stakes gambling using the synthetic exposure of derivatives, indices and short-selling techniques.

Fed Creates Opportunities to “Go Long”

Like the jobless recovery in corporate profits that began in 2010, the housing market’s current recovery is characterized by rebounds in securities prices that do not necessarily reflect any widely shared economic improvements for most Americans. Instead, the recovery seems to be propelled by federal monetary policy.

The US Federal Reserve’s purchase of billions of mortgage-backed securities is most responsible for the nascent housing recovery, say many analysts. The Fed has committed to buying upwards of $40 billion a month into 2015 (totaling anywhere from $480 to $960 billion) in mortgage-backed securities. The effect of the Fed’s purchases is to drive up the price of mortgage bonds, which inversely reduces the yields on the bonds, and eases credit, theoretically making home loans cheaper and inducing more prospective home buyers to dive into the market. That’s the logic the Fed’s board is ostensibly using at least.

Home prices have decidedly responded. The Case-Shiller Index, which tracks changes in home values in major cities, showed definite increases in year-over-year values from 2011 to 2012. CoreLogic’s Home Price Index showed a similar rise, with home values up more than 6 percent in October 2012, compared with the prior year.

Skepticism abounds, however. “The reality is that quantitative easing has made it cheaper for the government to borrow, has artificially propped up the housing market (making it take longer to recover), and has dramatically manipulated the distribution of capital in financial markets,” said Anthony Randazzo, director of economic research at the Reason Foundation. “And the economy has not been in recovery.” Randazzo said the Fed’s mortgage-backed securities purchases are mostly benefitting the top 10 percent of Americans who own the bonds and stocks that are rising in price as a result of the Fed’s purchases.

Even economists within the Federal Reserve are noting that while the government’s mortgage securities purchases are lifting home prices, they are not necessarily helping the average American buy a house. Michael Bauer of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco noted in a May 2012 report, “the link between rates on mortgage-backed securities and actual mortgage rates has weakened in the wake of the financial crisis.” In other words, the Fed’s ability to stimulate lending and get houses into the hands of individual home buyers isn’t working as planned, but still home prices are rising.

Foreclosure to Rental Mills

There are buyers ready and able to take advantage of the Fed’s macro-economic influence on home prices: large investors seeking to buy up what they’ve identified as a “new-asset class,” single-family residential homes in select suburban housing markets.

Some of these companies have already amassed portfolios of thousands of foreclosed and short-sale homes at historically low prices and are busy converting them into rentals. The eventual increase in the value of these homes is an added enticement. Projected yields are high enough to justify purchases of single-family homes as an asset that will inflate greatly in value. If prices continue to increase, private equity buyers could hold the properties for a few years and then make an “exit,” as they say in the industry, and book a big profit.

Some companies like WayPoint of Oakland, California, already own portfolios of thousands of homes purchased at dramatically low prices, most of them obtained after heavily indebted owners were forced to abandon them. WayPoint’s holdings are concentrated in the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Chicago and Atlanta, according to the company’s web site. Menlo Park private equity firm GI Partners has committed over $1 billion to fund Waypoint’s expansion.

Others have copied WayPoint’s foreclosure-to-rental model and are buying up tens of thousands of distressed properties across the US to convert vast stocks of residential homes into rental housing. The Blackstone Group private equity fund has already spent $1 billion to buy up over 6,500 single family homes in multiple markets, assembling these into what the firm is calling its “single-family rental home platform.” In a public relations video Blackstone created for its real estate management company, Invitation Homes, the firm’s head of global real estate, Jon Gray, says, “I think at its heart we’re making a bet on America with this investment strategy. We’re betting that housing prices are going to begin to recover.”

McKinley Capital, another Oakland private equity real estate investor, is buying foreclosed single family homes at prices discounted up to 80 percent of their 2006 high in California’s hard-hit Central Valley. “McKinley plans to resell the houses in about five years for double what it paid and is targeting 20 percent annualized returns for its investors, which include wealthy individuals,” according to a report in the Wall Street Journal on the foreclosure-to-rental business.

Another foreclosure-to-rental mill, Silver Bay Realty Trust, described its business strategy in a December 2012 prospectus issued to investors: “As the housing market recovers and the cost of residential real estate increases, so should the underlying value of our assets. We believe that rental rates will also increase in such a recovery due to the strong correlation between home prices and rents. This trend also leads us to believe that the single-family residential asset class will serve as a natural hedge to inflation. As a result, we believe we are well positioned for the current economic environment and for a housing market recovery.”

Silver Bay owns more than 2,450 houses and plans to invest a quarter-billion dollars to obtain another 3,100 homes in Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas, according to the company’s SEC filings.

Mike Orr, director of the Center for Real Estate Theory and Practice at Arizona State University’s Carey School of Business, reported investors are buying up as much as a third of the homes selling in the greater Phoenix market today. “I know of a normal home that recently received 95 written offers, 51 from investors and 44 from owner occupiers,” said Orr. “You can take away the 51 investors and you still have 44 owner occupiers trying to buy one home. However, investors are buying with cash, so they usually win these competitive situations, leaving owner occupier buyers frustrated.” Orr believes that the presence of investors is causing prices to rise in Phoenix because of their buying power.

Atlanta Realtor Bruce Ailion also believes investors are not just responding to the Fed’s stimulus, but that the presence of large investors is further increasing home prices. “In my market, private equity and hedge funds are driving up prices,” Ailion recently told reporters with CBS News.

The end result is that many housing markets have already consolidated around fewer landlord-owners and an increased number of renters whose economic situations still prevent them from buying a home.

Derivatives Bets on the Recovery

Some of these same speculators who shorted subprime housing debt in 2006 and 2007 have already tacked a complete opposite bet, expecting home prices to rise due to the Fed’s mortgage bond purchases. Investors like former Goldman Sachs trader Josh Birnbaum, who now runs the Tilden Park hedge fund, are telling clients to put their money behind subprime mortgage bonds, many of which are rising in value. According to a recent Bloomberg News report, Birnbaum’s firm is posting a 30 percent gain in 2012, mostly from bets favoring price increases in subprime mortgage bonds that lost upwards of 80 percent of their value during the financial crisis.

Birnbaum was one of the architects of Goldman Sachs’ big short bet against subprime housing in 2006 through the ABX.HE Index. According to William Cohan, author of Money and Power: How Goldman Sachs Came to Rule the World, Birnbaum quit the investment bank after a $10 million bonus check left him feeling shorted himself for putting on the firm’s big short bet. Birnbaum’s hedge fund is reportedly using the same index this time around to gain the opposite kind of exposure to housing debt.

Joining Birnbaum’s hedge fund in this strategy is John Paulson’s firm, Paulson & Co., which posted the biggest gains of all thanks to the housing meltdown five years ago. Paulson’s fund reportedly began buying housing mortgage securities back in 2008 and 2009, just after they’d collapsed in price.

In a letter to his investors earlier this year, Kyle Bass of Hayman Capital wrote that, with respect to subprime housing debt, “the stars are aligned for a continued recovery of this asset class today.”  Bass told reporters recently that more than half of Hayman Capital’s funds are currently invested in subprime mortgage bets.

Greg Lippmann, the architect of Deutsche Bank’s $1.5 billion big short bet, is now running a hedge fund that is going long on US subprime debt. Libremax Capital, which is said to manage about half a billion dollars, mostly sourced from wealthy investors, is said to be investing in subprime mortgage bonds of early 2005 “vintages,” which have already purged many of the delinquent debts from their rolls. “We believe securitized [home mortgage] products are fundamentally cheap to broader markets,” Lippman told reporters last year when asked about his fund’s strategy. (http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2011-02-18/greg-lippmann-goes-long-on-sub-prime-bonds)

The biggest hedge fund winner in 2012 is the New York-based Metacapital. Its “Mortgage Opportunities Fund” has squeezed a 520 percent profit on the year by betting on housing price increases owing to the Fed’s purchase of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage bonds.

A Home Owner-less Housing Recovery?

According to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, homeownership rates have plummeted by 3 percent nationally since 2004, falling to a low not seen since the mid-1990s. The backlog of delinquent mortgage loans and in-process foreclosures means that millions more will lose their homes and become renters, couch-surfers or homeless in the next few years.

[Insert USFRB St. Louis FRED data on homeownership rate decline here]

While the foreclosure rate may be dropping nationally, it remains extremely high compared to historical averages. Approximately 186,000 homes, or one in every 706 units of housing, were foreclosed on in October, 2012. There have been about 5 million bank repossessions of housing between 2006 and 2012, according to RealtyTrac.

According to economists with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, only 10 percent of homeowners who lose their houses because of default on mortgage payments will regain access to mortgage markets in the next 10 years. This means that there are now millions of Americans who will be closed out of the housing market during not only this peculiar recovery phase, characterized by a rise in prices and private equity buyers acquiring much of the inventory, but also likely locked out of the housing market down the road, long after homes have regained much of their value.

January 13, 2013  |  

To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.

Given these last weeks, who doesn’t know what an AR-15 is? Who hasn’t seen the mind-boggling stats on the way assault rifles have flooded this country, or tabulations of accumulating Newtown-style mass killings, or noted that there are barely more gas stations nationwide than federally licensed firearms dealers, or heard the renewed debates over the Second Amendment, or been struck by the rapid shifts in public opinion on gun control, or checked out the disputes over how effective an assault-rifle ban was the last time around? Who doesn’t know about the NRA’s suggestion to weaponize schools, or about the price poor neighborhoods may be paying in gun deaths for the present expansive interpretation of the Second Amendment? Who hasn’t seen the legions of stories about how, in the wake of the Newtown slaughter, sales of guns, especially AR-15 assault rifles, have soared, ammunition sales have surged, background checks for future gun purchases have risen sharply, and gun shows have been besieged with customers?

If you haven’t stumbled across figures on gun violence in America or on suicide-by-gun, you’ve been hiding under a rock. If you haven’t heard about Chicago’s soaring and Washington D.C.’s plunging gun-death stats (and that both towns have relatively strict gun laws), where have you been?

Has there, in fact, been any aspect of the weaponization of the United States that, since the Newtown massacre, hasn’t been discussed? Are you the only person in the country, for instance, who doesn’t know that Vice President Joe Biden has been assigned  the task of coming up with an administration gun-control agenda before Barack Obama is inaugurated for his second term? And can you honestly tell me that you haven’t seen global comparisons of killing rates in countries that have tight gun laws and the U.S., or read at least one discussion about life in countries like Colombia or Guatemala, where armed guards are omnipresent?

After years of mass killings that resulted in next to no national dialogue about the role of guns and how to control them, the subject is back on the American agenda in a significant way and — by all signs — isn’t about to leave town anytime soon. The discussion has been so expansive after years in a well-armed wilderness that it’s easy to miss what still isn’t being discussed, and in some sense just how narrow our focus remains.

Think of it this way: the Obama administration is reportedly going to call on Congress to pass a new ban on assault weapons, as well as one on high-capacity ammunition magazines, and to close the loopholes that allow certain gun purchasers to avoid background checks. But Biden has already conceded, at least implicitly, that facing a Republican-controlled House of Representatives and a filibuster-prone Senate, the administration’s ability to make much of this happen — as on so many domestic issues — is limited.

That will shock few Americans. After all, the most essential fact about the Obama presidency is this: at home, the president is a hamstrung weakling; abroad, in terms of his ability to chose a course of action and — from drones strikes and special ops raids to cyberwar and other matters — simply act, he’s closer to Superman. So here’s a question: while the administration is pledging to try to curb the wholesale spread of ever more powerful weaponry at home, what is it doing about the same issue abroad where it has so much more power to pursue the agenda it prefers?

Submitted by The Diplomat’s Mark W. Frazier, Professor of Politics and Co-Academic Director of the India-China Institute at the New School

What Happens When China Goes “Gray”?

Developed economies are beginning to struggle with aging populations and more retirees. China may soon join them.

As China’s major trading partners try to control rising public pension and health care costs, they may not realize they also have an important stake in China’s ongoing struggle to fashion a safety net for its own rapidly aging population. Many observers assume China has no pensions or healthcare insurance for the 185 million people over the age of 60 (13.7% of population), the highest official retirement age for most workers. They may well believe this explains why Chinese families save so much—more than 30% of household income—and therefore spend less on consumer goods, including imports from trading partners.

But this line of reasoning is faulty because China already has large and rapidly growing public pension and health insurance programs in the cities, and is in the process of extending them to rural areas. It’s time that China’s trading partners, especially the United States, understand what this means for China’s economic future and, by extension, their own.

For all the criticism of outgoing President Hu Jintao for presiding over a “do-nothing” administration, he did manage to oversee a substantial increase spending on China’s public support systems.As a result, pensions have now become the most expensive function of the Chinese government–which already spends a lot on infrastructure, housing and defense. In 2011, pension expenditures rose to 1.28 trillion renminbi (RMB, U.S.$205 billion), up from only 489 billion RMB in 2006. These and civil service pensions cover only about half of those over age 60, but at current rates of growth universal coverage–and vastly higher expenditures–are not far off. The number of urban workers (including migrants from rural areas who in theory are in the cities temporarily) contributing to the public pension system now exceeds 290 million, while rural pensions are also growing rapidly. With so many new people paying in, the government’s future pension obligations are rising quickly. A recent report issued by the Bank of China and Deutsche Bank estimated that China’s pension system will have a U.S.$2.9 trillion gap between assets and liabilities by the end of 2013. By 2033 the gap is expected to reach U.S.$10.9 trillion, or 38.7% of GDP.

What happened in the past decade or so to cause China, with an annual per capita income of around $5,000 (adjusted for purchasing power), to begin to acquire pension burdens found in richer and heavily indebted industrial states? What will this mean for trading partners who keep urging the Chinese government to rebalance its economy toward greater consumption (and imports) and away from relying so heavily on exports?

Essentially what happened is that Beijing designed a pension system in the late 1990s that will leave households with much less to spend than many observers assume. Urged by World Bank economists and foreign pension experts, the Chinese government put in place a hybrid pension arrangement that relies on both traditional pay-as-you-go collections from employers and mandatory individual accounts, from which workers were to finance anywhere from one half to two-thirds of their retirement needs. (They also were expected to buy pension and annuity products from commercial providers). But that pension design has resulted in a double whammy: households consume less in order to save for retirement needs, while the government’s long term pension debt is escalating rapidly because local governments raided the individual accounts to pay benefits to current retirees.

The central government has tried to prevent local governments from tapping current pension assets, but has done so only by allowing them to accumulate further debt. Moreover, many local administrations bristle under the requirement that pension assets must be invested in low-interest bonds and bank deposits. Don’t be surprised if future pension scandals like the one that rocked Shanghai in 2006 are exposed as local administrations seek a higher, though riskier return on their pension assets.

As China’s population ages, scholars and officials are seriously considering proposals to phase out the one-child policy that is beginning to curb the flow of new workers into the economy, as well as raise retirement ages (currently 60 for men, 5 or 10 years earlier for women). But such adjustments are just as politically difficult in China as in in Western democracies because, as it turns out, not wanting to work longer is a widely held preference. Many Chinese also view the relatively early retirement age as a way to make vacancies for the millions of young people who enter the labor market each year. If older workers continue working into their twilight years, young workers may encounter greater difficulty in trying to find employment. This would pose its own issues for the country.

What does all this mean for the Asian, European, and American economies that trade with China? First, they should understand that China’s aging problem is a slow-motion fiscal crisis. China is not Greece, but local debt burdens are already enormous, and these calculations do not include the mounting pension obligations that local governments have incurred. Just as in America and Europe, the tendency in China is for local officials running state-level pension funds to ramp up current benefits and let future generations pay for them. China’s National Social Security Fund is the largest in the world at $150 billion, but these assets (some of which are permitted to be invested in stocks) still fall well short of the liabilities racked up by provincial and city pension funds.

Second, we should realize that as China moves towards universal pension and medical coverage (a likely prospect under its 2010 Social Insurance Law), the effect on household savings will be limited. True, families may no longer need to save for the high costs of catastrophic illnesses. But it is quite plausible that any reduction in household savings arising from the new safety net will be offset by mandatory payments by both workers and employers into the new welfare programs. In other words, don’t count on the new safety net to rebalance China’s economy, because it won’t give discretionary income much of a lift. This means that countries that have large bilateral trade deficits with China should not expect a turnaround at some uncertain date when Chinese households suddenly have imagined new spending powers.

Finally, we must consider the larger implications aging has on China and major economies such as the United States, Europe, and Japan. Aging trends don’t make the decline of these economies inevitable, of course, but it is time to calibrate expectations. Aging will curb or even reduce household consumption, which is the primary driver of Chinese exports to industrialized economies and what many hope will fuel future exports to China. All these governments need to find ways to slow the growth of health care and pension costs. In the United States and China, for example, insurance and other financial services providers (state-owned in China) make large profits on fees and other administrative charges for handling the funds that pass through their accounts. Cutting these costs is essential. More broadly, all these societies will be compelled to rethink the outdated notion that work is over and retirement begins at some arbitrary age defined by law.

Aging and the policies to cope with a graying population are first and foremost domestic issues, but, as is so often the case, the consequences of Beijing’s pension policies will resonate far beyond its borders. Those who manage economic relations with China should focus less on trade deficits and exchange rates and spend more time thinking through the long-term implications of aging, and what it will mean for patterns of trade and investment among the world’s largest economies.

The possession and use of all illegal drugs should be decriminalised and the least harmful substances should be regulated and sold in licensed shops, an inquiry by a group of cross-party peers has found.

A system for testing the safety of new drugs should be introduced with low-risk substances sold with labels detailing their risks, like cigarette packaging, members of the all-party parliamentary group for drug policy reform said.

While the supply of the most dangerous substances should remain banned, users caught with a small quantity of any drug should not be penalised, the inquiry found.

The controversial proposals are likely to irk the Prime Minister, who recently rejected calls by MPs to set up a royal commission to consider the decriminalisation of illegal drugs.

A panel of nine Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Labour and Crossbench peers from the all-party group conducted a parliamentary inquiry into new psychoactive substances. Presenting the inquiry findings, chair Baroness Meacher, who is also a chair of an NHS trust, said: “The Misuse of Drugs Act is counter-productive in attempting to reduce drug addiction and other drug harms to young people.”

The Act, which has been in force for 40 years, is in desperate need of reform, the group said. The remaining sections of the act in use are causing “serious risks to the many young people who are determined to experiment with drugs”, the group said.

The Act has forced thousands of young people into unemployment, homelessness and broken relationships, it added. In support of decriminalising the use of all drugs, the report alluded to the model in Portugal, where the numbers of young addicts has fallen under decriminalisation. And the proposals for regulating low-risk drugs echo those planned for New Zealand.

The group said strict regulatory controls could be introduced with an enhanced role for Trading Standards Services in the UK.

“Under these controls suppliers would, as is planned in New Zealand, be limited to certain outlets and required to label their product with a clear description of its contents, its risks and the maximum advisable dose,” the group said. The licensed supplier would also be responsible for assuring that the product causes an “agreed level of limited harm”.

Prevention programmes should also be promoted much more widely within schools and the community, the group said. It also recommended that that a minimum of £1.5 million be made available for a targeted pilot of Club Drug Clinics in 10 major hot spots across the UK with a duty to train front line accident and emergency and general practitioner staff.

On Saturday, beauty pageant contestants learned that if she gives a thoughtful answer on gun control during a high profile pageant–she will be vilified for it. Here’s what the New Miss America, Mallory Hytes Hagan of New York, said about the issue.

Champion: Good evening, Miss New York. In the wake of the Newtown tragedy, there is a lot of talk about gun control. One solution being proposed is an armed guard in every school. Do you think that would make our schools safer?

Hagan : I don’t think the proper way to fight violence is with violence. I think the proper way is to educate people on guns and the ways that we can use them properly. We can lock them up, we can have gun safety classes, we can have a longer waiting period. The answer is not to fight violence with violence, however.

The response from the winguttia was swift.

The conservative Media Research Center (MRC) blasted her answer, writing that she was “espousing liberal conventional wisdom on guns” while ridiculing her for supposedly suggesting that “law enforcement officers carrying guns fuels violence.”

Commenters on MRC’s website agreed:- “That idiot answer only reinforces the dumb blond stereotype”
– “The girl is cute, but she lives in a bubble like her head.”
– “this girl is f-ing stupid”
– “More idiocy from people who know nothing about guns”Conservative activists on the far-right Free Republic website condemned Hagan:- “So Mallory Hagan rather the victims get killed than fight back? She belongs in the UK (with Piers Morgan) not America.”
– “She got the looks, but I think she missed the brains line.”
– “Spoken like a true libtard.”

I’m sure more negative responses will forthcoming.

Here’s the latest excuse to come from Fox News on why Republicans will not cooperate with President Obama on passing any new gun control legislation. According to Bloody Bill Kristol, they’re only going to feel compelled to work with him on legislation that he campaigned on.

WALLACE: The Obama White House is clearly determined to keep up the pressure for more gun controls in the wake of Newtown. Bill, do you see any sign, and you heard the conversation today between Neera Tanden and Larry Pratt, of a new willingness on Congress to pass this kind of legislation?

KRISTOL: No, not much. I assume they’ll consider various measures, but ultimately those measures are not really going to do much about it, unfortunately, the mass killings we’ve had. The President didn’t campaign on gun control. Second term presidents do well when they actually try to implement things they told the voters they hoped to focus on. President Obama was going to focus on the economy. He was pro-Israel and now he’s nominated one of the most anti-Israel Senators as Secretary of Defense.

He didn’t talk about gun control when he controlled Congress in 2009 and 2010 and Democrats had huge majorities. They didn’t reinstate the assault ban.

WALLACE: But we did have Newtown.

KRISTOL: We did have Newtown, but honestly, one incident does not tell you what policy should be and in any case, as we pointed out a million times, the particular things Vice President Biden seems to be proposing would have nothing to do with Newtown. There’s not a single proposal in their menu that would have stopped Mrs. Lanza from buying those guns and having those guns apparently. There would have been a registry where people would have known she had those guns. Would that have really helped?

One incident, huh? As my fellow contributor Mugsy pointed out today, it was hardly one incident that led up to them finally having this long overdue debate. And the idea that these Republicans in the Congress would work with President Obama on anything simply because he campaigned on it is laughable.

Kristol also seems to have a short memory about just what sort of majority President Obama had during his first term. He had a filibuster proof majority for a few months, but when that majority includes a bunch of consderva-Dems in the Senate who are as bad or worse than their Republican counterparts, you’re not going to get any real progressive legislation through that Congress.

Wolf Richter  www.testosteronepit.com  www.amazon.com/author/wolfrichter

Bernd Scheifele, CEO of HeidelbergCement–one of the world’s largest producers of construction materials with nearly 55,000 employees at 2,500 locations in over 40 countries–lashed out against European politicians and their inability to bring budgets under control. But he reserved the most devastating judgment for the euro itself.

HeidelbergCement’s long history–it was founded in 1873–almost ended during the financial crisis. For more than 100 years, the company had expanded in Germany. But in 1977, it began to branch out internationally by acquiring Vicat in France and Lehigh Cement in the US. At the end of the 1980s, it invested heavily in Central and Eastern Europe, then moved via acquisitions into Northern Europe, Africa, and Asia–piling on debt as it went. The acquisition spree culminated in 2007, when it paid GBP 9.5 billion for Hansen plc., a British company with 26,000 employees. HeidelbergCement had become one of the world’s largest producers of cements and aggregates, the two key raw materials for concrete.

Then the financial crisis unfolded. Worldwide revenues dropped from €14.2 billion in 2008 to €11.1 billion in 2009, and net profits from €1.92 billion to €168 million. Staggering under nearly €12 billion in net debt, the company laid off 15,000 people. Shares plunged from €120 in May 2007 to €20 in early 2009. Credit became scarce. On the verge of bankruptcy, the company underwent some financial re-engineering that included a capital increase and the issuance of 62.5 million new shares.

It survived. By December 2011, revenues had recovered to €12.9 billion. Net profit approached €1 billion. Net debt had been reduced to €7.8 billion. And shares have more than doubled since their 2009 lows.

“The result of hard work, hard efforts to save money,” Scheifele told the FAZ. The crisis, “an absolutely exceptional situation,” had surprised him. Until then, he said, it was “hard to imagine” that sales would plunge “in almost all countries simultaneously.” But they did.

The entire industry had believed in the guiding principle that declines in one region of the world would be balanced out by growth in other regions. “That was suddenly obsolete,” he said. They’d done stress tests to determine how to react to revenue declines of 20%, but in the US, for example, “sales of cement collapsed within a few months by 50%.” Something that hadn’t happened since the 1930s. And when they needed an extension of their credit lines, they suddenly found themselves “in the middle of a tsunami.”

So never again load up on debt? No, he said, debt helps companies make the necessary investments, but the level of debt, for companies as well as governments, would always have to “remain within a manageable magnitude.” And that’s why he was worried about Europe.

Despite all the to-do about austerity, no country has managed to reduce its debt burden, he said. Instead, debts continue to rise, just more slowly. “I think this is devastating,” he said. “While companies are throttling back their expenditures, politicians keep spending cheerfully.”

But weren’t eurocrats proclaiming victory in fighting the debt crisis? Wasn’t he able to see the signs of progress?

“Hardly,” he said. The world economy wasn’t doing all that badly, Africa and Asia were growing nicely, the US was recovering. “The problem is Europe,” he lamented. “The costs of the monetary union are simply too high; politicians must finally recognize that.”

Harsh words for a German industrialist–words that flew in the face of persistent rumors that German industrialists, eager to expand outside Germany, were supporting the common currency with all their might.

“That’s why we invest in Europe only very frugally,” he added, dousing the future of Europe with gloom. Instead, the company was plowing its money into Asia, source of 40% of its revenues. “In particular, countries like Indonesia, China, and India are important for us,” he said.

Reason: cement, sand, and gravel could only be produced and sold locally, but in contrast to Europe, it was still possible “to open quarries and build new plants” in Asia–where a lot of cement was needed to build infrastructure. Cement consumption serves as a measure of industrial development, he said. “In Indonesia, for example, cement consumption is 230 kg (50 pounds) per capita. That’s currently more than in Great Britain. In some Chinese provinces that grow strongly” –perhaps he was referring to those that were building entire ghost cities–”values of 2,200 kg (4,800 pounds) per capita are not uncommon.”

He’d summarized with a few words how companies were reacting to the miasma in Europe: they were taking their money and investing it elsewhere–contributing to the economic hardship in Europe and to growth overseas. He blamed it on the costs of maintaining the euro, and on politicians who refused to “recognize that.” And just when the hype about Europe’s victory over its crisis reached a feverish pitch.

But not all overseas investments work out: Bolivian President Morales ordered the nationalization of four business units owned by Spain’s largest utility, Iberdrola. Hours later, the army and police seized the company’s offices. So far, 15 companies have been nationalized. Read…. Bolivia Seizes Spanish Utility In Forced Nationalization.

From Citi’s head of FX strategy, Steven Englander

No coin + temporary debt ceiling extension + sequester = USD negative

There was a an out-of-left-field idea that you could mint such a coin deposit it at the Fed and have a trillion dollars to spend. It was based on a very strained reading of some old legislation. The Washington Post link shows just how strained the reading is

It really was a non-starter because it would have been risky from a legal viewpoint and financial markets would have priced in the risk that courts would have rejected it and the US would be close to default, not to mention the Fed looking rather Weimarian had they signed up for it.

The rejection of the trillion dollar coin should not put any pressure on financial markets or risk-correlated currencies on Monday

It may be viewed as political hardball by the White House, as there statement implies that they will not negotiate. WP quotes Press Secretary Carney “there are only two options to deal with the debt limit: Congress can pay its bills or they can fail to act and put the nation into default.” This is a new reading since in 2011, they were busily negotiating with Congress (which is how the sequesters and temporary debt ceiling increase came into being.)

So it is possible that we will get a technical default for a few days, but more likely that Congress will give in, vote the debt ceiling up temporarily, and let the automatic sequesters kick in.

Mounting risk of a technical default was USD positive in 2011 because it led to cutting of long-risk positions and the USD/Treasury market remained safe havens. However, it also occurred in an environemtn of slowing EM growth and intensifying euro zone soveregin risk pressure, so the USD support came from external forces as well. Given that investors are now somewhat long risk again, the position cutting is again likely to be USD positive, however, unattractive US assets were. As was the case in 2011, it is very unlikely that the Treasury will not pay its bills, although even a technical default could have very unforeseen consequences, given the multiple functions that Treasuries play in global financial markets.

The more likely scenario of sequester plus grudging debt ceiling rise is USD negative. It will put more pressure on the Fed to keep pumping liquidity into the US economy without giving any reassurance to investors that long-term fiscal issues are close to resolution.

(h/t Heather at VideoCafe)

This Week with George Stephanopoulos marks the passing of one service person in Afghanistan:

US Army SGT Aaron X Wittman, 28, Chester, VA

According to iCasualties, the total number of allied service members killed in Afghanistan is now 3,256.

In addition, the following notable names lost their lives this weekend:
WY state politician Dave Edwards, television host Huell Howser, McDonald’s executive Fred L. Turner, stuntman/director David Ellis, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Richard Ben Kramer, WY state politician Larry Clapp, gay rights activist and PFLAG founder Jeanne Manford, San Francisco personality Vivian Brown, economist James Buchanan, Indiana state politician Robert Rock, Canadian politician John Wise, author Evan S. Connell, NC state politician Jean R Preston, guitarist John Wilkinson and internet innovator and activist Aaron Swartz.

Police in the US state of Connecticut have arrested two young people for leaving a fake bomb at a school and charged them with three felony counts.

Police arrested the young couple, Sean Doran and Kayla Sypek, after they admitted to planting the facsimile bomb outside the front doors of East Hampton Middle School on Saturday.

The incident prompted officials to lock down the building and call in the state police bomb squad, who after examining and X-raying the device, determined it did not contain any explosives.

Police said the two were charged with first-degree threatening, first-degree reckless endangerment and first-degree breach of peace, all felony charges, adding that the young men are each being held on $100,000 bail and are set to appear in court on Monday.

On December 14, 2012, 20 children and six adults were killed by a gunman — who later killed himself — at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The assailant had also killed his mother earlier in the day.

After the Sandy Hook massacre, a Gallup poll found that the majority of Americans would like stricter gun laws and a ban on high-capacity firearms.

Over 100,000 US citizens have signed the White House’s We the People petition on line, asking the administration of President Barack Obama to make gun laws stricter and to promote a national debate on gun control.

MN/MA

The Norwegian Ambassador to Iran says his country is ready to enhance its energy ties with the Islamic Republic.

Jens Petter Kjemprud made the remark during a meeting with Eshaq Rouyvar, the director of public relations of Iran’s Oil Ministry, in Tehran on Tuesday, the ministry’s official news agency, SHANA, reported on Sunday.

The Norwegian ambassador said his country is keen to expand relations with the Islamic Republic especially in the oil sector.

Rouyvar explained Iran’s capabilities in the fields of technology and human resources in the oil industry, and invited Kjemprud to visit the industrial city of Asalouyeh in the southern Iranian province of Bushehr.

Assalouyeh is home to the Pars Special Economic Energy Zone, which was established in 1998 for the operation of South Pars oil and gas resources.

Kjemprud also invited Rouyvar to Norway for a visit to facilities of the Scandinavian country’s energy industry.

On January 6, Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi said foreign investment in Iran’s upstream oil sector has climbed to 20 billion dollars.

The oil minister added that necessary funds for investment in the shared oil fields were provided from available resources, buyback deals with foreign countries, and private sector firms.

Iran’s crude oil is the target of sanctions by the US and the EU.

At the beginning of 2012, the US and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

The illegal US-engineered sanctions were imposed based on the unfounded accusation that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Iran’s civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.

NT/MA

Four men have been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving after a woman was killed and two children were seriously injured in a car accident.

The 25-year-old woman died after the Vauxhall Astra she was in collided with a black Seat Leon in Halifax, West Yorkshire, at around 3.30pm on Sunday.

The Astra’s male driver, 26, and two child passengers – a girl, seven, and boy, four – were said to be seriously injured and taken to local hospitals.

According to one report, the woman – who was pronounced dead at the scene – was the mother of the injured children.

Men aged 19, 20, 21 and 27 from Bradford were arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving, a police spokesman said.

Officers also want to trace the driver of a blue X-registered Mercedes that was seen to be driving with the Seat Leon before the collision.

The crash happened as the Astra was travelling from Chester Road, crossing the A647 Boothtown Road to go onto Woodlands Road.

Anyone with information should call West Yorkshire Police on 101.

By now most are aware of the various metrics exposing the unsustainability of US debt (which at 103% of GDP, it is well above the Reinhart-Rogoff “viability” threshold of 80%; and where a return to just 5% in blended interest means total debt/GDP would double in under a decade all else equal simply thanks to the “magic” of compounding), although there is one that captures perhaps best of all the sad predicament the US self-funding state (where debt is used to fund nearly half of total US spending) finds itself in. It comes from Zhang Monan, researcher at the China Macroeconomic Research Platform: “The US government is now trying to repay old debt by borrowing more; in 2010, average annual debt creation (including debt refinance) moved above $4 trillion, or almost one-quarter of GDP, compared to the pre-crisis average of 8.7% of GDP.“

This is a key statistic most forget when they discuss the stock and flow of US debt: because whereas the total US deficit, and thus net debt issuance, is about $1 trillion per year, one has to factor that there is between $3 and $4 trillion in maturities each year, which have to be offset by a matched amount of gross issuance just to keep the stock of debt flat (pre deficit funding). The assumption is that demand for this gross issuance will always exist as old maturities are rolled into new debt, however, this assumption is contingent on one very key variable: interest rates not rising.

It is the question of what happens to this ~$4 trillion in annual debt creation by the US, as well as other key ones, that Monan attempts to answer in the following paper on what happens to the world if and when the moment when rates truly start rising, instead of just undergo another theatrical 2-4 week push higher only to plunge over fears the Fed may soon pull the punchbowl.

By Zhang Monan, published first in Project Syndicate

The Real Interest-Rate Risk

Since 2007, the financial crisis has pushed the world into an era of low, if not near-zero, interest rates and quantitative easing, as most developed countries seek to reduce debt pressure and perpetuate fragile payment cycles. But, despite talk of easy money as the “new normal,” there is a strong risk that real (inflation-adjusted) interest rates will rise in the next decade.

Total capital assets of central banks worldwide amount to $18 trillion, or 19% of global GDP — twice the level of ten years ago. This gives them plenty of ammunition to guide market interest rates lower as they combat the weakest recovery since the Great Depression. In the United States, the Federal Reserve has lowered its benchmark interest rate ten times since August 2007, from 5.25% to a zone between zero and 0.25%, and has reduced the discount rate 12 times (by a total of 550 basis points since June 2006), to 0.75%. The European Central Bank has lowered its main refinancing rate eight times, by a total of 325 basis points, to 0.75%. The Bank of Japan has twice lowered its interest rate, which now stands at 0.1%. And the Bank of England has cut its benchmark rate nine times, by 525 points, to an all-time low of 0.5%.

But this vigorous attempt to reduce interest rates is distorting capital allocation. The US, with the world’s largest deficits and debt, is the biggest beneficiary of cheap financing. With the persistence of Europe’s sovereign-debt crisis, safe-haven effects have driven the yield of ten-year US Treasury bonds to their lowest level in 60 years, while the ten-year swap spread — the gap between a fixed-rate and a floating-rate payment stream — is negative, implying a real loss for investors.

The US government is now trying to repay old debt by borrowing more; in 2010, average annual debt creation (including debt refinance) moved above $4 trillion, or almost one-quarter of GDP, compared to the pre-crisis average of 8.7% of GDP. As this figure continues to rise, investors will demand a higher risk premium, causing debt-service costs to rise. And, once the US economy shows signs of recovery and the Fed’s targets of 6.5% unemployment and 2.5% annual inflation are reached, the authorities will abandon quantitative easing and force real interest rates higher.

Japan, too, is now facing emerging interest-rate risks, as the proportion of public debt held by foreigners reaches a new high. While the yield on Japan’s ten-year bond has dropped to an all-time low in the last nine years, the biggest risk, as in the US, is a large increase in borrowing costs as investors demand higher risk premia.

Once Japan’s sovereign-debt market becomes unstable, refinancing difficulties will hit domestic financial institutions, which hold a massive volume of public debt on their balance sheets. The result will be chain reactions similar to those seen in Europe’s sovereign-debt crisis, with a vicious circle of sovereign and bank debt leading to credit-rating downgrades and a sharp increase in bond yields. Japan’s own debt crisis will then erupt with full force.

Viewed from creditors’ perspective, the age of cheap finance for the indebted countries is over. To some extent, the over-accumulation of US debt reflects the global perception of zero risk. As a result, the external-surplus countries (including China) essentially contribute to the suppression of long-term US interest rates, with the average US Treasury bond yield dropping 40% between 2000 and 2008. Thus, the more US debt that these countries buy, the more money they lose.

That is especially true of China, the world’s second-largest creditor country (and America’s largest creditor). But this arrangement is quickly becoming unsustainable. China’s far-reaching shift to a new growth model implies major structural and macroeconomic changes in the medium and long term. The renminbi’s unilateral revaluation will end, accompanied by the gradual easing of external liquidity pressure. With risk assets’ long-term valuation falling and pressure to prick price bubbles rising, China’s capital reserves will be insufficient to refinance the developed countries’ debts cheaply.

China is not alone. As a recent report by the international consultancy McKinsey & Company argues, the next decade will witness rising interest rates worldwide amid global economic rebalancing. For the time being, the developed economies remain weak, with central banks attempting to stimulate anemic demand. But the tendency in recent decades — and especially since 2007 — to suppress interest rates will be reversed within the next few years, owing mainly to rising investment from the developing countries.

Moreover, China’s aging population, and its strategy of boosting domestic consumption, will negatively affect global savings. The world may enter a new era in which investment demand exceeds desired savings — which means that real interest rates must rise.

Syrian security forces have inflicted heavy losses on foreign-backed militants in key areas on the outskirts of Damascus.

On Sunday, the government forces killed and wounded many militants in Darayya, which is a strategic suburb of the capital’s, the official SANA news agency reported.

Earlier, a government official said the Army had taken much of Darayya after nearly two months of fighting in the district.

The Darayya suburb is flanked by the key districts of Mezzeh, which is home to a military airbase, and Kafar Sussah that houses the government headquarters.

Government troops also destroyed the militants’ hideouts and confiscated their weapons.

In addition, the Army killed and wounded many members of armed terrorist groups in Douma Farms and al-Maliha in Damascus countryside.

The security forces also attacked militants in and around the governorates of Hama, Homs, and in Aleppo. The Syrian troops destroyed their hideouts and confiscated weapons.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since mid-March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of Army and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants fighting the Syrian government are foreign nationals.

Several international human rights organizations have accused foreign-sponsored militants of committing war crimes.

GJH/HN

Plans for a radical shake-up of state pensions will be announced by the Government on Monday amid warnings that it will be little more than a “con trick” and could affect a hard-fought deal on public sector pensions.

The Coalition’s proposals include a single flat rate state pension, equivalent to around £144 in today’s money, to be introduced for new pensioners from 2017 in a bid to simplify the system.

Ministers said the reform will create a simple flat rate pension set above the means test (currently £142.70) and based on 35 years of National Insurance contributions and will “hugely benefit” women, low earners and the self employed, who under existing rules find it almost impossible to earn a full state pension.

Around six million workers will face higher national insurance payments in future as the practice of “contracting out” the state second pension to employers is ended.

Those affected are expected to include more than a million private sector staff enrolled in final salary schemes, and an estimated five million public sector workers.

The GMB union said there could be “very serious consequences” which could affect an agreement on public sector pensions, while the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) described today’s White Paper as little more than a “con trick” for future generations, by offering them less than they get now, asking them to pay more and work longer before they can get it back.

But ministers will argue that by replacing today’s complex system of add-ons and means-testing the single tier will provide certainty to people about what they will get from the state and provide a better platform for them to save for their retirement.

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Iain Duncan Smith, said: “This reform is good news for women who for too long have been effectively punished by the current system. The Single Tier will mean that more women can get a full state pension in their own right, and stop this shameful situation where they are let down by the system when it comes to retirement because they have taken time out to care for their family.”

Pensions Minister Steve Webb said: “The current state pension system is too complicated and leaves millions of people needing means-tested top-ups. We can do better.

“Our simple, single tier pension will provide a decent, solid foundation for new pensioners in an otherwise less certain world, ensuring it pays to save.”

Brian Strutton, national officer of the GMB union, said a new flat rate pension should be fairer than the present arrangements, but warned of a “very serious consequence” from the Coalition’s plans.

He said: “That is the increase in National Insurance contributions that employers and employees in defined benefit pension schemes will have to pay.

“For employers that is 3.4% of the NI ranking earnings and for the six million employees affected it will be an extra 1.4%. Most DB scheme employers and members will find this unaffordable so will need to renegotiate their schemes.

“A good example is the Local Government Pension Scheme which has just been reformed by unions and government and would face an unaffordable extra NI bill of several hundred million pounds. Just as the Treasury legislation to reform public sector pensions is going through parliament, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is proposing to blow it all out of the water by completely rewriting the state and occupational pension landscape.”

Mr Strutton said the Treasury and DWP needed to “get their act together” to avoid reopening the public service pension deals, adding: “Abolition of the contracting out NI rebate will impose a £6 billion new tax burden on workers and companies which may be a nice windfall for the Chancellor but is not fair to those who will have to pay more tax.”

Unions have been embroiled in a bitter dispute with the Government over its controversial public sector pension reforms, which led to a series of strikes.

An agreement was struck in local government, but unions in other areas have refused to sign up to new arrangements.
Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “The White Paper offers nothing to existing pensioners and leaves many of them to struggle on lower pensions and a complicated means-testing system. The worst affected will be around five million older women who don’t have a pension anywhere near £144 a week and would clearly benefit if they were included in the new arrangements, but look like they are going to miss out.

“This will only add insult to injury to millions who have already made a contribution to our society but are still living in poverty.”

“The outlook for future generations of pensioners is even worse. They are being asked to pay an extra five years’ worth of National Insurance contributions, work longer before they can retire and end up with less than they can get today. At the moment you only need to contribute for 30 years in order to get a full state pension, and if you do, you can get £150 a week when you retire at 65.

“What the government is trying to sell is a plan for people to pay in for 35 years, get £144 a week and have to wait at least until 68 before they can collect it. No-one should be taken in by what is little more than a con trick.”

Shadow pensions minister Gregg McClymont said the coalition had originally suggested the reforms would be introduced in 2016.

“The chaos surrounding the Government’s relaunch gets worse and worse. These pensions proposals are just half a plan yet they are still delayed by a year,” he said.

“With the granny tax, this Government has already established a track-record of incompetence and secrecy so we will look at the detail, but the Government should come clean immediately and set out exactly who the losers are.”

Joanne Segars, chief executive of the National Association of Pension Funds, said: “The end of contracting out will become a key issue in both the private and public sectors as the Government moves towards a much-needed overhaul of our state pension.

“The transition will have to be handled very carefully to ensure a fair result for employers and savers.”

Paris St Germain’s Zlatan Ibrahimovic. (Reuters / Pascal Rossignol)

Headline grabbing Swedish striker, Zlatan Ibrahimovic, has lashed out at two of the world’s best footballers Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo.

­“Messi may have four Golden Balls, but I don’t have to get on a box to buy a chocolate bar in a vending machine,” Ibrahimovic is cited as saying by Argentinean Canchallena website. “As for Cristiano Ronaldo, he’s a privileged spectator, who only watches how Messi receives all his awards. He doesn’t deserve to be in the top three, there are at least ten people better than him.”

1.69-meter tall Messi won his fourth straight Golden Ball award (given to the best footballer on the planet) on January 7.

The Argentinean’s Barcelona teammate, Andres Iniesta, and Real Madrid’s Cristiano Ronaldo finished as the runners up for the prestigious prize.

Ibrahimovic, who didn’t make it into the top three this year, is well known for his temper and controversial statements.

The PSG star also called Man City player Mario Balotelli a “mediocre” player and made some revealing statements about former Barcelona coach Pep Guardiola, in his autobiography.

France’s foreign minister says the US and Britain are providing support for the French-led military intervention in Mali amid clashes in the West African country.

Laurent Fabius made the announcement on Sunday, saying “We have the support of the Americans for communications and transport.”

The minister added that Britain, Denmark, and other European nations are also supporting the French-led military intervention in the country.

The announcement comes a day after that Washington offered to send drones to Mali as it has already declared its backing of moves against rebels in the African nation.

US commanders were further considering other options such as “providing intelligence and aerial refueling tankers” as well as “logistical backup and boosting intelligence sharing” involving its surveillance drones, AFP reported, quoting an unnamed US official that spoke on condition of anonymity.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has also approved to deploy aircraft to help transport troopers.

Earlier in the day, French jets and combat helicopters targeted the northern city of Gao, which had been controlled by the rebels.

The French Defense Ministry said in a statement that “French fighter jets have identified and destroyed this Sunday, Jan. 13, numerous targets in northern Mali near Gao, in particular training camps, infrastructure, and logistical depots” that served as bases for rebels.

According to the residents of Gao, its airport was among the targets of the airstrikes.

This comes three days after France took military action in Mali to halt advances made by the rebels, who control the north of the West African country.

On Friday, the Malian Army said it has driven back militants from the town of Konna after France intervened with airstrikes to halt advances by fighters.

Unrest erupted in Mali after President Amadou Toumani Toure was toppled in a military coup on March 22, 2012. The coup leaders said they had mounted the coup in response to the government’s failure to contain the Tuareg rebellion in the north of the country, which had been going on for two months.

MR/HN

An eight-year-old British girl has died after a gunman opened fire on a shop in Jamaica, according to reports.

Local media on the Caribbean island said three other people were injured in the shooting which happened in the north-western town of Duncans, in Trelawny.

It is understood the girl is from Balham, south London, and was visiting relatives in the country with her mother and older sister.

The British Foreign Office said: “We can confirm the death of a British national on 11th January in Jamaica. We are providing consular assistance and liaising with local authorities.

“The incident involved a minor.”

More to follow …

Saudi-backed Bahraini forces have clashed with anti-government protesters at the funeral of a demonstrator, killed by regime forces near Manama.

The clashes broke out on Sunday after Bahraini security forces fired tear gas and birdshot to disperse peaceful protesters, who had attended the funeral of Haj Habib Ibrahim Abdullah.

Abdullah died earlier in the day after inhaling poisonous teargas, fired at a peaceful anti-regime protest in the Malkiya village. The protester’s nine-year-old grandson was also injured in the incident.

The protesters called for the release of all jailed activists and demanded that King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa step down.

Since mid-February 2011, thousands of pro-democracy protesters have staged numerous demonstrations in the streets of Bahrain, calling for the Al Khalifa royal family to relinquish power.

On March 14, 2011, troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates invaded the country to assist the Bahraini government in its crackdown on the peaceful protesters.

According to local sources, scores of people have been killed and hundreds arrested.

Physicians for Human Rights says doctors and nurses have been detained, tortured, or disappeared because they have “evidence of atrocities committed by the authorities, security forces, and riot police” in the crackdown on anti-government protesters.

GJH/HN

Hundreds of Kuwaiti opposition activists have staged a demonstration to demand the dissolution of the new parliament and to press for political reforms in the Persian Gulf state.

On Sunday, the demonstrators marched through the streets of Sabah Al-Nasser, a predominantly tribal area just southwest of the capital Kuwait City, to show their opposition to the parliament, elected last month in general polls boycotted by opposition political groups, AFP reported.

“This is a parliament of shame,” said Mussallam al-Barrak, a leading opposition figure and a former member of the parliament.

The demonstrators also protested against an amendment to a key electoral law, saying it allows the government to impact the outcome of elections.

Last week, Kuwaiti police used tear gas canisters, rubber bullets, and stun grenades to disperse a similar protest.

On December 27, 2012, Human Rights Watch issued a statement, sharply criticizing Kuwait’s security forces over their use of “excessive force” against anti-government protesters.

Since the December 1, 2012 parliamentary elections, the opposition has been staging protests to demand that the new parliament be dissolved and the changes made to the electoral law be reversed.

Activists say a decision to change the electoral law by Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad Al Sabah is aimed at electing a rubber-stamp parliament.

Kuwait was the first Arab state in the Persian Gulf to establish an elected parliament in 1962. However, the Al Sabah family remained in control of key posts, including the premiership and the ministries of defense, interior, and foreign affairs.

MN/MA

As a sop to outraged public opinion over Wall Street’s looting of the real economy, criminal banksters are coming under increased scrutiny by federal regulators.

Scrutiny however, is not the same thing as enforcement of laws such as the Bank Secrecy Act and other regulatory measures meant to stop the flow of dirty money from organized crime into the financial system.

And never mind that President Obama and his hand-picked coterie of insiders from Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo (all of whom figured prominently in recent narcotics scandals) are moving to impose Eurozone-style austerity measures that threaten to ravage the social safety net, the American people are spoon-fed a pack of lies that this cabal will protect their interests and enforce the law when it comes to drug money laundering.

Late last week, Reuters reported that “U.S. regulators are expected to order JPMorgan Chase & Co to correct lapses in how it polices suspect money flows … in the latest move by officials to force banks to tighten their anti money-laundering systems.”

In December, the Department of Justice cobbled together a widely criticized deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with Europe’s largest bank, HSBC, over charges that the institution, founded in 1865 by British drug lords when the British Crown seized Hong Kong from China in the wake of the First Opium War, knowingly laundered billions of dollars in drug and terrorist money for some of the most violent gangsters on earth.

Despite the fact that DOJ imposed a $1.9 billion (£1.2bn) fine which included $655 million (£408m) in civil penalties, not a single senior officer at HSBC was criminally charged with enabling Mexican drug cartels and Al Qaeda terrorists to illegally move money through its American subsidiaries.

More outrageously, even when stiff fines are levied against criminal banks and corporations, as likely as not “some or all of these payments will probably be tax-deductible. The banks can claim them as business expenses. Taxpayers, therefore, will likely lighten the banks’ loads,” The New York Times disclosed.

“The action against JPMorgan,” Reuters reported,

“would be in the form of a cease-and-desist order, which regulators use to force banks to improve compliance weaknesses, the sources said. JPMorgan will probably not have to pay a monetary penalty, one of the sources said.”

Read that sentence again. America’s largest bank, responsible for some of the worst depredations of the housing crisis which tossed millions of citizens out of their homes and fined $7.3 billion (£4.53bn) for doing so, will not be fined nor will their officers be criminally charged for presumably washing black money for organized crime.

Despite the recklessness of senior officials at JPMorgan, including CEO Jamie Dimon, former CFO Doug Braunstein and former CIO Ina Drew over the bank’s massive losses in the credit derivatives market last year, Bloomberg News reported that the board will only “consider” whether to release a report on the fiasco which wiped out close to $51 billion in shareholder value at this “too big to fail” bank.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), severely criticized by the US Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in their 335-page report into HSBC, along with the Federal Reserve are expected to issue the cease-and-desist order as early as this week.

Last April however, when OCC issued a cease-and-desist order against Citigroup for alleged “gaps” in their oversight of cash transactions similar to those of drug-tainted HSBC and Wells-owned Wachovia, which laundered hundreds of billions of dollars for narcotics traffickers through dodgy cash exchange houses in Mexico, no monetary penalties were attached.

A “person close” to Citigroup “attributed part of the problem to an accident when a computer was unplugged from anti-money-laundering systems,” according to The New York Times.

While such bald-faced misrepresentations may pass muster with America’s “newspaper of record,” Citigroup’s sorry history when it comes to facilitating criminal money flows is not so easily swept under the rug.

Late last year investigative journalist Bill Conroy reported in Narco News: “In the 1990s, Raul Salinas de Gortari, the brother of former Mexican President Carlos Salinas, tapped US-based Citibank to help transfer up to $100 million out of Mexico and into Swiss bank accounts. Although US authorities investigated the suspicious money movements, ultimately no charges were brought against Raul Salinas or Citibank—a Citigroup Inc. subsidiary.”

“Again,” Conroy reported,

“in January 2010, Citigroup popped up on banking regulators’ radar, this time in Mexico, when a Mexican judge accused a half dozen casa de cambios (money transmitters) of laundering drug funds through various banks, including Citigroup’s Mexican subsidiary. In that case, Citigroup again was not accused of violating any laws.”

However, despite that fact that the OCC’s cease-and-desist order against Citigroup accused the bank of systemic “internal control weaknesses” that opened the institution up to shady transactions by “high-risk customers,” presumably including flush-with-cash narcotics traffickers, the bank was not indicted for criminal violations under the Bank Secrecy Act and did not admit wrongdoing, instead promising to “institute reforms.”

As with Wachovia and HSBC, OCC charged that Citigroup’s “lapses” included “the incomplete identification of high risk customers in multiple areas of the bank, inability to assess and monitor client relationships on a bank-wide basis, inadequate scope of periodic reviews of customers, weaknesses in the scope and documentation of the validation and optimization process applied to the automated transaction monitoring system, and inadequate customer due diligence.”

Additionally, Citigroup “failed to adequately conduct customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence on its foreign correspondent customers, its retail banking customers, and its international personal banking customers and did not properly obtain and analyze information to ascertain the risk and expected activity of particular customers.”

According to OCC auditors, Citigroup “self-reported” that “from 2006 through 2010, the Bank failed to adequately monitor its remote deposit capture/international cash letter instrument processing in connection with foreign correspondent banking.” As I have pointed out, correspondent and private banking are gateways for laundering drug and other criminal money flows.

In other words, replicating patterns employed for decades by the world’s leading financial institutions, organized criminals and terrorist financiers were enabled, with a wink-and-a-nod by the US government, above all by US secret state agencies which siphoned off part of the loot for covert operations, to wash black cash through the system as a whole.

Already stung by billions of dollars in losses due to risky trades in credit derivatives as noted above, MoneyWatch reported “CEO Jamie Dimon can’t blame this on a ‘flawed, complex, poorly reviewed, poorly executed and poorly monitored’ strategy, like he did when the bank lost $6.2 billion on the so-called ‘London Whale’ trade.”

“In many ways,” reporter Jill Schlesinger wrote, “the current potential regulatory action is worse than any trading loss, because it indicates a systemic lapse in controls.”

According to MoneyWatch, regulators “appear to have found a company-wide lapse in procedures and oversight connected to anti-money-laundering (AML) surveillance and risk management. AML controls are intended to deter and detect the misuse of legitimate financial channels for the funding of money laundering, terrorist financing and other criminal acts.”

But there’s the rub; federal regulators are loathe to police, let alone hold to account those responsible for such illicit transactions precisely because the infusion of dirty money into the system is a splendid means to keep failed capitalist financial institutions afloat, a process which Global Research political analyst Michel Chossudovsky has termed “the criminalization of the state.”

In fact, as former London Metropolitan Police financial crimes specialist Rowan Bosworth-Davies recently wrote on his website: “These institutions exist … to handle and facilitate the through-put of the staggering volume of criminal and dirty money which daily flows through the financial sector, because the profits there from are just so incredibly valuable.”

“The biggest problem for these banks,” Bosworth-Davies observed,

“is that by far the greatest amount of this money is illegal to handle under international money laundering laws. All banking institutions are now effectively subject to international laws which prohibit the handling or the facilitation of criminally-acquired money from whatever source, and that money includes the proceeds of drug trafficking, all other criminal activities (including tax evasion), and the proceeds of terrorism.”

Indeed, “The money they were moving was so huge … that it became very easy to persuade Governments to turn a blind eye, while regulators were encouraged to look the other way, when the banks began engaging in a series of wholesale criminal activities.”

Until OCC reveals the content of its cease-and-desist order pending against JPMorgan Chase we do not know the extent of the bank’s potential criminal “lapses” under the Bank Secrecy Act.

However, as Reuters reported although “no immediate action is expected from US prosecutors,” it is a near certainty that the federal government and complicit media will disappear whatever dirty secrets eventually emerge down the proverbial memory hole.

Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly and Global Research, he is a Contributing Editor with Cyrano’s Journal Today. His articles can be read on Dissident Voice, Pacific Free Press, Uncommon Thought Journal, and the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. He is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military “Civil Disturbance” Planning, distributed by AK Press and has contributed to the new book from Global Research, The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century.

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner. (Reuters / Robert Sorbo)

A fuel leak has been found on a 787 Dreamliner during a test in Japan on Sunday. The incident has joined a growing list of problems facing the highly anticipated aircraft prior to a high-priority review by the US Federal Aviation Administration.

The leak came from a fuel nozzle on the left wing that is used to remove kerosene, according to a Japan Airlines spokeswoman, who added that the cause of the incident was unknown. The aircraft is currently undergoing checks in Tokyo.

Friday’s decision by the American government to order a thorough review of Boeing 787 immediately followed a similar incident, which happened to another jet in Boston, when about 40 gallons of fuel spilled onto the airport taxiway due to a valve-related problem.

The review will not ground planes or halt production of new 787s, but will examine the plane’s design, manufacture and assembly, according to US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

“Through it, we will look for the root causes of recent events and do everything we can to make sure these events don’t happen again,” LaHood said.

At the same time US federal transportation officials backed the plane, saying that it was safe.

“We are confident about the safety of this aircraft,” said Federal Aviation Administrator Michael Huerta, adding that the FAA’s priority in the review will be the plane’s electrical systems. He said he would not speculate on how long the review would take.

The $32bln Dreamliner program has suffered several problems and setbacks over the years. The $200 million aircraft was delayed three years in making its debut due to design problems and supplier issues.

Before this week’s malfunctions, oil was discovered leaking from a generator on a Dreamliner engine last Friday at an airport in southern Japan, and a cracked cockpit window was discovered on another plane en route to western Japan, according to a spokesperson for All Nippon Airways.

A detail picture shows the inner workings of a jet engine before being installed on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft. (Reuters / Jason Reed)

On Monday, a maintenance worker found an electrical fire aboard an empty Japan Airlines 787 scheduled for take-off from Logan. One day later another Japan Airlines flight bound for Tokyo was aborted at Logan Airport in Boston due to a fuel leak.

Oil was also discovered leaking from the left engine of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner flight operated by All Nippon Airways on Friday, the airline said, adding to the number of recent incidents involving the aircraft.

To date no technical difficulties have resulted in human casualties.

“Boeing is confident in the design and performance of the 787. It is a safe and efficient airplane that brings tremendous value to our customers and an improved flying experience to their passengers. We welcome the opportunity to conduct this joint review. Our standard practice calls on us to apply rigorous and ongoing validation of our tools, processes and systems so that we can always be ensured that our products bring the highest levels of safety and reliability to our customers,” according to official statement released by Boeing on Friday.

The plane is in use for temporary United Airlines flights between Chicago O’Hare and Houston. The Chicago-based carrier has five other 787s in domestic service.

LOT Polish Airlines plans to begin operating the region’s first regular flight on a 787 between O’Hare and Warsaw, Poland, next week. That inaugural flight is scheduled for Wednesday, according to the airlines’ spokeswoman.

Since October 2011, when the 787’s first commercial flight occurred, Boeing has delivered 50 Dreamliners to customers around the world, the bulk of them to Japanese carriers.

The 787 aircraft is made of composite materials, using new technology to cut fuel consumption and provide a more comfortable flight experience for passengers.

Air carriers are seemingly pleased with upcoming savings and have so far given the plane their approval, as they ordered almost 850 jets despite the current chain of troubles with the aircraft.

A Boeing 787-8 passenger jet flies during a demonstration flight. (Reuters / Tim Chong)

January 13, 2013  |  

There’s always a scene in the grittiest vampire movies where the old bloodsucker is sleeping peacefully in his coffin, looking as innocent as the undead can look, and the handsome hero plants a pointed stake in the vampire’s sternum and takes a big swing at it with his mallet. Whether or not the blow turns out to be accurate and fatal, the vampire always wakes up when he’s pierced. His eyes pop open, his mouth opens on those awful canines dripping blood and saliva, and with a savage snarl he tries to sit up, as the audience draws a deep common breath. It’s a crowd-pleaser, if you like this stuff. And if the thing climbs out of the coffin, 20 minutes of premium violence are guaranteed.

Excuse a rare display of optimism on my part, but I’m suggesting a useful metaphor for the presidential election of 2012. After Mitt Romney collected 75% of the white male vote and lost, I fancied that I could hear a strangled snarl and imagine that the bloodthirsty, near immortal thing with the stake in its chest was the white patriarchy – the high-testosterone, low-melanin monopoly that has misguided and misruled this country, and this violent Western civilization, throughout recorded history and long before.

I’m not claiming a clean kill. The monster’s heart is still beating, though the stake that was struck on Nov. 6 pierced its coat, its shirt, even its undershirt – a sleeveless “wife-beater” of course – and possibly enough skin to leave a bead of blood (someone else’s) on its deathly-pale breast. It may yet climb out of the coffin. But the damned thing felt this one. Forty-five percent of the votes that re-elected Barack Obama were cast by minorities. The president won 55% of the women’s vote – though the huge question is what the other 45% were thinking when they voted for Romney, chained as he was to a platform that ignored and insulted women as recklessly as it dismissed the non-Aryan and the poor.

But the point – that sharp, whittled point of the vampire-slayer’s stake – is that three out of four white men rejected the president and it didn’t matter. He didn’t need them. When the dust settled, there were an unprecedented 20 women in the Senate and 78 in the House of Representatives, far short of a fair gender distribution but edging closer to 20% of Congress. As recently as the early 1990s, the norm was a marginal 5 or 6 percent. The Democratic caucus in the new House of Representatives, a 200-strong minority, will include 61 women, 43 African-Americans, 27 Latinos and 10 Asians. Fewer than half – 94 – will be male Caucasians. Neither the president nor the secretary of state is a white man, nor are four of the nine Supreme Court justices, though what we might accurately label Clarence Thomas, besides an African-American, is always up for debate.

All this is causing acute chest pain for the patriarchy, as well as the Republican Party that incorporates its demographic and its agenda. Though Republicans subsist on militant denial, the future is there for them to see, too, and the future is not bright for what columnist Gail Collins of the Times (in a nod to New Yorkers’ favorite red-tailed hawk) likes to call “the pale male.” The demographics are fatal: By 2043, according to the Census Bureau, non-Hispanic whites will be a minority in America, and of course less than half of the Caucasian minority will be male. We can predict fairly confidently that each generation of aging white men will be a little less rigid and arrogant than its predecessor. Voters under 30 chose Obama decisively, 60 to 36 percent. Mean old men, the heart, soul and checkbook of 21st-century Republicanism, are not a renewable resource.

Demonstrators takes part in a march in Paris, to protest France’s planned legalisation of same sex marriage.(Reuters / Philippe Wojazer)

Several hundred thousand demonstrators filled the streets of Paris during a protest against President Francois Hollande’s plans to legalize gay marriage later this year. The proposed law would allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

The protesters, many of whom travelled from outside the capital, formed three columns that converged at the Eiffel Tower.

“We love homosexuals but a child must be born from a man and a woman, and the law must respect that,” said Frigide Barjot, the alter ego of comedian Virginie Tellene, the intentionally apolitical face of the protest.

Demonstrators against gay marriage, adoption and procreation assistance gather in the streets of Paris.(Reuters / Benoit Tessier)

Demonstrators against gay marriage, adoption and procreation assistance gather in the streets of Paris.(Reuters / Benoit Tessier)

Demonstrators against gay marriage, adoption and procreation assistance gather in the streets of Paris.(Reuters / Benoit Tessier)

Police said at least 340,000 took the streets, with the organizers claiming the figure was closer to 800,000. Five specially chartered trains and 900 buses transported protesters to Paris ahead of the march.

Demonstrators carried placards proclaiming “Born of a man and a woman,”, “‘Marriagephile, not homophobe” and “A father, a mother for all our children”.

The protests have forged a rare coalition of Christian conservatives, Muslims, and center-right politicians opposed to the plans proposed by the Socialist government in the immediate aftermath of Hollande’s election victory last summer.

“This is an important test for Francois Hollande,” said Jean-Francois Cope, the leader of the center-right UMP party.

Demonstrators, one carrying a baby, gather on the Champ de Mars near the Eiffel Tower in Paris, to protest France’s planned legalisation of same-sex marriage.(Reuters / Mal Langsdon)

­
The “marriage for all” law is not a mere formality, though many traditionalists have balked at words “woman” and “mother” being replaced by “spouse” and “parent” in official documents. When it comes into force by June, same-sex couples will have the same right to adopt children as heterosexual couples, although the president recently backed down on plans to provide state-assisted artificial insemination for lesbians.

The government has faced stiffening resistance on the legislation, with even moderate opposition accusing Hollande of foregoing public debate on the controversial issue. A similar protest in November attracted 100,000 people.

Polls show that just over half of French people still support gay marriage, but the endorsement has fallen by ten percent since the proposal was initially touted. Most, however, remain opposed to adoption by a gay couple.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. (Reuters)

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has urged the Syrian opposition to come up with their own peace plan, following the Syrian President’s recent call for dialogue. He added that Assad’s removal from power is ‘impossible to implement.’

­Sergey Lavrov stressed that the opposition’s main precondition for peace talks being the removal of President Assad, was not realistic.

“This is a precondition that is not contained in the Geneva communique (agreed by world powers in June) and which is impossible to implement because it does not depend on anyone,” Lavrov said Sunday.

Lavrov admitted that initiatives that Bashar Assad forwarded in his speech on January 6, inviting the whole Syrian opposition to dialogue, may be considered not far-fetched and not serious enough by some, “but these are initiatives.”

“If I were in the opposition’s place, I would present my counter-ideas about establishing dialogue,” Lavrov said.

The Russian foreign minister also said that having Assad’s resignation as a precondition for peace may cost “more and more casualties”.  

“Those who support such approach should be responsible for this,” Lavrov said.

The Geneva communiqué that the Foreign Minister referred to in his statement, calls on both sides to succeed to adhere to an interim government, and has no clear regulation on Assad’s actions and future position in the country.

“We are hearing from opposition groups that they have decided to fight till final victory, how can we talk about implementing the Geneva communiqué then,” Lavrov said.

Assad’s political future in Syria is one of the bones of contention between Russian and Western powers concerning a possible solution to the conflict.

While Moscow insists that only Syrians can decide their future including ousting Assad, either though elections or dialogue, Western powers along with Arab League states insist that to solve the conflict Assad should first step down.  

“Mr.Brahimi and I exchanged our views and we agreed [during the meeting on Friday] on that the crisis is becoming more and more threatening not only for Syria but for the whole region. Our joint stance is that in the current situation, perhaps the only people who win are radicals, extremists, connected also with terrorist groups like al-Qaeda…Preconditions make it impossible to start a dialogue, “ he explained.

The civil war in Syria has lasted almost two years and according to UN estimates claimed lives of 60,000 people.

That China openly manipulates its economic data, especially around key political phase shifts, such as one communist regime taking over for another, is no secret. That China is also the marginal economic power (creating trillions in new loans and deposits each year) in a stagflating world, and as such must be represented by the media as growing at key inflection points (such as Q4 when Europe officially entered a double dip recession, and the US will report its first sub 1% GDP in years) as mysteriously reporting growth even without open monetary stimulus (something we have said the PBOC will not engage in due to fears of importing US, European and now Japanese inflation) is critical for preserving hope and faith in the future of the stock market, is also very well known. Which is why recent market optimism driven by “hope” from Alcoa that China is recovering and will avoid yet another hard landing, and Chinese reports of a surge in Exports last week, are very much suspect. But no longer is it just the blogosphere that is openly taking Chinese data to task – as Bloomberg reports, even the major banks: Goldman, UBS and ANZ – are now openly questioning the validity and credibility of the goalseek function resulting from C:\China\central_planning\economic_model.xls.

From Bloomberg:

China’s unexpected surge in exports last month renewed concern from analysts at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., UBS AG and Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. (ANZ) that statistics from the nation can be unreliable.

The 14.1 percent jump from a year earlier was the biggest positive surprise since March 2011, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The increase didn’t match goods movements through ports and imports by trading partners according to UBS, while Goldman Sachs and Mizuho Securities Asia Ltd. cited a divergence from overseas orders in a manufacturing index.

Smaller trade gains could signal a less robust recovery from a seven-quarter slowdown just as Australian Treasurer Wayne Swan says the economic rebound is a sign of improving global demand. Accurate statistics from the world’s second-biggest economy are increasingly important for domestic and foreign investors and for China’s government, ANZ’s Liu Li-Gang says.

Too good to be true:

ANZ’s Liu and colleague Louis Lam published research last week that underscored doubts about the quality of China’s economic data. They found that quarterly GDP, industrial production, fixed-asset investment and inflation data published in percentage terms failed to conform to “Benford’s Law,” which holds that in any series of numbers certain patterns will be found only if the statistics are naturally generated.

As we have previously observed, even China has previously mocked its own data “fudgability”:

Li Keqiang, who may succeed Wen Jiabao as premier in March, was quoted in 2007 as saying he watched figures on power, rail cargo and loans because gross domestic product numbers were “man-made.” Li’s remarks were in a U.S. diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks in late 2010.

One reason for the “surge” in recent data may be the demand of the new Politburo to telegraph that all is well following the latest Congress which took place in November, and that the economy is once again picking up, even if in reality it isn’t:

After China’s statistics bureau reported third-quarter GDP in October, Standard Chartered Plc analysts said the 7.4 percent increase was “too good to be true” when compared with the slowdown in electricity production and the readings of a manufacturing index, while London-based Capital Economics Ltd. said its own analysis indicated expansion of about 6.5 percent.

The median forecast for December exports in a Bloomberg survey of 40 economists was for a 5 percent gain, with the highest estimate at 9.2 percent, after November’s 2.9 percent growth. Goldman Sachs, ranked by Bloomberg as the most accurate forecaster for the indicator, projected a 7 percent rise.

The increase, which was the biggest since May, could indicate exporters’ rush to finish year-end orders and government pressure to report exports before the end of the year to reach the government’s 2012 target of 10 percent growth, Shen Jianguang, Mizuho’s Hong Kong-based chief Asia economist, said in a Jan. 10 note.

A possible explanation for how Chinese companies are cooking their export books comes from none other than Goldman:

“It is possible that local governments may have tried to boost exports data by either making round trips in special trade zones” or by exporting “earlier than otherwise in an attempt to improve the annual exports data,” Goldman Sachs’ Beijing- based economists Yu Song and Yin Zhang wrote the same day.

Rushed shipments and even faked exports to secure tax refunds may have contributed to the stronger growth data, according to Alistair Thornton and Ren Xianfang, Beijing-based analysts at IHS Inc.

Some trading companies are turning to transportation providers like Shenzhen Global Express Logistics Ltd. for help in shipping goods through so-called bonded zones to claim export tax rebates or charge higher import prices for goods without them physically leaving the country. Shenzhen Global offers customs clearing and other freight services including a “one-day tour,” Lin Yongtai, a manager with the company in the city bordering Hong Kong, said in a telephone interview.

For a fee of 1,000 yuan ($161) per vehicle per day, the company will drive trucks into warehouses in bonded zones, where cargo must clear customs, so that businesses can obtain a refund of value-added tax on the “export” of their products or boost sale prices for goods that carry the cachet of being imported.

“A poor villager can boast he has thousands of yuan of turnover every day, but people later discover he only has one bull — he takes the bull out every morning and brings it back every evening,” Lin said. “The same applies to some parts of China’s foreign trade.”

Of course, there is also the simple test of matching one country’s exports to another one’s imports (after all, it is a closed loop). Once more, it appears that China is literally pulling numbers out of thin air:

UBS economists led by Hong Kong-based Wang Tao pointed to a “quite obvious discrepancy” in the growth of China’s exports to Taiwan and South Korea and those economies’ reported imports from China in recent months, even as historically they have tracked each other well.

Finally, that China is openly making up numbers is no surprise: it will continue doing that until, like everywhere else, the discrepancy between perception and reality (usually manifested in the case of China by a lot of angry people breaking something or simply rioting) becomes too glaring for even the most optimistically inclined to ignore.

What is a surprise is that it is none other than the banks – the primary carriers of the status quo gene – who are implicitly pulling the rug out from beneath the economy that is supposed to once again, as in 2008 and 2009, provide the bridge from a contracting “here” to a growing “there.”

The question is why?

Is this an attempt to undermine the Chinese leadership which has so far merely sought to grow the economy by fiscal stimuli, while avoiding monetary ones: i.e., finally get the PBOC involved in not only growing the money supply (if not the economy), but in joining the rest of the world’s central banks in a race to debase? And if indeed this is the case, what happens when China begins growing its own local inflation in addition to importing everyone else’s.

Or is it a way to force a drop in a market that hangs on to every piece of good news like a drowning meth addict clutching at the tiniest of straws, allowing the same “skepticism-inducing” banks to buy at cheaper prices?

Or, more likely, is this merely a red herring to be used as a scapegoat when the latest dead cat bounce, so optimistically telegraphed by every sell side strategist, fails to materialize once more? After all: when in doubt, blame it all on the upcoming debt ceiling fiasco, and now: made up Chinese data.

We are confident we will get the answer very soon.

January 13, 2013  |  

For nearly a century after, its founding in 1871, the National Rifle Association was America’s foremost pro-gun control organization. It was not until 1977 when the NRA that Americans know today emerged, after paranoid libertarians who equated owning a gun with the epitome of freedom and fomented widespread distrust against government–if not armed insurrection–emerged after staging a hostile leadership coup.

In the years since, an NRA that once encouraged better markmanship and reasonable gun control laws gave way to an advocacy organization and political force that saw more guns as the answer to society’s worst violence, whether arming commercial airline pilots after 9/11 or teachers after the Newtown, while opposing new restrictions on gun usage.

It is hard to believe that the NRA was committed to gun-control laws for most of the 20th century–helping to write most of the federal laws restricting gun use until the 1980s.

“Historically, the leadership of the NRA was more open-minded about gun control than someone familiar with the modern NRA might imagine,” wrote Adam Winkler, a Second Amendment scholar at U.C.L.A. Law School, in his 2011 book, Gunfight: The Battle Over The Right To Bear Arms In America. “The Second Amendment was not nearly as central to the NRA’s identity for most of the organization’s history.”

Once Upon A Time…

The NRA was founded in 1871 by two Yankee Civil War veterans, including an ex-New York Times reporter, who felt that war dragged on because more urban northerners could not shoot as well as rural southerners. It’s motto and focus until 1977 was not fighting for constitutional rights to own and use guns, but “Firearms Safety Education, Marksmanship Training, Shhoting for Recreation,” which was displayed in its national headquarters.

The NRA’s first president was a northern Army General, Ambrose Burnside. He was chosen to reflect this civilian-militia mission, as envisioned in the Second Amendment, which reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The understanding of the Amendment at the time concerned having a prepared citizenry to assist in domestic military matters, such as repelling raids on federal arsenals like 1786’s Shays Rebellion in Massachusetts or John Brown’s 1859 attack in Harper’s Ferry, Virginia. Its focus was not asserting individual gun rights as it is today, but a ready citizenry prepared by target shooting. The NRA happily accepted $25,000 from New York State to buy property for a firing range ($500,000 today). For decades, the U.S. military gave surplus guns to the NRA and sponsored shooting competitions.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the NRA’s leaders helped write and lobby for the first federal gun control laws–the very kinds of laws that the modern NRA labels as the height of tryanny. The 17th Amendment outlawing alchohol became law in 1920 and was soon followed by the emergence of big city gangsters who outgunned the police by killing rivals with sawed-off shotguns and machine guns–today called automatic weapons.

In the early 1920s, the National Revolver Association–the NRA’s handgun training counterpart–proposed model legislation for states that included requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon, adding five years to a prison sentence if a gun was used in a crime, and banning non-citizens from buying a handgun. They also proposed that gun dealers turn over sales records to police and created a one-day waiting period between buying a gun and getting it–two provisions that the NRA opposes today. Nine states adopted these laws: West Virginia, New Jersey, Michigan, Indiana, Oregon, California, New Hampshire, North Dakota and Connecticut. Meanwhile, the American Bar Association had been working to create uniform state laws, and built upon the proposal but made the waiting period two days. Nine more states adopted it: Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland, Montana, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

State gun control laws were not controversial–they were the norm. Within a generation of the country’s founding, many states passed laws banning any citizen from carrying a concealed gun. The cowboy towns that Hollywood lionized as the ‘Wild West’ actually required all guns be turned in to sheriffs while people were within local city limits. In 1911, New York state required handgun owners to get a permit, following an attempted assassination on New York City’s mayor. (Between 1865 and 1901, three presidents had been killed by handguns: Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley.) But these laws were not seen as effective against the Depression’s most violent gangsters.

In 1929, Al Capone’s St. Valentine’s Day massacre saw men disguised as Chicago police kill 7 rivals with machine guns. Bonnie and Clyde’s crime-and-gun spree from 1932-34 was a national sensation. John Dellinger robbed 10 banks in 1933 and fired a machine gun as he sped away. A new president in 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt, made fighting crime and gun control part of his ‘New Deal.’ The NRA helped him draft the first federal gun controls: 1934’s National Firearms Act and 1938’s Gun Control Act.

The NRA President at the time, Karl T. Frederick, a 1920 Olympic gold-medal winner for marksmanship who became a lawyer, praised the new state gun controls in Congress. “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons,” he testified before the 1938 law was passed. “I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”       

These federal firearms laws imposed high taxes and registration requirements on certain classes of weapons–those used in gang violence like machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and silencers–making it all-but impossible for average people to own them. Gun makers and sellers had to register with the federal government, and certain classes of people–notably convicted felons–were barred from gun ownership. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld these laws in 1939.

The legal doctrine of gun rights balanced by gun controls held for nearly a half-century.

In November 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed President John F. Kennedy with an Italian military surplus rifle that Owsald bought from a mail-order ad in the NRA’s American Rifleman magazine. In congressional hearings that soon followed, NRA Executive Vice-President Frankin Orth supported a ban in mail-order sales, saying, “We do think that any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing into this bill the instrument which killed the president of the United States.”

But no new federal gun control laws came until 1968. The assassinations of civil rights leader Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy were the tipping point, coming after several summers of race-related riots in American cities. The nation’s white political elite feared that violence was too prevalent and there were too many people–especially urban Black nationalists–with access to guns. In May 1967, two dozen Black Panther Party members walked into the California Statehouse carrying rifles to protest a gun-control bill, prompting then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to comment, “There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”

The Gun Control Act of 1968 reauthorized and deepened the FDR-era gun control laws. It added a minimum age for gun buyers, required guns have serial numbers and expanded people barred from owning guns from felons to include the mentally ill and drug addicts. Only federally licensed dealers and collectors could ship guns over state lines. People buying certain kinds of bullets had to show I.D. But the most stringent proposals–a national registry of all guns (which some states had in colonial times) and mandatory licenses for all gun carriers–were not in it. The NRA blocked these measures. Orth told America Riflemen magazine that while part of the law, “appears unduly restyrictive, the measure as a whole appears to be one that the sportsmen of America can live with.”  

The Paranoid Libertarians’ Hostile Takeover
Perhaps the sportsmen of America could abide by the new law, but within the NRA’s broad membership were key factions that resented the new federal law. Thoughout the 1960s, there were a few articles in American Rifleman saying the NRA was waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to declare the Second Amendment included the right to own a gun, Joan Burbick recounts in her 2006 book, Gun Show Nation: Gun Culture and American Democracy.

But in the mid-1960s, the Black Panthers were better-known for expressing that view of the Second Amendment. By 1968, however, Burbick notes that the NRA’s magazine’s most assertive editorials began saying the problem was fighting crime and not guns–which we hear today. The 1968 law ordered the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to enforce the new gun laws. In 1971, ATF raided a lifetime NRA member’s house who was suspected of having a large illegal arms cache and shot and killed him. That prompted “the ardent reactionary William Leob,” then editor of New Hampshire’s  influential Manchester Union Leader newspaper, to call the federal agents, “Treasury Gestapo,” even though later evidence confirmed the weapons cache. Loeb and other white libertarians with podiums then started to assert that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to guns–like the Black Panthers. But, of course, they were seeking to keep America’s white gun owners fully armed.

A split started to widen inside the NRA, Burbick notes. Gun dealers thought they were being harassed. Rural states felt they were being unduly punished for urban America’s problems. In 1975, the NRA created a new lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, under Harlon B. Carter, a tough-minded former chief of the U.S. Border Patrol who shared the libertarian goal of expanding gun owners’ rights. Burdick writes that “by 1976, the political rhetoric had gained momentum and the bicentennial year brought out a new NRA campaign, ‘designed to enroll defenders of the right to keep and bear arms’ in numbers equal to ‘the ranks of the patriots who fought in the American Revolution.’” Looking back, the seeds of a hostile takeover were everywhere.

Harlon Carter wasn’t just another hard-headed Texan who grew up in a small town that was once home to frontiersman Davy Crockett. He was an earlier era’s version of George Zimmerman, the Floridian young man who claims to have shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense in February 2012–even though police records and 911 recordings seem to show Zimmerman was looking for a fight. According to Carol Vinzant’s 2005 book, Lawyers, Guns, and Money: One Man’s Battle With The Gun Industry, a 17-year-old Carter found and confronted a Mexican teenager who he believed helped steal his family’s car. When the 15-year-old pulled a knife, Carter shot and killed him. His conviction was overturned when an appeals court said the jury should have considered a self-defense argument.

In November 1976, the NRA’s old guard Board of Directors fired Carter and 80 other employees associated with the more expansive view of the Second Amendment and implicit distrusting any government firearm regulation. For months, the Carter cadre secretly plotted their revenge and hijacked the NRA’s annual meeting in Cincinatti in May 1977. The meeting had been moved from Washington to protest its new gun control law. Winkler writes that Carter’s top deputy Neal Knox was even more extreme than him–wanting to roll back all existing gun laws, including bans on machine guns and saying the federal government had killed Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy as “part of a plot to advance gun control.”

Using the NRA’s parliamentary rules, the rebels interrupted the agenda from the floor and revised how the Board of Directors was chosen, recommited the NRA to fighting gun control and restored the lobbying ILA. Harlon Carter became the NRA’s new executive director. He cancelled a planned move of its national headquarters from Washington to Colorado Springs. And he changed the organization’s motto on its DC headquarters, selectively editing the Second Amendment to reflect a non-compromising militancy, “The Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.”

After Carter was re-elected to lead the NRA in 1981, The New York Times reported on Carter’s teenage vigilante killing–and how he changed his first name’s spelling to hide it. At first, he claimed the shooting was by someone else–and then recanted but refused to discuss it. Winkler writes, “the hard-liners in the NRA loved it. Who better to lead them than a man who really understood the value of a gun for self-protection?”

After the coup, the NRA ramped up donations to congressional campaigns. “And in 1977, new articles on the Second Amendment appeared” in American Rifleman, Burbick noted, “rewriting American history to legitimize the armed citizen unregulated except by his own ability to buy a gun at whatever price he could afford.” That revisionist perspective was endorsed by a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee chaired by Utah Republican Orrin Hatch in 1982, when staffers wrote a report concluding it had discovered “long lost proof” of an individual’s constitutional right to bear arms.   

The NRA’s fabricated but escalating view of the Second Amendment was ridiculed by former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger–a conservative appointed by President Richard Nixon–in a PBS Newshour interview in 1991, where he called it “one of the greatest pieces of fraud–I repeat the word ‘fraud’–on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”

Burger would not have imagined that the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008–13 years after he died–led by libertarian activist Justice Antonin Scalia–would enshrine that “fraud” into the highest echelon of American law by decreeing that the Second Amendment included the right to own a gun for self-protection in one’s home.

VELSHI: The dealt ceiling is the next self-inflicted crisis that Congress needs to deal with. The debt limit is not like a credit card. It is simply not. It makes me crazy when Republicans and Democrats alike, including the president, continue to use this misleading analogy. It’s also not the same as your household budget with a few zeros taken out.

For those who don’t remember the last time Congress pushed us past the debt ceiling, here’s how it works. Congress and the president spend money by creating bills and signing them into law. That is when the money is committed. Last year the U.S. government spent $3.8 trillion. Two-thirds of that, the green, came from revenues, mostly taxes. The rest of it, the red, came from borrowing. That’s the deficit.

The subtotal of all of these annual deficits plus the interest on it is the national debt.

Today the national debt stands at $16.4 trillion. The Treasury is empowered to borrow money to make up for that shortfall but only up to a certain amount. That’s the debt ceiling. Just keep this in mind, the Treasury does not make decisions about how the money is spent. They are simply empowered in this case to borrow the money and write the checks to pay the bills already incurred by your democratically elected Congress.

Today the debt ceiling is $16.3 trillion, which is less than our deficit. The U.S. breached the debt ceiling on December 31st but the Treasury can use what it calls extraordinary measures to raise an extra $200 billion. Those extra funds will only last until about mid -February or early March, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Well, good luck trying to explain this to conservative talk radio show host Rush Limbaugh.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSH LIMBAUGH, CONSERVATIVE TALK RADIO SHOW HOST: I think of the debt limit as your monthly credit card limit. You can’t go over it on your credit card. And the United States government can’t spend more that what it’s credit limit or its debt limit.

Now Ali Velshi of CNN says that has no relation to spending.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELSHI: That’s right, Rush. The debt ceiling was created so that Congress wouldn’t need to constantly authorize the Treasury to borrow more money. Raising the debt ceiling doesn’t authorize any new spending. It authorizes payment. It does not increase deficits. It just allows the Treasury to pay for the things that the U.S. government has already bought. If Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, Treasury won’t be able to pay the bills and the U.S. government will start defaulting on some of its obligations.

Here is what happens, for instance, on February the 15th of this year. The federal government will take in an estimated $9 billion in revenue. That’s the good news. But compare that to the $52 billion in bills that it will need to pay, everything from interest on the debt to pay for members of the military.

The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that roughly 40 percent of the bills for the month would go unpaid.

Now what’s the consequence of not paying? The truth is nobody really knows since it’s never happened before, but you try telling American Express that you’re not paying your bill this month because you spent too much money going out to dinner last month. Even talking about not raising the debt ceiling in 2011 caused the S&P to lower the U.S. credit rating because investing in U.S. debt is so safe. Interest rates are low, 1.58 percent for 10-year bonds. But missing an interest payment could cause those rates to rise.

That’s still not enough to sway some members of Congress. They say they need to hold the debt ceiling hostage to get real spending cuts.

Ron Johnson is a Republican senator from Wisconsin. He is the member of the Senate Budget Committee.

Senator, as I just said — welcome, by the way. As I just said the debt ceiling is not actually about future spending. It is for paying for bills that we already bought. Whether or not you think we should spend less money in the United States, do you agree with my premise?

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R), WISCONSIN: No, I don’t, Ali. And hello, by the way. What the debt ceiling is all about is providing the president the authority to borrow more money, put that on the backs of our children and grandchildren. So there’s no doubt that we are not going to default on our debt. But what the debt ceiling allows — what the debt ceiling allows Congress to do is continue to deficit spend. If we would stop incurring deficits we wouldn’t need to increase the debt ceiling. But it’s not really about paying past bills. You start getting into the cash flow aspect of this thing. But basically what you’re talking about is if — in order to increase the debt ceiling we are actually just basically giving the president the authority to put that debt burden on our children and grandchildren. So it’s really not about spending at all.

VELSHI: OK. Let me ask you a couple of questions here. First of all you said —

JOHNSON: It’s called deficit spending.

VELSHI: You said there’s no doubt we are not going to default on our payments.

JOHNSON: No.

VELSHI: I just — but the math indicates that if at some point we don’t increase the debt ceiling —

JOHNSON: Because, because —

VELSHI: — why won’t we?

JOHNSON: Listen, our interest payment this year is under $250 billion. We’re going to bring in $2.5 trillion in tax revenue, so that’s 10 times what our interest — the servicing on the debt is. There is some casual aspects about turning over some debt but basically the only reason we have to increase the debt ceiling is because we continue to deficit spend. We’re actually spending a trillion dollars more than we were bringing in —

(CROSSTALK)

VELSHI: But we’re not anywhere close to not — when you say we continue —

JOHNSON: Well, that’s why we have to increase the debt ceiling.

VELSHI: When you say we continue to deficit spend, we have deficit spent under this entire administration, under the — under the entire previous administration, as well. This isn’t new. We never don’t deficit spend. We’ve hardly ever not deficit spend. And we’re not going to get there anywhere soon. So why would you pick this moment to have that fight?

JOHNSON: We need to stop doing that.

VELSHI: Well, we — you can’t. Can you come up with a budget?

(CROSSTALK)

JOHNSON: Because what —

VELSHI: Paul Ryan couldn’t come up with one.

JOHNSON: Well, Paul Ryan did pass a budget in the House. Where we haven’t passed a budget is in the United States Senate controlled by Democrats for over three years.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: So what we need to — what we need to use the debt ceiling moment as is a moment to educate the American public about all the deficit spending, the fact that we blew through, by the way, a $2.1 trillion increase in the debt ceiling in just 17 months.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: Now, Ali, it took us 200 years to incur $2.1 trillion from our founding to 1986.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: We blew through that same amount in 17 months. We have got to start bringing —

VELSHI: But Senator —

JOHNSON: — reducing spending, reducing our deficit so we don’t have to keeping doing that.

VELSHI: The debt ceiling is a technicality. You’re talking about the budget, you’re talking about federal spending.

Let me just show you a piece of an editorial from “The Wall Street Journal.”

(CROSSTALK)

JOHNSON: But if you —

VELSHI: I’m going to get your comment on this. They said, “You can’t take a hostage you aren’t prepared to shoot.” Now that is — that is charged language these days so I don’t certainly want to ask you about hostages and shooting. I want to ask you a question on a different way.

JOHNSON: Right.

VELSHI: Do you — do you understand that the consequences or what the consequences are of the U.S. even technically defaulting on its financial obligations and are you willing to let that happen?

JOHNSON: Yes.

VELSHI: Because you talk about interest rates, but the U.S. government has a lot more to pay than interest.

JOHNSON: Ali, I don’t want to play brinkmanship here. When you start coming to the terms of the fact we cannot continue to run deficits over a trillion dollars per year.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: Because what’s going to happen is our interest rates is going to increase and then interest expense can — if we just revert to our 30-year average —

VELSHI: Yes.

JOHNSON: — interest cost from 1970 to 1999 that adds $600 billion in interest costs per year. That is what we are trying to prevent.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: So what my suggestion would be is we just start increasing the debt ceiling in incremental amounts —

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: — until we get President Obama to actually get serious about reducing spending.

VELSHI: And will increase it. You will vote to increase it.

JOHNSON: Reducing the increase in the rate of spending. That’s —

VELSHI: You will vote to increase it in an incremental amount.

JOHNSON: It — listen, there’s a very good construct in terms of giving, you know, $1 — increasing the debt ceiling for every $1 in deficit reduction.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: That’s what we have to start using the debt ceiling to — to impose that spending discipline on this administration. And let’s face it, President Obama is saying that we don’t have a spending problem. We have a spending problem, this nation. We have a deficit spending problem.

VELSHI: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

VELSHI: We’ve all — we’ve all —

JOHNSON: We should be doing this incrementally. This debate is not going away.

VELSHI: Senator, we’ve heard all of the — both sides, bumper stickers. Let me bring you back to my example of February the 15th. OK. On February 15th, we had $52 billion in committed spending, $9 billion in money that we’re taking in. And by the way, there isn’t a chest of money sitting around for all the extra stuff. So I’ve got a list there. I’ve got interest, which is the one you’re talking about, it’s absolutely the biggest part, it’s $30 billion.

OK, so, we’re taking in $9 billion, we have $30 billion in interest. You’ve said that there are other ways to handle that. You’ve got refunds, tax refunds, $6.6 billion.

JOHNSON: Yes —

VELSHI: Federal salaries — hang on, sir — $3.5 billion. Military pay, $2.7 billion, Medicare and Medicaid $2.3 billion, Defense vendors, $1.5 billion, other stuff $4.4 billion.

Which one are you cutting, sir?

JOHNSON: Ali, you’re taking a look at one day’s —

(CROSSTALK)

VELSHI: I could pick any day. I could pick any day.

JOHNSON: Which is a distortion. Now let’s take a look at the year. In a year we will get about $2.5 trillion worth of tax revenue. Last year we spent $3.5 trillion.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: Now if you actually utilize the Social Security trust fund to make the Social Security payments, that’s another $775 billion. So now you’re up to revenue of over $3.2 trillion. Basically you’re funding all of government. And that’s why we need to take a look at this. We — I don’t want to play brinksmanship. We should make sure that we can fund as much of government as revenues coming in.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: But we have got to start seriously taking a look at how we reduce the rate of growth in spending. And that’s what we’re talking about. For really nobody is talking about cutting government in total, we’re talking about reducing the rate of growth in government so we stop adding this burden of debt to our children and grandchildren.

VELSHI: Sure.

JOHNSON: And that’s what this debt ceiling is about. It’s how much are we going to allow the president to increase the debt burden on our children and grandchildren. And he says he doesn’t even want to have that debate. Listen, anytime we talk about debt it should be a very serious debate. We’ve got to start coming to —

VELSHI: I get you, I get you, and I hear you. But I’m glad —

(CROSSTALK)

I’m glad that you don’t want to play brinkmanship. I guess my point is that the raising of the debt ceiling beyond the money that we’re at right now is for money that is already committed. So that is not actually more spending.

JOHNSON: No, it is not. It —

VELSHI: That’s fire preventing.

JOHNSON: It is not. It is — it is to pay for additional deficit spending, which I agree with you, nobody says we can start balancing our budget immediately.

VELSHI: Right.

JOHNSON: But what Republicans are saying is if you’re going to increase the debt burden on our children, at least start working with us to restrain the — the rate of growth in spending over the next few years so we can finally start bringing our budget into balance.

VELSHI: OK.

JOHNSON: So we don’t totally mortgage our children’s future. That’s what this debate should be about.

VELSHI: You were absolutely right. It should be about that. And we’re going to discuss that later in the show. The idea about why we don’t have budgets and how we can fix that.

Senator, thanks for taking the time to talk to us. We hope to talk to you more in the coming weeks.

JOHNSON: Have a great day.

File photo shows Iranian Navy boats taking part in maneuvers near Strait of Hormuz. (Reuters)

Iran claims its capability to defend itself is growing and the Islamic republic is “prepared for any threat”. The statement follows tests of “modern warfare” capabilities and exercises to hone battle tactics in the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

­The naval force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which is in charge of maintaining security in the Persian Gulf area, held exercises near the port city of Bandar Abbas, which holds a strategic position on the Strait of Hormuz. The main aim was to boost its forces combat readiness, familiarize them with the latest drills, and increase their response time.

The drills also tested well-timed responses to natural and manmade disasters, and allowed IRGC forces to operate new weapons, Iranian Press TV reported.

“Our present capabilities are incomparable to the past. Today, our youth, banking on the past experiences and modern science, have managed to show their capabilities to the world and be prepared for any threat,” IRGC Navy Commander Rear-Admiral Reza Torabi was quoted as saying.

This was the fifth such tactical exercise held by Tehran, however nothing was officially said about the previous tests.

Over the past few years, Iran has held several military drills to enhance the defensive capabilities of its armed forces and to test modern military tactics and equipment.

One of the latest tests took place in December 2012, when Iran’s Navy held a six-day naval drill aimed to show “the armed forces’ military capabilities” in confronting enemy threats.

The maneuver also took place in the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route that accounts for more than a third of the world’s seaborne oil exports, and involved testing warships, submarines, jet fighters and hovercrafts.

Iran has been constantly upgrading its military capabilities lately. In recent years, Iran declared it had made great achievements in the defense sector and attained self-sufficiency in essential military equipment and systems. The country produces its own tanks, self-propelled guns and multiple rocket launchers. This September, Iran’s navy announced the launch of the overhauled super-heavy Tareq 901 submarine. Iran is also actively engaged in missile development. Its Shahab-3 long-range ballistic rocket has a range of 5,000km — meaning it could reach Israel and all US military bases in the Persian Gulf.

A man has been charged with the murders of two Big Issue sellers in Birmingham.

The 23-year-old is accused of killing Wayne Lee Busst, 32, and Ian Watson Gladwish, 31, both from Birmingham.

They were killed on Friday just before 6pm.

One of the men was found outside a Sainsbury’s store in Martineau Place, and the other slumped yards away near Boots in Union Street.

Both had suffered stab wounds and were pronounced dead at the scene.

The force has said hundreds of people may have witnessed the stabbings which took place in a busy shopping street.

Detective Inspector Buck Rogers, who is leading the investigation, said: “We have had a fantastic response from the public so far and their information has proved vital to our investigation.”

John Bird, founder of The Big Issue magazine, condemned the double killing as “utterly senseless”.

In a statement, Mr Bird said: “Myself and everyone at The Big Issue have been deeply saddened to hear the tragic news that two of our well-liked, Birmingham-based vendors, were stabbed to death in the city centre.”

The Federal Communications Commission has been around since 1934. And not once has a woman served as chair.

President Obama may soon need to appoint a new chair to succeed Julius Genachowski, who is expected to step down. The Women’s Media Center created a petition at Change.org urging the president to appoint a woman to succeed Genachowski. It’s within the realm of possibility: Two of the five current FCC commissioners are women. I’ve signed the petition, and I hope you will too.

This isn’t just about having more women in positions of leadership within the federal government. (But we need that too. Just yesterday another female member of President Obama’s cabinet stepped down. So far, all of the president’s top appointments for his new administration are men.)

This is also about who owns the media. White men own most broadcast TV and radio outlets. The FCC’s own data show that women own less than 7 percent of all broadcast licenses. And people of color own just 7 percent of radio stations and just 3 percent of TV stations. To make matters worse, the percentage of minorities in newsrooms has declined every year since 2006.

Is diversity a priority at the FCC? Well, consider that it took the agency 13 years to issue this data. And that’s a shame because diversity in media ownership expands the variety of options, voices and stories on our airwaves.

Right now we have a system where women’s perspectives are often missing. The presidential election dominated the 2012 news cycle, and guess what? 4th Estate’s report on gender and election coverage showed that men crowded out women in electoral reporting during the six months studied.

As in: Men wrote 72.1 percent of the print articles in major publications during the time of the study. Men were seven times more likely to be quoted in major newspapers and TV news programs. (Yes, even for stories on “women’s issues” like abortion, birth control, Planned Parenthood and women’s rights. No, really.) And as my colleague Amy Kroin pointed out, this trend held true for both conservative and liberal media outlets.

The biggest story of 2012 illustrates the larger problem. Women are underrepresented in print bylines, as expert sources in print and in television news broadcasts, as guests on talk shows and as creators, producers and directors of content. And men run almost every major telecom company. Read these and other sobering statistics in the Women’s Media Center’s “Status of Women in the U.S. Media 2012” report.

The Consumer Electronics Show is taking place right now in Vegas. I want to see a woman give a keynote address at the next conference, as Chairman Genachowski has in years past. I want to see a woman lead the fight in Washington for policies that connect more Americans to high-speed broadband. And I want to see someone who departs from Genachowski’s missteps – especially when it comes to diversity issues.

The new FCC chair will help shape the policies that define our media landscape and infrastructure for years to come. Sign the petition and tell President Obama to nominate a woman as the next FCC chair.

Tens of thousands of people have staged a mass rally in the French capital, Paris, to denounce government plan to legalize same-sex marriage and adoption of children by gay couples.

The new bill, which is to be put to debate in French parliament later this month, has angered Catholics and Muslims alike.

Three different marches have been organized around the city near the iconic Eiffel Tower.

French Justice Minister Christiane Taubira, however, said the government will stick to the project and protests could not affect the decision.

According to the police, around 340,000 people took part in the “Demo for All,” a reference to the government’s billing of its legislation as “marriage for all.”

Same-sex marriage was one of the presidential campaign promises of French President Francois Hollande, but his proposed legislation now has to go through the parliament to become a law.

The French opponents of the draft law believe the bill will lead to the disintegration of family institution.

The drive has also drawn criticism from conservative lawmakers as well as Muslim, Protestant, and Jewish communities in the predominantly Catholic nation.

Several other European states, including the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Norway, Spain, and Sweden have authorized same sex-marriage.

TE/PKH/SS

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s removal from power is not part of past international agreements and is “impossible” to implement.

“This is a precondition that is not contained in the Geneva Declaration (agreed by world powers in June 2012) and which is impossible to implement because it does not depend on anyone,” Lavrov said on Sunday.

The Russian foreign minister also referred to the plan proposed by Bashar al-Assad to resolve the country’s crisis on January 6, 2013, saying that the initiative forwarded by Assad “will probably not look serious to some,” but they “are offers.”

“If I were in the opposition’s place, I would present my counter-ideas about establishing dialogue,” Lavrov added.

In a key speech on Sunday, Assad said his government is always ready to hold talks with the opposition and political parties and will call for a “comprehensive national dialog” after foreign parties end their support for the militants and the terrorist activities end in the country.

On Saturday, Russia reiterated its support for political transition in Syria saying that Syrians themselves should decide about the future of their country without outside interference.

“In our opinion, the priority task is to immediately stop any violence and bloodshed as well as provide Syrians including internally displaced persons and refugees with humanitarian aid,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Saturday.

Syria has been the scene of unrest for nearly two years. Many people, including large numbers of army and security personnel, have been killed in the turmoil that began in March 2011.

TE/PKH/SS

Contact Information:

Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com

General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com

Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com

Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com

Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com

Suggested Reading:

Make sure to read our “How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]” Guide

It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here’s our Cookie Policy. 

Labour and the Liberal Democrats are turning up the heat on David Cameron as he struggles to stop his party tearing itself apart over Europe.

With just over a week until the Prime Minister’s crunch speech on Britain and the EU, Ed Miliband insisted it would be “wrong” to promise a referendum, and accused Mr Cameron of “sleepwalking us towards the exit door”.

Meanwhile, Lib Dem Cabinet minister Danny Alexander warned that the consequences of leaving the grouping were so drastic that no responsible politician would contemplate it.

The interventions came as Tory Europhiles launched a fightback against demands for an in-out referendum.

Cabinet minister Ken Clarke is to share a platform with Labour peer Lord Mandelson later this month to stress the benefits of remaining in the union. The pair are launching a new cross-party organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe (CBIE), to make the “patriotic” case for British engagement.

Around 20 Tory MP have also apparently signed a letter, due to be published this week, warning of “massive damage” if the UK leaves the EU. Rumours are swirling that Downing Street has given tacit approval to efforts to highlight the dangers of an exit.

In an unusual intervention last week, senior US diplomat Philip Gordon openly stated that America wanted Britain to remain in the EU. Prominent business figures including Sir Richard Branson and PR guru Roland Rudd have also spoken out about the potentially dire consequences of severing ties.

Sources told the Mail on Sunday that Mr Cameron believes it is “mad” to think that Britain can go it alone. And Tory backbencher Robert Buckland, who has organised the pro-membership letter, said he had been informed that Number 10 regarded his efforts as “helpful”.

“The danger for the Tories is that because the right-wing Eurosceptics are making the most noise, we could slide towards the exit door of the EU,” he told the Mail on Sunday. “The Prime Minister is a Eurorealist. He wants us to stay in the EU while having a debate about the terms of our membership, but it must not be used as a Trojan horse to get us to leave.”

Another Conservative ‘Big Beast’, Lord Heseltine, waded into the row on Saturday by warning that the economy would suffer if Mr Cameron took a “punt” next week and committed to a referendum on membership. However, the party’s Eurosceptics are determined to maintain pressure on Mr Cameron, buoyed by Chancellor George Osborne’s recent comments that the UK can only stay in the EU if it changes.

Britain is standing by for a blast of cold weather, with snow forecast in some areas.

Temperatures are expected to drop everywhere over the weekend, with wintry showers expected in Scotland and down the east coast.

Temperatures in 2013 have been mild so far – they were still as high as 9C in Cornwall on Thursday – but the mercury is expected to plummet over the next few days.

Alexi Boothman, a forecaster with MeteoGroup, the weather division of the Press Association, said: “Temperatures will fall over the weekend, and in many places, even during the daytime, we won’t see more than a degree or two above zero.

“From overnight tonight we can expect to see wintry showers arriving in parts of Scotland and north-east England, driven by cold easterly winds, and also down the east coast as far as East Anglia. There may also be some snow showers in Wales.”

The Highways Agency said it was “well prepared” for winter conditions.

A spokeswoman said: “We have a fleet of 500 state-of-the-art winter vehicles on stand-by, supported by tried and tested winter resilience plans.

“We have reviewed salt stock levels and taken action where needed to enhance our resilience and we have again established a reserve salt stock to help ensure that there is enough salt to deal with severe winter.

“Our roads will be treated whenever there is a risk of ice or snow. However, even when roads have been treated, drivers should still take care, especially on stretches where the local road layout or landscape means there could be a greater risk of ice forming.”

The Shia genocide in Pakistan is the product of a twisted ill-defined mentality systematically promoted by the US and its puppet Arab regimes, an academic says.

“The root causes of religious extremism in Pakistan are traceable to the time when the US government sought to oust Soviet forces from Afghanistan. In those days, the ISI [Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence] was heavily mobilized by the US and funded by the Saudi Wahhabis to achieve this goal,” Ismail Salami wrote for Press TV on Sunday.

“No wonder, the only countries that recognized the Taliban with the green light of Washington were Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates,” he said.

Salami took to task the ISI and other “government-funded organizations” for the incessant violence against Shias in Pakistan.

“There is a purported claim that the ISI is not in the least affiliated to the government and that it operates out of its own volition in eliminating the Shia population which forms at least one-fourth of the population,” the academic added.

In the latest anti-Shia violence, more than one hundred people were killed and two-hundred others were wounded in twin suicide attacks in an area dominated by Shia Muslims last Thursday. Outlawed terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Thousands of people have gathered at the site of the multiple bombings, refusing to bury the bodies of 96 of the victims. The protesters say they will not stop unless the army takes over Quetta to protect Shia civilians. They also want the Balochistan provincial government to be dismissed.

The latest violence comes as part of escalating attacks against Shia Muslims in different parts of Pakistan in recent months. Since the beginning of 2012, hundreds of Shias have been killed in the country.

“No matter what labels we use to describe the tragedy, the fact is that what is happening in Pakistan to the Shia minority is an ugly truth, an indelible human stain and an act of genocidal ideology the bitter memory of which will rankle in the minds for many years to come,” Salami concluded.

KA/HGH/SS

The British Queen Elizabeth II seems to have happy memories of the island’s empire era and its conquest.

Last year in September, a committee of the British House of Commons opened an inquiry, under which the word “Empire” would be replaced with “Excellence” in the five major ranks of the royal medals, including Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE), Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE), Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE), Knight Commander or Dame Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (KBE or DBE), and Knight Grand Cross or Dame Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (GBE).

The designers of the plan, including Republican Labour MP Paul Flynn, said that the word “Empire” is originally an outdated “relic” of the “jingoism of a country at war”.

Although the move was met by strong opposition from some of the Conservatives in the UK Parliament, its effect was so great that the Queen intervened herself and called for any changes in the titles of the honours to be dealt after her reign when her son Prince Charles ascends the throne.

Apparently, the word “Empire” was so dear to the Queen that she preferred to stop such a move even before it gets serious in the Parliament.

The Queen has a direct personal link to the Empire: her father, George VI, was the last Emperor of India, losing the title in 1947 when the country was granted independence.

This is while many citizens of the Commonwealth countries have a mixed look of resentment and aversion at such titles.

Among those who have received the Knight Commander of the British Empire names such as Donald Charles Cameron colonial administrator of Nigeria, William Manning colonial governor of Jamaica and William Peel colonial administrator of Hong Kong could be found.

Benjamin Zephaniah, a British Jamaican poet, publicly rejected an OBE in 2003 because it reminded him of “thousands of years of brutality”. Referring to the honour connection with the idea of the British Empire, he said, “IT reminds me of how my foremothers were raped and my forefathers brutalized.”

Appointments to the Order are made on recommendation of the Minister of Defence, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and the appropriate Minister of State for Commonwealth countries in respect of the military division, and the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in respect of the civil division.

This could be further evidence of the impact of Britain’s foreign policy and its old colonial structure in granting titles to servants of the Queen.

SSM/HE

Thousands of Turkish militants have reportedly crossed into the crisis-hit Syria and are now fighting against the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

According to a report by Turkish radio Kuresel Haber, militants from Turkey, including Turks and Kurds, are among the top non-Arab militants operating in Syria.

It also said that many of the terrorist snipers in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo are Turkish nationals, adding that militants from the al-Qaeda linked al-Nusra Front and other militant groups have turned a number of residential buildings in the city into their bases.

The report also added that militant groups in Aleppo have been divided into two, taking turns fighting against the Syrian army which has resulted in the continuation of clashes in the restive city around the clock.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of army and security personnel, have been killed in the turmoil.

A recent UN report revealed that militants from 29 countries have so far infiltrated into Syria to fight against the Damascus government, most of whom are extremist Salafists.

The Syrian government has repeatedly said that the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and that a very large number of the militants operating in the country are foreign nationals.

HM/PKH

An Iranian lawmaker says Tehran’s support for President Bashar al-Assad’s peace initiative is aimed at restoring the rights of Syrians.

Member of the Majlis Committee on National Security and Foreign Policy Seyyed Ahmad Reza Dastgheyb said Sunday that the three-point Assad peace plan is a litmus test for Syrian opposition groups as well as state sponsors of terrorism.

Dastgheyb said reforms can only be implemented in Syria if violence and unrest ends, rebel groups are disarmed, and an atmosphere of tranquility is restored.

“Since the outbreak of the Syrian crisis, Iran has voiced support for Syrians and called for an end to violence and election in the country. Iran supports Assad’s plan as it serves the interests of the Syrian nation,” he added.

In a key speech on January 6, Assad called for an end to terrorist operations inside Syria and urged “concerned states and parties” to stop funding, arming and harboring militants.

Assad said his government is always ready to hold talks with the opposition and political parties and that he would call for a “comprehensive national dialog” after foreign parties end their support for the militants and the terrorist activities cease in the country.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed in the turmoil.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

MP/HGH/SS

Just because there was not enough encroachment by the government into virtually every corner of private life, here is another “collaboration” that will further enmesh big brother into every aspect of private life, in this case private financial life, because as the WaPo reports, “major U.S. banks have turned to the National Security Agency for help protecting their computer systems after a barrage of assaults that have disrupted their Web sites, according to industry officials. The attacks on the sites, which started about a year ago but intensified in September, have grown increasingly sophisticated, officials said. The NSA, the world’s largest electronic spying agency, has been asked to provide technical assistance to help banks further assess their systems and to better understand the attackers’ tactics.”

And while we salute the great diversionary pretext that “Iranian hackers” pose a greater risk to the stability of the US financial system than, say, the ongoing monetization of US debt at a pace of $85 billion per month, which has made the Fed’s DV01 rise to a mindboggling $2.75 billion, or idiot pundits who claim all American problems can be resolved with one coin, we can’t help but wonder what happens when the most intrusive of US spy agencies, one which as reported last year is free “to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store” virtually every electronic communication in the entire world, now has full explicit access to all bank data, and, incidentally, every American’s financial snapshot at any given moment?

More on the official spin:

The cooperation between the NSA and banks, industry officials say, underscores the government’s fears about the unprecedented assault against the financial sector and is part of a broader effort by the government to work with U.S. firms on cybersecurity. Nonetheless, the assistance is likely to dismay privacy advocates, who say that the NSA has no business peering inside private companies’ systems, even if for the strict purpose of improving computer security.

U.S. intelligence officials said last year they believe the attacks against the banks and other companies have been carried out by Iran, although some experts have cautioned that it is difficult to accurately determine who is behind them.

The banks whose Web sites have been disrupted include Bank of America, PNC Bank, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, HSBC and SunTrust. In recent weeks, attackers have targeted up to seven banks a day, but only on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays.

So Monday and Friday are holy days for Iranian hackers we take it?

It appears that the private anti-hacker sector is completely powerless to withstand this massive onslaught of millions of Iranian hackers hell bent on seeing just how much money the average American has in their Bank of America online account page:

The banks whose Web sites have been disrupted include Bank of America, PNC Bank, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, HSBC and SunTrust. In recent weeks, attackers have targeted up to seven banks a day, but only on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays.

Enter the NSA, which has generously agreed to provide its expertise in learning all there is to know about everyone’s finances thwarting evil Iranian hacks.

The government’s willingness to engage “is emblematic of how these cyber-related risks are evolving,” the bank official said. “Agencies like the NSA have tremendous expertise for very sophisticated types of information-security programs.”

In general, it can provide assistance to private-sector companies when their systems are seen as critical to national security, said Richard George, a former computer security official at the NSA. The request must come from a government agency, such as the Treasury Department or the Department of Homeland Security, that has authority to work with the company.

But don’t worry – the NSA is with the government, and it is here to help:

“The dual mission of the NSA, to promote security and to pursue surveillance, creates an intractable privacy problem,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

Former NSA officials say privacy concerns are overblown and note that requests for NSA assistance are denied when there is no national security interest at stake. George said that, over the past decade, the agency has aided about 10 companies a year after their networks were compromised.

“If NSA is involved [with the banks], it’s because they would love to see what’s happening on the victim’s side,” a second former defense official said. “There’s probably more for the government to learn than to give.”

In conclusion:

The NSA declined to comment for this article beyond a statement saying that the agency provides assistance “in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.”

Enlighten us, please, which applicable laws and regulations are these? The same ones that give the government the right to detain citizens indefinitely. Or the one granting it the right to spy and monitor all Americans’ emails and calls without a warrant? Because we are confused.

Global Research Editor’s Note

In the light of recent events in Northern Mali, we bring the following April 2012 Global Research article to the attention of our readers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The recent Coup in Mali by a Army Officer Captain while all the Generals, Brigadiers, Colonels and Majors are nowhere to be seen or heard should not be seen in isolation or simplistically.

The Tuaregs living in Northern Mali, Northern Niger, Southern Algeria and southern Libya are a Nomadic Pastoral People with no ambitions for statehood, only recognition of their particular culture and freedom to travel without hindrance in the Saharan Region.

The conflict in Libya has had a devastating effect in Niger and Mali where the nomadic Tuareg peoples in the Sahara Desert regions of northern Niger and Mali and southern Libya have been involved in a spate of kidnappings and armed uprisings known as the ‘Tuareg rebellion’. This is especially dangerous for northern Niger in and around the town of Arlit, an industrial town located in the Agadez region, where uranium is mined by French companies in two large uranium mines (Arlit and Akouta).

Arlit was the subject of the Niger uranium forgeries when President George W. Bush, in the build-up to the (illegal) Iraq war, in his 2003 State of the Union address stated, ‘The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,’ when it was alleged that Saddam Hussein had attempted to purchase ‘yellowcake’ uranium powder from Niger during the Iraq disarmament crisis. These 16 words and the intelligence in this regard were later found to be baseless and rubbished by US intelligence agencies, albeit too late for innocent Iraqis who lost their lives over a lie during the war years.

Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who travelled to Niger to investigate the Iraq/yellowcake plot, concluded that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place, thus clearing Saddam Hussein of any re-starting of Iraq’s WMD (weapons of mass destruction) programme. Ambassador Wilson was punished for this by the outing of his wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA agent, allegedly by an official working in then vice-president Dick Cheney’s Oofice in the White House, which was also the plot of the movie ‘Fair Game’ released in 2010.

Put simply, this is about Uranium to be found in the Tuareg areas of Mali, Niger and Libya, the next step will be UN/ECOWAS/NATO Peace-keepers, Military intervention and killing of thousands of Tuaregs.

Moeen Raoof is a Humanitarian & Emergency Aid Consultant and Conflict Analyst. He undertook an investigation of the Bush Yellowcake/Iraq claim prior to the Iraq invasion by traveling to Niger at the same time as Ambassador Wilson’s Mission. ,

A series of military options are being considered by UK defense chiefs as tension mounts between Britain and Argentina over the Falkland Islands, a report by the Sunday Telegraph claims.

Extra troops, warships and Typhoon combat aircraft could be dispatched to the islands if needed, ahead of the March 11 referendum on the island’s future, the newspaper claims, citing sources in Britain’s military.

The Permanent Joint Headquarters in Northwood, north-west London is also reportedly considering a ‘show of force’, including conducting naval exercises in the South Atlantic. These could include the deployment of the Royal Navy’s Response Task Force Group, a flotilla of destroyers, a frigate, a submarine and Royal Marine commandos.

A more costly alternative would be to deploy the British Army’s 16 Air Assault Brigade, an airborne task force with more than 8,000 soldiers from five infantry battalions, including the 2nd and 3rd battalions of the parachute regiment.

The Paras, as they are known, have just completed training exercises in Spain, which covered rapid engagement with conventional armies, not an area of training that most army units have undergone in the past decade of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The report alleged that some members of Three Para have recently returned from the Falklands as part of a routine deployment and would be well-placed to brief troops deploying there at short notice.

Despite the increasingly hostile rhetoric between London and Buenos Aires, the British government does not believe that Argentina currently has the political will or the military capability to recapture the islands, the newspaper said.

But the prime minister has told his defense chiefs, according to the Sunday Telegraph, that the UK must be prepared for every eventuality.

Last week the PM announced on a BBC TV show that the UK is ready to defend the Falklands if necessary.

“Of course we would [defend the territory], and we have strong defenses in place on the Falkland Islands, that is absolutely key, that we have fast jets stationed there, we have troops stationed on the Falklands,” he said.

The March referendum is expected to receive a 100 per cent ‘yes’ vote to the question: ‘Do you wish the Falkland Islands to retain their current political status as an overseas Territory of the United Kingdom?’ All of the 3,000 islanders are British.

The Sunday Telegraph reported claims that intelligence chiefs have warned the prime minster that the Argentinians may carry out an aggressive ‘stunt’ at the same time as the islanders hold their referendum. For example, a small raiding party might plant the country’s flag on the islands or the Argentine navy might conduct a harassment campaign against the Falklands’ fishing fleet, or disrupt British oil and gas exploration.

If the Royal Navy was then ordered to intervene, such a situation could potentially escalate into an exchange of fire.

“Britain needs to be in a situation to respond very quickly to a whole series of threats — that is why we have contingency plans. Our posture has not changed, but neither are we complacent. That is quite normal, commanders like to be two steps ahead rather than two steps behind,” a senior defense source told The Telegraph.

Britain’s current defense of the islands is made up of 1,500 soldiers, four RAF Typhoon jets and anti-aircraft and artillery batteries.

A Royal Navy destroyer, currently HMS Edinburgh, is always on duty in the South Atlantic, alongside the patrol ship HMS Clyde and the ice patrol ship HMS Protector.

However, privately British defense chiefs have been warning that in the event of a full-scale Argentinian invasion of the islands, Britain would be powerless to recapture them.

General Sir Mike Jackson warned in January last year that the UK would not be able to retake the islands if they were captured by Argentine forces.

“”What if an Argentinian force was able to secure the Mount Pleasant airfield? Then our ability to recover the islands now would be just about impossible. We are not in a position to take air power by sea since the demise of the Harrier force,” he told the Telegraph.

A comparison between the capability and size of the UK’s armed forces in 1982, when they retook the islands in a two month military campaign, and of today reveals that Britain may not be able to project sufficient airpower to sustain military action so far from the UK.

In a separate development on Saturday two British P&O cruise ships have shelved plans to dock at three Argentinian ports because of growing tensions over the Falklands. The two liners Arcadia and Adonia are also visiting Port Stanley, the capital of the Islands, as part of their round the world cruises next week. Recently, Argentinian port authorities have refused ships that have visited the Falklands permission to dock.

Despite being defeated by the British task force when General Leopold Galtieri military junta tried to retake the Islands in 1982, the majority of Argentinians support their country’s claim over the islands.

Opinion polls suggest that about two-thirds of Argentinians support their president’s Cristina de Kirchner’s position on the Falklands.

The Falklands dispute has renewed in recent years — in 2007, Argentina reasserted its claim over the islands. Kirchner’s position has hardened since the discovery of potential oil reserves off the islands, as well as last year’s 30th anniversary of the Falklands War.

Frank Luntz wants everyone to believe the 2012 epic failure of the Republican Party and the current low opinion of Republicans in Congress is all about their language. If only they had used different language, he argues, they wouldn’t be regarded as lower than cockroaches by the American public.

Take, for example, the debt ceiling fight unfolding right now. In the world according to Luntz, the debt ceiling battle has been lost already by Republicans because they keep referring to it as a hostage (they don’t). Luntz writes:

But they need a new language to communicate their ideas effectively; it starts with abandoning ugly phrases such as “a hostage you might take a chance at shooting” to describe budget negotiations. And Republicans need to stop expressing a willingness to shut down the government if they don’t get their way on the debt ceiling. Americans don’t want a government shutdown – for any reason.

What language does he suggest? When it comes to the debt ceiling, he doesn’t suggest anything, which suggests he may be telling Republicans to quit playing that tired game and just pass the clean increase just as previous Congresses have done since there was a debt ceiling to raise.

On other issues, here are his suggestions.

• Instead of smaller government, they should talk about more efficient and effective government. The former is ideological language of the 1980s; the latter is practical language of today.
• Instead of tax reform, talk about making the IRS code simpler, flatter and fairer. Speak to what people really hate about the code: its complexity.
• In addition to cutting spending, they must talk about controlling – not capping – it. What angers Americans more than how much politicians spend today is how much more they know Washington will waste tomorrow. A “cap” can be lifted, but “controls” are constant.
• Instead of entitlement reform or controlling the growth of Medicare and Social Security, talk about how to save and strengthen these programs so they are there when voters need them. After all, they paid for them.
• Better than discussing economic opportunity and growth, Republicans should talk about creating a healthier and more secure economy. Everyone benefits when economic health is restored. And while economic opportunity would be nice, security is a necessity.

In other words, Frank Luntz is instructing Republicans to start agreeing with President Obama, who has used every single one of these phrases in recent speeches. When you read that list, surely you heard the president’s campaign speeches about protecting and strengthening Social Security and Medicare, or making the tax code simpler and fairer?

Like Peggy Noonan, Luntz is telling Republicans to start acting like Democrats and deal with the very real issues at hand. Like Democrats. I’m not sure Republicans actually get that yet.

If I had a chance to speak to Frank Luntz face to face about this article, I’d tell him it’s not merely language, and it’s cynical to say it is. Pretty language has to be backed up with some solid policy ideas. Paul Ryan says he wants to strengthen Medicare all the time and preserve it for future generations. Then Paul Ryan puts forward his proposal, which kills Medicare and hands its future off to private insurers, which gives them far more power than they deserve to have while taking it away from the sick, disabled and elderly.

It isn’t mere language that is a problem here. I can call that brown thing over there on the grass canine excrement but if anyone goes over and examines it, it’s still dog sh*t and if you step in it and get it on your shoes your shoes will stink and no one will let you come inside before you take your shoes off and leave them far away from the back door. Luntz can call Paul Ryan’s Medicare-killing proposal “strengthening Medicare”, but it still carries the stench of a dog turd attached to his shoe.

When Luntz says Americans are angry about spending, he forgets what spending they’re angry about. They’re not angry about spending on Americans; they’re angry about spending on bank bailouts and wars that no one wanted in the first place. They’re not angry about spending on the elderly; they’re angry about giving rich people such a huge and loophole-ridden tax code that they pay less than 15 percent while the rest of us pay whatever we owe, which on average is higher than their 14 percent.

If Republicans head out from their retreat with the intention of papering over what they do and have been doing with less incendiary language, they will still be the same monumental failures they’ve been for the last four years, because people are not that stupid. They know the smell of dog crap on someone’s shoes when they smell it.

Nevertheless, there is one suggestion Luntz makes that Republicans should heed.

Beyond fiscal policy, Republicans need to revamp their messaging on other issues. For example, the tragic school shooting in Newtown, Conn., offered Republicans a chance to discuss public safety – a more personal issue than “crime” – on a human level. That hasn’t happened, but it still can. Most people agree that there is a middle ground between gun-control hard-liners, who see every crime as an excuse to enact new laws, and the National Rifle Association, which sees every crime as an excuse to sell more guns. The Second Amendment deserves defending, but do Republicans truly believe that anyone should be able to buy any gun, anywhere, at any time? If yes, they’re on the side of less than 10 percent of America. If not, they need to say so.

Yes, they need to say so and they need to put some action items behind that say-so. No more kowtowing to the lunatic fringe who thinks a war should break out over reasonable gun safety laws. It is high time for Republicans to stop allowing the blood of their fellow Americans to wash over them every time some nut with an assault weapon decides to make some kind of a statement and step up.

On that score, they should listen, and so should any Democrat who still thinks the NRA has any hold over them.

When we Black women tell our stories, we center ourselves in the American experience. This legacy of voiced expression in the public realm dates back to the 1700s — 1800s. Nineteenth century slave woman Harriet Jacobs wrote about her 7 year self-imposed confinement in an attic overlooking her owner’s property. From the tiny crawl-space where her body is disabled by the immobility she experiences there, Jacobs literally and figuratively looks down on the master who would rape her if she emerged. She also remains in close proximity to her two children, whom her grandmother raises on the plantation. Though her body is confined, her mind is free. Jacobs offers not only her personal experience of sexual degradation, confinement, and the clever use of disguise to eventually escape slavery by sailing north to freedom, she also bears witness to the experiences of other slaves, male and female. She tells the tales of the others, like her, her sisters and brothers in bondage.

From her master’s point-of-view, Jacobs disappears from the plantation during those 7 years she hides away in an attic crawl-space. To him, she is invisible. But just because the dominant white male does not see her, that doesn’t mean she is not there. She is, there, in the middle of it all, cleverly compelling him to waste time and money tracking her in the north, outwitting him, eyeing him all the while.

Through the first half of Django Unchained, Broomhilda appears either in Django’s imagination as an umbra, a delightful spirit compelling his quest, or in flashback, as Django recounts the horrors of slavery as experienced by Broomhilda, whose beauty is assaulted by the medieval torture employed by filthy overseers.

When the audience finally sees the real Broomhilda in real narrative time, she is naked and locked in an underground torture chamber, her punishment for attempting escape. This symbolizes a kind of death for her. Django rescues her from near suffocation in the searing, tomb-like space just outside the big house where, we are made to understand, she is frequently the target of rape.

The images that come from Django’s imagination carefully construct a counter-narrative to the prevailing stereotypes of Black women as crass jezebels and big-bodied mammies. Broomhilda is bi-lingual, poised, classier than any of the free white women in the film. The images that come through Django’s flashbacks carefully construct the slave narrative of Black female degradation. As punishment for attempting to run away to a more authentic liberation, Broomhilda is branded like a horse, whipped like a dog, then dressed like a doll.

Broomhilda willingly acquiesces her position as favored house negro, a kind of pet for her former owner, to forge an authentic union with the man she loves — but we don’t really see her do this. The audience only hears Django say that she does this — then we see him leading her by the hand to run, begging for her not to be whipped.

What Broomhilda lacks, even when she appears in real time, is agency over her destiny – a destiny where she will be free. This lack of agency, this powerlessness, is an insult to real slave women like Jacobs, who crafted complicated strategies to liberate themselves.
It also dishonors the memory of real slave women like Harriet Tubman, who was skilled enough with firearms to become a scout and spy in the Union Army. This weak portrayal of one fictional slave woman’s life acts as a kind of erasure of the powerful testimony of actual slave women like Sojourner Truth, who “ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns… [who] could work as much and eat as much as a man – when [she] could get it – and bear the lash as well!… [who had] borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery” and yet remained, through it all, an autonomous woman.

This lost opportunity to authentically render the real-life heroism of Black women during slavery weakens the film. When Broomhilda first sees Django, she faints. When the shootout occurs, she can’t manage to grab a gun and fire even one shot all by herself. When Django comes back for her after the shootout, she doesn’t help plan the destruction of Candie Land. When the mansion where she was sexually assaulted on a regular basis is blown apart, she can only close her ears and smile approvingly at her man’s cunning power. When she and Django ride off together, the careful viewer might catch the silhouette of her holding a rifle in her hand, but of course, at that point, the movie is over. There’s no one left to shoot.

I would enjoy a film where the talented Kerry Washington is given the opportunity to express a breathtakingly powerful strength, just as she did so well in her feature debut, a beautiful, quiet little film called Our Song. I would have liked to see her in the center of this hyper-masculine, big-budget film, not in its margins. I would have liked to see her do more than just smile and fold her hands and pass out and splash in the hot springs of male fantasy and sit on a horse while this looming symbol of her people’s oppression is destroyed. I would have liked to see her kick ass, too.

I do wish Tarantino had given her the opportunity to be more than just Jamie Foxx’s onscreen helpmate – again. I would have liked to see Broomhilda unchained.

Forecasters have issued a new severe weather warning, with a high chance of disruptive ice and snow in England for much of next week.

The Met Office has raised its alert level to three – one step below a national emergency – and said icy conditions could last until Friday morning. 

Snow is expected in the North and East of the country, where downpours will build up on the ground as temperatures remain below zero.

Some snow is also expected in the South East and South West, along with central areas.

All of Britain is already feeling the effects of winter as temperatures continue to linger at zero or just above.

Commuters have been warned to expect difficult journeys on Monday, when several centimetres of snow is expected across large swathes of the UK.

Snow has already begun to fall in Scotland and will slowly spread south today and overnight delivering a light dusting, but a heavier dump is expected to land over north Wales, central England and northern England tomorrow.

On Saturday, temperatures in some areas were between 2C and 5C (36F-41F), but in Inverness and Aviemore in the Scottish Highlands they never got above -1C (28F).

Temperatures were low across the UK overnight into Sunday, with the lowest reading -6C (21.2F) at Shap in Cumbria at 3am.

The AA has warned that 75% of drivers are not prepared for conditions on the roads, and urged drivers to carry an essential winter kit and check their cars before getting behind the wheel.

The RAC is expecting up to 56,000 breakdowns and widespread disruption.

It has placed extra patrols on stand-by to help stranded motorists and said call-outs are expected to rise by 20% or more.

The Highways Agency said it is “well prepared” for winter conditions, adding that a fleet of 500 state-of-the-art winter vehicles were on standby.

A spokeswoman said: “Our roads will be treated whenever there is a risk of ice or snow. However, even when roads have been treated, drivers should still take care, especially on stretches where the local road layout or landscape means there could be a greater risk of ice forming.”

“Truthout Radio” host, Ted Asregadoo, speaks to Marisa Holmes, author of “Debt Versus Democracy: A Battle for the Future” from Truthout.org, about the ways in which international democratic movements are looking to address the crisis of debt among individuals in the U.S., Europe, and other parts of the world.

From Qbamco’s Paul Brodsky:

Macro Polo

The absence of meaningful negative market responses to debt ceiling dramas, Japanese inflation targeting, trillion dollar coins, and other odd and dubious politically-oriented market meddling seems to be sending reflexive signals back to capitals: all clear, continue self-destructing.

The markets seem not to care, knowing that central banks have their back. Money creation can suspend nominal economic contraction and ensure rising financial markets until something, (anything!), might stir the public’s imagination again and animal spirits. But while money can suspend animation, it is not and cannot replace real economic functioning. In fact, ongoing money creation is locking-in negative real economic growth and real returns in most financial assets. We think the best strategy for discretionary investors is to stay focused on the growing monetary mountain across the valley, and to not look down.

This piece seeks to place the current investment environment in economic, political and social perspective. The second Chukker may break new ground for many.

* * *

A European friend recently suggested to us that madness has taken over American politics. True that. But it seems more likely that American politics is merely reflecting far greater and deeper social introspection. Americans seem to be in the process of sorting themselves into groups with shared social values. Why might this be? Perhaps it is because our money no longer allows us to measure our personal industry? What is my personal economic value to society when a Nobel Laureate thinks the effect of proclaiming a trillion dollar coin would be “benign”?

On the surface, Left and Right fringes have always seemed bipolar opposites in terms of their social sensibilities and views on the optimal role of government. However, it is obvious that in the current environment the fringes are infiltrating established parties with which each has historically been associated and, it seems, finding a hollow core — the parties are long of self-serving ambition and tactical expertise and short of worthwhile principles. In this, the Left and Right fringes have a lot in common. They share deep disappointment in the efficacy of government and they are increasingly agitated by their representation in it.

The response of centrist elected leaders has been to revert to what they know: to secure funding from special interests with deep pockets in return for implicit favors, and then to use the funds to create a fictional narrative to appeal to the masses. As time goes on the masses are learning their representatives are providing only basal representation; enough only to keep them on the team for the next election cycle. The sad reality is that this is actually working for elected officials and their backers, but at a cost of increasing popular self-worth and identity.

Governments in representative democracies are not providing representation and their policies resemble nothing close to economic problem solving. Rather, they seem to be the result of consultants’ cost/benefit analyses of political capital expended vs. …what, self-serving ambition? It may be working now but the political establishment should be very worried.

The rest of us, regardless of our past politics, should be very excited. Like an old married couple that can no longer talk past each other once the money runs out, competing political parties are discovering they cannot escape each other as their societies’ real wealth is diminishing. It seems they are almost to the point where they might have to begin to give a shine about the people they ostensibly serve. (Look for the reincarnation of Andrew Jackson in 2016 or 2020?)

* * *

Discussions of fiscal cliffs and sovereign bailouts are political constructs that we think have less to do with secular macroeconomics than most observers believe. At the risk of seeming overly glib, such events have been inevitable flashpoints that had to emerge. They represent the decision surrounding debt default: should it be explicit (natural credit deterioration that demands sudden widespread austerity), or implicit (policy-administered inflation that demands the loss of perceived wealth)?

The former would demand politicians and policy makers step away and let organic market forces prevail. Debt would quickly be right-sized through massive defaults, nominal output levels would drop precipitously and there would be great social expense in the near term. The latter would maintain irreconcilable debt-to-real output levels at not-so-obvious near-term social expense in perpetuity until societies implode, their economic production uncompensated in real terms.

The political decision has been made several times over: do the latter, take a pass and let central banks de-lever private banks, transferring wealth to them from the public directly via transfer payments and indirectly, via inflation.

* * *

To G7 leadership: it is time to shift the terms of the Monetary Empire before it destroys our cultures, both externally and from within.

There are no good data points in the modern era where all global economic participants simultaneously lost faith in a completely unreserved global monetary regime. It would not be in your best interests to test these logical limits and then have to start the system from scratch. But the economic sky does not have to fall and property does not have to be transferred if (when) the current monetary system converts to a more sustainable one. We would all wake up the next morning in our beds and go to work. All that would change is the numbers we place on our commerce and property would be far larger, and the amount we owe far smaller in comparison.

We urge readers, policy makers, political donors and, most importantly, global investors able to influence all of the above through capital allocation, to force central banks to devalue our currencies and peg them to sovereign gold, before it is too late. The money spent to date has yet to be created. Close the gap and let us all get back to work.

Full letter (pdf link)

January 11 – $1660 down $17.30 – Silver $30.37 down 51 cents

An Ape Man Could See It

“Recent smashdowns in the gold futures markets have triggered enormous buying of real metal, causing Swiss refineries to fall far behind in deliveries.” … Swiss gold fund manager Egon von Greyerz

GO GATA!

The question many of us had going into today was whether the no follow-through allowed rule would be implemented yet again by The Gold Cartel for the zillionth time in a row. The odds of them preventing the price of gold trading like any other free market were off the charts in their favor and they didn’t fail to deliver.

It began in the most noticeable of fashions in the Access Market yesterday and then continued when The Gold Cartel traders reported for work in London … giving us PLAN A of course.

Then, a lousy US trade number…

Jan. 11, 2013, 8:30 a.m. EST
U.S. trade deficit widens 15.8% to $48.7 billion

… fueled a further sharp rise in the euro. So gold, which had dipped to $1667 (giving up half its gains of yesterday) rocketed back to the unchanged area when the goon squad reappeared and the price was sent right back down. Not only sent back down, but smashed with another waterfall raid…

At one point gold was pushed back to $1655, which means all of its gains of yesterday were lost in an hour of Comex trading following yesterday’s close. The ludicrous reason offered by The Muppets for the fall will probably be this one…
 
DJ Fed’s Plosser: Wants Fed To Tighten Before Most On FOMC

Fri Jan 11 09:30:04 2013 EDT

SOMERSET, N.J.–The leader of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
worried Friday that the central bank won’t raise rates soon enough to prevent a
future inflation problem.

While he doesn’t expect inflation to rise above the Fed’s 2% goal,
Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser said, “this expectation is based on
my assessment that the appropriate monetary policy is likely to tighten more
quickly than the Committee anticipated in its latest statement.”

Because of the divergence between outlooks, Mr. Plosser said he sees “some
risks to inflation in the medium to longer run, given the current stance and
anticipated path of monetary policy.”

Mr. Plosser’s comments came from the text of a speech prepared for delivery
before a gathering held by the New Jersey Bankers Association, in Somerset,
N.J. The official isn’t currently a voting member of the monetary policy
setting Federal Open Market Committee…

-END-

You have to be kidding me! How many times is The Gold Cartel going to go to their well to raid gold on hypothetical Fed talk? This guy is not even a voting member.

As mentioned on the last hypothetical Fedspeak raid, only gold and silver were affected today. If there was meat to what they are feeding into the market, in coordination with this The Gold Cartel intervention, ALL the markets would be affected, not just gold and silver. But, the euro didn’t budge off its early highs and the DOW barely blinked. Can’t gold beat reporters count to ten?

The gold market has been trading in such a predictable, Gold Cartel influenced way for so long now (EVERY DAY they can be spotted), an ape man could see it. But, since the mainstream gold world pundits do not have the intelligence of an ape man, they never report on what is really going on.

This Kitco guy couldn’t even count before the big hit…

Gold Lower on Chart Consolidation, Bearish Outside Markets – Kitco News, Jan 11 2013 8:21AM

..the key outside markets are also in a bearish posture for the precious metals Friday morning, as the U.S. dollar index is firmer..

-END-

But, not true … look at what his own website showed the dollar trading:

USD 79.45 -0.31

Dave from Denver’s take on the Plosser speech…

This is ridiculous

Plosser says in a speech that inflation is a risk if the Fed doesn’t tighten sooner than is reflected in the latest FOMC minutes? He’s projecting 3% GDP growth for 2013.

Is this guy living in a cave on Mars? I guess he doesn’t follow business and economic news, because the trade deficit for November released today was significantly higher than expected. In fact, the trade deficit was 20% higher than was forecast by Wall Street’s brain trust. I can’t recall EVER seeing a miss this big to the downside for import/export numbers. The reason cited was Iphones, but that’s absurd because 1) Iphone 5 sales have disappointed so far and 2) Import forecasts would have incorporated assumptions about the affect of Iphone 5 sales. Conceptually what this means is that the rest of the world is buying less U.S. exported goods and the U.S. isn’t manufacturing the goods being demanded by U.S. consumers. What this means is that manufacturing, one of the primary drivers of GDP outside of consumption, is still declining. It means that anyone who asserts that GDP for 3% is either living in a cave on Mars or is lying, for whatever motive.

What does this mean, it means that GDP esitmates for Q4 will likely be revised to below 1%. Moreover, it is generally acknowledged now that holiday sales for 2012 were disappointing. The consumer is largely tapped out, the number of people dependent on the Govt for living expenses (food stamps, general welfare, social security, social security disability and student loans) rises every month.

Please tell me, Mr. Plosser, where exactly is this GDP growth of 3% going to come from given that the trend in GDP going into 2013 is declining, 1% or less and the main driver of GDP over the last 12 years – consumption – is quickly eroding.

Jim Sinclair calls this nonsense “MOPE.” Management Of Perception Economics.” Everyone else calls this “Orwellian.” This smack on silver is a table-pounding buy.

***

It seemed to me before yesterday’s rally that the waterfall bombings ought to be over for now because the physical markets were just too firm at the bombed out levels. Maybe down there, but not so at higher levels as today was clearly another financial market terrorist attack, attacks which continue to unnerve those on the long side because they occur for no reason and cause huge losses in the futures markets in seconds.

Gold’s eventual low was $1652.70, while silver was trashed to $30.07 before recovering to some degree. Nothing has been done to change the technicals in terms of the bottom formations in each precious metal. But those breakouts mentioned yesterday were shattered.

James Mc lays it all out…

Cartel checklist- 10 for 10

Bill,
1% cap job – check.
Weak trade into the access trade close signaling the next day – check.
No follow through allowed – check.
Gold plummets on bullish news, weak USD – check.
Flash crash for no discernable reason – check.
Down, hard following 1% rally – check.
Lower PM fix than AM fix – check.
Technical points rendered irrelevant – check.
Fresh spec longs mowed down – check.
CFTC as co-conspirators – check.

Just a hop, skip, and a jump now from Feb. op. ex. and FND. Ya think one in a million describes the odds of $1,700 gold by then? It’s obvious that the intensity of the rigging is commensurate to the intensity of investors wanting gold. As such, and based on days like today, gold bullishness must be off the charts. Of course like all other charts the cartel renders them meaningless.
James Mc

Everyone in the mainstream gold world should read what James Mc put out today and keeps bringing to our attention. The ape man doesn’t have to read it. It is too easy to spot for him.

Pimco’s Mohammed El-Erian knows exactly what James is talking about and even uses the “M” word regarding markets, but doesn’t go into any specifics…

Ft.com
Beware the ‘central bank put’
By Mohamed El-Erian

Mohamed El-Erian on the split between prices and fundamentals

The investment recommendations made by many financial commentators are now dominated by cross-asset class relative valuation rather than the fundamentals of the investment itself. A typical refrain runs something like this: buy X because it is cheaper than other things out there. This is an understandable approach as unusual central bank activism has artificially elevated certain asset prices. Yet the dominance of this increasingly popular advice comes with potential risks that need to be well understood and well managed.
High quality global journalism requires investment.

Several asset classes now have highly manipulated prices due to experimental central bank activities, both actual and signalled. The more this happens, the more investors come under pressure to migrate to higher risk investments in search of returns. Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve chairman, said as much at his latest press conference, noting that the aim of policy is to “push” investors to take more risk. True to his wish, many pundits seem eager to discard fundamentals in favour of searching for (and levering) anything that “yields” more…

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/bb66425c-54cf-11e2-89e0-00144feab49a.html…

-END-

The gold open interest rose 2564 contracts to 141,122, not that much for such an extensive move in the price. The silver open interest is back above Rocket Rich’s pivotal 140,000 mark, rising 2281 contracts to 141,122. On December 28, with the price of silver at $29.92, the MIDAS headline was:

SHOOT OUT AT OK CORRAL IS COMING

They are still shooting at The OK Corral, with JPM firing on rallies towards $31 and the physical buyers firing back when silver plunges towards $30, or takes that level out.

Behavioral Finance

*The yield on the 10 yr T note is 1.9%.

*Behavioral Finance is the same as Jim Sinclair’s MOPE. An ape man could see what is going on here too. Even the very visible, very establishment Mohamed El-Erian is willing to go there.

While we all are aggravated about what is going on here, there is a silver lining in it all. TW has it right…

Today’s action

Dear Bill,
Please ignore my musings but the frequency of these waterfall attacks suggests that matters may be reaching a critical stage. If the gold price collapses then the cartel have won themselves some more time but the other possibility is that the bad guys are nearly all in and there’s not much more they can do. Also, behind all the shenanigans of the paper market is the real physical market (I always think of a large but slow flowing river) and these takedowns must be accelerating the physical off take and hence the end game. Testing times but I think something may be building.
Best regards
TW

For months a number of us have cited the increased market manipulation intensity by The Gold Cartel and noted it wreaked of desperation. It went into high gear after October 4, 2012 with the price of gold threatening to take out the key $1800 level and silver managing a small close above its pivotal $35 level. The scene…

October 4 – Gold $1794.1 up $16.80 – Silver – $35.04 up 41 cents
That day the euro closed at 1.3017.

Who knows what else is going on behind the scenes, but what we do know is the US is looking more pathetic by the week and month in our inability to solve our fiscal deficit/growing debt problems. They are both out of control and nothing is being done about them. Meanwhile QE3 and DE4 are in full bloom. And based on the information sent our way, the demand for physical gold is stout, to put it mildly.

Yet, since October 4th the price of gold has fallen to $1660 with the price of silver dropping to $30.37. 

But, the euro has RISEN to 1.3341. What gives? What about the pundits who kept saying the most important aspect affecting gold is a weaker dollar? Where are they now?

Daily euro
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/E6/

Daily gold
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/DG/

It is ignominious for the US to have the euro soaring like this against the dollar with all the problems they still have over there. There is a reason for it. As long mentioned here, there are NO SOLUTIONS for the US to our growing fiscal/debt issues which are acceptable to the American people and politicians. Kicking the can on tough fiscal issues, and manipulating our financial markets, is catching up to those doing so. Chaos is likely to breakout over these issues in the near future, and they know it. So, a bit of panic has set in. All they know to do is SHOOT THE MESSENGER; defuse the widely watched barometer of US financial market health, that being the gold price. It won’t be long before this nonsense catches up with them too.

Brian Meyers lays it out is coming in this NO SOLUTIONS time in the US…

The only choices available to ‘put things right’ are:

1) dramatically higher taxes
2) dramatically lower spending
3) dramatic cuts in entitlements
4) dramatically higher inflation

… or some combination, more likely. But only one of those ‘options’ is politically feasible: the one the public doesn’t really understand and won’t know who to blame (tho the gov will make plenty of table-pounding suggestions, to include China, the ME, etc… it’s their fault, right?), inflation. Of course, against this is the massive deflationary pressures overhanging economy, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the business cycle. It has *everything* to do with 60 years of economic mismanagement.

In the end, the Fed will do *whatever is necessary* to inflate. Weimer-style hyperinflation is a definite possibility. Perhaps low-delta, but any delta on hyperinflation means a lot of someones have screwed up something huge.

***

A picture is worth a thousand words, as they say…

America on a Roll

Mexico Mike…

Ground Hog Day again

Hi Bill!
Today is yet another example of the Cartel standard operating procedure. There is no upside follow through allowed in the PM sector under any circumstances. Never mind that the dollar is dropping like a dying quail, or any other positive fundamentals. This is about management of investor sentiment and nothing more. And I would challenge any of the bozos that suggest there is no manipulation to
present a counter argument on why the reversals occur with such regularity to wipe out any significant gains in a prior session. For the small investors in this sector, every trading day is like another trip to the dentist.

The commentary that gold declined due to higher inflation in China is a joke. The Chinese have been among the most aggressive gold buyers on the planet in part due to their desire to have a bullion hedge to protect against inflation. The idea that any real selling would come from this news is a misrepresentation of the facts. But more
importantly, consider how that selling occurred. The usual high volume waterfall event, probably entirely manufactured from one seller dumping a large short order to destabilize the market. This has nothing to do with the Chinese, except perhaps to help them quietly buy more bullion in the aftermath at a discount.

Again I say, there is a shelf life to all of this nonsense. Perhaps investors in the West are clueless of what is going on. But the real bullion demand is coming from Asia and the Mideast and none of this market rigging is going to discourage these buyers. In fact it will probably encourage even more aggressive accumulation.

I cannot wait to see how the media presents the story when the eventual default event happens. Will it be the usual ‘rogue trader’ that is blamed for the failure to deliver? Or some accounting error to explain why millions of ounces of allocated bullion disappears from somewhere? Or, my favorite is that when a big bullion ETF blows up, they will point to the fine print and say it was always there in the contract that the unit holders could be settled out in cash only and not have a claim, when it is revealed that the bullion supposedly held by the fund is in actual fact just a book keeping entry.

There is not enough bullion coming out of the ground or available in this market to meet all of the outstanding claims and this situation becomes more acute with every waterfall selling event. Sooner or later one of the leveraged bullion scams is going to blow up like a hand grenade. It will be amusing to me when the analysts are running
around with their collective hair on fire in the aftermath. Just like the furor over the MFG collapse, everyone will be shocked it can happen and trying to find out how. Well folks, it is going on before your very eyes right now, for those who bother to look. Sure as the day follows the night, sooner or later one of the crooks is going to go too far and then there will no longer be the cover of tinfoil hat speculation to discount what we have been saying all along.

Have a great weekend Bill!
MexicoMike

MM is right on too, as is James Mc about these hideous waterfall attacks and constant price suppression being long in the tooth. We are gearing up for something spectacular on the precious metals upside, and it should not be too far off.

Perhaps this is why the gold/silver shares paid scant attention to today’s financial market terrorist attack. The XAU only fell .25 to 163.36. The HUI lost .32 to 322.05.

Dave from Denver is right on too. We have a mania coming. Hang in there!

GATA BE IN IT TO WIN IT!

Bill Murphy
www.LeMetropoleCafe.com

F2C2012: Aaron Swartz keynote – “How we stopped SOPA”, May 21, 2012

I know as I stare at the blank page in front of me that I cannot do justice to this post, that my feelings of sadness and anger will prevent me from the eloquence I wish I could have. So I apologize to you, the reader and I apologize to Aaron Swartz for failing to find the words that his memory is owed.

I knew of Aaron, having been on common lists and sharing common acquaintances and frequently, common political aspirations. But I can’t say that we had much in the way of interactions. Still, what I knew of him, genius is not too strong a word. How else could you describe the person who developed RSS at the age of 14? Or sold Reddit to Conde Nast (effectively making him independently wealthy) at the age of 20? He could have sat back on his laurels then, but Aaron had a mission: to make information free and available to all on the internet. Remember, information is the ultimate democratizer and Aaron believed that the internet was a great democratizing tool.

But genius does not necessarily make you smart. Aaron took risks that were not wise and that others warned him against. And those risks ultimately cost Aaron Swartz his life.

Yes, Aaron took his own life. Yes, Aaron suffered from depression, which he wrote about as well as anyone else I’ve seen and instantly identifiable to anyone who has suffered from it as well.

But Aaron was also facing a terribly bleak future in prison for decades, although his actions hurt no one and put no one in danger. But he had the bad luck of his case coming across the desk of Carmen Ortiz, US Attorney in Massachusetts. Lawrence Lessig, one of Aaron’s mentors:

But all this shows is that if the government proved its case, some punishment was appropriate. So what was that appropriate punishment? Was Aaron a terrorist? Or a cracker trying to profit from stolen goods? Or was this something completely different?

Early on, and to its great credit, JSTOR figured “appropriate” out: They declined to pursue their own action against Aaron, and they asked the government to drop its. MIT, to its great shame, was not as clear, and so the prosecutor had the excuse (s)he needed to continue his war against the “criminal” who we who loved him knew as Aaron.

Here is where we need a better sense of justice, and shame. For the outrageousness in this story is not just Aaron. It is also the absurdity of the prosecutor’s behavior. From the beginning, the government worked as hard as it could to characterize what Aaron did in the most extreme and absurd way. The “property” Aaron had “stolen,” we were told, was worth “millions of dollars” – with the hint, and then the suggestion, that his aim must have been to profit from his crime. But anyone who says that there is money to be made in a stash of ACADEMIC ARTICLES is either an idiot or a liar. It was clear what this was not, yet our government continued to push as if it had caught the 9/11 terrorists red-handed.

The ironic part of Aaron’s prosecution is that the information he downloaded from the JSTOR files became publicly available for free just months after his arrest. Who did he damage? How was anyone hurt? This, by the way, is not the first time that Ortiz has sought penalties that seemed disproportionate to the crime, ostensibly to build a platform for her own political ambitions (she is expected to run for Governor of Massachusetts).

But contrast the bleak future of decades in prison for downloading public files from behind a paywall to the economic terrorism of Wall Street executives. Or the threatened sedition of a James Yeager. Or the ongoing actions of the NRA, enabling 87 gun deaths a day. These people have caused real and measurable damage to Americans and yet they walk freely on the streets. Greenwald:

Lessig wrote today:

[..]”For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House – and where even those brought to ‘justice’ never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled ‘felons’.”

Whatever else is true, Swartz was destroyed by a “justice” system that fully protects the most egregious criminals as long as they are members of or useful to the nation’s most powerful factions, but punishes with incomparable mercilessness and harshness those who lack power and, most of all, those who challenge power.

There is so much for which to grieve: the senseless suicide of a young man; the ongoing painful void within his family and friends; the tools that Aaron may have yet conceived, likely in the spirit of opening access for the masses. But we must also grieve for a failed justice system that made suicide the best option for Aaron Swartz.

Rick Perlstein gives a moving eulogy here.

Sign a petition asking the White House to remove Carmen Ortiz from the Swartz case.

Or donate to Demand Progress, Aaron’s foundation, dedicated to progressive policy change

AFP Photo / Kevork Djansezian

New York State has become the latest region to declare a health emergency due to a flu epidemic, with the number of confirmed cases already four times higher than last year.

“We are experiencing the worst flu season since at least 2009, and influenza activity in New York State is widespread, with cases reported in all 57 counties and all five boroughs of New York City,” said governor Andrew Cuomo.

More than 19,000 cases of flu have been confirmed in laboratory analysis, up from 4,404 last year. But these numbers are thought to represent just a tiny fraction of those affected, as only the most severe cases usually get clinically tested.

At least two children and ten adults have died from influenza this season in New York City alone.

To combat the spread of disease, Cuomo has authorized pharmacists to vaccinate children as young as six months for the next 4 weeks. Usually, drug store staff can only give shots to adults.

“It’s a bad year,” the city’s health commissioner, Dr. Thomas A. Farley, said in a statement to the media.

“We’ve got lots of flu, it’s mainly type AH3N2, which tends to be a little more severe. Our message for any people who are listening to this is it’s still not too late to get your flu shot.”

The vaccine used this year prevents flu in only 62 percent of cases, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and is likely to be less effective in those already weakened by other conditions.

Widespread flu has been reported in 47 US states.

Boston declared a state of emergency on Wednesday, following 18 flu-related deaths in Massachusetts.

Nonetheless, health experts hope that the worst may be over, after statistics fort he last two weeks showed the number of positive flu tests going down for the first time since the start of the season.

Economists estimate that the direct cost of the flu, including vaccination, hospitalizations and medicine, exceeds $10 billion dollars in an average year, but when other factors like missed work days are taken into account, the economic impact could top $80 billion.

A teenager who gained nationwide fame after writing a “bucket list” of things to do before she died has lost her battle with cancer at the age of 17.

Alice Pyne, from Ulverston in Cumbria, managed to complete most of her list, including meeting Take That and going whale watching.

She was feted by celebrities and politicians as the nation rallied to help her fulfil her dreams.

The list – part of her blog – attracted the attention of footballer Rio Ferdinand, Hollywood actor Channing Tatum and TV host Philip Schofield.

Alice’s idea was inspired by the film The Bucket List, which follows Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman as they embark on a road trip to do things they want to before they “kick the bucket”.

The teenager, who lived with her parents, Simon and Vicky, and younger sister, Milly, achieved many of her wishes, she told in her blog.

She died on Saturday after battling illness for the past six years.

In a posting on Alice’s blog, her mother Vicky gave the sad news.

“Our darling girl, Alice, gained her angel wings today. She passed away peacefully with Simon, Milly and myself by her side,” she wrote.

“We are devastated and know that our lives will never again be the same.”

President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign stop in Durham, N.H., June 25, 2012. (Photo: Damon Winter / The New York Times) Washington – President Obama plans to push Congress to move quickly in the coming months on an ambitious overhaul of the immigration system that would include a path to citizenship for most of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, senior administration officials and lawmakers said last week.

Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats will propose the changes in one comprehensive bill, the officials said, resisting efforts by some Republicans to break the overhaul into smaller pieces – separately addressing young illegal immigrants, migrant farmworkers or highly skilled foreigners – which might be easier for reluctant members of their party to accept.

The president and Democrats will also oppose measures that do not allow immigrants who gain legal status to become American citizens one day, the officials said.

Even while Mr. Obama has been focused on fiscal negotiations and gun control, overhauling immigration remains a priority for him this year, White House officials said. Top officials there have been quietly working on a broad proposal. Mr. Obama and lawmakers from both parties believe that the early months of his second term offer the best prospects for passing substantial legislation on the issue.

Mr. Obama is expected to lay out his plan in the coming weeks, perhaps in his State of the Union address early next month, administration officials said. The White House will argue that its solution for illegal immigrants is not an amnesty, as many critics insist, because it would include fines, the payment of back taxes and other hurdles for illegal immigrants who would obtain legal status, the officials said.

The president’s plan would also impose nationwide verification of legal status for all newly hired workers; add visas to relieve backlogs and allow highly skilled immigrants to stay; and create some form of guest-worker program to bring in low-wage immigrants in the future.

A bipartisan group of senators has also been meeting to write a comprehensive bill, with the goal of introducing legislation as early as March and holding a vote in the Senate before August. As a sign of the keen interest in starting action on immigration, White House officials and Democratic leaders in the Senate have been negotiating over which of them will first introduce a bill, Senate aides said.

“This is so important now to both parties that neither the fiscal cliff nor guns will get in the way,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, a Democrat who is a leader of the bipartisan discussions.

A similar attempt at bipartisan legislation early in Mr. Obama’s first term collapsed amid political divisions fueled by surging public wrath over illegal immigration in many states. But both supporters and opponents say conditions are significantly different now.

Memories of the results of the November election are still fresh here. Latinos, the nation’s fastest-growing electorate, turned out in record numbers and cast 71 percent of their ballots for Mr. Obama. Many Latinos said they were put off by Republicans’ harsh language and policies against illegal immigrants.

After the election, a host of Republicans, starting with Speaker John A. Boehner, said it was time for the party to find a more positive, practical approach to immigration. Many party leaders say electoral demographics are compelling them to move beyond policies based only on tough enforcement.

Supporters of comprehensive changes say that the elections were nothing less than a mandate in their favor, and that they are still optimistic that Mr. Obama is prepared to lead the fight.

“Republicans must demonstrate a reasoned approach to start to rebuild their relationship with Latino voters,” said Clarissa Martinez de Castro, the director of immigration policy at the National Council of La Raza, a Latino organization. “Democrats must demonstrate they can deliver on a promise.”

Since the election, Mr. Obama has repeatedly pledged to act on immigration this year. In his weekly radio address on Saturday, he again referred to the urgency of fixing the immigration system, saying it was one of the “difficult missions” the country must take on.

Parallel to the White House effort, Mr. Schumer and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican, have been meeting with a group of at least four other colleagues to write a bill. Republicans who have participated include John McCain of Arizona, who has supported comprehensive legislation in the past; Jeff Flake, also of Arizona, who is newly elected to the Senate; and Mike Lee of Utah. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida participated in one meeting last month.

Democrats in the meetings include Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat; Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado.

Basic tenets for the bill, Mr. Schumer said, were that it would be comprehensive and would offer eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants who follow a prolonged process to correct their status.

“This is a bottom line,” Mr. Schumer said in an interview on Thursday. “The Democrats have made it clear we will not accept a bill without a direct path to earned citizenship.” He said senators from both parties had been “pleasantly surprised” at how rapidly the talks had proceeded.

Mr. Rubio, a Cuban-American who has emerged as a star in his party, is making immigration one of his primary issues. He has advocated taking changes in pieces, arguing that lawmakers will get better results if the politically and practically tangled problems of the immigration system are handled separately.

Mr. Rubio has been preparing a bill that would provide legal status specifically for young illegal immigrants, known as Dreamers, who came to the United States as children.

Mr. Rubio said Thursday that the piecemeal approach was “not a line in the sand” for him. But he said he would insist that any legalization measure should not be unfair to immigrants who played by the rules and applied to become residents through legal channels.

His proposals would allow illegal immigrants to gain temporary status so that they could remain in the country and work. Then they would be sent to the back of the line in the existing system to apply to become permanent residents, without any special path to citizenship.

Mr. Rubio said he hoped to rally Republicans to support changes. Speaking of Latinos, he said, “We are going to have a struggle speaking to a whole segment of the population about our principles of limited government and free enterprise if they think we don’t want them here.”

In the Republican-controlled House, the future of a comprehensive bill remains unclear.

Representative Phil Gingrey, a Georgia Republican who follows immigration issues, said he remained opposed to “amnesty of any kind.”

He said that the Obama administration had been lax on enforcement, and that he would “continue working to secure our borders and enforce existing immigration law.”

But groups backing the overhaul say they are bigger and better organized than in the past. Last month, the labor movement, including the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and other sometimes-warring factions, affirmed a common strategy. Last week, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it would work with labor, Latino and church organizations to pass the overhaul this year.

Six men have been arrested over another gang rape of a woman who was travelling on a bus in northern India.

The victim had boarded the service to visit her in-laws when she was abducted and driven on a motorbike to a house in Gurdaspur district, bordering the city of Amritsar, in Punjab province, on Friday evening.

Five men, including the driver and conductor, took it in turns to rape the woman before dropping her off near the village where her in-laws lived the following morning.

The alleged attack comes just weeks after the gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old medical student on a bus in Delhi which has sparked nationwide protests about violence against women.

“Six men have been arrested on allegations of having raped a 29-year-old woman … after forcibly taking her to an unknown location on the night of January 11,” local police officer Raj Jeet Singh said, adding that a seventh suspect was being hunted.

“The lady, after being kidnapped, was raped brutally throughout the night by the seventh accused,” he continued.

“After raping the victim throughout the night, one of the accused dropped her near her in-laws’ house the next morning where she narrated the whole incident to her sister-in-laws.”

The extent of the victim’s injuries are yet to be established, the police officer added.

On Monday, the five men accused of the December 16 Delhi attack appeared in court for the first time.

The victim, and her male companion who was beaten up by the assailants, were thrown off the moving bus.

The woman died in a Singapore hospital 13 days later.

The accused, who could face the death penalty if convicted, are charged with kidnap, robbery and conspiracy over the attack.

A sixth suspect, says he is 17. If that is confirmed, he is likely to be tried in a separate court for juveniles where the maximum sentence is three years in a reform facility.

Protesters across India have called for the police to be more vigilant and sensitive to the growing incidence of sexual assault against women, after details emerged of the Delhi attack.

Sky’s India correspondent Alex Rossi said the latest attack was “strikingly similar” to the Delhi gang rape.

“The bus driver and the conductor it is alleged kidnapped her then took her to a location when they and five accomplices gang-raped her,” he said.

“Eventually, after her ordeal, they dropped her off. She went to a police station, made a complaint. Six people have so far been arrested, The other person is still on the run, according to the police, and they are now investigating.

“The woman has been sent for a medical examination, and they have started the wheels of justice, if you like, in this case.

“The alleged culprits will appear in court on either Monday or Tuesday.

“It is strikingly similar to the case in Delhi. Another alleged sexual attack on another woman in India.”

He added: “What will be interesting in this case is to see whether or not it provokes any kind of public reaction in terms of demonstrations or protests.”

AFP Photo / Hugo Philpott

The British public views immigration as the biggest issue facing society, but UK citizens are basically tolerant to immigration, as long as new arrivals are in work and integrate into society, it was revealed in a poll reported in The Observer.

The poll found that one in three people believes tension between immigrants and UK citizens is a major cause of division, while over half those questioned believe it is one of the top three causes, a major new survey entitled ‘State of the Nation: Where is Bittersweet Britain Heading?’ found out, the British Sunday paper wrote.

Over the past two decades immigration has increased to historically high levels, with 100,000 more people entering than leaving the country every year since 1998.

Sunder Katwala, the director of British Future, the think tank which carried out the survey, said it showed that there was a national anxiety about immigration which politicians needed to address.

However, he pointed out that the results suggested that there was very little relation between the geographical distribution of immigrants and the levels of people’s concern. For example, immigration was regarded as a divisive issue by 19 per cent of people in the north-east of England and 20 per cent of people in Wales. In both areas a 2011 census showed that one in 20 people were born abroad. But in London, where one in three people are immigrants, the number of people who regarded immigration as divisive, still stood at 20 per cent.

“People are obviously very anxious about immigration. But I was struck by how much it was driven by a national rather than a local tension. And I don’t think anyone has any confidence in how it is managed as a system. Also there is concern around national cohesion, identity and ability to cope with the scale of change,” said Katwala.

Other issues considered the three essential traits of a Briton were respect for the law, freedom of speech of others, and an ability to speak English. These came out as the top criteria among all ages and social classes in the survey, which polled 2,515 people aged between 16 and 75. Treating women and men equally and respect for people of all ethnic backgrounds and faiths came fourth, fifth and sixth on the list respectively.

The release of the poll’s results coincides with an upcoming speech by Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, in which he hopes to aid efforts of integration into society. He is expected to stress that knowledge of English is vital to social mobility and for the economy as a whole.

The survey also found that three in four people think that the UK is in a housing crisis, an issue that has been on the political agenda of all parties for a number of years. Current Housing Minister Nick Boles is proposing that green field sites, currently protected by planning law, should be built upon in order to provide much needed new housing stock. All age groups surveyed said that owning your own property is better than renting.

When asked what made people proud to be British, the NHS came top, with 45 per cent of people saying it was the institution they were most proud of. The armed forces came second, with 40 per cent of people saying they made them feel proud to be British, while in light of the Olympics and the Paralympics, 38 per cent said ‘Team GB’.

When people were asked if being born in Britain was important to being British, two thirds said as long as someone has worked here for up to 15 years, they should be allowed access to the welfare state, regardless of where they were born.

Finally, roughly two thirds said they would rather be British than any other nationality in the world, while around 15 per cent said they would rather not be British and 20 per cent neither agreed nor disagreed.

The shadow chancellor has called for multinational companies to publish a “single figure” for the amount of corporation tax they pay in the UK to tackle tax avoidance and ensure everyone “pays their fair share”.

Writing in an exclusive blog for The Huffington Post UK, Ed Balls has pushed the government to put “concrete proposals on the table for the G8 to deliver internationally agreed action on tax transparency”.

Balls said: “At the moment it is too easy to set up complex networks of companies within a group, some of which can be based in tax havens, and move profits between them. This can make it very difficult to assess the overall amount of tax paid. Multinational groups can and should be able to structure however they wish, but they should have to produce a single figure for their UK tax.”

The shadow chancellor also pressed for reform of the corporation tax system, promising “clearer, tighter and properly enforced” regulation as part of Labour’s policy review.

READ ED BALLS’ BLOG HERE

Whether it is to serve as a diversion from the ongoing deterioration in the French economy (purchases of French sovereign bonds by the SNB implying “all is well” notwithstanding), to distract public attention from the recent humiliation (and backfire) of the socialist government’s “tax the rich” campaign or for whatever other reason, is unclear for now, but what is clear is that over the past two days France has launched a major airstrike and military campaign against Islamist rebels in northern Mali, the pretext being that control of northern Mali by the rebels posed a security threat to Europe.

What is also clear is that even as France is protecting “European interests” deep in the heart of African darkness, elsewhere in Africa, the socialist country, whose military “expertise” is best known for building impassable fortifications all around perfectly crossable forests, suffered yet another offensive humiliation when not only was a hostage held by Somalian insurgents, al Shabaab, killed during an attempted rescue operation, but a commando from the “rescuing” team was allegedly left behind during the bungled operation. The cherry on top in president Hollande’s first major foreign policy excursion is that the same insurgents subsequently released a statement that the hostage was perfectly safe, even as a French pilot was killed in the Mali airstrikes early on in the campaign, all of which probably makes France wish it had just stayed home.

From Reuters on what is set to be another major humiliation for the French “military machine”:

French fighter jets bombed Islamist rebels in Mali for a third day on Sunday as Paris poured more troops into the capital Bamako, awaiting the arrival of a West African force to dislodge al Qaeda-linked insurgents from the country’s north.

French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said France’s dramatic intervention on Friday to bomb a convoy of heavily armed Islamist fighters sweeping southwards had stopped them from seizing Mali’s capital Bamako within days.

Western countries fear Islamists could use Mali as a base for attacks on the West, forming a link with al Qaeda militants in Yemen, Somalia and North Africa.

Le Drian said former colonial power France was carrying out continuous bombing raids against the alliance of rebel groups, which seized the country’s vast desert north in April.

“There are raids going on now: there were some last night, and there will be more tomorrow,” Le Drian told French television. “The president is totally determined that we must eradicate these terrorists who threaten the security of Mali, our own country and Europe.”

A Reuters cameraman reported seeing on Sunday more than 100 French troops disembarking from a military cargo plane at Bamako airport, just on the outskirts of the capital.

Bamako itself was calm on Sunday, with the sun streaking through the dust enveloping the city as the seasonal Harmattan wind blew from the Sahara. Some cars drove around with French flags draped from the windows to celebrate Paris’s intervention.

President Francois Hollande has made it clear that France’s aim in Mali is to support the deployment of a West African mission to retake the north, endorsed by the United Nations, the European Union and the United States.

A French pilot was killed on Friday when rebels in Mali shot down his helicopter.

Naturally, since Russia (or China) have no interest in preserving their geopolitical interest in the west-African republic, the UN has no problem with sanctioning a military operation over yet another sovereign. But at least it’s democratic.

As for the parallel campaign staged by France several thousand miles east in Somalia, things did not turn out quite as good.

France sent special forces into Somalia to rescue a secret agent but insurgents apparently killed their hostage during the raid along with a commando, Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Saturday.

The intelligence agency team flew into southern Somalia by helicopter under cover of darkness to try to free Denis Allex, held since 2009, by al Qaeda-linked al Shabaab, on the same day France launched air strikes against Islamist militants in Mali.

“Commandos broke into where Allex was being detained last night and immediately faced strong resistance,” Le Drian told a news conference.

“Intense combat took place, during which – and now I speak with caution – everything leads us to believe that Denis Allex was unfortunately killed by his captors.”

…

The defence ministry said earlier that 17 Somali fighters were killed in a mission prompted by “the intransigence of the terrorists, who refused to negotiate for three and half years”.

What is worse are reports from the locals that the hostage was not in fact killed, suggesting the French expedition merely used his death as a scapegoat to justify a retreat so prompt it may even have left one of its commandos behind:

Sowing confusion, Al Shabaab said in a statement that Allex was still alive.

A French commando died from wounds sustained in the Somali raid and a second was missing, Le Drian said.

Al Shabaab said in a statement that Allex was alive and being held at a location far from the base where French military helicopters attacked overnight.

“The injured French soldier is now in the custody of the mujahideen and Allex still remains safe and far from the location of the battle,” it said. “Several French soldiers were killed in the battle and many more were injured before they fled from the scene of battle, leaving behind some military paraphernalia and even one of their comrades on the ground.“

When asked about whether the missing commando was now in the hands of Al Shabaab, French Army chief Admiral Edouard Guillaud said: “If he is alive then he could be, but he could also be hiding.”

Embarassing or not, the French military campaign is merely doing the one thing all “developed, democratic” governments do when left with no other options: distract from problems inside the country. And as can be seen in the list below, France certainly has experience in protecting its national interests especially within its former African colonies:

• 1991 – DJIBOUTI/ETHIOPIA – French troops based in Djibouti help check the Afar rebellion and disarm Ethiopian soldiers who cross the border after the overthrow of Ethiopian President Mengistu Haile Mariam.
• 1994 – RWANDA – French and Belgian soldiers evacuate Europeans from Rwanda as Hutu hardliners massacre hundreds of thousands, mainly Tutsis. Later in the year some 2,500 French troops, backed by contingents from African countries, launch “Operation Turquoise”, described as a humanitarian effort, from Zaire into eastern Rwanda.
• 1995 – COMOROS – French forces crush a repeat coup attempt led by French mercenary Bob Denard against President Said Mohamed Djohar. About 200 French soldiers forced Denard to leave the Comoros and restored order after president Ahmed Abdallah’s assassination by his guard in 1989.
• 1996/97 – CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC – French troops intervene to end army pay mutiny against President Ange-Felix Patasse.
• 1997 – CONGO REPUBLIC – Some 1,200 French troops rescue French and African nationals during fighting between Congo army and supporters of military leader Denis Sassou Nguesso, now president again.
• 2002 – IVORY COAST – French forces mount “Operation Licorne” to help westerners trapped by a military uprising which effectively cut Ivory Coast in two. In 2004 they destroyed Ivory Coast’s small air force after government forces bombed a French base.
• 2008 – CHAD – A new French intervention bolsters the regime of Chadian president Idriss Deby and evacuates foreigners during attacks by rebels who crossed from neighbouring Sudan.
• 2011 – LIBYA – French planes are the first to bomb Muammar Gaddafi’s forces in March after the United Nations voted to allow intervention in Libya to protect civilians caught up in a rebellion against Gaddafi’s four-decade rule. NATO took command of the overall mission on March 31 which allowed Libyan rebels to defeat government forces and effectively seize power.
• 2011 – IVORY COAST – French forces tip the balance alongside U.N. forces in the civil war which erupted after the refusal of Laurent Gbagbo to step down and accept the election victory of Alassane Ouattara as president.
• 2013 – French aircraft pound Islamist rebels in Mali after they tried to expand their power base and headed towards the Malian capital, Bamako. France had warned that the control of northern Mali by the rebels posed a security threat to Europe. At the same time France mounted an unsuccessful commando raid to try to rescue a French hostage held by al Shabaab militants in Somalia, also allied to al Qaeda. The hostage was killed.

All of which leads us to one simple conclusion: expect some very ugly economic numbers out of France now that even Germany is expected to report the first leg of a full blown recession.

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore. And we’re continuing our series of interviews with Yves Engler about his book The Ugly Canadian, which is all about Stephen Harper’s foreign policy. And this week we’re going to talk about Haiti. Thanks for joining us, Yves.

YVES ENGLER, AUTHOR AND POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thanks for having me.JAY: So there’s a controversy brewing in Canada as we speak. The minister of international cooperation and trade, I guess his name is Julian Fantino, who used to be the Ontario police commissioner. People may have heard his name on The Real News, ’cause he used to be–he was very involved in the G-20 events that led to the arrests of over 1,000 people. But now he’s a minister in the Harper government. And he announced that CIDA, which is the arm of the Canadian government that gives money away that’s supposed to be used to reduce poverty, he’s saying CIDA needs to work more closely with, facilitate, perhaps even co-invest with Canadian mining companies and energy extraction companies. And Haiti is one of the targets for this. So what is this controversy all about?ENGLER: Basically, about a year ago CIDA announced a number of projects for Canadian NGOs, like Plan Canada, World Vision, to work with mining companies like Barrick Gold, IAMGOLD, in places like Burkina Faso in Peru. And basically the public aid agency (the Canadian International Development Agency) is putting up millions of dollars for projects whereby the NGO works with the mining company in the local community where the mining company’s operating. And basically it’s a credible financial inducement to NGOs to work with the mining company, because so much, you know, millions of dollars of public money is being made available. But basically the point of the aid projects is to pacify local opposition to the mining company. And what’s happened in recent days is that Fantino, the minister, has come out and made a couple of public declarations saying very explicitly that this is the new direction for CIDA. These previous projects were announced about a year ago, and there was a fair bit of–there’s been a fair bit of controversy about them, but now there’s sort of a solidification of that process. And Conservative MPs in the standing committee on international development in the House of Commons have put forward a report saying that they would want to solidify their relationship between the aid agency and the extractive–Canadian extractive industries. And so there’s a real controversy around it. There’s all kinds of elements of sort of embarrassment to the minister. He seems very ignorant about most of the issues. He’s been sort of shown to be ignorant by opposition members of Parliament.But I think it’s a disturbing trend within the Conservative government of, one, further politicizing aid money. There’s been a whole bunch of NGOs that have had their budgets cut over the past years because they were challenging Canadian mining companies abroad, because they were standing up for Palestinian rights. And so there’s been a sense of the real politicization, further politicization of Canadian aid. And this is a new element, to where we’re sort of extending this element to it of really working with the extractive industry.JAY: So the point here is people are concerned that CIDA money now–and Haiti is–we’re going to focus on Haiti–is the second-largest recipient of Canadian foreign aid money after Afghanistan, but that in Haiti and places like this, decisions of where CIDA money will go will have to do more with what makes a mining or Canadian extractive industry look good rather than what’s going to be most effective in terms of poverty reduction.ENGLER: Exactly. I mean, what this is is a very extreme example of it. I’ve said this before or argued this before that basically there’s four purposes of Canadian aid money. This goes back historically and continues today. The first purpose is a tool of geopolitics. It’s a way of supporting certain political forces in countries that are more amenable to our interests, to, you know, propping up the–let’s say, the right-wing Colombian government in the face of a leftward shift in Latin America, which is one of the things that’s taken place in recent years. It’s been, obviously, used alongside Canadian troops. And if you look where Canadian troops are very active, in places like Afghanistan or, recently, until recently, you know, in Haiti, significant Canadian aid goes there. So the first intent of Canadian aid since its starting in 1950, and continuing today, is as a tool of geopolitics. The second motivation of Canadian aid is basically to advance Canadian corporate interests, everything from tied aid to what we’re seeing today with advancing the interests of Canadian mining companies in the global south. The third motivation of Canadian aid is to co-opt Canadians, sort of, particularly young Canadians, into being more sympathetic towards Canadian foreign policy and sort of moving people more towards a sort of NGO model, rather than a more resistanced model towards Canadian foreign policy.And the fourth motivation of Canadian aid is what most people think aid is about, which is about helping the world’s poor. And the recent example with bringing the NGOs and the mining companies together is just a particularly flagrant example of this. But this is not something new, and the case of Haiti is a particularly clear example of that, where Canadian aid–. Haiti has been the second major recipient of Canadian aid after Afghanistan for basically the last eight years, since Canada participated with the U.S. and France in overthrowing Haiti’s elected government, as well as thousands of other elected officials, back in February 2004. And since that time, Haiti has been a major recipient of Canadian aid. A big chunk of that Canadian aid goes to building up a Haitian police force, which was basically designed to protect the 1 percent in Haiti, the Haitian elite. So there’s a long history of Haiti being very politicized. It’s just the Conservatives are making it, you know, that much more about advancing corporate and imperial interests.JAY: Are they making it more in practice? Or are they just being more honest about what they’re doing? It seems to me CIDA’s mostly, or to a large extent, played that role for years.ENGLER: That is certainly largely true, in the sense that part–one of the things the Liberal government did is they were willing to fund, you know, a few dissident NGOs, right? The Conservatives aren’t willing to fund any dissident NGOs, basically. And basically if you don’t say almost exactly what they want to hear, you simply get your funding cut off.But the thrust of the policy hasn’t really changed. It’s just the sort of intensity of the policy at the level of NGOs, I think at the level of the corporate sector as well. So, for instance, CIDA back in the ’90s was involved in rewriting Colombia’s mining code in a way that was incredibly beneficial to foreign mining interests, dropped the royalty rates they had to pay from something like 15 percent down to, like, 1.4 percent, a whole series of policies that were very much in the interests of Canadian mining companies. That was sort of one step removed. It wasn’t–that wasn’t money going directly to Canadian mining companies for projects in their local communities. That was, you know, changing the overarching environment in which Canadian mining companies operate in Colombia to better serve foreign mining interests, particularly Canadian mining interests.This example, the recent model, is even more direct, it’s even more flagrant, and if you like, you could say even more honest in the case of the Conservatives as just being, hey, there’s no difference between what the aid agency’s about and what the mining company’s about, and they’ve actually–the previous minister, Bev Oda, made a speech in February basically saying that to the Prospectors & Developers Association [incompr.]JAY: So what are Canadian commercial interests in Haiti? Why is Canada so involved in Haiti?ENGLER: Canadian mining companies are significant players in Haiti. There’s actually one Canadian mining company, St. Geneviève, that has the prospecting rights for 10 percent of Haitian territory. So there are Canadian mining companies operating there. There’s a major–the second-biggest employer, until the earthquake–and I presume it still is the second-biggest employer, but at least it wasn’t till the earthquake–is Gildan activewear, a Montreal-based blank T-shirt maker, one of the biggest blank T-shirt makers in the world. And they operate a whole bunch of sweatshop kind of production, both directly and indirectly. There are–so, you know, Canadian banking interests of longstanding players in Haiti.I wouldn’t say that the corporate interests in Haiti are, you know, sufficiently important to explain the Canadian policy in Haiti. I think that a big part of it comes down to the fact that Washington has made it very clear that it wants Ottawa to be a big player in Haiti. And that goes back to the time of the coup d’etat in 2004. And there’s, you know, WikiLeaks documents showing how right when Stephen Harper came to office at the start of 2006, the American ambassador in Ottawa immediately asked that–the question of Haiti was a high priority for him in his first meeting with Stephen Harper. So there are some serious corporate interests, but I think it’s more broadly part of Canada’s tie to the U.S. empire.JAY: The division of labor.ENGLER: Division of labor. And Canada, one element in that division of labor is the fact that a big chunk of Canada is a, you know, French-speaking place. So there are some sort of added relationships between Quebec–.JAY: A very big Haitian community in Montreal.ENGLER: Exactly. There’s about 100,000 people from the Haitian diaspora in Montreal. And so there’s relationships there, and there’s–it’s often, you know, Canadian–Quebec officials, really, that are–when we talk about Canadian policy [incompr.] Haiti, it’s really generally Quebec politicians, NGOs, businesses, police, etc., that are operating in Haiti. And the language plays a role, and, you know, longstanding ties even, you know, from the Catholic Church ties that go back decades and decades.JAY: Are there some positive things coming out of current Canadian poverty reduction investment or policy in Haiti?ENGLER: I’ve been to Haiti a couple of times, and you can see individual projects that will be beneficial, you know, seeing a school that this Canadian aid agency is helping out. So, you know, there are certainly examples. There’s, you know, funding for–since the earthquake, funding for, you know, camps, you know, the people who were displaced, that are beneficial. But if you–you have to look at the policy in its macro. And the policy in the macro, the point of the aid money, is to advance Canadian interests. And since the time of the coup d’etat in 2004, Canadian interests have been very clearly on behalf of the small Haitian elite and have been against the vast majority, the majority impoverished of the country.And so, you know, lots of Canadian money goes to supporting the UN military force in Haiti. Well, that’s a military force that has been there to basically protect the Haitian elite. It’s the force that’s, you know, brought cholera, that’s been involved in, you know, shooting on demonstrators, all kinds of human rights violations that have come with that UN force. And the Conservative government’s a big proponent of the UN force of Haiti, because it’s seen as advancing Western interests in the country. So, yes, there are definitely many individual projects, aid projects in Haiti that do have very concrete benefits to many people’s lives. But the thrust of the policy, even the aid policy, let alone the broader policy–the thrust of the aid policy is spending huge amounts of money on building prisons, on building up the Haitian national police. Canada has been a major player with the Haitian national police since the time of the coup. The early part of that was about bringing in former Haitian military, many of which have terrible human rights records, into the Haitian police force, and basically building up a pro-elite Haitian police force. And the Canadian government has continued that training and continued that role in terms of building that police force. You know, even since the earthquake, the biggest sector of Canadian aid money has gone to refurbishing prisons and building police academies and training the police force. So it’s certainly a very elite-centric policy in Haiti.JAY: Alright. Thanks very much for joining us, Yves. We’ll be continuing this discussion about other areas of Canadian foreign policy. Thanks for joining us, Yves.ENGLER: Thanks for having me.JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Sadly it seems MSNBC has found yet another former Pennsylvania Democrat to come on the air to advocate for rewarding Republicans for their obstruction and intransigence over the last four years. We were already treated to “Fix the Debt” corporate shill Ed Rendell arguing for cutting benefits to our seniors with the chained CPI as way to figure the cost of living increases for Social Security and for raising the age for Medicare eligibility. And in a subsequent interview, he was not only pushing to cut our social safety nets, but to help get more Republicans elected to office as well.

This Saturday, former Rep. Joe Sestak took up Rendell’s mantle and recommended that President Obama nominate former Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison for transportation secretary. I probably would not be as irritated at Sestak for this interview had I not heard him earlier this week talking about how reasonable cutting the benefits to our seniors would be and that Democrats are going to have to give into the idea that this chained CPI is coming and there’s nothing they can do about it if we want to fix our deficit problems. Never mind that Social Security does not add a dime to our deficit. He did the same thing a little later in this segment but wasn’t quite as specific as he’d been in the previous interview on which cuts are going to have to be made to our social safety nets.

Sestak took to the air here to call for more privatization of our infrastructure and nominating a Republican who could get that passed as the solution to fixing our crumbling roads and bridges. It makes me start to wonder if anyone besides MSNBC is signing a paycheck for him just like they are for Ed Rendell, because these sure as hell aren’t positions Democrats who don’t want to have themselves considered as Republican-lite should be advocating for.

As long as we’ve got Democrats like Rendell and Sestak shilling for Republicans and their policies on that so-called “liberal” network MSNBC, who needs Republicans?

The interview that follows was conducted by Kathy Kelly and Maya Evans, members of the US- and UK-based chapters of Voices for Creative Nonviolence (VCVN).

Raz Mohammad, an Afghan Peace Volunteer, is a Pashtun from Maidan Wardak province in eastern Afghanistan.

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Voices for Creative Nonviolence: Raz Mohmmad, what do you think about drones?

Raz Mohammad : I think drones are not good. I remember how, in my village, a drone attack killed my brother-in-law and four of his friends. It was truly sad. A beautiful life was buried and the sound of crying and sorrow arose from peaceful homes. I say that this is inhumane. Today, the idea of humanity has been forgotten. Why do we spend money like this? Why don’t we use an alternative way? The international community says that drones are used to kill the Taliban. This is not true. We should see the truth. Today, it’s hard to find the truth and no one listens to the people.

VCVN: How have drones impacted Wardak Afghanistan?

RM: Drones have a negative impact on the lives of the people of Wardak and other provinces in Afghanistan, because drones don’t bring peace. They kill human beings. Drones bring nothing but bombs. They burn the lives of the people. People can’t move around freely. In the nights, people are afraid. Drones don’t improve people’s lives, they limit the people’s lives. The people are not happy with drones. When they hear the sound of drones, they feel sad. Those who live in Kabul and those who live in the provinces especially in Pashtun areas feel differently about drones. Those in Kabul don’t feel the pain of those in the provinces where there’s war and family members are being killed. It is those families of victims who should be asked and whose voices should be heard. 

VCVN: Are drones making Afghanistan safer?

RM: No. Drones don’t protect the people of Afghanistan. Instead, drones kill the people of Afghanistan. You hear in the news and reports that every day, families, children and women are killed. Do you call this safety?

VCVN: Is there a mental impact on Afghans from the presence of drones?

RM: Yes, drones have a negative impact on the mind. For me, when I go home, I recall the incident with my brother-in-law which affected me a lot and changed my life. I don’t have a peaceful mind. When I’m home and study at night, my father & mother are very worried and tell me not to stay up too late because they may make a mistake and bomb the house. When my younger brother knows of a drone incident, he says he won’t go to school or get out of bed early today because the drones may come. See, how it affects the mind of a 5 or 8 year old child.

VCVN: What do you think about the use of drones after the 2014 withdrawal?

RM: I think that the use of drones today or in 2014 is inappropriate. Why has the international community sent drones to wage war in Afghanistan? Why have we forgotten the concepts of humanity and the love of humanity? War is not a solution. We can see this from the past 30 years of war in Afghanistan. Wars bring killing and enmity. Drones after 2014 will cause enmity between Pashtuns, Tajiks and Hazaras because those in government use the people for their own benefit. For their own power and lives, they drop bombs on the people, and bring division and inhumanity. As I see it now and after 2014, innocent human beings will be killed.

VCVN: Do you have any other message to give?

RM: My message to the ordinary people of the world is to listen, and become aware of drone warfare because what international governments say about using drones to kill terrorists is not true. Friends who come here can see that innocent people and women are killed. We should listen to the voices of Afghans and promote and defend humanity and humane relations. My message to the governments of the world is : Why have you forgotten humanity and the love of humanity? You are killing human beings for your own monetary benefit. I demand that this ( drone warfare ) be stopped, especially the spending of so much money on drones in Afghanistan and the killing of so many innocent people. Isn’t it appropriate for you to help the people in alternative ways? We are human beings and are always your friends, thank you.

Sorting materials in cooperative El Alamo Green Center. (Photo: Ciudad de Buenos Aires)“Environmental Possibilities: Zero Waste” features new ways of thinking, acting, and shaping government policy that are circling the globe. Each week, we highlight a success story in the zero waste movement, excerpted from the report On the Road to Zero Waste: Successes and Lessons from Around the World by the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA). GAIA is a powerful worldwide alliance of more than 650 grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals in over 90 countries. Their collective goal is a just, toxic-free world without incineration. Other Worlds is excited to promote the work of GAIA and the organized communities it works with, and hopes that the stories inspire you and others to begin moving your home, town or city, nation, and planet toward zero waste.

The story of waste management in Buenos Aires illustrates how cartoneros, or grassroots recyclers, have won legal and financial support from the city government. As recently as 2001, waste picking was illegal. Since then, cartonero cooperatives have organized themselves, educated residents on the environmental benefits of recycling, and lobbied the city government for a cleaner approach to waste management with allied environmental and social organizations. The result: an about-face in the city’s approach to waste, including separating at source and giving waste pickers exclusive access to the city’s recyclables.

The Implementation of a Legal Framework

Traditionally, the city of Buenos Aires relied on landfilling to deal with its waste, and cartoneros operated without public recognition or legal sanction. In 2001, Argentina’s serious socioeconomic crisis led to a dramatic increase in unemployment, and many people in the city resorted to collecting and selling recyclable materials from the streets in order to survive. In fact, it is estimated that 100,000 cartoneros were working in the metropolitan region of Buenos Aires in 2001.

In 2002, zero waste legislation created the Urban Recyclers Program and annulled the decree that had banned waste picking in the city. Furtherobjectives included prioritizing separation of waste and setting targets for reducing waste taken to landfills.

However, in practice the law was barely implemented. Consequently, between 2005 and 2011, new resolutions were passed that required each collection company to design and construct a resource recovery facility, or “Green Center,” in the area it serviced, as well as provide the equipment, machines, and other elements necessary for it to operate. The activities of sorting, baling, and storing of materials for sale were to be managed by the cooperative of waste pickers assigned to each Green Center.

The Cooperatives

The informal recyclers´ registry managed by the Recycling Department of the government listed 7,479 people as of August 2011. However, the government estimates the number of cartoneros in Buenos Aires to be 5,500 – 2,500 of whom are organized and 3,000 of whom work on their own. Some of the 12 cooperatives are larger than others, some are older, and they provide different services and run different programs.

The El Ceibo cooperative was formed in 1997 by a group of 10 women who had been working together on housing and women’s rights issues since 1989. As explained by the cooperative’s president, they wanted to find a way to “do a nicer job without going through the trash.” By training families on source separation of waste–paper, glass, plastics–El Ceibo changed the perception and the process of recovering recyclables. As a result, the informal collectors were knownno longer as “cartoneros,” but as “environmental promoters,” working under more formal conditions–regular schedules, uniforms–and ringing the doorbells of the Palermo neighborhood residents to recover materials. The El Ceibo Cooperative has 67 members who earn a monthly salary of US $511 or more.

Formed in 2005, the Movement of Excluded Workers (MTE) is the group with the most members (2,500). The city government provides the cooperative with buses and trucks to transport workers and the recyclable materials, plus a monthly incentive of US $209 for each member, on top of what is earned through the sale of products. Workers also receive health insurance, risk insurance, and uniforms. MTE has a child care center as part of their fight against child labor, financed both by the cooperative and the government.

Cooperative Recuperadores Urbanos del Oeste officially became a cooperative in 2008, but its core group of cartoneros has been working since 2002. It has 500 members (490 on the streets and 10 more working at the Green Center). The members working on the streets receive the government incentive of US $209 and a percentage from the sale of materials; the ones working at the plant receive US $465 to $581 per month.

Cooperative Del Oeste has been working since 2002 and has 30 workers. Members of the cooperative receive an incentive of US $186 per month, at least until December 2011. Currently the cooperative is struggling to purchase its own trucks so they do not have to rely on the government.

Operating since 2003, Cooperative El Álamo has six trucks and 49 workers. For the last three years, the cooperative has had an agreement with the social welfare agency of the city government, through which it receives food. In addition, it trains citizens in recycling at the Agronomy School of Buenos Aires University.

Over the past decade almost half of the cartoneros have organized in cooperatives, and have not only gained recognition from the residents but from the government. Among their major victories are the official recognition and inclusion of cartoneros in the waste management legislation, the creation of an agency within the government dedicated to cartoneros, the extension of alliances with local and international organizations and companies, and a dramatic increase in the budget allocated to cartoneros. According to a local source, in 2007 the city government allocated US $300,000 to grassroots recyclers; by 2008 it reached US $30 million.

However, the multiplicity of actors in municipal solid waste collection (i.e., independent cartoneros, cooperatives, private companies) creates tension and competition for territory. The government’s policy of treating the cooperatives inconsistently furthers feelings of distrust among them. As a result, they do not coordinate demands on the government or develop joint projects.

In 2010, the city government began offering two separate waste collection contracts, one for dry materials and another for wet. The novelty was that the contract for dry waste was exclusive to recyclers’ cooperatives, meaning that–for the first time–they would have access to the dry waste without having to compete with private companies.

The zero waste law and resolutions in Buenos Aires have been at the vanguard of waste management approaches in the region. On the other hand, in order to effectively minimize waste in Buenos Aires, it will be necessary to treat organics separately. Moreover, the shadow of waste incineration continues to loom large, as various city and national bodies lobby for construction of waste-to-energy plants, a move that would seriously jeopardize recycling in the city as well as the livelihoods of grassroots recyclers.

By implementing its own legislation and investing in an earnest campaign to promote source separation of discards–including organics–Buenos Aires has the ability to position itself as a true leader in zero waste. Such an advance, if done properly, would capitalize on the expertise of the cartoneros, expand their already important contributions to the city, and showcase them as allies in waste management, so that recyclables recovery is never again associated with poverty in the city. The wealth of this local experience is an asset the city cannot afford to waste.

Analyst Michel Chossudovsky believes that the objective of the United States and its NATO partners is “to create factional violence, ethnic cleansing, promote divisions within Syria between Alawite Shi’ites and Christian communities.”

New videos have surfaced online showing foreign-sponsored militants committing more terrorist acts in Syria. One of the videos, posted on the internet recently, shows heavily armed men shooting down a civilian airliner in the city of Dayr al-Zawr in eastern Syria. Another video uploaded to a social media website shows a militant attack on the Taftanaz military airport in the Northwest of the country. The footage shows militants firing truck-mounted weapons and a tank on fire. Another video shows militants from the al-Qaeda linked al-Nusra Front executing three Syrian Army soldiers, who were reportedly captured by the terrorists in Dayr al-Zawr.

Press TV talks with Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization in Montreal, regarding the issue. The following is an approximate transcript of the interview.

Press TV: Has the so-called Free Syrian Army become so desperate that it is attacking civilian airplanes? Why cannot it sit down at the negotiating table?

Chossudovsky: The Free Syrian Army is really a network of terrorist entities. It is not professional armed forces. It does not have commanded control; it does not have logistics and much of these terrorist attacks are conducted by the Al-Nusra Front which is said to be an affiliated to al-Qaeda in Iraq.

In fact, the former ambassador to Syria has confirmed that it is affiliated to al-Qaeda in Iraq and we know that this group is supported covertly by Western intelligence as well as NATO. These al-Nusra operations bear the fingerprints of US paramilitary training.

They are integrated by mercenaries; they use terror tactics and weapon systems and I think it is very important to underscore that, within their ranks, they have embedded especial forces or the employees of private security companies.

Now that does not mean that officially the United States is supporting this group. It is a covert operation. The irony is that Jabhat Al-Nusra is on the list of terrorist organizations of the United States department.

Press TV: We know that President Bashar al-Assad made a speech several days ago and announced several proposals for the political crisis to Syria. Just how much are these proposals going to work for Syria, do you think?

Chossudovsky: I think that, first of all, the scanty reports that we are receiving, not from the Western media but from other sources, indicate that the Free Syrian Army is being defeated, that government forces are gaining ground and are in a process of repealing these terrorist attacks so that, let’s say from the military strategic point of view, there is a turning point.

Now the proposal of course presented by President Bashar al-Assad is a very important proposal because first of all, he states very explicitly that the so-called and self-proclaimed opposition which is involved in insurgency, which is killing people, the Syrian government cannot negotiate with them and the bulk of the so-called opposition are involved in terrorist acts directed against civilians; they are involved in ethnic cleansing.

We know this and it is so well-documented that the objective of the United States and its NATO partners is to create factional violence, ethnic cleansing, promote divisions within Syria between Alawite Shi’ites and Christian communities and these communities are being targeted.

I should say that the Sunnis are also being targeted because many Sunnis are saying we do not support this process and then they had categorized these traitors and they are executed by these terrorist groups and as I said, it is very important.

This is not a civil war; this is US-NATO sponsored insurgency; it bears the fingerprints of the death squadrons which were actually set up in Iraq a few years earlier in the mid 90s by Ambassador [John] Negroponte and his number two man was Robert Stephen Ford, the former [US] ambassador to Syria.

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore.

The Canadian cabinet minister who is in charge of the Canadian International Development Agency has said he is going to review Canada’s aid to Haiti, suggesting they might suspend new money for Haiti. And here’s what he said:”Our government has a responsibility to maximize the value of Canadian taxpayers’ dollars. However, we remain concerned with the slow progress of development in Haiti, in large part due to weaknesses in their governing institutions.”Fantino said this in a statement posted on CIDA’s website on Tuesday.Now joining us to talk about development in Haiti and what he thinks of the Canadian minister’s statement is Mark Weisbrot. Mark is codirector of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He’s a regular columnist for The Guardian and a regular contributor to The Real News.Thanks for joining us, Mark.MARK WEISBROT, CODIRECTOR, CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH: Thank you.JAY: So what do you make of what the minister’s saying? They’re saying that there hasn’t been enough progress, they need more transparency, and that essentially the governing institutions of Haiti are failing.WEISBROT: Well, the first two things: there definitely hasn’t been enough progress. I mean, it’s terrible. You had, you know, 1.5 million people who were made homeless by the earthquake. You still have 358,000 of them living in camps. A lot of the ones who’ve been moved out of the camps were just forced out, and so they don’t have anyplace to live. You have 1 million people living in housing that’s basically unsafe, that they shouldn’t be living in, that needed repairs or are supposed to be demolished. And so, you know, they didn’t even solve the most basic housing problem.So of the money from USAID, 67 percent of that is going to inside-the-beltway contractors. Only 1 percent is going to Haitian firms.So, again, you know, [incompr.] doing anything to build the capacity, even in the health ministry, for example, although they’re starting to change that a little bit, to deal with the reconstruction. And, you know, the worst thing of all to me is that they actually–you know, the UN troops actually brought this deadly disease of cholera to Haiti. Over 7,900 Haitians have been killed and over 600,000 infected. In fact, most of the cholera infections in the whole world in the last couple of years, since they brought it there, have been in Haiti.So this is something that they created. They made this mess. Haiti didn’t have cholera for over a century, and it’s something that they’re going to have to live with for years. And what are they doing, what have they done to just provide clean water and sanitation, which most Haitians don’t have, access to sanitation? And probably 40 percent don’t have drinkable water. This is what, you know, spreads the disease. This is the cause of the disease, really. The normal way you [incompr.] the disease is to provide water and sanitation. And they haven’t even done that. The UN hasn’t even taken responsibility for having done this, even though everybody knows they did it. I mean, Bill Clinton acknowledged it in March, and you had, you know, any number of scientific studies from New England Journal of Medicine, the Center for Disease Control, you know, all these studies show that this disease was brought to Haiti by UN troops. And they won’t even–you know, now, finally, in December, you know, two years after they brought cholera there, they finally say, okay, we’re going to come up with a plan, we’re going to have a ten-year plan to get clean water and sanitation to Haiti, and, of course, also the Dominican Republic. But it’s going to take years before they actually do anything. And in the meantime they’ve even cut back–in the last year they’ve cut back on cholera treatment centers and cholera treatment units. So, you know, 357 people died in the last quarter of last year from cholera. This is really an outrage. And I don’t think it would be permitted in any other country.JAY: Right. Now, when Canada talks about the failure of Haitian institutions, some people argue there’s a certain kind of irony to that, because after the earthquake, wasn’t it Canada, the United States, and the UN that kind of made sure that Haitian society returned to what it had been pre-earthquake, that the elites remained in power and the various institutions remained essentially serving those elites?WEISBROT: Well, it’s worse than that. I mean, yeah, why don’t they have a government? Because, you know, the U.S. and Canada and France have–you know, overthrew the last democratically elected government in 2004. And that’s when they brought in the UN troops. And I should say, you know, a lot of people think the UN troops that brought the cholera to Haiti actually came in after the earthquake to help, but that isn’t true. They actually came in after the coup in 2004, which was the second time that the United States overthrew the democratically elected government in Haiti, the first in just the last 20 years. You know. The first time, it was the same president. It was Jean-Bertrand Aristide. He was overthrown the first time in 1991.So why doesn’t Haiti have a government? Because the so-called international community, they never let them build a government, never let them have their own government. And that’s, you know, of course the fundamental problem.And then you look at these troops who were never invited there. Then they bring this deadly disease. And they’re eating up, you know, most of the–enormous amounts of money. In the last two years, the money that the UN troops have cost just to maintain–and these are people, you know, troops that the Haitians don’t even want there–you know, that’s almost as much as you would need for the $2.2 billion for the whole ten years, which of course the UN and the international community doesn’t have.So the money is there. They’re using it to maintain this troop presence, to basically occupy this country. And they have no legitimate reason for it. I mean, this isn’t–you know, sometimes they call them peacekeeping troops, but they’re not peacekeeping troops. They weren’t brought in at any time during, you know, a civil war or to keep the peace, and there’s no peacekeeping agreement under which they are there. So this is one of the terrible ironies of the international community running around and blaming the Haitians for the mess that they have created.JAY: Alright. Thanks for joining us, Mark.WEISBROT: Thank you.JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Context: As yet there are no context links for this item.

Transcript

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore. And welcome to this week’s edition of The Black Financial and Fraud Report with Bill Black, who now joins us.

Bill is associate professor of economics and law at University of Missouri—Kansas City. He’s a white-collar criminologist, a former financial regulator. And he’s the author of The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One. Thanks for joining us again, Bill.BILL BLACK, ASSOC. PROF. ECONOMICS AND LAW, UMKC: Thank you.JAY: What are you working on this week?BLACK: Well, the odd convergence of Paul Krugman and President Obama. And so on the same day, they put out these odes to austerity that in the one case is ironic, because if Obama had gotten his way, he would have crushed his reelection opportunities, along with the U.S. economy, and the second, because Krugman has been fighting against austerity all these months. So the first one is a Krugman column. And what he mostly wants to say is things like, you know, print the platinum $1 trillion and such. And he has a throwaway paragraph that says, you know, if you folks really want to deal with the budget deficit, if that’s your issue, well, then there’s a simple way to do that: you just raise taxes and cut spending. But elections have consequences and, you know, you don’t always get that which you wish. And then President Obama, in connection with Treasury Secretary Geithner leaving and nominating Jacob Lew to take that position, said something very similar. He said, hey, Geithner’s the greatest Treasury secretary in modern times because he’s produced 6 million new jobs, and now we’re starting to reduce the deficit through a combination of taxes and government spending. So let’s go back to Krugman for a second. We’re in a great recession and a weak recovery from it, in which unemployment is still twice as high as it should be, in which long-term unemployment is at record levels, in which poverty is at record levels, use of food stamps is at record levels. We have a jobs crisis and an inequality crisis.But of course that’s not what is good for the politics of all of these things. So President Obama wants to take credit for the creation of the jobs, which comes from the weak recovery. And then he wants to switch to his real love, which is the talking about deficit reduction. And that’s the transition to Lew. And he says Lew is the guy that presided over three years of balanced budgets with Clinton, and he’s going to be the guy to, you know, basically put austerity into force, full force, in the United States, and then all will be well.Now, this is incredibly odd in the–start with Krugman, because Krugman has been writing for years about how austerity is not a simple matter, that in fact if what we did was raise taxes and cut spending, what we would do is cut private-sector demand by raising taxes, and then we would cut public sector demand by cutting spending [snip] would indirectly, since most government spending goes to the private sector, then also reduce private-sector demand. And the reason you have a recession is that demand is already inadequate. And this is not just any recession; this is the Great Recession, where demand was inadequate by trillions of dollars–and a trillion is a thousand billion, right? So the stimulus program, everybody knew, was nowhere remotely big enough to replace the lost demand. But Krugman has been saying, don’t do austerity, don’t do austerity, that’s the path that has pushed the Eurozone into recession into recession and put Spain, Italy, and Greece into Great Depression levels of unemployment, so don’t go that route. It isn’t simple. If you increase taxes, if you cut spending at this period, it will not cure the economy. It’s just the opposite. It’s more like medical malpractice in the old days of bleeding the patient. And then, because it doesn’t, of course, help them recover, you bleed them more. And you do this until you cause an economic disaster.So Krugman’s completely off base if you quote Krugman on Krugman. And it’s very strange. Then you get to Obama. And what Obama doesn’t realize is Geithner, of course, is the guy that pushed to kill stimulus. He is the guy that fought very hard not to create those 6 million jobs. If Geithner has gotten his way–and Geithner’s famous quotation is that stimulus doesn’t do anything for you, that it’s like sugar: you just get a short-term high, and then, you know, you’re cranky and rebellious and such and nothing gets done. So had Obama listened to Geithner in the earliest months of the administration, Obama would have already been out of a job, because he would have thrown us back into a deep recession using austerity, and, of course, the Republicans would have control of the Senate. Then Geithner tries to do it again in July 2011. This is what they refer to as the grand bargain–what I refer to as the grand betrayal–where they deliberately sought to cut the safety net–Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps–where they sought to slash well over $1 trillion in public spending over the decade and raise taxes. Had Geithner and Lew [incompr.] two, three principal aides pushing this–the third was a guy named Bill Daley, who was [incompr.] and Peterson is the guy that wants Social [Security privatized so that] Wall Street can make a fortune [snip] fees of our retirement accounts. These three aides–and they were the top aides for Obama on these negotiations back in July 2011–tried very hard to impose austerity. At the time, unemployment was 9.1 percent. This is, again, July 2011. Had they succeeded in getting austerity, the country would have gone back into recession within a few months, unemployment would have been well above 10 percent, quite possibly above 11 percent–European levels, in other words–and it would have been increasing every month during 2012, their election year. Hence Obama would have been destroyed politically and the Democrats would have lost the Senate. So that’s the second time Geithner and Lew combined to try to create the grand betrayal and would have had the ironic effect of defeating Obama.The third was after, despite himself, he gets reelected, Geithner tries the same thing, and with the support of Lew, where they go and they tell the president, we should, even though we don’t have to, make deep concessions on spending cuts and on the safety net. And, fortunately, Senate Majority Leader Reed was so outraged, he took the proposal and threw it into his fireplace, into the fire, the raging fire in his fireplace, and burned it up. So we dodged the bullet again. But now the president is signalling that’s what Lew is going to try to do to the nation again. And so all the emphasis is now we need to start cutting spending even more, we need to raise taxes even more. And we can all look at what this has done to Europe and the devastation. But apparently the president and his principal advisers can’t see that. And now it looks like even Krugman has become deeply clouded.JAY: Thanks for joining us, Bill.BLACK: Thank you.JAY: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

Comments

Our automatic spam filter blocks comments with multiple links and multiple users using the same IP address. Please make thoughtful comments with minimal links using only one user name. If you think your comment has been mistakenly removed please email us at contact@therealnews.com

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Seven lost manuscripts belonging to ‘Scotland’s favorite son’, Robert Burns, have been discovered by a researcher. It’s believed that the artifacts could help throw new light on the poet’s work.

­Among the newly-discovered manuscripts are letters between the pioneer of the Romantic Movement and his close friends.

The documents were identified by Chris Rollie, a Burns expert, who was tipped off by a woman about a private collection.

Rollie reportedly came across three handwritten manuscripts by Burns, three letters to the author of Auld Lang Syne, and a tender letter from his famous lover Clarinda McLehose to his physician, Dr. William Maxwell, asking details of how the poet died, Herald Scotland reported.

The collection had been reportedly lost to scholars for almost 200 years until Rollie found the cache.

“I feel very privileged to have discovered these manuscripts,” Rollie was quoted as saying.

By Hu Yumin

Washington will have 1,500 to 1,800 sea- and air-based first-strike cruise missiles by 2015 and 2,500 to 3,000 by 2020.

The US aims to combine PGS [Prompt Global Strike] with its space and anti-missile technologies to form an integrated defense system, which could render other countries’ strategic weapons, including nuclear arms, almost useless.

This could put other countries in a dilemma: they either lose the capability to launch a strategic nuclear counterattack or use nuclear weapons first to avoid devastation.

The US could cut its defense spending because of the fiscal cliff. But it would be wrong to assume that such a cut will weaken the US military.

In fact, the US has allocated more funds for the development of Prompt Global Strike, a system that can deliver a precision non-nuclear weapon strike anywhere in the world within 1 hour. The number of such weapons in the US armory will continue to grow, with the Russian Defense Ministry estimating that Washington will have 1,500 to 1,800 sea- and air-based first-strike cruise missiles by 2015 and 2,500 to 3,000 by 2020.

The US aims to combine PGS with its space and anti-missile technologies to form an integrated defense system, which could render other countries’ strategic weapons, including nuclear arms, almost useless. It intends to break the global and regional strategic balance, minimize other countries’ capability of strategic counterattack during emergencies and squeeze their strategic space.

This could put other countries in a dilemma: they either lose the capability to launch a strategic nuclear counterattack or use nuclear weapons first to avoid devastation.

Russia’s army, navy as well as air force still have the capability to deal with any challenge. Moscow’s Topol-M missiles are its major strategic nuclear deterrent and the project to deploy them is the most important part of its national armament planning. Russia has a reliable protection system, which also consists of multi-range anti-aircraft missiles to defend against air attacks from even high-precision non-nuclear weapons.

The Russian army has a multi-level firepower system, comprising C-400 and C-400M anti-aircraft missiles, and Thor and Amor anti-aircraft missile launchers, which is regarded as the best anti-aircraft power combination targeting PGS.

Since Russia’s strategic weapon system is better than China’s in terms of numbers, mobility and protection capabilities, some experts believe that the US army’s PGS poses a greater threat to China than Russia.

To many defense experts’ surprise, Chinese military experts seem to pay more attention to missile defense while ignoring the precision-guided prompt long-distance strike system. Some experts even say that China faces a difficult choice. On one hand, it is not sure of being able to build an effective protection system. On the other, even if it can build one, it will expose its limited and covert strategic missile launching bases.

During talks on strategic arms reduction, Russia has opposed the US’ use of nuclear weapons delivery vehicles for non-nuclear military objectives because it not only helps the US save huge amounts in defense spending, but also boosts its PGS project.

It is highly likely that Russia will stick to its stance at future strategic weapons reduction talks. But the fact is Russia can hardly stop the US from going ahead with its plan. Apart from demanding restrictions on the deployment of the European antimissile system and seeking other nuclear powers’ support, Russia does not have the bargaining chips to force the US into accepting its demand.

Major countries know that the advances made in military science and technology have made strategic stability in nuclear and non-nuclear fields highly correlated, especially during the strategic deployment process. And over-dependence on nuclear power, especially during an emergency, can undermine a country’ s national security.

But since other countries, compared to the US, are at a disadvantage in terms of conventional weapon systems, they have to adopt asymmetric corresponding actions. Global strategic stability depends more on the stability in Europe and Northeast Asia. This is something that the international community should understand and tell the countries that are calling for a “nuclear- free world” not to develop conventional weapons to replace nuclear ones, because it will have serous consequences on international security.

Some insightful people in the US have indeed emphasized the importance of maintaining global strategic stability. In 1967, Robert McNamara, then US secretary of defense, suggested that the former Soviet Union restrict the development of its anti-missile system to avoid escalating tensions. Initially, the Soviet Union opposed the idea but eventually it accepted it because it realized that developing the anti-missile system was destabilizing the world. This led to the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems between the Soviet Union and the US.

In 1985, when the US began experiments on how to use missiles to destroy low earth orbit satellites, many American senators and scholars said a US-Soviet Union race in this field was dangerous. Since the Soviet Union had unilaterally stopped its anti-satellite experiments in 1983, the US also gave up its tests later.

People who value peace hope that long-distance launching vehicles for precision-guided conventional warheads and missile defense systems will be part of the agenda at the strategic arms reduction talks.

The author is a senior research fellow with China Arms Control and Disarmament Association.

Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/stopnato/ messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff. wordpress. com

Liberal Values: Obama in his second term will be more of a fighter, but he’s going to need our help.

The People’s View: Outrage without action is just whining.

Cannonfire: As long as we’ve got that trillion-dollar coin lying around, let’s spend it on something that would be worth the money.

Freak Out Nation: Christian Right anti-gay activist Lisa Biron is a fine paragon of moral uprightness.

Blog round-up by Infidel753. Tips to mbru [at] crooksandliars [dot] com.

All climate scientists agree that the sun affects Earth’s climate to some extent. They only disagree about whether or not the effect form the sun is minor compared to man-made causes.

We noted in 2011:

This week, scientists from the US Solar Observatory and the US Air Force Research Laboratory have discovered — to their great surprise — that the sun’s activity is declining, and that we might experience the lowest solar output we’ve seen since 1645-1715. The Register describes it in dramatic tones:

What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening.

Scientists who are convinced that global warming is a serious threat to our planet say that such a reduced solar output would simply buy us more time … delaying the warming trend, but not stopping or reversing it.

On the other hand, scientists who are skeptical about global warming say that the threat is a new mini ice age. (Remember that scientists have been convinced in the past that we would have a new ice age, and even considered pouring soot over the arctic in the 1970s to help melt the ice — in order to prevent another ice age. Obama’s top science advisor was one of those warning of a new ice age in the 1970s. And see this.)

NASA reports this week that we may be on the verge of another Maunder Minimum (a period with an unusually low number of sunspots, leading to colder temperatures):

Much has been made of the probable connection between the Maunder Minimum, a 70-year deficit of sunspots in the late 17^th-early 18th century, and the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America were subjected to bitterly cold winters. The mechanism for that regional cooling could have been a drop in the sun’s EUV output; this is, however, speculative.

The yearly averaged sunspot number for a period of 400 years (1610-2010). SOURCE: Courtesy of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center.

***

The sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots. Matt Penn and William Livingston of the National Solar Observatory predict that by the time Solar Cycle 25 arrives, magnetic fields on the sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will be formed. Independent lines of research involving helioseismology and surface polar fields tend to support their conclusion.

NASA explains that interactions between the sun, sources of cosmic radiation and the Earth are very complicated, and it takes an interdisciplinary team of heliophysicists, chemists and others to quantify what is really going on. And the Earth’s climate is also affected by cosmic radiation.

So — even if NASA’s prediction of a period of an unusually low amount of sun spots is proven correct — it is hard to know whether that will lead to a large or small reduction in temperature trends.

 America came to stay. Accelerated withdrawal claims reflect subterfuge. Washington officials and media scoundrels don’t explain. Msinformation and illusion substitute for reality.

Reuters headlined “Obama, Karzai accelerate end of US combat role in Afghanistan.”

“Obama’s determin(ed) to wind down a long, unpopular war.”

The New York Times headlined ‘Obama Accelerates Transition of Security to Afghans.”

Obama is “eager to turn a page after more than a decade of war.”

“(B)eginning this spring American forces (will) play only a supporting role in Afghanistan.”

The Washington Post headlined “Obama announces reduced US role in Afghanistan starting this spring.”

Plans are “for a small troop presence in the country after the American mission formally ends there in 2014.”

On January 11, Obama and Karzai’s joint press conference was more surreal than honest. Duplicitous doublespeak substituted for truth.

“(T)ransition is well underway,” said Obama. Plans are for Afghan forces to replace Americans. By yearend 2014, they’ll “have full responsibility for their security, and this war will come to a responsible end.”

At the same time, US forces will “continue to fight alongside (Afghans) when necessary.” Obama didn’t say what troop strength will remain.

Drone wars continue daily. US Special Forces and CIA elements came to stay. Search and destroy missions are prioritized.

By spring 2013, “our troops will have a different mission — training, advising, assisting Afghan forces. It will be a historic moment and another step toward full Afghan sovereignty.”

“Afghanistan (has) a long-term partner in the United States of America.”

It’s Washington’s longest war. Iraq and Afghanistan are its most costly ones.

Iraq boils out of sight and mind. Afghanistan rages. Experts agree. The war was lost years ago. It continues. Why US officials don’t explain.

A previous article discussed Lt. Colonel Daniel Davis. He assessed conditions accurately. His 84-page unclassified report called them disastrous.

“How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding,” he asked? His report’s opening comments said:

“Senior ranking U.S. military leaders have so distorted the truth when communicating with the US Congress and American people in regards to conditions on the ground in Afghanistan that the truth has become unrecognizable.”

“This deception has damaged America’s credibility among both our allies and enemies, severely limiting our ability to reach a political solution to the war in Afghanistan.”

His classified report was more explicit.

“If the public had access to these classified reports,” he explained, “they would see the dramatic gulf between what is often said in public by our senior leaders and what is actually true behind the scenes.”

“It would be illegal for me to discuss, use, or cite classified material in an open venue, and thus I will not do so.”

He traveled thousands of miles throughout the country. He spoke to US commanders, subordinates, and low-ranking soldiers. He talked at length with Afghan security officials, civilians and village elders.

What he learned bore no resemblance to rosy scenario official accounts. Insurgent forces control “virtually every piece of land beyond eyeshot of a US or International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) base.”

Everywhere he visited, “the tactical situation was bad to abysmal.”

Afghanistan’s government can’t “provide for the basic needs of the people.” At times, local security forces collude with insurgents.

Davis hoped to learn something positive. He “witnessed the absence of success on virtually every level.” One senior enlisted leader spoke for others. He hoped to get out alive in one piece.

Why war continues remains for Obama to explain. He dissembles instead.

Afghanistan is strategically important. It straddles the Middle East, South and Central Asia. It’s in the heart of Eurasia.

Occupation projects America’s military might. It targets Russia, China, Iran, and other oil-rich Middle East States. It furthers Washington’s imperium. It prioritizes unchallenged global dominance.

China and Russia matter most. Allied they rival US superpower strength. Beijing is economically robust. Russia’s nuclear capability and military pose the only threat to America’s formidable might.

Russia is also resource rich. Its oil reserves are vast. Its natural gas supply is the world’s largest. Expect neither country to roll over for Washington. They’re a vital last line of defense.

More on Washington’s plans below. A previous article discussed Afghanistan’s troubled history.

In his book titled, “Freedom Next Time: Resisting the Empire,” John Pilger addressed it, saying:

“Through all the humanitarian crises in living memory, no country has been abused and suffered more, and none has been helped less than Afghanistan.”

 For centuries, Afghans endured what few can imagine. Marauding armies besieged cities, slaughtered thousands, and caused vast destruction.

Great Game 19th century struggles followed. Wars, devastation, and deplorable human misery reflect daily life for millions. America bears full responsibility now.

Wherever US forces show up, mass killings, destruction and incalculable human misery follow. After over 11 years of war and occupation, Afghans perhaps suffer most of all.

Living conditions are deplorable. Millions remain displaced. Makeshift dwellings substitute for real ones. Little protection from harsh Afghan weather is afforded. People freeze to death in winter.

Dozens of children die daily. Millions have little or no access to clean water. Life expectancy is one of the world’s lowest. Infant mortality is one of the highest. So is pre-age five mortality. Electricity is scarce.

Extreme poverty, unemployment, human misery, and constant fear reflect daily life. Afghans worry about surviving. Many don’t get enough food. Forced evictions affect them. They lack healthcare, education, and other vital services.

Occupation related violence harms innocent men, women, children and infants. Civilians always suffer most. Washington prioritizes conquest, colonization, plunder and dominance. War without end rages. Human needs go begging.

Displaced Afghans lack virtually everything necessary to survive. Included are proper housing, clean water, sanitation, healthcare, education, employment, enough income, and sufficient food to avoid starvation.

America and Afghanistan’s puppet government don’t help. Karzai is a pathetic stooge. He’s a caricature of a leader. He wasn’t elected. He was installed. He’s a former CIA asset/UNOCAL Oil consultant.

He’s little more than Kabul’s mayor. He’s despised. He wouldn’t last five minutes unprotected anywhere.

Afghanistan is the world’s leading opium producer. During the 1990s, Taliban officials largely eradicated it. Washington reintroduced it.

Crime bosses and CIA profit hugely. So do major banks. Money laundering is a major profit center. An estimated $1.5 trillion is laundered annually. Around $500 billion reflects elicit drug money.

Obama lied about ending combat operations by 2014. America came to stay. Permanent occupation is planned. Washington’s empire of bases reflect it.

During WW II, Brits complained that Americans were “overpaid, overfed, oversexed, and over here.” They virtually everywhere now. Planet earth is Washington occupied territory. Bases vary in size.

They include large main operating bases to medium and smaller-sized ones. Covert ones supplement them. US Special Forces operate in over 120 countries. CIA elements are everywhere.

National sovereignty rights are violated. America’s malevolent agenda is hostile. Public land is expropriated.

Toxic pollution, environmental damage, intolerable noise, violence, occupation related criminality, and unaccountability reflect Washington’s presence.

It’s hugely destructive. Afghanistan’s dystopian hell reflects it. Status of forces (SOFA) agreements establish a framework under which US forces operate abroad.

They provide an illusion of legitimacy. Nations are pressured and bullied to accept what harms their national interest.

In his book, “The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic,” Chalmers Johnson explained SOFAs as follows:

“America’s foreign military enclaves, though structurally, legally, and conceptually different from colonies, are themselves something like microcolonies in that they are completely beyond the jurisdiction of the occupied nation.”

“The US virtually always negotiates a ‘status of forces agreement’ (SOFA) with the ostensibly independent ‘host’ nation.”

They’re a modern day version of 19th century China’s extraterritoriality agreements. They granted foreigners charged with crimes the right to be tried by his (or her) own government under his (or her) own national law.

SOFAs prevent local courts from exercising legal jurisdiction over American personnel. Murder and rape go unpunished unless US officials yield to local authorities. Offenders are usually whisked out of countries before they ask.

America’s total number of SOFAs is unknown. Most are secret. Some are too embarrassing to reveal. America has hundreds of known, shared, and secret bases in over 150 countries.

Johnson said they “usurp, distort, or subvert whatever institutions of democratic (or other form of) government may exist with the host society.”

Their presence is troubling. Locals lose control of their lives. They have no say. There’s virtually no chance for redress. Permanent occupations harm most.

America built city-sized Iraq and Afghanistan super bases. They weren’t established to be abandoned. Washington came to stay. Both countries are US occupied territory.

Tens of thousands of private military contractors supplement military forces. Their skills range from technical to hired guns.

Obama suppressed Washington’s agenda. Permanent occupation is planned. America came to stay. Abandoning what’s strategically important won’t happen. How much longer Americans will tolerate war without end, they’ll have to explain.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

 Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/permanent-afghanistan-occupation-planned-2/

At least 20,000 Russian opposition supporters rally .(AFP Photo / Kirill Kudryavtsev)

Some 9,500 people have marched in central Moscow against the so-called Dima Yakovlev anti-adoption law. The protest has been peaceful, with no arrests made.

­Despite the freezing temperatures in Russia’s capital this weekend, Kremlin critics and opponents of the ban converged on the Boulevard Ring for the protest they dubbed ‘Against the Scoundrels’, referring to State Duma lawmakers who approved the bill earlier in December.

Some of the activists have been holding banners reading anti-law and anti-political notes; some were chanting “Shame” and “Putin is a scoundrel!”

Among numerous banners there were some depicting faces of Russian lawmakers crossed by the red word reading ‘shame’.

Marchers were also holding toys and pictures of children.

The opposition demands the law that prohibits adoptions of Russian children by US citizens be revoked and the dissolution of the State Duma and a new election.

Russian parliamentarians approved the anti-adoption bill rather quickly in December following the adoption of the Magnitsky Act by the US. The Act allows the US to deny visas to, as well as freeze the assets of, Russian officials allegedly involved in the death of Russian lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who died in jail three years ago.

Russian lawmakers insist the law, adopted in retaliation to the US Magnitsky Act, was justified by the lack of the US officials’ response to death of 19 Russian children adopted by Americans. The legislation was named after two-year-old Dima Yakovlev, who died three months after an American couple had adopted him.

Critics of what they call a “scoundrels’ law” does not punish American people, but Russian orphans.

The newly-enacted Dima Yakovlev law imposes a visa ban and asset freeze on US officials who violate the rights of Russian citizens abroad, and bans the US sponsorship of NGOs that operate in Russia, as well as the work of US citizens in Russian NGOs.

Opposition supporters take part in a protest march in Moscow.(Reuters / Sergei Karpukhin)

Opposition supporters take part in a protest march in Moscow.(Reuters / Sergei Karpukhin)

A Russian opposition supporter holds placards during an opposition rally.(AFP Photo / Kirill Kudryavtsev)

At least 20,000 Russian opposition supporters rally.(AFP Photo / Kirill Kudryavtsev)

At least 20,000 Russian opposition supporters rally.(AFP Photo / Andrey Smirnov)

At least 20,000 Russian opposition supporters rally.(AFP Photo / Kirill Kudryavtsev)

Opposition supporters take part in a protest march in Moscow.(Reuters / Sergei Karpukhin)

A petition calling on President Obama to build a working Death Star has been rejected by the White House.

The proposal to build an inter-stellar space station with unimaginable destructive power passed the needed 25,000 signatures last month.

The petition was launched in the name of “national security”.

Close but no Death Star

Yet on Friday in a somewhat sarcastic response, Paul Shawcross, chief of the Science and Space Branch of the Office of Management and Budget, pointed out: “The Administration does not support blowing up planets.”

In the Star Wars film series, the Death Star was a space station about the size of a small moon that was equipped with laser weapons powerful enough to destroy planets.

Shawcross added: “The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We’re working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.

“Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?”

Sad face for all those Star Wars fans then…

The official wording of the petition was:

“We petition the Obama administration to:

Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.

By focusing our defense resources into a space-superiority platform and weapon system such as a Death Star, the government can spur job creation in the fields of construction, engineering, space exploration, and more, and strengthen our national defense.”

Several fictional characters added their signatures to the 34,000 long list, including a mysterious Mr Darth V, who listed his location as “Imperial Battlecruiser”.

Earlier this year it was calculated that the Death Star would cost more than £541 trillion just for the raw materials – or 13,000 times the gross domestic product of the Earth.

While the very idea of the American government sanctioning the construction of such a thing may sound ridiculous, let’s not forget the US once considered blowing up the Moon during the Cold War, hence nothing is off the table.

All images from “Star Wars and History,” edited by Nancy R. Reagin and Janice Liedl, published by Wiley, November 2012

Mainstream financial analysts want us to believe that gold’s unprecedented rise throughout the last decade is almost over — that it is just another bubble soon to pop. Central banks, state-sponsored economists and many well respected high dollar investors have all tried to convince us that there is no more upside for precious metals, often arguing that the 5,000 year-old relics are but worthless metals — not money.

The interesting thing is they’ve been saying that repeatedly, since before the financial crisis was ever recognized. Yet, gold has continued to rise unabated.

In the following Future Money Trends interview, well respected investment analyst Jay Taylor of MiningStocks.com discusses this powerful trend in gold, the government manipulation of the financial and economic system, the importance of diversifying your wealth, why precious metals are a good investment, some ideas for investors, and the signs you’ll see when gold does finally become a “bubble.”

A lot of the establishment would have us believe gold is already in a bubble.

But if you look at the supply of gold above ground relative to the amount of money that’s been created, it’s money and it’s the bond market that’s in a bubble.

Yes, I suppose that one day that could happen.

I remember 1980, when gold went from $35 a few years earlier to $850.

I remember that time there was panic buying of gold by people in the streets of New York City. They were lined up around the block… to buy gold and Krugerrands at that time.

I don’t see anything like that now.

If I walk down the streets of New York and ask people, “do you think you should have five or ten  percent of your portfolio in gold,” most people would say, “No, no way. That’s ridiculous. It doesn’t pay you any interest. Why would you own the stupid stuff?”

So, I think we’re a long way away from that bubble.

I think people in the rest of the world and don’t trust their politicians to the extent that Americans do, are buying gold.

Certainly the Chinese are…

…

I suppose that we could see a bubble at some time.

I suppose that, as we saw in 1980, there will be huge amounts of people that finally lose confidence and throw in the towel on the policy makers.

And, then there will be a rush to gold like we’ve  never seen before.

And when people start to insist on delivery of their gold… for the huge amounts of paper that’s out there in the futures markets… And if those people on the buy side want to take delivery… the price is going to go to the moon. I really believe that.

Via: FutureMoneyTrends.com

As an asset of last resort, precious metals like gold and silver have always been worth something. With the fiscal and monetary policies currently under implementation around the world, along with literally trillions of dollars in unserviceable debt, it wouldn’t take much to set off a panic buying spree in gold.

In the last 30 days, since the Newtown school shootings, panic buying has left gun stores across the country with nothing on their shelves and back-orders of six months or more. Tens of thousands of Americans have been lining up outside of firearms shops and gun shows, grabbing up anything they can get their hands on.

That’s what it looks like when the entire consciousness of a nation suddenly shifts.

That’s what it looks like when hundreds of millions of dollars of capital are rapidly reallocated.

One day in the not too distant future, the people of this country and around the world are going to come to the realization that our governments, central banks and state-sponsored financial institutions have been playing a shell game — that it’s all been one grand manipulation.

Confidence in our government’s ability to manage this crisis will be lost.

When that happens, as Jay Taylor notes, “there will be a rush to gold like we’ve  never seen before.” Precious metals dealers and coin shops all over the globe will sell out of inventory.

As we’ve seen with popular assault rifles, ammunition and accessories recently, this shift of capital will lead to almost immediate price increases, and subsequently more public interest and panic buying.

There will be a bubble in gold — perhaps one of the biggest asset bubbles we’ve ever seen.

But we’re not there yet.

When you see lines of anxious shoppers waiting around the block to get in to your local bullion exchange and when stocks in exploration and mining companies jump hundreds of percentage points in just a few weeks time, then you’ll know we’ve reached bubble levels.

If you haven’t acquired some gold and silver assets by then, it’ll be too late.

Get gold now.

Sidewalk dirt drawing, supporting the closure of the Tamms Supermax prison in downstate Illinois. 61st & Blackstone. (Photo: reallyboring)The Tamms prison in Illinois, which helped fuel a nationwide movement against solitary confinement and “supermax” prisons, shut its doors on January 4.

Prison reform advocates celebrated the closure, which they say ends more than a decade of torture for the men incarcerated inside Tamms.

“There is not a single man left behind. The era of the notorious Tamms supermax prison is over,” reads the Facebook page of Tamms Year Ten, the activist group working to close the prison. “We are going through stages of relief, disbelief, celebration and reflection.”

Operating as a “supermax,” Tamms was built to house prisoners that were considered the most dangerous. Groups including The American Civil Liberties Union found that most inmates placed into solitary confinement fared significantly worse than when they went in, and suffered from mental health issues and self-mutilation brought on by their isolation.

The closure comes after a drawn-out battle between prison reform advocates, the union and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn. Tamms was only one of several prisons that Quinn chose to close in a move he said would save the state $100 million a year.

The closure plan eventually overcame a lawsuit by the prison guard union and the return of line item funding to keep Tamms and other facilities open by downstate legislators in the November veto session.

Before Tamm closed, The Belleville News-Democrat estimated that 25 percent of the inmates had been held in solitary confinement since it opened, more than 10 years ago.

On January 5, the Tamms Year Ten campaign offered a report from a mother of one of the transferred inmates:

“My son called at 6:04 p.m. tonight. Things seem good at Pontiac. They were passing the phones around, and it was not an automatic cutoff. The guard came and told him his time was up. We had a wonderful visit on the phone. He and many others received their personal property on Sunday. Some have already gone out to the yard. He also had two oranges, fresh fruit! He was happy that he was given a real toothbrush and a regular pen instead of the little short ones. He said that it is the small things that matter. He is behind bars and not the steel doors and will have to adjust to the noise.”

Tory grandee Ken Clarke is joining forces with Labour peer Lord Mandelson in a historic cross-party bid to turn back the rising tide of Euroscepticism.

The two political heavyweights will share a platform to call for an abandonment of plans to disengage from the European project. Clarke, who attends cabinet as a minister without portfolio, is determined to fight back against the clamour for Britain to step back from the European Union or withdraw entirely.

Along with Liberal Democrat Lord Rennard, Clarke and Mandelson will spearhead a new organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe (CBIE), which will support a cross-party “patriotic fightback for British leadership in Europe”. The organisation will hold its launch event at the end of the month.

Read the whole story at The Observer

David Cameron is facing a challenge to hold his party together as battle lines are drawn over Europe.

With just over a week until the Prime Minister’s key speech on Britain’s relationship with the EU, Tory Europhiles have launched a fight-back against demands for an in-out referendum.

Cabinet minister Ken Clarke will share a platform with Labour peer Lord Mandelson later this month to stress the benefits of remaining in the union.

The move comes after fellow Conservative Lord Heseltine warned that the economy would suffer if Mr Cameron took a “punt” and committed to a national poll on membership.

Around 20 Tory MPs have also apparently signed a letter, due to be published this week, warning of “massive damage” if the UK leaves the EU.

Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, told Sky’s Murnaghan show that he, Mr Cameron and many other MPs were in agreement on the EU’s importance to Britain.

The Lib Dem said the idea of isolating Britain from Europe was “just mad”. “That would be completely the wrong thing,” he said.

“In the end it is our national interest, our national interest in terms of our economy and jobs and society that has to come first in any approach.”

Labour leader Ed Miliband on Sunday criticised Mr Cameron’s handling of the situation as “incredibly dangerous”, and he ruled out promising a referendum before the future shape of the EU was clear.

He told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show: “I think he is essentially sleepwalking us towards the exit door of the EU.

“The last thing we should do is start saying for some date five, six, seven years hence, let’s decide now to have an in-out referendum.”

Mr Miliband went on: “As Michael Heseltine said very well … that means you are having a referendum on a negotiation that has not yet begun, with a timescale that is uncertain and an outcome that is unknown. That is an incredible gamble.

“We know why this is happening. (Mr Cameron) is worried about the threat from UKIP and he is worried about what is happening in his own party.”

Rumours have been circulating that Downing Street has given tacit approval to efforts to highlight the dangers of an exit.

In an unusual intervention last week, senior US diplomat Philip Gordon openly stated that America wanted Britain to remain in the EU.

Prominent business figures including Sir Richard Branson have also spoken out about the potentially dire consequences of severing ties.

Tory backbencher Robert Buckland, who has organised the pro-membership letter, said he had been informed that Number 10 regarded his efforts as “helpful”.

“There is a silent majority out there who do not want Britain to leave the EU,” he told the Mail on Sunday.

“The danger for the Tories is that because the right-wing Eurosceptics are making the most noise, we could slide towards the exit door of the EU.”

According to the Observer, Mr Clarke and Lord Mandelson are spearheading a new organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe.

The group, due to launch at the end of the month, will apparently support a cross-party “patriotic fightback for British leadership in Europe”.

AFP Photo / Sajjad Hussain

Six men have been arrested after kidnapping and raping a female bus passenger in the northern Indian state of Punjab. The arrests come after a similar New Delhi gang-rape case where the victim died from her injuries, triggering nationwide protests.

The victim was kidnapped after boarding a bus on January 11 to go to her in-laws’ house in a village in Gurdaspur. The bus passed through the woman’s bus stop and continued on to Gurdaspur town.

From there the driver and the conductor forced the woman on to a motorcycle and took her to an unknown location, where five more men joined them and raped the victim.

“The lady, after being kidnapped, was raped brutally throughout the night by the seven accused,” officer Raj Jeet Singh told AFP.

Then one of the rapists dropped the woman off near her sister-in-law’s village from where the victim managed to walk home.

The woman reported the incident a day later by lodging a complaint at the Kahnuwan police station.

“Six men have been arrested on allegations of having raped a 29-year-old woman… after forcibly taking her to an unknown location on the night of January 11,” Singh said, adding that they were searching for the seventh suspect.

Those arrested include the driver and the conductor. All six have already confessed to their crime, Singh said.

The extent of woman’s injuries is unclear.

The attack comes in the wake of a similar case when on December 16 a 23-year-old medical student was gang-raped and severely injured on a bus in Delhi, while her male companion was cruelly beaten. Both were then stripped and thrown off the bus, after which the rapists tried to run the woman over, but her male companion managed to push her out of the way.

She later died from her injuries in hospital, triggering a wave of national protests.

Tens of thousands came out on the streets of India to demand tougher measures from the government to protect women from the daily threat of harassment and violence.

Fearing for their safety, hundreds of Indian women applied for firearm licenses and joined self-defense classes.

In response to public uproar, India’s ruling Congress Party is drafting the new legislation for submission to the Justice Verma Committee, charged with reassessing current rape laws and suggesting changing them to ensure greater safety for women.

The document stipulates a maximum jail sentence of 30 years for those convicted of rape and the introduction of chemical castration as a punitive measure, writes the Indian Express.

Additionally, the Indian government heard calls from the Bharatiya Janata Party to hold an emergency parliamentary session to discuss women’s safety.

New Delhi, with a population of nearly 17 million people, has the highest number of reported sex crimes of all India’s cities. The number of reported rape cases in the capital has risen since 2011 to 17 per cent, with 661 last year, government figures revealed. According to police statistics, a rape is reported on average every 18 hours, and a sexual assault occurs every 14 hours in the capital.

However victims of rape often do not come forward to the police in India for fear of shaming their families or being ignored by police, skewing the statistics.

Spanish medical unions and public health workers are set to stage a rally in the capital, Madrid to denounce the government’s decision to privatize the health sector.

The protesters are scheduled to take to the streets on Sunday as part of their efforts to force the government to stop its painful private management policies.

Madrid’s regional government plans to privatize six hospitals and 27 health centers of the 270 in the region, insisting that the plan is necessary for the region to meet its tough deficit targets.

Medical unions, however, have been angered by the policies of the conservative government, arguing that they can save around 600 million euros without any of the painful privatization, rather with a better management.

The medical unions say they have no alternative than to go on strikes once or twice a week and plan to complete their acts of protest by publishing news of their grievances and explaining to the patients and citizens the reasons why they are failing to provide their duties during the strikes.

The eurozone’s fourth-largest economy must lower its deficit to 4.5 percent in 2013 and 2.8 percent in 2014. Economists, however, say those targets will be difficult to meet amid poor prospects for the country’s economic recovery.

Battered by the global financial downturn, the Spanish economy collapsed into recession in the second half of 2008, taking with it millions of jobs.

AO/SZH

Prime Minister, David Cameron, is facing a huge challenge to keep the Conservatives together ahead of his crunch speech on Britain’s relationship with the EU.

Tory Europhiles have launched a fightback against demands for an in-out referendum. Cabinet minister Ken Clarke is to share a platform with Labour peer Lord Mandelson later this month to stress the benefits of remaining in the union.

Cameron is facing opposition from Tory Europhiles

The move comes after fellow Conservative “Big Beast” Lord Heseltine warned that the economy would suffer if Cameron took a “punt” and committed to a national poll on membership.

Around 20 Tory MP have also apparently signed a letter, due to be published this week, warning of “massive damage” if the UK leaves the EU.

Rumours are swirling that Downing Street has given tacit approval to efforts to highlight the dangers of an exit.

In an unusual intervention last week, senior US diplomat Philip Gordon openly stated that America wanted Britain to remain in the EU.

Prominent business figures including Sir Richard Branson and PR guru Roland Rudd have also spoken out about the potentially dire consequences of severing ties.

Sources told the Mail on Sunday that Cameron believes it is “mad” to think that Britain can go it alone.

And Tory backbencher Robert Buckland, who has organised the pro-membership letter, said he had been informed that Number 10 regarded his efforts as “helpful”.

“There is a silent majority out there who do not want Britain to leave the EU,” he told the MoS.

“The danger for the Tories is that because the Right-wing Eurosceptics are making the most noise, we could slide towards the exit door of the EU.“

Buckland added: “I have been told No 10 views my efforts as being helpful. The Prime Minister is a Eurorealist. He wants us to stay in the EU while having a debate about the terms of our membership, but it must not be used as a Trojan horse to get us to leave.”

According to the Observer, Clarke and Lord Mandelson are spearheading a new organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe (CBIE).

The group, due to launch at the end of the month, will apparently support a cross-party “patriotic fightback for British leadership in Europe”.

CBIE director Peter Wilding, a former Conservative Party spin doctor, told the newspaper: “We would argue – and many in the Tory party would agree – that disengagement from Europe is profoundly contrary to Britain’s national interests.”

Mandelson and Clarke are hoping to halt the push away from Europe

However, Tory Eurosceptics are determined to maintain pressure on Cameron, buoyed by Chancellor George Osborne’s recent comments that the UK can only stay in the EU if it changes.

A poll today suggested that Cameron could see off the rising political threat from Ukip by promising an in-out referendum in his speech.

Research by ComRes for the Sunday People found that 37% of Ukip supporters would desert the party if that pledge was made.

Nearly two-thirds of those quizzed wanted a national vote on whether Britain should remain in the EU.

Some 33% said they would cast their ballot in favour of a full withdrawal – including two thirds of Ukip supporters, 27% of Tories, 25% of Labour voters, and 17% of Liberal Democrats.

However, more people – 42% said they were against leaving the EU.

There were also signs that opposition to the union has softened, with the proportion who think there should be a referendum dropping from 68% in October 2011.

At that time 37% wanted to exit the EU altogether.

Meanwhile, the Fresh Start Group of Tory MPs is set to demand that swathes of powers covering crime, justice and policing are clawed back from the EU.

In a manifesto being published on Wednesday, it will call for the repatriation of more than 130 powers which it claims are vital to retain “national democratic accountability”, protect British interests and resist the rise of the EU superstate.

Heseltine voiced his concern on Saturday over Britain’s increasing isolation from Europe

Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom, co-founder of the Fresh Start Group, told the Sunday Telegraph: “The proposed reforms in policing and crime are representative of the new relationship the Fresh Start Project supports for the UK in the EU. Effective cooperation without ceding democratic control.

“The status quo in the EU is no longer an option. Returning powers to member states is not an impossible task.”

Labour leader Ed Miliband ruled out promising a referendum on Britain’s relationship with Europe before the future shape of the EU was clear.

He told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show that the way Cameron was handling the situation was “incredibly dangerous”.

“I think he is essentially sleepwalking us towards the exit door of the EU,” he said.

“The last thing we should do is start saying for some date five, six, seven years hence, let’s decide now to have an in-out referendum.”

Miliband went on: “As Michael Heseltine said very well yesterday… that means you are having a referendum on a negotiation that has not yet begun, with a timescale that is uncertain and an outcome that is unknown. That is an incredible gamble.

“We know why this is happening. He is worried about the threat from Ukip and he is worried about what is happening in his own party.

“It is the wrong thing to do. It is not in the national interest.”

Miliband added: “The question for now is should we have a referendum, should we commit to a referendum, should we promise one. I’m saying very clearly to you, no is the answer.”

Liberal Democrat Chief Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander said Britain’s national interest had to trump party political difficulties.

He also insisted that no “responsible” politician should be contemplating exit from the union.

“Of course there are difficulties on Europe in different political parties,” he told Sky News’ Murnaghan programme. “But in the end it is our national interest, our national interest in terms of our economy and jobs and society that has to come first in any approach.”

Alexander went on: “It was Margaret Thatcher who led the foundation of the European single market which is very important to British business and British jobs.

“That is why we have seen a lot of business leaders over the last last few days coming out very strongly and saying they want to see Britain’s place in the EU maintained.”

Alexander said there were “many reasons why Britain is an attractive place to invest”.

“But it is clear that for many sectors for many investors our place in the European single market, our participation as a leading member of the EU is part of that mix,” he added.

“I just think that any responsible British politician should not be contemplating British exit from the EU given how serious the consequences should be.”

He insisted Cameron had been “very clear he does not want Britain to leave the EU”.

:: ComRes interviewed 2,059 adults online between December 19 and 21. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. The Ukip voter sample size was 304.

© Copyright 2010 Press TV. All rights reserved.

Canadian rights activist Theresa Spence says she will continue her hunger strike as aboriginal protesters gear up for fresh demonstrations against the violation of their rights.

Spence, chief of the troubled Attawapiskat First Nation in northern Ontario until the government holds a new meeting to discuss the rights of Indians.

The activist has been on a hunger strike since December 11, 2012.

Spence boycotted the first meeting joined by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and native leaders on Friday.

Spence had said in a statement issued on Wednesday that she would not attend the meeting with Harper held on Friday, because Governor General David Johnston, who is a representative of Queen Elizabeth II, would not be taking part in it.

Spence went to the second meeting, but left the session quickly as she cited the meeting as pointless.

During the 4-hours-long meeting on Friday, Harper agreed to pay more attention to native demands and aboriginal issues, but made no promises.
Harper’s office said in a statement that the “government remains committed to ongoing dialogue on aboriginal issues and to taking achievable steps that will provide better outcomes in First Nations communities.”

The protests have been staged across the North American country after Spence went on a hunger strike on December 11, 2012.

Many of Canada’s natives live in poor conditions with unsafe drinking water, inadequate housing, addiction, and high suicide rates.

In a report released on December 19, 2012, Amnesty International called on Canada to address human rights abuses in the country, particularly with respect to the rights of indigenous peoples.

AO/SZH

Britain is to test flight a remote controlled stealth combat aircraft build by British arms producer BAE Systems for the British military later this year.

The new robotic plane, Taranis, which has been designed to fly intercontinental missions to bomb targets, has no pilot and cannot be detected by radar.

The aircraft has cost £125 million to build and is to be flown for the first time in a series of tests in Australia in the spring.

Currently, British Ministry of Defence (MoD) and US military use unmanned drones such as Reaper to attack targets.

The Taranis, however, is expected to provide a prototype of a new kind of bomber that will replace piloted planes and the current drones.

This comes as the deployment of assassination drones by the US and its allies have led to killings of at least hundreds of innocent civilians, including many women and children, in the Middle East.

MOS/AMR/HE

Ehud Olmert.(AFP Photo / David Silverman)

Ex-Israeli premier Ehud Olmert has accused current PM Benjamin Netanyahu of spending $3 billion on a war with Iran that never took place.

­Olmert pointed out that the current leader “wasted” the money on “harebrained adventures that haven’t, and won’t, come to fruition.”

“We are dealing with expenditures that go above and beyond multi-year budgets,” Olmert also said in an interview with Israeli broadcaster Channel 2 News. “They scared the world for a year and in the end didn’t do anything.”

The former leader also pointed out that the money was spent on “security delirium”, and “the projects won’t be carried out because 2012 was the decisive year.” The ex-PM referred to the Israeli drive to toughen sanctions, and possibly engage in a military conflict, with Iran to interfere with the nuclear development in the country.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, along with Ehud Barak, the deputy PM and the defense minister, reacted to the ex-premier’s claims in an interview with Army Radio set to be aired on Sunday, IsraelNationalNews.com reported. Netanyahu called the former PM’s criticism “a bizarre, irresponsible thing to say.” The current leader also indicated, “We’ve done a lot to strengthen the IDF, Mossad and Shin Bet [the Israeli Security Service] in various ways.”

In fact, it’s not the first time that Benjamin Netanyahu has come under fire from former top Israeli politicians. Olmert commented on the anti-Iran drive back in May, saying “There is no reason at this time not to talk about a military effort, but definitely not to initiate an Israeli military strike.” 

Tzipi Livni, the resigned leader of the centrist liberal Kadima party, joined the chorus of critics, saying that Netanyahu’s government is putting the existence of the Jewish state “in mortal danger” by ignoring growing international discontent.

“Israel is on a volcano, the international clock is ticking and you should not be the ‘chief of Shin Bet’ to understand that. The real danger is a politics that buries its head in the sand,” Livni pointed out.

Last week, the former head of Israeli Security Service (Shin Bet) Yuval Diskin accused Netanyahu of putting his own interests ahead of the state’s and of playing fast and loose with the country’s security.

“Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to go down in history as the person who did something on this size and scale. I have heard him belittle what his predecessors have done and assert that his mission on Iran is on a much grander scale,” Yuval Diskin told Yediot. In particular, Diskin mentioned a meeting during which an attack on Iran was discussed, with Netanyahu eager to convince the leadership to launch an assault on Iran, The Times of Israel reported.

Netanyahu’s leadership comes under fire on the backdrop of calls from leading economists to cut the defense budget, or at least stop its expansion, Haaretz reported. Professor Manuel Trajtenberg, chair of the Israeli Council for Higher Education’s planning and budgeting Committee, warned that Israel can’t sustain larger defense spending and that further increases would lead to financial collapse. Furthermore, the former director general of the Finance Ministry, Yarom Ariav, called to shake up the military establishment, reducing the massive armored corps and reconsidering the costly pension arrangements that prevail in the Israel Defense Forces, according to TheMarker.com.

As for the assault on Iran, Defense Minister Ehud Barak estimated at the end of October that Israel and its allies would have to take decision over a military solution of the stand-off in “eight to 10 months”, because sanctions and diplomacy would fail to curb Iran’s nuclear ambition, Britain’s Daily Telegraph quoted him as saying.

The waves of criticism sweep the Netanyahu leadership just weeks before the election, and the current leader’s campaign has largely been focusing on bolstering defense in the country.

Three Iraqi soldiers have been killed in an attack by a militant group on an army checkpoint north of the capital, Baghdad.

Iraqi army and medical sources said on Sunday that the militants threw hand grenades at the checkpoint, east of the city of Samarra, about 110 kilometers north of Baghdad, before they opened fire using machineguns.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Bombings and shootings have recently intensified across Iraq.

On December 31, over 20 people, including children, were killed and 80 others injured in a wave of attacks in several cities and towns in the country.

Also on December 24, over 45 people were killed and over 110 others wounded in similar attacks targeting both security guards and civilians across the country, marking the deadliest day in Iraq since November 29, 2012, when at least 50 people lost their lives.

The Iraqi government has stepped up efforts to increase security across the country over the past few months.

SF/HSN

David Cameron thinks it would be ‘mad’ for Britain to leave the EU and is secretly backing a move by Tory MPs to warn of the perils of cutting all our ties with Brussels.

The Prime Minister was also ‘pleased’ at US President Barack Obama sending a clear signal that the White House is opposed to the UK leaving the European Union.

Read the whole story at Mail On Sunday

An Egyptian court has accepted an appeal by former President Hosni Mubarak over his life sentence for his involvement in the death of hundreds of people during the 2011 revolution, ordering a retrial.

The Court of Cassation granted ousted Egyptian leader an appeal over his life sentence on Sunday.

On June 2, Mubarak was found responsible for the deaths of some 900 pro-democracy protesters killed by regime forces seeking to suppress the revolutionary move and sentenced to life in prison.

“The court has ruled to accept the appeal filed by the defendants … and orders a retrial,” said Judge Ahmed Ali Abdel Rahman after a brief hearing.

On December 27, Mubarak was transferred from prison to a military hospital after breaking his ribs in a fall in prison in mid-December.

“The retrial will be based on the same evidence used in the previous trial. No new evidence will be added to the case,” said Mubarak’s lawyer, Mohamed Abdel Razek.

Razek also said that the new panel of judges could also consider the health condition of the 84-year-old ousted leader while giving a verdict.

The court also ordered a new retrial for Mubarak’s sons Alaa and Gamal, former interior minister Habib al-Adli and his top security chiefs.

Egyptians launched a revolution against Mubarak’s pro-Israeli regime in January 2011, which eventually brought an end to his 30-year-long dictatorship in February that year.

SAB/SZH

AFP Photo / Yoshikazu Tsuno

Over 125 years after Van Gogh had painted a series of his most recognizable works, ‘Sunflowers’, scientists discovered his key works began changing bright-yellow color due to exposure to energy-efficient lights installed in museums across the world.

­According to experts, the bright-yellow pigment becomes unstable under LED lights and, over time, turns a shade of brownish green.

A sample of 14 works dated between 1887 and 1890 were tested for the reaction which affects the oil paint color known as chrome yellow, often used by 19th-century artists, including Paul Cézanne and Paul Gauguin, the Independent reported.

As a result, researchers had to warn museums to reconsider the use of LED lighting to prevent the colors in certain paintings fading away further and further.

“LED lights appear to have many advantages, but museums should carefully consider that paintings from the Van Gogh era could be affected by them,” Claus Habfast, from the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in France, told The Independent.

A team of scientists in France and Germany reportedly used ultra-powerful X-ray technology to analyze the bright-yellow tones in paintings by such luminaries as Van Gogh, Cézanne and Gauguin.

“We have found the unstable forms of chrome yellow in several well-known paintings, such as Portrait of Gauguin and the famous Vase with Sunflowers at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam,” Letizia Monico, a member of the research group that conducted the experiment, told the newspaper.

Van Gogh was determined to capture the sunflowers in a series of 12 pictures because the life-affirming yellow plants wilted very quickly.    
“I am working with the enthusiasm of a man from Marseilles eating bouillabaisse, which shouldn’t come as a surprise to you because I am busy painting huge sunflowers,” the Dutch painter wrote in August 1888 when the sunflowers were in full bloom.

Van Gogh painted the series to please his friend, Paul Gauguin, and decorate the room where he would stay when he arrived in Arles. In the long run, Van Gogh created four sunflower still lifes, but felt only two were good enough to hang in Gauguin’s bedroom. He was later to paint three copies of them, one of which can be found in the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.

Thousands of protesters gather at the historical Stadium Merdeka (Independence Stadium) during a rally for electorial reforms in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

Tens of thousands Malaysians have come out to protest in the country’s capital against the government calling for reforms and possible ouster of the ruling coalition. The rally comes before Malaysia’s general elections, which are due by mid-2013.

According to local police, 80,000 people marched through Kuala Lumpur to the legendary Stadium Merdeka, where the current governing alliance declared independence from Britain in 1957, reported The Malaysian Insider.

Opposition estimates that the turnout was even higher, at about 100,000, according to Malaysia Kini.

Protesters’ demands included better electoral and environmental laws, improved education system, abolition of student loans and fair royalty payments to oil-producing states.

The opposition argues that the country’s electoral register is fraudulent and has pro-government bias.

A protestor waves flag during a grand gathering at the historical Medeka Stadium (Independence Stadium) during a rally for electorial reforms in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Saeed Khan)

During the rally people wore various bright colors including yellow and green, each representing an activist group.

The rally resembled a festival with food sellers and other vendors coming out to the streets. People carried flags and signs and some even wore Guy Fawkes masks, as popularized by the 2005 film V for Vendetta.

A protestor wearing a Guy Fawkes mask waves a Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) flag inside the historical Stadium Merdeka (Independence Stadium) as he takes part in an opposition rally ahead of looming elections in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

Opposition leader Lim Guan Eng spoke at the protest urging for change from the country’s Prime Minister Najib Razak’s and his Barisan Nasional coalition, which has held power for the past 55 years.

The ruling coalition has been in control of Malaysia since independence from Britain.

“Our government is so corrupt. The government should listen to us. They need to reform. For more than 50 years they have ruled Malaysia,” rally participant Azlan Abu Bakar told News24.

Malaysia opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim (C) shouts alogans during a grand gathering at the historical Medeka Stadium during a rally for electorial reforms in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Saeed Khan)

Malaysia’s national poet A. Samad Said read out some of his work to a cheering crowd.

“Even poems have become weapons,”  he said. “I am already 80, I have always dreamed of witnessing a sea of souls. This is it, change now.”

Access to the stadium was granted by local authorities and the rally was peaceful, police reported.

Protestors march towards the historical Merdeka Stadium (Independence Stadium) during a rally for electorial reforms in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Saeed Khan)

This stands in stark contrast to the previous demonstration held in April 2012 when at least 1,000 people were injured and hundreds detained after police Malaysian police fired teargas and chemical-laced water at 25,000 protesters gathered calling for electoral reforms.

The ruling government’s term is due to expire in April with elections to be held by mid-2013.

PM Razak’s bloc faces a new opposition force comprised of Anwar Ibrahim’s multi-ethnic party, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party and Malaysian Chinese Association, party dominated by ethnic Chinese.

The ruling block has also been experiencing waning support. It lost more than a third of its seats in parliament to the opposition in 2008, as the charges of corruption grew.

Protestors climb for high angle view outside the historical Stadium Merdeka (Independence Stadium) as they take part in an opposition rally ahead of looming elections in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

Protestors march towards the historical Merdeka Stadium (Independence Stadium) during a rally for electorial reforms in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Saeed Khan)

Protestors climb for high angle view inside the historical Stadium Merdeka (Independence Stadium) as they take part in an opposition rally ahead of looming elections in Kuala Lumpur.(AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

CSKA Moscow’s former forward, Vagner Love, says farewell to fans in summer 2012. (RIA Novosti / Alexey Kudenko)

After a year of absence, Brazilian striker Vagner Love is making a comeback to Russian Premier League leaders CSKA Moscow.

­Vagner has already bid farewell to his partners at Flamengo and began packing for Russia.

The decision on the move was made after the 28-year-old striker met up with the Rio de Janeiro club’s new president, Eduardo Bandeira de Mello, who found CSKA’s offer beneficial.  

According to the local media, the Muscovites offered to write off Flamengo’s 6-million-euro debt for Vagner’s transfer, with the play getting a rich personal contract as well.

Love has scored 15 goals in his 41 games for Flamengo this season.

Vagner is the most successful foreigner in Russian football history.

During his stay with CSKA in 2004—2012, he netted 117 goals, winning two domestic championships and the UEFA Cup.

But he always felt homesick and the Moscow club had to lend him to Brazilian sides Palmeiras and Flamengo on two occasions.

Love’s arrival will be a huge boost for CSKA in the title race as two of their first-choice strikers Seydou Doumbia and Tomas Necid out of action after serious injuries.

The proportion of sexually exploited children in Britain who have been trafficked within the country is rising, a major charity warns.

Of 546 sexually exploited children who Barnardo’s worked with in September, the number known to be trafficked rose by 84%, from 76 to 140 year on year.

That equates to one in four in the UK, up from one in six in 2011, and rising to one in two in Wales.

The number of sexually exploited children known to Barnardo’s rose by 22% to 1,452 in the UK last year and 37% during the past three years.

Barnardo’s chief executive Anne Marie Carrie said: “We are shocked at the rise in the number of children reporting they have been moved around the country by abusers.

“Domestic trafficking of children for sex is a sophisticated type of exploitation, a sinister form of organised violation through networks of criminals.

“Nobody currently knows the full extent of these crimes because of their hidden nature, but what we do know is that every time we open a new service for victims it quickly becomes fully subscribed.

“If we are to save children from suffering for years at the hands of their abusers, more must be done by the authorities to identify victims of child sexual exploitation who are being internally trafficked and to stop this activity earlier on.”

The charity surveyed 23 of its specialist services, an annual report it compiles each year.

Barnardo’s service data also revealed that numbers of sexually exploited children helped by the charity rose by 377% in Wales, from 22 to 83, where the charity has become more active.

The National Hockey League’s logo (AFP Photo / Bruce Bennett)

The NHL and the Players’ Association have signed a Memorandum of Understanding, reflecting the terms of a 10-year Collective Bargaining Agreement, which puts an end to the lockout in the world’s biggest hockey league.

­According to the new Agreement, which will be the longest in history, the hockey related revenues (HRR) will be shared 50-50 between the club owners and the players.

The document also limits the length of individual player contracts to seven years, which may be prolonged for another season when a team are re-signing their own man.

The NHL teams are to open their training camps on Sunday, January 13, with the shortened regular season scheduled for face-off on January 19.

It will consist of 720 games, with each side holding 48 meetings before the playoffs begin.

It was originally planned that the 2012/13 NHL season would start on October 11, but the players and the owners failed to come to terms on the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Many of the league’s stars — including Evgeny Malkin, Alex Ovechkin, and Ilya Kovalchuk — waited out the nearly four-month-long lockout in the KHL clubs, but are returning to North America to fulfill their contracts.

Mali’s army has driven back Islamist rebels from a strategic central town after France intervened with air strikes to stop militants controlling the country’s desert north from advancing.

French President Francois Hollande took action in the West African country at the request of interim President Dioncounda Traore who has declared a state of emergency.

Western governments expressed alarm on Thursday after an al Qaeda-linked rebel alliance captured the town of Konna, a gateway towards the capital Bamako 600km (375 miles) south.

Mr Hollande said the “terrorist groups, drug traffickers and extremists” in northern Mali “show a brutality that threatens us all.” He vowed that the operation would last “as long as necessary”.

For the past nine months, the Islamic militants have controlled a large swathe of northern Mali, a lawless desert region where kidnapping has flourished.

“French armed forces supported Malian units this afternoon to fight against terrorist elements,” Mr Hollande said in Paris.

He did not give any details of the operation, other than to say that it was aimed in part at protecting the 6,000 French citizens in Mali, where seven of them already are being held captive.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, when asked whether France had launched air strikes, said: “To the question of whether there was an air intervention, the response is yes.” He refused to give any other details for security reasons.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Senegal and Nigeria also responded to an appeal from Mali’s president for help to counter the militants.

Late last year, the 15 nations in West Africa, including Mali, agreed on a proposal for the military to take back the north, and sought backing from the UN.

The Security Council authorised the intervention but imposed certain conditions. Those include the training of Mali’s military, which has been accused of serious human rights abuses since a military coup last year sent the nation into disarray.

Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Africa has been a shadowy presence for years in the forests and deserts of Mali, a country hobbled by poverty and a relentless cycle of hunger. Most Malians adhere to a moderate form of Islam.

In recent months, however, the terrorist group and its allies have taken advantage of political instability, taking territory they are using to stock weapons and train forces.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said his government was taking action because “in recent days, the situation unfortunately deteriorated very seriously”.

The delay by the international community in taking action allowed “the terrorist and criminal groups of northern Mali … to move toward the south with the goal of … installing a terrorist state,” he added.

The Islamists insist they want to impose Shariah only in northern Mali, though there long have been fears they could push further south.

David Cameron has agreed to help transport foreign troops and equipment to Mali amid efforts to halt an advance by Islamist rebels in a conflict that has already claimed 120 lives.

The help was agreed in a phone call between the British prime minister and President Francois Hollande, after France sent in forces to support the Malian government.

French combat troops preparing to be airlifted into Mali on Saturday

Downing Street stressed that no UK troops would engage in combat operations in the country, but two transport planes, believed to be C-17s, are expected to be deployed within 24-48 hours.

“The Prime Minister spoke to President Hollande this evening [Saturday] to discuss the deteriorating situation in Mali and how the UK can support French military assistance provided to the Malian Government to contain rebel and extremist groups in the north of the country,” a spokeswoman said.

“The Prime Minister has agreed that the UK will provide logistical military assistance to help transport foreign troops and equipment quickly to Mali.

“We will not be deploying any British personnel in a combat role. They also agreed that the peacekeeping mission from West African countries needs to be strongly supported by countries in the region and deployed as quickly as possible.

“Both leaders agreed that the situation in Mali poses a real threat to international security given terrorist activity there.”

The Government’s National Security Council (NSC) is set to discuss the situation in Mali when it meets on Tuesday.

Hundreds of French troops were deployed in Mali on Saturday after state forces lost control of a strategically important town to al-Qaida-linked Islamists. The rebels seized a swathe of northern Mali last spring.

France insists its soldiers have been deployed to aid West African troops, backed by the UN, in the fight against the rebels.

Washington is currently pondering whether to join France and Britain in aiding local troops via intelligence sharing against the rebels.

Britain is to send two C-17 transport planes to Mali

President Hollande also sent French commandos into Somalia in a failed attempt to rescue hostage Denis Allex, who was kidnapped in July 2009. Two soldiers and Mr Allex are believed to have died in the bid.

Paris insists the two operations are entirely separate. The country’s terrorist threat level has been raised over fears of reprisals from extremists.

Earlier, Cameron released a statement expressing “deep concern” about the rebel advances.

“I welcome the military assistance France has provided to the Malian government, at their request, to halt this advance,” he said.

“These developments show the need to make urgent progress in implementing UN Security Council resolutions on Mali, and ensure that military intervention is reinforced by an inclusive political process leading to elections and a return to full civilian rule.

“I would also like to send personal condolences to the families of the French hostage killed in Somalia and those of the two soldiers either killed or missing in the rescue attempt.”

The Government’s National Security Council (NSC) is set to discuss the situation in Mali when it meets on Tuesday.

The statement from No.10:

I am deeply concerned about the recent rebel advances in Mali, which extend the reach of terrorist groups and threaten the stability of the country and the wider region. I welcome the military assistance France has provided to the Malian Government, at their request, to halt this advance.

“These developments show the need to make urgent progress in implementing UN Security Council resolutions on Mali, and ensure that military intervention is reinforced by an inclusive political process leading to elections and a return to full civilian rule.

“I would also like to send personal condolences to the families of the French hostage killed in Somalia, and those of the two soldiers either killed or missing in the rescue attempt. Last night’s tragic events underline how essential it is that we work together to combat terrorism in Africa.

Prominent American blogger and computer prodigy Aaron Swartz, who spoke against US President Barack Obama’s “kill list” and cyber attacks against Iran, has been found dead in New York.

Police found the body of the 26-year-old in his apartment in New York City borough of Brooklyn on Friday, said a spokeswoman for the city’s chief medical examiner.

Brooklyn’s chief medical examiner ruled the death a suicide by hanging, but no further detail is available about the mysterious death.

Last year, Swartz openly criticized the US and the Israeli regime for launching joint cyber attacks against Iran.

The blogger was also vocal in criticizing Obama’s so-called kill list and other policies.

Obama has been reportedly approving the names put on the “kill lists” used in the targeted killing operations carried out by US assassination drones.

Every week or so, more than 100 members of the US national security team gather via secure video teleconference run by the Pentagon and go over the biographies of suspects in Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan, and “nominate” those who should be targeted in the attacks.

Obama is then provided with the identities of those put on the “kill list” and signs off on every strike in Yemen and Somalia as well as the risky strikes in Pakistan.

Swartz was also widely credited for co-authoring the specifications for the Web feed format RSS 1.0 (Rich Site Summary) which he worked on at age 14.

RSS is designed to deliver content from sites that change constantly, such as news pages, to users.

Swartz was critical of monopoly of information by corporate cartels and believed that information should be shared and available for the benefit of society.

“Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for themselves,” he wrote in an online “manifesto” in 2008.

Based on that belief, the computer prodigy founded the nonprofit group DemandProgress.

The group launched a successful campaign to block a 2011 bill that the US House of Representatives called the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Had it been approved, the bill would have allowed court orders to restrain access to some websites considered to be involved in illegal sharing of intellectual property.

DemandProgress argued that the thwarted Stop Online Piracy Act would have broadly authorized the US government to censor and restrict legitimate Web communication.

ASH/HSN/MA

An eight-year-old British girl has been shot dead on holiday in Jamaica.

Reports have named the schoolgirl as Imani Green, who was killed in the town of Duncans on Friday night.

Imani, from Balham, south London, is understood to have died after being shot twice, including once in the head, in what may have been a revenge attack, the BBC has reported.

The young girl was with relatives at a cafe owned by her cousin when a gunman entered and opened fire following an argument.

Three others were injured in the shooting and taken to hospital for treatment but are thought to be in a stable condition.

Police told the BBC that there are a number of lines of inquiry, but one theory is that the shooting was in reprisal for an earlier gun attack.

Imani arrived on the island with her mother shortly before New Year to stay with relatives.

The Foreign Office has confirmed the death of a British national in Jamaica on Friday and said it is providing consular assistance to the family.

The Israeli military has forcefully evacuated a protest camp set up by Palestinian and foreign activists at a site designated for new illegal settlement units.

Israeli forces early Sunday clashed with some 200 activists who had set up makeshift tents in the occupied West Bank to prevent Tel Aviv from building new settler units.

“Hundreds of Israeli police came from all directions, surrounding all those who were in the tents and arresting them one by one,” Palestinian legislator Mustafa Barghouti said.

On Saturday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the closure of roads leading to the site.

Netanyahu’s office said on Saturday that the regime petitioned the Supreme Court to rescind an earlier ban blocking the evacuation, allowing it to use force against activists.

On Friday, the activists set up more than 20 tents in the controversial E1 area between the occupied east al-Quds (Jerusalem) and the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim to support the rights of Palestinian land owners.

Israel has been globally condemned for pursuing the building of thousands of illegal settler homes on occupied Palestinian land.

Last month, Israeli officials said they would go ahead with plans to build 6,500 settler units on Palestinian territory despite the opposition of the United Nations and the international community.

The presence and also the continued expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine are major obstacles for the efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.

More than half a million Israelis live in over 120 illegal settlements built since Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories of the West Bank and East al-Quds in 1967.

The UN and most countries regard the Israeli settlements as illegal because the territories were captured by Israel in a war in 1967 and are hence subject to the Geneva Conventions, which forbids construction on occupied lands.

DB/SZH/MA

French troops underestimated the strength of Islamist rebels when they launched a failed bid to free an intelligence officer held hostage in Somalia, the French defense minister said.

One French soldier died and another went missing during the raid in which the hostage was probably killed by his captors, Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said Saturday. Seventeen guerrillas were killed, he added.

The overnight operation involving some 50 troops and at least five helicopters to free the intelligence agent, with the alias of Denis Allex, was launched by elite forces from the DGSE secret service, he said.

“The resistance was stronger than expected and the heavy weaponry at the hands of the terrorists were clearly underestimated,” said Le Drian.

He said that one commado was dead and another missing and that “all indications” point to that fact Allex had been killed by his captors belonging to the Shebab, a Somali Islamist group affiliated to Al Qaeda.

However the group denied that Allex was dead and said they were also holding the missing French commando. They also threatened reprisals against France.

“In the end, it will be the French citizens who will inevitably taste the bitter consequences of their government’s devil-may-care attitude towards hostages,” a Shebab statement said.

French President Francois Hollande said the operation failed “despite the sacrifice of two of our soldiers and without doubt the killing of our hostage”, but underscored France’s determination “not give in to the blackmail of terrorists.”

Le Drian said the raid in Bulomarer, some 110 kilometres (70 miles) south of Mogadishu, was sparked by the “intransigence of the terrorists who have refused to negotiate for three and a half years and were holding Denis Allex in inhuman conditions.”

Although the raid happened on Friday, the same day French troops launched air strikes on Islamist militants in Mali, in west Africa, the minister said the operations were not connected.

Allex is among nine French hostages in Africa of whom at least six are held by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

A French expert involved in several hostage negotiations said “talks with the Somali Islamists had become impossible due to the huge ransom demanded and the marked opposition of the Americans to the payment of ransom.

“Denis Allex became a human shield and an operation had become indispensable,” the expert said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

A source close to the case, also speaking on condition of anonymity said the DGSE had been preparing a raid to free Allex for more than a year. It had “been cancelled at the last minute three or four times as we did not have a solid confirmation of his location,” the source added.

The Shebab statement said the French had carried away “several” of their dead.

“The helicopters attacked a house… upon the assumption that Denis Allex was being held at that location, but owing to a fatal intelligence blunder, the rescue mission turned disastrously wrong.

“The injured French soldier is now in the custody of the mujahedeen and Allex still remains safe and far from the location of the battle,” it said.

A Bulomarer resident, Idris Youssouf, told AFP: “We don’t know exactly what happened because the attack took place at night, but this morning we saw several corpses including that of a white man.

“Three civilians were also killed in the gunfight,” he said.

Allex was kidnapped in Somalia on July 14, 2009 — Bastille Day — along with a colleague. A second hostage, named as Marc Aubriere, was free a month later, in what the French government said was an escape.

The Al-Qaeda linked Shebab lost their main strongholds in the south and centre of Somalia following an offensive launched in mid-2011 by an African Union force, but they still control some rural areas.

Allex appeared in a video in June 2010 appealing to Paris to drop its support for the Somali government.

He last appeared in another video in October looking gaunt and calling on Hollande to work for his release.

Somalia has not had an effective central government since 1991.

France has a recent history of botched operations, including a failed joint raid with Niger forces in 2011 that left both hostages dead: and another in Mali that led to the hostage’s execution.

In 2009, French commandos launched a raid to free a French family whose yacht had been hijacked by Somali pirates. They retook the boat but accidentally shot the father.

Several hundred people have taken to the streets in Azerbaijan to protest against the suspicious death of a soldier.

On Saturday, around 500 protesters staged a demonstration in Baku’s Fountain Square against the death of 18-year-old Jeyhun Gubadov.

The demonstrators held up pictures of Gubadov and shouted slogans such as “No to murders in peace time.”

The protesters also demanded the resignation of Defense Minister Colonel General Safar Abiyev.

Clashes broke out after police forces dispersed the crowd. Several people were arrested.

Gubadov died at a military barracks in Azerbaijan on January 7.

Mubariz Gurbanly, a leading parliamentary deputy in New Azerbaijan Party, said in an interview APA state news agency that the demands of the protesters have been heard.

Following Gubadov’s death, several soldiers were reportedly detained for investigation.

The country’s defense ministry says that the soldier died of heart failure while his family says he was beaten to death.

NT/SZH

Several hundred people have taken to the streets in Azerbaijan to protest against the suspicious death of a soldier.

On Saturday, around 500 protesters staged a demonstration in Baku’s Fountain Square against the death of 18-year-old Jeyhun Gubadov.

The demonstrators held up pictures of Gubadov and shouted slogans such as “No to murders in peace time.”

The protesters also demanded the resignation of Defense Minister Colonel General Safar Abiyev.

Clashes broke out after police forces dispersed the crowd. Several people were arrested.

Gubadov died at a military barracks in Azerbaijan on January 7.

Mubariz Gurbanly, a leading parliamentary deputy in New Azerbaijan Party, said in an interview APA state news agency that the demands of the protesters have been heard.

Following Gubadov’s death, several soldiers were reportedly detained for investigation.

The country’s defense ministry says that the soldier died of heart failure while his family says he was beaten to death.

NT/SZH

The Islamic Republic of Iran has produced 253,300 tons of aluminum ingots in the first nine months of the current Iranian calendar year, which started on March 20, 2012.

The volume of aluminum ingot production in the country over the previous Iranian calendar month of Azar (November 21-December 20, 2012) stood at 29,200 tons, which showed a 5.5% growth compared to the corresponding period a year earlier, IRNA reported.

The report added that Iran produced 165,800 tons of alumina powder in the first nine months of the current Iranian calendar year.

Last May, Iranian Deputy Minister of Industry, Mine and Trade Vajihollah Ja’fari said Iran’s aluminum output would exceed 400,000 tons by the end of the current Iranian calendar year, and would hit 1.5 million tons by the end of the country’s 20-year Development Vision Plan, which ends before 2025.

He added that the Iranian Mining and Mineral Industries Development and Renovation Organization would implement various projects across Iran to achieve the aluminum output target set for this year.

The official highlighted that Iran’s ranking in production of aluminum ‘has risen by four steps since 2005 to stand at number 22’ in the world aluminum output.

Ja’fari stressed that Iran ‘plans to book the 14th rank’ in the global aluminum production by the end of the 5th Economic Development Plan (2010-2015).

MP/HSN

The Islamic Republic of Iran has produced 253,300 tons of aluminum ingots in the first nine months of the current Iranian calendar year, which started on March 20, 2012.

The volume of aluminum ingot production in the country over the previous Iranian calendar month of Azar (November 21-December 20, 2012) stood at 29,200 tons, which showed a 5.5% growth compared to the corresponding period a year earlier, IRNA reported.

The report added that Iran produced 165,800 tons of alumina powder in the first nine months of the current Iranian calendar year.

Last May, Iranian Deputy Minister of Industry, Mine and Trade Vajihollah Ja’fari said Iran’s aluminum output would exceed 400,000 tons by the end of the current Iranian calendar year, and would hit 1.5 million tons by the end of the country’s 20-year Development Vision Plan, which ends before 2025.

He added that the Iranian Mining and Mineral Industries Development and Renovation Organization would implement various projects across Iran to achieve the aluminum output target set for this year.

The official highlighted that Iran’s ranking in production of aluminum ‘has risen by four steps since 2005 to stand at number 22’ in the world aluminum output.

Ja’fari stressed that Iran ‘plans to book the 14th rank’ in the global aluminum production by the end of the 5th Economic Development Plan (2010-2015).

MP/HSN

People have taken to the streets in southern Turkey to condemn US forces based in the country over reports that the soldiers desecrated Islam.

The protest was held on Saturday in the province of Adana, home to the Incirlik Air Base, where US troops are stationed.

The demonstrators demanded that the culprits be identified and punished. They also called for the expulsion of the US troops from Turkey.

The rally came after reports that a group of drunk US soldiers broke the windows of a mosque and destroyed copies of the Qur’an on New Year’s Eve.

The Adana Governor’s office is said to have launched an investigation into the allegations.

The Turkish military denies the sacrilegious move was committed by US troops.

MRS/MA

People have taken to the streets in southern Turkey to condemn US forces based in the country over reports that the soldiers desecrated Islam.

The protest was held on Saturday in the province of Adana, home to the Incirlik Air Base, where US troops are stationed.

The demonstrators demanded that the culprits be identified and punished. They also called for the expulsion of the US troops from Turkey.

The rally came after reports that a group of drunk US soldiers broke the windows of a mosque and destroyed copies of the Qur’an on New Year’s Eve.

The Adana Governor’s office is said to have launched an investigation into the allegations.

The Turkish military denies the sacrilegious move was committed by US troops.

MRS/MA

Qatar has made a fresh call for an Arab force to intervene in Syria if diplomatic efforts made by UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi fail to restore calm in country.

“Arabs must think seriously about sending forces to ensure security in Syria if diplomatic efforts fail to resolve the crisis,” Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, said in remarks broadcast by Doha-based Al Jazeera television.

“It is not a question of intervention in Syria in favor of one party against the other, but rather a force to preserve security,” stated Sheikh Hamad, who also heads an Arab League committee on Syria.

Doha had made a similar proposal in September, where the Qatari told the UN General Assembly that Arab states should intervene in Syria if the Security Council failed to end the crisis there.

Brahimi is trying to build on an agreement, reached in Geneva in June, that calls for a transitional period in Syria.

Meanwhile, differences between Russia and the US over the future of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad continue.

The United States – along with Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia – has been pushing for the ouster of the Assad government.

Russia on Saturday voiced support for Brahimi’s peace efforts but insisted Assad’s exit cannot be a precondition for a deal to end the prolonged conflict in Syria.

Syria has experienced 21 months of deadly unrest, which has claimed the lives of many people, including large numbers of security forces.

The Syrian government says the chaos that began in the country in March 2011 is being orchestrated from outside. There are also reports that a very large number of the armed militants are foreign nationals.

MRS/MA

Qatar has made a fresh call for an Arab force to intervene in Syria if diplomatic efforts made by UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi fail to restore calm in country.

“Arabs must think seriously about sending forces to ensure security in Syria if diplomatic efforts fail to resolve the crisis,” Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, said in remarks broadcast by Doha-based Al Jazeera television.

“It is not a question of intervention in Syria in favor of one party against the other, but rather a force to preserve security,” stated Sheikh Hamad, who also heads an Arab League committee on Syria.

Doha had made a similar proposal in September, where the Qatari told the UN General Assembly that Arab states should intervene in Syria if the Security Council failed to end the crisis there.

Brahimi is trying to build on an agreement, reached in Geneva in June, that calls for a transitional period in Syria.

Meanwhile, differences between Russia and the US over the future of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad continue.

The United States – along with Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia – has been pushing for the ouster of the Assad government.

Russia on Saturday voiced support for Brahimi’s peace efforts but insisted Assad’s exit cannot be a precondition for a deal to end the prolonged conflict in Syria.

Syria has experienced 21 months of deadly unrest, which has claimed the lives of many people, including large numbers of security forces.

The Syrian government says the chaos that began in the country in March 2011 is being orchestrated from outside. There are also reports that a very large number of the armed militants are foreign nationals.

MRS/MA

French aircraft have pounded Mali for a second day, killing several militants and a large number of civilians, a Malian rebel group says.

A spokesman for one of Mali’s rebel groups, Ansar Dine, said on Saturday that only five of the people killed by French airstrikes were members of the group.

However, the French bombardment left hospitals in the town of Konna overwhelmed with injured and dead, including many women, children, and elderly people, the Ansar Dine spokesman said.

A resident of the northern city of Gao also said hospitals in his city were full of injured and dead.

Human Rights Watch said 10 civilians, including three children, were killed during the airstrikes.

“Konna residents told Human Rights Watch some 10 civilians were killed in the fighting, including 3 children who drowned trying to cross the river to safety,” said Corinne Dufka, the senior West Africa researcher for Human Rights Watch.

The Malian troops drove the militants out of Konna, which was captured by militants on Thursday, after France intervened on Friday with airstrikes to halt advances by the rebels, who control the north of the West African country.

“We’ve already held back the progress of our adversaries and inflicted heavy losses on them,” French President Francois Hollande said on Saturday evening. “Our mission is not over yet.”

Malian officials say Nigeria and Senegal have sent ground forces to support government forces in the conflict.

Chaos broke out in the West African country after Malian President Amadou Toumani Toure was toppled in a military coup on March 22, 2012. The coup leaders said they mounted the coup in response to the government’s inability to contain the Tuareg rebellion in the north of the country, which had been going on for two months.

However, in the wake of the coup d’état, the Tuareg rebels took control of the entire northern desert region, but the Ansar Dine extremists then pushed them aside and took control of the region, which is larger than France or Texas.

GJH/HGL

Iran, Iraq, and Syria have signed a memorandum of understanding to expand their trade cooperation and boost the transit of goods through their borders.

Deputy Iranian Roads and Urban Development Minister Shahriyar Afandizadeh told the Fars News Agency on Saturday that the tripartite agreement on transportation and the transit of goods was signed in Tehran last week.

He added that senior Iranian, Iraqi, and Syrian trade officials agreed to facilitate the transport of goods by rail and road.

Afandizadeh noted that a rail line connects Bandar Imam Khomeini on the Persian Gulf in Iran’s southwestern province of Khuzestan and the town of Shalamcheh on the border with Iraq.

He said plans have been drawn up for the establishment of a railway connection between Shalamcheh and the Iraqi port city of Basra. Once the project is completed, the railway link will stretch to the Syrian port city of Latakia and subsequently to North Africa, the Iranian official stated.

Afandizadeh added that the Iran-Iraq-Syria railroad connection will accelerate the transit of goods from the northern coast of the Persian Gulf to African and European countries and make the process more economical.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran attaches paramount importance to the transit of goods and is seeking to expand its transit ties with neighboring states,” Iran’s deputy roads and urban development minister said.

He also noted that Iran is making efforts to boost the transit of goods from the port city of Chabahar in the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan to former Soviet republics.

Iran, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Oman, and Qatar also plan to sign an agreement to enhance transit cooperation in the near future, Afandizadeh said in conclusion.

MP/HGL

Malian troops backed by French air power pushed back Islamist rebels in the centre of the country, as African nations pledged troops on the ground, some as early as Sunday, and Britain promised technical support.

French President Francois Hollande hailed the success of the operation, but ordered tighter security at home in case of reprisal attacks from Islamic extremists.

French Mirage fighters carried out a second day of air strikes Saturday to stop the advance of columns of Islamist fighters driving south, Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told reporters.

But France suffered one casualty, a pilot killed carrying out air raids, he added.

The Islamist fighters have controlled the north of the country since last March and had been threatening to push south. But Hollande said French air power had halted their advance.

“Our foes have suffered heavy losses,” he said, stressing that the French intervention had “only one goal, which is the fight against terrorism”.

A statement late Saturday from Mali’s interim president Dioncounda Traore said 11 soldiers had died and some 60 had been wounded in the fighting.

“They fell on the field of honour at Konna,” the central town recaptured from the Islamists on Friday.

Earlier, a Malian officer in the central town of Mopti, near the frontline, said dozens, possibly as many as a hundred Islamists had been killed in Konna. Residents there described the bodies of men wearing Arab clothing and turbans.

Malian troops recaptured the town just a day after it had fallen to the insurgents, who had threatened to continue their southward advance.

Human Rights Watch, citing reports from residents, said at least 10 civilians including three children had died in Konna.

Children forced by the Islamists to fight in their ranks had been wounded and possibly killed in the fighting, said HRW’s Corinne Dufka.

Konna lies some 700 kilometres (430 miles) northeast of the capital Bamako, but was in government-controlled territory, near the demarcation line separating the Islamist-controlled north from the rest of the country.

The French intervention appeared to galvanise plans for a UN-approved African intervention force in Mali, which only a few days ago had not been expected to deploy until September.

On Saturday Burkina Faso, Niger and Senegal each pledged 500 troops for the force. Ivory Coast’s African Integration Minister Ally Coulibaly said the first elements could arrive as early as Sunday.

“We are not letting up the pressure,” he added. “It is the reconquest of north Mali that has just begun.”

Ivory Coast currently holds the rotating presidency of the 15-nation West African bloc ECOWAS, which late on Friday cleared the immediate deployment of troops for the force.

The office of British Prime Minister David Cameron told AFP it was sending two military transport planes to Mali to help transport foreign troops and equipment.

But a statement earlier from his office made it clear there would be no British troops on the ground.

On Friday, US officials suggested Washington might offer the French logistical support, including surveillance drones and refuelling facilities.

Hollande said that following the intervention in Mali he had ordered tightener security at home.

France “has to take all necessary precautions” in the face of a terrorist threat including increased surveillance of public buildings and transport, he said.

France has also deployed troops in the Malian capital to protect the former colonial ruler’s 6,000-strong expatriate community.

A failed French commando raid in Somalia overnight Friday to Saturday against Islamist Shebab militants holding an intelligence agent is also thought to have increased the risk of attacks on French targets.

In London, around 60 Islamists including women in veils protested outside the French embassy in London against the intervention, holding placards that read “French army, you will pay” and “Sharia is the only solution for Mali”.

The collapse of Mali, once seen as a democratic success story in the region, had already raised fears that the Islamist-held north could become a haven for extremist groups. Some observers feared their recent advance south threatened the whole country.

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso on Saturday joined the chorus of Western support for the operation, praising the “courageous action by French troops”.

But Russia’s Africa envoy, Mikhail Margelov, lashed out at Paris.

“African residents aside, no one else can or should solve the continent’s problems,” Margelov said.

The Islamists seized northern Mali, a territory the size of France, in the wake of last year’s March 22 coup, which ousted democratically elected president Amadou Toumani Toure.

Captain Amadou Sanogo, who briefly took power after the coup, on Saturday welcomed the French intervention, acknowledging their decisive role in comments broadcast on state television.

Sanogo still plays a key role in the country’s affairs despite having stepped aside in the face of international pressure.

Since taking power in the north, the Islamists have destroyed centuries-old Muslim mausoleums they see as heretical and imposed an extreme form of Islamic law, flogging, amputating and sometimes executing those they see as transgressors.

The clean-up from the 2012 floods is expected to cost insurers over £1bn and push premiums up for a fourth consecutive year.

Eight thousand properties were flooded last year, according to the Environment Agency , as flooding remains Britain’s greatest risk.

Residents and business owners in the town of Braunton in Devon experienced flash floods in the days before Christmas.

Pub landlord Mark Ridge, from the London Inn, is expecting to claim in excess of £160,000.

He had initially thought the damage could be repaired in a fortnight but has now been told he will have to close until Easter.

“It soon became apparent that it was a rip-out job, strip the whole pub, and get the insurances involved,” said Mr Ridge.

“That’s everything from the buildings, to contents, stock, loss of earnings, staff wages have to be claimed for as well. All of which we have to pay for first and then claim back – so it’s not an easy task.”

Four of the top five wettest years on record have been since the year 2,000 which is putting pressure on the Government and insurers to renew their 10-year deal to provide universal cover for all homes, including those in flood prone areas.

Mohammad Khan, a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), said: “The weather events of 2012 have dented insurers’ profits and will probably lead to renewal premiums rising by up to 5% for those unaffected by the floods and by up to 50% for those flooded.

“The UK floods therefore, have also brought into sharp focus the current standoff between the insurance industry and the Government on the renewal of the Flood Principles – agreement needs to be reached in 2013.”

The negotiations over continued cover from insurers, in return from assurances from the Government including the managing of flood risks and robust planning controls, will continue until June.

Matt Cullen, from the Association of British Insurers , warned: “We’ve calculated following some extensive research that if we don’t reach agreement with the Government over what replaces the Statement of Principles then around 200,000 homes in flood-proned areas could struggle to access cover.”

But the Government has played down the likelihood of such a situation.

A Defra spokesperson said: “We want to find a lasting solution that secures the affordability and availability of flood insurance for the first time, without placing unsustainable costs on wider policyholders or taxpayers.

“Our primary role is to prevent flooding in the first place. We are on course to spend £2.3bn on preventing flooding and coastal erosion over this four-year period.”

PwC said it estimates the cost of the floods to the insurance industry in 2012 to now add up to around £1bn.

Submitted by Jim Quinn from The Burning Platform

Free Shit “Disabled” Army Massing Its Forces

Whenever I hear a liberal MSM talking head say that Social Security is not a problem, I want to throw something at the TV. Obama and Romney both declared the Social Security system sound. They lied to the American people that it will only require minor tweaks to keep it solvent for a hundred years. Liberals hate math. The Social Security System has an unfunded liability of $18 trillion. This means our politicians have promised $18 trillion more than they can possibly pay out. I guess $18 trillion is trivial to a liberal minded person like Krugman or Obama. Lucky for them that 99% of all Americans don’t understand what unfunded liability even means. The chart below gives the gory details. The Social Security system had a negative cashflow of $47.8 billion last year, after running a $48 billion deficit the year before. You may notice that 77% of this deficit was created by the SSDI program, where the depressed masses gather after their 99 weeks of unemployment run out. Do you have a headache? Are you depressed because liquor stores don’t accept food stamps? Did you pull a muscle getting on your government provided rascal? Trouble hearing your Obama phone? Then you are eligible for SSDI.

The funniest line item on the chart is the Assets at End of Year line, which shows the Social Security system having $2.7 trillion. Even using this funny number, the SSDI will be broke in three years. Al Gore told us this money was in a lockbox. They take it out of your paycheck and put it into a fund, waiting for you to retire and collect what you’re owed. Right? Wrong! If you tried to observe the vault with the $2.7 trillion on deposit, you’d be looking for a long long time. You see, the noble politicians in Washington DC took the $2.7 trillion and spent it on undeclared wars overseas, ethanol subsidies, investments in Solyndra, turtle crossings, tax breaks for hedge funds, TARP, bailing out AIG, subsidizing GM, $800 billion stimulus packages, cash for clunkers, homebuyer tax credits, predator drones, DHS, Sandy relief and thousands of other buckets of shit. There are nothing but IOU’s in the vault. The $2.7 trillion is long gone. The U.S. government had to borrow $47.8 billion to fund SS last year. They will have to borrow over $50 billion this year. There will be 10,000 per day turning 65 for the next decade. The borrowing will rise exponentially. If the $2.7 trillion actually existed, why would we need to borrow?

The trust funds are required by law to hand over all surplus revenues to the Treasury and the Treasury then provides “special issue” non-marketable bonds–essentially electronic IOUs–to the trust funds in return for the cash. These “IOUs” become part of the national debt. When the Treasury pays “interest” that increases the value of the Social Security Trust Funds it does so by increasing the number of IOUs it owes the trust funds. When the Social Security program runs a net cash flow deficit, as it has in the last three fiscal years, the Treasury needs to borrow cash from the “public” to keep the program funded.

Does this look like a trend that is going to reverse itself or level out with 10,000 Boomers turning 65 years old every freaking day?

These costs will be exceeding $1 trillion per year in the near future. Meanwhile, the number of workers per retiree will continue to fall as it has for decades. In 1945 there were 42 workers per retiree. In 1965 there were 5 workers per retiree. Today there are less than 2.5 workers per retiree. There are only 1.6 full time private workers for every one retiree. With Obamacare working its magic of destroying jobs across the land, there is much less revenue going into the Social Security System. The system is unsustainable and ignoring the problem will not make it go away.

A recent article on Bloomberg below barely scratches the surface of the massive fraud going on in the SSDI program. Those who think we owe them a living are faking disabilities by the millions. The number of annual applications were flat at 2.1 million per year between 2004 and 2007. They now exceed 3 million per year, as the Obama administration has actively attempted to get more people on the dole. In a matter of a couple years, there were suddenly 40% more people getting disabled. Amazing!!!

Shockingly, as 1.4 million people have been kicked off the 99 week unemployment rolls, the number of people applying for SSDI skyrocketed. Just because the scumbags on Wall Street and in the rest of corporate America commit fraud on a massive scale does not mean we should look the other way when lowlifes in our community do the same thing on a smaller scale. The working middle class pays the bill for the cost of both frauds. More than 90% of all the people who go onto SSDI never go back to work. This program was supposed to be short term until people could recover and go back to work. There are now 8.83 million people so disabled, they supposedly can’t work. There are only 12 million officially unemployed people in the country. The government is so incompetent, they barely check the applications for SSDI. Anyone with an ounce of brain power (this disqualifies anyone on MSNBC) knows that at least 50% of the people on SSDI are capable of some form of employment.

The Social Security system is already broke. The money is gone. Pretending all is well is for fools and there are millions of them in this country. If someone within the leadership of this country was honest with the American people we could fix the Social Security system. A combination of age adjustments, means testing, and reconfiguration of income levels subject to the tax could make it viable. Too bad Washington is inhabited by snakes, scumbags, liars and knaves. Corrupt lowlife politicians, lying liberal media whores, and a delusional populace will ignore the Social Security problem until it becomes a crisis of epic proportions. Then they will propose wrong solutions and implement them badly. Some things are easily predictable.

OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.

The Administration shares your desire for job creation and a strong national defense, but a Death Star isn’t on the horizon. Here are a few reasons:

The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We’re working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.

The Administration does not support blowing up planets.

Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?

However, look carefully (here’s how) and you’ll notice something already floating in the sky — that’s no Moon, it’s a Space Station! Yes, we already have a giant, football field-sized International Space Station in orbit around the Earth that’s helping us learn how humans can live and thrive in space for long durations. The Space Station has six astronauts — American, Russian, and Canadian — living in it right now, conducting research, learning how to live and work in space over long periods of time, routinely welcoming visiting spacecraft and repairing onboard garbage mashers, etc. We’ve also got two robot science labs — one wielding a laser — roving around Mars, looking at whether life ever existed on the Red Planet.

Keep in mind, space is no longer just government-only. Private American companies, through NASA’s Commercial Crew and Cargo Program Office (C3PO), are ferrying cargo — and soon, crew — to space for NASA, and are pursuing human missions to the Moon this decade.

Even though the United States doesn’t have anything that can do the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs, we’ve got two spacecraft leaving the Solar System and we’re building a probe that will fly to the exterior layers of the Sun. We are discovering hundreds of new planets in other star systems and building a much more powerful successor to the Hubble Space Telescope that will see back to the early days of the universe.

We don’t have a Death Star, but we do have floating robot assistants on the Space Station, a President who knows his way around a light saber and advanced (marshmallow) cannon, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is supporting research on building Luke’s arm, floating droids, and quadruped walkers.

We are living in the future! Enjoy it. Or better yet, help build it by pursuing a career in a science, technology, engineering or math-related field. The President has held the first-ever White House science fairs and Astronomy Night on the South Lawn because he knows these domains are critical to our country’s future, and to ensuring the United States continues leading the world in doing big things.

If you do pursue a career in a science, technology, engineering or math-related field, the Force will be with us! Remember, the Death Star’s power to destroy a planet, or even a whole star system, is insignificant next to the power of the Force.

Paul Shawcross is Chief of the Science and Space Branch at the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Tens of thousands of demonstrators have taken to the streets of Bilbao to call on the Spanish government to allow ETA prisoners to serve the rest of their prison terms in jails nearer to their homes.

The ETA supporters shouted “Independence!” and “Amnesty now!” in a massive demonstration, which was held in Bilbao, the capital of the Spanish province of Biscay in the autonomous community of the Basque Country, on Saturday, AFP reported.

The demonstrators and the prisoners’ family members were led by a bus emblazoned with the slogan “Euskal Presoak Euskal Herrira” — which means Basque prisoners to the Basque country.

“We will not have peace as long as this issue of prisoners remains unresolved as it is the key to solving the conflict,” one of the protesters said.

French Basque activist Aurore Martin said he was “very impressed at the size of the protest.”

On December 22, 2013, Martin was arrested on charges of belonging to a terrorist group but was later released on bail.

According to the Basque prisoners’ association, Herrira, 607 of the 700 ETA members are in prisons in France, Spain, Portugal, and Britain.

Listed as a terrorist organization by Spain, the United States, and the European Union, ETA is held accountable for the deaths of over 800 people in bombings and shootings since the late 1960s.

The group is seeking the creation of a Basque homeland in northern Spain and southwest France.

NT/HGL

Katie Price has announced she is to get married for the third time.

Price, 34, said builder and part-time stripper Kieran Hayler proposed over a Christmas dinner, adding “when something feels right I just go for it”, The Sun on Sunday reported.

The mother of three, who has previously been married to Australian singer Peter Andre and cage fighter Alex Reid, split from Argentinian model Leandro Penna in October.

She told The Sun on Sunday that her 25-year-old fiance “treats her like a princess” and is a “true gentleman”.

She said: “He is a normal guy, he works hard and the kids love him. It just feels right. I know what people will say about me because I’ve heard it all before. But life is short so when something feels right, I just go for it.”

The pair began tweeting pictures and messages to each other in recent weeks.

Mr Hayler is reported to be a plasterer who works for a building firm and is also a part-time stripper who has appeared in EastEnders.

Price has two children, Junior, aged seven, and Princess, aged five, with ex-husband Peter Andre, 39. The pair met on reality TV show I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here! in 2005, but divorced in 2009.

She married Reid a year later in 2010 but split from the 36-year-old less than a year later.

Price also has a son, Harvey, aged 10, with ex-Manchester United striker Dwight Yorke.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is not in a coma and is “responding well to his medical care,” his brother says.

Adan Chavez made the remarks in a statement published on Saturday.

“Reports that the president is in a coma and that the family is discussing ending life support are totally false,” the president’s brother said.

On Friday, Venezuelan Vice President Nicolas Maduro flew to Cuba to visit the ailing president.

“I’m leaving for Havana to continue that work of visiting the family, meeting with his medical team, visiting our commander president,” Maduro said on television in Caracas.

The 58-year-old Venezuelan president traveled to Havana on December 10 for a fourth operation after his cancer reappeared, despite a year and a half of treatment.

In late March 2012, Chavez began radiation treatment in Cuba after an operation in February 2012 that removed a second cancerous tumor from his pelvic region. Chavez’s first tumor, which was baseball-sized, was removed in June 2011, and then he received chemotherapy.

Chavez, who came to power in 1999, was reelected to a new six-year term in October.

NT/HGL

“If you have to forecast, forecast often“

– Edgar Fiedler, assistant Treasury secretary for economic policy under Nixon/Ford administrations

Need just one chart to avoid anyone who says they have any idea where the S&P will close in three years… or two… or one? Here it is: the graphic below shows that when it comes to predicting the closing level of the S&P several years into the future, absolutely nobody, and certainly not the consensus outlook, has any clue. However, they sure make up for lack of accuracy and insight with hope, optimism, and relentless persistence and enthusiasm to be wrong again and again and again.

Source: Global High Yield Perspectives – Brandywine Global Investment Management

Tens of thousands of Pakistani Shia Muslims have staged demonstrations across the country to condemn Thursday’s massacre in the southwestern city of Quetta.

More than 90 Pakistanis lost their lives in twin bomb attacks that targeted Shia Muslims in a crowded billiard hall in Quetta.

Two other bomb attacks were carried out in Pakistan on Thursday — one in the Swat Valley and one more in Quetta – that left a total of 130 people dead and nearly 300 injured. The outlawed terrorist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claimed responsibility for the billiard hall attack.

On Saturday and Friday, demonstrations were held in the cities of Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Quetta, Hyderabad, Sukkur, Khairpur, Multan, Muzaffarabad, and many other cities and towns across the country.

The gatherings were organized by the Imamia Student Organization (ISO), the All Pakistan Shia Action Committee (APSAC), and Majlis Wahdat-e-Muslimeen Pakistan (MWMP).

The demonstrators shouted slogans against the government and criticized Pakistan’s security forces for failing to provide security to the country’s Shia Muslims.

They also denounced the Saudi Arabian policy of funding extremist groups that commit acts of violence against Muslims in Pakistan.

In addition, the protesters called on the government to take immediate action against the forces involved in the sectarian killings and said more demonstrations would be staged if justice is not served.

A demonstration was also held outside the High Commission for Pakistan in London, where protesters chanted slogans condemning the Shia killings in the South Asian country.

In Quetta, Shia leaders and the relatives of the billiard hall attack victims demanded that the military take control of the city to protect them and said they would not allow the victims to be buried until their demands are met.

Human rights groups have vehemently criticized the Pakistani government for its failure to stem the rising tide of violence against the country’s Shia Muslims.

On Friday, the Pakistan director of Human Rights Watch also commented the issue.

“2012 was the bloodiest year for Pakistan’s Shia community in living memory and if this latest attack is any indication, 2013 has started on an even more dismal note,” Ali Dayan Hasan said.

“As Shia community members continue to be slaughtered in cold blood, the callousness and indifference of authorities offers a damning indictment of the state, its military, and security agencies,” Hasan said.

“Pakistan’s tolerance for religious extremists is not just destroying lives and alienating entire communities, it is destroying Pakistani society across the board,” he added.

GJH/HGL

From Jerry Haworth of 36 South Capital

Let’s Legalise Cocaine

Think about it — a substance which makes one feel good, promotes a feeling of well-being and confidence…..what is the problem with that?

The problem, as I explained to all my teenagers, is not that drugs are inherently bad per se, it is the medium to long term consequences of drug use that inevitably leave one worse off and forces one to make decisions one would not normally make e.g. selling your mother’s wedding ring for drug money.

Like the good pseudo-parents they are, the governments have (probably correctly) stepped in and outlawed drugs and their use. But there are other substances which also make one feel good, promote a feeling of well-being and confidence but is just as dangerous. With this substance the government does NOT limit use but promotes it! It is in fact the grower and distributor!

What is this stuff? Hint …. Comes in two flavours: money (present money) and credit (future money).

Our pseudo parents, the governments, are money pushers and we are the junkies. They have encouraged their “children” to take up the habit. Thus, we have all become addicts, the world is one big “needle park” and we are so habituated that any call to limit its creation is met with derision. The fiscal cliff, which should be renamed ‘last stop before insanity,’ was merely an attempt by the “Salvation Army” to limit our addiction, to put a boundary on how much longer we can go on without consequence.

The governments have driven interest rates to near zero as well. What does this mean? Interest rates are like an automatic ship stabiliser. If the economy tilts too much towards credit, interest rates go up, telling the economy that there is too much credit in the system and vice versa. If the economy tilts too much towards present money, interest rates fall basically indicating there can be more credit money in the system. When governments subvert this indicator by effectively switching it off by artificially driving rates to near zero, there is no way to tell the correct mix of credit and money in the system. This suits the government, they know they have too much credit in the system (especially their own bonds) and they know that there is so much other credit in the system that any Volker-like move to raise rates to correct the imbalance would send the economy into another Great Depression. Thus they distort the present money/ future money balance to suit their and our short term avoidance of pain all at the expense of the medium and long term. Lyrics from Hotel California spring to mind, “you can check out any time you like but you can never leave”.

At time of writing I don’t know how the debt ceiling will turn out but I am eerily calm about it, the government, the ”pusher” of money, is not going to stop “pushing”. And the medium to long term consequences of this money and credit creation to solve a previous “money and credit creation” problem will be disastrous for so many. Why? It will result in high inflation and probably more likely the serious strain, stagflation. Imagine 20% unemployment, 20 % inflation and 1% interest rates. How would you protect wealth and savings?

The upshot of this scenario would be even more severe wealth inequality as a lucky few closest to the government spigots would benefit “oligarch style”. Hardest hit will be the middle class, the working mule of society, as inflation or stagflation tightens its stranglehold. The ultimate sadness will be taken to its logical conclusion; we will have a great depression anyway, in million dollar units instead of 10 dollar units.

So if our money junkie pseudo-parents, the government, have no regard for our medium to long term well-being, why stop at money? Legalise drugs! Don’t pretend to have our interests at heart in one important area of our lives, our health and not in the other important area of our lives, our wealth.

For the record the above is nothing more than a metaphor, I don’t really condone the use of drugs and don’t want them legalised.

A close ally of Britain’s heir to the throne, Prince Charles, has been accused of money-laundering at the Baltic International Bank, founded by the Prince of Wales and a Kuwaiti entrepreneur.

Latvian banker, Valeri Belokon, the principal shareholder of the joint venture called PF Urban, is being implicated by the authorities in the central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan in a case, in which millions of pounds’ worth of state assets have been stolen.

The accused eastern European financier has also been appointed to the board of trustees of The Prince’s Foundation, one of Charles’s charities.

Belokon is a former close business associate of Maxim Bakiyev, whose father, Kurmanbek, was president of Kyrgyzstan until 2010, when he fled to Belarus following an uprising. The men have been partners in ventures across Europe and Asia.

Bakiyev, who lives in Surrey and has sought asylum in the UK, is now fighting extradition to the US over allegations of insider dealing. Like Belokon, he is wanted in Kyrgyzstan on charges of money laundering and theft. Nicknamed “the prince” because of his luxurious lifestyle, Bakiyev rarely went anywhere in his native country without bodyguards.

MOL/HE

(Image from twitter user@man_on_crack)

Hundreds of Israeli security forces have raided and evicted an outpost set up by Palestinian activists in the occupied West Bank, despite an earlier injunction by Israel’s High Court preventing the government from such action.

Several activists have been reportedly detained.

On Friday dozens of Palestinians pitched tents in the disputed E1 area, where Israel plans to build settlements. Around 20 large, steel-framed tents were set up in the “Bab Al Shams” camp, in a bid to preserve the area for an independent Palestinian state.

Israeli forces entered the encampment early Sunday morning after surrounding the site late on Saturday and preventing activists from entering.

The eviction was ordered by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and came despite a temporary injunction ordered by Israel’s High Court preventing the state from taking such action, Haaretz reports. The government told the court that the evacuation was a matter of “urgent security.”

The eviction comes despite the tents being pitched on private Palestinian land, according to Haaretz .

The building of Israeli settlements is frowned upon by many international powers which say the move will be detrimental to securing an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal. Direct peace talks between Israel and Palestine broke down in 2010.

Israel has frozen building in E1 for many years, after coming under pressure from then US President George W. Bush.

However, Netanyahu announced settlement plans after the Palestinians won de-facto state recognition at the UN General Assembly last year. Those plans involve building around 4,000 housing units in the area.

(Image from twitter user@AbirKopty)

The photo reportedly shows owners of the land where “Bab Al Shams” stands showing the deeds of ownership. (Image from twitter user@Tweet_Palestine)

A couple of articles out this week lay out the reasons for Republicans’ whinging about not dealing with the White House anymore on anything, never, no how.

First, there’s Jonathan Chait’s analysis of the current stonewalling strategy; namely, not one penny more of revenue from anywhere no matter what, but plenty of cut, cut, cut. And absolutely no deal. Here’s the paragraph that caught my eye, though:

So, step one: Block any compromise to reduce the deficit. Step two: Blame Obama for failing to reduce the deficit. I actually think this plan can work.

This may sound like a cynical strategy. And it is. But it’s not a purely cynical strategy. It reflects an important intellectual development on the right. Capretta is advocating not just the classic no-taxes-ever approach that has defined the party for years, but also its newer (or newly fervent) belief in privatizing health-care services.

Aha, and that follows what I’m seeing on a state level.

Rick Scott’s little song and dance was the first salvo. Scott, as you’ll recall, decided he would turn down the Medicaid expansion dollars from the federal government because he’s crazy. But after hospitals lobbied him hard, he went to Kathleen Sibelius looking for a deal that went like this: Let me privatize all Medicaid services and I’ll take your Medicaid dollars.

What a guy. And that leads me to this article in the New York Times on Wednesday, addressing the differences in care between for-profit providers and not-for-profit providers.

Writing about his colleagues’ research in his 1988 book “The Nonprofit Economy,” the economist Burton Weisbrod provided a straightforward explanation: “differences in the pursuit of profit.” Sedatives are cheap, Mr. Weisbrod noted. “Less expensive than, say, giving special attention to more active patients who need to be kept busy.”

This behavior was hardly surprising. Hospitals run for profit are also less likely than nonprofit and government-run institutions to offer services like home health care and psychiatric emergency care, which are not as profitable as open-heart surgery.

A shareholder might even applaud the creativity with which profit-seeking institutions go about seeking profit. But the consequences of this pursuit might not be so great for other stakeholders in the system – patients, for instance. One study found that patients’ mortality rates spiked when nonprofit hospitals switched to become profit-making, and their staff levels declined.

These profit-maximizing tactics point to a troubling conflict of interest that goes beyond the private delivery of health care. They raise a broader, more important question: How much should we rely on the private sector to satisfy broad social needs?From health to pensions to education, the United States relies on private enterprise more than pretty much every other advanced, industrial nation to provide essential social services. The government pays Medicare Advantage plans to deliver health care to aging Americans. It provides a tax break to encourage employers to cover workers under 65.

It’s a little amazing to think this even has to be said, but apparently it does. If you’re chasing a bottom line, it’s likely that services will suffer while profits are padded, and nowhere is that more evident than health care. A simple comparison of the administrative costs between Medicare and private insurance plans proves that. Medicare averages around 7 percent annually, while private insurers “struggle” to keep theirs below 20 percent.

So if I’m right, Republicans have decided that they will not participate in any budget negotiation that actually reduces the deficit because while they happen to agree that health costs will be the primary driver of future deficits, their answer is simply to privatize those costs, continue to drive up the deficit while loading up the pockets of their corporate for-profit cronies.

If this is, in fact, their strategy then we can expect bandaid solutions to deadlines. When this continuing resolution runs out Republicans will submit yet another budget privatizing Medicare, signed with a Paul Ryan flourish. The Senate will, of course, reject anything that looks like that, and the House will not approve any Senate amendments changing that, which means they’ll just go on approving the continuing resolution for short periods of time.

Siege mentality with a privatized chaser. The only answer to this is to get ahead of the message now, to keep hammering home how disgusting and odious privatizing Medicare and giving Granny a voucher would be, and to make Republicans own it. They can’t be allowed to hand this off to Democrats, which means pushing Democrats to quit thinking there is some bipartisan answer to this. There isn’t.

Then in 2014, boot their asses out of office. Just like that.

As Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, Brennan played a central role in two episodes that provided the President with much needed image-boosts. In one, Navy SEALs bagged the numero uno prize, Osama bin Laden. In the other, Navy SEALs rescued a young American woman from Somali pirates.

As we noted here previously, neither of these operations is free of controversy. You can see some of the issues we raised on the Abbottabad raid, shortly after it took place, here, here, here, and later here.

With the bin Laden operation, Brennan has provided a shifting panoply of details concerning what went on that have never been rationalized, and that raise fundamental questions. In that linked article, we reported that Brennan…was the principal source of incorrect details in the hours and days after the raid. These included the claim that the SEALs encountered substantial armed resistance, not least from bin Laden himself; that it took them an astounding 40 minutes to get to bin Laden, and that the White House got to hear the soldiers’ conversations in real time.

[…] Almost all that turns out to be hogwash–according to the new account produced by The New Yorker three months later. An account that, again, it seems, comes courtesy of Brennan. The minutes did not pass like days. Bin Laden was not armed, and did not take cover behind a woman. And the commandoes most certainly were not on the ground for 40 minutes. Some of them were up the stairs to the higher floors almost in a flash, and it didn’t take long for them to run into and kill bin Laden.

Perhaps the most troubling of many troubling assertions was the final explanation Brennan provided for why Osama bin Laden’s body was hastily dumped in the ocean–rather than being made available for autopsy and identification procedures, or buried somewhere unknown to the public but where the body could later be exhumed if necessary (a common occurrence when identity issues arise). Here’s what Brennan said: he consulted the Saudis on what to do with the body, and they said sure, good idea to toss the terror leader into the deep.

Brennan, it should be noted, has close ties to the Saudi leadership from his years running the CIA station in Riyadh, 1996 to 1999. (He then returned to Washington and was CIA deputy executive director at the time of the September 11 attacks.)

There’s a great deal of irony in taking advice from the Saudis on deep-sixing a valuable piece of evidence, given questions about the Saudi leadership’s knowledge of what was afoot with the 9/11 hijackers. For one thing, there’s the well-known rapid departure of Saudi royals from around the United States immediately following the carnage in New York and Washington.

But there’s a meatier, documented Saudi connection. If you’re not familiar with it, be sure to read our multi-part piece here. As we reported, in the weeks prior to the attacks the alleged hijackers were hanging out at the Florida house owned by a top lieutenant in the Saudi hierarchy. Is Brennan not interested in that? Shouldn’t some Senator ask him about it?

And why did the SEALs kill the unarmed bin Laden, when it would have seemed strategically wiser to exert every effort to capture him alive? Imagine what stories this Saudi black sheep could tell! To explain why he was summarily killed, we were first told that he was armed, then we learned he was not, then that his fate was left up to the SEALs themselves.)

Brennan–who ran the National Counterterrorism Center for George W. Bush while Bush was seeking re-election in 2004 and pushing the “terror alerts” button like crazy–has plenty of questions to answer.

Iranian football player Mehdi Mahdavikia has been voted the most popular footballer in Asia and the second most well-liked in the world for the year 2012.

The results of a poll recently conducted on the website of the International Federation of Football History & Statistics showed that the 35-year-old Iranian, who currently plays for the Persepolis football club in Iran’s Premier League, tops the list as Asia’s most popular football player with 103,703 votes.

He was also chosen as the world’s second most popular footballer after Juan Fernando Arango Saenz, who plays for Borussia Monchengladbach in Germany. The 32-year-old Venezuelan received 104,297 votes.

Goalkeeper Seyyed Mehdi Rahmati, who currently plays for the Iranian national football team and Esteqlal in Iran’s Premier League, got 79,533 votes and was named the world’s and Asia’s third most popular footballer.

MP/HGL

Nearly half of UK firms back a “looser” British relationship with the European Union while remaining members of the club, a new survey shows.

Only 9% of firms want closer integration, 12% want to leave the EU altogether, 26% want the relationship to stay as it is and 6% are unsure, according to a poll conducted last June by the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) involving 1,840 of its members.

That leaves 47% opting for “a looser relationship … but with the UK remaining a member of the EU” in findings published as Prime Minister David Cameron finalises his long-awaited speech setting out his vision of Britain’s EU future.

Mr Cameron is, within a fortnight, to use a major policy speech to set out details of a new EU “settlement” he wants to negotiate to repatriate some sovereign powers from Brussels.

The BCC called for a “pragmatic” renegotiation to reflect the interests of UK businesses across the economy.

BCC director general John Longworth said: “After months of endless press speculation the time has come for the Prime Minister to set out how the Government intends to tackle the question of Britain’s future place in Europe.

“Businesses across Britain are pragmatic and want both a renegotiated relationship and a reinvigorated single market.”

He urged Mr Cameron to “ignore the siren songs of both the europhiles and the europhobes, and negotiate a new European settlement that is in Britain’s national economic interest”.

“Inaction on Europe favours only global companies and the Brussels elite, while sleepwalking towards the exit door without a plan favours no one at all,” Mr Longworth warned.

“We should not be afraid to set out our stall because we start with a strong negotiating position. Our trade with the rest of Europe is in deficit, so it is not in Europe’s interest to exclude the UK.”

Israeli troops have killed a Palestinian on the border of the West Bank as tension rises over Tel Aviv’s plan to build a new illegal settlement on occupied Palestinian land.

Palestinian sources said the victim, identified as 21-year-old Odai Darwish from the village of Dura, was shot on Saturday at the apartheid fence south of al-Khalil (Hebron) as he tried to reach his work place.

Tension has been rising in the occupied territories since Friday, when a protest camp was set up by Palestinian and foreign activists on a piece of land Israel has earmarked for a new settlement.

It has been reported that Israel is preparing to use force to evict the activists from the camp, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the closure of roads leading to the site.

Nearly 500,000 Israelis live in more than 100 settlements built since the Israelis occupied the West Bank and East al-Quds (Jerusalem) in 1967.

The occupation is a violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, and thus the international community regards all the Israeli settlements across the West Bank as illegal according to international law.

MRS/HGL

January 12, 2013  |  

As we head into a new year, the guardians of traditional religion are ramping up efforts to keep their flocks–or in crass economic terms, to retain market share. Some Christians have turned to soul searching while others have turned to marketing. Last fall, the LDS church spent millions on billboards, bus banners and Facebook ads touting “I’m a Mormon.” In Canada, the Catholic Church has launched a “ Come Home” marketing campaign. The Southern Baptists Convention voted to rebrand itself. A hipster mega-church in Seattle combines smart advertising with sales force training for members and a strategy the Catholics have emphasized for centuries: competitive breeding.  

January 12, 2013  |  

As we head into a new year, the guardians of traditional religion are ramping up efforts to keep their flocks–or, in crass economic terms, to retain market share.  Some Christians have turned to soul searching while others have turned to marketing. Last fall, the LDS church spent millions on billboards, bus banners, and Facebook ads touting “I’m a Mormon.” In Canada, the Catholic Church has launched a “ Come Home” marketing campaign. The Southern Baptists Convention voted to rebrand themselves. A hipster mega-church in Seattle combines smart advertising with sales force training for members and a strategy the Catholics have emphasized for centuries: competitive breeding.  

Relatives of the 32 people who died when the Costa Concordia ran aground will mark a year since the disaster with a series of events near the rusting wreckage.

A service will be held at the church on the island of Giglio, where many of the survivors were treated after they were forced to abandon the listing ship after 9pm on January 13, 2012.

The 952-foot-long cruise liner, which is twice the weight of the Titanic, hit Le Scole reef after the captain sailed within a few hundred yards of the island.

Captain Francesco Schettino is under investigation for manslaughter, causing a shipwreck and abandoning the vessel before all the passengers were evacuated.

He remains under house arrest, but has not been formally charged.

The ship had 4,252 passengers and crew and was on a six port cruise when the captain decided to stage a “sail-past” to honour a retired seaman who lives on Giglio, off the coast of Tuscany.

Captain Schettino insists the cruise company had permitted the route on several other occasions, and that his actions in steering the stricken ship onto an underwater ledge spared the lives of many others.

Today’s commemoration will include a symbolic launch of lanterns into the sea at the moment the ship hit the rock which gouged a 230-foot gash in the hull.

A plaque will be added to the recovered boulder which will then be returned to the seabed.

Some survivors, who were offered 11,000 euros compensation by Costa Cruises, were asked not to attend today’s event because the small island is already crowded with victims’ relatives and media.

Many are now seeking civil claims against the American parent company Carnival.

The operation to right the ship is now running over budget and behind schedule because of the enormous technical challenges faced by the salvage team.

Over 400 engineers are planning to attach giant metal floats to either side of the ship – some 11 storeys high – before using a series of pullies to slowly stand the vessel.

She will then be towed to a port, possibly in Sicily, where it could take two years to dismantle the ship and sell remnants for scrap.

The salvage cost, to be mostly covered by insurance payouts, has now risen by \$100m over \$400m and is described as the biggest operation of its kind ever attempted.

The delay has been caused by environmental fears, the hard nature of the bedrock, and the position of the ship which must now be slowly shifted on its axis.

It should be refloated by the end of September at the latest.

by Abdullah Mansoor

Human rights watchdog, Amnesty International (AI), in its new report titled “The Hands of Cruelty — Abuses by Armed Forces and Taliban in Pakistan’s Tribal Areas” claimed that millions of people in Pakistan’s north-western tribal areas were locked in perpetual lawlessness where human rights were allegedly violated by Pakistan armed forces.

A diminutive portion of the report also blamed the Taliban and other armed militant groups for killing thousands of civilians in indiscriminate attacks. The report was based on more than 100 testimonies from victims of human rights violations in detention, witnesses, relatives, lawyers, representatives of Pakistani authorities and armed groups.

Pakistan military and foreign ministry spokespersons rejected the report as a biased document and termed it as a part of sinister propaganda campaign against Pakistan and its armed forces.

A first glance at the report gives an impression that both the Pakistan Army and the Taliban are violating human rights in the tribal areas. However, its critical analysis reveals that the report is a sequel of international hostile elements’ propaganda against Pakistan’s security institutions, which is launched with the sole aim to malign Pakistani security forces and discredit military operations in the tribal areas.

To serve this malicious purpose, exaggerated stories of individuals victimized by armed forces are blown out of proportion to validate the propaganda claim. A deep insight into the report also reflects that militants’ inhuman activities are inappropriately discussed, whereas criticism against them is deliberately incorporated in the report to increase its authenticity and project it as an unbiased investigation. The report overlooks accounts of various inhabitants of tribal areas, who opposed terrorists’ radical beliefs and consequently experienced their cruelty. Thus, the report can be termed as biased and one-sided.

Such a misinformation against Pakistan Army is not something new, as ever since the advent of war on terror in Afghan-Pak region, Pakistan is being fallaciously maligned for allegedly providing sanctuaries to terrorists, being involved in extra judicial killings in KPK and FATA or forced disappearances in Balochistan. But, in reality, Pakistan Army is fighting for the survival of Pakistan and protecting its people from hostile elements in tribal areas, while its personnel are sacrificing their lives for the global cause of eradicating terrorism and extremism from this region. Yet ironically, both sides of the picture are never shown by such so-called human rights organizations that are working in accordance with their nefarious objective of undermining Pakistan’s efforts in war on terror.

Amnesty International claims that it is an internationally recognized human rights organization and independent of any government, political ideology, economic interests or religion, has proved categorically false. A well-reputed geopolitical researcher, Tony Cartalucci writes in his article on infowars.com that “AI is in fact one of the greatest obstacles to real human rights advocacy on earth. Its funds are not only run by governments, but the organization is also entwined with political ideology and economic interests. UK Department for International Development continued to fund a four-year human rights education project of AI in Africa, while the European Commission also awarded it with a multi-year grant for education work in Europe.

Amnesty’s leadership also tells its true agenda; Suzanne Nossel, Executive Director of AI’s USA chapter, was drawn directly from the US State Department, which utterly contradicts Amnesty’s claims of being “independent” of governments’ interests. Nossel also promotes US foreign policy regarding Iran, Syria and Libya behind AI’s logo.

A glance at AmnestyUSA.org also reveals that at each and every front the US State Department is currently working on and has prioritized, is also coincidentally being prioritized by AI.”
Ordinary people are given the false impression that “someone is watching out” for human rights abuses, but in reality, AI is managing public perception of selective global human rights abuses, fabricating and/or manipulating many cases specifically to suit its agenda. For instance, Pakistan Army is in no comparison with the human rights violations by the US military in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghareb and Bagram Jails, yet their plight is seldom highlighted at the international level. The US, a major proponent of human rights in the world, carried out heinous crimes and massive human rights violations in Iraq and Afghanistan, where thousands of innocent civilians were killed in unprovoked air strikes.

Organizations like AI must raise voice for the detainees of Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan prisons, who have complained of enduring beatings, sleep deprivation, prolonged constraints in uncomfortable positions, prolonged hooding, and other physical and psychological mistreatment by the US forces. Moreover, it is imperative that all human rights organizations advocate transparency and project both sides of the picture without singling out a particular group, faction or country so that people may become able to distinguish between illusion and reality.

President Obama’s second term hasn’t started yet, but that didn’t stop Stephen Colbert from already proclaiming it a disaster and bemoaning the the lack of diversity with some of his recent nominations to fill retirements in his cabinet. Never mind that over 40 percent of the President’s appointees have been women.

As Karoli already noted here, all of this carping over the need for “more women in the cabinet” that Colbert was mocking in this segment has just been concern trolling on the media’s part. Colbert was much too kind to MSNBC here, who deserved to be ripped for Scarborough’s chauvinistic crap, and for having one segment after another for days on end about this stupid nonsense, that no one else besides the Villagers in the media gives a hoot about.

I’m a lot more concerned about their policies than I am whether they are men or women or what race. Unfortunately we’re not going to get any liberal nominees for any of these positions no matter what race or sex they are. It does give the beltway talking heads something to wring their hands about though.

A picture released by the French Army Communications Audiovisual office (ECPAD) on January 12, 2013 shows French Mirage 2000 D aircrafts flying over Mali overnight January 11 to 12, after taking off from the French military base of N’Djamena, in Chad. (AFP Photo / Nicolas-Nelson Richard)

Britain has announced it will provide France with logistical support during its Mali intervention as French forces stepped up airstrikes against Islamist militants fighting government troops.

The British prime minister welcomed France’s decision to intervene in the North African country to help the Malian army halt a rebel advance towards the capital Bamako.

“The Prime Minister has agreed that the UK will provide logistical military assistance to help transport foreign troops and equipment quickly to Mali,” David Cameron’s office said in a statement on Saturday, adding that London is not going to deploy British personnel in a combat role.

Over 100 Islamist militants have been killed as Malian troops backed by the French military fought for control of the strategic town of Konna.

Meanwhile, Paris announced on Saturday that a French pilot had been killed in an air raid over Konna. “During this intense combat, one of our pilots… was fatally wounded,” French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said in a statement. The pilot was wounded during the operation and later died in hospital, the minister said.

This comes just two days after France sent hundreds of troops to its former colony. The West African regional bloc ECOWAS, will begin sending troops to Mali on Monday.

French airstrikes overnight pushed back Islamist rebels from Konna and destroyed a rebel command center, Le Drian said.

The deployment of French troops has been met with anger from Islamist group Ansar Dine, which said the move will have “consequences for French citizens in the Muslim world.” Ansar Dine is fighting on the frontline of the battle of Konna.

“We are actually in Konna for the jihad [holy war],” an Ansar Dine spokesperson told AFP on Friday.

French President Francois Hollande says the country will raise its domestic terror threat level as a result of the military operations. He promised to increase protection at public buildings and transportation networks.

France decided to take military action after a plea from Mali’s president, and says the intervention will last as long as necessary. However, many critics say France may have had its own motivations for deploying troops in the country.

“There is that much at stake financially and strategically in Mali. But on the other hand this is the sort of intervention that could drag on for very long time. I think what triggered it was the move by the Islamist rebels towards Bamako, which is the capital where most of the French citizens are.Most of them are located at the southern end of the country and I think Hollande felt he had to do something to protect them.” France-based independent journalist Robert Harneis told RT.

On Thursday, the UN Security Council called for “rapid deployment” of international forces in Mali to combat the Islamist militants in the north of the country.

Given the latest developments in the West African country, the members of the UNSC “expressed their determination to pursue the full implementation” of its resolutions on Mali, in particular Resolution 2085, adopted in December, which authorizes the deployment of over 3,000 African-led international troops.

The support force approved by the UN had not been expected to be deployed until September 2013.

Ansar Dine and Mujao have controlled most of northern Mali since last April. They formed an alliance with Tuareg rebels following a military coup in March.

However, their alliance quickly collapsed, with the Islamists capturing the area’s urban centers and marginalizing the Tuareg rebels.

The Islamists have been accused of war crimes and attempting to impose strict Sharia law throughout the region, harboring fears that the area could soon become a hub for al-Qaeda linked militants.

Who would have thought that ultra-rapid industrialization, building entire empty cities to goalseek a supply-driven GDP number that has no reflection on demand reality, and ramming an entire country’s industrial output into overdrive without any concern for the environmental impact would have a disastrous effect on smog levels. Certainly not China. Which is why earlier today people across much of northern China were warned to stay indoors as the entire region was put on health alert to avoid air pollution that, in the Beijing area, was among the worst for a decade and possibly ever, is literally off the charts and has in many areas reduced visibility to under 50 metres.

As SCMP reports, “in Beijing, pollution readings by the local environmental watchdog, as well as the US embassy, blew past the upper limit of “hazardous” early yesterday afternoon and stayed there for the rest of the day. US embassy pollution data published hourly on Twitter showed the level of health-threatening PM2.5 – or particles smaller than 2.5 microns – had reached 886 micrograms per cubic metre at 8pm. Its Air Quality Index, which includes PM2.5 and ozone, had surged past the maximum rating of 500 to 755, or “beyond index”. With no wind forecast to bring more favourable conditions in the next three days, experts said the worst may be yet to come. “It’s so awful that I find it really difficult to breathe,” said Zhou Rong , a Greenpeace campaigner in Beijing. “It’s the most polluted day I can remember.”” Then again, who needs to breathe as long as the brand new Politburo can pretend the economy is growing at the needed 7%+ level, so critical to preserve stability. In fact, to paraphrase Stalin, if China has a few less people, it would also have a few less problems. So maybe the record smog levels are not all that unwelcome after all.

More from SCMP:

The Beijing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau said its own figures showed PM2.5 levels had exceeded 700 micrograms per cubic metre since early afternoon. That pushed the Air Quality Index to its maximum of 500 for the first time since real-time air pollution updates began on New Year’s Day.

Under the mainland’s newly revised standards, a level above 200 is considered heavy pollution and unhealthy to those with lung or heart diseases. Readings above 300 are deemed “hazardous for the entire population”.

State television and local media warned people to avoid going outdoors as much as possible, quoting forecasts that suggest winds will not arrive to clear the choking smog until Tuesday.

Beijing Children’s Hospital said heavy pollution was largely to blame for the number of children being treated for respiratory ailments hitting a five-year high in the past week, with more than 7,000 patients a day.

Exacerbated by heavy fog, pollution in Chengdu , Jinan , Wuhan , Xian , Zhengzhou and many other cities has worsened significantly in recent days. Visibility fell to less than 50 metres in many areas, forcing the closure of dozens of highways and the cancellation of dozens of flights.

AFP chimes in:

Those who did venture out wore facemasks for protection, with visibility low, the skyline shrouded, and the sun hidden in the smog.

Air quality in Beijing showed airborne particles with a diameter small enough to deeply penetrate the lungs at a reading of 456 micrograms per cubic metre, the warning centre said.

The quality is considered good when the figure stands at less than 100.

Fog also covered vast swathes of east and central China also closed numerous highways and delayed flights in several provinces, it added.

China’s air quality is among the worst in the world, international organisations say, citing massive coal consumption and car-choked city streets in the world’s biggest auto market.

And some pictures:

The family of Jacintha Saldanha, the nurse who was found hanged after taking a hoax phone call about the Duchess of Cambridge, have yet to receive answers from hospital bosses to questions over the death.

Ms Saldanha’s widower and her two children are also waiting to hear back from radio show bosses in Australia after the nurse was duped by a radio feature in which a DJ impersonated the Queen in an attempt to reach the Duchess, who was being treated for morning sickness at the time.

The 46-year-old, from Bristol, was found dead in her nurses’ quarters three days after she transferred the call from 2Day FM’s Mel Greig and Michael Christian to a colleague at London’s King Edward VII’s Hospital who then described Kate’s condition in detail.

Ms Saldanha left two notes in her room and had marks on her wrist when her body was discovered on December 7 last year, Westminster Coroner’s Court in London heard.

It has now been confirmed that the 40 questions prepared by her grieving family looking for answers into Ms Saldanha’s death will only be answered following an internal inquiry, led by hospital chairman Lord Glenarthur.

Labour MP Keith Vaz, who has supported Ms Saldanha’s family since the death, said: “I welcome the fact that the hospital is conducting an internal inquiry, although I am disappointed that it will take such a long time for the results to be made available to the family.

“I feel that it would have been in the family’s best interest that there should have been an independent element of the inquiry. Despite the fact that the family have sent a list of 40 questions to the hospital they still seem unwilling to answer them.”

The Australian radio station’s parent company, Southern Cross Austereo, also received a list of questions from Ms Saldanha’s family. Mr Vaz added: “As far as the radio station is concerned, I am disappointed that they have still not written directly to the family and apologised. However, I am glad that they are co-operating fully with the Australian regulatory body’s inquiry.”

In a letter to Mr Vaz, hospital chief executive John Lofthouse said he wanted to reiterate that “no disciplinary action was being contemplated” against Ms Saldanha. He added: “We regarded her as the victim of a cruel hoax.”

Greig and Christian spoke of their grief on Australian television soon after the nurse’s death. They said their prank had prompted “a tragic turn of events no-one could have predicted or expected”.

An Iranian MP says some of the 48 Iranian citizens who were kidnapped in Syria in August and released last week will appear before the Majlis (parliament) in the next few days to deliver reports about the ordeal they went through at the hands of foreign-sponsored Syrian militants.

MP Seyyed Baqer Hosseini, who is a member of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said on Saturday that the abductees will give accounts about their days in captivity to parliamentarians, and the legislators will hold a ceremony to honor them for their resistance.

Forty-eight Iranian citizens, who were kidnapped by foreign-backed armed militants in Syria several months ago, arrived at Tehran’s Mehrabad Airport on the afternoon of Thursday, January 10.

The abductees arrived in Tehran, a day after they were released in a swap deal between the Syrian government and armed militants.

The Iranian citizens, who were traveling on a bus from Damascus International Airport to the shrine of Hazrat Zainab (AS), which is located on the outskirts of the Syrian capital, were abducted by the militants on August 4, 2012.

In a video aired by the Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television network, the militants threatened to kill all the Iranian abductees if the Syrian government did not release militants who were captured and did not halt operations against armed groups within 48 hours. However, the threat was never carried out.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

MP/HGL

The ten things you need to know on Sunday 13 January 2013…

1) WITHDRAW FROM THE EU? ‘MAD,’ SAYS PM

It feels like the early 1990s, with the papers full of Europe stories this morning. The best one is in the Mail on Sunday, where it seems the prime minister’s allies have been briefing against his Europhobic backbenchers. That’ll go down well, won’t it?

The Mail on Sunday’s Simon Walters reveals:

“David Cameron thinks it would be ‘mad’ for Britain to leave the EU and is secretly backing a move by Tory MPs to warn of the perils of cutting all our ties with Brussels.

“The Prime Minister was also ‘pleased’ at US President Barack Obama sending a clear signal that the White House is opposed to the UK leaving the European Union.”

“.. [T]hose close to Mr Cameron say he does not believe withdrawal is ‘realistic or desirable’.”

Meanwhile, as the Huffington Post reports:

“David Cameron could slash Ukip’s support by more than a third if he promises an in-out referendum on EU membership, according to a poll.

“Research by ComRes for the Sunday People found 63% of the public want a vote on whether Britain should remain in the union.

“Some 33% said they would cast their ballot in favour of a full withdrawal – including two thirds of Ukip supporters, 27% of Tories, 25% of Labour voters, and 17% of Liberal Democrats.

“However, more people – 42% said they were against leaving the EU.”

The poll also shows that Ukip could push the Tories into third place in 2014’s European elections – Cameron’s Conservatives would fall to 22%, one point below Ukip. Uh-oh.

2) THE KEN AND MANDY SHOW

It’s not just the Spice Girls who are getting back together again to perform their greatest hits. From the Observer:

“Tory grandee Ken Clarke is joining forces with Labour peer Lord Mandelson in a historic cross-party bid to turn back the rising tide of Euroscepticism.

“The two political heavyweights will share a platform to call for an abandonment of plans to disengage from the European project. Clarke, who attends cabinet as a minister without portfolio, is determined to fight back against the clamour for Britain to step back from the European Union or withdraw entirely.

“Along with Liberal Democrat Lord Rennard, Clarke and Mandelson will spearhead a new organisation, the Centre for British Influence through Europe (CBIE), which will support a cross-party ‘patriotic fightback for British leadership in Europe’. The organisation will hold its launch event at the end of the month.”

Hmm. Will it affect public opinion? Tory Eurosceptics, like the Spectator’s James Forsyth, don’t seem too scared of interventions from the likes of Clarke, Mandelson and – yesterday – Heseltine:

“Eurosceptics need to get organised and start pointing out that the people claiming that renegotiation will lead to the sky falling in are, by and large, the same people who were pushing for Britain to join the single currency. If this message is rammed home to the public, then it should be a lot easier to persuade them to take these warnings with a pinch of salt.”

“The Britain in Europe crowd was wrong on the most fundamental public policy issue of our time. They need to be reminded of this fact every time they enter the Europe debate.”

Ouch.

3) ON THE FRONT FOOT

Ed Miliband has had a strong and high-profile start to 2013 – and will be buoyed by the latest polls (see Public Opinion Watch, below).

The Independent on Sunday reports on Miliband’s

“.. plans to protect tenants from ‘rogue landlords’.

“In a keynote speech on the future of his party, Labour’s leader revived calls for a national register of landlords – and greater powers for councils to bar the worst.”

Miliband was on the Andrew Marr programme this morning, where he said “‘One Nation’ is about the way I want to govern this country…about responsiblity going all the way to top of society”.

On Europe, he said he thought it was “incredibly dangerous what David Cameron is doing..sleepwalking us towards the exit door of the European Union”.

On the economy and the deficit, he refused to give any pledges on reversing Tory cuts – to child benefit or anything else – but highlighted the importance of tackling tax avoidance and changing the law to prevent multinations from dodging tax in the UK.

He also resisted calls to support “means-testing” on welfare and said “the tax system is a fairer way” of redistributing from rich to poor and pointed out the “best way” to cut the welfare bill is to cut unemployment.

On the leaders’ TV debates, the Labour leader didn’t seem too keen on having Ukip’s Nigel Farage join the ‘big three’ but said he was “relishing these TV debates…I hope they happen”.

On Ed Balls, he said Balls was “doing a great job” as shadow chancellor – Miliband even reminded viewers of Balls’ prescient speech on austerity at Bloomberg’s HQ in August 2010. Now there’s an endorsement!

“There is no vacancy for shadow chancellor,” declared Ed.

4) O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU?

David Miliband isn’t coming back to Labour’s front bench anytime soon, says the Sunday Telegraph’s Patrick Hennessy:

“Mr Miliband, who lost his party’s leadership election to his younger brother in 2010, was said last week to be giving ‘serious thought’ to coming back to the political front line – with the post of shadow chancellor claimed to be in his sights.

“However, it can be revealed that Ed Miliband has no plans to replace the current shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, or to hand his brother the job of masterminding Labour’s preparations for the next general election campaign.”

The Sunday Telegraph story says the elder Miliband’s supporters were briefing journos that David might return because they’re ‘spooked’ by the meteoric rise of the shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna.

5) UKIP MEMBERS: IN THEIR OWN WORDS?

The Sunday Mirror seems to have set out to prove David Cameron right that Ukip is a party of “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists’, containing “some pretty odd people”. The paper reports:

“On the [party’s official online] forum, senior Ukip member Dr Julia Gasper branded gay rights a ‘lunatic’s charter’ and claimed some homosexuals prefer sex with animals. She added: ‘As for the links between homosexuality and paedophilia, there is so much evidence that even a full-length book could hardly do justice to the ­subject.’

“The former parliamentary candidate and UKIP branch chairman in Oxford now faces the sack over her comments.

“Tackled about her remarks yesterday, she said: ‘I’m not going to talk about them. It’s none of your business.’

“Lecturer Dr Gasper is just one of many Ukip members who use the forum to vent their controversial views.

“.. Another member complained about the impact of immigration on the NHS, writing: ‘I am informed by past media that Black Caribbean and not Black African have a higher instance of schizophrenia.

“‘I wonder if this is due to inbreeding on these small islands in slave times or is it due to smoking grass.'”

BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR…

Watch this video of a puppy trying to eat an orange.

6) ‘KING OF WHITEHALL’

Fascinating piece on top civil servant Sir Jeremy Heywood by James Forsyth in the Mail on Sunday today:

“Sir Jeremy is regarded by friend and foe alike as the most formidable operator in Whitehall,” he writes, adding: “Aides who want to give Cameron advice without Heywood’s knowledge have been reduced to trying to surreptitiously slip a note into the Prime Minister’s Red Box.”

Forsyth writes:

“Steve Hilton, Cameron’s senior adviser, once tried to wrest control of the box from Heywood by demanding that all the box notes had to go through him as well. Yet the sheer weight of material put paid to this effort. Hilton has since gone on sabbatical, partly in frustration at the extent of Heywood’s influence.”

He concludes:

“Heywood knows that he is playing a long game. In conversation, he sometimes pointedly refers to the ‘current Government’.

“It is a reminder that he intends to be at the centre of power far longer than any politician.”

Meanwhile, the Sunday Times reports on how Hilton:

“.. has revealed his ‘horror’ at the powerlessness of Downing Street to control government decisions, admitting the prime minister often finds out about policies from the radio or newspapers – and in many cases opposes them.

“Steve Hilton, who remains one of Cameron’s close confidants, said: ‘Very often you’ll wake up in the morning and hear on the radio or the news or see something in the newspapers about something the government is doing. And you think, well, hang on a second – it’s not just that we didn’t know it was happening, but we don’t even agree with it! The government can be doing things … and we don’t agree with it? How can that be?’

“He described how No 10 is frequently left out of the loop as important policy changes are pushed through by ‘papershuffling’ mandarins.”

7) NORTHERN IRISH GLOOM

It ain’t getting any better. The Sun reports:

“A total of 29 cops were hurt in riots over flying the Union flag in Northern Ireland yesterday.

“Police used water cannon and baton rounds after being bombarded with bricks and fireworks as they tried to separate loyalists and republicans.

“.. Chief Constable Matt Baggott said cops acted with ‘exceptional courage’. Politicians from Belfast, Dublin and London will discuss the protests this week.”

8) ROUGE ALERT

From the BBC:

“French President Francois Hollande has ordered security stepped up around public buildings and transport because of military operations in Africa.

“He was responding to the risk of Islamist attack after French forces attacked militants in Mali and Somalia.

“France’s anti-terrorism alert system known as “Vigipirate” is being reinforced immediately, with security boosted at public buildings and transport networks, particularly rail and air. Public gatherings will also be affected.

“The alert will remain at red, the second-highest level at which emergency counter-attack measures are put in place.”

Is it wrong of me to point out that the chaos and instability in Mali is a direct result of, and spillover from, the west’s intervention in Libya, which France pushed hardest for?

Meanwhile, the HuffPost UK reports:

“David Cameron has agreed to help transport foreign troops and equipment to Mali amid efforts to halt an advance by Islamist rebels in a conflict that has already claimed 120 lives.”

9) ‘GOTCHA’ – THE SEQUEL

From the Sunday Telegraph:

“Defence chiefs have drawn up new contingency plans designed to prevent hostile action by Argentina towards the Falkland Islands.

“A series of military options are being actively considered as the war of words over the islands intensifies.

“It is understood that additional troops, another warship and extra RAF Typhoon combat aircraft could be dispatched to the region ahead of the March referendum on the Falkland Islands’ future.”

The paper adds, however, that

“.. the British government believes that Buenos Aries currently lacks both the political will and military capability to recapture the islands.”

Phew. That’s alright then.

10) KENNEDY JOINS.. KENNEDY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS

Conspiracy theorists of the world: you have a new and important ally!

From the Mail on Sunday:

“Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is convinced that a lone gunman wasn’t solely responsible for the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, and said his father believed the Warren Commission report was a ‘shoddy piece of craftsmanship.’

“.. He said that he, too, questioned the report.

“‘The evidence at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman,’ he said, but he didn’t say what he believed may have happened.”

Oliver Stone will be delighted.

PUBLIC OPINION WATCH

From the Sunday Times/YouGov poll:

Labour 44
Conservatives 31
Lib Dems 11
Ukip 8

That would give Labour a majority of 124.

From the Observer/Opinium poll:

Labour 41
Conservatives 31
Ukip 12
Lib Dems 7

That would give Labour a majority of 116.

140 CHARACTERS OR LESS

@PeterHain @Ed_Miliband commanding on Marr programme ludicrous to expect detailed Labour tax and spend now: no idea scale of mess we will inherit 2015

@paulwaugh Memories of ‘tax bombshell’ Saatchi campaign runs deep in Lab psyche. EdM’s remarks about 92 prove it. #marr #kinnockyears

@Mike_Fabricant When Hezza attacks David Cameron about Europe, and Norman Tebbit attacks DC about morality, I know we are getting it about right.

900 WORDS OR MORE

Andrew Rawnsley, writing in the Observer, says: “David Cameron should take tips from John Major about Europe.”

Janet Daley, writing in the Sunday Telegraph, says: “A system intended to promote social solidarity has had the opposite effect.”

John Rentoul, writing in the Independent on Sunday, focuses on Sir Jeremy Heywood: “A civil servant too effective for his own good.”

Got something you want to share? Please send any stories/tips/quotes/pix/plugs/gossip to Mehdi Hasan (mehdi.hasan@huffingtonpost.com) or Ned Simons (ned.simons@huffingtonpost.com). You can also follow us on Twitter: @mehdirhasan, @nedsimons and @huffpostukpol

An Egyptian opposition supporter shouts political slogans on December 18, 2012, to demonstrate against President Mohamed Morsi and the draft constitution. (AFP Photo / Gianluigi Guercia)

At least 15 people have been injured in Egypt’s capital after attackers fired birdshot and threw Molotov cocktails at people taking part in a sit-in, protesting the country’s new Islamist-backed constitution which has deeply divided the nation.

In the latest case of Egyptian demonstrators being targeted, about a dozen masked assailants attacked the protesters’ camp outside the presidential palace on Saturday. The sit-in was started by the opponents of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi on December 4, amid a fierce debate over the new constitution.

The total number of wounded in the attack stands at 15, including nine members of the security forces and six protesters, AP reports citing paramedic Mohammed Sultan.

Witnesses say the attackers threw Molotov cocktails at the camp, setting some tents on fire.

Egypt’s new constitution has proven extremely divisive, sparking violence across the country. It was passed with a 64 per cent “yes” vote in a referendum last month and was signed into law by President Morsi on December 26.

At least 10 people died in clashes outside the presidential palace on December 5, which broke-out after Morsi supporters attacked the protesters’ sit-in.

David Cameron could slash Ukip’s support by more than a third if he promises an in-out referendum on EU membership, according to a poll.

Research by ComRes for the Sunday People found 63% of the public want a vote on whether Britain should remain in the union.

Some 33% said they would cast their ballot in favour of a full withdrawal – including two thirds of Ukip supporters, 27% of Tories, 25% of Labour voters, and 17% of Liberal Democrats.

However, more people – 42% said they were against leaving the EU.

There were also signs that opposition to the union has softened, with the proportion who think there should be a referendum dropping from 68% in October 2011.

At that time 37% wanted to exit the EU altogether.

The poll suggested that Ukip is on track to knock the Tories into third place in next year’s European parliament elections.

Asked who they would back in the contest, 35% said Labour, 23% Ukip and 22% the Conservatives. The Lib Dems were on just 8%.

But as the Prime Minister prepares to make his crunch speech on Europe later this month, Ukip voters were asked how they would react if he pledges to hold an in-out referendum.

Nearly four in 10 – 37% – said they would probably not support the party any more.

ComRes chairman Andrew Hawkins said: “While European and Westminster electoral dynamics are different, the prospect of humiliation in 2014 would fuel disquiet among Mr Cameron’s right flank who have still not forgiven him for not winning in 2010 and want to see traditional Tory values asserted more aggressively.

“The challenge for (Ukip leader) Nigel Farage is to appeal now to Labour voters and to maintain his party’s support in the event of the promise of a referendum.”

Earlier on Saturday, Tory grandee Lord Heseltine turned on David Cameron, warning the PM against taking a “punt” by holding a referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the European Union.

The former minister, who served under Margaret Thatcher, made the comments in interviews with The Times and FT ahead of Cameron’s speech on the EU later this month.

Cameron has said he wants the UK to stay in the EU, but wants to renegotiate the terms of the relationship, particularly as those within the EU are pushing for greater integration.

However the PM’s desire to fashion a looser relationship with Europe could prove tricky. On Thursday, a delegation of German MPs told the prime minister not to “blackmail” the rest of Europe with threats, while on Wednesday the Obama administration warned Britain not to turn “inwards” with a referendum.

ComRes interviewed 2,059 adults online between December 19 and 21. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. The Ukip voter sample size was 304.

The Mobile User Objective System (MUOS). (Image from en.wikipedia.org)

Sicily’s governor has halted the installation of a US military satellite communication system, demanding guarantees it isn’t a threat to people’s health. The decision, taken independently from Rome, comes after activists clashed with police.

The governor of the autonomous region, Rosario Crocetta, said more research has to be done on how the US operated Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) ground station, affects health and the environment.

The MOUS network, developed for the US Department of Defense, is aimed at providing the next-generation military communications system. When complete, it will consist of four ground stations around the world. One such station is being currently constructed in Sicily’s Sughereta Nature Reserve in Niscem, raising criticism from people there.

Locals are concerned about the possible increase in radiation levels caused by the electromagnetic waves emitted by the system. People fear that it may cause diseases such as cancer and leukemia. Activists insist that located within the Sughereta Nature Reserve, the satellite ground system also threats Sicily’s unique park with rare plants and cork forest.

Besides health and environment concerns, Crocetta’s ruling also raised questions on whether the station’s electromagnetic waves would impact air navigation, with the airport of Comiso (RG), just a few kilometers away.The airport is set to start operating in just a few months.

The construction of MUOS, an ultra-high frequency narrow-band satellite communication network, has been driving locals onto the streets for months now.

Since the construction began in July 2011, people of the small town of Niscemi, near which MUOS is to be eventually installed, have been embroiled in protest. They claim it was “illegally placed in the middle of a nature reserve”.

Friday night’s clashes were reported to be the culmination of months of peaceful protests; the violence is thought to have greatly influenced Crocetta’s decision.

Protesters from ‘NO MUOS’ movement, launched by activists, clashed with police forces 48 hours after the announcement of the works being resumed, months after Silicy’s public prosecutor’s office ordered a halt to operations.

Officers arrived at the scene to disperse demonstrators who blocked the US operated construction site, trying to prevent convoys laden with building materials from entering.

In October 2012 prosecutors ruled that the construction violates environmental legislation governing the nature reserve.

Crocetta said that before formally halting the construction of MOUS, he had met some American diplomats in the US embassy and warned them to act with caution.

“We would not want it to lead to clashes with local people. Besides that no study of the impact on the environment and human health has been conducted by Higher Institute of Health,” an Italian newspaper Il Messaggero (The Messenger) quoted the governor of Sicily as saying.

In negotiations with the US he argued that the study was made by an engineering company, and “does not seem all that competent”.

“An engineering company can study the level of emissions but definitely not the impact on public health,” he said.

“We are not against the Americans and are not against the MOUS. But we want all the guarantees for the protection of public health,” Crocetta told journalists explaining his ruling.

When asked if the decision was agreed by Prime Minister Mario Monti, the governor said that he “warned” Monti but did not ask “permission” from Rome.

“It would be disturbing if to suspend the work of the MUOS I had to ask permission from President Monti. I am a president of autonomy, do not ask certain permissions from the Monti government when I take my own decisions,” the governor said.

The local Assembly approved Crocetta’s request for more research on the issue.

The US responded to the announcement, saying that Italy, as a member of NATO and an important partner for peace and security at the international level, as well as other members of the Alliance, will benefit from MUOS in support of NATO operations.

The MOUS construction site is located some 60 kilometers away from a US Naval Air Station in Sicily.

US activity near Niscemi, in Sicilia’s province of Caltanissetta, sparked the first protests back in 2009 after a project to build a military satellite dish became known to the public.

A huge sit-in protest has been held outside the Pakistan High Commission in London with protesters demanding action to stop sectarian killings in the South Asian nation.

The sit-in protest followed a big bomb attack in the Pakistani city of Quetta, where at least 120 people, many of them oppressed Shia Muslims were killed on Thursday.

People travelled long distances to take part in the protest, and to show their support and solidarity with the innocent Shia Population of Pakistan, who are being targeted on sectarian basis.

The protestors also condemned the Pakistani and international media outlets for remaining silent over the brutalities of Wahabbi extremists, who patronize Zionism.

On Thursday night, a suicide bomber detonated the explosives inside a crowded snooker club on Alamdar Road, a Shia-dominated neighbourhood of Quetta.

Fifteen minutes later, another explosion went off outside the club as police, media persons and rescuers rushed to the site.

Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claimed responsibility for the blast and said their target was the Shia Hazara community.

The bomb explosions are the latest in a wave of attacks by terror groups, which have been engaged in a violent campaign against Shia Muslims in Pakistan over the past few years.

SSM/MOL/HE

The U.S. is sending troops to 35 African nations under the guise of fighting Al Qaeda and related terrorists.

Democracy Now notes:

U.S. Army teams will be deploying to as many as 35 African countries early next year for training programs and other operations as part of an increased Pentagon role in Africa. The move would see small teams of U.S. troops dispatched to countries with groups allegedly linked to al-Qaeda, such as Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. The teams are from a U.S. brigade that has the capability to use drones for military operations in Africa if granted permission. The deployment could also potentially lay the groundwork for future U.S. military intervention in Africa.

NPR reports:

[A special American brigade] will be able to take part in nearly 100 separate training and military exercises next year, in nearly three dozen African countries

Glenn Ford writes:

The 2nd Brigade is scheduled to hold more than 100 military exercises in 35 countries, most of which have no al-Qaida presence. So, although there is no doubt that the U.S. will be deeply involved in the impending military operation in Mali, the 2nd Brigade’s deployment is a much larger assignment, aimed at making all of Africa a theater of U.S. military operations. The situation in Mali is simply a convenient, after-the-fact rationale for a long-planned expansion of the U.S. military footprint in Africa.

Timothy Alexander Guzman argues:

AFRICOM’s [the U.S. military’s Africa command] goal is to eliminate China and other countries influence in the region.  Africa’s natural resources is another important element to consider because it includes oil, diamonds, copper, gold, iron, cobalt, uranium, bauxite, silver, petroleum, certain woods and tropical fruits.

In a must-watch interview, Dan Collins of the China Money Report agrees that the purpose of the deployment is to challenge China’s rising prominence in Africa:

In reality — as we’ve repeatedly noted — the U.S. sends in the military to fight “terrorists” in any country which has resources we want (and see this).

And the U.S. is not shy about backing our “mortal enemies” to topple those standing between us and resources we pine for.

Anthony Carlucci argues that the overthrow of Gaddafi (largely through American support of terrorists) was really the opening salvo in the war for African resources:

David Cameron could slash Ukip’s support by more than a third if he promises an in-out referendum on EU membership, according to a poll.

Research by ComRes for the Sunday People found 63% of the public want a vote on whether Britain should remain in the union.

Some 33% said they would cast their ballot in favour of a full withdrawal – including two thirds of Ukip supporters, 27% of Tories, 25% of Labour voters and 17% of Liberal Democrats. However, more people – 42% – said they were against leaving the EU.

There were also signs that opposition to the union has softened, with the proportion who think there should be a referendum dropping from 68% in October 2011. At that time 37% wanted to exit the EU altogether.

The poll suggested that Ukip is on track to knock the Tories into third place in next year’s European parliament elections.

Asked who they would back in the contest, 35% said Labour, 23% Ukip and 22% the Conservatives. The Lib Dems were on just 8%.

But as the Prime Minister prepares to make his crunch speech on Europe later this month, Ukip voters were asked how they would react if he pledges to hold an in-out referendum.

Nearly four in 10 – 37% – said they would probably not support the party any more.

ComRes chairman Andrew Hawkins said: “While European and Westminster electoral dynamics are different, the prospect of humiliation in 2014 would fuel disquiet among Mr Cameron’s right flank who have still not forgiven him for not winning in 2010 and want to see traditional Tory values asserted more aggressively. The challenge for (Ukip leader) Nigel Farage is to appeal now to Labour voters and to maintain his party’s support in the event of the promise of a referendum.”

ComRes interviewed 2,059 adults online between December 19 and 21. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. The Ukip voter sample size was 304.

David Cameron could slash Ukip’s support by more than a third if he promises an in-out referendum on EU membership, according to a poll.

Research by ComRes for the Sunday People found 63% of the public want a vote on whether Britain should remain in the union.

Some 33% said they would cast their ballot in favour of a full withdrawal – including two thirds of Ukip supporters, 27% of Tories, 25% of Labour voters and 17% of Liberal Democrats. However, more people – 42% – said they were against leaving the EU.

There were also signs that opposition to the union has softened, with the proportion who think there should be a referendum dropping from 68% in October 2011. At that time 37% wanted to exit the EU altogether.

The poll suggested that Ukip is on track to knock the Tories into third place in next year’s European parliament elections.

Asked who they would back in the contest, 35% said Labour, 23% Ukip and 22% the Conservatives. The Lib Dems were on just 8%.

But as the Prime Minister prepares to make his crunch speech on Europe later this month, Ukip voters were asked how they would react if he pledges to hold an in-out referendum.

Nearly four in 10 – 37% – said they would probably not support the party any more.

ComRes chairman Andrew Hawkins said: “While European and Westminster electoral dynamics are different, the prospect of humiliation in 2014 would fuel disquiet among Mr Cameron’s right flank who have still not forgiven him for not winning in 2010 and want to see traditional Tory values asserted more aggressively. The challenge for (Ukip leader) Nigel Farage is to appeal now to Labour voters and to maintain his party’s support in the event of the promise of a referendum.”

ComRes interviewed 2,059 adults online between December 19 and 21. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. The Ukip voter sample size was 304.

Russia’s Andrei Yeshchenko in the 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification (RIA Novosti / Vitaliy Belousov)

Anzhi Makhachkala’s defense has been boosted, after Russian international, Andrey Eschenko, moved to the club from Lokomotiv Moscow.

­According to Anzhi’s official website, the club and Eschenko have signed a long-term deal, with no further details revealed.

The 29-year-old has already arrived in Dubai where his new team are preparing for the restart of the Russian football season, scheduled for March.

“I’m very happy to become a part of such club as Anzhi.I hope I’ll able to make myself useful in the Dagestan side,” Eschenko told fc-anzhi.ru. “I have no doubts about the decision I’ve made. I’m sure that working with such a coach as Guus Hiddink — who greeted me so warmly — and such famous players as Roberto Carlos and Samuel Eto’o will became a great experience, which will help me grow.”  

“I also want to thank the administration of Lokomotiv football club, the players and fans, whose support I always felt playing for Loko,” he added.

Besides Lokomotiv, Eschenko has competed for a number of Russian and Ukrainian clubs, with Dynamo Moscow and Dynamo Keiv being the most notable of the lot.

The defender made his début in the Russian national team this Autumn under Fabio Capello, already making four appearances in his country’s jersey.

­

Anzhi’s Mehdi Carcela-Gonzalez (L) and Lokomotiv’s Andrei Yeshchenko in the 15th round of the Russian Football Premier League (RIA Novosti / Iliya Pitalev)

The United States of America was conceived and nurtured by violence.

Americans not only engage in violence, they are entertained by it.

Killing takes place in America at an average of 87 times each day. Going to war in Afghanistan is less dangerous than living in Chicago.

The Romans went to the Coliseum to watch people being killed. In major cities, Americans just look out their windows. Baseball, once America’s national game, a benign, soporific sport, has been replaced by football which is so violent it destroys the brains of those who play it. Violent films, euphemized as action flicks, dominate our motion picture theatres and television sets. Our children play killing video games.

So do you really believe that gun control will miraculously make America into a tranquil nation? Do you really believe that outlawing products and practices will make Americans peace loving? A culture cannot be changed by laws, change requires a sustained effort over several generations. Are Americans up to the task?

Carry Amelia Moore Nation was born on November 25, 1846. She became a radical member of the temperance movement which opposed the consumption of alcohol. She described herself as “a bulldog running along at the feet of Jesus, barking at what He doesn’t like,” and claimed a divine ordination to promote temperance by destroying bars. She began her temperance work in Medicine Lodge, Kansas by starting a local branch of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union and campaigning for the enforcement of Kansas’ ban on the sales of liquor. She became infamous by vandalizing taverns. Often accompanied by hymn-singing women and musicians, she would march into a bar and sing and pray while smashing bar fixtures and stock with a hatchet. Between 1900 and 1910 she was arrested around 30 times for “hatchetations,” as she called them. She died on June 9, 1911 and was buried in an unmarked grave in Belton, Missouri. The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union later erected a stone inscribed “Faithful to the Cause of Prohibition, She Hath Done What She Could.” Had she lived just eight years longer, she would have seen prohibition become the law of the land.

But, of course, it didn’t last. Prohibition was repealed on December 5, 1933. It lasted a mere 14 years. It had absolutely no beneficial effects on society. In fact, it helped establish organized crime in America.

Yet Americans do not give up easily. In this anti-intellectual society where people are told more scientists are needed, unscientific practices prevail. What is shown not to work is repeated over and over again. So in 1971, the Nixon administration declared war on drugs. Now, almost 50 years later, the walls of the trenches are beginning to collapse. This long effort at prohibition too has just not worked, and it too has had absolutely no beneficial effects on society. In fact, it has resulted in the deaths of thousands in America and abroad, has ruined countless lives of young people, and squandered vast amounts of money. Just as Prohibition did, it has fostered the creation of international criminal cartels. What people with a scientific bent would have abandoned as ineffective, Americans have put into practice with greater and greater vigor. One would think that someone would recognize the folly. But no, the crowd is again clamoring. Now it’s about guns.

Don’t misread this piece. I own no guns; I can think of no reason why people living in a civilized state should need guns. Guns have one purpose and one purpose alone–to kill! People in a civilized state should have no need or reason to do that. If guns are needed for self-protection, the state has failed in its primary function of insuring domestic tranquility. (Read your Constitution!) A nation that cannot provide even that has thoroughly failed. And the fact that there are those in America who insist on owning guns says more about them and the nation’s failure than it says about guns.

But another attempt at prohibition is nothing but an emotional attempt to do something even if it is something that won’t have any significant effect on the level of violence in America. Some have referred to gun control laws as “feel good” acts. Perhaps, but feel good acts are better than feel bad acts, and I know of no good reason to oppose gun control. What I object to is the Pollyanna belief that gun control will significantly reduce violence in American society. Guns are not the cause of this violence; the violent nature of American society is the cause of the American love affair with guns.

The United States of America was conceived and nurtured by violence. The Europeans who colonized America were neither tolerant or enlightened; they were the dregs of society, and they even despised each other. The totally impure Puritans of Massachusetts despised the Quakers of Pennsylvania and the Catholics of Maryland. In the Pequot War, English colonists commanded by John Mason, launched a night attack on a large Pequot village on the Mystic River and burned the inhabitants in their homes and killed all survivors. By conservative estimates, the population of the United states prior to European colonization was greater than 12 million. Four centuries later, the count has been reduced to 237,000. Four centuries of continuous violence against native Americans, and the violence persists.

Abraham Lincoln, enshrined as the great emancipator, freed the slaves by inciting a war that killed somewhere around 750,000 Americans. Emancipation came to the slaves by previously unheard of violence. In contrast and at about the same time in history, the autocratic Tsar Alexander II of Russia emancipated more than 23 million serfs without killing a single person. Oh, those horrid Russian Tsars!

After the Civil War, Americans pushed the frontiers of America all the way to the Pacific Ocean. They did it with the gun. The Winchester Model 1873 repeating rifle and Colt Peacemaker revolver of 1873 are colloquially known as “The Guns that Won the West” for their predominant roles in the hands of Western settlers. Americans shot their way from the Mississippi to the Pacific.

American foreign policy for decades has consisted primarily of military misadventures–foreign policy through the barrel of a gun! Today, the gun has become the drone and the bullet, the hellfire missile. General Smedley Butler (1881-1940), one of only two Americans to win the Medal of Honor on two separate occasions, wrote: “I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. . . . I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.” Now, of course, we’re using the gun to make the Middle East and Southeast Asia “safe for democracy.” But the attempt isn’t faring very well.

Violence pervades this culture. Americans not only engage in violence, they are entertained by it. Killing takes place in America more often than the Sun rises, currently at an average of 87 times each day. Going to war in Afghanistan is less dangerous than living in Chicago. The Romans went to the Coliseum to watch people being killed. In major cities, Americans just look out their windows. Baseball, once America’s national game, a benign, soporific sport, has been replaced by football which is so violent it destroys the brains of those who play it. Violent films, euphemized as action flicks, dominate our motion picture theatres and television sets. Our children play killing video games.

So do you really believe that gun control will miraculously make America into a tranquil nation? Do you really believe that outlawing products and practices will make Americans peace loving? A culture cannot be changed by laws; the only function of law is to justify vengeance. No law in all of recorded history has been enacted that eliminated the practices it was meant to reduce. The oldest profession has been outlawed since the dawn of recorded history. It still is carried on. The truth of the matter is that a society based on law is a lawless society.

American society is violent not because of guns but because of the attitudes of Americans. When Europeans first came to the Americas, they thought that they had discovered a new world. Instead they found a land already inhabited by people with their own ways of life. Christian intolerance required the use of violence. Just as the Romans took the parts of Europe they wanted, these Europeans took the Americas. Violence was in their souls. Current day Americans have inherited it.

Wayne LaPierre, a National Rifle Association spokesman, has said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Someone should tell him that many consider him to be a bad guy with a gun.

So sure, enact legislation to control the proliferation of guns, but don’t get sanguine about it. Such legislation may help, but don’t count on it. Unless you can change the American character, our violent nature will endure until we exterminate ourselves. Live by the. . . . Oh, you know how that goes. Cultures are extremely difficult to change; changing them requires a sustained effort over several generations. I doubt that Americans are up to the task.

John Kozy is a retired professor of philosophy and logic who writes on social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the U.S. Army during the Korean War, he spent 20 years as a university professor and another 20 years working as a writer. He has published a textbook in formal logic commercially, in academic journals and a small number of commercial magazines, and has written a number of guest editorials for newspapers. His on-line pieces can be found on http://www.jkozy.com/ and he can be emailed from that site’s homepage.

The United States of America was conceived and nurtured by violence.

Americans not only engage in violence, they are entertained by it.

Killing takes place in America at an average of 87 times each day. Going to war in Afghanistan is less dangerous than living in Chicago.

The Romans went to the Coliseum to watch people being killed. In major cities, Americans just look out their windows. Baseball, once America’s national game, a benign, soporific sport, has been replaced by football which is so violent it destroys the brains of those who play it. Violent films, euphemized as action flicks, dominate our motion picture theatres and television sets. Our children play killing video games.

So do you really believe that gun control will miraculously make America into a tranquil nation? Do you really believe that outlawing products and practices will make Americans peace loving? A culture cannot be changed by laws, change requires a sustained effort over several generations. Are Americans up to the task?

Carry Amelia Moore Nation was born on November 25, 1846. She became a radical member of the temperance movement which opposed the consumption of alcohol. She described herself as “a bulldog running along at the feet of Jesus, barking at what He doesn’t like,” and claimed a divine ordination to promote temperance by destroying bars. She began her temperance work in Medicine Lodge, Kansas by starting a local branch of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union and campaigning for the enforcement of Kansas’ ban on the sales of liquor. She became infamous by vandalizing taverns. Often accompanied by hymn-singing women and musicians, she would march into a bar and sing and pray while smashing bar fixtures and stock with a hatchet. Between 1900 and 1910 she was arrested around 30 times for “hatchetations,” as she called them. She died on June 9, 1911 and was buried in an unmarked grave in Belton, Missouri. The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union later erected a stone inscribed “Faithful to the Cause of Prohibition, She Hath Done What She Could.” Had she lived just eight years longer, she would have seen prohibition become the law of the land.

But, of course, it didn’t last. Prohibition was repealed on December 5, 1933. It lasted a mere 14 years. It had absolutely no beneficial effects on society. In fact, it helped establish organized crime in America.

Yet Americans do not give up easily. In this anti-intellectual society where people are told more scientists are needed, unscientific practices prevail. What is shown not to work is repeated over and over again. So in 1971, the Nixon administration declared war on drugs. Now, almost 50 years later, the walls of the trenches are beginning to collapse. This long effort at prohibition too has just not worked, and it too has had absolutely no beneficial effects on society. In fact, it has resulted in the deaths of thousands in America and abroad, has ruined countless lives of young people, and squandered vast amounts of money. Just as Prohibition did, it has fostered the creation of international criminal cartels. What people with a scientific bent would have abandoned as ineffective, Americans have put into practice with greater and greater vigor. One would think that someone would recognize the folly. But no, the crowd is again clamoring. Now it’s about guns.

Don’t misread this piece. I own no guns; I can think of no reason why people living in a civilized state should need guns. Guns have one purpose and one purpose alone–to kill! People in a civilized state should have no need or reason to do that. If guns are needed for self-protection, the state has failed in its primary function of insuring domestic tranquility. (Read your Constitution!) A nation that cannot provide even that has thoroughly failed. And the fact that there are those in America who insist on owning guns says more about them and the nation’s failure than it says about guns.

But another attempt at prohibition is nothing but an emotional attempt to do something even if it is something that won’t have any significant effect on the level of violence in America. Some have referred to gun control laws as “feel good” acts. Perhaps, but feel good acts are better than feel bad acts, and I know of no good reason to oppose gun control. What I object to is the Pollyanna belief that gun control will significantly reduce violence in American society. Guns are not the cause of this violence; the violent nature of American society is the cause of the American love affair with guns.

The United States of America was conceived and nurtured by violence. The Europeans who colonized America were neither tolerant or enlightened; they were the dregs of society, and they even despised each other. The totally impure Puritans of Massachusetts despised the Quakers of Pennsylvania and the Catholics of Maryland. In the Pequot War, English colonists commanded by John Mason, launched a night attack on a large Pequot village on the Mystic River and burned the inhabitants in their homes and killed all survivors. By conservative estimates, the population of the United states prior to European colonization was greater than 12 million. Four centuries later, the count has been reduced to 237,000. Four centuries of continuous violence against native Americans, and the violence persists.

Abraham Lincoln, enshrined as the great emancipator, freed the slaves by inciting a war that killed somewhere around 750,000 Americans. Emancipation came to the slaves by previously unheard of violence. In contrast and at about the same time in history, the autocratic Tsar Alexander II of Russia emancipated more than 23 million serfs without killing a single person. Oh, those horrid Russian Tsars!

After the Civil War, Americans pushed the frontiers of America all the way to the Pacific Ocean. They did it with the gun. The Winchester Model 1873 repeating rifle and Colt Peacemaker revolver of 1873 are colloquially known as “The Guns that Won the West” for their predominant roles in the hands of Western settlers. Americans shot their way from the Mississippi to the Pacific.

American foreign policy for decades has consisted primarily of military misadventures–foreign policy through the barrel of a gun! Today, the gun has become the drone and the bullet, the hellfire missile. General Smedley Butler (1881-1940), one of only two Americans to win the Medal of Honor on two separate occasions, wrote: “I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. . . . I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.” Now, of course, we’re using the gun to make the Middle East and Southeast Asia “safe for democracy.” But the attempt isn’t faring very well.

Violence pervades this culture. Americans not only engage in violence, they are entertained by it. Killing takes place in America more often than the Sun rises, currently at an average of 87 times each day. Going to war in Afghanistan is less dangerous than living in Chicago. The Romans went to the Coliseum to watch people being killed. In major cities, Americans just look out their windows. Baseball, once America’s national game, a benign, soporific sport, has been replaced by football which is so violent it destroys the brains of those who play it. Violent films, euphemized as action flicks, dominate our motion picture theatres and television sets. Our children play killing video games.

So do you really believe that gun control will miraculously make America into a tranquil nation? Do you really believe that outlawing products and practices will make Americans peace loving? A culture cannot be changed by laws; the only function of law is to justify vengeance. No law in all of recorded history has been enacted that eliminated the practices it was meant to reduce. The oldest profession has been outlawed since the dawn of recorded history. It still is carried on. The truth of the matter is that a society based on law is a lawless society.

American society is violent not because of guns but because of the attitudes of Americans. When Europeans first came to the Americas, they thought that they had discovered a new world. Instead they found a land already inhabited by people with their own ways of life. Christian intolerance required the use of violence. Just as the Romans took the parts of Europe they wanted, these Europeans took the Americas. Violence was in their souls. Current day Americans have inherited it.

Wayne LaPierre, a National Rifle Association spokesman, has said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Someone should tell him that many consider him to be a bad guy with a gun.

So sure, enact legislation to control the proliferation of guns, but don’t get sanguine about it. Such legislation may help, but don’t count on it. Unless you can change the American character, our violent nature will endure until we exterminate ourselves. Live by the. . . . Oh, you know how that goes. Cultures are extremely difficult to change; changing them requires a sustained effort over several generations. I doubt that Americans are up to the task.

John Kozy is a retired professor of philosophy and logic who writes on social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the U.S. Army during the Korean War, he spent 20 years as a university professor and another 20 years working as a writer. He has published a textbook in formal logic commercially, in academic journals and a small number of commercial magazines, and has written a number of guest editorials for newspapers. His on-line pieces can be found on http://www.jkozy.com/ and he can be emailed from that site’s homepage.

The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s rule defining a “qualified mortgage”, which was announced on Thursday, creates vast new opportunities for the nation’s biggest banks to engage in predatory lending practices with impunity.

While the mainstream media describes the rule as an attempt to protect borrowers from the risky types of loans that caused the financial crisis, the opposite is true. The real purpose of the rule is to provide legal protection for the banks from homeowner lawsuits, and to lay the groundwork for more reckless lending that could inflate another housing bubble. In other words, the rule was designed to serve the interests of the banks and the banks alone. This is why bankers everywhere are celebrating the final draft. Take a look at this from Forbes:

“We applaud the Bureau for offering a legal safe harbor to lenders when they originate loans that meet the rigorous ‘qualified mortgage’ standards in the rule,” said Debra Still, chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association, in a statement. “This approach should allow lenders to offer sustainable mortgage credit to a great number of qualified borrowers without having to risk unreasonable and overly punitive litigation and penalties.” (Could New Tighter Mortgage Rules Actually Ease Lending?” Forbes)

The banks are happy because they got everything they wanted; blanket legal immunity for garbage mortgages they plan to offload onto US taxpayers, a green light to resume extending credit to high-risk borrowers, and a first-rate public relations campaign that makes the entire coup look like genuine consumer protection. As one cheery bankster quipped, “This was the Superbowl of rules”.

Indeed. It’s a big victory for the banks, but a major defeat for consumers. And the aftershocks will be felt for years to come, because (as we said in an earlier article) housing sales are already above trend and prices are back to normal which means that the only way the banks can reduce their huge backlog of 5 million distressed homes (which will face foreclosure in the next few years) is by creating another housing bubble. And, as we all know, housing bubbles require lax lending standards so that people who are not really creditworthy, end up borrowing hundreds of thousands of dollars that they’ll never be able to repay. This is what the new rule is really all about; it provides new opportunities for predatory lending, but with one notable difference from before, that is, if the loan meets the pitiable standard of a qualified mortgage, then the losses from the defaulting loan will be paid by taxpayers. That’s why the bankers are celebrating.

So, ignore the PR-hype about the banning of “deceptive teaser rates” or “no documentation loans” or “protecting the consumer”. That’s just a smoke screen to confuse you. The meat and potatoes in this rule, is what it doesn’t say. Here’s a clip from the Wall Street Journal that sums it up perfectly:

“Do qualified mortgages have a minimum down payment or credit score requirement?

No. Instead, the rules focus primarily on documenting a borrower’s ability to make monthly payments.” (“What the CFPB Measures Mean For Borrowers”, Wall Street Journal)

Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous in your life?

Didn’t we just go through a massive housing implosion which sent the financial system and the real economy into a 4-year death spiral? And now the agency which is supposed to protect consumers from another similar catastrophe is allowing the banks to issue mortgages that will be guaranteed by the government to applicants who don’t have the wherewithal for a lousy 5 or 10 percent down payment (No “skin in the game”) and whose credit scores will not be used to help decide whether they’re capable of repaying the loan or not?

What sense does that make? Does CFPB Director Richard Cordray think that he’s protecting consumers from the ravages of predatory lending by abandoning traditional standards and criteria for issuing a mortgage? Is that it?

Or is Cordray just another “captured” regulator doing the banks’ bidding? (It was clear that Cordray was another malleable bank toady back in Oct 2012 when this issue first arose. See: “Consumer Protector Caves to the Banks“, CounterPunch)

The media is making a big deal about the “ability-to-repay” provision of the new rule which requires banks to see that borrowers have sufficient assets or income to pay back the loan. But, once again, it’s all fluff. Banks don’t operate on the “honor system”. They’re going to stretch the new QM rule as far as possible, fitting borrowers into loans that will certainly fail sometime in the future. The losses for those loans will then be passed on to taxpayers. This is the same scam that took place during the subprime mortgage crisis. The banks booked profits on all manner of junk loans to high-risk borrowers figuring that the losses would be shifted onto investor groups who purchased the (subprime) bonds in the secondary market. The same nightmare is about to unfold again, only this time the banks won’t get stuck with the tab. Here’s an excerpt from an article in the New York Times that explains:

“As regulators complete new mortgage rules, banks are about to get a significant advantage: protection against homeowner lawsuits … some banking and housing specialists worry that borrowers are losing a critical safeguard. Industries rarely get broad protection from consumer lawsuits, and banks would seem unlikely candidates given the range of abuses revealed during the housing bust.” (“Banks Seek a Shield in Mortgage Rules”, New York Times)

Can you believe it? Even the business-friendly NYT is shocked that the CFPB is giving the banks legal immunity. (“Safe harbor”) Why? Why would the government agree to insure the activities of private industry (through Fannie and Freddie), especially when that industry has shown that it is loaded with crooks and criminals? This is corporate welfare at its worst and, unfortunately, it creates a powerful incentive for the banks to game the system and recklessly extend credit to anyone who can sit upright and sign a mortgage application.

Here’s more from the NYT:

“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the fledgling agency that is shaping the rules, faces a crucial but difficult task. Banks are pressing for a strong version of the legal shield. They also want qualified mortgages to be available to a broad range of borrowers, not just those with pristine credit.”

Of course they do. That’s how they make their money, by creating toxic loans that are passed along to Uncle Sam. How else are the banks going to boost profits in an economy where underemployment is tipping 14 percent, where wages are shrinking, and where the net wealth of the average American has plunged by a harrowing 40 percent in the last decade?

Business investment?

Don’t make me laugh. The only way the banks can survive is by attaching themselves parasitically to the US government and sucking for all they’re worth. Bad loans are simply the modus operandi, the means by which they extract fluid from their victim. Cordray and Co. appear to be only-too-eager to assist them in this task. Here’s more from the Times:

“Big financial institutions have faced an onslaught of litigation since the downturn, although mostly by the government, investors and other companies instead of borrowers. In February, five large mortgage banks reached a $26 billion settlement with government authorities that aimed, in part, to hold banks accountable for foreclosure abuses.”

Okay, so now we’re getting down to brass tacks. The banks want the new rule to shield them from future losses that will naturally accrue when they start ripping people off again. Right? This is why they fought tooth-n-nail to keep Elizabeth Warren off the CFPB board, because they knew she wouldn’t play ball with them. So they turned to “rubber stamp” Cordray instead, who has performed admirably executing Wall Street’s latest big heist with the skillfulness of a paid assassin.

Way to go, Rich.

There’s one more tidbit in the new QM rule that’s worth noting, a provision that states that “loans would be deemed qualified mortgages if borrowers are spending no more than 43% of their pretax income on monthly debt payments.”

“43% pretax income”?

You gotta be kidding me. That means that borrowers can qualify even if they’ll have to fork over 50% or more of their weekly paycheck. How many of those loans are going to get repaid?

Not many, I’d wager. This bill is a joke. Cordray has set up taxpayers for some hefty losses just to ingratiate himself with the Wall Street Bank Mafia. It’s shocking.

Can you see what’s going on?

The banks don’t want to act like banks anymore. They don’t want to hold capital against the loans they issue, they don’t want to keep loans on their books, and they don’t want to pay the losses when the loans blow up. The just want to keep printing private money (credit), booking profits on that money (loans), and then dumping the red ink on Uncle Sam. That’s how the whole thing works.

The QM rule was designed to work hand in hand with the Fed’s $40 billion per month purchases of mortgage backed securities. (MBS) This is key to understanding what’s going on.

The Fed, in concert with the Obama administration and the big banks, has replicated the same conditions that existed just prior to the last big bubble. The Central Bank will play the same role as investors in the secondary market (from 2003 to 2007), that is, the Fed will buy up all the garbage MBS the banks can produce. All the banks have to do is to find mortgage applicants who meet the wretched “no down payment, no credit score” requirements of the CFPB, and then “Let ‘er rip.”

All the pieces are now in place for another humongous, economy-crushing housing bubble. This isn’t going to end well.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s rule defining a “qualified mortgage”, which was announced on Thursday, creates vast new opportunities for the nation’s biggest banks to engage in predatory lending practices with impunity.

While the mainstream media describes the rule as an attempt to protect borrowers from the risky types of loans that caused the financial crisis, the opposite is true. The real purpose of the rule is to provide legal protection for the banks from homeowner lawsuits, and to lay the groundwork for more reckless lending that could inflate another housing bubble. In other words, the rule was designed to serve the interests of the banks and the banks alone. This is why bankers everywhere are celebrating the final draft. Take a look at this from Forbes:

“We applaud the Bureau for offering a legal safe harbor to lenders when they originate loans that meet the rigorous ‘qualified mortgage’ standards in the rule,” said Debra Still, chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association, in a statement. “This approach should allow lenders to offer sustainable mortgage credit to a great number of qualified borrowers without having to risk unreasonable and overly punitive litigation and penalties.” (Could New Tighter Mortgage Rules Actually Ease Lending?” Forbes)

The banks are happy because they got everything they wanted; blanket legal immunity for garbage mortgages they plan to offload onto US taxpayers, a green light to resume extending credit to high-risk borrowers, and a first-rate public relations campaign that makes the entire coup look like genuine consumer protection. As one cheery bankster quipped, “This was the Superbowl of rules”.

Indeed. It’s a big victory for the banks, but a major defeat for consumers. And the aftershocks will be felt for years to come, because (as we said in an earlier article) housing sales are already above trend and prices are back to normal which means that the only way the banks can reduce their huge backlog of 5 million distressed homes (which will face foreclosure in the next few years) is by creating another housing bubble. And, as we all know, housing bubbles require lax lending standards so that people who are not really creditworthy, end up borrowing hundreds of thousands of dollars that they’ll never be able to repay. This is what the new rule is really all about; it provides new opportunities for predatory lending, but with one notable difference from before, that is, if the loan meets the pitiable standard of a qualified mortgage, then the losses from the defaulting loan will be paid by taxpayers. That’s why the bankers are celebrating.

So, ignore the PR-hype about the banning of “deceptive teaser rates” or “no documentation loans” or “protecting the consumer”. That’s just a smoke screen to confuse you. The meat and potatoes in this rule, is what it doesn’t say. Here’s a clip from the Wall Street Journal that sums it up perfectly:

“Do qualified mortgages have a minimum down payment or credit score requirement?

No. Instead, the rules focus primarily on documenting a borrower’s ability to make monthly payments.” (“What the CFPB Measures Mean For Borrowers”, Wall Street Journal)

Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous in your life?

Didn’t we just go through a massive housing implosion which sent the financial system and the real economy into a 4-year death spiral? And now the agency which is supposed to protect consumers from another similar catastrophe is allowing the banks to issue mortgages that will be guaranteed by the government to applicants who don’t have the wherewithal for a lousy 5 or 10 percent down payment (No “skin in the game”) and whose credit scores will not be used to help decide whether they’re capable of repaying the loan or not?

What sense does that make? Does CFPB Director Richard Cordray think that he’s protecting consumers from the ravages of predatory lending by abandoning traditional standards and criteria for issuing a mortgage? Is that it?

Or is Cordray just another “captured” regulator doing the banks’ bidding? (It was clear that Cordray was another malleable bank toady back in Oct 2012 when this issue first arose. See: “Consumer Protector Caves to the Banks“, CounterPunch)

The media is making a big deal about the “ability-to-repay” provision of the new rule which requires banks to see that borrowers have sufficient assets or income to pay back the loan. But, once again, it’s all fluff. Banks don’t operate on the “honor system”. They’re going to stretch the new QM rule as far as possible, fitting borrowers into loans that will certainly fail sometime in the future. The losses for those loans will then be passed on to taxpayers. This is the same scam that took place during the subprime mortgage crisis. The banks booked profits on all manner of junk loans to high-risk borrowers figuring that the losses would be shifted onto investor groups who purchased the (subprime) bonds in the secondary market. The same nightmare is about to unfold again, only this time the banks won’t get stuck with the tab. Here’s an excerpt from an article in the New York Times that explains:

“As regulators complete new mortgage rules, banks are about to get a significant advantage: protection against homeowner lawsuits … some banking and housing specialists worry that borrowers are losing a critical safeguard. Industries rarely get broad protection from consumer lawsuits, and banks would seem unlikely candidates given the range of abuses revealed during the housing bust.” (“Banks Seek a Shield in Mortgage Rules”, New York Times)

Can you believe it? Even the business-friendly NYT is shocked that the CFPB is giving the banks legal immunity. (“Safe harbor”) Why? Why would the government agree to insure the activities of private industry (through Fannie and Freddie), especially when that industry has shown that it is loaded with crooks and criminals? This is corporate welfare at its worst and, unfortunately, it creates a powerful incentive for the banks to game the system and recklessly extend credit to anyone who can sit upright and sign a mortgage application.

Here’s more from the NYT:

“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the fledgling agency that is shaping the rules, faces a crucial but difficult task. Banks are pressing for a strong version of the legal shield. They also want qualified mortgages to be available to a broad range of borrowers, not just those with pristine credit.”

Of course they do. That’s how they make their money, by creating toxic loans that are passed along to Uncle Sam. How else are the banks going to boost profits in an economy where underemployment is tipping 14 percent, where wages are shrinking, and where the net wealth of the average American has plunged by a harrowing 40 percent in the last decade?

Business investment?

Don’t make me laugh. The only way the banks can survive is by attaching themselves parasitically to the US government and sucking for all they’re worth. Bad loans are simply the modus operandi, the means by which they extract fluid from their victim. Cordray and Co. appear to be only-too-eager to assist them in this task. Here’s more from the Times:

“Big financial institutions have faced an onslaught of litigation since the downturn, although mostly by the government, investors and other companies instead of borrowers. In February, five large mortgage banks reached a $26 billion settlement with government authorities that aimed, in part, to hold banks accountable for foreclosure abuses.”

Okay, so now we’re getting down to brass tacks. The banks want the new rule to shield them from future losses that will naturally accrue when they start ripping people off again. Right? This is why they fought tooth-n-nail to keep Elizabeth Warren off the CFPB board, because they knew she wouldn’t play ball with them. So they turned to “rubber stamp” Cordray instead, who has performed admirably executing Wall Street’s latest big heist with the skillfulness of a paid assassin.

Way to go, Rich.

There’s one more tidbit in the new QM rule that’s worth noting, a provision that states that “loans would be deemed qualified mortgages if borrowers are spending no more than 43% of their pretax income on monthly debt payments.”

“43% pretax income”?

You gotta be kidding me. That means that borrowers can qualify even if they’ll have to fork over 50% or more of their weekly paycheck. How many of those loans are going to get repaid?

Not many, I’d wager. This bill is a joke. Cordray has set up taxpayers for some hefty losses just to ingratiate himself with the Wall Street Bank Mafia. It’s shocking.

Can you see what’s going on?

The banks don’t want to act like banks anymore. They don’t want to hold capital against the loans they issue, they don’t want to keep loans on their books, and they don’t want to pay the losses when the loans blow up. The just want to keep printing private money (credit), booking profits on that money (loans), and then dumping the red ink on Uncle Sam. That’s how the whole thing works.

The QM rule was designed to work hand in hand with the Fed’s $40 billion per month purchases of mortgage backed securities. (MBS) This is key to understanding what’s going on.

The Fed, in concert with the Obama administration and the big banks, has replicated the same conditions that existed just prior to the last big bubble. The Central Bank will play the same role as investors in the secondary market (from 2003 to 2007), that is, the Fed will buy up all the garbage MBS the banks can produce. All the banks have to do is to find mortgage applicants who meet the wretched “no down payment, no credit score” requirements of the CFPB, and then “Let ‘er rip.”

All the pieces are now in place for another humongous, economy-crushing housing bubble. This isn’t going to end well.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

And just like that the most surreal two weeks of sheer monetary idiocy is over, with the Treasury and the Fed both formally announcing the death of the trillion trollin’ dollar platinum coin idea, which was nothing but a cheap charlatan trick devised by page view-desperate media outlets to dumb down their already confused audience and distract from the fact that the US is, sadly, once again on the verge of bankruptcy.

As the WaPo reports:

The Treasury Department will not mint a trillion-dollar platinum coin to get around the debt ceiling. If they did, the Federal Reserve would not accept it.

That’s the bottom line of the statement that Anthony Coley, a spokesman for the Treasury Department, gave me today. “Neither the Treasury Department nor the Federal Reserve believes that the law can or should be used to facilitate the production of platinum coins for the purpose of avoiding an increase in the debt limit,” he said.

This is good news: at least the US monetary system will not devolve into an all out circus and parlor trick. For the time being at least. Because it is and always will be far easier to create empty, repoable “money” out of fungible electronic 1s and 0s, than an actual piece of metal.

It is even better news because one can now permanently filter out and ignore all destructive “opinions” originating from those vocal proponents of this monetary gimmick, some of whom even have awards not ironically named for the inventor of dynamite.

We won’t even touch on what you need to know for the click-through and CPM loss this means for Series ZZ preferred round investors in slideshow-centric electronic media outlets located at the intersection of gossip and financial cluelessness.

Finally, and on a more serious note, this once again means that it will be once again up to the market to get the political left and right to come to a compromise, as was the case in the summer of 2011.

Veteran Olympian Eddie “The Eagle” Edwards finally earned sporting acclaim – nearly 25 years after his infamous Olympic flop – by winging his way into the next round of new diving-inspired talent show Splash!

British ski jumper Edwards, who soared to glorious failure in the 1988 winter Games, topped the ITV show’s leaderboard with a daring 10-metre dive, while bandaged-up sports presenter Charlotte Jackson won a head-to-head “splash-off” against reality TV personality Joey Essex to progress past the heat stage.

Edwards joked he had “ruined his reputation” by winning Saturday night’s round, earning praise from judges – Team GB’s diving coach Andy Banks, comedienne Jo Brand and former Olympic diving medallist Leon Taylor – as well as Olympic bronze medallist and competition mentor Tom Daley.

Jackson – who had several wardrobe malfunctions during practice sessions – performed despite suffering a double fracture in training. She had been diving from the high boards before Saturday, but had to be taken to hospital after breaking two bones in her toe. Banks described her dive as technically “easy”, but praised her for persevering with a heavily bandaged foot.

Essex used his catchphrase as inspiration for his effort – the “reem tuck dive” – from the 10m board. It was only enough to earn him 19.5 points from the judges, and next-to-last place on the leaderboard. But the public vote ensured his place in the splash-off with Jackson, who would become the first female to make it past the show’s first round.

American model Caprice, 41, wowed the judges with her one-and-a-half somersault tuck from the 3m springboard, scoring 24.5 from the judges. It took her to second in the leaderboard after the judges’ scores, but she was condemned to competition exit following the public vote.

Garden designer Diarmuid Gavin admitted having huge nerves before his basic but uncomfortable descent into the water. It earned him a paltry 16.5 points from the judges and he was also eliminated after the public vote.

Edwards was last to take to the water, where he completed the fiendishly tricky forward one-and-a-half somersault pike, described as the most difficult dive in the competition. And the former Olympian impressed the panel by executing a near-perfect routine.

Judge Banks said Edwards “brought some spice to the show”, with Daley suggesting the veteran athlete should have represented Great Britain as a diver rather than a ski-jumper.

Edwards and Jackson join comedian Omid Djalili and actor Jake Canuso in the next round of the talent show, with interior designer Linda Barker, comedian Dom Joly and boxer Anthony Ogogo all lined up to perform next weekend.

Veteran Olympian Eddie “The Eagle” Edwards finally earned sporting acclaim – nearly 25 years after his infamous Olympic flop – by winging his way into the next round of new diving-inspired talent show Splash!

British ski jumper Edwards, who soared to glorious failure in the 1988 winter Games, topped the ITV show’s leaderboard with a daring 10-metre dive, while bandaged-up sports presenter Charlotte Jackson won a head-to-head “splash-off” against reality TV personality Joey Essex to progress past the heat stage.

Edwards joked he had “ruined his reputation” by winning Saturday night’s round, earning praise from judges – Team GB’s diving coach Andy Banks, comedienne Jo Brand and former Olympic diving medallist Leon Taylor – as well as Olympic bronze medallist and competition mentor Tom Daley.

Jackson – who had several wardrobe malfunctions during practice sessions – performed despite suffering a double fracture in training. She had been diving from the high boards before Saturday, but had to be taken to hospital after breaking two bones in her toe. Banks described her dive as technically “easy”, but praised her for persevering with a heavily bandaged foot.

Essex used his catchphrase as inspiration for his effort – the “reem tuck dive” – from the 10m board. It was only enough to earn him 19.5 points from the judges, and next-to-last place on the leaderboard. But the public vote ensured his place in the splash-off with Jackson, who would become the first female to make it past the show’s first round.

American model Caprice, 41, wowed the judges with her one-and-a-half somersault tuck from the 3m springboard, scoring 24.5 from the judges. It took her to second in the leaderboard after the judges’ scores, but she was condemned to competition exit following the public vote.

Garden designer Diarmuid Gavin admitted having huge nerves before his basic but uncomfortable descent into the water. It earned him a paltry 16.5 points from the judges and he was also eliminated after the public vote.

Edwards was last to take to the water, where he completed the fiendishly tricky forward one-and-a-half somersault pike, described as the most difficult dive in the competition. And the former Olympian impressed the panel by executing a near-perfect routine.

Judge Banks said Edwards “brought some spice to the show”, with Daley suggesting the veteran athlete should have represented Great Britain as a diver rather than a ski-jumper.

Edwards and Jackson join comedian Omid Djalili and actor Jake Canuso in the next round of the talent show, with interior designer Linda Barker, comedian Dom Joly and boxer Anthony Ogogo all lined up to perform next weekend.

Pro-gun activists in the United States have announced that they will be holding an event called Gun Appreciation Day on January 19.

The organizers of the event say that on January 19, people should go to local firearm stores, gun shows, and shooting ranges with their rifles, US flags, the US Constitution, and signs saying “Hands off my gun.”

On Friday, Larry Ward, the chairman of the group organizing Gun Appreciation Day, said the event would be a day to demonstrate against President Barack Obama’s “post-Sandy Hook assault on gun rights” and a day to “honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,” who was killed by a racist gunman in 1968.

“I think Martin Luther King, Jr. would agree with me if he were alive today that if African Americans had been given the right to keep and bear arms from day one of the country’s founding, perhaps slavery might not have been a chapter in our history,” Ward said.

However, anti-gun activist Maria Roach called Ward’s remarks “ridiculous” and said that the statements contradict historical reality, since slaves actually did mount many armed uprisings in the US, although all failed and were followed by heavy retaliation by the slave owners.

In addition, many people find it offensive that the pro-gun activists are trying to claim some kind of connection with the legacy of civil rights movement leader Martin Luther King, Jr., who was a pacifist, by staging Gun Appreciation Day on the weekend before the Monday holiday for Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

The organizers of Gun Appreciation Day have estimated that 50 million US citizens will back the proposal and say that there are more than 70 listed sponsors on its website, including sports stores, magazines, and political groups.

The discussion on gun control has greatly intensified in the United States since the massacre of 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the town of Newton, Connecticut on December 14.

CAH/HGL

The news from the world of finance has been incredibly depressing of late, as the big Wall Street banks keep winning round after round in their battles with regulators. The flurry of deals, which in part were closed pre-Jan 1st to allow the banks to clean up their books before the end of the year, were just one big win for the banks after another: the $10 billion Bank of America deal with Fannie Mae; the deal between 2 regulatory agencies and 10 major banks to come up with $3.3 billion dollars for 3.8 million homeowners; the international Basel 3 capitulation caving into everything the big international banks were asking for on regulation. Compared with the size of the crimes, the number of people who got badly hurt, and the amount of money these banks made off the fraudulent deals they committed, this money is pocket change, an insult to the millions of hard working families who have had their lives ripped apart by bank fraud.

Now even the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the one agency which has been rightly lauded for fighting for consumers on other issues since it got created due to Elizabeth’s Warren’s work, has caved into Wall Street demands on a new rule they just issued relating to mortgages and given the big banks a major edge against homeowners in legal issues going forward. People at Americans for Financial Reform and the other groups working on these issues tell me they are appalled by these new rules.

The best hope for investigating and prosecuting fraudulent bankers has been in the inter-agency task force co-chaired by NY AG Eric Schneiderman, but the DOJ has refused to give the task force the staff that it needed, and as a result things have been moving slower than molasses, and it is not at all clear at this point whether anything is going to come of it.

Media figures enamored of Wall Street think all this is a swell thing. WP writer Neil Irwin thinks it’s terrific because “every dollar a bank holds as part of its liquidity buffer is a dollar they are not lending out…as a loan to build a factory.” This was Obama’s argument in his first State Of The Union speech, where he talked about how he hated to bail out the banks but only by helping them would they be able to start making loans again so that the economy would recover. It has pretty much been Geithner’s entire philosophy while at Treasury: anything that gets in the way of the big banks’ ability to make money will hurt the economy. The problem is that while the big banks have been swimming in money most of the last 4 years, making record profits and handing out record bonuses to execs in some years, the rest of the economy is flat. Small businesses are still having trouble getting loans, factory start-ups have been slow, housing remains weak even with its recent uptick, and in case nobody has noticed in a DC obsessed by deficits, unemployment is still appallingly high.

Here’s the other thing: if people steal money and commit fraud and never have to go to jail or pay any real penalty, they generally keep doing it. It is equally true of street criminals and Wall Street bankers. With a government that is doing nothing to prosecute these crimes, that is settling for light slap on the wrist settlements time and time again, and that is still allowing banks to get bigger and bigger, what exactly will stop future financial crises caused by big bank greed and fraud?

One other extremely important point here: this is also about the functioning of the day to day economy, not just occasional financial crises. When the financial sector is as big and powerful and corrupt as the American financial sector is, and when tax law and special interest loopholes are so weighted to the finance sector and speculative finance as they are today, it drains money out of the real economy- out of manufacturing, out of small business start-up loans, out of housing, out of construction, out of Main Street business and workers’ pocketbooks.

What is especially painful to a loyal Democrat like me is how much of the power of Wall Street has flourished on my party’s watch. I was proud to be a member of the Bill Clinton ’92 campaign and White House, we did a lot of good things the years he was President- progressive budget packages, S-CHIP, a minimum wage increase, the Brady Bill and Assault Weapons Ban, Family and Medical Leave, etc. I was proud to support Barack Obama in his 2 races, and be a part of his transition team. He too has accomplished many things I am proud of: a progressive stimulus bill, Obamacare, the CFPB, the Lily Ledbetter Act, the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and many others. But these Presidents have a blind spot the size of the Bank of America building about Wall Street, and have appointed 3 Treasury Secretaries and other financial regulators who have done way more for Wall Street than for working families.

Which brings me to Jack Lew. Personally, I am quite biased toward Jack Lew, as he and I worked together on health care reform for Hillary Clinton in the 1993-94. Before he worked on health care reform he worked with my dear friend and mentor the late Eli Segal on creating AmeriCorps. He was the intellectual father of the S-CHIP program. I found him to be a straight shooter with a good heart who was a tried and true heir to the politics of the man he worked for a few years, Tip O’Neill. He is certainly not, as some have described him, a protege of Bob Rubin. And as OMB director, he worked on budget issues not financial issues, so he doesn’t deserve the blame for truly god-awful bill that repealed Glass-Steagall.

However, as fond as I am of Jack, he is not the progressive answer to the power of the big banks. He once said that financial deregulation had little to do with the financial collapse of 2008, which is very disappointing, and he certainly isn’t my style of a strong progressive in terms of taking on the power of Wall Street. (Of course, someone with my view about taking on the power of Wall Street would not be appointed by this President or confirmable by this Senate.) And regardless of Jack’s views, he will still be surrounded by what Jeff Connaughton in his book The Payoff: Why Wall Street Always Wins calls the Wall Street “blob”: the Treasury appointees who come from Wall Street and plan to return there after they leave; the Capitol Hill staffers who want high paid Wall Street jobs after they leave the Hill; the armies of Wall Street lawyers, lobbyists, political operatives, PR guys; the members of Congress whose campaigns are well-funded by those Wall Street denizens; the think tanks given huge Wall Street contributions to spout the party line.

I think Jack will be a better Treasury Secretary than Rubin, Summers, or Geithner. He may well be the best a financial reform activist like me could have hoped for, given the alternatives. I hope so, because you never want your friends to sorely disappoint you. But it will take a renewed and impassioned movement to take on Wall Street and have a chance at lessening their economic stranglehold on the nation’s throat, and the nation’s political system. Having a champion like Elizabeth Warren in the Senate will help, but the rest of us who care about these issues will need to fight like cats and dogs to make anything happen where the rest of can win, rather than Wall Street.

A Rolls Royce belonging to Freddie Mercury is being auctioned at the Autosport International show in Birmingham.

The Silver Shadow was bought for the former Queen frontman’s personal use by his managing company Goose Productions Ltd in 1979 and was used by the singer until his death in November 1991.

But Mercury never actually drove the it himself, as he did not have a driving licence. Instead he relied on three chauffeurs who shared the driving duties.

With a guide price of £9,000-£11,000, the luxury car was last used for the premier of the Queen musical We Will Rock You in 2002.

It has covered minimal mileage since and has remained with Mercury’s family ever since.

Another special car among the lots being sold by auctioneers COYS at the NEC is the 1980 Ford Capri S from TV comedy Only Fools And Horses – estimated to fetch between £24,000 and £28,000.

Although the main motor star of the sitcom was the yellow three-wheel Reliant Supervan, many of the later episodes featured the green Capri, with tiger fur interior and pink aerials.

The present owner bought the car in 1998 from MGM Cars Ltd of Elstree Studios – apparently for £400 – and has kept the car since.

We Americans like to think, and in fact have been indoctrinated for decades to believe, that we are the greatest country in the world, the best at just about everything. Sadly, that hasn’t been true for quite some time. Words patriots once gave their lives for, like ‘freedom’… and ‘patriots’… have become almost meaningless.

So if you’re curious about who’s taken our crown, you might be surprised. The latest international index of 123 countries released by the Fraser Institute, Canada’s leading public policy think-tank, and Germany’s Liberales Institut, ranked New Zealand number one for offering the highest level of freedom worldwide, followed by the Netherlands then Hong Kong. Australia, Canada and Ireland tied for fourth spot. The survey measured the degree to which people are free to enjoy classic civil liberties – freedom of speech, religion, individual economic choice, and association and assembly – in each country surveyed, as well as indicators of crime and violence, freedom of movement, legal discrimination against homosexuals, and women’s freedoms. Pretty extensive stuff.

The United States tied Denmark for seventh. We didn’t even get bronze.

As for the idea that the United States is the envy of the world when it comes to free markets and business? Wrong again. The U.S. continues to lose ground against other nations in Forbes’ annual look at the Best Countries for Business. The U.S. placed second in 2009, but in 2012 it ranks 12th, trailing fellow G-8 countries Canada (5th), the United Kingdom (10th) and Australia (11th) The world’s biggest economy at $15.1 trillion scores abysmally when it comes to trade freedom and monetary freedom.

So, who did top the list for the Best Countries for Business?

New Zealand. New Zealand can boast a transparent and stable business climate that encourages entrepreneurship. New Zealand is the smallest economy in the top 10 at $162 billion, but it ranks first in personal freedom and investor protection, as well as a lack of red tape and corruption.

Okay, so at least MIT is still the best university in the entire world, we’re still first at something…Well, according to the Association of American Colleges and Universities, there are two thousand six hundred eighteen accredited four-year colleges and universities in the United States, most of which operate privately or as part of state governments. Only fifty-four of these are in the top 200, very slightly over 2% . So who does top the educational rankings?

That would be New Zealand again, first in the world on the basis of performance in three areas: access to education, quality of education and human capital.

The annual QS World University survey ranks institutions based on scores for academic reputation, employer reputation and how many international students it has, among other things. Up to 20,000 universities from around the world were surveyed to find the top 700 academic institutions from 72 countries, the best universities in the world.

New Zealand has eight universities nationwide, with slightly less than around a half million students. According to the QS World University Rankings, two of New Zealand’s universities — Auckland and Otago — rank in the top 200 of the 700 best universities in the world, and Auckland in the top 100 (83rd and 133rd respectively). That’s 25% compared to the United State’s 2.06%. All eight universities rank in the top 500, with Auckland University of Technology appearing on the list for the first time this year. That’s a 100% rating.

Even when New Zealand isn’t top of the list, they’re outranking and out-performing the United States on just about any index you want to consider. How about the environment? According to the Yale University and Columbia University 2012 Environmental Performance Index at the World Economic Forum, ranking 132 countries, New Zealand placed 14th in the top 30. The United States trailed at 49th.

We rank top of the list for the most expensive health care system in the world, but dead last overall compared to six other industrialized countries – Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom — when it comes to quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and the ability to lead long, healthy, productive lives.

There are a few other things the United States tops the charts at: We’re fifth out of the top 25 countries in the world in terms of crime rate. New Zealand is 24th.

Auckland is ranked the third best city out of the top five for quality of living, after Vienna and Zurich, nothing in the United States making the list at all. Even when it’s just the Americas being ranked for quality of living overall (taking New Zealand out of the equation altogether), the top four cities are all in Canada, with Honolulu coming 28th.

Don’t even get me started on the All Blacks.

One of the smallest countries in the world is kicking our ass when it comes to actually living up to the standards we Americans pretend we still have. Isn’t it about time we stopped kidding ourselves, stopped living on past glories that mostly never were, and started actually trying to be at least as good as one of the smallest nations on earth?

BELFAST (Reuters) – Four police officers were injured during clashes between pro-British and Irish nationalist youths in Belfast on Saturday following another protest against the decision to remove the British flag from city hall.

Nationalists threw golf balls and stones at a crowd walking home from a rally in the city centre demanding for the return of the flag. Police used water cannon and at least one plastic bullet round in a bid to restore calm.

The unrest over the past five weeks has been some of the most sustained in the British-ruled province since a 1998 peace deal ended 30 years of conflict between Catholic Irish nationalists seeking union with Ireland and Protestant loyalists determined to remain part of the United Kingdom.

Exposing a deep vein of discontent with the peace deal, loyalists have held nightly protests since councillors voted last month to end a century-old tradition of flying the British union flag every day over the city hall.

Loyalist politicians have joined their nationalist rivals in condemning the violence, but they have been unable to prevent groups of young men draped in British flags from clashing with police.

The protesters have complained that the removal of the flag was a step too far in the ebbing of loyalist dominance in the province, saying too many concessions had been given to Irish nationalists in a power-sharing government.

At least 1,000 loyalists, some with British flags and “No Surrender” banners, gathered at City Hall on Saturday. Hundreds of police were escorting them back towards east Belfast when the clashes began.

Reinforcements including dozens of jeeps, a helicopter and at least three water cannon trucks were sent in to try to control the crowds.

(Reporting by Stephen Mangan; Writing by Conor Humphries; Editing by Rosalind Russell)

January 12, 2013  |  

This article was originally published by The Southern Poverty Law Center.


A New Hampshire lawyer who works with a virulently anti-gay Christian-right organization has been found guilty of child pornography charges after videotaping her own daughter having sex with two men on multiple occasions.

Lisa Biron, 43, of Manchester faces a minimum sentence of 25 years in prison after a jury convicted her yesterday. The jury deliberated for less than an hour.

Biron, arrested by the FBI last November, was accused of eight felony counts involving the videotaping of men having sex with a 14-year-old girl who was identified by the Associated Press as her daughter. She also allegedly made a cellphone video of herself having sex with her daughter.

Biron, who claimed on her Facebook page (which was taken down, according to the Concord Monitor) that the Bible was her favorite book, had worked with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), formerly the Alliance Defense Fund, in defending a Pentecostal church in Concord in a tax fight against the city.

The Arizona-based ADF calls itself a “servant ministry” that seeks to transform the legal system and advocate “for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.” The group issues dire warnings about “the homosexual agenda” and offers a book (available for a donation of $35) by its president, Alan Sears, and senior director Craig Osten, with that title. In the book, the authors claim that “the homosexual agenda” will destroy religious liberty and free speech. In one chapter, they claim that homosexuality on college campuses leads to pedophilia, and that homosexuality and pedophilia “are intrinsically linked,” a falsehood long perpetuated by the anti-gay right to demonize LGBT people.

In the wake of Biron’s arrest, the ADF removed all mentions of her from its website and Facebook page, and in a November “CBS News” report the ADF said that Biron was never an employee. The group has released no further statements on Biron. According to the LGBT blog Joe.My.God., the group continued to remove mentions of her from its Facebook page yesterday and banned anyone who posted anything about her.

January 12, 2013  |  

This article was originally published by The Southern Poverty Law Center.


A New Hampshire lawyer who works with a virulently anti-gay Christian-right organization has been found guilty of child pornography charges after videotaping her own daughter having sex with two men on multiple occasions.

Lisa Biron, 43, of Manchester faces a minimum sentence of 25 years in prison after a jury convicted her yesterday. The jury deliberated for less than an hour.

Biron, arrested by the FBI last November, was accused of eight felony counts involving the videotaping of men having sex with a 14-year-old girl who was identified by the Associated Press as her daughter. She also allegedly made a cellphone video of herself having sex with her daughter.

Biron, who claimed on her Facebook page (which was taken down, according to the Concord Monitor) that the Bible was her favorite book, had worked with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), formerly the Alliance Defense Fund, in defending a Pentecostal church in Concord in a tax fight against the city.

The Arizona-based ADF calls itself a “servant ministry” that seeks to transform the legal system and advocate “for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.” The group issues dire warnings about “the homosexual agenda” and offers a book (available for a donation of $35) by its president, Alan Sears, and senior director Craig Osten, with that title. In the book, the authors claim that “the homosexual agenda” will destroy religious liberty and free speech. In one chapter, they claim that homosexuality on college campuses leads to pedophilia, and that homosexuality and pedophilia “are intrinsically linked,” a falsehood long perpetuated by the anti-gay right to demonize LGBT people.

In the wake of Biron’s arrest, the ADF removed all mentions of her from its website and Facebook page, and in a November “CBS News” report the ADF said that Biron was never an employee. The group has released no further statements on Biron. According to the LGBT blog Joe.My.God., the group continued to remove mentions of her from its Facebook page yesterday and banned anyone who posted anything about her.

Israeli troops have killed a Palestinian on the West Bank border amid escalating tensions over Tel Aviv’s plan to build a new illegal Jewish settlement on the occupied lands.

PG/SS

An activist says the government of the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has only created the illusion of collaborating with the First Nations community, Press TV reports.

“I think they are just sort of trying to appease people, you know, like giving the illusions of actually having that consultation going on but not actually committing to it,” Myka Burning said in an interview with Press TV on Saturday.

Referring to the protests staged by the Idle No More movement, Burning noted that the demonstrators will continue until they can achieve their demands.

“The protests when it comes to Idle No More itself…will continue until Harper brings back that collaboration with First Nations people which he has supposed to be doing, which he has been failing to do. That is one of the main objectives of Idle No More – it has to get that dialogue back on the table,” she further explained.

The Idle No More, a movement of the First Nations in Canada, has been holding protests since November 2012.

On January 3, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations Shawn Atleo called on Harper to meet with the aboriginal leaders over their concerns.

Canadian aboriginals have also held demonstrations since the government approved Bill C-45, which seeks to change the rules about aboriginal land. The protests intensified after Chief of Attawapiskat First Nation in Northern Ontario Theresa Spence went on a hunger strike on December 11, 2012, demanding a meeting with Harper.

“Until he [Stephen Harper] does that overall, the movement will keep going. It has to be a consistent thing. It cannot be just like a promise of, ‘Oh, I’m going to do this’. We need to see some actual concrete things coming from parliament,” Burning pointed out.

She added that the First Nations community believes that the Canadian government has the duty to consult with the indigenous people of the country based on the treaties and agreements.

“Again, [we will continue] until we see that they are…actually communicating with us and having us on the forefront of that consultation, again, it is just words. We are waiting to see action,” the activist concluded.

TNP/SS