• China and India embassies boosted and Europe posts cut • Foreign Office ‘must match realities of 21st century’ William Hague is due to unveil changes to the way Britain deploys diplomats around the world, with fewer to be stationed in Europe and more to go to emerging powers, such as China and India, in what he claims is the biggest strategic shift in the service for decades. The changes, which the foreign secretary will present to the Commons, are a response to the 10% cut in the Foreign Office’s resources imposed in last year’s comprehensive spending review, and to changes in the global power structure. Hague will say that redeployments of diplomats over the next four years will reflect Britain’s long-term interests rather than be in response to short-term crises. “By 2015 we must aim to be a Foreign Office that is lean and efficient but configured to match the realities of the 21st century,” Hague told civil servants on Tuesday. “Taken together, this represents the biggest strategic diplomatic advance by Britain in decades.” The most tangible change will be a boost to the number of diplomats despatched to the world’s emerging powers. There will be 50 more envoys in China and 30 more in India, roughly a 7% increase in the size of both embassies. More “frontline staff” will be sent to Brazil, Mexico, Turkey and Indonesia. Hague will maintain the existing 140 or so embassies and high commissions, but add more – in El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, South Sudan (due to become independent in July) and, when local circumstances permit, in Somalia and Madagascar. To pay for this expansion and meet the Foreign Office’s budgetary target of a 10% real cut by 2014-15, savings are to be made in Europe, the most expensive region. Representation in European cities outside capitals is to be scaled down; consulates will close or be replaced with smaller trade missions. Some consular staff will move according to peaks in demand, following the flow of tourists, for example. It is hoped the missions in Afghanistan and Iraq can be scaled back as conditions allow in the coming years. “When I am asked if the intensive pace of events in the Middle East means that we care less about commercial diplomacy and relations with the emerging powers, the answer is a resounding no. We have to do both the short- and long-term work. So by 2015 we must aim to be a Foreign Office that is lean and efficient but configured to match the realities of the 21st century,” Hague told Foreign Office staff on Tuesday, in a preview of the Commons statement. “Taken together, this represents the biggest strategic diplomatic advance by Britain in decades.” Some of the European savings would be additional to the target of £100m reductions in departmental running costs, and up to £40m cuts in the costs of programmes, such as special joint projects with other governments. Robin Niblett, director of the foreign policy thinktank Chatham House, said: “This is putting meat on the bones of the announced strategy of shifting from a Euro-Atlantic focus towards a more G20, multipolar world.” In 2008 Hague’s predecessor, David Miliband, also called for a shift of resources away from Europe to China and India, and for “laptop diplomats” who could be sent to remote areas and troublespots where they could function independently without the need for embassies or consulates. Foreign Office sources said that Miliband’s ambitions were overshadowed by the urgent need to build up the UK embassy in Kabul, and by the department’s temporary loss of budgetary protection against fluctuations in global exchange rates. Foreign policy William Hague Julian Borger guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
In letter in New York Times under Omar bin Laden’s name, sons say wanted to know why their father was killed, not arrested Osama bin Laden’s adult sons have attacked the legitimacy of the American assault which killed their father, calling for a UN enquiry to determine why he was not arrested and prosecuted. In a joint letter the family said it wanted to know “why an unarmed man was not arrested and tried in a court of law so that truth is revealed to the people of the world”. “Arbitrary killing is not a solution to political problems,” they said. The letter was sent to the New York Times under the name of Omar bin Laden, the 30-year-old fourth son of Bin Laden who lived with the al-Qaida leader in Sudan and Afghanistan but has publicly denounced his attacks on civilians. Drawing comparisons with Saddam Hussein and the former Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic, the statement said that “international law has been blatantly violated” and, in a reference to the shooting of other people in the compound, said Obama had ordered “the execution of unarmed men and women” The letter contained some contradictions. Bin Laden called on the US to provide proof of his father’s death – “we are not convinced” he said – while also condemning Osama bin Laden’s sea burial as a deprivation of the family’s religious rights. Bin Laden also said it was “unworthy” of US special forces to kill an unarmed female family member and one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, identified in news reports as 22-year-old Khalid. But the exact identities of those killed remains unclear. Some reports last night suggested that another son, 20-year-old Hamza, had escaped the raid. A senior Pakistani intelligence official said he had no information about any escapees. Bin Laden’s family said it was calling on Pakistan to repatriate his three wives and several children, currently in military custody after surviving the dramatic US special forces raid on their Abbottabad home eight days ago. Washington has publicly demanded access to the wives, one Yemeni and two Saudis, saying they may offer new intelligence on al-Qaida. Officials in Islamabad responded with conflicting statements but last night the interior minister, Rehman Malik, told CNN that access would be granted although he not specify when. In 2007 Omar bin Laden married Jane Felix-Browne, a parish councillor from Cheshire who met him during a holiday to Egypt. She later changed her name to Zaina Mohamed al-Sabah. In the statement Bin Laden reiterated that he “always disagreed with our father regarding any violence and always sent messages to our father, that he must change his ways and that no civilians should be attacked under any circumstances.” “Despite the difficulty of publicly disagreeing with our father, he never hesitated to condemn any violent attacks made by anyone, and expressed sorrow for the victims of any and all attacks.” He said he was assembling a “panel of eminent British and international lawyers” to help obtain answers. If the Obama administration did not respond within 30 days they would take “necessary action” including lodging cases with the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice. Osama bin Laden United States Obama administration US politics Declan Walsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Survey shows just 7% of people read the full terms when buying a product or service online, while a fifth say they have suffered from not doing so It is the important small print setting out our contractual rights, but latest research reveals just 7% of Britons read the online terms and conditions when signing up for products and services. The research, commissioned by investment specialist Skandia , exposes how easy it is for people booking and paying for goods and services online to click the terms and conditions box without actually reading them in full. Nearly six in 10 (58%) adults said they would rather read an instruction manual or their utility or credit card bill than go through online terms, and more than one in 10 (12%) would rather read the phone book. Meanwhile, 43% of those who don’t always read the terms and conditions say they are boring or difficult to understand. But by failing to check the small print they are in the dark about their rights, until something goes wrong. Just over a fifth (21%) of people surveyed said they had suffered as a result of ticking the terms and conditions box without having done their homework. One in 10 found themselves locked into a longer contract than expected because they signed up without reading the small print, and one in 20 lost money by not being able to cancel or amend hotel or holiday bookings. Joanne Lezemore, senior lawyer at Which? Legal Service , said: “The advice is simple: always read the terms and conditions of any contract before you sign it. “It is really important you understand everything before you sign on the dotted line, as you could find yourself landed with extra fees or charges. While all consumer contracts are subject to the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations, this doesn’t mean you can challenge a clause just because you didn’t know it was there, or you think it’s unfair – because it’s clearly written, you’re bound by it.” She said online shoppers may be tempted to tick the box to confirm they have read the terms and conditions when they have not actually done so, but added: “They are different on every website, so make sure you know what you’re agreeing to. People are often surprised to find out they’re obliged to pay to return unwanted items purchased online, as it is commonly stated in the terms and conditions – and these fees can be expensive.” Skandia conducted the research to draw attention to changes made to the terms and conditions on all its financial products, and has signed up the broadcaster and comedian Clive Anderson to present its standard online terms to customers in a video . Rachel Eyre got caught out after buying plane tickets online on 7 October 2010. “Having purchased the tickets, the travel company decided to refund my payment on 9 October stating that the flights were no longer available at the price I paid. “The travel agent refused to supply the tickets or enter any resolution process despite many requests – referring me to their standard terms and conditions which they claim allow them to do this. I will always make sure I read terms and conditions now before signing up to anything.” Consumer rights Consumer affairs Rebecca Smithers guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Prime minister Naoto Kan says renewables will become a key part of energy policy as country marks two months since tsunami Japan is to abandon plans to expand its nuclear power industry and make renewables a key part of its energy policy, the prime minister, Naoto Kan, said as the country marked two months since the tsunami disaster. As workers continued efforts to stabilise the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, Kan said he would “start from scratch” a policy that initially envisaged nuclear making up more than 50% of Japan’s energy needs by 2030. Japan, whose 54 nuclear reactors provide 30% of its electricity, had planned to build at least 14 new reactors over the next 20 years, but policymakers accept that will be impossible in light of the Fukushima crisis. Kan said that renewables, which currently make up 20% of overall supply, would have a bigger role to play in meeting the country’s energy needs. “I think it is necessary to move in the direction of promoting natural energy and renewable energy” such as wind, solar and biomass,” he said. The stronger commitment to renewables marks Kan’s second sudden shift on nuclear power in the space of a week following his order to close the Hamaoka atomic, which sits on an active fault line, while a new tsunami wall is built. Confronted with low approval ratings and criticism of his handling of the nuclear crisis from inside his own party, his public commitment to nuclear power has markedly weakened in recent days. But Kan, who will not take his prime minister’s salary until the Fukushima crisis is resolved, said Japan would retain the use of fossil fuel and ruled out an abandonment of nuclear power. “We need to start from scratch,” he said. “We need to make nuclear energy safer and do more to promote renewable energy.” He added: “I believe the government bears a major responsibility for having promoted nuclear energy as national policy. I apologise to the people for failing to prevent the nuclear accident.” His announcement came as the first of tens of thousands of nuclear evacuees were allowed to return home for two hours to collect clothes and other personal items. About 100 residents of Kawauchi village – a small portion of those who will make similar trips in the coming weeks – were each permitted to fill one large bag with belongings. Dressed in protective suits, goggles and facemasks, the residents were given personal radiation monitors and walkie-talkies as they made their short but emotional return home for the first time in weeks. They were taken out of the zone on chartered government buses and screened for radiation exposure. About 80,000 people within 20 kilometres of the Fukushima Daiichi plant were forced out of their homes by the accident and have yet to be given an idea when they will be able to return permanently. The plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power [Tepco], has vowed to stabilise radiation levels and achieve safe “cold shutdown” of the plant’s damaged reactors within six to nine months. In the past few days, workers have entered the No 1 reactor building to start reconnecting cooling systems knocked out by the tsunami. On Tuesday they were preparing to flood the reactor’s containment vessel to immerse overheating fuel rods in cool water. Tepco sought to calm fears about rising temperatures in the No 3 reactor, releasing an image showing fuel rods covered with debris from hydrogen explosions in March. The firm said it believed the fuel rods, some of which contain plutonium, had been largely undamaged. On Wednesday, Tepco said it would accept the conditions for state support for a massive compensation payout for those deprived of their homes and businesses by the Fukushima accident. The utility, which has seen its market value plummet since the disaster, accepted there should be no upper limit on damages that could reach 10 trillion yen. It must also dramatically cut costs and cooperate with an investigation by a government-appointed panel. The government is considering setting up a fund that would draw on cash from the state and other power companies if Tepco were unable to cover all of the compensation claims itself. Japan disaster Japan Nuclear power Renewable energy Energy Justin McCurry guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
WikiLeaks founder receives the Sydney Peace Foundation’s gold medal for ‘championing people’s right to know’ WikiLeaks’ Australian founder Julian Assange, who enraged Washington by publishing thousands of secret US diplomatic cables, was given a peace award on Tuesday for “exceptional courage in pursuit of human rights”. Assange was awarded the Sydney Peace Foundation’s gold medal in London, only the fourth to be handed out in its 14-year history. The not-for-profit organisation is associated with the University of Sydney and supported by the City of Sydney. Currently fighting extradition from Britain to Sweden over alleged sex crimes, the computer expert was praised for “challenging centuries-old practices of government secrecy and by championing people’s right to know”. “We think the struggle for peace with justice inevitably involves conflict, inevitably involves controversy,” the foundation’s director Professor Stuart Rees said. “We think that you and WikiLeaks have brought about what we think is a watershed in journalism and in freedom of information and potentially in politics.” He also criticised the Australian government, saying it must stop shoring up Washington’s efforts to “behave like a totalitarian state”, and said the foundation was “appalled by the violent behaviour by major politicians in the United States”. WikiLeaks caused a media and diplomatic uproar late last year when it began to publish its cache of more than 250,000 US diplomatic cables, revealing secrets such as that Saudi leaders had urged US military action against Iran. Some American politicians said WikiLeaks should be defined as an international terrorist organisation. Assange himself claimed publication of the cables helped shape uprisings in north Africa and the Middle East and said WikiLeaks was on the side of justice. Julian Assange Australia WikiLeaks United States guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Fines of £80 to £100 portrayed as a break from the previous government’s supposed reliance on speed cameras Motorists are to be hit with on-the-spot fines of between £80 and £100 for careless driving as part of a major package of road safety laws being portrayed as a break from the previous government’s supposed reliance on speed cameras. The fixed penalty notices have been designed with a view to clamping down on “boy racers”, who drive aggressively by tailgating, undertaking or cutting up fellow motorists, along with other offenders such as repeat law-breakers and those who drive under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Ordinary motorists should not fear the tough new penalties, the government will insist in its overall road safety strategy – the Strategic Framework for Road Safety. “We want to make a clear distinction between those drivers who are a real danger to road safety – reckless, dangerous drivers – and those who are merely occasionally careless or who make an honest mistake,” the transport secretary, Philip Hammond, said in the Daily Mail. “That means much more emphasis on enforcement against those who represent the biggest risk and a big increase in the use of education for those who make minor transgressions.” He signalled a determined break with the previous administration’s strategy. “The big problem under the last government was using technology. Speed cameras were installed and speed became the only focus of the road safety agenda. It ceased to be a road safety agenda and became a speed agenda,” added Hammond. “That meant somebody driving at 55mph in a 50mph limit might get prosecuted but the idiot who is weaving in and out of traffic and tailgating gets off scot-free.” However, the government’s scrapping of grants for councils to put up speed cameras sparked warnings last year from road safety campaigners who said that lives could be put at risk. Additional measures in the package include retests for disqualified offenders before they regain their licence, an end to the right to request blood tests rather than breath tests for drink-driving, seizures of vehicles belonging to the most dangerous offenders, a post-test qualification for new drivers to encourage lower insurance premiums and the offer of educational courses instead of points on a licence for minor offences. Other elements will revolve around a new crackdown on driving while under the influence of drugs, an increase in the range of educational courses for lower level offence and the abolition of loopholes that allow drink drivers to get off without charge. The current Pass Plus scheme for novice drivers will also be replaced with a new qualification – including an assessment – in an attempt to encourage insurers to lower premiums. The Department for Transport said: “The strategy will focus on cracking down on the really reckless drivers through more efficient enforcement. By giving the police the tools to deal with those who present the greatest danger to others, we can make our roads even safer. “While seeking to do everything possible to tackle the most dangerous drivers, the strategy will also help the responsible majority to improve their driving. This is the government’s twin approach to improving road safety.” Road transport Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media C-SPAN featured some past White House Correspondents’ Dinners last Saturday and here’s Al Franken back in 1996 poking fun at Don Imus, President Clinton, Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh among others. Open thread below…
Continue reading …
As much as liberals complain about conservative “misinformation”and incivility, they never seem to find it on channels like MSNBC, and we know there are small bands of liberals that wander over there. While many were watching the first GOP presidential debate on May 5, Ed Schultz invited on left-wing bomb-thrower (and 2010 congressional-seat loser) Alan Grayson to heap mud on George W. Bush. Schultz asked if Bush failed to accept Obama’s invitation to Ground Zero out of personal pique. Grayson replied through a smirk, “I suspect that President Bush might've been passed-out drunk for the last three or four days, so I’m not sure he made any conscious decision at all.” Schultz found that acceptable. “Great to have you with us tonight,” he said to Grayson at interview’s end. “Thank you for your take.” That wasn’t a “take.” It was a typical smear. That same shameless disregard for the truth really shook the crowd at the 2011 Media Research Center Gala on May 7. Special Ed – as radio talker Chris Plante calls him — overwhelmingly won on the applause meter for the (worst) “Quote of the Year,” which actually covered two years. On September 23, 2009, Schultz yelled this ridiculous, foam-flecked rant on MSNBC about critics of ObamaCare. “The Republicans lie! They want to see you dead! They'd rather make money off your dead corpse! They kind of like it when that woman has cancer and they don't have anything for her.” He wasn’t joking. He was serious. Poor Special Ed. It fell on Ann Coulter to point out – with glee — the redundancy of Schultz saying “dead corpse.” But where on the spectrum of “fact” and “misinformation” do you place the idea that conservatives want Americans dead and deeply enjoy denying health care to cancer patients? And who, exactly, is Ed Schultz to pose as the one who most definitely does not take glee in others’ medical misfortune? This is the same hack who said on February 24, 2010 that “You're damn right, Dick Cheney's heart's a political football! We ought to rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him! I'm glad he didn't tip over. He is the new poster child for health care in this country.” On June 16, 2009, Joe Scarborough asked Schultz if he felt Cheney hoped Americans would die in a terrorist attack so it would benefit Republicans. “Absolutely, absolutely,” said Schultz. “I think Dick Cheney is all about seeing this country go conservative on a hard-right wing and I think he'll do anything to get it there.” A month earlier, he begged for Cheney to die. “Lord, take him to the Promised Land.” Lack of civility is one thing. Lack of honesty is another. Schultz routinely uncorks sentences that seem to have recklessly rocketed off the planet of Fact. Here’s a funny one from days ago, on April 27. “I see that Sean Hannity is now on a regular basis losing to Rachel Maddow. Hmm, interesting. Must be that liberal media that just doesn't connect with people.” In reality, Hannity routinely doubles Maddow’s audience, just as Greta van Susteren has double the viewers of Ed Schultz now that he’s at 10 pm. That Ed Schultz, he “connects with people.” Here’s another jaw-dropper from Special Ed. On his radio show on October 22, 2010, he announced, “I call NPR National Pentagon Radio. They're no more left wing than Fox News as far as I'm concerned. Look at the commentators they have on there, right? They're all right-wing commentators. I couldn't get in the door of NPR.”
Continue reading …NHL’s Sean Avery criticized by right-wing sports agent for supporting "Same Sex Marriage"
May 10, 2011 No CommentSean Avery has been a very controversial player in his NHL career. He’s said some stupid things and played over the line at times, but on this issue he’s right on the money. Avery got together with Human Rights Campaign and made this video in support of same-sex marriage. Sean joins New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and actors Julianne Moore and Sam Waterston, in supporting marriage equality. However, a sports agent came out and criticized Avery for his support of the gay community: Avery’s video in support of gay marriage for the Human Rights Campaign ‘s New Yorkers for Marriage Equality drive spurred hockey agent Todd Reynolds of Uptown Sports Management to write Monday night on the @uptownhockey Twitter account, “Very sad to read Sean Avery’s misguided support of same-gender ‘marriage’. Legal or not, it will always be wrong.” The agent also tweeted: “To clarify. This is not hatred or bigotry towards gays. It is not intolerance in any way shape or form. I believe we are all equal … But I believe in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. This is my personal viewpoint. I Do not hate anyone.” Uptown Sports represents a handful of NHL players, including Nashville Predators winger Mike Fisher , the husband of country singer Carrie Underwood . Response against Reynolds’ tweet was sharp, including from fellow agents. Scott Norton of Chicago -based Norton Sports tweeted, “Not to promote violence, but @NortonSports Jr has something in mind for #UptownSports!” with a link to a video of his son doing karate practice. — The Human Rights Campaign’s video series also has included messages from Mayor Bloomberg, his predecessors Ed Koch and David Dinkins, and both of New York’s senators, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand. A typical excuse by right wingers is that they don’t hate gays, they just think they shouldn’t have equality. It’s nice to see a sports figure stand with the gay community because so much of the sports world is dominated by homophobic right-wing types. And make no mistake, sports in America does have an influence on America and politics. As we’ve seen, sports talk radio has already played a hand in electing Scott Brown in MA., when all the local radio jocks attacked his opponent, Martha Coakley, over her misstatements about Curt Schilling. I wrote about this earlier; Margery Eagan: The media is afraid to talk about how Right Wing Talk and Sports Radio ‘Demonized’ Martha Coakley EAGAN: Well, she got very good press from “The Boston Globe,” not from my paper, “The Boston Herald.” But you know something? People don’t like — TV journalists and newspaper journalists do not like to talk about the influence of talk radio. Let me tell you something. There was a nonstop hammering of Martha Coakley on the AM stations here, on the huge sports stations here. She was the evil incarnate and Scott Brown was the next coming. And, you know, the New England Patriots in the playoffs lost early on. It was as if there was this transference from Tom “Terrific” Brady, the quarterback of the Patriots, to Scott “Terrific” Brown. You look at the rallies for Scott Brown, they were very white, they were very suburban, they were Gillette Stadium fans, and there was almost this…
Continue reading …