Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), a Tea Party-backed candidate, was elected in November and he just held his first town hall meeting in Brooklyn – after voting for the Republican budget plan developed by Paul Ryan. Most of those who attended weren’t very happy with his support for Ryan’s Medicare plan: The crowd lay in wait for him with sharpened reports from the Congressional Budget Office, incendiary printouts from liberal blogs, and even a few lethal rolled-up newspapers with articles about the House plan. Mr. Grimm was left standing, but only after 90 minutes of high-decibel debate, during which a school security guard had to threaten to remove several citizens vibrating with anger about Medicare. It began when he asked the crowd of about 100 people whether they believed the nation faced a debt crisis. A woman near the front row responded that the nation faced a revenue crisis . Someone else shouted out that taxes were too low, and a third person shouted that it was all President George W. Bush’s fault for cutting taxes on the rich. There was a big round of applause, and with that the evening became a battle of statistics and worldviews , in perhaps the only section of the city divided enough to match the national debate. “Adjust Medicare, don’t kill it!” shouted one woman. “The program just isn’t sustainable,” Mr. Grimm said, trying to control his meeting. “That’s a flat-out lie,” said a man in a Communications Workers of America shirt. Around the country, Republican lawmakers on recess have encountered bitter opposition as they meet with constituents infuriated at their Medicare vote. Republicans have complained that the town meetings have been targeted by Democratic activist groups like MoveOn. It’s true, but the criticism is no less legitimate than when members of the Tea Party swarmed town halls in 2009 at the height of the health care debate. Many of Mr. Grimm’s critics at the Brooklyn meeting were wearing union shirts, or reading from printouts. One woman who almost got thrown out for shouting is a regular contributor to the Daily Kos Web site. A few said in interviews that they lived in more affluent sections of the borough. But just as many appeared to be Mr. Grimm’s constituents, and said they had grave concerns about his vote to cut the safety net while benefiting the rich. “If this whole budget is about trying to get out of debt,” asked one woman, “then why are we still providing tax cuts to the people who need it less?” Mr. Grimm responded in a depressingly familiar way: “What this debate has turned into is class warfare — let’s be honest about it,” he said. Lower taxes across the board would increase government revenue, he maintained, in the face of loud catcalls from those who pointed out that that economic theory has long since been discredited According to one show of hands, nearly half the audience voted for Mr. Grimm, and while they occasionally applauded, they were far quieter than the critics. None stood up to support his vote on Medicare. At his Staten Island meeting the next night, someone even rose to accuse him of trying to “kill Grandma. ” Mr. Grimm, who won election by only three percentage points in 2010 (and who lost the Brooklyn section) may find his vote makes the task quite a bit harder in 2012. By the way, here’s a video from Grimm’s campaign days where he tells a potential voter his opponent is lying, he “doesn’t want to privatize Social Security or Medicare” (starting at 1:08). You know, even though he voted for the Republican’s Ryan Medicare plan:
Continue reading …Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), a Tea Party-backed candidate, was elected in November and he just held his first town hall meeting in Brooklyn – after voting for the Republican budget plan developed by Paul Ryan. Most of those who attended weren’t very happy with his support for Ryan’s Medicare plan: The crowd lay in wait for him with sharpened reports from the Congressional Budget Office, incendiary printouts from liberal blogs, and even a few lethal rolled-up newspapers with articles about the House plan. Mr. Grimm was left standing, but only after 90 minutes of high-decibel debate, during which a school security guard had to threaten to remove several citizens vibrating with anger about Medicare. It began when he asked the crowd of about 100 people whether they believed the nation faced a debt crisis. A woman near the front row responded that the nation faced a revenue crisis . Someone else shouted out that taxes were too low, and a third person shouted that it was all President George W. Bush’s fault for cutting taxes on the rich. There was a big round of applause, and with that the evening became a battle of statistics and worldviews , in perhaps the only section of the city divided enough to match the national debate. “Adjust Medicare, don’t kill it!” shouted one woman. “The program just isn’t sustainable,” Mr. Grimm said, trying to control his meeting. “That’s a flat-out lie,” said a man in a Communications Workers of America shirt. Around the country, Republican lawmakers on recess have encountered bitter opposition as they meet with constituents infuriated at their Medicare vote. Republicans have complained that the town meetings have been targeted by Democratic activist groups like MoveOn. It’s true, but the criticism is no less legitimate than when members of the Tea Party swarmed town halls in 2009 at the height of the health care debate. Many of Mr. Grimm’s critics at the Brooklyn meeting were wearing union shirts, or reading from printouts. One woman who almost got thrown out for shouting is a regular contributor to the Daily Kos Web site. A few said in interviews that they lived in more affluent sections of the borough. But just as many appeared to be Mr. Grimm’s constituents, and said they had grave concerns about his vote to cut the safety net while benefiting the rich. “If this whole budget is about trying to get out of debt,” asked one woman, “then why are we still providing tax cuts to the people who need it less?” Mr. Grimm responded in a depressingly familiar way: “What this debate has turned into is class warfare — let’s be honest about it,” he said. Lower taxes across the board would increase government revenue, he maintained, in the face of loud catcalls from those who pointed out that that economic theory has long since been discredited According to one show of hands, nearly half the audience voted for Mr. Grimm, and while they occasionally applauded, they were far quieter than the critics. None stood up to support his vote on Medicare. At his Staten Island meeting the next night, someone even rose to accuse him of trying to “kill Grandma. ” Mr. Grimm, who won election by only three percentage points in 2010 (and who lost the Brooklyn section) may find his vote makes the task quite a bit harder in 2012. By the way, here’s a video from Grimm’s campaign days where he tells a potential voter his opponent is lying, he “doesn’t want to privatize Social Security or Medicare” (starting at 1:08). You know, even though he voted for the Republican’s Ryan Medicare plan:
Continue reading …Cindy Sheehan Thinks ‘Empire’ Faked Osama Takedown: Will Chris Matthews Recant Urging Her to Run for Congress?
May 3, 2011 No Comment
Remember back in 2005, when the major media turned Cindy Sheehan into
Continue reading …
Standup’s growing popularity has seen it emerge from pubs and clubs to grander venues from the Nottingham Arena to the Albert Hall. Now the comedy must develop to fit them You know all those fringe theatre shows that reduce epic stories to pint-sized performances? I’m thinking of Ben Hur at BAC , or Spymonkey’s Moby Dick – the joke, or chutzpah, behind which is that the material is wildly out of proportion with the lo-fi staging. I was reminded of them when watching John Bishop perform standup at the Albert Hall . Around Bishop, an arena whose elegance, ornamentation and vast size were designed with the profound, the heart-soaring and the ineffable in mind. Onstage, a man cracking gags about trips to Ikea. This incongruity was in some ways the daftest joke of the evening. I’m not saying Bishop doesn’t belong in the Albert Hall – far from it. I’m all for demotic, democratic entertainment gatecrashing elitist buildings. But (at least until his song’n’dance finale) the quotidian nature of his shtick created an odd contrast with the venue. The act of talking to people from a stage about, say, the domestic habits of one’s wife was not originally undertaken with the Albert Hall in mind. The pub-chat school of standup was originally just that – a bloke with a microphone in a bar or working men’s club, talking to like-minded barflies. That style still prevails, and works fine on TV and in your average standup venue. But its smallness is exaggerated by arenas; the Albert Hall exposed the modesty of Bishop’s comedy in a way that even Edinburgh’s sizeable McEwan Hall (where I first saw the show) didn’t. The following night, I went to see Scott Capurro in the tiny Etcetera Theatre, a 41-seat room above a Camden pub. That was a disconcerting experience too – partly because Capurro deserves a bigger audience, and partly because a teensy studio theatre is an odd environment for a wilful provocateur to ply his trade. Capurro needs to be public, not private, to generate a frisson. A cabaret-style venue, where we can clock one another’s discomfort; a decent-sized theatre, whose audience can develop some kind of collective identity, and in which a collective gasp or bristle might really register – these are the spaces where his comedy would thrive. As standup booms, we’re going to see it in more and more shapes and sizes of venue, which is fine. But a show that works one way in Pleasance Two may work differently in the O2. In a tiny room, standup can feel confrontational, awkward or marginal. In an enormo-dome, it may feel low-horizoned or artistically unambitious. There are plenty of exceptions: Tim Minchin’s current orchestra show is one blazing example; Lee Evans’s energy could pin you to the back wall of the Nottingham Arena. Right now, standup is still amazed to find itself in the Albert Halls of this world – a point the incredulous Bishop repeatedly made onstage. But as comedy gets used to the promotion, here’s hoping we see more acts respond, in more ambitious ways, to the grand scale on which their work can now be performed. Comedy Brian Logan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
After four months of training with some of the greatest runners in the world, it was time for a half-marathon north of the border I’m running along by the shore of a wide, glistening lake. Up ahead, a herd of horses are hauling themselves out of the water and crossing the path. The runner in front of me manages to skirt around one side, making the horses skip back. I spot my chance and nip through the same gap. I’m running a half-marathon in Ethopia, the self-proclaimed “land of runners”. As I cross the finish line, the greatest distance-runner ever, Haile Gebrselassie . is standing there smiling, ready to shake my hand. Ethiopia is Kenya’s northern neighbour and fierce athletics rival. Although Kenyans win more races and have more top athletes than anywhere else in the world, their dominance in distance running is seriously dented by a small group of super-fast Ethiopians. While the nation doesn’t have the same quantity of athletes or cover the same range of events (Kenyans regularly win medals at 400m and 800m too), the list of Ethiopian world-record holders and Olympic champions is testament to its running prowess. Ethiopia has won the men’s 10,000m at the last four Olympics, and Ethiopian men currently hold the 5000m, 10,000m and marathon world records. Ethiopian women have also won four gold medals in the last three Olympics, compared to Kenya’s two. So I’ve come to Ethiopia to run, too. And my first port of call is the town of Hawassa where, on the shores of the lake, Gebrselassie has built himself a huge luxury hotel, the Haile Resort . And it’s here that I’m undergoing the first test of my Kenyan training. After four months of chasing my tail around the steep hills of Iten , gasping like a dying man as I try to keep up with the Kenyans, I’m running the Every One half-marathon . Sponsored by Save the Children , USAID and a host of other NGOs, this is a light-hearted charity race and there are lots of other non-Africans running. In fact, the pack seems to be made up mostly of aid workers, both Ethiopian and foreign, from Addis Ababa. The “elite” runners – 70 Ethiopians and one Kenyan – get to run their own race later, after our “mass race” is over. To avoid the worst of the day’s heat, which descends early here in Hawassa, the event starts at 6.30am. After all my early morning runs in Kenya, it seems quite natural to be up and running at this time, so I’m feeling fairly sprightly as I do some last-minute limbering up on the start line. And then with a blast of a hooter we’re off. Almost immediately I find myself running on my own, with a lead group of about six runners pulling ahead while everyone else seems to have drifted away behind me. The course winds along a dirt track by the lake and then up and through the town. Lots of local people are out to cheer us on, clapping and shouting “bravo” as we go by – a remnant of a brief Italian occupation in the 1930s. At one point the crowd gets very angry with an Ethiopian runner as I overtake him. I can hear them berating him behind me for a while but eventually, after I get far enough ahead, the general clapping and good-natured encouragement returns. Halfway round the second of three laps, I catch a glimpse of my shadow on the tarmac road. I actually look like an athlete, striding away strongly along the wide avenue. Twelve kilometres done and I’m cruising. By the time I pass the same point on the third lap, however, it’s not such a glorious sight. My stride length has shortened, my arms have stopped moving. I’m struggling with a stitch, which actually forces me to stop and do some stretching. It keeps coming and going. The slower I run, the better it is. Or is that just my mind playing tricks on me? I’m caught in a battle of wills between my desire to run as fast as I can, and my body’s desire to slow down. My body, though, has co-opted my mind to its cause, and the desire to run fast is being drowned out by the rationalising chatter that tells me it doesn’t really matter what time I run, or where I finish, that I should just enjoy the experience, jog home, that I’ve tried hard enough already. Despite being talked down like this from pushing on too hard, I manage to keep on and cross the line in 7th place, in a personal best time of 1 hour 26 minutes and 47 seconds. The seconds are important, because it’s a best time by just seven seconds. Gebrselassie greets me like a long-lost friend. I collect my medal and free T-shirt, and even get myself a quick massage, before heading off to find some breakfast. So, after four months of training with the greatest runners in the world, I’ve knocked seven seconds off my best half-marathon time. I was really hoping for a bigger improvement than that. But then again, the race was run at an altitude of 5,500ft. I got a bad stitch. And just two days before it I was ill, recovering in my hotel room in Addis Ababa and being forced to watch the royal wedding by my children. So maybe it wasn’t so bad. As for the elite race, it was won by Kimutai Kiplimo, the one Kenyan invited to the race as motivation for the Ethiopian runners to go faster. Another point to the Kenyans. They’re having a good year so far . Running Fitness Athletics Ethiopia Kenya Adharanand Finn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Farmers angry as Mississippi allowed to drown 130,000 acres of rich farmland, while ailing Illinois town is spared Engineers have blown up a levee in the midwest, hoping to save a historic town from destruction by raging flood waters – but condemning 130,000 acres (53,300 hectares) of rich agricultural farmland. Late on Monday night, the US army corps of engineers began detonating charges embedded in the levee at Birds Point, Missouri, in order to create a 2,000-ft breach. The blasts were expected to lower the waters of the Mississippi by up to 7ft, thus sparing the city of Cairo, Illinois. But the breach in the levee was also expected to drown a vast expanse of rich farmland under water, sand and silt. Ninety homes were also at risk. The decision – which has been fiercely contested in the courts – set a fading town of 2,800 mainly African American residents against relatively well-off farmers. “Making this decision is not easy or hard,” major general Michael Walsh, commander of the army corps, told reporters. “It’s simply grave – because the decision leads to loss of property and livelihood, either in a floodway or in an area that was not designed to flood.” Cairo, which lies on the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio rivers, was an important steamboat port in the 1800s, and served for a few months as the headquarters for the union armies of Ulysses S Grant early in the civil war. But the town is long past its heyday, and the decision to save the town outraged Missouri farmers and state officials who had fought to block the demolition in court. Stephen Tilley, the speaker of the Missouri house, even went so far as to suggest that Cairo was so dilapidated as to be expendable. When asked by a reporter which he would rather see underwater, the town or farmland, Tilley replied emphatically : “Cairo. I’ve been there. Trust me, Cairo.” But the legal battle was exhausted on Sunday night when the US supreme court refused to hear an emergency appeal from Missouri’s attorney general. By Monday afternoon, with more rainfall straining the 64ft floodwall, the town was deserted. Almost all of the residents of Cairo had already been evacuated, and were waiting to see if the homes they had left behind would be saved or left for the flood waters. “It was equal to having been in Vietnam,” said Mattie Woods, 63, who was born and raised in the town. “We have had flooding before, but we have never really faced total disaster. This one was full devastation for all of us.” A number of people who tried to return for belongings earlier on Monday were ordered to go back. “They just weren’t letting anyone in,” said resident Eddie Smith. Mr Smith had left his home after spending several anxious days watching the water rise around the tyres of his car. By the time he left last Tuesday (a week ago), “the water was coming right up to the front step,” he said. “I’ve never seen the river do this before.” Members of the Illinois national guard were deployed filling sandbags, and packing explosives into pipes embedded in an area of the levee downriver from the town. The army corps of engineers was planning a second series of explosions on Tuesday to try to drain the water from the farmland that contain corn, wheat and soybean crops. Farming Flooding Water Missouri Illinois United States Suzanne Goldenberg guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Prime minister denies it was inappropriate to dine with News Corp bosses while government was considering BSkyB deal The prime minister, David Cameron, has denied that it was inappropriate for him to have dinner at the home of senior News Corporation executive Rebekah Brooks while the government was considering the company’s takeover bid for BSkyB. Cameron said Brooks, the chief executive of News Corp’s UK newspaper publisher News International, was “married to a very old friend of mine” – a reference to her husband, Charlie Brooks, the racehorse trainer and writer. Both attended Eton. He added that party leaders and prime ministers “have lunches and dinners with editors, journalists and proprietors all of the time” and he did not think “there’s a problem at all” with him attending the dinner. Cameron was quizzed about the dinner at the Oxfordshire home of the Brooks over the Christmas period on BBC Radio 4′s Today programme on Tuesday by presenter John Humphrys . The dinner was also attended by James Murdoch, the News Corp chairman and chief executive for Europe and Asia, and took place while the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was considering whether to refer the company’s bid to acquire the 61% of Sky it did not already own to the Competition Commission on public interest grounds. It took place a few days after Cameron had stripped the business secretary, Vince Cable, of responsibility for media takeovers and given the powers to Hunt. Cable had been secretly taped by Daily Telegraph journalists saying that he was “at war” with Rupert Murdoch, the News Corp chairman and chief executive. Humphrys said a lot of people thought attending the dinner was inappropriate and asked Cameron if he wished he had not done it. “No. I’ve had absolutely nothing to do with the merger proposals that were put forward,” Cameron replied. “I deliberately excluded myself from any part of that decision-making process. The first I knew of [Hunt's decision] was when the results were announced on the BBC. “Jeremy Hunt had a quasi-judicial role to carry out, which he carried out in my view entirely properly, and it’s quite right that he didn’t consult the prime minister over that. He looked at the evidence and he made the decision and so I don’t think there’s a problem at all. “Party leaders and prime ministers have lunches and dinners with editors, journalists proprietors all of the time.” Pressed further by Humphrys, he said: “The person in question is married to a very old friend of mine. I even occasionally meet people who work for the Guardian, or the Independent, or the BBC, or whatever.” Cameron was also asked about his comments last month that parliament and not the courts should decide where the right privacy begins , in response to the rash of celebrities taking out injunctions to prevent media coverage of their private lives. The prime minister said “we should have a discussion and a debate” about the issue, but shied away from backing a new privacy law, suggesting that more could be done through the newspaper industry’s self-regulatory body, the Press Complaints Commission. “I think we should discuss what is the right way forward. I sense that there’s still more to be done to recognise that actually the Press Complaints Commission has come on a lot in recent years and we should be working with that organisation to make sure that people get the sort of protection they need, while still having a free and vibrant press,” Cameron added. “We don’t want statutory regulation of the press. By all means let’s debate it,” he said. “But I think there’s still more to be done through the Press Complaints Commission.” •
Continue reading …Politicians are hiding their real values and intentions behind snide, loaded euphemisms While sitting at my desk performing my usual “back-office function” recently, I was struck by a story on the debate over cuts to police budgets and the likely impact on the “frontline”. Warwickshire police officers are being ordered off the beat into civilian roles as the force tries to manage its budget after the 20% cuts imposed by the coalition government. The Home Office response was familiarly blunt: forces should cut back on “bureaucracy” and “wasteful spending” while “increasing efficiency in the back office”. David Cameron weighed in the following day: there is no reason for frontline policing to be affected, he said. Sir Denis O’Connor, the chief inspector of constabulary, hit back in a report stating how important “middle-office” and “back-office” roles were in supporting “frontline” officers. All in this together, if you like. Elsewhere in austerity Britain, Hull council was being lauded by a Times leader for making “substantial savings by rationalising back-office functions and reducing the number of buildings from which it delivers services”. Eulogies were reserved for other local authorities reacting to the big cut in central funding by launching “efficiency” drives. The BBC has been caught up in the fight between government and opposition to win a spin contest over the precise terms to use when covering stories about the cuts. Savings or cuts? Here at the Guardian, we normally use cuts. It’s shorter, to the point and is a shoo-in for headline writers. Oh, and Lord Littlejohn of Maildom rants about its use. For the record, he prefers to talk about “massive waste, non-jobs and vast salaries of senior council officers”. All around us these figurative euphemisms are being trotted out by ministers defending the burden placed on the NHS, local councils and the police to protect the all-important frontline services. Get rid of the back-office staff, the thinking goes. Not quite as “unproductive” as the “feckless workshy”, the unworthy and disposable state employee has the cheek to draw a salary – paid for by “you, the taxpayer” – while easing towards retirement and, yes, a “gold-plated” pension. These invidious phrases aimed at those with lower qualifications and on lower pay are not new. “Deregulation” of the job market and enhanced “labour mobility” have long been phrases associated with the school of economic thought that implies the market will naturally find full employment and equitable wage levels as long as it remains unfettered by state legislation and intervention. Unemployed people must get on their bikes and find work or stay on the dole through “lifestyle choice”. The phrases du jour are rooted in the economic doctrine of the neoclassical orthodoxy of the 1930s – the father of Thatcher’s 1980s monetarist mayhem and grandfather of Cameron and Osborne’s supply-side wild child currently ravaging the public sector and ushering in an era of militant privatisation. They are utterances born of the strict economic theory that sees employees purely as factors of production; not human beings with occasionally irrational urges, needy families, hefty mortgages, complex relationships, myriad emotional commitments and a need for belonging, a place in society, “big” or otherwise. The longest-serving Labour prime minister in history, Tony Blair, set the current trend for euphemistic political buzzwords while masking an ideological drift to the right. “Choice”, “hard-working families”, “fairness”, “prepare for change” and “rights and responsibilities” were all key elements of New Labour’s “reform” policy agenda in health and education. Such fuzzy language was noted by George Orwell in his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language as increasingly used by politicians as a “defence of the indefensible”. For this reason, he went on: “Political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.” Back in coalition Britain 2011, the back-office function is a prime example of Orwell’s target. The implication is that those employed in these jobs are virtually useless and their loss would be no great shame for the organisation; the reality is that unemployment can turn a person’s life upside down. There are, however, members of an organisation who no doubt do meet the criteria of vulnerability and exposure to ruthless market forces. Take the coalition ministers spouting these snide, loaded, euphemistic circumlocutions. As Anne Robinson might ask: “Who’s ‘frontline’ and who’s ‘back-office’ in this government?” Clearly Cameron, Osborne, Hunt, Gove and Pickles are out there flying the flag for “reform” while fighting the big ideological battles. Frontline, maybe. But the three most prominent Lib Dems in the coalition – Nick Clegg, Danny Alexander and Vince Cable – should perhaps think twice before using such inhuman, pejorative and invidious language. Some observers might argue they’re no more than “human shields” for the Tory generals leading the fight. So with the knife-edge AV referendum and the potentially devastating local elections just days away, the Lib Dem high-ups and ward councillors alike may be about to feel like the most disposable of team members. As for the coalition – with its stark divisions on AV increasingly apparent – who knows how the result will play out for the losers facing their party faithful? Even from my “back-office” position, I can see that Thursday’s elections might just unleash the powerful yet precise force of the political “invisible hand” as voter “rationalisation” sweeps through polling stations all around the country. Language Jamie Fahey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Manufacturers reported subdued consumer confidence and lower orders from the construction sector as well as high output prices UK manufacturing output fell to a seven-month low last month as a slowdown in new orders highlighted the fragile state of the economy. Manufacturing has been one of the brightest parts of the British economy in 2011, but data released on Tuesday morning suggested that it is now flagging as domestic customers cut their spending. Exports, though, remained healthier with orders rising during April. The monthly Markit/CIPS PMI index of the manufacturing sector fell to 54.6 points in April, the weakest reading since last September. March’s reading was also revised down, from 57.1 to 56.7 – still above the 50-point mark that separates expansion from contraction. The survey also showed that output prices remained near to March’s peak, suggesting that consumers will continue to face rising prices . Many companies reported delays in receiving parts from suppliers, following the Japanese earthquake and tsunami in March. Manufacturers also reported subdued consumer confidence and lower orders from the construction sector. David Noble, chief executive officer at CIPS, said the survey showed that the manufacturing industry faced a much bleaker outlook than just a few months ago, with companies experiencing “a tale of two markets”. “Export orders continue to grow at a very healthy rate but domestic demand is suffering as a result of falling consumer confidence and spending,” said Noble. Manufacturers had built up a healthy backlog of work earlier this year, as orders rebounded after the weather-related disruption last December. CIPS is concerned that many firms ate into their reserves of work during April. “Much of the output growth came from manufacturers clearing the backlog of existing orders which is the equivalent of a consumer dipping into their savings to maintain their existing spending levels,” said Noble. “The problem with this is that, just like savings, backlogs of orders will soon run out if they are not topped up.” Rob Dobson, senior economist at Markit, said that new orders growth had “collapsed from a booming pace”. The pound fell more than half a cent against the dollar, to around $1.649, after the PMI data was released as an early interest rate rise became even less likely. “The survey reinforces worries over the economy’s ability to withstand the fiscal tightening that increasingly kicked in from early April and reinforces belief that the Bank of England will keep interest rates unchanged at 0.50% on Thursday,” said Howard Archer, chief UK economist at IHS Global Insight. “Indeed, we believe it is looking ever more likely that the Bank of England will not raise interest rates before November.” Manufacturing sector Manufacturing data Economics Graeme Wearden guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
London men stopped by officers policing nuclear site in Cumbria Five men have been arrested under the Terrorism Act near the Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria, police said. The men were detained at 4.32pm on Monday after a vehicle was stopped and checked by officers from the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, who police the facility in west Cumbria. The five, all in their 20s and from London, were arrested under section 41 of the act and held in police custody overnight in Carlisle before being taken to Manchester on Tuesday morning, a spokesman for Cumbria police said. An investigation is now under way by the north-west counterterrorism unit. Greater Manchester police said the investigation was in its early stages and there would be no further information released immediately. They were not aware of any connection to the death of Osama bin Laden in the US special forces operation in Pakistan. The police said a road closure affected the area for “a short period of time”. UK security and terrorism Nuclear power Crime Energy Helen Carter guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …