Embattled Italian PM also offers tax breaks to island’s residents as critics accuse him of using diversionary tactics Facing fierce criticism over his handling of a wave of north Africans landing on the Italian island of Lampedusa, Silvio Berlusconi has put on a vintage display of showmanship, claiming he would empty the island of immigrants within 60 hours, nominate locals for a Nobel peace prize and buy a holiday home there. So far this year 18,000 north African migrants have sailed to the island, which has only 5,000 native inhabitants. During a lightning visit to Lampedusa, which is closer to Africa than the Italian mainland, Berlusconi told cheering locals that six chartered ferries were arriving to pick up the remaining 6,000 migrants, mainly young Tunisian men, who have made the sea crossing since the collapse of the Tunisian government in January and the suspension of coastal patrols. The migrants will join other north Africans who have already been transferred to centres and camps on the mainland after paying out thousands of euros to make the often perilous crossing. “In 48 to 60 hours, Lampedusa will be inhabited only by Lampedusans,” said Berlusconi. Locals have protested against the nightly arrivals by using fishing boats to block the harbour entrance as the island’s immigrant centre was overwhelmed, food supplies ran short and migrants bivouacked on a rubbish-strewn hill overlooking the port. To frequent applause, Berlusconi told residents he would give them tax breaks and propose they receive the Nobel peace prize for their patience, later telling a press conference he would push for the construction of a casino and a golf course. “We are buying up the fishing boats so that they cannot be used for the crossings,” he said. “That way when I am out of politics I will use them to set up a fresh fish business.” The prime minister also said he would use his private TV channels to promote the relaunch of tourism in Lampedusa. While surfing the internet before his visit, he added, he had purchased a beach house on Lampedusa, which he visited before leaving the island. A local couple living next door to the €2m house said they had been woken on Tuesday night by noises from the house. “I thought it was the Tunisians,” said Rosina Licciardi, “but it was the gardener and his wife cleaning things up.” Berlusconi said he would also ask the mayor to plant a few more trees on the island and paint the houses brighter colours. Opposition members alleged Berlusconi’s appearance was a diversionary tactic as his supporters in parliament worked on a measure trimming the statute of limitations for first-time offenders, a measure they claimed is designed to cancel the prime minister’s ongoing trial for bribing British lawyer David Mills. “Over there he bought a house, while here he bought himself safe conduct,” said Pier Luigi Bersani, the head of the opposition Democratic Party. Berlusconi is now seeking to convince Italy’s regional governors to put up the migrants brought ashore. Over 3,000 who have already escaped from makeshift camps have travelled to Ventimiglia seeking to cross into France, where many have relatives. Interior minister Roberto Maroni has told parliament that a deal was underway with the Tunisian government to take the migrants back. “If they are economic migrants, and most of them are, then Italy can repatriate,” said Laura Boldrini, a UN spokeswoman, “Many come from villages on the coast and worked in the tourism industry but now fear job cuts.” Italy will need to identify each migrant and serve an expulsion order, which can be appealed against, added Boldrini. Maroni has warned that the Tunisians may be just a warm up for 50,000 migrants fleeing the war in Libya. Boldrini said 1,500 people had crossed to Italy so far from Libya, mainly Eritreans, Ethiopians and Somalis. Silvio Berlusconi Italy David Mills Europe Tom Kington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Troops loyal to Alassane Ouattara seize control of Yamassoukro as power appears to be ebbing away from President Laurent Gbagbo Rebel forces in Ivory Coast have taken control of the official capital, as power seems to be slipping away from the president, Laurent Gbagbo. Residents and military sources said troops loyal to Gbagbo’s rival, Alassane Ouattara, had entered Yamoussoukro, meeting little resistance as security forces fled. The port city of San Pedro also fell. Yamoussoukro residents told how they braced themselves for conflict before sporadic gunfire erupted. Serge Kipre, who runs a small clothing store in the city, said: “The night before, we were all calling each other to make sure nobody went outside. In the morning, I saw loads of police with balaclavas and Kalashnikovs racing across town. The market closed, shops shuttered. Everybody seemed on edge.” But the approach of the rebels was eagerly awaited by many young pro-Ouattara supporters. Kipre added: “They set a police station ablaze because they felt they would be liberated soon. We are so tired of this situation – we just want them to get it over with.” The pro-Ouattara Republican Forces (FRCI) captured the city within hours as government opposition melted away. Eyewitnesses saw soldiers taking off their uniforms and throwing guns and ammunition into ditches as they fled from the rebel army. Others say some soldiers simply switched sides and joined the FRCI. The capture of Yamassoukro, which is in a pro-Ouattara area, is symbolic but not decisive. Gbagbo’s seat of power is in the commercial capital, Abidjan, where fighting has raged for months. But the fall of Yamoussoukro opens up the main road to Abidjan, just 143 miles away. Earlier this month a leader of rebel forces, which have controlled northern Ivory Coast since the 2002-03 civil war, told the Guardian they would “surprise all the analysts” by removing Gbagbo quickly and cleanly. Such confidence appears to have been borne out so far as the rebels make rapid advances on three fronts and encounter little resistance. Gbagbo has called for a ceasefire, though this has been widely dismissed as a ploy. Young men are being enrolled into the army, reportedly to replace soldiers who are not turning up for work or who have changed sides. Ally Coulibaly, Ouattara’s ambassador to Paris, claimed rebel forces now controlled three-quarters of the country. “President Alassane Ouattara was patient and gave Mr Laurent Gbagbo every possibility to leave power peacefully,” he told the French radio station France Inter. “He refused every offer made to him.” Ivorians had eventually had to take up arms to avoid a massacre of the civilian population, he added. A statement by Ouattara’s RHDP party said: “All peaceful avenues to convince Laurent Gbagbo of his defeat have been exhausted.” Forces loyal to Ouattara have taken several western towns with relative ease, but Abidjan poses a tougher challenge. Don Mello, a spokesman for Gbagbo, told Radio France International it was “impregnable” to attack. “We call for an immediate ceasefire and the opening of talks under the mediation of the African Union high representative,” he said. “Failing which, we will use our legitimate right of defence. “We have adopted a strategy of tactical withdrawal. We hope that dialogue will open very shortly. It is useless to head into conflict and increase the number of victims.” A priest in Tiebissou, who did not wish to be named, said Gbagbo’s forces had tried to fight off the rebels for three and a half hours before fleeing. Another priest said he had seen the bodies of three dead soldiers in the town, which is 21 miles from the capital. Many wounded fighters were being taken to a nearby hospital. People were looting public buildings in Tiebissou, including the police station, witnesses said. A third front from the east of the country was advancing south, with combat taking place in Akoupe. The rebels secured Bondoukou and Abengourou, along the Ghana border on Tuesday, and seemed poised to strike directly at Gbagbo on this front, as Akoupe is only 70 miles from Abidjan. Violence in Abidjan may escalate after Gbagbo’s army spokesman called on his youths to join the fight. “The hour for their enrolment has arrived,” Colonel Babri Gohourou told state TV. “They will be called up from Wednesday.” In several neighbourhoods of Abidjan, men in military uniform continued to threaten and extort immigrants and Ivorians with northern names. Malick Traore, a doctor whose parents were born in neighbouring Mali, was stopped by six gunmen and asked to show his identity papers. He said: “They said: ‘Oh, you are against us; you are against the republic. We’ll give you a choice: either we kill you on the spot or we send you to the frontline.’ Luckily, I had money on me, and I gave them everything I had. So they let me go. “A little while later, I heard poom-poom-poom – you know, the sound of an automatic gun. They killed five people on the spot, including a coffee seller who was very well liked in our neighbourhood.” Gbagbo’s Young Patriots have targeted UN staff for weeks, beating them, burning UN vehicles and sometimes abducting them. A Nigerien UN peacekeeper was seized by unknown attackers two weeks ago and remains missing, according to security sources. “We think one of our soldiers in the Nigerien contingent in Abidjan was kidnapped in the week from 12 to 19 March,” a security source in Niamey, Niger’s capital, told Reuters. “The UN is investigating.” The international community and Ivory Coast’s electoral commission say Ouattara won the presidential election. But Gbagbo refuses to give up power. More than 1 million people have fled the fighting that has ensued and at least 462 have been killed since the election, according to UN figures. Ouattara’s camp puts the death toll above 700. Ivory Coast David Smith guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Troops loyal to Alassane Ouattara seize control of Yamassoukro as power appears to be ebbing away from President Laurent Gbagbo Rebel forces in Ivory Coast have taken control of the official capital, as power seems to be slipping away from the president, Laurent Gbagbo. Residents and military sources said troops loyal to Gbagbo’s rival, Alassane Ouattara, had entered Yamoussoukro, meeting little resistance as security forces fled. The port city of San Pedro also fell. Yamoussoukro residents told how they braced themselves for conflict before sporadic gunfire erupted. Serge Kipre, who runs a small clothing store in the city, said: “The night before, we were all calling each other to make sure nobody went outside. In the morning, I saw loads of police with balaclavas and Kalashnikovs racing across town. The market closed, shops shuttered. Everybody seemed on edge.” But the approach of the rebels was eagerly awaited by many young pro-Ouattara supporters. Kipre added: “They set a police station ablaze because they felt they would be liberated soon. We are so tired of this situation – we just want them to get it over with.” The pro-Ouattara Republican Forces (FRCI) captured the city within hours as government opposition melted away. Eyewitnesses saw soldiers taking off their uniforms and throwing guns and ammunition into ditches as they fled from the rebel army. Others say some soldiers simply switched sides and joined the FRCI. The capture of Yamassoukro, which is in a pro-Ouattara area, is symbolic but not decisive. Gbagbo’s seat of power is in the commercial capital, Abidjan, where fighting has raged for months. But the fall of Yamoussoukro opens up the main road to Abidjan, just 143 miles away. Earlier this month a leader of rebel forces, which have controlled northern Ivory Coast since the 2002-03 civil war, told the Guardian they would “surprise all the analysts” by removing Gbagbo quickly and cleanly. Such confidence appears to have been borne out so far as the rebels make rapid advances on three fronts and encounter little resistance. Gbagbo has called for a ceasefire, though this has been widely dismissed as a ploy. Young men are being enrolled into the army, reportedly to replace soldiers who are not turning up for work or who have changed sides. Ally Coulibaly, Ouattara’s ambassador to Paris, claimed rebel forces now controlled three-quarters of the country. “President Alassane Ouattara was patient and gave Mr Laurent Gbagbo every possibility to leave power peacefully,” he told the French radio station France Inter. “He refused every offer made to him.” Ivorians had eventually had to take up arms to avoid a massacre of the civilian population, he added. A statement by Ouattara’s RHDP party said: “All peaceful avenues to convince Laurent Gbagbo of his defeat have been exhausted.” Forces loyal to Ouattara have taken several western towns with relative ease, but Abidjan poses a tougher challenge. Don Mello, a spokesman for Gbagbo, told Radio France International it was “impregnable” to attack. “We call for an immediate ceasefire and the opening of talks under the mediation of the African Union high representative,” he said. “Failing which, we will use our legitimate right of defence. “We have adopted a strategy of tactical withdrawal. We hope that dialogue will open very shortly. It is useless to head into conflict and increase the number of victims.” A priest in Tiebissou, who did not wish to be named, said Gbagbo’s forces had tried to fight off the rebels for three and a half hours before fleeing. Another priest said he had seen the bodies of three dead soldiers in the town, which is 21 miles from the capital. Many wounded fighters were being taken to a nearby hospital. People were looting public buildings in Tiebissou, including the police station, witnesses said. A third front from the east of the country was advancing south, with combat taking place in Akoupe. The rebels secured Bondoukou and Abengourou, along the Ghana border on Tuesday, and seemed poised to strike directly at Gbagbo on this front, as Akoupe is only 70 miles from Abidjan. Violence in Abidjan may escalate after Gbagbo’s army spokesman called on his youths to join the fight. “The hour for their enrolment has arrived,” Colonel Babri Gohourou told state TV. “They will be called up from Wednesday.” In several neighbourhoods of Abidjan, men in military uniform continued to threaten and extort immigrants and Ivorians with northern names. Malick Traore, a doctor whose parents were born in neighbouring Mali, was stopped by six gunmen and asked to show his identity papers. He said: “They said: ‘Oh, you are against us; you are against the republic. We’ll give you a choice: either we kill you on the spot or we send you to the frontline.’ Luckily, I had money on me, and I gave them everything I had. So they let me go. “A little while later, I heard poom-poom-poom – you know, the sound of an automatic gun. They killed five people on the spot, including a coffee seller who was very well liked in our neighbourhood.” Gbagbo’s Young Patriots have targeted UN staff for weeks, beating them, burning UN vehicles and sometimes abducting them. A Nigerien UN peacekeeper was seized by unknown attackers two weeks ago and remains missing, according to security sources. “We think one of our soldiers in the Nigerien contingent in Abidjan was kidnapped in the week from 12 to 19 March,” a security source in Niamey, Niger’s capital, told Reuters. “The UN is investigating.” The international community and Ivory Coast’s electoral commission say Ouattara won the presidential election. But Gbagbo refuses to give up power. More than 1 million people have fled the fighting that has ensued and at least 462 have been killed since the election, according to UN figures. Ouattara’s camp puts the death toll above 700. Ivory Coast David Smith guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …In a post a few days back , I observed that the big Wall Street banks were in for a fall because they had become so arrogant in their power and wealth. One example of this is on the swipe fee issue, where their over-the-top market manipulation and hyper-aggressive political tactics are ticking off not just old progressive populists like me, but a lot of the rest of the business community. Small retailers, grocers, restaurant owners, gas station owners, and cabbies have become incensed the way these banks and their credit card companies charge exorbitant swipe fees and will not negotiate on the matter. I have started working with retail business groups on this issue simply because I’d much rather see these Main Street business folks get more of the $48 billion going out the door in swipe fees than the big banks that control more than 80 percent of the market. This issue is likely to come up for a vote within days in the Senate, so raise some hell. Here’s a new Web ad an organization I chair, American Family Voices , just put up that does a great job of talking about this issue from the small business point of view. Check it out : Over the weekend, I wrote about an ad on the Clean Air Act that AFV had just put up. Yesterday, I wrote about the Social Security and Medicare issue . While these are very different issues in one way, they all have the one thing in common: they are about attacks on the American middle class. Wealthy special interests, along with their allies in Congress and the right-wing flacks like Glenn Beck that defend them (have you seen Beck’s high-pitched whining over the last week about the outrageous idea that people might actually want to take to the streets to challenge Wall Street on foreclosures?) want the ability to run roughshod over the American middle class — even if it means poisoning your kids, telling your Grandma she’s just going to have to get by on less, or taking money out of the pockets of consumers and struggling small businesses on every credit/debit card transaction. Washington is dominated by these behemoths, so even when standing up for policies that so obviously benefit the vast majority of middle-class Americans, it is difficult to fight them. These Wall Street banks are the worst of the special interests. It is not enough to have crashed the entire world economy with their speculative bubbles and financial fraud; it is not enough that in their determination to continue to manipulate their books and inflate their assets they are foreclosing on millions of homeowners rather than writing down their mortgages; it is not enough that they fight tooth and nail against every tiny little bit of oversight that sensible folks want to place on them; it is not enough that the six biggest banks already own assets equaling 64 percent of our nation’s GDP. None of that wealth, power, and hubris is enough for them. They also want to gouge every mom-and-pop businessperson who wants to let customers pay for things with a credit or debit card. The first step in restoring the American Dream is to take these arrogant Wall Street guys and other wealthy special interests out of the temple of our government. . Mike Lux is the President of American Family Voices.
Continue reading …
Girl shot in chest is believed to be London’s youngest gun crime victim A five-year-old girl is in a critical condition after she and another passerby were shot during an apparent gang-related attack in a shop in south London. The girl, believed to be London’s youngest gun crime victim, was injured in the chest, and a 35-year-old man was shot in the face. The incident took place at around 9pm on Tuesday at the Stockwell Food and Wine shop in Stockwell Road, Brixton. Police have confirmed that the two victims were not the intended targets of the shooting, which is believed to be connected to local gangs. Just before the shots were fired, witnesses saw two black youths coming from nearby Broomgrove Road, being chased by three other black youths on bicycles. It is understood that the three youths on bikes approached the shop, but did not enter. DCI Tony Boughton from the Met’s Trident taskforce said: “The assumption is at the moment is that the firearm is fired through the open door because there is no damage on the outside.” The shop worker and child were hit as two black youths hid in the store from the other three youths who had been chasing them. As the pair hid inside, the gunman stopped at the door and opened fire indiscriminately. The three attackers, who are thought to be aged between 14 and 17, fled as their intended targets chased them on foot from the Stockwell Road shop along Broomgrove Road and into Stockwell Park Estate. Mareh Silva, age 34, was leaving the Stockwell Food and Wine shop with friends at around 9pm. She said she saw three black youths aged between 14 and 17 drop their bikes outside. She explained how the boys’ faces were covered with black scarves and balaclavas and she could only see their eyes as they ran into the shop. “I looked in and saw a lot of blood on the floor but I didn’t want to look at what had happened, and I was very scared,” she said. DCI Boughton would not confirm if the groups were from rival gangs. He said: “I’m treating it as three young lads chasing two other young lads – we don’t know any affiliations and the assumption is that they are from the local area.” The 35-year-old victim was a worker in the shop, and was not related to the five-year-old, who was at the shop visiting other relatives. The names of the two victims have not been released, but it is understood that both are of Sri Lankan origin. They were taken to King’s College hospital, where they are now in a stable but serious condition. Barny Stutter, 45, co-owner of nearby Brixton Cycles, said workers in the area’s fastfood shops often had similar trouble. “We are absolutely disgusted with what’s happened,” he said. Peter Robbins, one of three Lambeth councillors who represent the area, said, “It is incredibly shocking, I think the whole community at the moment is numb and horrified. “There is a fairly well-known problem with gangs and guns in Lambeth, it is something that the council and the police are working together incredibly hard to solve. There is always more you can do and incidents like this really bring that home.” Rachel Heywood, Lambeth’s cabinet member for community safety, said she found the crime “hugely shocking”. “Tackling serious violence is a major priority for this council. We will of course do everything in our power to assist the police with their investigation. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families at what must be an extremely distressing time.” Anyone with information is asked to call the Metropolitan police on 0300 123 1212 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 Gun crime Crime London Camilla Turner guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
More than 200 organisations lose support on ‘agonising’ day of 15% cuts to the arts – but those who win, win big Live blog – culture cuts It is a day of radically mixed fortunes for the arts in England , as organisations up and down the country receive news of their funding levels from Arts Council England (ACE). In all, 638 organisations who applied for funding were disappointed as the crucial letters flooded into email inboxes this morning. Of those, 206 were formerly funded regularly by ACE. Alan Davey, chief executive of the organisation, talked of “agonising and painful decisions” and “good organisations we have not been able to fund”. He said there had been a “clear intellectual framework” for the decisions and a “transparent process”. But 110 new arts organisations were brought into the ACE portfolio for the first time, among them innovative young theatre organisations including HighTide Festival Theatre, Birmingham’s live art Fierce festival and the much larger Manchester International Festival. ACE, which received a 29.6% cut in its grant-in-aid from the government, passed on cuts of 15% to the arts as a whole, but it promised not to “salami slice”, giving equal pain to all. This meant there were big winners – and big losers – as the funding decisions were announced. Exeter Northcott theatre and Derby theatre lost their funding totally. So did the organisation that exists to help arts organisations raise funds, Arts and Business. Also disappointed this morning were Shared Experience theatre company and the Riverside Studios in London. The Almeida theatre in London took a surprise hit of 39% in real terms while its neighbour a few miles east, the Arcola theatre, saw its grant up by 82.1%. Punchdrunk, which has become famous for its immersive theatrical experiences in unusual spaces, had a hefty rise of 141%. The large national organisations, such as the National Theatre, the Royal Opera House and the Royal Shakespeare Company, all received cuts, in real terms, of 15% over the period 2012-15. English National Opera had a slightly smaller real-terms cut of 11%. Tony Hall, chief executive of the Royal Opera House, said: “It is fair that the big organisations take what cut they can to allow others to survive and do great things. Alan Davey has come up with some wise judgments.” In the field of visual arts, the Institute of Contemporary Arts, which has struggled financially in recent years, took a heavy 42% cut, but Davey called thenew grant of £900,000 a year “a good amount of money … Putting this amount of money in is a vote of confidence in their future.” There were uplifts for galleries, such as 107% for the South London Gallery, currently enjoying a successful period, and increases for a trio of new galleries about to open – FirstSite in Colchester (up 16.8%), the Hepworth in Wakefield (up 7.7%) and Turner Contemporary in Margate (up 9.8%). Mima, in Middlesbrough, was a significant winner, with an upswing of 143.8%. The country’s symphony orchestras received a standard 11% cut in real terms, but Cambridge’s Britten Sinfonia was rewarded for innovative touring work with an 11.8% increase; and Tête à Tête opera, which creates small-scale work in innovative spaces, became part of the portfolio for the first time, as did the Academy of Ancient Music. Arts leaders spoke out against the cuts from central government. Tim Etchells, artistic director of the theatre company Forced Entertainment, welcomed his standstill grant, but said: “We feel that the government cuts – to the arts and to other vital areas of social provision – are both destructive and ideologically motivated. Cuts for the arts are particularly shortsighted given that the recent commitment to funding and development has made British culture the envy of the world and an industry which enjoys a sizable return on investment.” Tom Morris, artistic director of Old Vic, also received a standstill grant. “However,” he said, “many organisations and cities have not been so fortunate. It would be easy to blame Arts Council England, but this is not their fault. They have been set a riddle to which there is no fair solution.” Ivan Lewis, the shadow culture secretary, said: “The contention that the cuts will not affect frontline provision of the arts have been blown out of the water. Half of those who applied received no funding. Arts Council England has tried to do its job in good faith … but taken together with cuts to local authorities and to higher education, the picture is not good.” Arts funding Theatre Art Classical music Opera Cuts and closures Charlotte Higgins guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Poll: PBS is the most trusted name in TV news as Fox plummets. The price of being O’Keefe’d
March 30, 2011 No Comment
Fox News has now lost their perch as most trusted news in the PPP’s newest survey. However, since PBS wasn’t polled last year, I’d say they never had that distinction in the first place. Raw Story: In the space of one year, Fox News has lost its perch as the most trusted TV news network in the US and is now average at best, a new survey has found. A poll gauging public trust in TV news has found that PBS is the most trusted name in news, while trust in Fox News has dropped significantly. According to a survey from Public Policy Polling, “a year ago a plurality of Americans said they trusted Fox News. Now a plurality of them don’t.” In a survey taken a year ago, PPP found that Fox was the most trusted news network, with 49 percent saying they trusted the network, and 37 percent saying they did not. In the new poll, 42 percent said they trusted the network while 46 percent disagreed. The new reigning champion is PBS, which was not included in last year’s inaugural poll. The public broadcaster was found to be trusted by 50 percent of respondents, and distrusted by 30 percent — the closest any news network has come to gaining the trust of a majority of Americans. Fox News has found itself in roughly the same place, trust-wise, as NBC and CNN, but still above ABC and CBS, who were trusted by 35 and 36 percent, respectively, in the latest poll. PPP notes that trust in the network declined only marginally among conservatives, from 75 percent to 72 percent. “But moderates and liberals have both had a strong increase in their level of distrust for the network — a 12-point gain from 48 percent to 60 percent for moderates and a 16-point gain from 66 percent to 82 percent for liberals,” the institute reported… read on They lost 12 points of trust with moderates. As Digby says, who are these people? Anyway, it’s good to see some people understanding the truth, but it’s really taken a lot of crazy-town to convince them and as the election draws near, the amount of crazy will surely rise to incredible heights. enlarge Credit: jezebel James O’Keefe the Pimp! I know conservative flim-flam artists will not abide. Here’s a reminder to PBS and their staff and brass: Beware being O’Keefe’d. The guy even took a slimy shot at CNN . What did they ever do to him? I mean, CNN even does its best to support the Tea Party. PBS, just remember the pimp.
Continue reading …
NBC's Matt Lauer, on Wednesday's Today show, startled Michele Bachmann as he tried to convince her that Obama's strategy of bombing Libya was a good way to show support for the rebels as he pressed the Republican Minnesota Congresswoman ” If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?” Bachmann was taken aback by the thrust of the question as she responded: “Compassion for al Qaeda?” Lauer scrambled to clarify himself, insisting he meant the U.S. would be showing compassion for “civilians in Benghazi.” Bachmann pointed out to Lauer: “Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point,” as seen in the following exchange: (video, audio and transcript after the jump) (MP3 audio) MATT LAUER: Going back to my question though, had you been President on that day, March 17th, what would you have done? Would you have done nothing? MICHELE BACHMANN: I would not have gone in. LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, “We support you, but we're not coming?” BACHMANN: Well I think that what, what presidents do is they stay involved and they, they try to get their, the very best intelligence that they can. Because I think, one thing the American people need to know is that we did not know, nor did the intelligence community know who the opposition is. If we are going in – because, remember, there were, there was just testimony yesterday that there are flickers of al Qaeda. We don't know how much al Qaeda is involved in the opposition forces. Why would we want to strengthen al Qaeda's hand in North Africa? That certainly wouldn't be in the interests of the United States. LAUER: Well, well let me, let me flip that coin on, on its, on its other side. If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people? BACHMANN: Compassion for al Qaeda? LAUER: No, compassion for civilians in, in Benghazi. BACHMANN: Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point. There is no more compassionate nation in the world than the United States of America. We are the ones that offer the humanitarian aide. But in this instance, under the Obama Doctrine, the President of the United States is using the United States military for the purpose of humanitarian aide. This is a marked difference from the way that the United States military has been used before. The Obama Doctrine is very, very different from any interventions that we have done in the past. The following is the full interview as it was aired on the March 30 Today show: MATT LAUER: Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann from Minnesota has been critical of U.S. involvement in Libya calling it, quote, “President Obama's war.” Congresswoman Bachmann, good morning to you. [On screen headline: "Target: Libya, What Would Bachmann Do Differently?"] REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, MINNESOTA-R: Good morning, Matt. LAUER: I want to take you back to March 17th. It was a Thursday, it was the day that Moammar Khaddafy told the people of Libya and Benghazi that his troops were on the way, they would show no mercy and they would find them in their closets. If you had been President of the United States on that day what would you have done specifically? BACHMANN: Well I don't think at that point that we had seen the threat to the United States either from Khaddafy or have we seen a vital American national interest at risk. That really needs to be our first line of defense. Because unfortunately there are atrocities that do happen in different countries in the world. We just saw this weekend slaughter in Syria. So based upon that criteria humanitarian intervention, which apparently is the new Obama Doctrine- LAUER: Right. BACHMANN: That would be the basis for the United States to enter into one country after another. I don't think that's in the American interest- LAUER: So- BACHMANN: -for us to enter into one country after another. LAUER: Going back to my question though, had you been President on that day, March 17th, what would you have done? Would you have done nothing? BACHMANN: I would not have gone in. LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, “We support you, but we're not coming?” BACHMANN: Well I think that what, what presidents do is they stay involved and they, they try to get their, the very best intelligence that they can. Because I think, one thing the American people need to know is that we did not know, nor did the intelligence community know who the opposition is. If we are going in – because, remember, there were, there was just testimony yesterday that there are flickers of al Qaeda. We don't know how much al Qaeda is involved in the opposition forces. Why would we want to strengthen al Qaeda's hand in North Africa? That certainly wouldn't be in the interests of the United States. LAUER: Well, well let me, let me flip that coin on, on its, on its other side. If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people? BACHMANN: Compassion for al Qaeda? LAUER: No, compassion for civilians in, in Benghazi. LAUER: Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point. There is no more compassionate nation in the world than the United States of America. We are the ones that offer the humanitarian aide. But in this instance, under the Obama Doctrine, the President of the United States is using the United States military for the purpose of humanitarian aide. This is a marked difference from the way that the United States military has been used before. The Obama Doctrine is very, very different from any interventions that we have done in the past. LAUER: Alright, let me ask you one more question, again, placing you in the White House. If you are the President of the United States, given what you know now, what's taking place on the ground in Libya, would you make a decision to arm the rebels? BACHMANN: I would not. Because, again, we do not know enough about who they are. And we also have not identified it an American vital international interest. That must be done before the United States can intervene in another nation's affairs. LAUER: So as I ask you a couple of questions asking what you would do if you were president, are you running? BACHMANN: No. I haven't made a decision to run. I'm going into the early primary states and speaking to primary voters, but I won't be making the decision, I don't think, until some time this summer. LAUER: Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. Congresswoman Bachmann, thanks for your time this morning. I appreciate it. BACHMANN: Good to see you, Matt. Thanks. —Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here
Continue reading …
Cost-saving potential set out in government plan for national roll-out of energy-saving technology Smart meters, which monitor energy use in real-time, will save households £7.3bn over the next two decades, the government said on Wednesday as it set out its strategy for the roll-out of the energy-saving technology . The roll-out – the most comprehensive yet planned in any country – will require 53m smart meters to be installed in 30m homes and businesses, starting in 2014 and finishing in 2019. Households are likely to save £23 on their annual energy bills by 2020, the government has estimated, up from its previous estimate of £14 in savings. But these figures were disputed by the consumer group Which? and by smart metering industry experts. Jessica Driscoll, senior advocate at Which?, said: “It’s too difficult to say that people will save a certain amount of money. The savings depend on people making changes to the way they use energy, and that is very hard to do. Smart meters are just one way of helping people make those changes.” She said Which? had not yet made an estimates of the cost or savings from the technology because there was not yet enough information to make a reliable estimate. She said it was more important to reassure consumers that smart meters would bring a variety of benefits, than to try to persuade them of the potential cost savings based on estimates. Some industry experts privately agreed that it was too soon to make such exact estimates of the cost savings that could be realised by the roll-out. Smart meters benefit consumers by showing their energy use in real-time. This means people can respond quickly, for instance by turning off unnecessary lights or appliances, to save money. The technology also benefits energy suppliers, as it eliminates the need for meter readers to visit properties and allow for more accurate billing, and better data on energy demand patterns. Future generations of smart meters are likely to offer even greater advantages, for instance by allowing utilities better to manage demand within consumers’ homes, by switching appliances such as washing machines on when demand is lower, or turning down fridges when demand peaks. This could save billions through more efficient management of the electricity grid, but these capabilities are unlikely to be introduced for several years at the earliest. But these capabilities also bring potential problems, according to Driscoll, such as what happens to the valuable consumer data that the meters collect how utilities will ensure that people can retain control over their own energy use. Some companies might try to use the opportunity of installing smart meters to sell souped-up versions with more features, or to sell additional services, such as internet or telephones. “Once they’re in your home, they might try to ‘upsell’, which is something we are worried about,” Driscoll warned. She added: “People do not trust energy companies. They need to work very hard to ensure that this rollout is going to be a big benefit to British people.” Chris Huhne, the secretary of state for energy and climate change, stressed the potential benefits of the plan, which is one of the most visible aspects of the government’s low-carbon strategy, as the meters will be in every home. He said: “Smart meters are a key part of giving us all more control over how we use energy at home and at work, helping us to cut out waste and save money. In combination with our plans to reform the electricity market and introduce the green deal [project to insulate homes], the roll-out of smart meters will help us keep the lights on while reducing emissions and getting the best possible deal for the consumer.” From now until 2014, the government plans to work with industry and consumer groups to lay the groundwork for the roll-out, including setting specifications for the kinds of smart meters to be used. Today’s announcement is expected to kick off a frenzy of activity among smart meter technology companies, utilities and communications businesses as they jockey for position in pressing for the adoption of their competing ideas on how smart meters should work. During this phase, companies are expected to build and test trial systems, get customer feedback and demonstrate how they can ensure energy savings. Consumers are likely to be invited to take place in trials. The government will also set up a Data and Communications Company, intended to provide data and communications services for the smart metering system nationwide. In the following stage, from 2014 to 2019, the mass roll-out will take place. Charles Hendry, energy minister, said: “Smart meters will enable us to modernise the electricity system over the coming years and create the smart grids we will need to bring new low carbon energy sources online, and handle much higher demand for electricity as we progressively electrify transport and heating.” Energy monitoring Energy efficiency Energy Ethical and green living Energy bills Consumer affairs Household bills Fiona Harvey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Paul Allen uses memoir to portray Bill Gates as a bully who sought to deprive him of his share in Microsoft fortune Bill Gates betrayed his ailing business partner and tried to deprive him of his share of the Microsoft fortune, according to a scathing memoir from Paul Allen , the company’s billionaire co-founder. Allen portrays the Microsoft mogul as a sarcastic bully who tried to force his founding partner out of the firm and to cut his share in the company as he was recovering from cancer. The book, Idea Man: a Memoir by the co-founder of Microsoft, is set to go on sale on 17 April, and an extract appears in May’s Vanity Fair magazine and has been released online . Despite Gates’s moves Allen held on to his Microsoft stake – a stake that contributed to the lion’s share of what Forbes magazine’s estimates to be a $13bn (£8.1bn) fortune. The two were once inseparable and met at Lakeside high school in Seattle where Allen paints a picture of the couple as the original nerds. Allen didn’t fit in amid the golfers and tennis players “who carried their rackets wherever they went”. Then in 1968 he met Gates, another gawky kid who was also spending all his free time hunkered over the school’s first computer, a ASR-33 Teletype model . “His blond hair went all over the place. You could tell three things about Bill Gates pretty quickly. He was really smart. He was really competitive; he wanted to show you how smart he was. And he was really, really persistent.” At the age of 13 Gates was already pouring over Fortune magazine and planning on building a company. When Gates went to Harvard, Allen followed him and the two spent their spare time working on ideas for a software firm. “I’d assumed that our partnership would be a 50-50 proposition. But Bill had another idea,” Allen writes. Gates had put in more work than Allen, and eventually after some quibbling from Gates, Allen agreed to a 64-36 split. Allen writes that when the relationship soured he wondered again about that split. “I’d been taught that a deal was a deal and your word was your bond. Bill was more flexible,” he writes. Gates pushed deals “as hard and as far as he could”. Relations worsened as Microsoft took off. Gates would prowl the car park to see who came in on the weekend. He thrived on conflict and sarcasm. Allen and Gates would argue for hours at a stretch. Then Gates brought in Steve Ballmer , the firm’s current boss, to help manage the company. Gates offered Ballmer 8.75% of the firm, angering other employees and Allen, who had agreed to a far smaller percentage. In 1982 Allen contracted Hodgkin’s lymphoma. When he returned to work relations with Gates and Ballmer hit a new low. Allen claims the pair undermined him and he overheard them discussing ways of diluting his stake in the firm. “Unable to stand it any longer, I burst in on them and shouted, ‘This is unbelievable! It shows your true character, once and for all,’” he writes. Ballmer and Gates later apologised but the partnership was over. Allen resigned and Gates tried to buy him out for $5 a share, Allen refused and said he wouldn’t discuss less than $10. Gates balked at the price and Allen left with what was to become an enormous fortune. Shares are trading at more than $25 and the company is now worth more than $214bn. “While my recollection of many of these events may differ from Paul’s, I value his friendship and the important contributions he made to the world of technology and at Microsoft,” Gates said in a written statement given to the Wall Street Journal. Microsoft Bill Gates Computing United States Dominic Rushe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …