Reports give no reason for Bashar al-Assad’s decision but state TV footage shows huge crowds The Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, has sacked the governor of the city of Hama where 200,000 people took to the streets to protest against his regime. State TV announced the removal of the governor on Saturday. Although the report gave no reason or detail for his sacking, video footage showed the huge crowds of protesters in a central square of the provincial capital calling for an end to Assad’s rule. “The Syrian president signed a decree today relieving Doctor Ahmad Khaled Abdel Aziz of his post as governor of Hama,” the state-run Sana news agency announced. Hama was the site of an armed Islamist revolt against Assad’s father, Hafez al-Assad, in 1982. At least 10,000 people were killed and part of the old city was flattened when the army crushed the uprising. The protests on Friday across Syria were the largest since the uprising against Assad’s rule began nearly four months ago. Hundreds of thousands took to the streets nationwide, with human rights groups saying that at least 24 people had been killed by security forces on what was dubbed “the Friday of departure”, a slogan borrowed from the demonstrators against Hosni Mubarak in Egypt at the start of the Arab uprising. Activists claimed many were injured when police fired on protesters in the Damascus suburb of Daraya. Demonstrations were also reported in Aleppo, Latakia and Homs. Human rights campaigners estimate that more than 1,350 civilians have been killed since the uprising began in mid-March. The government says about 500 security personnel have also been killed. Days after the protests erupted in the southern city of Deraa on 18 March, Assad sacked its regional governor. Syria Bashar Al-Assad Arab and Middle East unrest Protest Middle East David Batty guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former California governor and Terminator star had confessed to fathering a lovechild with housekeeper Mildred Baena Former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and his wife Maria Shriver are to divorce after papers were filed with a Los Angeles court on Friday. Maria Shriver, a stalwart of the Kennedy clan, filed for divorce citing irreconcilable differences. The documents submitted to the Los Angeles Superior court and mark official proceedings to end the couple’s 25-year marriage. Entertainment website TMZ reported that Shriver has also submitted an application for custody for the couple’s two youngest children, Patrick Schwarzenegger, 17, and Christopher, 13. The news comes nearly two months after it emerged the Hollywood action man and Terminator star had fathered a 13-year-old lovechild with the couple’s former housekeeper, Mildred Baena. Revelations of Schwarzenegger’s infidelity broke shortly after he resigned his governorship and confessed to fathering the child and making maintenance payments to Baena, who had worked for the couple for 20 years. Shriver had moved out of the couple’s LA mansion following the split in May and reports suggested the couple have been living separatelyfor several weeks. Schwarzenegger has also been the subject of a number of further stories of alleged extra-marital affairs. The actor has said he plans to return to the Terminator series of films, while Shriver has said she is now concentrating on planning a conference to forward women’s power as an agent of global change. Arnold Schwarzenegger United States Celebrity Jo Adetunji guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media In an interview with GBTV head correspondent Raj Nair on the streets of New York Friday, Glenn Beck explained that he despises Republicans as much as Democrats. “Ask the average person, am I Republican?” asked Beck. “I hate them… I don’t know how to say — I hate them.” Beck may have also surprised conservatives by railing against the practice known as extraordinary rendition. “Ghost planes — we’re picking people up in the middle of the night. We’re saying talk to us or we’re going to drop you off over in Egypt. That’s insane. That’s what causing all of these problems is we are sitting here looking at — picking people up and expecting them, when we march in, to say ‘oh, the Americans are here. The Americans just put him on a ghost plane and now he’s in the prison with Mubarak’s people torturing him.’ They don’t understand that. We don’t stand for anything.”
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media In an interview with GBTV head correspondent Raj Nair on the streets of New York Friday, Glenn Beck explained that he despises Republicans as much as Democrats. “Ask the average person, am I Republican?” asked Beck. “I hate them… I don’t know how to say — I hate them.” Beck may have also surprised conservatives by railing against the practice known as extraordinary rendition. “Ghost planes — we’re picking people up in the middle of the night. We’re saying talk to us or we’re going to drop you off over in Egypt. That’s insane. That’s what causing all of these problems is we are sitting here looking at — picking people up and expecting them, when we march in, to say ‘oh, the Americans are here. The Americans just put him on a ghost plane and now he’s in the prison with Mubarak’s people torturing him.’ They don’t understand that. We don’t stand for anything.”
Continue reading …
From an alleged love child to a potential runaway bride, rumors have made Monaco’s royal wedding more farce than fairy tale. The union of 33-year-old Charlene Wittstock and 53-year-old Prince Albert of Monaco went forward today at the royal palace, with guests including French President Nicolas Sarkozy, James Bond star Roger Moore, supermodel Naomi Campbell,
Continue reading …Disparity Between Crack and Cocaine Users Lessened, 12K May Get Sentences Reduced
July 1, 2011 No CommentThis is a really positive decision that will help black communities, who have far too many people in prison because of the racially-biased sentencing disparity between crack and powdered cocaine: WASHINGTON – As many as 12,000 people in federal prison for crack-related crimes can get their sentences reduced as a result of a new law that brought the penalties for the drug more closely in line with those for powdered cocaine, a government commission decided Thursday. The decision by the U.S. Sentencing Commission applies to approximately 1 in 17 inmates in the federal system. Congress last year substantially lowered the sentences for crack-related crimes such as possession and trafficking, changing a 1980s law that was criticized as racially discriminatory because it came down extra hard on a drug common in poor, black neighborhoods. The question before the commission Thursday was whether people already locked up under the old law should benefit retroactively from the changes. The six-member commission unanimously decided in their favor. “I believe that the commission has no choice but to make this right,” said Ketanji Brown Jackson, a vice chairwoman of the commission. “I say justice demands this result.” The NAACP was among the groups praising the commission’s action. About 85 percent of the inmates expected to benefit from the decision are black. The commission’s action is final unless Congress decides by the end of October to intervene, and that is considered unlikely. Prisoners will have to petition a judge for a sentence reduction, and requests will be decided on a case-by-case basis, with the court taking into consideration the defendant’s behavior in prison and danger to society. Prosecutors will be allowed to weigh in. The earliest anyone could get out is November.
Continue reading …
On Thursday's CBS Evening News and Friday's Early Show, CBS glossed over President Obama's aim to break a campaign promise with a proposal to raise taxes on people who make less than $250,000 a year. Both Chip Reid and Bill Plante noted that “the White House is also insisting on…a limit on deductions for people…making more than $200,000 a year,” but didn't reference the Democrat's 2008 tax pledge. Near the end of his report, which aired 44 minutes into the 6 pm Eastern hour, Reid highlighted the Obama administration's push for tax hikes: REID: Democratic sources familiar with the negotiations say the President now wants more than $400 billion in tax increases as part of the deal . The biggest piece by far- $290 billion- would come from limiting deductions for couples making more than $250,000 a year and individuals making more than $200,000, who the President referred to in yesterday's press conference as millionaires and billionaires . Just over 12 hours later, the senior White House correspondent gave a similar line during his report on the stalemate in the budget/debt ceiling talks and named other tax increase proposals: PLANTE: Bipartisan talks, led by Vice President Biden, have identified more than a trillion dollars worth of spending cuts over ten years. But the White House is also insisting on revenue increases – a limit on deductions for people the President called millionaires and billionaires, would apply to anyone making more than $200,000 a year , and raise $290 billion over ten years; a change in accounting practices, 60 billion [dollars]; elimination of oil and gas loopholes, 45 billion; elimination of an interest deduction for hedge funds, 20 billion; elimination of the corporate jet loophole, 3 billion; a total over ten years: 418 billion. During the first presidential debate between Obama and Senator John McCain on September 26, 2008, the then-candidate promised that ” if you make less than $250,000, less than a quarter-million dollars a year, then you will not see one dime's worth of tax increase .” That very night, after the debate concluded, ABCNews.com actually pointed out that ” Obama misleads on $250,000 tax claim ,” explaining that ” Obama has called for higher taxes on income, capital gains and dividends for individuals making $200,000 per year; his tax plan imposes higher taxes on couples starting at $250,000 a year .” One might conclude that the President has consistently misled since he made that statement almost three years ago. But CBS certainly hasn't gone out of its way to point this out. The full transcripts of Chip Reid's report from Thursday's CBS Evening News and Bill Plante's report from Friday's Early Show: 06:44 pm EDT SCOTT PELLEY: The negotiations over the U.S. debt crisis have apparently descended to insults. Yesterday, the President said his daughters work harder on their homework than the Congress does on the budget. Today, one Republican senator suggested Mr. Obama needs medication. All of this as the nation careens toward defaulting on its debts in about four weeks. Chip Reid has the latest. CHIP REID (voice-over): Republican leader Mitch McConnell today politely invited President Obama to visit the Senate. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL (from speech on the Senate floor): Come on up to the Capitol and meet with Senate Republicans. REID: Kansas Republican Pat Roberts was a little less polite. SENATOR PAT ROBERTS (from press conference): So, maybe, if he'd just take a Valium and calm down and come on down to talk to us, it might be helpful. REID: Both senators said they want to explain to the President that there is no chance Republicans will support tax increases as part of a deal on increasing the national debt. But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the President has no interest in talking about what will not pass. WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY (from press conference): That's not a conversation worth having. What we need to have is a conversation about what will pass. REID: Despite Republican resistance, Democratic sources familiar with the negotiations say the President now wants more than $400 billion in tax increases as part of the deal. The biggest piece by far- $290 billion- would come from limiting deductions for couples making more than $250,000 a year and individuals making more than $200,000, who the President referred to in yesterday's press conference as millionaires and billionaires. The sources also say that while August 2 is the final deadline for passing a deal and avoiding a economic meltdown, it will take time to get it through Congress. They say that means an agreement in principle needs to be reached by about July 22, just over three weeks away. REID (on-camera): Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said today he's canceling next week's Fourth of July recess, to work on the debt deal. But, Scott, sources on Capitol Hill tell me there's very little they can do until the President and Republican leaders resolve their impasse over taxes. PELLEY: Thanks, Chip. 07:06 am EDT HILL: President Obama heads to Camp David today for the Fourth of July weekend, after turning down Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's offer to meet with Republicans over the budget stalemate. CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante has the latest this morning on those negotiations. Bill, good morning. BILL PLANTE: Good morning to you, Erica. Well, now, the talks are stalled, so both sides are playing to public opinion. Senator McConnell delivered his invitation to the President from the Senate floor, and the White House, just as publicly, said no thanks. JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY (from press conference): What the Senator invited the President to do was to hear Senate Republicans restate their maximalist position. We know what that position is, and he also invited them to hear- invited the President to hear what would not pass. That's not a conversation worth having. PLANTE (voice-over): After the President's taunt that Congress was away too often, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that the Senate would forego its July Fourth break, and instead, work on a deal to raise the debt ceiling and balance the budget. SEN. HARRY REID, MAJORITY LEADER (from speech on Senate floor): It's very important that we do this. That moment is too important, the obstacles too steep, and the time too short to waste even a moment. PLANTE: Bipartisan talks, led by Vice President Biden, have identified more than a trillion dollars worth of spending cuts over ten years. But the White House is also insisting on revenue increases- a limit on deductions for people the President called millionaires and billionaires, would apply to anyone making more than $200,000 a year, and raise $290 billion over ten years; a change in accounting practices, 60 billion [dollars]; elimination of oil and gas loopholes, 45 billion; elimination of an interest deduction for hedge funds, 20 billion; elimination of the corporate jet loophole, 3 billion; a total over ten years: 418 billion. Republicans say all those ideas are dead on arrival. SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, MINORITY LEADER (from speech on Senate floor): The Congress isn't going to approve hundreds of billions of dollars in tax hikes. It's simply not going to happen. PLANTE: And Republicans let it be known they were unhappy that the President was out of town at political fundraisers, instead of meeting with them at the Capitol. SEN. PAT ROBERTS, (R), KANSAS (from press conference): Maybe if he'd just take a Valium and calm down and come on down and talk to us, it might be helpful. PLANTE (on-camera): Well, each side is obviously trying to make sure that the other gets the blame if this doesn't work. But Democrats familiar with the negotiations tell CBS News that they remain confident there will be a deal. They say the drop-dead date is about July 22, in order to have something by August 2, which is the deadline. That means that you can expect three or four more weeks of all this public posturing, while, maybe, behind the scenes, there's actual talking going on. Erica? HILL: Just what everybody wanted to hear, three more weeks of it. Bill Plante at the White House this morning- Bill, thanks.
Continue reading …As Republicans continue to posture over the debt ceiling, the idea of going over Congress’ head and invoking the 14th amendment as basis to raise it automatically is gaining traction. Here’s the latest shenanigans from Republicans. After the President took them to task for taking off on vacation, Mitch McConnell issued an invitation for President Obama to meet with Republicans, but not to negotiate. No, McConnell wanted Mr. Obama to come into the room so he could ” hear directly ” why he will never get what he’s asking for. “I’d like to invite the president to come to the Capitol today to meet with Senate Republicans — any time this afternoon, if he’s available, to come on up to the Capitol,” McConnell said. “ That way he can hear directly from Senate Republicans … why what he’s proposing will not pass .” You may have heard about the “14th amendment option”, a sort of nuclear option for the executive to completely bypass Congress and rely on the language in the 14th amendment to render any legislative action on the debt ceiling moot. If you haven’t, watch the segment in the video at the top of this post where it’s explained pretty thoroughly. It’s an untested concept, but rooted in some really strong history. I cannot recommend this post enough for the backstory and history around the adoption of Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment: The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. When I first heard about this I was completely confused as to how language about the public debt became part of a constitutional amendment, which is why you really must read the post on Balkanization. Here’s a snippet: What do we learn from this history? If Wade’s speech offers the central rationale for Section Four, the goal was to remove threats of default on federal debts from partisan struggle. Reconstruction Republicans feared that Democrats, once admitted to Congress would use their majorities to default on obligations they did disliked politically. More generally, as Wade explained, “every man who has property in the public funds will feel safer when he sees that the national debt is withdrawn from the power of a Congress to repudiate it and placed under the guardianship of the Constitution than he would feel if it were left at loose ends and subject to the varying majorities which may arise in Congress.” Well, now. That seems to lend itself to a place in this Very Serious Discussion of the Very Serious Republicans to blow up the world economy for Very Partisan Reasons. Jon Chait : This means that the very existence of the debt limit is unconstitutional because it calls into question the validity of the debt. So would any other provision of law. That is a key reason why Congress created a permanent appropriation for interest payments at the same time that the Fourteenth Amendment was debated. Previously, Congress had to pass annual appropriations for interest. It goes without saying that provoking a constitutional crisis over the debt limit is a bad idea, but a debt crisis would be worse. At a minimum, the Fourteenth Amendment greatly strengthens the president’s hand in getting the debt limit increased in a timely matter. He should not be afraid to use it. Chait is gnawing around the edges of the benefits of this strategy. Let’s just say it outright. The administration has set a drop-dead date of July 22nd to get this done. Assuming Republicans keep their petulant sad faces and refuse to negotiate in any faith, much less good faith, all the White House has to do is remind them that they’re irrelevant by reminding the global bond markets that they’re irrelevant. Suddenly the hostage is breathing just a little bit easier and Republicans look like the fools that they are. We know this will spin away from the President in the media. He will be painted by sniveling Republicans as a bully and a despot. But for everyone who doesn’t want the administration to cave on Medicare and Social Security, I note that the bully pulpit was used quite successfully yesterday (despite the cries and whimpers about scoldings and the like) and the administration’s surrogates are speaking out forcefully about the usefulness of the 14th amendment solution, so it would seem to be in our benefit to have their backs on this one. It’s certainly gotten more interesting with this on the table. I’m suddenly having fun watching Mitch McConnell and John Boehner tilt at windmills.
Continue reading …As Republicans continue to posture over the debt ceiling, the idea of going over Congress’ head and invoking the 14th amendment as basis to raise it automatically is gaining traction. Here’s the latest shenanigans from Republicans. After the President took them to task for taking off on vacation, Mitch McConnell issued an invitation for President Obama to meet with Republicans, but not to negotiate. No, McConnell wanted Mr. Obama to come into the room so he could ” hear directly ” why he will never get what he’s asking for. “I’d like to invite the president to come to the Capitol today to meet with Senate Republicans — any time this afternoon, if he’s available, to come on up to the Capitol,” McConnell said. “ That way he can hear directly from Senate Republicans … why what he’s proposing will not pass .” You may have heard about the “14th amendment option”, a sort of nuclear option for the executive to completely bypass Congress and rely on the language in the 14th amendment to render any legislative action on the debt ceiling moot. If you haven’t, watch the segment in the video at the top of this post where it’s explained pretty thoroughly. It’s an untested concept, but rooted in some really strong history. I cannot recommend this post enough for the backstory and history around the adoption of Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment: The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. When I first heard about this I was completely confused as to how language about the public debt became part of a constitutional amendment, which is why you really must read the post on Balkanization. Here’s a snippet: What do we learn from this history? If Wade’s speech offers the central rationale for Section Four, the goal was to remove threats of default on federal debts from partisan struggle. Reconstruction Republicans feared that Democrats, once admitted to Congress would use their majorities to default on obligations they did disliked politically. More generally, as Wade explained, “every man who has property in the public funds will feel safer when he sees that the national debt is withdrawn from the power of a Congress to repudiate it and placed under the guardianship of the Constitution than he would feel if it were left at loose ends and subject to the varying majorities which may arise in Congress.” Well, now. That seems to lend itself to a place in this Very Serious Discussion of the Very Serious Republicans to blow up the world economy for Very Partisan Reasons. Jon Chait : This means that the very existence of the debt limit is unconstitutional because it calls into question the validity of the debt. So would any other provision of law. That is a key reason why Congress created a permanent appropriation for interest payments at the same time that the Fourteenth Amendment was debated. Previously, Congress had to pass annual appropriations for interest. It goes without saying that provoking a constitutional crisis over the debt limit is a bad idea, but a debt crisis would be worse. At a minimum, the Fourteenth Amendment greatly strengthens the president’s hand in getting the debt limit increased in a timely matter. He should not be afraid to use it. Chait is gnawing around the edges of the benefits of this strategy. Let’s just say it outright. The administration has set a drop-dead date of July 22nd to get this done. Assuming Republicans keep their petulant sad faces and refuse to negotiate in any faith, much less good faith, all the White House has to do is remind them that they’re irrelevant by reminding the global bond markets that they’re irrelevant. Suddenly the hostage is breathing just a little bit easier and Republicans look like the fools that they are. We know this will spin away from the President in the media. He will be painted by sniveling Republicans as a bully and a despot. But for everyone who doesn’t want the administration to cave on Medicare and Social Security, I note that the bully pulpit was used quite successfully yesterday (despite the cries and whimpers about scoldings and the like) and the administration’s surrogates are speaking out forcefully about the usefulness of the 14th amendment solution, so it would seem to be in our benefit to have their backs on this one. It’s certainly gotten more interesting with this on the table. I’m suddenly having fun watching Mitch McConnell and John Boehner tilt at windmills.
Continue reading …
Despite jump since Lord Davies issued 25% target, proportion of executives who are female is barely above 13% Britain’s biggest companies have more than doubled the number of women they are appointing to boardroom jobs since Lord Davies, the government’s champion of female board representation, told businesses this year that within four years a quarter of senior bosses should be women. FTSE 100 companies have recruited 23 women to their boards this year – representing about 30% of total board appointments – after Davies said they should sign up to a voluntary target of 25% board representation by 2015. The data was collected by the Cranfield School of Management. This year’s recruitments mark a jump on the 18 women appointed to FTSE 100 boards made for the whole of 2010, representing 13.3% of last year’s total. In another sign of progress, the number of blue-chip companies without a single woman on their boards has fallen to 14, down from 21 last December . The appointments include Lucinda Bell, who became British Land’s finance director in March, and Elizabeth Doherty, appointed chief financial officer at consumer goods group Reckitt Benckiser in February. Baroness Vadera of Holland Park, a former business minister, has taken independent non-executive directorships at pharmaceuticals company AstraZeneca and BHP Billiton, the mining group. However, Cranfield points out that despite this year’s jump, still only 13.9% of FTSE 100 board positions are held by women – or 152 out of 1,086 seats – compared with 12.5% in December. Female board representation in the FTSE 250 is still low, at 8.7% (up from 7.8% in December). Lord Davies of Abersoch welcomed the leap in FTSE 100 board representation but said there was “a danger that the issue becomes forgotten”. He said he was working with business secretary Vince Cable and the prime minister’s office on “ways to keep the pressure up”. In February, Davies told FTSE 350 companies to set their own “challenging targets” and called on chairmen to announce their goals within six months and for chief executives to review the percentage of women they aim to have on their executive committees in 2013 and 2015. “We are making progress but we have to make sure all companies publish their targets in the autumn. Even though it is voluntary, I have written to every company secretary laying out what we are expecting and I am getting letters from boards saying they are going to comply.” He added: “Post August, I intend to make sure I keep the pressure up and there is going to be a bit of naming and shaming of companies not supporting it… There will be an event in the autumn that will make the corporate sector realise the government has not forgotten,” Davies said. “All members of the government want to make sure that companies realise this is not just about publication of the report, but about a long-term transformation of the boardroom. This is a continuous issue that’s not going to go away.” However, he said he had no plans to introduce mandatory quotas, which many women oppose as it could create a perception that they have been hired only because of their sex. Cable said: “These figures are good news. However, we still need to see more women appointed to senior decision-making positions in our largest companies. I strongly urge all chairman to publish their aims by September of this year.” Dr Ruth Sealy, Cranfield’s deputy director of the international centre for women leaders, described her latest female board figures as “very, very encouraging” and “pretty much entirely down to the Davies report”. She added that the recent appointment of Christine Lagarde as the IMF’s first female head “can only be a good thing”. Lagarde has backed quotas as the only way of forcing change. Corporate governance Equality Gender Tom Bawden guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …