Regime claims attack that killed son and three grandchildren was aimed at Libya’s leader, as allies accused of overstepping UN security council resolution Nato is facing urgent questions about the legality of its air strike on a Gaddafi family compound at the weekend, which the Libyan government said had killed the leader’s second youngest son, 29-year old Saif al-Arab, and three grandchildren under 12. The grandchildren were not named. The Libyan government spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, said Muammar Gaddafi and his wife, Safiya, had been in the building at the time, but had escaped injury. He said the aim of the attack was clear: to assassinate the Libyan leader. Nato swiftly scrambled to deny that it was targeting any individuals, insisting that it was only interested in attacking the military command structure. The prime minister, David Cameron, told the BBC that UN resolutions permitted attacks against the regime’s “command and control” sites because their aim was to prevent “a loss of civilian life by targeting Gaddafi’s war-making machine”. But the deaths of Gaddafi’s three grandchildren, if confirmed, will reinforce the doubts of alliance members uncomfortable with Nato’s six-week bombing campaign and generate criticism from countries such as Russia that Nato is pushing beyond its UN security council mandate. “Statements by participants in the coalition that the strikes on Libya are not aimed at the physical destruction of … Gaddafi and members of his family raise serious doubts,” the Russian foreign ministry said. “The disproportionate use of force … is leading to detrimental consequences and the death of innocent civilians.” The ministry called for “an immediate ceasefire and the beginning of a political settlement process without preconditions.” The Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, said in Caracas: “There is no doubt the order was given to kill Gaddafi. It doesn’t matter who else is killed … this is a murder.” The attack, which one diplomatic source said had been carried out by Danish airmen possibly in an F16 bomber, ripped through the Gaddafi residence at around 8pm on Saturday night. It was the second time in recent days that an airstrike has come close to the Libyan leader, and Ibrahim indicated that someone within the leader’s circle may have leaked intelligence on his whereabouts. But in Washington, Stephen Hadley, former national security adviser in the Bush administration, warned that the assassination of Gaddafi by Nato aircraft could prove counterproductive. “The narrative we want to come out of this is that the Libyan people overthrew a dictator – not that we came in and toppled a despot,” he told CNN. “What we really want him to do is to leave or to die at a Libyan hand, not an American hand.” But senior Republicans expressed little concern over the prospect of Gaddafi becoming a casualty. Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News: “Wherever Gaddafi goes, he is a legitimate military target. He’s the command and control source. He’s not the legitimate leader of Libya and the way to get this to end is to go after the people around him and his support system.” Reminded that assassinating foreign leaders is illegal, Graham said: “In my view, he’s not a foreign leader, he’s a murderer.” John McCain, another Republican senator who specialises in foreign affairs, told CBS: “We should be taking out his command and control. If he is killed or injured because of that, that’s fine.” Michele Bachmann, a Republican congresswoman considering seeking the Republican presidential nomination who was also on the Sunday talk shows, said it was foolish of Barack Obama to have become involved in Libya. She told Fox: “When President Obama went in, his doctrine was to enter Libya for humanitarian purposes. The point of what I am saying is that we are seeing many, many lives lost, including innocent civilians’ lives. “What will be the ultimate objective and gain? I don’t see it. I think it was a foolish decision to have gotten involved.” In spite of criticism by Russia that Nato is trying to assassinate Gaddafi, Moscow has stopped short of raising the attacks at the UN security council. The Libyan government has been pressing Russia and China to challenge the legality of the Nato action. Both have expressed sympathy with the argument that Nato strikes against compounds where Gaddafi and his family live go beyond the UN mandate to protect civilians in rebel-held areas. A UN security council official said on Sunday that there was no sign of Moscow seeking to bring the issue up at the security council. The official said China was taking its cue from Russia. Both abstained in the vote on the resolution sanctioning action against Libya in March. According to British diplomats, the Gaddafi regime retaliated against the airstrike by dispatching a mob to attack western embassy buildings, which have been abandoned in recent weeks as the hostilities have gathered pace. A spokeswoman said a building housing the ambassador’s residence had been set on fire, and according to initial reports had been burned down. Sky News journalist Mark Stone, who visited the embassy, reported on Twitter: “Totally burnt out. WW2 memorial smashed on the ground. Burnt out cars. Looted.” A British official, speaking on condition of anonymity said there was no doubt in London that the mob attacks had been officially sanctioned. “There are no demos allowed to move anywhere in Tripoli unless they are 100% orchestrated by the regime.” William Hague said: “I condemn the attacks on the British embassy premises in Tripoli as well as the diplomatic missions of other countries. The Vienna convention requires the Gaddafi regime to protect diplomatic missions in Tripoli. By failing to do so that regime has once again breached its international responsibilities and obligations. I take the failure to protect such premises very seriously indeed.” Omar Jelban, the Libyan ambassador, who has worked as a diplomat in London since 2001, was given 24 hours to leave. Britain expelled five Libyan diplomats in March, on the grounds that they were a threat to national security. The Libyan embassy in London continues to function without about a dozen remaining staff, according to British officials. Britain retains a minimal diplomatic presence in Tripoli within the Turkish embassy. Libya Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Muammar Gaddafi Nato United Nations United States Europe Julian Borger Ian Traynor Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Regime claims attack that killed son and three grandchildren was aimed at Libya’s leader, as allies accused of overstepping UN security council resolution Nato is facing urgent questions about the legality of its air strike on a Gaddafi family compound at the weekend, which the Libyan government said had killed the leader’s second youngest son, 29-year old Saif al-Arab, and three grandchildren under 12. The grandchildren were not named. The Libyan government spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, said Muammar Gaddafi and his wife, Safiya, had been in the building at the time, but had escaped injury. He said the aim of the attack was clear: to assassinate the Libyan leader. Nato swiftly scrambled to deny that it was targeting any individuals, insisting that it was only interested in attacking the military command structure. The prime minister, David Cameron, told the BBC that UN resolutions permitted attacks against the regime’s “command and control” sites because their aim was to prevent “a loss of civilian life by targeting Gaddafi’s war-making machine”. But the deaths of Gaddafi’s three grandchildren, if confirmed, will reinforce the doubts of alliance members uncomfortable with Nato’s six-week bombing campaign and generate criticism from countries such as Russia that Nato is pushing beyond its UN security council mandate. “Statements by participants in the coalition that the strikes on Libya are not aimed at the physical destruction of … Gaddafi and members of his family raise serious doubts,” the Russian foreign ministry said. “The disproportionate use of force … is leading to detrimental consequences and the death of innocent civilians.” The ministry called for “an immediate ceasefire and the beginning of a political settlement process without preconditions.” The Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, said in Caracas: “There is no doubt the order was given to kill Gaddafi. It doesn’t matter who else is killed … this is a murder.” The attack, which one diplomatic source said had been carried out by Danish airmen possibly in an F16 bomber, ripped through the Gaddafi residence at around 8pm on Saturday night. It was the second time in recent days that an airstrike has come close to the Libyan leader, and Ibrahim indicated that someone within the leader’s circle may have leaked intelligence on his whereabouts. But in Washington, Stephen Hadley, former national security adviser in the Bush administration, warned that the assassination of Gaddafi by Nato aircraft could prove counterproductive. “The narrative we want to come out of this is that the Libyan people overthrew a dictator – not that we came in and toppled a despot,” he told CNN. “What we really want him to do is to leave or to die at a Libyan hand, not an American hand.” But senior Republicans expressed little concern over the prospect of Gaddafi becoming a casualty. Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News: “Wherever Gaddafi goes, he is a legitimate military target. He’s the command and control source. He’s not the legitimate leader of Libya and the way to get this to end is to go after the people around him and his support system.” Reminded that assassinating foreign leaders is illegal, Graham said: “In my view, he’s not a foreign leader, he’s a murderer.” John McCain, another Republican senator who specialises in foreign affairs, told CBS: “We should be taking out his command and control. If he is killed or injured because of that, that’s fine.” Michele Bachmann, a Republican congresswoman considering seeking the Republican presidential nomination who was also on the Sunday talk shows, said it was foolish of Barack Obama to have become involved in Libya. She told Fox: “When President Obama went in, his doctrine was to enter Libya for humanitarian purposes. The point of what I am saying is that we are seeing many, many lives lost, including innocent civilians’ lives. “What will be the ultimate objective and gain? I don’t see it. I think it was a foolish decision to have gotten involved.” In spite of criticism by Russia that Nato is trying to assassinate Gaddafi, Moscow has stopped short of raising the attacks at the UN security council. The Libyan government has been pressing Russia and China to challenge the legality of the Nato action. Both have expressed sympathy with the argument that Nato strikes against compounds where Gaddafi and his family live go beyond the UN mandate to protect civilians in rebel-held areas. A UN security council official said on Sunday that there was no sign of Moscow seeking to bring the issue up at the security council. The official said China was taking its cue from Russia. Both abstained in the vote on the resolution sanctioning action against Libya in March. According to British diplomats, the Gaddafi regime retaliated against the airstrike by dispatching a mob to attack western embassy buildings, which have been abandoned in recent weeks as the hostilities have gathered pace. A spokeswoman said a building housing the ambassador’s residence had been set on fire, and according to initial reports had been burned down. Sky News journalist Mark Stone, who visited the embassy, reported on Twitter: “Totally burnt out. WW2 memorial smashed on the ground. Burnt out cars. Looted.” A British official, speaking on condition of anonymity said there was no doubt in London that the mob attacks had been officially sanctioned. “There are no demos allowed to move anywhere in Tripoli unless they are 100% orchestrated by the regime.” William Hague said: “I condemn the attacks on the British embassy premises in Tripoli as well as the diplomatic missions of other countries. The Vienna convention requires the Gaddafi regime to protect diplomatic missions in Tripoli. By failing to do so that regime has once again breached its international responsibilities and obligations. I take the failure to protect such premises very seriously indeed.” Omar Jelban, the Libyan ambassador, who has worked as a diplomat in London since 2001, was given 24 hours to leave. Britain expelled five Libyan diplomats in March, on the grounds that they were a threat to national security. The Libyan embassy in London continues to function without about a dozen remaining staff, according to British officials. Britain retains a minimal diplomatic presence in Tripoli within the Turkish embassy. Libya Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Muammar Gaddafi Nato United Nations United States Europe Julian Borger Ian Traynor Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
• British heavyweight boxer dies at his son’s home in Surrey • ‘A true warrior and great human being,’ says David Haye Sir Henry Cooper, who will always be remembered for flooring Muhammad Ali, has died aged 76. Cooper, who was knighted in 2000, is best remembered for two famous clashes with Ali in the 1960s. He floored Ali in the fourth round with “Enry’s Ammer” – his trademark left hook – but Ali eventually won the 1963 non-title fight at Wembley. Ali triumphed again when they boxed three years later but Cooper remained a favourite with the British public. Alongside Frank Bruno, Tommy Farr and Lennox Lewis, he is regarded as one of the best all-time British heavyweights. The former British, Commonwealth and European heavyweight champion fought 55 times but never won a world title and retired in 1971 after losing to Joe Bugner. Tributes began to pour in on Sunday night for the London-born Cooper, who died at his son’s house at Oxted, Surrey, two days before his 77th birthday. David Haye, the British WBA world heavyweight champion, tweeted: “One of Britain’s greatest sports man Sir Henry Cooper passed away today. A true warrior and great human being. Rest in Peace.” Robert Smith, the general secretary of the British Boxing Board of Control, described Cooper as “one of the sporting icons, not just for the boxing public but sport in general”. Speaking to Sky Sports News, Smith said: “He fought Muhammad Ali twice, once when he was Cassius Clay and once when he was Muhammad Ali, and he put up wonderful performances. “Ali is possibly the greatest athlete there’s ever been and Henry put up a great performance and just wasn’t quite good enough on both occasions – but he’s not the only one who wasn’t good enough to beat Ali. “Ali was one of the first ‘big’ heavyweights and Henry lost to Joe Bugner, who was 15-odd stone and Henry was 14 – just bigger men. For such a small man, he put up some great performances in a world-class context.” On the affection in which Cooper was held he said: “It’s not just the boxing and your ability, it’s the personality as well. He won the BBC Sports Personality of the Year on two occasions, which is a tremendous feat for a boxer. Everyone called him ‘Our Enry’ and he was much loved, he served boxing wonderfully.” Johnny Nelson, the former WBO cruiserweight world champion, told Sky Sports News: “Henry was a total champion. He was always a gentleman, always straight down the line. He told it how it was. “Ali always showed that bit of respect for Henry Cooper. He was a no-nonsense fighter, the man that almost dethroned one of the greatest fighters in the world, Muhammad Ali. There’s nobody that came across Sir
Continue reading …• British heavyweight boxer dies at his son’s home in Surrey • ‘A true warrior and great human being,’ says David Haye Sir Henry Cooper, who will always be remembered for flooring Muhammad Ali, has died aged 76. Cooper, who was knighted in 2000, is best remembered for two famous clashes with Ali in the 1960s. He floored Ali in the fourth round with “Enry’s Ammer” – his trademark left hook – but Ali eventually won the 1963 non-title fight at Wembley. Ali triumphed again when they boxed three years later but Cooper remained a favourite with the British public. Alongside Frank Bruno, Tommy Farr and Lennox Lewis, he is regarded as one of the best all-time British heavyweights. The former British, Commonwealth and European heavyweight champion fought 55 times but never won a world title and retired in 1971 after losing to Joe Bugner. Tributes began to pour in on Sunday night for the London-born Cooper, who died at his son’s house at Oxted, Surrey, two days before his 77th birthday. David Haye, the British WBA world heavyweight champion, tweeted: “One of Britain’s greatest sports man Sir Henry Cooper passed away today. A true warrior and great human being. Rest in Peace.” Robert Smith, the general secretary of the British Boxing Board of Control, described Cooper as “one of the sporting icons, not just for the boxing public but sport in general”. Speaking to Sky Sports News, Smith said: “He fought Muhammad Ali twice, once when he was Cassius Clay and once when he was Muhammad Ali, and he put up wonderful performances. “Ali is possibly the greatest athlete there’s ever been and Henry put up a great performance and just wasn’t quite good enough on both occasions – but he’s not the only one who wasn’t good enough to beat Ali. “Ali was one of the first ‘big’ heavyweights and Henry lost to Joe Bugner, who was 15-odd stone and Henry was 14 – just bigger men. For such a small man, he put up some great performances in a world-class context.” On the affection in which Cooper was held he said: “It’s not just the boxing and your ability, it’s the personality as well. He won the BBC Sports Personality of the Year on two occasions, which is a tremendous feat for a boxer. Everyone called him ‘Our Enry’ and he was much loved, he served boxing wonderfully.” Johnny Nelson, the former WBO cruiserweight world champion, told Sky Sports News: “Henry was a total champion. He was always a gentleman, always straight down the line. He told it how it was. “Ali always showed that bit of respect for Henry Cooper. He was a no-nonsense fighter, the man that almost dethroned one of the greatest fighters in the world, Muhammad Ali. There’s nobody that came across Sir
Continue reading …
Row over windfall tax on offshore drilling provokes possible closure of field that produces 6% of nation’s gas The dispute between energy firms and the government over the level of tax paid by firms operating in the North Sea dramatically escalated on Sunday with British Gas threatening to shut down an important gas field on the Irish Sea. Centrica, which owns British Gas, closed the Morecambe Bay field for routine maintenance and warned it may not reopen it because of the 12% tax rise on North Sea profits announced by the chancellor, George Osborne, in the budget in March. The move provoked an immediate response from the Treasury, which said the rise was necessary and that the company would continue to make substantial profits on its operation. Morecambe Bay produces 6% of the UK’s gas, but Centrica said it may now be cheaper to buy supplies on the open market, shipping them in from abroad, rather than bear the expense of operating Morecambe where gas is subject to an “onerous” tax regime. Centrica said that UK oil and gas fields are now subject to the highest levels of tax in the world. A spokesman said: “At these higher tax rates, Morecambe’s profitability can be marginal. Accordingly, we may choose to buy gas for our customers in the wholesale markets in preference to restarting the field after planned maintenance [due to last four weeks].” The company added that following the increase in supplementary corporation tax, North Morecambe will be subject to a 62% tax rate and South Morecambe 81%. “This impacts the trigger levels at which point we shut in production and purchase gas from other sources such as LNG [liquefied natural gas].” A Treasury spokesman said the tax rise was essential to help motorists cope with the soaring cost of petrol: “The decision to increase the charge on oil and gas companies … has allowed the government to lower fuel duty, helping hard-pressed motorists at a difficult time. Even with this change, average post-tax oil profits per barrel are forecast to be higher in the next five years than the last five, meaning that profits are expected to stay high.” In February, Centrica reported record profits of £742m at British Gas – a 24% leap on a year earlier – provoking criticism from consumer groups. Centrica had pushed through a 7% increase in energy bills just two months earlier. Centrica argues that its gas production goes into power stations, not to fuel cars, and that it should not have to pay a tax being levied to help motorists. The row between business and government is potentially embarrassing for Centrica as its chief executive, Sam Laidlaw, has recently been appointed a non-executive director at the Department for Transport as part of the drive to import private-sector efficiency to Whitehall. The chancellor sparked uproar in the energy industry when he imposed the £2bn windfall tax on North Sea firms. The industry was furious that the levy was introduced without consultation and warned it could jeopardise investment, damage investor confidence and hit jobs. Last week, Shell and BP both reported big increases in profits but said the tax increases could cost them as much as $1bn (£600m) each. Some companies have threatened an investment boycott in response to the new tax, which follows increases introduced a few years ago when Gordon Brown was chancellor. Executives argue they need “fiscal certainty” if they are to continue to invest in the North Sea, where production is in decline but thousands of British workers are still employed. They have been lobbying hard to change the chancellor’s mind, but so far he has refused to reconsider. Critics have complained that the energy industry is trying to dodge its responsibilities and avoid paying a fair share of higher taxes at a time of national economic hardship. Unions and consumer groups point out that oil prices have been soaring, thanks to the boom in commodity prices generated by bigger demand from India and China. Last week, the AA said it planned to ask the European competition commission to investigate whether oil and petrol markets are being manipulated after Shell reported first-quarter profits up 40%, which means the company is making £2m an hour. In the past, Treasury ministers have dismissed fears that the hike in North Sea taxes would lead to a decline in production. But oil executives have threatened to bring forward the retirement of many big fields, shutting down infrastructure that could affect smaller developers struggling to bring new oil fields into production. Thousands of jobs in Scotland have been put at risk after Norway’s Statoil said it would “pause and reflect” before starting on a £3bn project near the Shetlands. Oil companies have complained that Osborne’s decision would scupper plans to explore the remaining North Sea fields, a move which was expected to create 15,000 jobs. Centrica Budget 2011 Budget Gas Commodities Energy industry Energy Gas Richard Wachman guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Prime minister accused of using referendum to ruin Nick Clegg’s leadership as new polls shows No lead cut to 10 points The deepening loss of personal trust at the top of the coalition government engendered by the bitter AV referendum campaign was exposed when David Cameron was accused of a systematic and shortsighted attempt to trash Nick Clegg’s leadership. The attack by the energy secretary, Chris Huhne, in the final week of the campaign further exposes the deep anger among Liberal Democrats that Cameron is using the referendum to shore up his position within the Conservative party at Clegg’s expense. Huhne expressed anger over widely circulated no campaign leaflets that focus on Clegg’s alleged broken pledges. He told the Guardian: “David Cameron has had the power to stop these no campaign leaflets saying Nick Clegg has broken promises and told lies. He has done nothing about it. “To attack your political colleagues in a coalition and Nick Clegg in particular for accepting the compromises necessary to allow the Conservatives to implement some of its policies is absurdly short-sighted and outrageous. “Our two parties came together in the national interest in order to deal with our country’s economic problems. The Conservative party is now completely trashing us and Nick Clegg’s leadership for doing something they asked us to do in the national interest.” Huhne’s remarks constitute the most personal attack on Cameron mounted by a Lib Dem during the referendum campaign. Huhne, who has taken more risks than any other Lib Dem cabinet member to take the fight to the Conservatives during the campaign, said the no camp was run and wholly funded by the Conservative party, and if Cameron wanted to stop the leaflets he could have done so. Cameron insisted he was only responsible for the Conservative no campaign, and not the wider all-party campaign. The latest row follows a Sunday Times/YouGov poll that showed some tightening in the race, with the no lead narrowing from 18 points to a still emphatic 10. There is some sign that Labour voters now believe it is in their better long-term interest to damage Cameron by voting yes than it is to vote no and punish Clegg. But the yes campaign is still only leading in Scotland, suggesting that despite the fluctuating polls it may have an insurmountable job to turn a tentative shift into a decisive victory by Thursday. Both Clegg and Cameron said the coalition would survive Thursday’s results, which could also see the loss of 600 Conservative councillors and as many as 400 Liberal Democrats. Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Cameron said he would not be giving his coalition partners any consolation prizes if they were defeated in the referendum. “I don’t believe that a successful coalition is based around trying to endlessly sort of trade off each other’s policies.” But he signalled he wanted to revise his plans to introduce GP-led commissioning in the NHS so that the reform did not exclude hospital doctors. Meanwhile, Clegg accused the no campaign of trying to sow confusion over AV. But he acknowledged that “at a time of some anxiety … it’s sometimes quite a challenge to persuade people that we need to change things, move with the times”. He said the campaign had shown “this coalition government is composed of different parties with different values and different identities; maybe in the long run that’s not a bad thing”. The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, also waded into the dispute yesterday, saying: “I have always thought that this is likely to be a five-year government. I think it is less likely after the rows of the last month.” Alternative vote AV referendum Electoral reform David Cameron Nick Clegg Chris Huhne Conservatives Liberal Democrats Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …For fans of The Office , Michael Scott’s leaving was a hard but enjoyable climax—and that’s what she said, of course. And for fans of “that’s what she said” joke, two scientists at the University of Washington have created a computer program for identifying the popular double entendre, the Double…
Continue reading …Four years ago, Mitt Romney was everywhere. But as the former Massachusetts governor again guns for the White House, he’s one of the quietest frontrunners ever—and that’s a good thing, writes Dan Balz in the Washington Post .. “This year, he runs as if he couldn’t care less what others…
Continue reading …When America fails in combat, we don’t blame the troops for being lazy, we blame the top brass. So why is it that our response to a failing education system is to blame the teachers? asks Dave Eggers, writing with Nínive Clements Calegari in the New York Times . When combat…
Continue reading …Surveying an underwhelming field of presidential candidates, GOP party elders are scrambling to entice stronger politicians into the race, reports the New York Times . “The race needs more responsible adults who can actually do the job,” says a party official from New Hampshire. The first debate is Thursday, and the…
Continue reading …