|
News Flash |
-
07:40 - 29.05.2010
News >> Latest
“I was very conscious that the Democratic establishment didn’t want me in the race.”Read Article
Read more...
-
11:05 - 13.12.2009
News >> Latest
Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisorDrugs and crime chief says $352bn in criminal proceeds was effectively laundered by financial institutionsRajeev Syal The Observer, Sunday 13 December 2009 Article historyDrugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations' drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were "the only liquid investment capital" available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (£216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.This will raise questions about crime's influence on the economic system at times of crisis. It will also prompt further examination of the banking sector as world leaders, including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, call for new International Monetary Fund regulations. Speaking from his office in Vienna, Costa said evidence that illegal money was being absorbed into the financial system was first drawn to his attention by intelligence agencies and prosecutors around 18 months ago. "In many instances, the money from drugs was the only liquid investment capital. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system's main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor," he said.Some of the evidence put before his office indicated that gang money was used to save some banks from collapse when lending seized up, he said."Inter-bank loans were funded by money that originated from the drugs trade and other illegal activities... There were signs that some banks were rescued that way." Costa declined to identify countries or banks that may have received any drugs money, saying that would be inappropriate because his office is supposed to address the problem, not apportion blame. But he said the money is now a part of the official system and had been effectively laundered."That was the moment [last year] when the system was basically paralysed because of the unwillingness of banks to lend money to one another. The progressive liquidisation to the system and the progressive improvement by some banks of their share values [has meant that] the problem [of illegal money] has become much less serious than it was," he said.The IMF estimated that large US and European banks lost more than $1tn on toxic assets and from bad loans from January 2007 to September 2009 and more than 200 mortgage lenders went bankrupt. Many major institutions either failed, were acquired under duress, or were subject to government takeover.Gangs are now believed to make most of their profits from the drugs trade and are estimated to be worth £352bn, the UN says. They have traditionally kept proceeds in cash or moved it offshore to hide it from the authorities. It is understood…
Read more...
-
03:55 - 06.06.2009
News >> Latest
From The Times of London June 6, 2009 Barack Obama sends message to Iran and Israel on emotional Buchenwald visit
Read more...
-
13:58 - 29.03.2010
News >> Latest
Steve Jobs's email replies The Apple chief's top five terse email replies to customers. Read Article
Read more...
-
06:49 - 19.12.2009
News >> Latest
Copenhagen climate conference: The grim meaning of 'meaningful'Comments () Editorial The Guardian, Saturday 19 December 2009 Article historyLike businessmen who insist a deal is legit, politicians protesting they have done something "meaningful" arouse suspicions that the opposite is in fact true. And "meaningful" was about the best word the spin doctors could muster in respect of the agreement of sorts that was brokered in Copenhagen late last night.The climate change summit had three big tickets on its agenda: emissions, financial assistance and the process going ahead. And on each of these counts the accord – which was effectively hammered out not by the whole conference, but rather by the US, India, China and South Africa – fell woefully short. There was no serious cementing of the positive noises on aid that had emerged earlier on in the week. On emissions, a clear-eyed vision for the distant future was rendered a pipe dream by outright fuzziness about the near term. And most alarmingly of all, there was no clear procedural roadmap to deliver the world from the impasse that this summit has landed it in. Outright failure to agree anything at all would have been very much worse, but that is about the best thing that can be said.The course of the summit as a whole – which moved from bold rhetoric, through blame games to eventual grudging concessions – was neatly epitomised in Barack Obama's flying visit. The newly-crowned Nobel laureate opened his brief speech in near-identical terms to those we recently deployed – in common with 56 newspapers worldwide – in a shared editorial which called on global leaders to do the right thing.Stating climate change was a frightening fact, the president pronounced his determination to act. Soon, however, he broke his own rhetorical spell by following his eloquent overture not with a magnanimous announcement, but with some none-too-subtle pointing of the finger at China. He may have been technically accurate in implying that it nowadays emitted more than the US, but this cheap point distracted from the reality that much of China's – in any case low – per-head emissions are incurred in serving western consumers.Later on he stood back from the brink. First, by conceding some language on monitoring emissions which addressed China's concerns about sovereignty, and secondly – at a late-night press conference – by making a nod towards UN scientists who have this week been warning that the offers tabled so far would set the mercury surging by a catastrophic 3C.Obama's singular failure to raise the American game no doubt reflects his having one eye on the Senate, whom he still needs to persuade to enact his climate laws. Other leaders, however, proved equally unable to transcend parochialism when the crunch came.China's premier Wen Jiabao used his own speech to harry the developed world to make good on the cash it has pledged to the poor,…
Read more...
|
|
|
|
Drug Use, Poor Discipline Afflict Afghan Army |
|
Drug Use, Poor Discipline Afflict Afghan ArmyThe U.S. strategy for leaving Afghanistan is heavily dependent on building capable Afghan military and police forces that can take over, but U.S. soldiers complain of a trigger-happy attitude, general carelessness and the use of drugs within those forces. Read Article |
|
|
Facebook fears 100m users info leaked |
|
Facebook's '100m user file' A file of public information on millions of Facebook users has been created. Read Article |
|
|
" This is about something bigger than deficit reduction " |
|
Taxes: A Defining IssueBarack Obama knows taxes define worldview. The GOP should offer voters an alternative. Read Opinion |
|
|
How to Fill a Stadium? Offer Better Video |
|
How to Fill a Stadium? Offer Better VideoBy MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT With the New Meadowlands Stadium in New Jersey set to provide fans free smart-phone applications and enhanced video, is a live game no longer enough to pack the seats? Read Article |
|
|
Al Gore questioned over sexual assault allegations |
|
Al Gore questioned over sexual assault allegations Police question former vice-president over claims by masseuse. Read Article |
|
|
Clooney's girlfriend named in sex and drugs scandal |
|
Clooney's girlfriend named in sex and drugs scandal Elisabetta Canalis named in scandal involving high-class prostitutes Read Article |
|
|
Ansel Adams Trove, or a Pile of Glass?A set of 65 glass photographic negatives was identified as vintage work of Ansel Adams by a team of experts enlisted by the owner Read Article |
|
|
Obama approaches Lame-Duckness |
|
If President Obama carries on like this, he will turn into a lame duck The president hasn't grown into the job - all that's needed to beat him is a serious Republican By Simon Heffer
The shock about coming to America after an absence of four months is how, in that time, respect for and confidence in President Obama has slumped. It wasn't good in March; now the effect of what one blogger has called his apparent "impotence" has taken hold. It is not clear what Mr Obama actually does. He isn't engaged with the economy; he certainly isn't engaged with foreign policy; he has abandoned hope of a climate change bill this year (and probably for ever); he has seen his health care bill into law, but America awaits news of how it will be implemented; he is under attack for a casual approach to illegal immigration, notably from the Mexican narco-state. He has only just girded himself to go campaigning for his party in the mid-term elections. Last Sunday was the 100-days-to-go mark, and the talk in politics here is of little else. Joe Biden, the vice-president, has been nominated as "campaigner in chief". Why? What is the President doing? He appears to be reading the newspapers and the blogs and watching television. Last week, a twisted opponent put out a selectively edited video of a black Department of Agriculture official, Shirley Sherrod, apparently admitting discriminating against a white farmer. Mrs Sherrod had done nothing of the sort – either the discrimination or, therefore, the admission of it – but was immediately sacked, for fear that Fox News was about to broadcast the video. This outrageous act was followed by an even more outrageous apology by the president the next day – outrageous in that Mrs Sherrod was not immediately given back her job. In the White House there were, we are told, great mutual congratulations (to start with) that swift action had stopped this becoming "a story". Well, it's a story now, not least because it exemplifies the incompetence and disconnection of the administration. Mrs Sherrod's husband was a leading civil rights activist and her father was murdered by white racists in 1965, so there is a resonance to this story that is causing discomfort. This immediate proof of mismanagement adds to the cumulative feeling on so many other fronts that Mr Obama and his team simply don't understand governance. Last month Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Fed, warned America that without more care being taken it could have a Greece-style debt problem. The president seemed to regard this warning as so self-evidently absurd that he quickly asked Congress for another $50 billion for various social projects. Last week, benefits for the long-term unemployed were extended for another six months at a cost of $34 billion. The health care programme is forecast to cost at least $863 billion. The total deficit this year is to be $1.47 trillion. America's debt is likely to be $18.5 trillion by 2020, though it will be so low as that only if growth is maintained at 4 per cent: it is currently 3 per cent, and rocky. Unemployment is 9.5 per cent and forecast to stay there for the time being. There are three million more jobless than when Mr Obama came to power, and unemployment among teenagers is around 25 per cent. The very constituencies to which he made his greatest appeal – the young and the disadvantaged – still suffer. This is despite the $787 billion stimulus programme last year, much of which was sucked into America's corrupt and inefficient local government system, or did favours for congressmen and senators, or provided wonderful pay days for trade unionists, or in some cases all three at once. The President sought the stimulus on the grounds that it would stop unemployment rising above 8 per cent; so that has been an expensive failure. All Mr Obama appears to have done is wave the money goodbye. Last week, trying not to sound provoked, Mr Bernanke announced that there was "unusual uncertainty" about economic recovery. The dollar fell against sterling and even the euro. Mr Bernanke wants a renewal of Bush-era tax cuts for people earning over $250,000 a year, which are due to expire on December 31. So do many Democrats, who fear that removing incentives and purchasing power from the better-off will harm recovery by reducing consumption and employment. These are arguments familiar from Britain, about the equally damaging and pointless 50 per cent rate. The response, by Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, is familiar too – the "rich" must take their share of the burden. It is equally specious here; the political importance of bashing the (presumably Republican) wealthy plainly exceeds what is good for the US economy. One advocate of renewing the cuts is Newt Gingrich, architect of the "Contract with America" in 1994, and now threatening to seek the Republican nomination in 2012. He is the sort of opponent Mr Obama should fear, because he is experienced, an intellectual, and has widespread name recognition. Yet some Democrats (including Howard Dean, the party chairman) are urging him to stand, if only to ensure that the Republicans make some policies that the Democrats can attack: for, at the moment, the GOP is simply attacking the incumbents rather than offering any solutions of its own. Wishing for Mr Gingrich (or someone like him) is a big gamble, though: all that seems to prevent Mr Obama's being confirmed as a one-term president is the absence of a credible Republican against him. One senses that the Democrats are talking down the likelihood of success in the mid-terms in order to look better if things go less badly than expected. It is possible that they could lose control of Congress, though that looks a close-run thing. They certainly won't lose their Senate majority, though the Republicans should get sufficient seats to operate a filibuster against legislation they don't like. A lame-duck Congress like that would emphasise the reality of a lame-duck president. On Wall Street, some former donors to the Democrats, so angry at what they perceive to be Mr Obama's vindictive and ignorant attempts to re-regulate them, have stopped giving money to the party. Some are saying that if the mid-terms go badly then Hillary Clinton should resign as Secretary of State and declare her intention to seek the Democratic nomination in 2012. That is highly unlikely; but the fact that it is being talked about seriously in Mrs Clinton's New York heartland ought to horrify the president. Last week an opinion poll reported that not only is Mr Obama less popular than Mrs Clinton (who by spending much time out of the country succeeds in seeming only vaguely associated with him), he is less popular than her husband, who is forbidden by the constitution from seeking the highest office again. President Clinton is much in demand for the mid-term campaign, but it will be interesting to see what sort of role his wife plays in it. There is no summer vacation for those seeking re-election in November, who will work hard throughout August to get their message over. They will return to Washington in September to see one of the Democrats' most senior congressmen, Charlie Rangel, a costermonger-like 80-year-old representative from New York, tried on an $831,000 ethics violation; which in its way sums up what the Democrats have done for America over the last couple of years. In that ecstatic dawn in November 2008, the Democrats would not have thought that things could turn out like this. But that is the trouble with the modern political mind these days: it never does think. |
|
|
" Our Divisive President " |
|
Caddell and Schoen: Our Divisive PresidentBarack Obama promised a new era of post-partisanship. In office, he's played racial politics and further split the country along class and party lines. Read Opinion |
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 1 - 9 of 6177 |
|
|