|  |  |  | | | | | The Guardian World News | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Romney confirms authenticity of video where he calls 47% of voters government-dependent, in most damaging mishap yet Mitt Romney's campaign came close to hitting the self-destruct button when he stood by a secret video recording suggesting that 47% of Americans are government-dependent scroungers who do not pay taxes. In a hastily-convened press conference, the Republican presidential candidate confirmed the authenticity of the video and opted against disavowing the views expressed in it. He said only that the case was not "elegantly stated" and that he had "spoken off the cuff". He was speaking after a secret video recording was posted on a website in which he was caught denigrating people who receive benefits from the government. He went on suggest they could expect little help from him if he became president. "My job is not to worry about those people," he said. He added that all these government-dependent people would support Barack Obama. The video was recorded a few months ago at a fund-raising event behind-closed-doors. The release of the video is the most damaging episode yet in a campaign filled with Romney mishaps. His campaign is in danger of turning into one of the most ineptly-run in recent US political history, though there are still seven weeks left to turn it round. The Obama campaign described the video as "shocking". In his press conference, in California, Romney basically repeated the case he made in the video that the 47% dependent on the government would vote for Obama, though couched in slightly less inflammatory language. Obama's policies are "attractive to people who do not pay taxes", Romney said. Romney tends to avoid the press as much as possible and it is a sign of the seriousness of the situation that he had to make an impromptu statement. He attempted to pose his comments as part of a broader philosophical debate about the future of America. "Do you believe in a government-centered society that provides more and more benefits? Or do you believe instead in a free enterprise society where people are able to pursue their dreams?" He insisted he wanted to help all Americans. While his views about people dependent on the government will be applauded by parts of the right, he risks alienating independents who do not share his view of American society and also motivating disgruntled Democrats who may have otherwise have abstained in the 6 November election to get out and vote. It also plays into the portrait that the Democrats have been gradually building of Romney as an extremely wealthly individual who is out of touch with working-class and middle-class Americans. At a bare minimum, the controversy ensures it will be the dominant theme of the week, with Romney forced on the defensive again, with detailed discussion of who precisely constitutes the 47%. It also means that the issue of how much he himself paid in taxes will resurface, with calls for him to release his tax returns beyond the two years he has volunteered. The video, was posted on the website of the liberal Mother Jones magazine. It came only hours after the Romney campaign acknowledged it is struggling when it announced it was to change strategy. Romney is trailing Obama in the polls by about three percentage points. In the video, Romney said: "All right, there are 47% who are with him (Obama), who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it." He added: "These are people who pay no income tax." Apart from offending a large part of the population, the comment is also inaccurate. Many of those he includes in the 47% do pay tax. Many of those also receive government money because they are elderly and have been paying into the system all their lives. The controversy broke only hours after the Romney campaign set out to recalibrate its strategy. It said it would attempt to give a clearer, more positive picture of their candidate as it seeks to regain the initiative with just 50 days to go until the election. The new strategy will not abandon negative campaigning, but will focus on positive ads as well as speeches to spell out the Romney would pursue in office, in particular his five-point economic plan. Romney began his campaign early in the summer intent on making the election about Obama's economic record and making himself as small a target as possible by disclosing little about his own policies. But since then there has barely been a clear week in which Romney has been able to get his message across, either because of a barrage of ads on his record as chief executive of Bain Capital and his unwillingness to release more than two years' worth of tax records, or because of gaffes on his own side.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Joint US-Afghan missions halted after four US and two British troops killed in an 'insider attack' on the weekend The US military has suspended joint operations with Afghan forces because of a collapse in trust after a surge in the number of Americans and other Nato soldiers killed by the men they are fighting alongside or training. The chief US military officer, General Martin Dempsey, described the sharp rise in "insider attacks" by rogue Afghan soldiers and policemen, which saw four American and two British soldiers killed at the weekend, as "a very serious threat to the campaign" against the Taliban. American commanders said that joint operations on the ground will be suspended "until further notice" in a dramatic admission that the strategy to shift responsibility for fighting the insurgents to local forces has been deeply compromised by Afghan government soldiers and policemen killing 51 Nato soldiers in 36 attacks this year. At least 12 attacks were carried out last month alone, leaving 15 dead. The US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, described the attacks as the "last gasp" of a weakened Taliban. But the admission that Nato troops are no longer safe from the forces they are relying on to keep the Taliban at bay after the final US pullout in 2014 is a severe blow to Washington's military plans. Under the strategy, members of the soon to be 350,000 strong Afghan security forces gain experience patrolling and fighting alongside American and other foreign soldiers. But the killings have led to a collapse in trust. The US army said it is "not walking away" from Afghan military units and will continue to advise them. But Nato troops will patrol with them only when specific approval is given by a regional commander. American officials say the insider attacks are carried out by a mix of Taliban infiltrators dressed as soldiers, by insurgents who have got themselves recruited and Afghan soldiers angry about their treatment because of personal insults or cultural differences. US commanders had already assigned soldiers to guard their comrades as they slept, ate or interacted with Afghan forces because of the increasing number of "insider killings". American troops were also ordered to carry loaded weapons at all times, even inside their own bases. Nato attacks on Afghan civilians have added to the strain. In the latest, an air strike killed eight women and girls collecting firewood. The loss of trust in the force the US is relying on to prevent the Taliban taking control of Afghanistan again, compounds other concerns about Washington's strategy. The additional 33,000 soldiers Barack Obama despatched two years ago as part of the "surge" are expected to complete their withdrawal this week. The remaining 68,000 US troops are supposed to gradually shift responsibility to Afghan forces which, under the American strategy, are to take the lead in combat as early as next year. But despite gains on the battlefield, questions persist about whether the Afghan forces will have the ability and will to keep an undefeated Taliban at bay once Nato forces have left.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Republican presidential candidate filmed dismissing 47% of population of the United States as government-dependent Mitt Romney was caught up in a fresh and damaging secret video controversy on Monday night, only hours after his campaign team tacitly admitted it was struggling and was going to have revise its campaign strategy. The video, showing Romney at a closed-doors fundraising event, captures him dismissing 47% of the nation as government-dependent. "My job is not to worry about those people," he says. He adds: "I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." The release of the video, on the liberal Mother Jones website, came at an awkward moment for the Romney campaign amid reports of internal strife and bickering among his campaign managers. The Republican presidential candidate is also running behind Barack Obama in the polls, albeit only by 3%, after a lacklustre Republican convention in August. His campaign team announced on Monday morning that it would recalibrate its strategy and that, instead of focusing on criticising Obama, it will begin to set out "specifics" about what policies Romney will pursue if he wins the White House. But only hours later the new strategy was overtaken by the recording of Romney posted on the Mother Jones site. It has the potential to alienate a lot of independent voters who will cringe at a potential president being so dismissive of the poor. The Obama campaign team described it as "shocking". The Romney campaign did not deny that the video is authentic and insisted only that the candidate cares about all Americans. "Mitt Romney wants to help all Americans struggling in the Obama economy," said spokeswoman Gail Gitcho. In the video, Romney said: "There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. "All right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it," he said. He added: "These are people who pay no income tax." Apart from offending a large part of the population, the comment is also inaccurate. The 47% are not people who pay no income tax and encompasses sections of the population who have earned their entitlements. Earlier in the day, the Romney campaign said it would attempt to give a clearer, more positive picture of their candidate as it seeks to regain the initiative with just 50 days to go until the election. The new strategy will not abandon negative campaigning, but will focus on positive ads as well as speeches to spell out the Romney would pursue in office, in particular his five-point economic plan. The latest polls show Obama's large post-convention poll bounce beginning to narrow. A Gallup poll recorded a drop from 7% last week to 3%, with the president on 48% to Romney's 45%. But the problem for the Romney campaign is less Obama's post-convention bounce and more the fact that the Republican failed to secure any bounce at all. Romney began his campaign early in the summer intent on making the election about Obama's economic record and making himself as small a target as possible by disclosing little about his own policies. But since then there has barely been a clear week in which Romney has been able to get his message across, either because of a barrage of ads on his record as chief executive of Bain Capital and his unwillingness to release more than two years' worth of tax records, or because of gaffes on his own side. Romney's trip to Britain, Israel and Poland, which was intended to showcase him as a figure of some standing in the international community, quickly went askew. His position on abortion became a week-long issue after Todd Akin, a Republican congressman in Missouri running for the Senate, talked about "legitimate rape". Hurricane Isaac disrupted the Republican convention. Then, last week, Romney issued a hasty response to the evolving Middle East crisis, essentially accusing Obama of appeasement. His rash comment, from which many senior Republicans distanced themselves, dominated the news in the US for days after the killing of US ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, and the spotlight is only now beginning to turn to Obama's policy on the Middle East and North Africa.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Activists determined to mark one-year landmark but tension with police and divided opinion give the day a sense of deja vu Occupy Wall Street's one-year anniversary began with early morning protests at New York's financial centre, but the demonstrations were marred by numerous arrests as activists marched around lower Manhattan. On 17 September 2011 hundreds had answered a call from Adbusters, the Canadian activist magazine, sparking demonstrations against failing financial systems and the influence of money in politics that spread around the globe. Thousands of protesters took to streets and encampments before high-profile police crackdowns in New York and Oakland signalled a lull that lasted through the winter and beyond. But Occupy protesters were determined to come out in force to mark the movement's birthday, with protests over the weekend set to culminate in Monday's encircling of Wall Street. People were gathering near Zuccotti park at 7am, and by 7.30am there were 300-400 people stationed opposite the famous former encampment, far fewer than in the movement's heyday, when more than 10,000 people regularly came out in support. It was a beautiful, warm September's morning, just like the days last autumn when protesters kicked off demonstrations that were reported across the globe. The nature of the protests were similar, too, as protesters attempted to "shut down" Wall Street, while their failure to achieve that goal also had a sense of deja vu. The group at Zuccotti Park was set to be one of four meeting points around lower Manhattan, with the separate demonstrations intending to surround the city's iconic financial centre. As it turned out, Wall Street remained open, although there was some disruption. A large police presence nullified protesters' attempts to access Wall Street, with officers arresting dozens of people in the early actions. A repeated theme of the detentions was police rushing forward to seize people identified as agitators. By about 5pm, 150 people had been arrested in New York, a significant number for demonstrations attended by comfortably fewer than a thousand people. Only people with work ID cards were allowed on to the street, with financial workers, many disgruntled, having to negotiate the crowd. "You know, I was just thinking it's getting a little tiresome," said one besuited man with a thick grey moustache. "I just had to walk half a mile to get into my building." There were signs, however, that Occupy Wall Street still has mainstream support. "I think they're exercising what everyone is feeling – even though we have to go to work we're still supporting what they're protesting," said 50-year-old Gabriel Adeniyi, who was watching the procession close to Wall Street, where he works as an underwriting specialist for a trust company. "The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." While people may empathise with the cause, however, there was a sense of frustration among some onlookers. One man who gave his name as Bill summed it up: "They've been around, I have some sympathy, but their message is really unfocused." The game of cat and mouse with police was quite deja vu inducing, as protesters roamed the streets, changing course as officers appeared in front of them and being ordered to "keep on the sidewalk" repeatedly. After the morning's excitement, protesters retired to Bowling Green park in lower Manhattan, then Battery Park, in pre-planned moves, before eventually marching to Zuccotti Park, which was surrounded by barriers, but private security personnel were allowing people in. Once there, the celebratory aspect of Monday's events came to the fore as the "drummers' circle", which antagonised so many a local resident, was revived, while elsewhere a brass band and a lone bagpiper played. There were costumes too – a large, ghoulish Statue of Liberty that was a common sight in 2011, as well as a more topical "Bain Capital", a reference to Mitt Romney's former employers. The costume was based on the Batman comic book figure, outlandishly large with one particularly bulky hand labelled "Mitt's fist". Later in the afternoon there were marches from Zuccotti towards Wall Street, and more sporadic arrests, including the independent journalist John Knefel, whose detention was described as "completely unprovoked" by his journalist sister Molly Knefel. The detention of journalists again brought back memories of last fall, when the NYPD on occasion arrested journalists wearing NYPD credentials. This was a smaller protest than last year, however, and there was some frustration. "Honestly? It's a bit dead," said Jefferson Moighan, who had travelled from an hour outside New York City to attend. Moighan was involved in Occupy in October and November 2011, he said, but his participation had dwindled since then, and he was unimpressed with both numbers and tactics. "We planned too much in advance, so police know what we're doing," he said. Kevin Limiti, a 22-year-old from Long Island, was more optimistic, describing the day as "extremely empowering", but he too was frustrated by the actual nature of the protests. "It's just hard to do anything with police up your ass. We don't seem like we get the chance to protest freely." There was common agreement among protesters, however, that there was still a need to draw attention to the kind of issues that brought people to the streets a year ago. "Our problems aren't solved, our problems are plaguing our society," said Kanene Holder, an educator living in Harlem who has been a part of Occupy since the early days. "The reason Occupy started was because our systems were so broken," she added, citing the influence of money in government following the Citizens United ruling, a common Occupy gripe. "It doesn't matter how you protest your government, or demand what you think you deserve. Do it."
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duke and Duchess of Cambridge launch case against Closer magazine, while editor of Irish Daily Star is suspended The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were said to be "profoundly shocked and troubled" by the topless photographs of the duchess taken while they were on holiday in France, a French court has heard. It was, their lawyer said, a shocking breach of their "personal intimacy" that the photographs were taken of them in a private place and published on the front cover of a French magazine. And he reminded the court that the pictures of the young couple were taken almost 15 years to the day since the "cynical, morbid and useless" chase that led to the death of the duke's mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. The legal clashes in France between lawyers for the royal couple and the magazine that published the photographs came as the fallout from the scandal resulted in the suspension of the editor of an Irish tabloid newspaper, which also printed the images. Michael O'Kane was suspended while an internal investigation is carried out into the decision to run the images in the Irish Daily Star, which is co-owned by media baron Richard Desmond's Northern and Shell group and the Irish-based Independent News and Media, and has been under threat of closure since publishing the pictures. The country's justice minister said he would revisit privacy legislation, a move that could spell the death knell for the days of self-regulation of newspapers in Ireland. In a strongly worded statement on Monday afternoon, Alan Shatter said he was going to return to Ireland's 2006 Privacy Act to "consider what changes should be made" and then "progress its enactment". He added that despite the existence of a press regulator "some sections of the print media are either unable or unwilling in their reportage to distinguish between 'prurient interest' and 'the public interest'". The threat is a blow to the Irish newspaper industry, which battled to stave off statutory regulation in 2003 and in the end successfully negotiated with the government to set up a regulatory system based around the independent Irish press council and a press ombudsman. Appearing for the royal couple , lawyer Aurélien Hamelle, told the court at Nanterre in the Paris suburbs that he was acting for William Arthur Mountbatten Windsor and his wife Catherine Middleton. He described the photographs as portraying the "profoundly intimate life of the couple", and asked: "In what name did this magazine publish these shocking photos ... It was certainly not in the name of information. This has no place on the cover of a magazine or even in an article in a magazine." He said that the couple "had not consented to and had absolutely no knowledge that the photographs were being taken". "It was a holiday place, a private house and the duke and duchess had a right to be there out of the public eye. They could not be seen by the naked eye by someone passing, they could only be seen by a [camera] lens and that is the problem. "The photographs were taken on 5 September 2012, which was, give or take, six days, the 15th anniversary of the cynical, morbid and useless chase that led to the death of Prince William's mother." Hamelle showed anger as he described how Closer magazine had crowed about its "scoop" and had been publicly proud of it. He said the magazine editor had even tweeted: "Catherine Middleton as you have never seen her and you will never see her again". "They [Closer] were aware of the illegal character of the photos. The knew how the princess and Prince William would react to having their intimacy violated." He added: "The magazine said it's an ordinary scene and millions of women every day go on beaches wearing only their bikini bottoms. They say this is a woman's liberty.To impose this on a woman who did not want it is not progress or a sign of modernity. It's a regression and profoundly shocking." He said the couple was seeking an injunction preventing Closer magazine from printing any more copies of the offending issue, to remove the photographs from its website and not to distribute the photographs to any other publications. He also demanded that the magazine hand over the electronic files for the original photos. He said they were not seeking to have the magazine withdrawn from kiosks and newsagents because it was "too late". Delphine Pando, defending Closer magazine, said the storm was a "disproportionate response" to the publication of the photographs. She said the magazine had not publicised the edition. "There was no television campaign, there was no poster campaign, there was not a single press release. Not one." She said it was the royal couple who brought it to the headlines. "The damage came from the direct declaration of the couple. It's because of that all these journalists are here." She said that the royal couple was clearly convinced they were "sheltered from prying eyes" at their holiday residence owned by Viscount Linley, but she insisted: "They were clearly visible from the road".Showing the three judges a copy of the Daily Mail, she added: "It is incontestable that the scene was visible from the road and this has caused a debate in England over security." She said Closer had no intention of republishing the photographs but the magazine had no control over the agency which had them and the asked the judge to throw out the case. When she had finished, Hamelle leapt to his feet, clearly very angry, and said: "It is scandalous to suggest that this couple was responsible for the damage caused. Where is the morality in that? "We and Closer obviously don't have the same values." The duke and duchess have asked for the injunction order to be accompanied by a warning that the magazine would be fined €10,000 (£8,000) for every day that it did not comply with an injunction and fined €100,000 if it tried to resell the photographs. The judges will rule on the case on Tuesday at lunchtime. The couple have launched a separate criminal lawsuit in France for violation of their privacy.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Mitt Romney's team to give more positive picture of candidate after negative campaigning fails to erode Obama's poll lead Mitt Romney's campaign team is recalibrating its strategy amid signs of strife among his senior staff over Barack Obama's post-convention poll leads. In a tacit admission that the campaign's focus on harnessing disenchantment with Barack Obama is not working, Romney's team will attempt to give a clearer, more positive picture of their candidate as they seek to regain the initiative with just 50 days to go until the election. The new strategy will not abandon negative campaigning, but will focus on positive ads as well as speeches to spell out the Romney would pursue in office, in particular his five-point economic plan. In a conference call with reporters on Monday, Ed Gillespie, one of Romney's leading strategists, said the change in tack was driven because many voters were only now locking into the election and wanted to know about Romney's policies. "We know people want to know more about the specifics. It is the time in the election cycle to do this," Gillespie said. As expected, the latest polls show Obama's large post-convention poll bounce beginning to narrow. A Gallup poll recorded a drop from 7% last week to 3%, with the president on 48% to Romney's 45%. Gillespie pounced on the Gallup poll as an indication that Obama's lead is narrowing, and claimed Romney and Obama were in a "virtual dead heat" in the swing states. But the problem for the Romney campaign is less Obama's post-convention bounce and more the fact that the Republican failed to secure any bounce at all. The campaign has also found itself persistently on the back foot, and the new positive message comes amid clear signs of trouble behind the scenes. On Sunday night, the Politico website reported in detail on dissent from members of the team, with much of the criticism focusing on the running of the convention in Tampa and Romney's acceptance speech, which insiders say was a squandered opportunity to flesh out the detail of his plans. Romney began his campaign early in the summer intent on making the election about Obama's economic record and making himself as small a target as possible by disclosing little about his own policies. But since then there has barely been a clear week in which Romney has been able to get his message across, either because of a barrage of ads from the Obama campaign on Romney's record as chief executive of Bain Capital and his unwillingness to release more than two years' worth of tax records, or because of gaffes on his own side. Romney's trip to Britain, Israel and Poland, which was intended to showcase him as a figure of some standing in the international community, quickly went askew. His position on abortion became a week-long issue after Todd Akin, a Republican congressman in Missouri running for the Senate, talked about about "legitimate rape". Then, last week, Romney issued a hasty response to the evolving Middle East crisis, essentially accusing Obama of appeasement. His rash comment, from which many senior Republicans distanced themselves, dominated the news in the US for days after the killing of US ambassador Chris Stevens and the other three Americans, and the spotlight is only now beginning to turn to Obama's policy on the Middle East and North Africa. In the first sign of his campaign's new approach, the team released a new ad on Monday saying that Romney, as president, would help the working and middle classes by creating 12 million new jobs in the next four years. To do this, the ad says, Romney would balance the budget, cut the deficit, reduce spending, champion small businesses, and confront China over unfair trade practices. Economists say that the 12 million is slightly misleading in that this is basically the number of new jobs that will naturally be created as the economy recovers, rather as a result any action the federal government takes. Another ad is directed at Latino voters, a large demographic group that the Republicans have largely alienated through anti-immigrant rhetoric. The Obama campaign team described the new-look Romney campaign as "an extreme makeover" and mocked what it sees as the sudden attempt to appeal to Latinos. Much of the ire detailed in the Politico piece, coming from other members of the team in anonymous quotes, is directed at Stuart Stevens, Romney's leading strategist. The article described a long-time Romney friend as saying: "The campaign has utterly failed to switch from a primary mindset to a general-election mindset, and did not come up with a compelling, policy-backed argument for credible change." Stevens is being overshadowed by Gillespie, a veteran Republican strategist and former chairman of the Republican party, who joined the team late, at the invitation of Stevens. Politico reported arguments over speech writers before the convention, with two drafts of the speech being commissioned and ditched just days before the event. Stevens, in interviews on Monday, played down the talk of internal dissent. Responding to the anonymous quotes about him, he told ABC: "I never get mad at people who criticise." Stevens, who in the past has cautioned against hasty reactions when things have gone wrong for Romney, also noted that Obama's post-convention bounce was evaporating. Of the new-look strategy, he said that while the campaign would continue to focus on the ailing economy, it would become wider, encompassing foreign policy, the national debt and other issues. Romney's running-mate Paul Ryan was due to to make debt the central theme of a rally in Des Moines on Monday. Iowans have some of the lowest rates of credit in the country, making them particularly responsive to criticism of the size of the national deficit.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Follow how the day unfolded after Hezbollah's leader, Hasan Nasrallah, appeared at the latest anti-US rally over the Innocence of Muslim film
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah makes rare public appearance to support protests that are continuing from Tunisia to Indonesia Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanon's powerful Hezbollah movement, has called for new demonstrations to express outrage at a film that denigrates Islam and the prophet Muhammad, as unrest triggered by it continues from Tunisia to Indonesia. "Prophet of God, we offer ourselves, our blood and our kin for the sake of your dignity and honour," Nasrallah told supporters chanting "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" at a rally in the southern Shia suburbs of Beirut. "The US should understand that if it broadcasts the film in full it will face very dangerous repercussions around the world." Nasrallah, who fears assassination by Israel, appears in public only rarely. Political opponents suggested that anger over the film – Innocence of Muslims – was a useful diversion from the bloody crisis in neighbouring Syria, where the Assad government, along with Iran, is a patron of the Lebanese militant group. Reflecting nervousness about the protests in the region, the US embassy in Beirut has started to destroy classified material as a security precaution, the Associated Press reported. In Tunis, police surrounded a mosque where a Salafi leader was meeting followers. Sheikh Saif-Allah Benahssine is wanted by police over clashes at the US embassy last week, in which two people died, but managed to slip past the cordon and escape. In Benghazi, Libya's second city, the Islamist brigade suspected of involvement in killing the US ambassador Chris Stevens said that America itself was to blame for allowing the release of the film. "We categorically deny we were there," said Youssef el-Gehani, spokesman of the Ansar al-Sharia brigade. "American policies target some of the most sacred elements of our religion so you should expect a reaction," he told the Guardian. "The embassy (US consulate) knew how sensitive it was to have that film, they should have evacuated the embassy." At the weekend Libya's de facto head of state, Mohamed al-Magariaf, said Ansar al-Sharia members were involved in the night-long assault that left four US consulate staff dead. He linked the group to al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb. Gehani warned that the US would continue to face attacks in Muslim countries. "If America wants respect in the Arab world, it should avoid spilling blood in places such as Syria and Afghanistan, and avoid insulting the prophet." His comments came amid chaos in Libya's government, with the deputy interior minister Wanis al-Sharif being sacked after claiming that 50 suspects had been arrested in connection with the attack on the anniversary of 9/11. The interior minister, Fawzi Abdul Al, insisted only four arrests had been made. A Libyan witness told the Associated Press that Stevens was still breathing, though his face was blackened and he seemed paralysed, as people pulled him from a consulate room where he was found after the attack. In Pakistan, the prime minister, Raja Pervez Ashraf, ordered the suspension of YouTube over the "blasphemous" film. Two protesters were killed as police used teargas and fired into the air to control crowds which have grown since last week. Thousands of people shouting anti-American slogans took to the streets in Peshawar, Lahore and, for a second day, in Karachi. Violent rage also spread to Kabul in Afghanistan, with hundreds of people taking to the city's streets, burning tyres and a car, and attacking police and a US base with stones. Indonesian police fired teargas and water cannons to disperse hundreds of demonstrators who massed outside the US embassy in Jakarta, the capital of the world's most populous Muslim country. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted on state TV as saying that western leaders must prove they were not "accomplices" in a "big crime". In Egypt, two prominent figures are facing legal action over broadcasting a clip of the film. Khaled Abdallah, an ultra-conservative television anchor, and Nader Bakkar, spokesman of the Salafi al-Nour party, stand accused of instigating violence that led to the storming of the US embassy in Cairo. Tony Blair, meanwhile, said in a BBC interview that the offending film was "wrong and offensive but also laughable as a piece of filmmaking". He added: "What is dangerous and wrong is the reaction to it." The former prime minister, now a Middle East peace envoy, said the protests were about the "struggle of modernisation" under way in the region and not "some form of oppression by the west". Blair's reputation in the Arab world has never recovered from his role supporting George Bush in the Iraq war of 2003.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Police arrest up to 70 protesters as crowd gathers at Zuccotti Park, Manhattan location where movement began one year ago Police have arrested up to 70 protesters, including three wheelchair users who were handcuffed and loaded into a waiting van, during a march in New York's financial district to mark the one-year anniversary of the Occupy movement. The numbers of arrests, reported by a lawyer from National Lawyers Guild, were not immediately confirmed by the New York police department. Among those arrested was New York artist Molly Crabapple, who reported on Twitter that she had been "grabbed off the sidewalk, along with everyone else here." Crabapple, whose illustrations have appeared in the Nation and the New York Times, continued to tweet from the police van, providing details of her arresting officer's number and badge.
A number of journalists were also arrested, according to the New York Post. A crowd of between 300 and 400 protesters converged at around 7.30am on Monday at Zuccotti Park, where the grassroots movement began and where, for two months in 2011, it was occupied day and night by activists protesting against US financial institutions and America's political system. New York's Occupy Wall Street protest, which began after a call from Canadian anti-consumer magazine Adbusters, spawned hundreds of similar events in towns and cities across the US and world-wide. The anti-capitalist protests, the targets of which included the bank bailouts and the uneven distribution of wealth, entered the national conversation for a few brief weeks. The occupations of public and private space were eventually thwarted by police and legal clampdowns which put an end to activists ability to gather in large numbers in public to exchange and discuss ideas. Protesters had planned to surround the stock exchange with a "people's wall" on Monday, but a heavy police presence and the erection of metal barricades allowing only those with work ID to enter, kept the majority of protesters at bay. They splintered into small groups, with each planning specific actions. At one point, 300 protesters marched up and down Broadway, south of Wall Street. Police threatened to arrest people who stepped onto the road. At least three protesters in wheelchairs were arrested outside Bank of America near Zuccotti Park at around 10am. Attorney Gideon Orion Oliver told the Guardian that 70 protesters had been arrested, a number that came from his office's arrest and legal support hotline. On Sunday, Paul Brown, NYPD's deputy commissioner for public information, said he expected the march to be peaceful, but said: "A relatively small group of self-described anarchists will attempt unlawful activity and try to instigate confrontations with police by others while attempting to escape arrest themselves." "We accommodate peaceful protests and make arrests for unlawful activity," he said. Many of the protesters were wearing costumes, party hats and carried musical instruments to celebrate the anniversary of the movement. The celebrations began on Saturday, when at least a dozen protesters were arrested as a 300-strong crowd gathered in lower Manhattan. Anniversary marches and rallies are planned in more than 30 cities worldwide. Organisers said they hoped that the renewed attention resulting from the first anniversary events may help rejuvenate the movement. To date, officers in New York have made more than 1,800 arrests in connection to OWS action. Last October, 700 protesters were arrested after spilling into the roadway while marching across the Brooklyn bridge.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Protests on the streets of Madrid and Barcelona over the weekend showed the level of public anger over Spain's austerity programme
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Follow live coverage as Occupy Wall Street plans a day of action on the one-year anniversary of the movement's birth
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Beijing responds swiftly to White House action at WTO amid mounting fears of a trade war between world's top economies Fears of a trade war between the United States and China intensified on Monday after Barack Obama launched action at the World Trade Organisation to stop Chinese auto industry aid from threatening jobs in the key electoral battleground state of Ohio. With growth and jobs seen as vital in the race for the White House, the administration said it had begun a case at the WTO in Geneva against what the White House said were illegal export subsidies for cars and car parts. The ratcheting up of the trade tension between the world's biggest and second biggest economies prompted immediate tit-for-tat retaliation from Beijing, which announced its own WTO case against the US. Trade experts said the tougher approach taken by Obama came as little surprise given the high level of unemployment. No president since Roosevelt in the 1930s has won an election with the jobless rate as high as 8.3% and the labour market has proved particularly weak in the so-called rust belt states of the midwest. "Export subsidies are prohibited under WTO rules because they are unfair and severely distort international trade," US trade representative Ron Kirk said in a statement. "China expressly agreed to eliminate all export subsidies when it joined the WTO in 2001." Obama's decision to adopt a more aggressive approach towards China followed accusations by Mitt Romney, his Republican challenger in the presidential race, that the president has been too soft in the face of repeated violations of global trade rules. China's export-led growth model has resulted in a trade surplus averaging $25bn a month in 2012, attracting criticism from manufacturing lobbying groups and unions. Jobs in the US auto parts sector dropped by roughly half between 2001 and 2010, while US imports of auto parts from China have increased seven-fold, according to the Obama administration. Ohio, one of the most important of the six swing states likely to decide this year's tight race for the White House, depends heavily on the auto industry, which was bailed out by Obama following the savage global downturn of 2008-09. Polls show that Obama has a slight edge in Ohio. Scott Paul, executive director of the American Alliance for Manufacturing welcomed the administration's move. "The facts in the case are indisputable. China is subsidizing its auto parts sector, blocking our exports, and causing significant harm to workers and businesses in our nation," he said. "Our auto assembly sector, now back on its feet, could be undercut by China's cheating, causing irreparable damage to the heart of America's productive economy." The WTO confirmed that the US had filed a case against China and that the two sides would now have a 60-day cooling-off period in which to seek an agreement. If the talks fail, a panel will be set up to decide whether US jobs had been outsourced as a result of subsidies that unfairly cut the cost of Chinese exports. Sources said that in high-profile cases involving the WTO's bigger members consultations often resulted in failure, and Beijing responded swiftly to the action taken by Obama by challenging measures adopted by the US to prevent the dumping of cheap Chinese goods, including kitchen utensils, steel, tyres, wood flooring, magnets and paper. China has already won one WTO case against the US over its use of anti-dumping measures, which forced Washington to bring in new laws designed to be compliant with global trade law. Beijing today said that the new US law was also in breach of WTO regulations and affected exports worth more than $7bn. "Chinese enterprises in an uncertain legal environment, in violation of the relevant rules of the WTO transparency and due process," a spokesman for China's ministry of commerce said. Obama and Romney have both pushed China to the forefront as they seek to refocus their campaigns after a week dominated by foreign policy and the protests at US embassies across the Arab and Islamic world. Tough action on China is one of the few foreign policy positions Romney has pushed in the campaign so far, claiming Obama's weak response has harmed US workers. The president has countered with claims that Romney has investments in Chinese companies and outsourced jobs to China while running the private equity firm Bain Capital.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Union's refusal to approve contract endangers students' safety, city officials argue, as strike enters its second week Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel raised the stakes in his confrontation with the city's teachers' union on Monday as he launched legal action to force teachers back to work. City attorneys asked a judge to declare the strike illegal, claiming it endangers the health and safety of students and contravenes a new state law that has ostensibly outlawed strikes over issues like evaluations and rehiring. "This was a strike of choice and is now a delay of choice that is wrong for our children," Emanuel said in a written statement. The judge has sought to delay making a decision until Wednesday, which may obviate Emanuel's legal strategy if the delegates ratify the agreement tomorrow. The legal move marks an intensification in a dispute most thought was winding down over the weekend after both sides said they had reached a framework they were comfortable with for agreement. Last week ended with the expectation that schools would be open on Monday. That was the outcome union leader Karen Lewis said she was "praying for" and that one school board member said would only be prevented by something "nutsy" happening. The week-long strike has received the overwhelming support of the city's parent,s although finding alternative arrangements for the 350,000 students has caused difficulties. It centred on the extensive use of testing for teacher evaluation and the right of teachers who have been fired from school closings to be rehired. The agreement had reached a compromise on testing and agreed that teachers with good evaluations who have been laid off would be rehired when vacancies came up. "I'm hard-pressed to imagine how they could have done much better", Robert Bruno, a professor of labor and employment relations at the University of Illinois at Chicago, told the Associated Press. "This is a very impressive outcome for the teachers." But when union negotiators presented the new contract to their house of delegates for ratification on Sunday the delegates asked for more time to read it through. "There's no trust for our members of the board," Lewis said Sunday night. "They're not happy with the agreement. They'd like it to actually be a lot better." The deliberation pushed the first possible day children could return to school to Wednesday – delegates will not meet until Tuesday because of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Delegates will meet with rank-and-file teachers over the next 24 hours to discuss the deal. There were mixed feelings on the picket line at one north side school on Monday – as several cars continued to honk their support – about the delegates' decision to delay. There is little trust between teachers and city hall and so they understood the need to read over the contract carefully before signing off on it. Most believed that the deal the negotiators have agreed is good, although the prospect of an extensive wave of school closings has made many wary. But there was also concern that further delay beyond Wednesday might test both the support of the public and the unity of the union. The response to Emanuel's legal threat was a mixture of disbelief and derision. Anecdotally at least parents remain sympathetic to the teachers and say they understand why teachers are taking their time. "As much as we want our kids back in school, teachers need to make sure they have dotted all their i's and crossed their t's," said Becky Malone, mother of a second grader and fourth grader, who have been studying at home and going to museums over the last week. "What's the point of going on strike if you don't get everything you need out of it? For parents, it'll be no more of a challenge than it's been in the past week."
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Mitt Romney to relaunch lacklustre presidential campaign as White House moves against China to WTO for trade violations
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In 2008, Obama swept to victory on a promise of hope. But his lofty rhetoric has been sapped by a grim economic picture, and voters feel let down. Is he still the change they can believe in? "You want to run for president?" asked the New York Times columnist Frank Bruni in his book Ambling into History. "Here's what you need to do. "Have someone write you a lovely speech that stakes out popular positions in unwavering language – and less popular positions in fuzzier terms. Better yet, if it bows to God and country at every turn: that's called uplift. Make it rife with optimism, a trumpet blast not just about morning in America but about a perpetual dazzling dawn. Avoid talk of hard choices and daunting challenges; nobody wants those. Nod to people on all points of the political spectrum … Add a soupcon of alliteration. Sprinkle with a few personal observations or stories: it humanises you. Stir with enthusiasm." So it was at the beginning of the year, as the Republicans competed to see who could paint the gloomiest picture of Barack Obama's America, that Obama reached back for the signature theme of his 2008 campaign: hope. Seeking to channel Ronald Reagan's re-election theme of 1984, when the nation was emerging from economic crisis, he used his state of the union speech in January to claim: "America is back". "Anyone who tells you that America is in decline, or that our influence has waned, doesn't know what they're talking about," he said. He test-drove the phrase in a range of settings. "I placed my bet on the American worker," he told a union conference in DC a month later. "The American auto industry is back." A month after that, at a fundraiser in Houston, he told donors. "The recovery is accelerating. America is coming back." This was by no means an absurd claim. By February there had been three straight months of employment growth; the final quarter of 2011 showed a spike in consumer borrowing, signalling more consumption and more lending. In the spring, many felt they witnessed the green shoots of economic recovery. And electorally it seemed like a smart claim, too. American voters may want politicians to ponder their fragility, but they've never been particularly keen on them actually reflecting it. The country was emerging from two failed wars and the most severe recession since the Great Depression. Confidence in America's political and financial classes was shattered; assumptions about its military supremacy were dented. According to Gallup, the last time most Americans were satisfied with the direction the country was heading in was January 2004 – and that stint of optimism lasted less than a week. The Republicans were wedded to the notion that under Obama America was in decline. Rick Santorum claimed it was an election "to save the soul of America" – prompting the question: well, then, who had lost it? – while Mitt Romney insisted he'd return the nation to a day when "each of us could walk a little taller and stand a little straighter". Obama's message was: "Walk tall. We're on our way." There was only one problem. People did not believe it. In February, Greenberg, Quinlan, Rosner Research focus-grouped four different ways of framing the nation's economic trajectory. Two concentrated on the enduring struggles of American middle-class families, and two claimed recovery was under way. The two that did best argued: "This is a make-or-break time for the middle class, and for all those trying to get into it." The one that tested worst, by a considerable margin, claimed: "America is back". "America is not back," Stanley Greenberg, GQR's chief executive, told the New York Times. "We have long-term fundamental problems. If you look at our data and history, it takes a long time before job numbers translate into accepting at a personal level that things are better." Indeed, if anything, Americans felt they were going backwards. Most believe young people will have a worse life than their parents, and a third think the country's best days are behind it. It's not difficult to see why. For 90% of Americans, wages have been effectively stagnant for the last 40 years, while median house prices have slumped 20% since 2006. Over the past decade, the cost of tuition has risen 32%, and the average healthcare premiums have rocketed 113%. A report earlier this year revealed that between 2007 and 2010, the median American family lost a generation of wealth. With figures like that, insisting that America is back sounds more like happy talk than fighting talk.
Herein lies the central dilemma for Obama's re-election. In 2008 he ran, with considerable rhetorical force, on a promise of hope and change in the midst of an economic crisis – and on his ability to bring consensus to a divided political class. But, for many, things have changed for the worse, and the country is even more polarised than when he started. So the substantial benefits of his presidency are not fully apparent – particularly to those most likely to have voted for him. Meanwhile, the symbolic significance of his candidacy is largely spent. You can only be elected the first black president once. His presence remains a source of great pride to many, particularly African Americans and the young. People will still travel halfway across the country on their own dime to hear him speak, and hawkers still sell T-shirts at his events. When he went to Fort Myers in Florida to speak in July, people started lining up for tickets the night before. But this time he's not standing on his promise, but on his record. Shortly after his inauguration, he told NBC. "Look, I'm at the start of my administration. One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I've got four years. And a year from now I think people are going to see that we're starting to make some progress. "But there's still going to be some pain out there. If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition." The pain is still out there, and that is precisely the proposition the Republicans are now making. *** There are several ways Obama can counter this. When he first ran, few understood the depth of the economic crisis, and few could have predicted the implosion of the eurozone and the subsequent drag on the world economy. Roughly two-thirds of the country still blame Bush for the state of the economy, while only half hold Obama responsible. Republicans have been both obdurate and obtuse in Congress, where approval ratings have rarely scraped 20%. The trouble is, to a sceptical ear these sound more like justifications for why he has failed to deliver than explanations as to how he might succeed if given more time. Bill Clinton conceded as much during his convention speech in Charlotte. "Here's the challenge he faces," he said. "A lot of Americans are still angry and frustrated about this economy. If you look at the numbers, you know employment is growing, banks are beginning to lend again, and in a lot of places, housing prices have even began to pick up. "But too many people do not feel it yet. I had this same thing happen in 1994 and early '95. But the difference this time is purely in the circumstances. President Obama started with a much weaker economy than I did. Listen to me now: no president could have fully repaired all the damage that he found in just four years. If you will renew the president's contract, you will feel it. You will feel it. Folks, whether the American people believe what I just said or not may be the whole election. I just want you to know that I believe it. With all my heart, I believe it." The trouble for Obama is that not enough Americans do believe it. Stewardship of the economy is the one area where Romney has been generally outpolling him (although it has been slipping since the conventions). It is also by far the most important issue in the election. In the nine states Obama won from Republicans last time, his approval ratings are below 50; in six they are 45 or less. Unemployment is higher in six of them today than it was when he was inaugurated. In the midterms, Republicans took more than 20% of the House seats from Democrats in those states. His defeat is not just plausible; it's possible. Indeed, given the metrics of unemployment, approval ratings, real disposable personal income growth per capita (what the average person has left after tax and inflation) he should lose. And if that weren't enough, Republicans will have far more money. In 2008, Obama outspent McCain by more than two to one. He has also outspent Romney so far, although that is largely because Romney had to wait until he was formally nominated before dipping into reserves of cash. But thanks to changes in the fundraising laws that allow unlimited donations from anonymous sources, Democrats fear being massively outspent by Republicans and their supporters this time. Obama donors at the convention were asked to open their wallets with the message: "If they outspend us by two or three times we're OK. But if it goes much beyond that we're in trouble." After a successful convention they came back thrilled by the speeches and daunted by the prospects. "If the economy is doing great then any leader looks great," says one of Washington's premier electoral analysts, Charlie Cook. "And if the economy is doing lousy I think almost any leader looks bad." The day the Democratic convention started a poll showed that most Americans believe both the country is worse off than it was when Obama was nominated four years ago, and that he does not deserve a second term. The day after it ended, the Treasury released a weak jobs report signalling a feeble recovery that's close to stalling.
The problem is not that he doesn't have a record. He can point to significant achievements that would or should satisfy his base and arguably credit him with the most progressive term since Lyndon Johnson. He has appointed two women – including the first Latina – to the supreme court, implemented a version of healthcare reform, ended don't ask, don't tell, withdrawn combat troops from Iraq and presented a timetable for withdrawing forces from Afghanistan. He authorised the killing of Osama bin Laden, and the US's standing in the world has greatly improved since he took over among both allies and enemies alike. The problem is that the record Obama has does not include the single most important achievement he could hope for – improving the economic lot of the broad swathe of middle America. And the various things it does include do not add up to a narrative. (It doesn't help that the main advantages to his principle achievement – healthcare – do not kick in for another two years). This was evident at the convention, where the same laundry list of Obama's achievements (the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which protects equal pay for equal work for women; the repeal of don't ask, don't tell; Bin Laden's killing; healthcare; his executive order on young immigrants) were aired each night less as a theme than an incantation. It is a flaw best illustrated in Joe Biden's claim to donors in Fort Worth, Texas that: "The best way to sum up the job the president has done if you need a real shorthand: Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive." Among other problems, such a summary links a single military operation and a particular economic achievement, both of which mark progress that is both episodic and partial. A counter summary could just as easily read: "Al-Qaida is alive and the economy is dying." Moreover, it falls well short of "We're back," (which is what people want to hear) let alone "hope" and "change" (which is what they heard last time). The greatest case for Obama's presidency so far can be summed up thus: things were terrible when I came to power, are much better than they would have been were I not in power, and will deteriorate if I am removed from power. Even if one accepts these claims as true, and understands them as important, they're a long way from the uplifting message of four years ago. Not so much "Yes we can," as "Could be worse". The problem with Obama trying to echo Reagan's lines of 1984 is that Republicans can and do counter with Reagan's line from 1980, when, concluding a debate with Jimmy Carter, he asked: "Are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the store than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago?" At the Republican convention in Tampa, this was evoked as the game-changing line gifted to Romney by history. But it only works if Reagan's quote is hacked in half. For the Gipper immediately went on to ask. "Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we're as strong as we were four years ago?" Even with American embassies under siege, most here would give him credit for that. It is rare for a president to recover from this level of protracted economic distress, particularly when they brought such high hopes with them. But the last year handed Obama two crucial, mutually reinforcing tools with which he could start to build an electoral revival. The first was Occupy Wall Street, which sprouted offshoots in every state in the country, burning brightly before fading into smaller more grassroots campaigns. The occupations had no specific demands and had no organic connection to the Democratic party. But by concentrating their ire on the inequities of the financial system and the greed of financial elites – two things Obama had failed to do anything about – they shifted the target of national frustration from government to inequality. Polls showed a significant portion of the country agreed with its aims with 77% believing there is too much power in the hands of a few rich people and corporations. Even as rightwing pundits and politicians mocked the protests ("Get a job right after you take a bath," said Republican contender Newt Gingrich), conservative analysts noted that they had struck a chord. When rightwing pollster Frank Luntz addressed the Republican Governors Association in December he told them: "The public still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we're seen as defenders of Wall Street, we've got a problem." Obama had clearly got the message. In the same state of the union speech that he proclaimed the US to be back, he appealed directly to the 98% of the country that earns less than $250,000. "Let's never forget," he said: "Millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a government and a financial system that does the same. It's time to apply the same rules from top to bottom: no bailouts, no handouts, and no cop-outs." And while there is no narrative in which to couch his first term, there is a theme for his second: fairness. Like a mantra at Charlotte, speakers argued for the middle class to have a "fair shot" and the rich to give their "fair share" as they carefully made it clear that inequality of outcome and income were tolerable so long as equality of opportunity was available. Massachusetts senate candidate Elizabeth Warren received a huge cheer when she said: "People feel like the system is rigged against them. And here's the painful part: they're right. The system is rigged. Look around. Oil companies guzzle down billions in subsidies. Billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. Wall Street CEOs – the same ones who wrecked our economy and destroyed millions of jobs – still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favours, and acting like we should thank them." The second gift has been Romney: a wooden candidate whose personal wealth amounts to double the combined wealth of the last eight presidents going back to Richard Nixon and yet only pays 14% tax. For if Occupy Wall Street reframed the debate, then it also provided the basis to depict Romney as out-of-touch magnate with a tin ear for the travails of the common man. Most of the Democratic attacks over the summer, over the firings and outsourcings at Bain Capital – the firm that Romney once ran – and over demands for his tax records, or about his wealthy donors, fit that mould. This rich guy doesn't understand you or what you're going through, and now he wants to buy the election.
By contrast, Obama has put his less fortunate roots front and centre, running not on a narrative of racial breakthrough but of class mobility. "Barack knows the American dream because he's lived it," said Michelle Obama in her convention speech. "And he wants everyone in this country to have that same opportunity, no matter who we are, or where we're from, or what we look like, or who we love." So this is the central strategy of the Obama campaign: not to lift people with lofty rhetoric, but hit them with a hard choice between him and Romney, and characterise it as a choice for either greater fairness or less; for the country to go backwards or forwards; someone who understands you or someone who doesn't. That tack seems to be paying off. Polls show that in swing states, where people are more likely to have seen the ads, they are twice as likely to see Romney's time at Bain as a reason to vote against him. Elsewhere the nation is evenly split. In the crucial swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, where voters were asked the question, "Would you say that Mitt Romney cares about the needs and problems of people like you, or not?" most said "not". The poll showed that 54% of likely voters in Pennsylvania, 55% in Ohio, and 49% in Florida felt Romney did not care about their problems. The Republican convention was dedicated in no small part turning that perception around. Arguably, it didn't work. So while Obama is vulnerable, he is nonetheless ahead. In national polls his lead is narrow – within the margin of error – but has widened since the convention. In the swing states he is performing better. Last time around he took nine states that Republicans had won in 2004; New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida. But according to Real Clear Politics' average of polls, he leads in seven of them and trails in just two (Indiana and North Carolina). The New York Times' Nate Silver, a well-respected statistician, psephologist and author of the Five Thirty Eight blog, currently gives Obama a 75% chance of winning. And 59% of voters now believe Obama will win – although this is far more than will actually vote for him. So the president has plenty of wriggle room as he seeks a path to victory this time around. He could lose the marquee big states of Ohio and Florida, as well as the smaller states of New Hampshire, Iowa and Indiana, and still get his second term. But it may not even come to that. Republicans were supposed to have picked much of the low hanging fruit clean by summer's end. But only in Indiana is Romney truly secure, while in North Carolina he is only now pulling away. Of the states Democrats won in 2004, only in Wisconsin is Obama really vulnerable. In some previously closely contested states, such as New Mexico and Pennsylvania, Romney is barely in contention. In the rest, Obama's lead is narrow (within the margin of error) but consistent and growing. A poll late last week showed Romney trailing Obama by at least five points in Florida, Virginia and Ohio. Although Romney wouldn't have to shift the needle very far to win, he'd have to shift a lot of needles in the same direction to stand a chance. Obama has precious little reason to be complacent but every reason to be optimistic at this stage. His response to events like the riots across the Muslim world could still shift the trajectory, as could Republicans' cash advantage.
In a race where there will be few undecideds and a lot of cash sloshing around, his challenge is to rally his base. This will be no simple task. Obama has considerable work to do on this front. Unlike four years ago, Republican voters are more likely to say it really matters who wins this election, to say they have given quite a lot of thought to the election and to have paid close attention to news about the election. Their base – white people, the wealthy and the old – is also more likely to turn out. The good news for the Democrats is that voters are more enthusiastic about their candidate. The percentage of people who said they strongly supported Obama was both higher than any Democratic candidate since 1988, including himself in 2008, and almost double those who strongly support Mitt Romney. The only candidate who's ever scored higher was George Bush in 2004. Democrat supporters also appear more engaged. A survey of web and social media usage by Pew found that the Obama campaign posted nearly four times as much content as the Romney campaign on the web, was active on nearly twice as many platforms and prompted twice the number of shares, views and comments. In 2008, Obama's victory was due, in no small part, to his ability to expand the electorate by attracting constituencies that had previously been under-represented at the polls – particularly young, black and Latino voters. He did not just win them by huge margins, but managed to amplify their electoral clout by motivating them to turn out in huge numbers. But those are the very groups who have suffered most under his presidency. Unemployment for 18- to 19-year-olds is 23.5%; for those 20 to 24 it's lower at 12.9%, but still significantly higher than the national rate of 8.2%. Black unemployment is at 14.1% – a 10% increase on when he was inaugurated. While Hispanic unemployment has remained consistent, Obama has deported more undocumented immigrants than any president since the 1950s. Polls show Obama still holds a significant advantage among all three groups, attracting 89% of the black vote and 60% of both the Latino vote and the 18-to-29 age group. The issue is less whether those people will vote for him but how many will show up, since all three groups are less reliable voters. "We haven't seen much of the stimulus trickle down to our people here," Mark Allen, a Chicago-based community organiser who used to work alongside Obama, told the Washington Post. "I liked the community organizer Obama better than President Obama … Democrats say Barack has got 90% or whatever of the black vote wrapped up. What they don't tell you is it's 90% of those who actually come out and vote … What if it's 90% of just 30 or 40% who vote?" In fact, the black turnout is the one part of his base that remains solid, but Democrats are less certain of Latinos and the young. In a base election, enthusiasm is key. Since black, Latino and young people live everywhere, there is not a single swing state where this is not an issue, and arguably only New Hampshire and Iowa – two of the whitest states in the country – where it is not key. This in no small part explains his decision to use the power of his office in June to halt the deportation of thousands of young undocumented immigrants – something he could have done at any time during his presidency. In an executive order he ruled that young immigrants who arrived in the US illegally before age 16 and spent at least five continuous years here would be allowed to stay and apply for work permits, providing they had no criminal history and met other criteria, such as graduating from high school or serving honorably in the military. This time around, he is also seeking to make inroads among white women, many of whom are turned off by Republican views on abortion and contraception, pensioners, who may be nervous about Republican plans for Medicare (both of which he lost by 53-45 in 2008), and gay voters, buoyed by his support for gay marriage and motivated by Republican opposition to it. If there is any volatility in this race it is not about the breadth of his support but the depth of it. National polls of registered voters may mostly show him with a narrow lead; but polls of likely voters often show him trailing. The one thing that hasn't changed since 2008 is the Democrats' emphasis on the 'ground game'. Sending volunteers out to collect information, persuade and, ultimately, ferry people to the polls. One Washington Post survey showed 20% of registered voters had been contacted by the Obama campaign, compared to 13% who'd been contacted by Mitt Romney's campaign. And Democrats had been particularly effective at reaching their base. Forty-two percent of liberal Democrats said they'd been contacted, as well as 24% non-whites and 31% of the people who voted for Obama last time. "This is light years ahead of where we were in 2008," said Obama's campaign manager, Jim Messina, during a forum in Charlotte. "We are going to make 2008, on the ground, look like Jurassic Park. They plan to knock on more than twice as many doors and register twice as many voters as they did last time. In North Carolina they have twice as many field offices as the Romney campaign. In Ohio they have three times as many. If Obama were only running against Romney, his victory would be all but assured by this stage. But he isn't. He's running against the economy, and on his promise to be a transformative president in tough times. To the extent that a second term election is a referendum on the incumbent, Obama is losing. Too many voters think he's not done enough. The degree, however, to which any election is a choice between at least two candidates, he is winning. Enough voters feel he is better than his opponent. For now, at least, he is not so much the change they can believe in as the change-agent they most believe in. And while the semantic difference is minimal, the rhetorical difference could hardly be greater.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fears rod containing americium-241/beryllium could fall into hands of terrorists after employees of US oilfield services company lost it in transit between oil wells Halliburton has lost a seven-inch radioactive rod somewhere in the Texas desert. The National Guard has been called in to help to find the device, which employees of the controversial US oilfield services company lost a week ago. The rod, which contains americium-241/beryllium and is stamped with a radiation warning symbol with the words "Danger Radioactive: Do not handle. Notify civil authorities if found", was lost during a 130-mile journey between oil well sites in Pecos and Odessa last Tuesday. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) warned that the radioactive material "could cause permanent injury to a person who handled them". The agency said americium-241/beryllium, known as Am-241, is a "category 3" source of radiation and would normally have to be held for some hours before causing health problems. But the NRC still warned that "it could possibly – although it is unlikely – be fatal to be close to this amount of unshielded radioactive material for a period of days to weeks". A spokeswoman for the NRC said the agency could not remember the last time a radioactive rod went missing. "[There has] never been one lost in the public domain," she said. The spokeswoman added that there was a concern the radioactive material could fall into the hands of terrorists. The route the Halliburton truck took between Pecos and Odessa has been painstakingly searched with radioactive detection gear three times with assistance from local police and the National Guard. "When the crew went to remove the Am-241 source they discovered the source transport container lock and plug were not in place and that the source was missing," the NRC said in its report into the incident. "The crew returned to the well site near Pecos and searched for the source, but did not find it. The radiation safety officer stated that the lock was found in the storage compartment in the back of the truck. The transport container plug was not in the container." The three-man Halliburton crew, who had been using the rod to identify oil and gas deposits suitable for fracking, have been questioned by the FBI. The NRC said Halliburton was carrying out a forensic search of the truck. "They are literally stripping it down, removing every piece of equipment looking for the source," the agency said. Halliburton said it would offer a reward to anyone who finds the rod but cautioned the public to stay at least 25ft away from the device. "The route between the two well sites continues to be combed using specialised equipment in extensive ground searches and aerial analysis," the company said. Halliburton, which was once run by former vice president Dick Cheney, has previously attracted controversy for its role in BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster, building Guantánamo Bay and for working in Iraq, Iran and Libya.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Attempt to conceal start of Wang Lijun's trial in Chengdu underlines case's sensitivity for China's Communist party The trial of the colourful police chief who sparked the ousting of the Chinese politician Bo Xilai has begun unexpectedly with a secret hearing, his lawyer said. Officials had said Wang Lijun would stand trial on Tuesday for defection, abuse of power and other offences in Chengdu, south-west China. The attempt to conceal the start of the hearing, which took place under heavy security, underlines the case's sensitivity for the Communist party as the handover of power to a younger generation of leaders fast approaches. Wang Yuncai, who is not related to her client, said the first day of the former police boss's trial at Chengdu intermediate people's court was closed because it concerned defection and abuse of power charges and touched on state secrets. The second would be open because it concerned less sensitive charges such as taking bribes. In practice, only a carefully selected audience – excluding foreigners – will be allowed in. Tuesday's session is expected to conclude the hearing. There is little doubt that Wang will be found guilty; the state news agency Xinhua has described the evidence against him as "concrete and abundant". The question is how harshly he will be punished for his crimes. According to the state media report of his indictment, Wang helped to cover up the poisoning of the British businessman Neil Heywood by Bo's wife, Gu Kailai. Gu was convicted of the murder last month and given a suspended death sentence. Steve Tsang, an expert on Chinese politics at Nottingham University, said the trial would be significant because Wang was a relatively senior figure and because of the apparent defection attempt. "It is a sensitive case because it is all about Bo Xilai," he said. It was "poetic injustice" that Wang – who trampled over the rights of suspects in an anti-gang campaign that made him famous – faced the flawed system to which he had subjected others, Tsang said. "It is not just for anybody to have what is clearly not the administration of justice." Some analysts believe that by indicting Wang for abuses while in power, as well as for defection, leaders are paving the way to charge his former boss. Officials have not commented on Bo since announcing in the spring that he was under investigation by the party for unspecified disciplinary offences. Others think they will shy away from trying Chongqing's former party secretary because of his popularity and because it would raise too many embarrassing questions about senior leaders in general. Wang was the city's vice-mayor and a key ally of Bo, but fled to the US consulate in Chengdu in February after the two men fell out and Bo removed him from police duties. Chongqing officials attempted to explain away his absence by claiming he was receiving "vacation-style therapy" for stress, but his dash to the mission was confirmed by central authorities, who collected him and escorted him to Beijing. US diplomats told their British counterparts that he had claimed Gu murdered Heywood, prompting the UK to request a reinvestigation of the death, which had previously been ascribed to excessive alcohol consumption. Two months later, Chinese officials announced they had detained Gu. The Wall Street Journal reported that American officials had passed British diplomats details of how to covertly contact an associate of Wang via a mobile phone and obtain evidence of the claims by setting up an email account with a specific address to receive documents. One source told the newspaper that British diplomats texted and called the number, but never received a response; another said the British received two text messages outlining Wang's allegations but adding no evidence.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Protests on the streets of Madrid and Barcelona over the weekend showed the level of public anger over Spain's austerity programme
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Follow how the day unfolded after Hezbollah's leader, Hasan Nasrallah, appeared at the latest anti-US rally over the Innocence of Muslim film
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Italian editor says he wanted to depict 'modern' Duchess of Cambridge, as royals press criminal charges against French title The editor of Italy's Chi magazine has defended the publication of 18 pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge sunbathing topless in a special edition devoting 26 pages to his "exclusive". Alfonso Signorini said he has done nothing illegal and he published the 26-page photo feature to show how the royal family in Britain had modernised. "I published them with a conviction that they are pictures of a modern contemporary duchess," he told Sky News, which said that off-camera Signorini had described her as "resembling a Greek goddess". Signorini said it was legal in Italy to take photographs on "a public thoroughfare" and the photos could just as easily been taken by a member of the public standing on the road bordering Lord Linley's Chateau d'Autet. It has been estimated the photos were all taken from between 400m and 800m away, which would have meant a member of the public would have to have been equipped with an expensive long-lens camera. Chi magazine – like France's Closer magazine, which caused a furore by publishing photos of the duchess topless on Friday – is owned by former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi's media company Mondadori. Signorini said it was "a very important scoop" for the magazine which rushed out its special edition on Monday, two days ahead of its normal Wednesday publication date. His defiant comments come as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge press ahead with a criminal complaint in a Paris court. The royal couple will ask a French judge on Monday afternoon to order Closer magazine to withdraw all copies from sale and remove them from its website. They are also considering their options including legal action against Chi and the Irish Daily Star, which published the pictures on Saturday causing co-owner Richard Desmond to threaten to close the paper with the loss of up to 70 jobs. St James's Palace has not, however, lodged a formal complaint with the Irish Press Council, the newspaper regulator. Its code of practice does not quite ban photos taken in private places, but says they are unacceptable unless justified by the public interest. Interest in Closer magazine in France rocketed on Friday when news broke that it had published a set of pictures of the royal couple in defiance of privacy laws. Figures calculated by traffic site Alexa.com shows traffic to Closer's website soared by 1600% on Friday, dropping almost as quickly when users realised the photos were not published online. Lawyers acting for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are making use of France's strict privacy laws with civil and criminal actions. At the Tribunal de Grand Instance in Nanterre, a suburb of Paris near Closer's offices, in a court hearing scheduled for late on Monday afternoon, they were seeking an injunction backed by the threat of punitive fines. The legal action, said St James's Palace, concerned the "taking of photographs of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge whilst on holiday and the publication of these photos in breach of their privacy". It is demanding Closer stop all publication of the images and that the magazine is removed from kiosks and newsagents. The couple will ask for a fine of €100,000 (£81,000) to be imposed for failure to comply with withdrawing the magazine and the same amount for failure to remove the pictures from "any electronic and especially digital means of communication". A further €100,000 fine is being demanded for the distribution of the photographs to other publications. • To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication". • To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | As teachers remain on strike into a second week, mayor looks to courts to force teachers and students back into classroom Chicago's mayor was turning to the courts to try to end a teachers' strike in the nation's third-largest school district that entered its second week Monday. The strike has been uncomfortable for the Obama administration with the presidential election approaching, as mayor Rahm Emmanuel is a former chief of staff to President Barack Obama and Democratic presidential candidates like Obama traditionally get union support. The strike is the first for the city's teachers in 25 years and has kept 350,000 students out of class. The union and school leaders seemed headed toward a resolution at the end of last week, but teachers decided Sunday to remain on strike, saying they needed more time to review a complicated proposal. Emanuel fired back, saying he told city attorneys to seek a court order forcing Chicago teachers union members back into the classroom. Central to the debate are two issues that have national concern: teacher evaluations and job security. Emanuel said the strike was illegal because it endangers the health and safety of students and concerned issues evaluations and layoffs that state law says cannot be grounds for a work stoppage. With an average salary of $76,000, Chicago teachers are among the highest-paid in the nation, and the contract outline calls for annual raises. But some teachers are upset it did not restore a 4% raise Emanuel rescinded last year.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Environmental protesters blast firm after it abandoned efforts to start drilling before winter when test of protection systems failed to meet standard to gain permit Environmental protesters blasted Shell on Monday after the energy giant abandoned controversial plans to start drilling for oil in the Arctic this year when a final test of its environmental protection equipment failed to meet the standards required to gain a full drilling permit. The oil and gas group said a new type of "containment dome" – designed for use in the event of a leaking wellhead – had been damaged during testing. "During a final test, the containment dome aboard the Arctic Challenger barge was damaged," Shell told investors in an update on Monday morning. "It is clear that some days will be required to repair and fully assess dome readiness." As a result Shell has been unable to secure a permit to undertake full drilling operations and will have to wait at least until after the Arctic winter to resume its efforts. The long-planned drilling programme in the Chukchi Sea, 70 miles off Alaska's north-west coast, has been dogged with last-minute hiccups as the company has raced to get drilling under way before the winter sets in. Some drilling started this month but was halted within days after it emerged that an ice floe 30 miles long and 12 miles wide appeared to be heading towards the drill ship. Progress was further hampered by efforts taken to protect local whaling operations. "In order to lay a strong foundation for operations in 2013, we will forgo drilling into hydrocarbon zones this year," Shell said. It will continue to drill several preparatory "top holes" ahead of full-blown drilling operations next year. Responding to Shell's latest Arctic setback, Ben Ayliffe, senior Arctic campaigner at Greenpeace International, said: "Shell has invested seven years of effort and spent the best part of $5bn on its Arctic programme, but we can now see what a monumentally reckless gamble this was. The company has nothing to show for it except a series of almost farcical safety mishaps that has left its reputation in tatters. "Investors must now be asking whether investing such vast sums of money trying to exploit the fragile Arctic is really worth it." Shell still awaits a full drilling permit for its exploration programme in the area and the paperwork is dependent on successful testing of its Arctic containment system, which includes the dome. "We look forward to the final receipt of our drilling permits for the multiyear exploration programme upon the successful testing and deployment of the Arctic containment system," the company said. Environmental campaigners have repeatedly warned about the high risks involved in Arctic drilling as well as the potentially catastrophic consequences of a spill similar to Deepwater Horizon in a region already affected by climate change. Asked if another major spill would destroy the company's reputation, Peter Slaiby, vice-president of Shell Alaska, recently told the Guardian: "I feel there is a hell of a responsibility on my head, but we have clear accountability models. I have the ability to do things in the right way and I have the backing of the most senior leaders in Shell to do things the right way." Slaiby had also rounded on critics, such as Greenpeace, which had raised concerns about the amount of field testing undertaken using the containment dome, also known as a "capping stack". "We even had the director of BSEE [Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement] out with me looking at the capping stack … I find these charges [of insufficient planning] groundless." Earlier this month, the containment dome had become the focus of debate after documents obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request suggested field testing of a containment dome took place over just two hours on 25-26 June. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), a US watchdog that helps federal and state employees raise concerns over environmental issues, said it was shocked by the single page of notes from the BSEE after it filed a federal lawsuit against the agency asking for all documents relating to the capping tests. "The first test merely showed that Shell could dangle its cap in 200ft of water without dropping it," said Kathryn Douglass, a Peer lawyer. "The second test showed the capping system could hold up under laboratory conditions for up to 15 minutes without crumbling. Neither result should give the American public much comfort." In its statement on Monday morning, Shell – which has spent more than $4.5bn (£2.77bn) over four years preparing for work in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas – pointedly reminded investors of the importance of its Arctic drilling programme to the US economy. "This exploration programme remains critically important to America's energy needs, to the economy and jobs in Alaska, and to Shell," it said.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Human Rights Watch says it has documented more than a dozen summary executions of prisoners Opposition groups in Syria have been accused of committing war crimes including torture and the summary execution of prisoners, and the UN has been warned of a growing number of human rights violations and the presence of foreign Islamist fighters ranged against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Human Rights Watch said it had documented more than a dozen executions by rebels in the northern provinces of Idlib and Aleppo and the coastal region of Latakia. Three opposition leaders who were confronted with evidence of extrajudicial killings said the victims had deserved to die, HRW reported. The Free Syrian Army, the main armed opposition group, came under pressure from foreign supporters to end abuses after the public execution of 14 members of a clan of pro-regime militiamen in Aleppo in August. It then issued a code of conduct and pledged to respect human rights and humanitarian law. "Declarations by opposition groups that they want to respect human rights are important, but the real test is how opposition forces behave," said Nadim Houry, deputy Middle East director at HRW. "Time and again Syria's opposition has told us it is fighting against the government because of its abhorrent human rights violations. Now is the time for the opposition to show that they really mean what they say." Assad's government has been repeatedly condemned by human rights organisations and foreign governments for systematic abuses that are said to amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. In Geneva, meanwhile, the UN human rights council heard a report describing the "increasing and alarming presence" of "foreign Islamist elements" in Syria. That presence tended to radicalise homegrown rebels who had also committed crimes, said the investigator Paulo Pinheiro. "Gross violations of human rights have grown in number, in pace and in scale," Pinheiro told diplomats. Pinheiro revealed a new secret list of Syrian individuals and units suspected of committing war crimes who should face criminal prosecution. It was based on "a formidable and extraordinary body of evidence", he said. He urged the UN security council to refer the situation in Syria to the international criminal court (ICC). Against a background of bitter disagreements and effective paralysis at the UN, western countries are seeking further condemnation of Assad's government. Russia and China, which have used their security council vetoes to block any punitive action against Syria, seem certain to oppose any ICC referral. The UN says 20,000 people have been killed in Syria in the past 18 months. Activists say the true figure is now closer to 30,000. In Cairo, the foreign ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey were meeting in the framework of a new diplomatic "contact group" proposed by Egypt to try to produce a regional solution to the Syrian crisis. Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN envoy who replaced Kofi Annan this month, was due to meet them to report on his meeting with Assad in Damascus on Saturday. Brahimi has described his mission as "nearly impossible". Iran, Syria's closest regional ally, is said to be seeking to expand the group to include Iraq as well as Venezuela. The US, Britain and other western countries – and Syria's divided opposition – say Iran cannot help end the crisis since its support for Assad makes it part of the problem. Another glaring difficulty is that Saudi Arabia is a keen supporter of the anti-Assad opposition.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Union leaders due to return to negotiating table with mining group as bitter dispute over pay enters its sixth week South African union leaders were due to return to the negotiating table with mining group Lonmin on Monday after another tense weekend of protests and police crackdowns across the country's 60-mile-wide platinum belt. Strikers rejected a pay offer from the financially stricken mining group on Friday, pushing the dispute into its sixth week. Lonmin, which could breach its banking covenants at the end of this month, said on Monday it remained committed to "a sustainable, agreed solution and looks forward to the resumption of talks today". The company said activity at its Marikana mine remained minimal because of "violence and intimidation … particularly in the last week … preventing many of our employees from returning to work". The company's acting chief executive, Simon Scott, said: "The situation is delicate but we have limited options in terms of managing the tradeoff between lost production, higher wages and business rationalisation, including a significant reduction in jobs. "There are already jobs that are at risk because of the current economic climate. The unprotected strike has already added pressure to some of our higher-cost shafts. A prolonged delay in production will only force further difficult management decisions." Pressure is growing on striking miners in South Africa to return to work after five weeks without pay and an increasingly hardline government stance on unauthorised protests and disorder. Armed soldiers and police in armoured cars were reportedly present at one Lonmin mine on Monday morning after another weekend of protests and tense standoffs. The soldiers are part of a 1,000-strong deployment across South Africa's platinum belt as the government seeks to reassert its authority and prevent the industrial dispute sending further shocks through the country's important mining industry. A bitter dispute over wages has stopped work at six platinum mines and one gold mine, and 45 people have been killed since the strike started. On Monday morning, two London-listed mining firms – Aquarius Platinum and Xstrata – announced the reopening of mines closed down amid industrial tension. On Saturday, police reportedly raided a Lonmin hostel and seized spears, machetes and other weapons from strikers. Rubber bullets and tear gas were said to have been used later to disperse protesters. Strikers at Lonmin's Marikana mine rejected a pay offer on Friday and reportedly blocked roads in an effort to prevent police from entering an area where strike leaders were believed to be present. There were reports of further disorder at another mine in the area operated by Aquarius Platinum. The world's largest platinum producer, Anglo American Platinum, said it would recommence mining at its suspended mine near the city of Rustenburg on Tuesday. The government has said it would "not tolerate" the unauthorised and dangerous strike action which had led to the loss of life, and launched a security clampdown on Friday. Over the weekend, however, police were reportedly forced to stop hundreds of demonstrators employed by Anglo American's platinum arm from marching on a police station in protest at the crackdown. Anglo had suspended operation near the city of Rustenburg last Wednesday in order to allow the government time to safely put in place additional security measures. In a statement to investors on Monday morning, Anglo said: "As we expect it will be possible for our employees to return to work safely on Tuesday, the paid suspension period will end on Monday evening." A spokesman for Xstrata Alloys told Reuters the situation in Rustenburg remained tense. He said: "As our employees were coming to work, there has been intimidation which is all over Rustenburg." Just 10% of the chrome mine's workforce were said to have reported for work over the weekend. Sylvania Platinum, which also suspended some operations last week, updated investors on Monday morning on the industrial unrest, highlighting the possibility that the levels of activism seen at neighbouring mines could spread. "It was anticipated that 2012 would be a difficult year in terms of labour unrest and for this reason Sylvania has been negotiating with the dominant union, the National Union of Mineworkers, over the last six months and has to report that, whilst being very aware and accommodating of workers' needs, there is currently still a gap between the union's expectations and economic reality," the company said in a statement. Shares in Aquarius Platinum regained some of last week's losses following news that operations at the group's Kroondal mine had resumed. "Aquarius commends the South African government and South African police services for its intervention and support over the weekend," it added.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Protests on the streets of Madrid and Barcelona over the weekend showed the level of public anger over Spain's austerity programme
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | US defence secretary urges restraint as diplomatic dispute over East China Sea islands threatens countries' close economic ties Japanese companies have temporarily closed factories and offices in China after a weekend of violent protests sparked by the countries' competing claims to a group of islands in the East China Sea, as the US warned of a danger of armed conflict and urged both sides to exercise restraint. The closures came after people took to the streets in more than 70 Chinese cities to protest the Japanese government's purchase last week of the Senkaku islands, known as the Diaoyu in China, from their private Japanese owners. China reacted by sending marine patrol ships to Japanese-claimed waters around the islands. On Monday, the Kyodo news agency, citing the online edition of the Central People's Broadcasting Station in China, said that as many as 1,000 Chinese fishing boats had set sail on Sunday and would arrive in waters off the Senkakus later in the day. The diplomatic row has spilled over into the countries' close economic ties, amid warnings by the US secretary of defence, Leon Panetta, that the spat could deteriorate into armed conflict. "Obviously we're concerned by the demonstrations and we're concerned by the conflict that is taking place over the Senkaku islands, and the message that I have tried to convey is a message that we have to urge calm and restraint on all sides," he told reporters before leaving Tokyo for Beijing earlier on Monday. While it sanctioned the demonstrations, the Chinese government on Monday attempted to dampen anti-Japanese sentiment, removing provocative online comments and photographs of the protests, and threatening to arrest anyone found to have broken the law. Chinese authorities said 10 people had been arrested for attacking cars or vandalising shops, while arrests were also reported over an arson attack on a Japanese electronics factory and car dealership. In some of the worst of the weekend's protests, demonstrators hurled bottles and other items at the Japanese embassy in Beijing and attacked Japanese restaurants and other businesses in at least five cities. Toyota and Honda said arsonists had badly damaged their dealerships in Qingdao in eastern China, while Panasonic said one of its plants had been set alight. The electronics giant said the factory would remain closed through Tuesday, when China marks the anniversary of the start of Japan's occupation of parts of the country. Canon said it would also close three of its four factories in China for the next two days, while All Nippon Airways reported a spike in cancellations on flights from China to Japan. Meanwhile, Japan's Fast Retailing said would close 19 of its Uniqlo clothing stores in China on Tuesday as it expects the anti-Japan demonstrations to escalate. Asia's largest apparel retailer shut seven stores on Monday. In the southern city of Shenzhen, police fired teargas and turned water cannon and pepper spray on thousands of protesters attempting to occupy a street. On Sunday, Panetta said he was concerned that other countries, including the US, could be dragged into any conflict over the islands. Washington has declined to take sides in the Senkaku row, but acknowledges that under the US-Japan security treaty it is required to come to its ally's aid if it is attacked. Japan's foreign minister, Koichiro Gemba, who met Panetta in Tokyo on Monday, said it was "mutually understood between Japan and the United States that [the Senkakus] are covered by the treaty". Panetta said the US did not take a position on the sovereignty claims, but added: "Having said that, we expect that these issues will be resolved peacefully and although we understand the differences here with regard to jurisdiction, it is extremely important that diplomatic means on both sides be used to try to constructively resolve these issues. "It is in everybody's interest for Japan and China to maintain good relations and to find a way to avoid further escalation." The Japanese prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, called on the Chinese authorities to ensure the safety of Japanese citizens and businesses. "Regrettably, this is a problem concerning the safety of Japanese nationals and Japan-affiliated companies," he told broadcaster NHK. "I would like to urge the Chinese government to protect their safety." China described Japan's decision to buy three of the uninhabited islets, which are thought to be surrounded by huge deposits of natural gas, as a violation of its sovereignty. Japan says the islands have been an integral part of its territory since the late 19th century, claiming that China had only shown an interest in them after studies pointed to the presence of potentially valuable natural resources nearby. Chinese state media and online activists united in calling for a boycott of Japanese goods, while Chinese tourism authorities ordered travel agents to cancel package tours to Japan during a week-long national holiday next month. One newspaper warned Japan that it could face another "lost decade" of economic stagnation if trade ties are affected. China replaced Japan as the world's second-biggest economy in 2010, but analysts said that both sides would suffer from a prolonged trade spat. China is Japan's single biggest trading partner and bilateral trade was worth a record $345bn (£213bn) last year. "How could it be that Japan wants another lost decade, and could even be prepared to go back by two decades," said a front-page editorial in the overseas edition of the People's Daily, a Communist party newspaper. The paper said China had always exercised caution over "playing the economic card", adding "but in struggles concerning territorial sovereignty, if Japan continues its provocations, then China will take up the battle". Other recent outbreaks of anti-Japanese sentiment, in 2005 and 2010, ended with short-lived protests and minor disruption to trade.
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Protests on the streets of Madrid and Barcelona over the weekend showed the level of public anger over Spain's austerity programme
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Follow live updates after Hezbollah's leader, Hasan Nasrallah, called for a week of fresh protests over the Innocence of Muslim film, amid continuing anti-US violence
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Firm abandons efforts to start drilling before winter after test of protection systems fails to meet standard to gain permit Shell has abandoned controversial plans to start drilling for oil in the Arctic this year after a final test of its environmental protection equipment failed to meet the standards required to gain a full drilling permit. The oil and gas group said a new type of "containment dome" – designed for use in the event of a leaking wellhead – had been damaged during testing. "During a final test, the containment dome aboard the Arctic Challenger barge was damaged," Shell told investors in an update on Monday morning. "It is clear that some days will be required to repair and fully assess dome readiness." As a result Shell has been unable to secure a permit to undertake full drilling operations and will have to wait at least until after the Arctic winter to resume its efforts. The long-planned drilling programme in the Chukchi Sea, 70 miles off Alaska's north-west coast, has been dogged with last-minute hiccups as the company has raced to get drilling underway before the winter sets in. Some drilling started this month but was halted within days after it emerged that a ice floe 30 miles long and 12 miles wide appeared to be heading toward the drill ship. Progress was further hampered by efforts taken to protect local whaling operations. "In order to lay a strong foundation for operations in 2013, we will forgo drilling into hydrocarbon zones this year," Shell said. It will continue to drill several preparatory "top holes" ahead of full-blown drilling operations next year. Shell still awaits a full drilling permit for its exploration programme in the area and the paperwork is dependent on successful testing of its Arctic containment system, which includes the dome. "We look forward to the final receipt of our drilling permits for the multiyear exploration programme upon the successful testing and deployment of the Arctic containment system," the company said. Environmental campaigners have repeatedly warned about the high risks involved in Arctic drilling as well as the potentially catastrophic consequences of a spill similar to Deepwater Horizon in a region already affected by climate change. Asked if another major spill would destroy the company's reputation, Peter Slaiby, vice-president of Shell Alaska, recently told the Guardian: "I feel there is a hell of a responsibility on my head, but we have clear accountability models. I have the ability to do things in the right way and I have the backing of the most senior leaders in Shell to do things the right way." Slaiby had also rounded on critics, such as Greenpeace, which had raised concerns about the amount of field testing undertaken using the containment dome, also known as a "capping stack". "We even had the director of BSEE [Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement] out with me looking at the capping stack … I find these charges [of insufficient planning] groundless." Earlier this month, the containment dome had become the focus of debate after documents obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request suggested field-testing of a containment dome took place over just two hours on 25-26 June. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), a US watchdog that helps federal and state employees raise concerns over environmental issues, said it was shocked by the single page of notes from the BSEE after it filed a federal lawsuit against the agency asking for all documents relating to the capping tests. "The first test merely showed that Shell could dangle its cap in 200ft of water without dropping it," said Kathryn Douglass, a Peer lawyer. "The second test showed the capping system could hold up under laboratory conditions for up to 15 minutes without crumbling. Neither result should give the American public much comfort." In its statement on Monday morning, Shell – which has spent more than $4.5bn (£2.77bn) over four years preparing for work in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas – pointedly reminded investors of the importance of its Arctic drilling programme to the US economy. "This exploration programme remains critically important to America's energy needs, to the economy and jobs in Alaska, and to Shell," it said.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Editor Alfonso Signorini had said not even a call from the Queen could stop him printing the paparazzi shots Italy's Chi magazine pushed ahead with its plan to publish a series of topless photos of the Duchess of Cambridge on Monday, complete with a curt dismissal of the protests raised by the royal family. The magazine published 18 photographs spread over 19 pages of the royal couple sunbathing at a villa in southern France after the editor, Alfonso Signorini, tweeted over the weekend that "not even a direct call from the Queen" would stop him. The photo sequence is no more compromising that the pictures published last week by French magazine Closer, and show the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on the balcony of the villa. Chi states they look "like a normal couple in love". Lawyers representing the royal family will be in court in Paris on Monday seeking damages from Closer magazine's publisher, Mondadori, and an injunction against further publication of the photos. But no decision has been made on separate legal proceedings in Italy. Mondadori, which is controlled by former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, also owns Chi magazine. Berlusconi's daughter Marina, who manages Mondadori, defended the publication of the photos on Sunday, claiming the publishing firm was exercising its editorial freedom and "doing its job". She denied her father had been consulted about publishing the photos, claiming "my father is in politics, and with all respect has more to think of than a photo shoot". In its article accompanying the photos, Chi magazine compliments Kate's "practically perfect" physique, while a separate article by a plastic surgeon speculates if she has had any cosmetic surgery. In his editorial, editor Signorini argues that "instead of getting angry with the media, who are just exercising their right to report, the royal family should, in my humble opinion, run with the ball and react with typical Anglo-Saxon humour, saying 'So what?'". In an interview with Italy's Corriere della Sera on Monday, Signorini said: "Since Kate is not exactly Alice in Wonderland, she should have expected this." He added: "If I had had more scandalous photos I would have willingly published them." Signorini has stated he has no fear of being sued because Italian law allows for paparazzi to take photos from public property, even if they are photographing people on private property. Photographs of topless women taken at Silvio Berlusconi's Sardinian villa in 2009 were banned, he added, because the photographer was standing inside the grounds of Berlusconi's villa when he took them.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | US says purpose of the radar installation is to protect Japan from threat of missile attack from North Korea The US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, has said an agreement had been reached to install a second system aimed at protecting Japan from the threat of a missile attack from North Korea. The exact location of the radar installation has not yet been determined. It will be in the south, US officials said, but not in Okinawa. Officials stressed the system would be aimed at protecting the region against the threat from North Korea and was not directed at China. The US already has similar early warning radar systems on ships in the Asia-Pacific. This second Japan-based system will allow the US vessels to spread out and cover other parts of the region. Panetta said the installation would also be effective in protecting the US itself from a North Korea threat. He spoke during a press conference in Tokyo with the Japanese defence minister, Satoshi Morimoto. Morimoto said it would not be appropriate at this time to specify a location for the new radar, and said a date for its deployment had not yet been set. While officials insisted the radar system would not be aimed at China, the decision is sure to raise the ire of Beijing. The radar will "enhance our ability to defend Japan", Panetta said, adding that he would talk to Chinese leaders about the system to assure them that this about protecting the US and the region from North Korea's missile threat. "We have made these concerns clear to the Chinese," he said. "For that reason … we believe it is very important to move ahead" with the radar system. Japan has worked closely with the US for several years on missile defence, and has both land- and sea-based missile launchers. North Korea's ballistic missiles are considered a threat to security in the Asia-Pacific region because of the risk of conflict erupting on the divided and heavily militarized Korean peninsula, and because of the secretive North's nuclear weapons program. The long-range rockets it is developing have been test-fired over Japan and could potentially reach the US. North Korea conducted its latest long-range rocket launch in April, defying a UN ban. Pyongyang said the launch was intended to send an observation satellite into space but it drew international condemnation as the rocket technology is similar to that used for ballistic missiles. The launch was a failure and the rocket disintegrated shortly after takeoff. Panetta is on his third trip to Asia in 11 months, reflecting the Pentagon's ongoing shift to put more military focus on the Asia-Pacific. The defence chief is urging countries involved in territorial disputes in the region to find a way to peacefully resolve those problems before they spark provocations and violence. Panetta's visit to Japan also included discussions with Morimoto about the deployment of V-22 Ospreys to the south-western island of Okinawa. Tens of thousands of people have protested against the hybrid aircraft's planned use, claiming they are unsafe. The US had hoped to have the aircraft in place as early as next month, but Morimoto said no specific date has been set. The Pentagon plans to deploy 12 of the aircraft, which take off and land like a helicopter, but fly like a plane. US officials have assured Japanese leaders the Ospreys are safe.
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Mayor Rahm Emanuel calls strike illegal and says he will go to court to seek an injunction to block the walkout The deal between the Chicago teachers' union and the City's school board to end a week long strike unravelled spectacularly on Sunday as the union refused to ratify its negotiator's deal and the mayor threatened to sue the union and force teachers back to work by law. In a dramatic and unforeseen escalation of the dispute, which on Friday evening both sides claimed was close to resolution, the union's House of delegates met on Sunday and decided it needed more time to consider the agreement hammered out by its negotiators. "They're not happy with the agreement. They'd like it to be a lot better for us than it is," said CTU president Karen Lewis. Since Monday is Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, they will not meet until Tuesday which means children will not be able to return to school at the earliest until Wednesday. Chicago mayor, Rahm Emanuel responded with characteristic ferocity, insisting he would file a court injunction to break the strike in its second week. "I will not stand by while the children of Chicago are played as pawns in an internal dispute within a union," he argued in a written statement. "This was a strike of choice and is now a delay of choice that is wrong for our children. Every day our kids are kept out of school is one more day we fail in our mission: to ensure that every child in every community has an education that matches their potential," Emanuel said. "This continued action by union leadership is illegal on two grounds – it is over issues that are deemed by state law to be non-strikable, and it endangers the health and safety of our children...While the union works through its remaining issues, there is no reason why the children of Chicago should not be back in the classroom as they had been for weeks while negotiators worked through these same issues." The teachers have overwhelming public support although the continuation of strike and the mixed signals from the union leadership may jeapordise that. The two sides were deadlocked for the first two days of the strike, particularly over the key questions of the degree to which test scores can be used for teacher evaluation and the city's policy for rehiring teachers who had been fired due to school closures. This was a particular point of concern because the city plans to close around 100 schools imminently throwing thousands of teachers out of work. The closures, said Lewis, "under-girds everything they talk about." Halfway through last week the two sides appeared to have found common ground on both issues. The City relaxed its sanctions regarding teacher evaluations and its emphasis on testing and a formula was agreed whereby teachers with good evaluations who were laid off would be recalled. On Wednesday night Lewis had been very upbeat about the prospect of an deal. Asked to use a scale of one to 10 regarding the chances of a deal being reached on Thursday, Chicago teachers union president Karen Lewis said: "I'm a nine." Asked on Thursday if she thought schools would be open on Monday, Lewis said "I'm praying, praying, praying. I'm on my knees for that, please. Yes, I'm hoping for Monday." The House of delegates demand for more time clearly took her – and the rest of the City by surprise. Some said they did not trust the mayor or the City and so wanted to read the agreement more thoroughly. On Saturday there was a huge celebratory rally of teachers on Chicago's Westside during which representatives of teachers' unions from all over the country came to show solidarity. So too was Barbara Byrd-Bennett, chief education officer with CPS, was also confident, claiming children could be in school as early as Friday. "I can really, really say to you, if we stick to the issues, unless something really nutsy happens, kids can be back in school [Friday]."
  | | | | | | | | | |  | |  | |  |
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire