The Nazi gang that ordered the theft of the infamous 'Arbeit Macht Frei' sign from the gates of Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland planned to sell it to fund violent attacks against the Swedish Prime Minister and Parliament, it was claimed today.
A spokesman for the Swedish security police confirmed that the authorities were taking seriously a threat by a militant Nazi group to disrupt national elections next year.
"We are aware of the information about the alleged attack plans," said Patrik Peter, the security police spokesman.
“We have taken actions. We view this seriously.”
The wrought-iron sign, whose inscription – translated as 'Work sets you free' – was viewed by hundreds of thousands of Jews as they entered the Nazi death camp where they met their deaths during the Second World War. It was stolen from the camp – now a museum – last Friday, provoking worldwide expressions of dismay and revulsion.
It was recovered on Monday, hacked into three pieces and wrapped in cloth. Police suspect that it was initially hidden in woodland before being transferred to a builder’s yard where it was found.
Allegations concerning who ordered the theft, and why, have surfaced today in Swedish newspaper reports after the former leader of a Swedish Nazi group claimed that it had been stolen to order for a collector in England, France or the United States.
"We had a person who was ready to pay millions for the sign," the unnamed source told Aftonbladet, Sweden's biggest-selling daily newspaper.
The Nazi source said that the money would pay for an attack on the home of Fredrik Reinfeldt, the Swedish Prime Minister who has held the rotating presidency of the European Union for the last six months, and on the Swedish Foreign Ministry, the paper reported.
A third attack allegedly involved plans to bombard Swedish MPs from the public seats of the parliament.
"The sign was to be delivered to Sweden, since it was here the deal should be made," the source said. "My role was to find a buyer. We had a person who was willing to pay millions but he had no political agenda. These things have a huge collector value... The biggest collectors are from England, the United States and France."
The source allegedly said that five men were to be paid for carrying out the theft. He reportedly insisted that he personally was not guilty of any crime as the deal had not been completed. Aftonbladet reported that he had been convicted several times in connection with his Nazi affiliation, and that he had made repeated visits to Poland.
Polish television has reported that police were investigation a Swedish connection in the theft of the Auschwitz sign. Mr Peter said that no arrests had yet been made.
"A prosecutor has been informed and the Government offices have been informed," said Mr Peter. He declined to discuss any details of the attack plans.
Five men, aged between 20 and 39, from the Torun area of northern Poland, have been arrested for the theft of the sign. The decisive tip-off came in one of 120 calls to a police hotline over the weekend. The museum had offered a £23,000 reward for information leading to the recovery of the sign. The caller gave enough information for all five suspects to be rounded up within three hours.
Andrzej Rokita, the deputy commander of Cracow police, described them as non-political. All had previous convictions for theft or assault.
They are being interrogated in Cracow, the city responsible for the nearby Auschwitz camp museum. If charges are pressed, they could face up to ten years in jail for the “theft of a cultural treasure of particular significance”.
Museum authorities are urging the police to release the three portions of the sign so that they can be re-erected before the 65th anniversary of the liberation of the death camp next month. In the meantime, a replica has been placed over the entrance.
Source: The times
search the web
Custom Search
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Jail for parents who transfixed America with 'balloon boy' hoax
The parents who fabricated a story that their young son had been carried away across the skies in a home-made balloon — triggering a huge police rescue mission and captivating television audiences — were given prison sentences yesterday for the hoax.
Richard Heene, 49, who orchestrated the elaborate lie because he and his wife wanted to become reality TV stars, apologised to the court as he was sentenced to 90 days in jail. “I want to apologise to all the rescue workers and the people that got involved in the community,” he said.
Heene was also given four years’ probation and forbidden from profiting from the balloon stunt during that time. His wife, Muyumi Heene, 48, was sentenced to 20 days in jail, although the judge ruled that she may serve her term flexibly to ensure that the couple’s children were cared for.
Judge Stephen Schapanski, in Denver, heeded a demand by prosecutors that Heene should receive the maximum 90-day sentence to deter copycat stunts. He will begin his term on January 11, with Mrs Heene ordered to start her sentence after her husband completes his.
Heene was also ordered to write a letter of apology to the community and the police and aviation agencies who scrambled to “rescue” the boy from the silver balloon as it hurtled though Denver airspace on October 15, unaware that Falcon, 6, was hiding in his parents’ garage.
Authorities will also seek at least $43,000 (£27,000) from the Heenes in reimbursement for the rescue mission, which involved local and state police, the US Forest Service, the National Guard and the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA).
At one point, as the empty balloon flew high above the Colorado landscape, flights at Denver international airport were grounded. The FAA says that the Heenes will also be subject to a $11,000 fine.
Last month Mr Heene pleaded guilty to a felony charge of attempting to influence a public servant. His wife admitted false reporting. One reason that the couple accepted a plea deal is that Mrs Heene, a Japanese citizen, could have faced deportation if found guilty at a fully contested trial.
The couple sparked a nationwide panic when they called emergency services to report that Falcon had climbed into the saucer-shaped balloon. They claimed that the craft had became untethered, carrying him high into the sky. Authorities, joined by millions of television viewers across the world, tracked the balloon for nearly an hour as it flew through the sky, believing that Falcon was on board.
In fact, under his parents’ instructions, Falcon was hiding at home. The Heenes claimed that they had truly believed that he had been in the balloon.
Suspicions were raised, however, during an interview on CNN when Falcon said: “We did this for a show.” A former business partner told reporters that Mr Heene had been in talks to create his own reality programme and had likely launched the balloon as a publicity stunt.
Bob Heffernan, a lead investigator in the case, said in a letter to the judge that there should be limits on how the Heenes might profit from the hoax, such as through book or TV deals.
“This would hopefully stop the Heenes from being able to exploit their criminal behaviour or their children any more than they already have,” Mr Heffernan wrote in the letter.
“All the while the Heenes were playing us all in hopes of making themselves more marketable.”
No joke
— Education officials in southern India warned teachers in July not to allow stunts that put pupils’ lives at risk after a show at a school in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu, culminated in a motorcyclist laying a wooden plank on top of a young girl and driving over her
— Yaroslav Kudrinsky, a pilot for Aeroflot, allowed his 15-year-old son, Eldar, to take control of an Airbus A310-304 on a flight from Moscow to Hong Kong in 1994. Voice and flight data recorders revealed that the aircraft crashed into a hillside in Siberia, killing all 75 passengers and crew, after the boy disabled the autopilot
Source:The times
Richard Heene, 49, who orchestrated the elaborate lie because he and his wife wanted to become reality TV stars, apologised to the court as he was sentenced to 90 days in jail. “I want to apologise to all the rescue workers and the people that got involved in the community,” he said.
Heene was also given four years’ probation and forbidden from profiting from the balloon stunt during that time. His wife, Muyumi Heene, 48, was sentenced to 20 days in jail, although the judge ruled that she may serve her term flexibly to ensure that the couple’s children were cared for.
Judge Stephen Schapanski, in Denver, heeded a demand by prosecutors that Heene should receive the maximum 90-day sentence to deter copycat stunts. He will begin his term on January 11, with Mrs Heene ordered to start her sentence after her husband completes his.
Heene was also ordered to write a letter of apology to the community and the police and aviation agencies who scrambled to “rescue” the boy from the silver balloon as it hurtled though Denver airspace on October 15, unaware that Falcon, 6, was hiding in his parents’ garage.
Authorities will also seek at least $43,000 (£27,000) from the Heenes in reimbursement for the rescue mission, which involved local and state police, the US Forest Service, the National Guard and the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA).
At one point, as the empty balloon flew high above the Colorado landscape, flights at Denver international airport were grounded. The FAA says that the Heenes will also be subject to a $11,000 fine.
Last month Mr Heene pleaded guilty to a felony charge of attempting to influence a public servant. His wife admitted false reporting. One reason that the couple accepted a plea deal is that Mrs Heene, a Japanese citizen, could have faced deportation if found guilty at a fully contested trial.
The couple sparked a nationwide panic when they called emergency services to report that Falcon had climbed into the saucer-shaped balloon. They claimed that the craft had became untethered, carrying him high into the sky. Authorities, joined by millions of television viewers across the world, tracked the balloon for nearly an hour as it flew through the sky, believing that Falcon was on board.
In fact, under his parents’ instructions, Falcon was hiding at home. The Heenes claimed that they had truly believed that he had been in the balloon.
Suspicions were raised, however, during an interview on CNN when Falcon said: “We did this for a show.” A former business partner told reporters that Mr Heene had been in talks to create his own reality programme and had likely launched the balloon as a publicity stunt.
Bob Heffernan, a lead investigator in the case, said in a letter to the judge that there should be limits on how the Heenes might profit from the hoax, such as through book or TV deals.
“This would hopefully stop the Heenes from being able to exploit their criminal behaviour or their children any more than they already have,” Mr Heffernan wrote in the letter.
“All the while the Heenes were playing us all in hopes of making themselves more marketable.”
No joke
— Education officials in southern India warned teachers in July not to allow stunts that put pupils’ lives at risk after a show at a school in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu, culminated in a motorcyclist laying a wooden plank on top of a young girl and driving over her
— Yaroslav Kudrinsky, a pilot for Aeroflot, allowed his 15-year-old son, Eldar, to take control of an Airbus A310-304 on a flight from Moscow to Hong Kong in 1994. Voice and flight data recorders revealed that the aircraft crashed into a hillside in Siberia, killing all 75 passengers and crew, after the boy disabled the autopilot
Source:The times
US Senate passes sweeping healthcare reform Bill - but tough talks lie ahead
The US Senate has approved landmark legislation today that would extend healthcare for tens of millions of uninsured Americans.
After weeks of partisan bickering, horse-trading and tense negotiation, senators voted for the Bill along party lines - 60-39 - ensuring passage for the upper chamber's version of the historic reform.
President Obama hailed the Bill, describing it as the most important piece of social legislation for the country since the 1930s.
"We are now finally poised to deliver on the promise of real, meaningful health insurance reform," he said. "With today's vote, we are now incredibly close to making health insurance reform a reality in this country."
The unusual timing on the vote - the first on Christmas Eve since 1895 - reflected its importance.
As senators called out "aye" or "no" to register their vote, Robert C. Byrd, the 92-year-old Democrat from West Virginia, deviated from the protocol with a short speech.
“This is for my friend Ted Kennedy,” Mr Byrd said, referring to the Democratic patriarch who died earlier this year, and was a champion of healthcare reform. “Aye!”
Once the legislation passed, after a vitriolic debate, representatives of both parties gave their differing reactions. "This is a victory for the American people," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid.
The man who ushered the bill through its final stages almost fluffed his lines when he called on to vote for the Bill. Mr Reid said: "No. I mean, aye. Yes!", then shaking his read and giving a palms-up shrug. The chamber erupted in laughter.
"This fight is long from over," warned Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell. "My colleagues and I will work to stop this bill from becoming law."
Many expressed regret at the partisan nature of the vote, as not a single Republican supported the Bill. Senator Olympia Snowe, a moderate Republican who has worked for years with Democrat colleagues on developing healthcare legislation, said that she was "disappointed".
She said the atmosphere in the house had not encouraged collaboration. "There was zero opportunity to amend the Bill or modify it, and Democrats had no incentive to reach across the aisle," she said.
Significant hurdles await the legislation. Work will begin in the new year to reconcile the Senate legislation with a House of Representatives Bill that was passed last month. Potentially tough negotiations are expected throughout January as the two Bills have significant differences.
The Senate Bill does not include the "public option" - a government-backed insurance programme - which is a key part of the House legislation. The provision is expected to be hard fought for by liberals in the House, but any public option risks losing the key votes of moderate Democrats in both the House and Senate.
Another dividing line between the two bodies is how the reforms will be financed. The House Bill would impose a surtax on high-earning individuals and couples, whereas the Senate Bill applies a 40 per cent tax to be paid by insurance companies on so-called "Cadillac plans" - health insurance premiums that cost more than $8,500 a year for individuals and $23,000 for families.
White House officials said yesterday it is unlikely that Mr Obama will be able to sign a final Bill before his State of the Union address, which is expected to be on January 26 or February 2.
Mr Obama and senators delayed their Christmas holidays for the vote today, defying snowstorms to travel to Capitol Hill. The President is due to fly to Hawaii now the vote has passed.
The new Senate Bill would extend health coverage to more than 30 million people who have no health insurance - covering 94 per cent of all Americans - and halt industry practices such as refusing insurance to people with pre-existing medical conditions.
Yesterday, Democrats gathered the 60 votes needed to keep the Bill on track for approval, over the unified opposition of Senate Republicans. Today’s vote requires a simple majority of the 100-member upper chamber.
Mr Obama's support for the legislation has angered his own supporters. Some Democrats believe that every last American should be covered and the “public option" should be included in both Bills.
Buying the Bill:
One section is thought to solely benefit Louisiana - and may have won the vote of the State’s Democratic senator Mary Landrieu. Estimates suggest the provision will cost the American taxpayers anything between $100-$300 million in additional aid for Medicaid recipients in her state.
Senator Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, won a provision exempting his state from paying part of the cost of expanding the Medicaid programme. The measure would cost the federal government an estimated $100 million over 10 years.
Mr Nelson also obtained a compromise that will allow individual states to choose whether to ban abortion coverage in certain health plans that receive government subsidies.
Senator Bernie Sanders, from Vermont, was given $10 billion to increase community health centres across America. Critics pointed out the provision will benefit two such facilities in his state, with Vermont also in line to receive additional Medicaid funding as well.
Senator Joseph Lieberman, from Connecticut, an independent that votes with the Democratic caucus, demanded the removal of the “public option” from the Senate Bill. Other moderate Democrats are also believed to have helped kill the measure.
Source: The times
After weeks of partisan bickering, horse-trading and tense negotiation, senators voted for the Bill along party lines - 60-39 - ensuring passage for the upper chamber's version of the historic reform.
President Obama hailed the Bill, describing it as the most important piece of social legislation for the country since the 1930s.
"We are now finally poised to deliver on the promise of real, meaningful health insurance reform," he said. "With today's vote, we are now incredibly close to making health insurance reform a reality in this country."
The unusual timing on the vote - the first on Christmas Eve since 1895 - reflected its importance.
As senators called out "aye" or "no" to register their vote, Robert C. Byrd, the 92-year-old Democrat from West Virginia, deviated from the protocol with a short speech.
“This is for my friend Ted Kennedy,” Mr Byrd said, referring to the Democratic patriarch who died earlier this year, and was a champion of healthcare reform. “Aye!”
Once the legislation passed, after a vitriolic debate, representatives of both parties gave their differing reactions. "This is a victory for the American people," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid.
The man who ushered the bill through its final stages almost fluffed his lines when he called on to vote for the Bill. Mr Reid said: "No. I mean, aye. Yes!", then shaking his read and giving a palms-up shrug. The chamber erupted in laughter.
"This fight is long from over," warned Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell. "My colleagues and I will work to stop this bill from becoming law."
Many expressed regret at the partisan nature of the vote, as not a single Republican supported the Bill. Senator Olympia Snowe, a moderate Republican who has worked for years with Democrat colleagues on developing healthcare legislation, said that she was "disappointed".
She said the atmosphere in the house had not encouraged collaboration. "There was zero opportunity to amend the Bill or modify it, and Democrats had no incentive to reach across the aisle," she said.
Significant hurdles await the legislation. Work will begin in the new year to reconcile the Senate legislation with a House of Representatives Bill that was passed last month. Potentially tough negotiations are expected throughout January as the two Bills have significant differences.
The Senate Bill does not include the "public option" - a government-backed insurance programme - which is a key part of the House legislation. The provision is expected to be hard fought for by liberals in the House, but any public option risks losing the key votes of moderate Democrats in both the House and Senate.
Another dividing line between the two bodies is how the reforms will be financed. The House Bill would impose a surtax on high-earning individuals and couples, whereas the Senate Bill applies a 40 per cent tax to be paid by insurance companies on so-called "Cadillac plans" - health insurance premiums that cost more than $8,500 a year for individuals and $23,000 for families.
White House officials said yesterday it is unlikely that Mr Obama will be able to sign a final Bill before his State of the Union address, which is expected to be on January 26 or February 2.
Mr Obama and senators delayed their Christmas holidays for the vote today, defying snowstorms to travel to Capitol Hill. The President is due to fly to Hawaii now the vote has passed.
The new Senate Bill would extend health coverage to more than 30 million people who have no health insurance - covering 94 per cent of all Americans - and halt industry practices such as refusing insurance to people with pre-existing medical conditions.
Yesterday, Democrats gathered the 60 votes needed to keep the Bill on track for approval, over the unified opposition of Senate Republicans. Today’s vote requires a simple majority of the 100-member upper chamber.
Mr Obama's support for the legislation has angered his own supporters. Some Democrats believe that every last American should be covered and the “public option" should be included in both Bills.
Buying the Bill:
One section is thought to solely benefit Louisiana - and may have won the vote of the State’s Democratic senator Mary Landrieu. Estimates suggest the provision will cost the American taxpayers anything between $100-$300 million in additional aid for Medicaid recipients in her state.
Senator Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, won a provision exempting his state from paying part of the cost of expanding the Medicaid programme. The measure would cost the federal government an estimated $100 million over 10 years.
Mr Nelson also obtained a compromise that will allow individual states to choose whether to ban abortion coverage in certain health plans that receive government subsidies.
Senator Bernie Sanders, from Vermont, was given $10 billion to increase community health centres across America. Critics pointed out the provision will benefit two such facilities in his state, with Vermont also in line to receive additional Medicaid funding as well.
Senator Joseph Lieberman, from Connecticut, an independent that votes with the Democratic caucus, demanded the removal of the “public option” from the Senate Bill. Other moderate Democrats are also believed to have helped kill the measure.
Source: The times
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Silvio Berlusconi will need weeks of treatment after Milan attack
Silvio Berlusconi will need weeks of treatment for the physical injuries and mental trauma suffered when he was assaulted by a mentally ill man in Milan on Sunday, his doctors have said.
The Italian Prime Minister’s nose was broken and he lost two teeth and half a litre of blood in the attack, at the end of a political rally. He said it was a “miracle” he had not been blinded when a chunky souvenir made of marble and metal was thrown at his face.
His assailant, Massimo Tartaglia, an electronics engineer and video games inventor with no criminal record, is said to have told police that he hated Mr Berlusconi. He has been charged with aggravated assault.
Video footage shows Mr Tartaglia, 42, waving a replica of Milan cathedral in the air several times before hurling it at the Prime Minister’s head as he greeted wellwishers and signed autographs.
Mr Berlusconi’s doctor, Alberto Zangrillo, said the injuries were more serious than initially thought, and he was able to eat only with great difficulty. “I found him shaken, embittered, as if he had been woken from a bad dream — really disheartened,” he said.
The Prime Minister has been kept in hospital for another day, and will not be attending the Copenhagen climate change summit this week.
Mr Berlusconi was telephoned by President Napolitano and visited by close aides and four of his children yesterday. Mr Tartaglia’s father, Alessandro, said the family voted centre-left, but nursed no hatred for Mr Berlusconi. “Massimo has psychiatric problems, but he has never done anyone any harm. He has never had any political involvement,” he said.
However, he added: “This episode has been brewing in the negative climate which has taken hold in Italy recently.”
Police suspect Mr Tartaglia’s attack was premeditated, because his pockets contained a pepper spray and a crucifix. A spokesman said Mr Berlusconi was still experiencing “terrible headaches” and was on painkillers and antibiotics. His nose will have to be reset, and he has been given stitches, though it is not clear if he will need surgery.
Mr Berlusconi is reported to have told Paolo Bonaiuti, his spokesman, on the way to the rally that he feared “something might happen”. Mariastella Gelmini, the Education Minister, who was near Mr Berlusconi at the time, said the impact of the object as it struck him was so loud she thought he had been killed.
Right-wing politicians blamed the Left for a “campaign of hate” and portrayed Mr Berlusconi as the victim of a conspiracy, even though Mr Tartaglia apparently acted alone. Hospital officials quoted Mr Berlusconi as asking: “Why do they hate me so much?”
Leaders of the Centre Left said the Prime Minister had created the “climate of hate” through his attacks on the President, the judiciary and the press, who are accused of frustrating his increasingly desperate attempts to change the law to halt legal action against him for alleged corruption.
Rosy Bindi, of the main opposition Democratic Party, said Mr Berlusconi was adept at “playing the victim”. Antonio Di Pietro, the former anti-corruption magistrate and leader of the centre-left Italy of Values party, condemned violence, but said Mr Berlusconi had himself “instigated” the attack. However, Pier Luigi Bersani, the Democratic Party leader who visited Mr Berlusconi in hospital, said he condemned the attack “with no ifs or buts as an unspeakable gesture”.
Amid increasing questions over how the assailant could get so close to the Prime Minister, Roberto Maroni, the Interior Minister, insisted that the rally had been “correctly policed”. The Corriere della Sera newspaper, however, outlined successive security breaches as Mr Berlusconi’s bodyguards failed to shield him from the projectile, and then neglected to drive him away at speed. Instead, he stood on the frame of his car door, continuing to wave to the crowd with blood streaming down his face. “What if there had been an accomplice with a gun?” the paper asked.
Ignazio La Russa, the Defence Minister, complained that police had done nothing to stop protesters who jeered. He said he had run to help police to arrest Mr Tartaglia “to save him from a lynching”, and that he was appalled by comments on the web praising the attacker.
Mr Berlusconi was visited in hospital by Gianfranco Fini, co-founder of the ruling People of Liberty party and his heir apparent. “This is truly a bad day for Italy, and it’s the duty of all the political forces to ensure that Italy does not go back to the years of violence,” he said, in a reference to the “Years of Lead” in the 1970s and 1980s.
Source: The times
The Italian Prime Minister’s nose was broken and he lost two teeth and half a litre of blood in the attack, at the end of a political rally. He said it was a “miracle” he had not been blinded when a chunky souvenir made of marble and metal was thrown at his face.
His assailant, Massimo Tartaglia, an electronics engineer and video games inventor with no criminal record, is said to have told police that he hated Mr Berlusconi. He has been charged with aggravated assault.
Video footage shows Mr Tartaglia, 42, waving a replica of Milan cathedral in the air several times before hurling it at the Prime Minister’s head as he greeted wellwishers and signed autographs.
Mr Berlusconi’s doctor, Alberto Zangrillo, said the injuries were more serious than initially thought, and he was able to eat only with great difficulty. “I found him shaken, embittered, as if he had been woken from a bad dream — really disheartened,” he said.
The Prime Minister has been kept in hospital for another day, and will not be attending the Copenhagen climate change summit this week.
Mr Berlusconi was telephoned by President Napolitano and visited by close aides and four of his children yesterday. Mr Tartaglia’s father, Alessandro, said the family voted centre-left, but nursed no hatred for Mr Berlusconi. “Massimo has psychiatric problems, but he has never done anyone any harm. He has never had any political involvement,” he said.
However, he added: “This episode has been brewing in the negative climate which has taken hold in Italy recently.”
Police suspect Mr Tartaglia’s attack was premeditated, because his pockets contained a pepper spray and a crucifix. A spokesman said Mr Berlusconi was still experiencing “terrible headaches” and was on painkillers and antibiotics. His nose will have to be reset, and he has been given stitches, though it is not clear if he will need surgery.
Mr Berlusconi is reported to have told Paolo Bonaiuti, his spokesman, on the way to the rally that he feared “something might happen”. Mariastella Gelmini, the Education Minister, who was near Mr Berlusconi at the time, said the impact of the object as it struck him was so loud she thought he had been killed.
Right-wing politicians blamed the Left for a “campaign of hate” and portrayed Mr Berlusconi as the victim of a conspiracy, even though Mr Tartaglia apparently acted alone. Hospital officials quoted Mr Berlusconi as asking: “Why do they hate me so much?”
Leaders of the Centre Left said the Prime Minister had created the “climate of hate” through his attacks on the President, the judiciary and the press, who are accused of frustrating his increasingly desperate attempts to change the law to halt legal action against him for alleged corruption.
Rosy Bindi, of the main opposition Democratic Party, said Mr Berlusconi was adept at “playing the victim”. Antonio Di Pietro, the former anti-corruption magistrate and leader of the centre-left Italy of Values party, condemned violence, but said Mr Berlusconi had himself “instigated” the attack. However, Pier Luigi Bersani, the Democratic Party leader who visited Mr Berlusconi in hospital, said he condemned the attack “with no ifs or buts as an unspeakable gesture”.
Amid increasing questions over how the assailant could get so close to the Prime Minister, Roberto Maroni, the Interior Minister, insisted that the rally had been “correctly policed”. The Corriere della Sera newspaper, however, outlined successive security breaches as Mr Berlusconi’s bodyguards failed to shield him from the projectile, and then neglected to drive him away at speed. Instead, he stood on the frame of his car door, continuing to wave to the crowd with blood streaming down his face. “What if there had been an accomplice with a gun?” the paper asked.
Ignazio La Russa, the Defence Minister, complained that police had done nothing to stop protesters who jeered. He said he had run to help police to arrest Mr Tartaglia “to save him from a lynching”, and that he was appalled by comments on the web praising the attacker.
Mr Berlusconi was visited in hospital by Gianfranco Fini, co-founder of the ruling People of Liberty party and his heir apparent. “This is truly a bad day for Italy, and it’s the duty of all the political forces to ensure that Italy does not go back to the years of violence,” he said, in a reference to the “Years of Lead” in the 1970s and 1980s.
Source: The times
Tough sanctions against Iran are needed urgently, Washington says
Revelations that Iran has been working secretly on a trigger for a nuclear bomb urgently underscore the case for tough new sanctions against Tehran, the Obama Administration said.
Referring to a report in The Times yesterday, which suggested that Iran has been working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb, a senior US official said: “Now that work may have been done on a trigger mechanism, this certainly gives urgency, in the absence of any meaningful response from Tehran . . . in terms of additional pressure on sanctions.”
The official added: “The revelations that work has been done [on a nuclear trigger] do add a sense of urgency and these revelations certainly don’t hurt.”
The reaction from Washington comes as the US begins a push to get China and Russia to back a tough new set of sanctions against Iran after a year in which Tehran has snubbed President Obama’s overtures to open a diplomatic dialogue over its nuclear programme. Calls for a united front came as China backed out of a crucial meeting of the six powers involved in negotiations with Tehran.
Meanwhile, Israel — described by a Saudi source as a “huge obstacle” in freeing the region of nuclear weapons — used increasingly aggressive rhetoric over the threat from Iran. Making clear that Israel reserves the right to launch a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, warned “all players not to remove any options from the table”, adding: “We do not remove it.”
Mr Barak said: “There is a need for tough sanctions, something that is well and coherently co-ordinated to include Americans, the EU, the Chinese, the Russians [and] the Indians.”
At the same time, Middle Eastern diplomats warned of a regional nuclear arms race and demanded greater involvement in diplomatic efforts to force an Iranian climbdown.
A Saudi diplomatic source, describing the fears of a nuclear arms race in the region, said: “We want the region free of nuclear weapons, including Israel.” He called Israel a “huge obstacle in this process.”
The revelations about work on the nuclear trigger, contained in confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times and which foreign intelligence agencies date to early 2007, come as the Obama Administration enters a new phase over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. After months of largely fruitless efforts to establish a dialogue with Tehran, the Administration now hopes to get meaningful sanctions out of the UN, something that requires the co-operation of Russia and China.
Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, said on Friday that world powers would soon impose “significant additional sanctions” on Iran.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, conceded yesterday that “I don’t think anyone can doubt that our outreach had produced very little in terms of any kind of positive responses from the Iranians”.
At a news conference with the Spanish Foreign Minister, she signalled that a push for sanctions may be coming soon. While she refused to comment on the Times report — she said that she never commented on intelligence — Mrs Clinton said that US concerns “have been heightened already” in recent months, with the exposure of the secret nuclear facility at Qom and Tehran's reluctance to ship low-enriched uranium out of the country.
The secret documents reveal that Iran has worked on a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion.
Source: The times
Referring to a report in The Times yesterday, which suggested that Iran has been working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb, a senior US official said: “Now that work may have been done on a trigger mechanism, this certainly gives urgency, in the absence of any meaningful response from Tehran . . . in terms of additional pressure on sanctions.”
The official added: “The revelations that work has been done [on a nuclear trigger] do add a sense of urgency and these revelations certainly don’t hurt.”
The reaction from Washington comes as the US begins a push to get China and Russia to back a tough new set of sanctions against Iran after a year in which Tehran has snubbed President Obama’s overtures to open a diplomatic dialogue over its nuclear programme. Calls for a united front came as China backed out of a crucial meeting of the six powers involved in negotiations with Tehran.
Meanwhile, Israel — described by a Saudi source as a “huge obstacle” in freeing the region of nuclear weapons — used increasingly aggressive rhetoric over the threat from Iran. Making clear that Israel reserves the right to launch a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, warned “all players not to remove any options from the table”, adding: “We do not remove it.”
Mr Barak said: “There is a need for tough sanctions, something that is well and coherently co-ordinated to include Americans, the EU, the Chinese, the Russians [and] the Indians.”
At the same time, Middle Eastern diplomats warned of a regional nuclear arms race and demanded greater involvement in diplomatic efforts to force an Iranian climbdown.
A Saudi diplomatic source, describing the fears of a nuclear arms race in the region, said: “We want the region free of nuclear weapons, including Israel.” He called Israel a “huge obstacle in this process.”
The revelations about work on the nuclear trigger, contained in confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times and which foreign intelligence agencies date to early 2007, come as the Obama Administration enters a new phase over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. After months of largely fruitless efforts to establish a dialogue with Tehran, the Administration now hopes to get meaningful sanctions out of the UN, something that requires the co-operation of Russia and China.
Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, said on Friday that world powers would soon impose “significant additional sanctions” on Iran.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, conceded yesterday that “I don’t think anyone can doubt that our outreach had produced very little in terms of any kind of positive responses from the Iranians”.
At a news conference with the Spanish Foreign Minister, she signalled that a push for sanctions may be coming soon. While she refused to comment on the Times report — she said that she never commented on intelligence — Mrs Clinton said that US concerns “have been heightened already” in recent months, with the exposure of the secret nuclear facility at Qom and Tehran's reluctance to ship low-enriched uranium out of the country.
The secret documents reveal that Iran has worked on a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion.
Source: The times
Eight killed in Kabul suicide bomb blast in diplomatic quarter
A massive suicide car bomb ripped through the Afghan capital this morning – at the gates of an upmarket hotel – killing at least eight people and wounding dozens more.
The explosion sent a thick plume of black smoke billowing into the sky above Kabul’s diplomatic district, close to the British and Danish embassies.
Eyewitness Ahmad Jawad said that he saw six bodies on the unmade road, in the immediate aftermath of the blast. Afghanistan's Ministry of Interior said later that eight people were killed; four men and four women. Another 40 people were wounded.
“I was in my car when the bomb exploded in front of me,” said Mr Jawad, 21. “The force of the blast turned my car around. When I got out I saw six bodies in front of the hotel.”
The blast came as President Hamid Karzai was due to attend a conference on how to tackle government corruption at the Foreign Ministry, in a separate part of the city.
Khalilullah Dastyar, the deputy police chief in Kabul, said: “One car was thrown over in the air by the explosion and ten others were destroyed by the blast.”
The gates of the heavily fortified Heetal Hotel Plaza, which is popular with westerners, suffered some damage, but neighbouring houses took the brunt of the blast.
Sidiqullah, 21, who worked in a private guesthouse opposite the hotel said at least five of their staff were seriously wounded, including two Indian cooks.
Eyewitnesses said windows were blown out and a nearby roof had partially collapsed.
Nearby residents fled their homes in the immediate aftermath of the blast.
A former vice president also lived nearby. The home of Ahmad Zia Massoud, brother of late anti-Soviet guerrilla leader Ahmad Shah Massoud, was heavily damaged.
A police source said the former vice president may have been the intended target.
The Wazir Akbar Khan district – built on the land where British were first based in the 1840s – is one of Kabul’s most expensive neighbourhoods.
Most of the multi-storey homes are owned by wealthy Afghans, including government officials, who lease them to western companies and foreign governments.
The Heetal Hotel, where suites cost up to $250 a night, was one of only a handful of hotels in Kabul deemed safe enough for visiting foreign dignitaries.
Source:The times
The explosion sent a thick plume of black smoke billowing into the sky above Kabul’s diplomatic district, close to the British and Danish embassies.
Eyewitness Ahmad Jawad said that he saw six bodies on the unmade road, in the immediate aftermath of the blast. Afghanistan's Ministry of Interior said later that eight people were killed; four men and four women. Another 40 people were wounded.
“I was in my car when the bomb exploded in front of me,” said Mr Jawad, 21. “The force of the blast turned my car around. When I got out I saw six bodies in front of the hotel.”
The blast came as President Hamid Karzai was due to attend a conference on how to tackle government corruption at the Foreign Ministry, in a separate part of the city.
Khalilullah Dastyar, the deputy police chief in Kabul, said: “One car was thrown over in the air by the explosion and ten others were destroyed by the blast.”
The gates of the heavily fortified Heetal Hotel Plaza, which is popular with westerners, suffered some damage, but neighbouring houses took the brunt of the blast.
Sidiqullah, 21, who worked in a private guesthouse opposite the hotel said at least five of their staff were seriously wounded, including two Indian cooks.
Eyewitnesses said windows were blown out and a nearby roof had partially collapsed.
Nearby residents fled their homes in the immediate aftermath of the blast.
A former vice president also lived nearby. The home of Ahmad Zia Massoud, brother of late anti-Soviet guerrilla leader Ahmad Shah Massoud, was heavily damaged.
A police source said the former vice president may have been the intended target.
The Wazir Akbar Khan district – built on the land where British were first based in the 1840s – is one of Kabul’s most expensive neighbourhoods.
Most of the multi-storey homes are owned by wealthy Afghans, including government officials, who lease them to western companies and foreign governments.
The Heetal Hotel, where suites cost up to $250 a night, was one of only a handful of hotels in Kabul deemed safe enough for visiting foreign dignitaries.
Source:The times
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Blair ‘would have gone to war without Iraqi WMD’
Tony Blair would still have led the country to war in Iraq even if he had known that it had no weapons of mass destruction.
The former Prime Minister has confessed that he would have had to use different arguments to justify toppling Saddam Hussein. But he says in an interview to be broadcast tomorrow morning that he would still have taken steps to remove the Iraqi dictator from power.
He also put the decision to go to war in Iraq in the context of a wider battle over Islam. He said: “I happen to think that there is a major struggle going on all over the world, really, which is about Islam and what is happening within Islam.” He said that this struggle had a “long way to go”.
At the time of the conflict Mr Blair, who is to be questioned by the Iraq inquiry early next year, based his decision to go to war on evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
He gives an indication of his motives in an interview with the former daytime host Fern Britton, to be screened on BBC One. Mr Blair, who converted to Roman Catholicism when he left office two and a half years ago, denied that his religious faith played a direct part in his decision to go to war. But his faith gave him the strength to hold to the decision and supported him during “the loneliness of decision-maker”.
He said it was the “threat” that Saddam presented to the region that was uppermost in his mind. The development of weapons of mass destruction was one aspect of that threat.
Mr Blair said that there had been 12 years of the United Nations going “to and fro” on the subject, and he noted that Saddam had used chemical weapons on his own people.
Asked by Britton if he would still have gone on had he known there were no weapons of mass destruction, he said: “I would still have thought it right to remove him.”
Parents of some of the servicemen who have died have refused to shake his hand and accused him of being a war criminal with blood on his hands.
Mr Blair said that he was prepared to carry that responsibility. “There’s no point in going into a situation of conflict and not understanding there is going to be a price paid.”
The former Prime Minister, who now spends much of his time in the Middle East, working as an envoy for the Quartet of the US, Russia, the UN and the EU, said that it was difficult to judge yet whether the decision to go to war had been helpful or not.
This week the head of MI6 said that Saddam’s Iraq was one of a number of countries where Britain would have liked regime change. Sir John Sawers, who was at the time Mr Blair’s private secretary for foreign affairs, told the Iraq inquiry that discussions had taken place in 2001 — two years before the invasion — on “political” actions that could help to undermine the Baathist regime.
However, Sir John insisted that there had been no talk at that stage in Whitehall of military action in Iraq. He said that the approach adopted was based on the methods that had led to the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia. Among the proposals considered was support for opposition groups and indicting Saddam for war crimes that he had committed during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
“I think there are a lot of countries around the world where we would like to see a change of regime. That doesn’t mean one pursues active policies in that direction,” he said.
It was claimed last night that Mr Blair misled MPs by insisting that Britain was at risk from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction before ordering the invasion. A senior Conservative MP said that evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war this week proved that the former Prime Minister was aware that new intelligence had established Saddam had no workable WMD missiles.
Sir John Scarlett, the head of the committee that oversaw intelligence in the build-up to the invasion in March 2003, told the inquiry that reports that Saddam did not have warheads capable of dispersing chemical weapons started at the end of 2002.
An intelligence update on March 10 — eight days before the crucial vote by MPs in favour of the war — reported that Iraq had “no missiles which could reach Israel and none which could carry germ or biological weapons”. All the intelligence reports went directly to the Prime Minister, Sir John said.
Richard Ottaway, a member of the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee, said that the evidence revealed that Mr Blair had repeatedly misled MPs. Mr Blair had described in detail the scale of Iraq’s armoury and said that Britain could not afford to back down in the face of the “clear and present danger” to national security posed by development of weapons of mass destruction. Inspections after the war revealed no evidence of workable chemical or biological weapons.
Sir John is due to be questioned again by the inquiry in private to avoid damaging national security.
Mr Blair is expected to give evidence next month or in early February.
Fern Britton
Age: 52
Education: Dr Challoner’s High School, Buckinghamshire; Central School of Speech and Drama
Career: After breakfast news with both BBC and GMTV found a niche presenting Ready Steady Cook. Spent ten years as Phillip Schofield's screen “wife” on ITV’s This Morning
The big interviews: Gordon Brown and Kerry Katona
Interview style: Like a doting mother asking if you are lying, and believing whatever you say, then apologising for questioning your judgment
Source:The times
The former Prime Minister has confessed that he would have had to use different arguments to justify toppling Saddam Hussein. But he says in an interview to be broadcast tomorrow morning that he would still have taken steps to remove the Iraqi dictator from power.
He also put the decision to go to war in Iraq in the context of a wider battle over Islam. He said: “I happen to think that there is a major struggle going on all over the world, really, which is about Islam and what is happening within Islam.” He said that this struggle had a “long way to go”.
At the time of the conflict Mr Blair, who is to be questioned by the Iraq inquiry early next year, based his decision to go to war on evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
He gives an indication of his motives in an interview with the former daytime host Fern Britton, to be screened on BBC One. Mr Blair, who converted to Roman Catholicism when he left office two and a half years ago, denied that his religious faith played a direct part in his decision to go to war. But his faith gave him the strength to hold to the decision and supported him during “the loneliness of decision-maker”.
He said it was the “threat” that Saddam presented to the region that was uppermost in his mind. The development of weapons of mass destruction was one aspect of that threat.
Mr Blair said that there had been 12 years of the United Nations going “to and fro” on the subject, and he noted that Saddam had used chemical weapons on his own people.
Asked by Britton if he would still have gone on had he known there were no weapons of mass destruction, he said: “I would still have thought it right to remove him.”
Parents of some of the servicemen who have died have refused to shake his hand and accused him of being a war criminal with blood on his hands.
Mr Blair said that he was prepared to carry that responsibility. “There’s no point in going into a situation of conflict and not understanding there is going to be a price paid.”
The former Prime Minister, who now spends much of his time in the Middle East, working as an envoy for the Quartet of the US, Russia, the UN and the EU, said that it was difficult to judge yet whether the decision to go to war had been helpful or not.
This week the head of MI6 said that Saddam’s Iraq was one of a number of countries where Britain would have liked regime change. Sir John Sawers, who was at the time Mr Blair’s private secretary for foreign affairs, told the Iraq inquiry that discussions had taken place in 2001 — two years before the invasion — on “political” actions that could help to undermine the Baathist regime.
However, Sir John insisted that there had been no talk at that stage in Whitehall of military action in Iraq. He said that the approach adopted was based on the methods that had led to the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia. Among the proposals considered was support for opposition groups and indicting Saddam for war crimes that he had committed during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
“I think there are a lot of countries around the world where we would like to see a change of regime. That doesn’t mean one pursues active policies in that direction,” he said.
It was claimed last night that Mr Blair misled MPs by insisting that Britain was at risk from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction before ordering the invasion. A senior Conservative MP said that evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war this week proved that the former Prime Minister was aware that new intelligence had established Saddam had no workable WMD missiles.
Sir John Scarlett, the head of the committee that oversaw intelligence in the build-up to the invasion in March 2003, told the inquiry that reports that Saddam did not have warheads capable of dispersing chemical weapons started at the end of 2002.
An intelligence update on March 10 — eight days before the crucial vote by MPs in favour of the war — reported that Iraq had “no missiles which could reach Israel and none which could carry germ or biological weapons”. All the intelligence reports went directly to the Prime Minister, Sir John said.
Richard Ottaway, a member of the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee, said that the evidence revealed that Mr Blair had repeatedly misled MPs. Mr Blair had described in detail the scale of Iraq’s armoury and said that Britain could not afford to back down in the face of the “clear and present danger” to national security posed by development of weapons of mass destruction. Inspections after the war revealed no evidence of workable chemical or biological weapons.
Sir John is due to be questioned again by the inquiry in private to avoid damaging national security.
Mr Blair is expected to give evidence next month or in early February.
Fern Britton
Age: 52
Education: Dr Challoner’s High School, Buckinghamshire; Central School of Speech and Drama
Career: After breakfast news with both BBC and GMTV found a niche presenting Ready Steady Cook. Spent ten years as Phillip Schofield's screen “wife” on ITV’s This Morning
The big interviews: Gordon Brown and Kerry Katona
Interview style: Like a doting mother asking if you are lying, and believing whatever you say, then apologising for questioning your judgment
Source:The times
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
