PDA

View Full Version : In The News Today .....


spare_change
11-29-2007, 06:42 PM
Slovak cops: Seized uranium is weapons-grade

updated 10:45 a.m. MT, Thurs., Nov. 29, 2007
BRATISLAVA, Slovakia - Two Hungarians and a Ukrainian arrested in an attempted sale of uranium were peddling material believed to be from the former Soviet Union, and it was enriched enough to be used in a radiological "dirty bomb," police said Thursday.

The three men, who were arrested Wednesday in eastern Slovakia and Hungary, were trying to sell about a pound of uranium in powder form, said First Police Vice President Michal Kopcik.

"It was possible to use it in various ways for terrorist attacks," Kopcik said.

Investigators were still working to determine who ultimately was trying to buy the uranium, which the three allegedly were selling for $1 million.

He said police had intelligence suggesting that the suspects — whose names were not released but were all men aged 40, 49, and 51 — originally had planned to close the deal sometime between Sunday and Wednesday. Police moved in when the sale did not occur as expected, he said.

One of the Hungarians had been living in Ukraine.

Kopcik said three other suspects — including a Slovak national identified only as Eugen K. — were detained in the neighboring Czech Republic in mid-October for allegedly trying to sell fake radioactive materials. It was unclear to what degree, if any, they played a role in the thwarted uranium sale.

"According to initial findings, the material originated in the former Soviet republics," Kopcik said.

He said the uranium had been stashed in unspecified containers, and that investigators determined it contained 98.6 percent uranium-235. Uranium is considered weapons-grade if it contains at least 85 percent uranium-235.

The arrests heightened long-standing concerns that Eastern Europe is serving as a source of radioactive material for a "dirty bomb," which would use conventional explosives to scatter radioactive debris.

Experts say roughly 55 pounds of highly enriched uranium or plutonium is needed in most instances to fashion a crude nuclear device. But they say a tiny fraction of that is enough for a dirty bomb — a weapon whose main purpose would be to create fear and chaos, not human casualties.

'No reason to panic'
Vitaly Fedchenko, a researcher with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said people should not get the idea that the world is awash in easily obtainable bomb components.

"The danger is definitely there. But there's no reason to panic," he said. "Most of the 'buyers' out there are law enforcement agents. And not all of the materials out there are weapons grade."

Eastern Slovakia's border with Ukraine is the European Union's easternmost frontier, and authorities have spent millions tightening security in recent years, fearing terrorists or organized crime syndicates could smuggle in weapons, explosives and other contraband.

In 2003, police in the Czech Republic, which borders Slovakia, arrested two Slovaks in a sting operation in the city of Brno after they allegedly sold undercover officers natural depleted uranium for $715,000.

Slovak and Hungarian police worked together on the new case starting in August, Kopcik said.

Ukraine's Interior Ministry declined immediate comment on the arrests. Marina Ostapenko, spokeswoman for the National Security Service, said she did not have any information, and the Ukrainan atomic agency could not be reached for comment.

But Natalia Shumkova, head of the Fuel and Energy Ministry's nuclear energy department, said the International Atomic Energy Agency strictly controls all the enriched uranium that is used in Ukraine.

Ukrainian authorities, Western governments and international watchdogs repeatedly have warned that radioactive material from the nation's 15 operational reactors and the Chernobyl nuclear power plant could find its way into the hands of terrorists.

In recent years, Ukrainian authorities have arrested more than a dozen people on suspicion of smuggling or purchasing radioactive materials.

The IAEA, which closely tracks reports of illicit trafficking in radioactive materials, said it was trying to contact Slovak and Hungarian authorities for more information.

Richard Hoskins, an IAEA official who administers the tracking database, said that last year alone, the U.N. nuclear watchdog registered 252 reported cases of radioactive materials that were stolen, missing, smuggled or in the possession of unauthorized individuals — a 385 percent increase since 2002.

But Hoskins cautioned that the spike probably was due at least in part to better reporting and improved law enforcement efforts. Of the 252 cases, about 85 involved thefts or losses, and not all the material was suitable for use in a weapon, he said.

Even so, "there are far too many incidents of material not being properly controlled," Hoskins told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "If we can do a better job, we can help keep these materials from falling into terrorist hands."

If terrorists ever succeeded in gathering enough material to make a nuclear weapon and detonate it, he added, "the consequences would be so catastrophic, the world would be a different place the next day."

Concerns about nuclear smuggling have generally been focused on Russia and countries of the former Soviet Union, where security at nuclear-related industries deteriorated after the 1991 Soviet collapse.

The U.S.-based Nuclear Threat Initiative, an organization dedicated to reducing the global threat from nuclear weapons, said in a report last year that Russia remains the prime country of concern for contraband nuclear material.

In 2006, Georgian agents working with CIA officials set up a sting that led to the arrest of a Russian citizen who tried to sell a small amount of weapons-grade uranium that he had in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket.

In 1997, seven men who officials said planned to smuggle 11 pounds of enriched uranium to Pakistan or China were arrested in Novosibirsk, Russia. That uranium reportedly had been stolen from a plant in the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan.

Pebbles
12-04-2007, 08:10 AM
Think this..."In News Today" is a good idea.

This article gave my sister a chuckle, so I thought I would share:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...ck=1&cset=true

LONDON - Karla Keating and her husband had retirement on their minds in May when they got what they considered an offer to good to refuse: a three-year stint in London.

Coming from North Carolina, they knew it was going to be a bit of a financial leap. But the major U.S. bank where her husband is an executive lured him with a 33 percent increase in pay. Within weeks, they had crossed the ocean and found a nice flat near Marylebone for 1,820 pounds--about $3,750.

"The estate agent told me the price, and I said OK, I guess that's kind of comparable to prices around Europe. And he said, 'That's the price per week,'" Keating recalls. Since then, it's been all down hill.




The iPod Nanos for the kids cost 99 pounds apiece (about $204), compared to $149 in the U.S. Keating's six-Diet Coke-a-day habit got shaved quickly to one, at $2 a can. They sit at the end of the day on their small balcony overlooking Great Portland Street, and her husband smiles (sort of) and says, "Here's your $12 glass of wine."

"When I got here I was like a deer in headlights. I was just, 'Oh my God' about everything," Keating said. "We figured out that with the increasingly weakening dollar, in reality he is making less than he was making 20 years ago."

The falling dollar has been a boon to U.S. manufacturers, and a windfall for the American tourism and retail industries, as Europeans flock to the U.S. for cheap holidays and shopping. But it has been an exercise in sticker shock for Americans living abroad, particularly in Europe, where the euro and the pound sterling have been expanding against the dollar for more than a decade.

Here in London, a pound that was worth $1.58 in 1995 was up to $2 last spring. In November, it hit $2.10, with a 10 percent rise over the past 12 months. For Americans and other expatriates paid in dollars, it makes for constant mental arithmetic whose solution is reached by doubling the price of everything in sight.

A Lands' End cashmere cardigan that sells for $139.50 in the U.S. catalog sells for 129 pounds ($266) in the British version. A Starbucks latte that costs $3.10 in the U.S. is 2.05 pounds ($4.22) in the U.K. A PlayStation 3 game console is $399.99 in New York, 299.99 pounds ($617.98) in London. Gasoline? About $7.80 a gallon.

The U.K.'s 17.5 percent value-added tax accounts for some of the difference, but increasingly, a wallet full of dollars feels like scant armament on a continent packing powerful pounds and euros.

"A lot of our students, the first thing they do every day is they pick up the Herald Tribune and look at what the exchange rate is. Because a lot of these kids, even if they come from around the world, their incomes are pegged to the dollar," said Mark Kopenski, dean of enrollment at the American University in London, which has a large population of Americans studying abroad.

To continue to recruit U.S. students, the university still accepts dollars for tuition and housing pegged to a long-ago exchange rate, meaning people able to pay in sterling get charged 20,000 pounds a year, while dollar-holders pay $36,000 -- most of which the university must convert painfully back into pounds at the going rate.

"In fact, if you did the exact exchange on that now, it'd be over $40,000. But we would be very hard pressed to stay in business if we were totally pegged to that exchange, and it was changing constantly. Our students would be just paying more, more, more the whole time they were here," Kopenski said. "At some point, we could actually lose money by having American students, which would be a shame."

Amanda Owen, a 19-year-old international relations student from Seattle, said she holds herself to a Draconian budget: Dinner out only every other month; she bought her iPod online in the U.S. and had her parents mail it to her; she weaned herself off lattes, organic food and, although she is a vegetarian, cheese.

"I've been to the movie theater twice since I came here, once with my friends, and once when I was baby-sitting," she said (a mid-level seat at the Odeon being $25.75). "I've come to look at entertainment in different ways."

The majority of Americans working in Europe get by because they work for a European company that pays in the local currency, or for a U.S. company that pays a cost-of-living differential, some of which have been adjusted every few weeks as the dollar continues to go south.

Although overseas deployments have become significantly more expensive for U.S. employers, most have seen it as a necessary cost of doing business, said Allyson Stewart-Allen, director of International Marketing Partners, a London-based company that specializes in trans-Atlantic business connections.

"It would be a travesty if an American company stopped sending its people internationally, partly because the business is increasingly international, and American business is already profoundly insular, and it would make American companies even less competitive in global markets than they are today," she said.

The increasing mobility of labor -- particularly in capitals like London, Paris and Berlin -- has enabled many companies, including those of U.S. origin , to hire talent locally and, when possible, pay in the local currency.

"We're not paying people, with very few exceptions, in dollars. And that's going to be the same in most companies these days," said David Campbell, president and CEO of Anschutz Entertainment Europe, a business unit of the Los Angeles-based Anschutz Entertainment Group that recently built London's The O-2, a major new sports and music arena that is one of the venues for the 2012 Olympics.

"The world is a smaller place, and people naturally move around. Certainly in a city like London at the moment, the talent pool at every level of business is pretty strong, so why would you go to the expense of shifting people across the Atlantic?"

But the company had to pay its sterling-based payroll with dollars brought in from the U.S. during the construction phase -- staving off disaster by locking in some $700 million in development costs at fixed, sometimes 3-year-old exchange rates -- until the nirvana point of ticket earnings in pounds sterling was achieved.

London's financial center, known as The City, will see many executives at U.S.-based banks nervously calculating their bonuses this year in dollars, even those that technically are doled out in pounds. But the recent chaos in the financial markets probably will make many of those bonuses smaller than in past years anyway, financial analysts say.

ƒo "Many candidates have the option at the beginning of the year to take their bonus in local currency at a pre-determined exchange rate," said Jon Durrant, a principle consultant at Selby Jennings, which specializes in recruitments to London's investment banks.

For people who don't have a million-dollar bonus to tide them over into the new year, there is the option of slinking back across the Atlantic. And for those who managed to gain a foothold in the European economy, that's looking more attractive than ever.

Walter Wentz, a 77-year-old retired pilot and police officer, moved from South Pasadena, Calif., in 1992 to a village just south of Shakespeare's birthplace, bought a 400-year-old cottage and went native. He bought a Morgan car, started complaining about tourists and launched a blog ("God Save the Queen and vote the straight republican ticket," he advises his readers.)

Lately, though, the queen's domain is getting pricey -- aviation fuel is so expensive he can't afford to fly anymore -- and you can't own handguns anymore, either. Wentz is shopping for property in the San Juan Islands in Washington state, and the good news is, he'll have a wad of cash to take with him.

The pound was at about $1.80 when he bought his house for 140,000 pounds. Now, he's getting ready to sell it for 550,000.

"Basically, if I sell this house, I can take the money, turn (it) into U.S. dollars at 2-for-1 and go back to the States with a million dollars in my pocket," Wentz said. "So I'm getting restless. I'm just getting a bit restless."

spare_change
12-12-2007, 09:26 PM
Keen sense of the obvious: “[W]ith the surge in Iraq and the level of American deaths declining, it is off the front pages.” —NBC’s Tim Russert

Talking down the economy: “Slowing Job Growth Seen as Ominous Sign for Economy” —The New York Times headline reporting 94,000 new jobs in the economy in November and a 4.7-percent unemployment rate

From the Clinton Cheerleaders: “Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is sending Bill Clinton to South Carolina on Saturday, the day before Oprah Winfrey arrives. The former president has spoken here often on behalf of his wife and has proved enormously popular with South Carolina voters.” —New York Times reporter Katharine Seelye **“That’s like saying George W. Bush ‘has proved enormously popular’ with New York voters. Bush got 40.1% of the New York state vote in 2004, slightly more than Clinton’s 39.9% in South Carolina in 1992.” —James Taranto

We Blame Global Warming: “Ski Resorts Warmed by East’s First Big Snowfall” —Lexington (KY) Herald-Leader ++ “First Snow Prompts Schools to Close Early” —WTOP-AM Web site (Washington) ++ “Snow Sets More Records in Grand Forks, Fargo” —Associated Press ++ “Portland Ties 1890 Snow Record” —Portland (ME) Press Herald ++ “Coldest Winter in Years, Environment Canada Warns” —CTV.ca ++ “Record Home Foreclosures Cause Snow Removal Problems” —KSTP-TV Web site (Minneapolis)

HEADLINES!!!

Barack Obama, the Only Sane Choice
"Nutter Endorses Clinton"--headline, Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 12

Recount!
"Chad Force Turns to Russia"--headline, Financial Times, Dec. 9

Answers to Questions No One Asked
"George Clooney Says No to Presidency"--headline, Hollyscoop.com, Dec. 10

Someone Alert Homeland Security
"Dangerous Seahawks Flying Under the Radar"--headline, MSNBC.com, Dec. 10

'Clichés Are a Dime a Dozen,' Washington Replies
" 'It Takes Two to Tango,' Beijing Tells US"--headline, Financial Times, Dec. 11

If These Walls Had Cheeks, the Tails They Could Tell
"Police Say Woman Pinned Boyfriend to Wall With Buttocks"--headline, Charleston (W.Va.) Daily Mail, Dec. 12

But Keep It Under Your Hat
"Reports Say Fedora New USM Coach"--headline, Press-Register (Mobile, Ala.), Dec. 12

'Michael Vick, You Are Hereby Sentenced to Death. Psych!'
"Deception Added to Vick's Punishment"--headline, Associated Press, Dec. 11

'Earth Is Nice, Pluto's Not So Hot'
"Voyager 2 Finds Solar System Uneven"--headline, Associated Press, Dec. 11

What an Odd Name for a Stadium
"Padres, Cubs, White Sox Interested in Fukudome"--headline, Associated Press, Dec. 11

'Dude, Does He Make Doritos Too?'
"Pot-Growing Cave Sold to Cheesemaker"--headline, Associated Press, Dec. 10

Help Wanted
"Thieves Seek Holiday Victims"--headline, Peoria (Ill.) Journal Star, Dec. 12

spare_change
12-12-2007, 09:34 PM
By Walter E. Williams --

The Nov. 13 Wall Street Journal editorial “Movin’ On Up” reports on a recent U.S. Treasury study of income tax returns from 1996 and 2005. The study tracks what happened to tax filers 25 years of age and up during this 10-year period. Controlling for inflation, nearly 58 percent of the poorest income group in 1996 moved to a higher income group by 2005. Twenty-six percent of them achieved middle or upper-middle class income, and over 5 percent made it into the highest income group.

Over the decade, the inflation-adjusted median income of all tax filers rose by 24 percent. As such, it refutes Dobbs-Edwards-Huckabee claims about stagnant incomes. In fact, only one income group experienced a decline in real income. That was the richest one percent, who saw an income drop of nearly 26 percent over the 10-year period. The editors explain that these people might have been rich for a few years, had some capital gains, or could not stand up to the competition with new entrepreneurs and wealth creators.

The U.S. Treasury study confirms previous studies dating back to the 1960s, concluding, “The basic finding of this analysis is that relative income mobility is approximately the same in the last 10 years as it was in the previous decade." As such, it points to a uniquely American feature: Just because you know where a person ended up in life doesn't mean you can be sure about where he started. Most of today's higher income and wealthy did not start out that way.

What about claims of a disappearing middle class? Let's do some detective work. Controlling for inflation, in 1967, 8 percent of households had an annual income of $75,000 and up; in 2003, more than 26 percent did. In 1967, 17 percent of households had a $50,000 to $75,000 income; in 2003, it was 18 percent. In 1967, 22 percent of households were in the $35,000 to $50,000 income group; by 2003, it had fallen to 15 percent. During the same period, the $15,000 to $35,000 category fell from 31 percent to 25 percent, and the under $15,000 category fell from 21 percent to 16 percent. The only reasonable conclusion from this evidence is that if the middle class is disappearing, it's doing so by swelling the ranks of the upper classes.

What about the concentration of wealth? In 1918, John D. Rockefeller's fortune accounted for more than half of one percent of total private wealth. To compile the same half of one percent of the private wealth in the United States today, you'd have to combine the fortunes of Microsoft's Bill Gates ($53 billion) and Paul Allen ($16 billion), Oracle's Larry Ellison ($19 billion), and a third of Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett's $46 billion. In 1920, America's richest one percent held about 40 percent of private wealth; by 1980, the private wealth held by the richest one percent fell to about 20 percent and has remained stable at that level since.

Demagogues duping Americans about stagnant and declining income give politicians justification to raise taxes and place regulatory obstacles in the path of risk-taking, productivity and hard work that will impede the enviable income mobility that has become a part of American tradition. Raising taxes on capital formation reduces the rate of capital formation. Raising taxes on income reduces incentives to work. Unfortunately, because so many Americans buy into the politics of envy, politicians have a leg up in enacting measures that cripple economic growth.

spare_change
12-12-2007, 09:34 PM
Deleted - duplicate