Thứ Tư, 1 tháng 5, 2013

Obama taps former lobbyist Wheeler as telecoms regulator

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Wednesday nominated venture capitalist and former wireless and cable lobbyist Tom Wheeler to be the top media and telecommunications regulator.

If approved by the Senate, Wheeler would become chairman of the Federal Communications Commission at a time when the agency prepares for a major reshuffling of ownership of radio airwaves and tries to catch up to rapidly changing technology.

"For more than 30 years, Tom's been at the forefront of some of the very dramatic changes that we've seen in the way we communicate and how we live our lives," Obama said of Wheeler, who has advised his administration on telecom policy and helped raise large sums for his presidential campaigns.

"Tom knows this stuff inside and out."

Wheeler, who now chairs the FCC's Technology Advisory Council and invests in tech at Core Capital Partners, headed the National Cable Television Association in the 1980s. From 1992 to 2004 he was CEO of the wireless industry group CTIA.

"If anybody's wondering about Tom's qualifications, Tom is the only member of both the cable television and the wireless industry hall of fame," Obama said of Wheeler, who stood next to the president at the nomination announcement.

Wheeler would succeed current FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, who plans to leave for the Aspen Institute think tank in coming weeks. Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a senior Democrat on the panel, will take over as acting chairwoman until the Senate confirms Genachowski's replacement.

(Reporting by Alina Selyukh; Editing by Xavier Briand)


View the original article here

Americans want U.S. to keep out of Syria conflict: poll

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most Americans do not want the United States to intervene in Syria's civil war even if the government there uses chemical weapons, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Wednesday, in a clear message to the White House as it considers how to respond to the worsening crisis.

Only 10 percent of those surveyed in the online poll said the United States should become involved in the fighting. Sixty-one percent opposed getting involved.

The figure favoring intervention rose to 27 percent when respondents were asked what the United States should do if President Bashar al-Assad's forces used chemical weapons. Forty-four percent would be opposed.

"Particularly given Afghanistan and the 10th anniversary of Iraq, there is just not an appetite for intervention," said Ipsos pollster Julia Clark.

The rebellion against Assad's government has resulted in 70,000 dead and created more than 1.2 million refugees since it erupted in 2011.

President Barack Obama has shied away from deep U.S. involvement, although he declared last year that the use or deployment of chemical weapons by Assad's government would cross a "red line."

Obama said on Tuesday there was evidence those weapons had been used, but too much is still unknown for Washington to do more than provide the non-lethal aid it is already sending to the Syrian rebels.

Obama did not rule out action - military or otherwise - against Assad's government. But he repeatedly stressed he would not allow himself to be pressured prematurely into deeper intervention in Syria's two-year-old civil war.

Many Americans are still oblivious to events in Syria. The poll found that about one-third, or 36 percent, had neither heard nor read anything about the civil war there.

Only 8 percent said they had heard or read a great deal and 19 percent said they had heard or read a "fair amount."

The online poll of 519 Americans aged 18 and over was conducted from April 26-May 1. The survey has a credibility interval of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Alistair Bell and Philip Barbara)


View the original article here

Mysterious Hebrew stone displayed in Jerusalem

JERUSALEM (AP) — An ancient limestone tablet covered with a mysterious Hebrew text that features the archangel Gabriel is at the center of a new exhibit in Jerusalem, even as scholars continue to argue about what it means.

The so-called Gabriel Stone, a meter (three-foot)-tall tablet said to have been found 13 years ago on the banks of the Dead Sea, features 87 lines of an unknown prophetic text dated as early as the first century BC, at the time of the Second Jewish Temple.

Scholars see it as a portal into the religious ideas circulating in the Holy Land in the era when was Jesus was born. Its form is also unique — it is ink written on stone, not carved — and no other such religious text has been found in the region.

Curators at the Israel Museum, where the first exhibit dedicated to the stone is opening Wednesday, say it is the most important document found in the area since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

"The Gabriel Stone is in a way a Dead Sea Scroll written on stone," said James Snyder, director of the Israel Museum. The writing dates to the same period, and uses the same tidy calligraphic Hebrew script, as some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, a collection of documents that include the earliest known surviving manuscripts of Hebrew Bible texts.

The Gabriel Stone made a splash in 2008 when Israeli Bible scholar Israel Knohl offered a daring theory that the stone's faded writing would revolutionize the understanding of early Christianity, claiming it included a concept of messianic resurrection that predated Jesus. He based his theory on one hazy line, translating it as "in three days you shall live."

His interpretation caused a storm in the world of Bible studies, with scholars convening at an international conference the following year to debate readings of the text, and a National Geographic documentary crew featuring his theory. An American team of experts using high resolution scanning technologies tried — but failed — to detect more of the faded writing.

Knohl, a professor of Bible at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, eventually scaled back from his original bombshell theory but the fierce scholarly debate he sparked continued to reverberate across the academic world, bringing international attention to the stone. Over the last few years it went on display alongside other Bible-era antiquities in Rome, Houston and Dallas.

Bible experts are still debating the writing's meaning, largely because much of the ink has eroded in crucial spots in the passage and the tablet has two diagonal cracks the slice the text into three pieces. Museum curators say only 40 percent of the 87 lines are legible, many of those only barely. The interpretation of the text featured in the Israel Museum's exhibit is just one of five readings put forth by scholars.

All agree that the passage describes an apocalyptic vision of an attack on Jerusalem in which God appears with angels on chariots to save the city. The central angelic character is Gabriel, the first angel to appear in the Hebrew Bible. "I am Gabriel," the writing declares.

The stone inscription is one of the oldest passages featuring the archangel, and represents an "explosion of angels in Second Temple Judaism," at a time of great spiritual angst for Jews in Jerusalem looking for divine connection, said Adolfo Roitman, a curator of the exhibit.

The exhibit traces the development of the archangel Gabriel in the three monotheistic religions, displaying a Dead Sea Scroll fragment which mentions the angel's name; the 13th century Damascus Codex, one of the oldest illustrated manuscripts of the complete Hebrew Bible; a 10th century New Testament manuscript from Brittany, in which Gabriel predicts the birth of John the Baptist and appears to the Virgin Mary; and an Iranian Quran manuscript dated to the 15th or 16th century, in which the angel, called Jibril in Arabic, reveals the word of God to the prophet Mohammad.

"Gabriel is not archaeology. He is still relevant for millions of people on earth who believe that angels are heavenly beings on earth," said Roitman. The Gabriel Stone, he said, is "the starting point of an ongoing tradition that still is relevant today."

The story of how the stone was discovered is just as murky as its meaning. A Bedouin man is said to have found it in Jordan on the eastern banks of the Dead Sea around the year 2000, Knohl said. An Israeli university professor later examined a piece of earth stuck to the stone and found a composition of minerals only found in that region of the Dead Sea.

The stone eventually made it into the hands of Ghassan Rihani, a Jordanian antiquities dealer based in Jordan and London, who in turn sold the stone to Swiss-Israeli collector David Jeselsohn in Zurich for an unspecified amount. Rihani has since died. The Bible scholar traveled to Jordan multiple times to look for more potential stones, but was unable to find the stone's original location.

Israel Museum curators said Jeselsohn lent the stone to the museum for temporary display.

Lenny Wolfe, an antiquities dealer in Jerusalem, said that before the Jordanian dealer bought it, another middleman faxed him an image of the stone and offered it for sale.

"The fax didn't come out clearly. I had no idea what it was," said Wolfe, who passed on the offer. It was "one of my biggest misses," Wolfe said.

What function the stone had, where it was displayed, and why it was written are unknown, said curators of the Israel Museum exhibit.

"There is still so much that is unclear," said Michal Dayagi-Mendels, a curator of the exhibit. Scholars, she said, "will still argue about this for years."

___

Follow Daniel Estrin at www.twitter.com/danielestrin


View the original article here

Anti-EU party pressures Britain's PM Cameron in local vote

By Andrew Osborn

ASHFORD, England (Reuters) - Britain's ruling Conservatives are set to lose hundreds of seats in local polls on Thursday that will go some way to measuring the threat the surging anti-European Union UK Independence Party (UKIP) poses to their hopes of re-election in 2015.

Even in towns like Ashford in southeast England, which has returned a Conservative MP to the national parliament at every election since 1945, surveys suggest UKIP could win up to one fifth of the votes.

History shows Britons often use mid-term council elections to punish their favored party for perceived failings by temporarily forsaking it only to return when it really counts.

But polling data shows UKIP, which wants to radically tighten immigration rules into Britain, is luring Prime Minister David Cameron's traditional supporters away.

That trend risks splitting the center-right vote in 2015, making Cameron's task of beating the main opposition Labour party even harder.

The Conservatives, the senior partner in a two-party national coalition, trail Labour by up to 10 percentage points in opinion polls, but they are banking on an economic rebound by 2015 to lift Britain from its torpor.

If a national election were held today, Labour would win.

"I've been a Conservative all my life but I'm going to vote for UKIP," said Bill Newton, 76, a retired businessman, out shopping in Ashford's futuristic tented mall. "I want the Conservatives to get the message that they need to change."

More than 2,000 council seats in largely English rural counties and in one Welsh area are up for grabs on Thursday. One national parliamentary seat is also being contested in northern England where UKIP hopes to come second to Labour.

Heavy Conservative losses could renew pressure on Cameron's leadership ahead of a national election in 2015, and the vote is being seen as one of the last chances to test the political climate before that ballot.

UKIP WANTS END TO "OPEN DOOR" IMMIGRATION

Campaigning on a promise to take Britain out of the EU and to end "open-door" immigration, UKIP's policies appeal to many traditional Conservatives who feel Cameron has taken their own party in too liberal a direction.

But though UKIP has surged in the polls, it has no MPs in the national parliament and Thursday's election will indicate if its swelling poll support translates into votes. Full results of the council ballots will not be known until Friday.

"One local poll put our support at 60 percent," Norman Taylor, the UKIP candidate for Ashford Central, told Reuters in an interview. "I don't believe we'll get that, but we should get around 20 percent. From now on we're going to be a dominant force in politics."

The main reason for UKIP's growing popularity is its immigration policy, he said.

"Say NO to mass immigration," proclaim colorful leaflets being handed out to voters on the streets of Ashford.

Taylor, 74, said Ashford and its periphery, which has a population of about 80,000 and is close to the tunnel that links Britain to France, had been "particularly hard hit" by immigration.

An area the former government designated a growth zone, he said it had seen an influx of British migrant workers moving from London for lower housing costs coupled with the arrival of foreign immigrants, particularly from Eastern Europe.

"Everything here is crumbling in every way," he said. "Public services can't cope. They let everyone in and only then did they start to think about the infrastructure."

Taylor said his views and those of his party were not racist but reflected the concerns of many local blue collar workers.

"I've got nothing against them (immigrants). The only problem is we can't handle the numbers."

The background of some of the party's candidates has stirred controversy, however. Several have been suspended after it emerged they had once belonged to far-right groups and a photograph of one candidate making what looks like a Nazi salute has been plastered on newspaper front pages.

Nigel Farage, the party's leader, has said UKIP was unable to vet all of its some 1,700 candidates properly, saying a few undesirables had got through.

On Ashford's main shopping street there are mixed feelings about UKIP, especially from the town's large Nepali diaspora.

A British army battalion of Gurkha soldiers is based nearby and many ex-soldiers have settled in Ashford.

One retired Gurkha who declined to be named said he felt uneasy. "I'm not convinced by UKIP," he said, saying he feared its policies could stoke hostility towards his own community.

(Editing by Mike Collett-White)


View the original article here

HMRC faces court challenge over Goldman "sweetheart deal"

By Estelle Shirbon

LONDON (Reuters) - The HMRC faces a court challenge on Thursday over a deal with Goldman Sachs worth an estimated 10 million pounds to the U.S. bank, a case aimed at pressuring the government into tougher action against corporate tax avoidance.

The challenge by activist group UK Uncut Legal Action stems from public anger in Britain about how big and powerful firms succeed in paying less tax than many ordinary people struggling to cope with a stagnating economy and government spending cuts.

The case concerns a settlement reached in 2010 between Goldman Sachs and the tax authority (HMRC), to end a long-running dispute over a now banned tax avoidance scheme involving the payment of bonuses to UK staff via an offshore tax haven.

UK Uncut Legal Action wants the High Court to declare the settlement, which allowed Goldman Sachs to pay the principal it owed but not the interest that had accrued during a five-year battle with HMRC, as unlawful.

The activist group labels the settlement a "sweetheart deal", a term rejected by the tax authority.

The risk for Goldman Sachs is further damage to its image in Britain after a public outcry in January caused it to scrap plans to delay paying bonuses to its bankers to make the most of an income tax cut for high earners.

In financial terms, the disputed $15 million (9.6 million pounds) is a drop in the ocean for a bank that paid its employees $12.9 billion in compensation and benefits last year.

"At a time when the government is making huge, unjust cuts to public spending, the rich must pay their fair share," said Murray Worthy, director of UK Uncut Legal Action.

The High Court hearing into the Goldman Sachs deal is a judicial review expected to last one day. The court will reserve judgment until a later date. Goldman Sachs, which will not be an active participant in the case, declined to comment.

At a time of budget austerity, revelations about the low tax bills of companies ranging from Vodafone to Starbucks have caused widespread outrage in Britain, putting pressure on the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government to act.

Chancellor George Osborne has called aggressive tax avoidance "morally repugnant" but critics say his new General Anti-Avoidance Rule is not enough.

Asked to comment on the case, HMRC pointed to a 2012 report by the National Audit Office (NAO) that said five big business tax settlements including the Goldman deal were "reasonable" in that HMRC may have received less if it had litigated and lost.

(Reporting by Estelle Shirbon; additional reporting by Lauren LaCapra in New York; Editing by Elaine Hardcastle)


View the original article here

Israel: Conflict over recognition, not territory

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel's prime minister insisted Wednesday that the conflict with the Palestinians is not about territory, rather the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland, appearing to counter a modified peace proposal from the Arab world.

Benjamin Netanyahu has not commented directly on the Arab League's latest initiative, but his words questioned its central tenet — the exchange of captured land for peace.

The original 2002 Arab initiative offered a comprehensive peace between Israel and the Muslim world in exchange for a withdrawal from all territories Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war. Sweetening the offer this week, the Arab sponsor said final borders could be drawn through mutually agreed land swaps.

Netanyahu questioned the premise that borders are the key.

"The root of the conflict isn't territorial. It began way before 1967," he told Israeli diplomats. "The Palestinians' failure to accept the state of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people is the root of the conflict. If we reach a peace agreement, I want to know that the conflict won't continue — that the Palestinians won't come later with more demands."

The Palestinians have rejected Netanyahu's demand to recognize Israel as the Jewish state, saying it would undermine the rights of Israel's Arab minority as well as millions of refugees scattered throughout the world whose families lost properties during the war surrounding Israel's establishment in 1948. The fate of the refugees is a core issue that would need to be resolved as part of a final peace deal.

Though Netanyahu's office has remained silent on the modified Arab proposal, his chief peace negotiator, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, has welcomed it, as have Israel's president and the main opposition parties. However, Netanyahu's own political base and one of his main government coalition partners are either opposed to giving up land or suspicious of the Arabs' motivations.

Qatari Prime Minister Sheik Hamad Bin Jassem Al Thani tried to allay some of the Israeli concerns as he presented the offer on Monday.

Speaking on behalf of an Arab League delegation, he reiterated the need to base an agreement between Israel and a future Palestine on the 1967 lines, but for the first time, he cited the possibility of "comparable," mutually agreed and "minor" land swaps between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

The U.S. has been trying to restart long-frozen peace talks with the Palestinians, and Secretary of State John Kerry called the new peace plan a "very big step forward." Palestinian officials were cool to the concept.

The original 2002 Arab peace initiative offered Israel peace with the entire Arab world in exchange for a "complete withdrawal" from territories captured in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians claim the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, all seized by Israel in 1967, for their future state. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

Though the latest proposal appears aimed at the Palestinians, the original formula refers to other territories as well. Israel also captured the Sinai from Egypt and Golan Heights from Syria in the 1967 war, withdrawing from Sinai in 1982. Peace talks between Israel and Syria over the fate of the Golan failed more than a decade ago.


View the original article here

UKIP pressures Cameron in local vote

By Andrew Osborn

ASHFORD, England (Reuters) - Britain's ruling Conservatives are set to lose hundreds of seats in local polls on Thursday that will go some way to measuring the threat the surging anti-European Union UK Independence Party (UKIP) poses to their hopes of re-election in 2015.

Even in towns like Ashford in southeast England, which has returned a Conservative MP to the national parliament at every election since 1945, surveys suggest UKIP could win up to one fifth of the votes.

History shows Britons often use mid-term council elections to punish their favoured party for perceived failings by temporarily forsaking it only to return when it really counts.

But polling data shows UKIP, which wants to radically tighten immigration rules into Britain, is luring Prime Minister David Cameron's traditional supporters away.

That trend risks splitting the centre-right vote in 2015, making Cameron's task of beating the main opposition Labour party even harder.

The Conservatives, the senior partner in a two-party national coalition, trail Labour by up to 10 percentage points in opinion polls, but they are banking on an economic rebound by 2015 to lift Britain from its torpor.

If a national election were held today, Labour would win.

"I've been a Conservative all my life but I'm going to vote for UKIP," said Bill Newton, 76, a retired businessman, out shopping in Ashford's futuristic tented mall. "I want the Conservatives to get the message that they need to change."

More than 2,000 council seats in largely English rural counties and in one Welsh area are up for grabs on Thursday. One national parliamentary seat is also being contested in northern England where UKIP hopes to come second to Labour.

Heavy Conservative losses could renew pressure on Cameron's leadership ahead of a national election in 2015, and the vote is being seen as one of the last chances to test the political climate before that ballot.

UKIP WANTS END TO "OPEN DOOR" IMMIGRATION

Campaigning on a promise to take Britain out of the EU and to end "open-door" immigration, UKIP's policies appeal to many traditional Conservatives who feel Cameron has taken their own party in too liberal a direction.

But though UKIP has surged in the polls, it has no MPs in the national parliament and Thursday's election will indicate if its swelling poll support translates into votes. Full results of the council ballots will not be known until Friday.

"One local poll put our support at 60 percent," Norman Taylor, the UKIP candidate for Ashford Central, told Reuters in an interview. "I don't believe we'll get that, but we should get around 20 percent. From now on we're going to be a dominant force in politics."

The main reason for UKIP's growing popularity is its immigration policy, he said.

"Say NO to mass immigration," proclaim colourful leaflets being handed out to voters on the streets of Ashford.

Taylor, 74, said Ashford and its periphery, which has a population of about 80,000 and is close to the tunnel that links Britain to France, had been "particularly hard hit" by immigration.

An area the former government designated a growth zone, he said it had seen an influx of British migrant workers moving from London for lower housing costs coupled with the arrival of foreign immigrants, particularly from Eastern Europe.

"Everything here is crumbling in every way," he said. "Public services can't cope. They let everyone in and only then did they start to think about the infrastructure."

Taylor said his views and those of his party were not racist but reflected the concerns of many local blue collar workers.

"I've got nothing against them (immigrants). The only problem is we can't handle the numbers."

The background of some of the party's candidates has stirred controversy, however. Several have been suspended after it emerged they had once belonged to far-right groups and a photograph of one candidate making what looks like a Nazi salute has been plastered on newspaper front pages.

Nigel Farage, the party's leader, has said UKIP was unable to vet all of its some 1,700 candidates properly, saying a few undesirables had got through.

On Ashford's main shopping street there are mixed feelings about UKIP, especially from the town's large Nepali diaspora.

A British army battalion of Gurkha soldiers is based nearby and many ex-soldiers have settled in Ashford.

One retired Gurkha who declined to be named said he felt uneasy. "I'm not convinced by UKIP," he said, saying he feared its policies could stoke hostility towards his own community.

(Editing by Mike Collett-White)


View the original article here