Nevermind what presidential hopeful Barack Obama is saying during his current campaign photo-op in Afghanistan. The people to whom Americans and congress — both sides of the aisle — should listen are our military commanders on the field of battle. To put it bluntly, Senator Obama is an “empty-suit” attempting to dupe American voters into believing he really knows what he’s doing when it comes to warfare, national security and geopolitical strategy. And, with the help of the anti-military news media, he’s succeeding.

The following is based on a Department of Defense teleconference with Internet journalists and bloggers. These are the people to whom we should listen and support.

Pakistan must do more on its side of the border with Afghanistan to combat terrorist extremists, U.S. defense leaders said Friday during a conference with Internet journalists and bloggers.

“We’re seeing a greater number of insurgents and foreign fighters flowing across the border with Pakistan, unmolested and unhindered,” Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during a news conference. “This movement needs to stop.”

Mullen, who recently returned from a trip to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, said all involved with operations on the border must do a better job of policing the region and eliminating the extremists’ safe havens in Pakistan’s federally administered tribal areas that are launching pads for attacks on coalition forces. The most recent example was an attack on a coalition and Afghan military outpost in Wanat, in which nine soldiers of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team were killed.

“We either find ways to work better together or we fail to secure a better future for the people we’ve all pledged to protect,” Mullen said. “We can and must do better.”

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said there is no question that the absence of pressure on the Pakistani side of the border is creating an opportunity for more terrorists to cross and launch attacks.

“There are efforts under way to try and improve that on both the Pakistani side and on the Afghan and coalition side,” he said. “There is a real need to do something on the Pakistani side of the border to bring pressure to bear on the Taliban and some of these other violent groups.”

Gates and Mullen said the enemy in Afghanistan has grown bolder, more sophisticated and more diverse. They also said the enemy is taking advantage of the safe havens to train and plan attacks. Mullen said that doing something about the situation was the main message he delivered to all leaders he met in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The new Pakistani government needs to face the reality that it faces a security challenge of its own from these groups, Gates said. The number of terrorist attacks inside Pakistan has doubled in a year, he noted.

“One of the things that is really important is the civilian government gaining a full appreciation of the magnitude and reality of the danger to them posed by these groups and the lack of control or the lack of pressure in the FATA and in the Northwest Province,” the secretary said. “So it seems to me the first thing is for the Pakistanis to have a clear understanding of what’s happening. We can make a contribution there. And then, … as I’ve said before, we are ready, willing and able to help them in any way we can.”

Defense Department officials are looking closely at sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. President Bush said the United States would like to send three brigade combat teams to Afghanistan in fiscal 2009. “I think that we are clearly working very hard to see if there are opportunities to send additional forces sooner rather than later,” Gates said. “No decisions have been made; no recommendations have been made.”

Gates said a need clearly exists to provide additional forces. Commanders in Afghanistan are looking within Afghanistan to see how to reposition the forces they have. The French, for example, are sending a 700-man battalion to Regional Command East that could free up U.S. troops for action elsewhere in Afghanistan.

Gates indicated that military planners are looking at a variety of options on how to respond to the need for more troops.

“I will tell you that I have sought assurances that there will be no return to longer than 12-month deployments,” Gates said. “That’s not something we’re considering, and I’m not aware of any plans to extend anybody beyond the extensions that have already taken place.”

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he’s the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund’s weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

“Autism is a very serious condition that greatly impacts the lives of those affected,” said NAA board member Lori McIlwain.

“Many children with autism experience tremendous physical pain from underlying pathologies, which accounts for the screaming this person callously dismisses. To have an uneducated opinion about autism is perfectly within one’s right, but to earn a living by shock-value exploitation of children’s suffering, while suggesting they should be called ‘idiots,’ is disgraceful,” she said.

While the symptoms of autism often include unusual or negative behaviors, there are serious underlying medical issues that cause these symptoms. “To suggest that these kids and their parents are to blame for autism is just plain ignorant,” said NAA vice president Ann Brasher, who has a grandson diagnosed with autism.

“The devastating emotional toll autism takes on families is unfathomable to those like Mr. Savage who haven’t lived with it. He owes an apology to children and their parents for trivializing their pain,” she added.

In addition to a public apology and retraction of his words regarding children and families impacted by autism, NAA asks that time be allowed on the Savage’s top-rated, nationally syndicated show for a truthful portrayal of autism, its effect on families, and the advances in research that are offering hope for recovery to those dealing with autism.

For more information on autism, visit www.nationalautismassociation.org.

ShareThis

(This article is based on a report submitted to the National Association of Chiefs of Police. The writer is the organization’s public information officer.)

The recent deployment of Tasers to State Police troopers for use in confrontational
situations is helping to ensure the safety of the public and officers themselves, Commissioner Jeffrey B. Miller said yesterday.

“Tasers already have proven to be highly effective, non-lethal weapons for subduing individuals threatening harm to themselves or others,” Miller said during a news conference at the State Police Academy in Hershey, PA.

“They have been used with great success to control people who are under the
influence of drugs or alcohol; suffering from mental health issues; or who simply are intent on harming themselves, our officers or others.

“In some of these cases, there is no doubt our troopers would have been required to grapple with the individuals, strike them with their batons, or fire their service weapons to protect themselves or others. The Taser provides an excellent option to the use of deadly force.”

Miller said Tasers have been used in a wide variety of circumstances, including the following situations:

— Two troopers in Clearfield County responded to a report of an
intoxicated man arguing with his elderly parents. The troopers found the
subject armed with a rifle, which he pointed at them. One of the troopers
fired his Taser and the man was taken into custody.

— Troopers in Cumberland County encountered a man armed with a knife
who was threatening suicide. When the man refused commands to drop the
knife, a trooper fired his Taser and the officers were able to disarm the
subject.

— Adult probation officers in Franklin County called State Police
seeking assistance with a suspect who had wrestled with them and fled on
foot. A trooper found the man, who was carrying a glass bottle. When the
man ignored the trooper’s commands and tried to run away, the trooper used
his Taser and took the suspect into custody.

Taser is the brand name of an electronic immobilization device, or EID, that fires two darts attached to wires. The device delivers a 50,000-volt charge, incapacitating an individual long enough for troopers to take the person into custody without causing permanent harm to the individual.

Miller said State Police conducted a two-year study of the possible use of EIDs and initiated a pilot program in 2006 by providing Tasers to 18 officers statewide.

Based on results of that program, Miller said, State Police this year began training and equipping 3,000 troopers with Taser X26 model devices made by Taser International Inc. of Scottsdale, Ariz. The Tasers, which cost $899 per unit, were purchased primarily with asset forfeiture funds.

Miller said troopers used their Tasers 144 times during the first six months of this year.

“The response from troopers in the field has been completely positive,” Miller said.

“One of the key reasons is that using Tasers means it’s much less likely that an officer will become involved in a physical confrontation that could result in injuries to the suspect or the officer.”

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he’s the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund’s weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

Although it isn’t at the core of the ITER mission, KSTAR has still achieved several milestones in physics and fusion energy production. It is currently the largest tokamak type reactor in the world, and it is one of the first reactors to use fully superconducting magnets of the same type as those that will be installed in ITER. KSTAR will be studying the use of both hydrogen and deuterium for potential fusion fuel sources, but is not intended to look into the use of tritium, which will be studied by the main ITER reactor once it has been completed.

KSTAR requires 30 supercooled (-268°C) superconducting magnets - weighing in at a combined 300 tons - in order to contain the plasma, which can reach temperatures up to one hundred million degrees. No known substance could contain matter at those temperatures, so magnetic fields must be employed to keep the plasma from coming into contact with the components of the reactor.

Kwon Eun-Hee, who works for the National Fusion Research Institute, said, “Today’s demonstration was highly successful.” Ryu Koo-hee, speaking on behalf of the Korean ministries of Education and Science and Technology, added that “[t]he generation of plasma proves that KSTAR is ready to operate and contribute significantly to the research for nuclear fusion.”

source

Creative Commons Attribution 2.5

ShareThis

Now Arecibo is facing severe budget cuts which could ultimately close the facility. In an in depth exclusive report, Wikinews examined how much of the observatory’s budget was at risk, and what the possible outcomes could be for the programs currently relying on Arecibo as their main research tool. Wikinews spoke to several individuals closely affiliated with projects and facilities who use significant time at the observatory.

Currently, the NSF funds the operations of Arecibo with just over US$10 million every year. By 2011 they plan to drastically cut that funding to only $4 million a year, nearly 65% less than the current budget. To counter that loss, the United States House of Representatives passed a bill that would authorize NASA to spend at least 2 million dollars of their nearly $21 billion budget to fund portions of Arecibo until 2009. But that still leaves more than half of the loss to be recovered, and if something isn’t done soon the facility will be closed by 2011 — or sooner if additional cuts are made.

Arecibo is 305 meters in diameter and 300 meters tall at its highest point. It also has an on-site remote sensing LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) system to detect light and range of a given object in space. Construction began in 1960 and the observatory officially opened on November 1, 1963. Since then, several projects, programs and discoveries were made possible because of the telescope.

In 1989, the first images of an asteroid named 4769 Castalia were captured using Arecibo. In 1992 Aleksander Wolszczan, an astronomer from Poland used Arecibo to discover pulsar PSR B1257+12 which then led him to discover the first three extrasolar planets in history, and possibly a comet. Scientists with the Near Earth Object Program also use the observatory to track possible meteors and asteroids that have the potential to strike the Earth. Arecibo is also part of the Express Production Real-time e-VLBI Service (EXPReS) project which is aimed at connecting telescopes from Africa, Europe and North and South America to create a 6,000 mile wide telescope. This allows all connected telescopes to observe the exact same spot in the sky giving scientists images 100 times better than any single telescope on Earth. A successful test of this system was completed on May 22.
Artist’s impression of the three extrasolar planets discovered in 1992. Image: NASA/JPL-Caltech/R. Hurt (SSC).
Artist’s impression of the three extrasolar planets discovered in 1992.
Image: NASA/JPL-Caltech/R. Hurt (SSC).

Perhaps the most well known use of Arecibo is its ongoing attempt to find and or communicate with extraterrestrial life. The popular distributed computing SETI@home project launched in 1999 (started by scientists at the University of California, Berkeley), uses Arecibo on a daily basis to record radio data. SETI@home users from around the world can then donate computer time to analyze the data for potential artificial signals, and maybe some day find a message from another intelligent civilization.

“If this occurs [budget cuts], all projects using Arecibo would stop, including uncompleted surveys looking for pulsars, mapping Galactic hydrogen and of course our SETI surveys (SETI@home and SERENDIP V),” stated Eric Korpela, the project scientist for SETI@home, to Wikinews. This would also include the NEO Program. Currently the NEO is mandated by Congress to keep a record of all near-Earth objects that are more than 1 kilometer in diameter.

According to Korpela, the cuts began several years ago when United States senators earmarked funds for other observatories located in West Virginia and New Mexico. He says that those actions “diverted money away from the rest of astronomy” causing the NSF to take the shortfall from the Arecibo budget.

“About two years ago, NSF decided that because of additional funding problems Arecibo would have to close in 2011 with substantial budget cuts before then,” added Korpela who also said the he is sure that SETI@home and SERNDIP V could find an alternative science source, but nothing as powerful and as sensitive as Arecibo. Korpela also adds that there is not yet any planned move of SETI@home, and no agreements between them and other observatories.

“I’m certain the both SETI@home and SERENDIP V would find another telescope to use. But no other telescope comes close to the sensitivity of Arecibo, with the next largest telescopes having a factor of 10 less collecting area and therefore a factor of 10 less sensitivity. The same is true for the pulsar searches. For the hydrogen mapping Arecibo has 3 times the angular resolution of the nearest competitors,” added Korpela but also stated that “there currently aren’t any plans” to move SETI@home and that they don’t “have any agreements from any of the telescopes” to host SETI@home; there are several possible telescopes SETI@home could use adds Korpela.
SETI@home logo. Image: SETI@home.
SETI@home logo.
Image: SETI@home.

“Of course we’d like the largest telescopes available if we could get them. Parkes (a 64m telescope in Australia) would be a good candidate. Effelsberg (a 100m dish in Germany) or the 100m Green Bank Telescope in the U.S. would also be good candidates, but as I said much discussion would need to take place before a change could happen,” said Korpela.

In June, former U.S. President Bill Clinton and his daughter Chelsea visited the observatory in an effort to bring awareness to the importance of Arecibo; he called the funding for the facility “gravely inadequate.” He also stated that his wife, and former 2008 U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, supports the need for “basic science”, and notes Hillary’s continued support for a defeated congressional bill that would have given Arecibo the funding it needed.

The bill, named H.R. 2862 ‘Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill’, was rejected by the House of Representatives because “it exceed[ed] the President’s request by $1.4 billion.” The House stated that the need for more funding for the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina was more important.

“The Administration shares the priority the Senate Committee affords basic research and fundamental science and education at NSF, but is concerned that the bill does not fully support the President’s request,” stated the bill which also added that “the Committee has identified areas, such as facilities oversight, that need increased investment to maintain NSF’s efficient operations” and that the NSF didn’t “provide [a] full request for salaries and expenses that would allow NSF to continue to perform to high standards.”
Bill Clinton and daughter Chelsea at Arecibo. Image: NAIC - Arecibo Observatory, a facility of the NSF. Photo by Tony Acevedo.
Bill Clinton and daughter Chelsea at Arecibo.
Image: NAIC - Arecibo Observatory, a facility of the NSF. Photo by Tony Acevedo.

A new bill was then resubmitted and reintroduced as H.R. 3737 on October 3, 2007. It is specifically aimed at providing the “National Science Foundation and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) utilization of the Arecibo Observatory.”

“[This bill will] ensure that the Arecibo Observatory is fully funded to continue its research on Earth’s ionosphere, continue its research in radio astronomy, and continue research on the solar system; and coordinate with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to ensure that the capabilities of the Arecibo Observatory continue to be available for National Aeronautics and Space Administration research in characterizing and mitigating Near Earth Objects, and other research as needed,” states the Bill.

If Arecibo were to close, Korpela states that it would take only a short time for SETI@home to move its project elsewhere, but that any agreements made with other observatories will take a much longer time to work out. “Setting up the equipment at a new telescope would be a matter of days, arranging an agreement to do so would take much longer. If we can’t find an alternative telescope after an Arecibo shutdown, the project would end once the existing data was analyzed. We’re still hoping that Arecibo will be spared,” added Korpela. He calls for more support of bill H.R. 3737 to continue Arecibo’s science, and SETI@home urges individuals to write to Congress to show support for the bill.

As for the NEO Program, packing up and moving to another location is not possible. There are no other observatories sensitive or large enough to perform the task of tracking near-Earth objects, especially ones at great distances. If Arecibo were to close, the NEO Program, despite a U.S. Congressional mandate and recognition from the Astronomical Science Senior Review Committee, would come to a screeching halt. Wikinews contacted the NSF for a statement, but a Dan MacMillan directed us to the Committee’s report.

“The SR endorses its future discovery potential and archival value. The SR recognizes the significant and unique scientific contributions that the Arecibo Observatory has made to astronomy and astrophysics and it congratulates NAIC and Cornell on operating the facility so effectively,” said the Committee in a 94 page report on the NSF’s budget.

“However, the committee was not persuaded of the primacy of the science program beyond the end of the decade and found that the case for long term support at the present level was not as strong as that for other facilities. The SR recommends that NAIC plan either to close Arecibo or to operate it with a much smaller AST budget. The SR recommends closure after 2011 if the necessary support is not forthcoming. It recommends that operation of the Angel Ramos Visitor Center continue,” added the Committee which also said that “that there were no reliable de-commissioning estimates and recommends that AST engage an independent study to advise on the viability and cost of decommissioning the telescope.”

In an attempt to cover the budget shortfall Arecibo faces, Don Campbell, Professor of Astronomy at Cornell’s Department of Astronomy, who specializes in radio and radar astronomy, tells Wikinews that the university is looking at all possible sources of funding to keep Arecibo open.

“Cornell/NAIC is looking at all possibilities for raising the funds needed to keep the Observatory operating as a forefront institution for research in astronomy and atmospheric sciences. This includes funding from federal agencies, from within Puerto Rico, via international agreements and from private sources,” said Campbell who added that “the NSF’s Division of the Senior Review (SR) panel recommended that NAIC’s budget - NAIC is head quartered at Cornell University and manages the Arecibo - from NSF/AST be reduced from about $10.5M to $8M in FY 2010. It also recommended that there be a further 50% reduction in FY 2011 and that Cornell must find the additional funds needed to operate Arecibo from other sources.”

Campbell also adds that Arecibo is so unique and sensitive, closing it makes no sense.

“Closing Arecibo would be closing the world’s largest and most sensitive single dish radio telescope. It is 4 to 5 times more sensitive, and has a higher resolving power at the same frequencies, than the next largest single dish radio telescope, the 100 m Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope,” said Campbell.

“Arecibo is also, of course, the source of the data that is processed by all the volunteers working with the SETI@home project. Given its relatively small operating budget, closing Arecibo makes no sense,” added Campbell.

source

Creative Commons Attribution 2.5

ShareThis

While most of the focus of federal law enforcement today is on counterterrorism, federal police agencies must still contend with more traditional anti-crime operations including emerging organized crime gangs.

Criminal enterprises represent a near and long-term threat to our nation. The criminal activities of these enterprises are increasing in scope and magnitude as they network with each other to expand operations worldwide. The geopolitical and technological changes of the last decade have allowed these enterprises to flourish globally, and their impact on the United States is expected to increase over the next five years.

Organized crime groups from Russia and other former members of the Soviet Union are engaged in racketeering activity, and are deeply involved in large scale white collar crime. They are skilled in the use of monetary systems to funnel and conceal the proceeds of their criminal activity, employing state-of-the-art encryption to safeguard their communication networks against traditional forms of detection.

Asian criminal enterprises are composed of U.S.-born citizens and immigrants. They are multi-crime organizations that, like other ethnically-based criminal enterprises, often victimize their own ethnic immigrant communities.

These communities are typically hesitant to report victimization to authorities. As the immigration of Russian, former Soviet Union, and Asian populations into the United States increases in the next five years, so too will related ethnic organized crime. 

La Cosa Nostra and Italian organized crime enterprises still pose a significant threat and will continue to influence the political and economic structure of the United States through engagement in racketeering-related activity. Alien smuggling and human trafficking will also continue to pose significant threats to the national security, as transnational criminal enterprises expand their activities in this area for economic profit.

In addition, the ability to facilitate the entry of illegal aliens into the United States could potentially be used to increase the membership of some of these criminal enterprises such as La Mala Salvatrucha or MS-13.

An emerging crime problem is Balkan criminal enterprises, specifically Albanian transnational organizations or clans. They are rapidly expanding their criminal activities to include loan sharking, weapons trafficking, alien smuggling, stock market manipulation, human trafficking, and drug trafficking. Additionally, these clans are forming partnerships with La Cosa Nostra, or LCN, crime families, as well as challenging traditional organized crime enterprises for territory.

Major theft rings account for billions of dollars in losses suffered by our nation’s businesses, with corresponding price increases passed on to the US consumer. Loss prevention and asset protection are top priorities for corporate America as increasingly sophisticated and highly organized criminal enterprises engage in cargo theft, high tech theft, vehicle theft, jewelry and gem theft, organized retail theft, art and cultural antiquity theft, and other major theft activity.

Drug trafficking remains a significant problem. The impact of illegal drug abuse is estimated to be over $160 billion in U.S. economic losses each year, including costs associated with health care, violent crime, and lost productivity. Colombian criminal enterprises are the largest source of cocaine in the world, and are also major heroin suppliers to the U.S. market.

Mexican criminal enterprises manufacture and supply much of the methamphetamine available in the United States, and transport the majority of cocaine and heroin into our nation. The ability of Mexican enterprises to corrupt public officials in Mexico and the United States has enhanced their capability to transport and distribute these illicit drugs.

Caribbean-based criminal enterprises specialize in the transportation and smuggling of drugs into Puerto Rico and the U.S. mainland. Over the next five years, South American and Mexican drug trafficking organizations will continue to maintain their dominance, and Caribbean-based groups will provide alternate importation routes.

A rise in homicides from 1999 through 2006, and continued incidence of other violent crimes have been attributed to the resurgence of violent gangs in major metropolitan areas, such as Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York, which average approximately 600 homicides per year. Within hours after celebrating the New Year, the city of Newark, NJ, experienced six homicides, all deemed gang-related.

Over the next five years, the Federal Bureau of Investigation must continue to focus the resources of Safe Streets Task Forces to combat those violent street gangs having major impact in our communities. This will necessitate use of RICO (Racketeering Influence and Criminal Organization Act).

Sources: National Association of Chiefs of Police, US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

TWA Flight 800 was a Boeing 747 that broke apart 12 years ago today, on July 17, 1996, above the Atlantic Ocean. All 230 people on board the New York to Paris flight were killed as the aircraft disintegrated shortly after takeoff from John F. Kennedy International Airport. It was ultimately determined that center wing fuel tank had exploded after sparking faulty wiring ignited a volatile fuel-air mix in the tank.

After the investigation was completed the NTSB requested that the FAA enforce the requirement of inerting systems to prevent dangerous fuel-air mixes from being ignited. One of the most feasible ways of doing this is with nitrogen pumped into the tank, reducing the amount of oxygen available and making ignition difficult or impossible. The NTSB has a ‘Most Wanted List of Transportation Safety Improvements’ and inerting systems for airliners have been on the list since 2002.

Since TWA 800 there have also been similar explosions in Thailand and India, but both occurred on the ground and resulted in no fatalities.

The FAA’s new directive requires all new aircraft from August 20 to have the equipment fitted. It also requires all carriers to retrofit their fleets, with half of their airliners to be compliant within six years and every jetliner in the US to have the technology fitted in nine years.

The FAA’s announcement was made at the Virginia hanger where the remains of Flight 800 are stored.

Air carriers, who until now have fought against the changes, say that there will be a cost running into millions of dollars. If the nitrogen system is installed, the cost of retrofitting an airliner is at US$92,000 for mid-range jets such as the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320, and costs $311,000 for a Boeing 777 or other similar long-range widebodied airliner. The 747, which has a large center wing fuel tank, is especially vulnerable to such explosions.

source

Creative Commons Attribution 2.5

ShareThis

In 2006, the fate of HBC was first in doubt when Zucker had bought it for $1.1 billion from another American owner. The businessman wanted to convert The Bay into a more upscale department-store chain.

Zucker had also began remodeling the company’s Zellers chain to simulate Target Corp. creating wider aisles, expanding outlets, and selling at prices that matched those of Wal-Mart Canada Corp.

NRDC plans to introduce up to 15 Lord & Taylor stores in Canada by converting some of HBC’s existing properties which include stores such as The Bay, Zellers, and Home Outfitters. Under the deal announced on Wednesday, NRDC will support a newly-established holding corporation, the Hudson’s Bay Trading Company with $500 million in funding.

The Hudson’s Bay Company was established in 1670 to support trade and development throughout the northern North American territory that is now Canada.

source

Creative Commons Attribution 2.5

ShareThis

Mexican cops reported that the cocaine was discovered inside over a hundred suitcases marked “private.” The military officers announced that they made three arrests as a result of the cocaine seizure.

Mexican officials claim that cocaine is increasingly being imported from Venezuela, with the US or Europe being the drugs’ final destination.

In this case the Mexican authorities waited for the plane to land at the airport of Ciudad de Carmen, about 550 miles east of Mexico City, after being tipped off by Interpol. The co-pilot of the aircraft was arrested. The pilot and co-pilot of another plane, which was believed to be ready to take the cocaine on to the next location, were also detained.

A Drug Enforcement Administration report last year indicted that Venezuela has become a key transshipment point for narcotics due to “rampant corruption at the highest levels of law enforcement and a weak judicial system”. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez terminated joint anti-drug operation with United States drug agents from the DEA. The paranoid president accused DEA agents of being spies.

The enormous amount of corruption within the Venezuelan government coupled with its president’s seizure and control of the press has made the country ripe for the transit of illegal drugs and other contraband. No journalist in Venezuela who wants to remain out of prison or worse will report on the corruption, drug trade, crime or any other issue that would embarrass the Chavez government.

A prison riot that occurred in Venezuela highlights the systemic corruption that exists within their criminal justice system:

The riot left 10 inmates dead and one wounded the day after officers seized weapons and illegal drugs from gang members in the prison. Venezuela’s prisons and jails are notoriously overcrowded and undersupervised. Firearms, illegal drugs and knives are often smuggled into prisons and sold to prisoners by guards.

As reported by the Associated Press, violence is common in the country’s 30 prisons, which were built to house 15,000 inmates but house around 20,000. Over 280 inmates died in violence and at least 449 were injured during the first nine months of 2005, according to the Venezuelan Prisons Observatory, a human rights watchdog. For all of 2004, at least 327 inmates were killed and 655 were wounded, the group says.

Meanwhile, at least one metric ton of cocaine per month, and smaller quantities of heroin, are exported to consumers through the country’s principal airport, several foreign counter-drug officials who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of their investigations told The Miami Herald.

One of the officials also estimated that as much as $2 million is paid out monthly in bribes to airport officials, policemen and National Guard personnel who collaborate with the drug runners. One informant told another investigator that airport jobs go to those willing to participate in the scheme.Counter-drug officials also say private airplanes that traffic drugs from Colombia to such nearby destinations as the Caribbean islands regularly pass through Maiquetia, landing there to get a change in identification numbers and perhaps a new paint job.

”The airport has been a problem, is a problem and will be a problem,” one of the officials told The Miami Herald.Venezuela has clearly become a major transshipment point for illegal drugs leaving Colombia.

Estimates vary, but U.S. officials say the country could be a transit point for upward of 200 tons of cocaine per year — half the estimated annual production in Colombia, the world’s leading cocaine producer.Venezuela’s own statistics showed an eight-fold increase in drug seizures since 1999.

Media reports have alleged the existence of drug smuggling cartels led by high-level National Guard officers. For their part, Venezuelan authorities have said the United States has no moral authority to comment on drug trafficking since it is the world’s leading consumer of illegal drugs.

There are some who believe that the corruption goes directly into the office of President Hugo Chavez.

It is significant that the drugs came via Venezuela, because the Colombian army has long alleged that Venezuela’s socialist president, Hugo Chavez, is sympathetic to the Marxist rIebels, according to Venzuelan political analyst Aleksander Boyd.

Boyd says, “Evidence, as is often the case with his ‘revolution,’ indicates that since Chavez’s arrival in power, Venezuela has become the favourite launching pad for Colombia’s drug traffickers. It is argued that 80% of the cocaine produced in neighbouring Colombia and the region enters the international markets via Venezuela, as heretofore unseen quantities have been seized in various countries.

“On the other hand Chavez’s cozy relationship with the FARC is no secret. So much so that the deranged president disrupted ties with Colombia, Venezuela’s second largest commercial partner, over the capture in Caracas of FARC’s leader Rodrigo Granda, who had Venezuelan citizenship, whose wife and step-daughter were welcomed by close associates of Chavez … Rodriguez Chacin, and who was a guest of honor in one of his Bolivarian get-togethers.”

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

Gregg William Bergersen, age 51, of Alexandria, Virginia, was sentenced in the Eastern District of Virginia to 57 months in prison and three years of supervised release for conspiracy to disclose national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it, according to a report obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police’s publication, The Chief of Police Magazine. 

Bergersen pleaded guilty to this offense on March 31, 2008, after being arrested by federal authorities on February 11, 2008.

Patrick Rowan, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security; U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg of the Eastern District of Virginia; and Arthur M. Cummings, II, Executive Assistant Director of the FBI’s National Security Branch, made the announcement after US District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema imposed the sentence.

“Mr. Bergersen betrayed his oath to serve and protect our nation when he used his government position to access and pass national defense information to a person he knew was not entitled to receive it. Today, he is paying the price for his actions,” said Patrick Rowan, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security.

“Mr. Bergersen predicted he would go to jail if anyone discovered he was unlawfully providing classified information to a foreign government.  We did.  He is,” said U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg.

“Espionage is one of the most serious crimes any American, much less a government official entrusted to serve and protect our Nation’s defense, can commit,” said FBI Executive Assistant Director Arthur M. Cummings, National Security Branch. 

“The FBI is working diligently with our partners in the law enforcement and intelligence community to safeguard America’s national defense information and to ensure individuals who commit such treasonous acts against the United States will be held fully accountable.”

According to a Statement of Facts filed in Court with Bergersen’s Plea Agreement, the criminal conduct spanned the time period of March 2007 to February 2008.  During this time, Bergersen was a Weapons Systems Policy Analyst at the Arlington, Va.-based Defense Security Cooperation Agency, an agency within the Department of Defense.

While in this position, Bergersen provided national defense information on numerous occasions to Tai Shen Kuo, a naturalized U.S. citizen and a New Orleans businessman. Much of the information pertained to U.S. military sales to Taiwan and was classified at the Secret level. 

During the course of the conspiracy, Kuo cultivated a friendship with Bergersen, bestowing on him gifts, cash payments, dinners, and money for gambling during trips to Las Vegas.  Unbeknownst to Bergersen, Kuo passed along to an official of the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) the information Bergersen had provided him. As described in court documents, Kuo operated within the United States under the PRC official’s direction, committing numerous acts of espionage during the time period of the conspiracy.

In some of his meetings with Kuo, Bergersen cautioned that the information he was providing was classified.  On one such occasion, in July 2007, Bergersen handed Kuo a classified document with jagged cut marks at the top and bottom of each page.  Bergersen pointed out to Kuo that he had cut off the document’s title and had also removed the classification markings from the top and bottom of every page, ensuring Kuo that he was being given classified information.

On May 13, 2008, Tai Shen Kuo pleaded guilty to conspiracy to deliver national defense information to a foreign government. Kuo is scheduled to be sentenced on August 8, 2008 and faces a maximum possible sentence of life in prison.

On May 28, 2008, another conspirator in the case, Yu Xin Kang of New Orleans, La., pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting an unregistered agent of a foreign government, namely the PRC. . According to court documents, Kang assisted Kuo by periodically serving as a conduit for information between Kuo and the PRC official. Kang faces up to ten years in prison when she is sentenced on August 1, 2008.

The investigation was conducted by the FBI. The Air Force Office of Special Investigations provided substantial assistance and cooperation throughout the course of the investigation.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he’s the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund’s weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

The counterintelligence function involves protecting the country, as well as intelligence agencies, from the activities of foreign intelligence services. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has principal responsibility for countering the activities of foreign intelligence services within the United States in order to protect both classified US Government information and proprietary information held by US industry.

The CIA is responsible for coordinating US counterintelligence activities abroad. Each of the military departments also has a counterintelligence element that operates domestically and overseas.

These elements has offensive and defensive missions. Offensively, they attempt to recruit agents within foreign intelligence services to ascertain what, if any, operations are being undertaken against the United States; they monitor the activities of known or suspected agents of foreign intelligence services; and they undertake operations to ascertain the targets and modus operandi of foreign intelligence services.

Defensively, they investigate cases of suspected espionage and prepare analyses for government and industry concerning the foreign intelligence threat. The FBI has principal jurisdiction to investigate suspected espionage within the United States, although all intelligence agencies maintain internal capabilities to undertake preliminary inquiries of their own employees. Military counterintelligence elements have concurrent jurisdiction to carry out counterintelligence investigations of their respective military personnel.

Counterintelligence, as a function of intelligence agencies, however, goes well beyond detecting and monitoring the activities of foreign intelligence services and investigating employees suspected of espionage. Counterintelligence is an integral part of the entire intelligence process.

All agencies that undertake intelligence collection, whether through human or technical means, must be constantly on guard that what they are collecting is genuine. This requires continuous evaluation of their sources as well as the information gathered from them. Intelligence analysts who are familiar with the totality of information on a particular topic are often in a position to detect anomalies.

Historically, intelligence agencies have not performed this crucial function very well. Virtually all have suffered severe losses due to a failure to recognize anomalous behavior on the part of their own employees. Some have also had problems recognizing anomalies in the behavior of their sources or in the appearance or actions of their targets. The Aldrich Ames spy case revealed serious shortcomings in both categories.

In the wake of the Ames case, the Intelligence Community made sweeping changes to its counterintelligence infrastructure. A new policy board, reporting to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, was established to coordinate counterintelligence activities and resolve interagency disagreements, and a “national counterintelligence center” was created to share and evaluate information regarding foreign intelligence threats. In addition, the CIA made numerous improvements to its counterintelligence and security posture.

Perhaps more than any other function of intelligence, counterintelligence has undergone the most significant change over the last two years. The question is whether these changes will have a long-term positive effect.

Because counterintelligence is so crucial to the success of the entire enterprise, the Intelligence Community must sustain the renewed emphasis recently placed on this function. Counterintelligence must be viewed not as an annoying intrusion but rather as an integral part of the intelligence process. It must focus not only on protecting our own sensitive information, but equally on efforts to manipulate our collection and analysis, through double agents or other means.

This requires a certain openness of mind and a willingness continually to balance the conclusions drawn from intelligence with the possibility of deliberate deception by a target.

Sources: Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Institute, American Federation of Police, National Association of Chiefs of Police

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

Santander said in a statement that “Santander and A&L announce that they have reached agreement on the terms of a recommended acquisition by Santander of A&L, which is to be effected by means of a scheme of arrangement under sections 895 to 899 of the Companies Act [2006].”

Sections 895 to 899 of the Companies Act 2006 focus on, among other things, the meeting of creditors and members and the duty of directors and trustees to provide information. Section 897 requires the company to “explain the effect of the compromise or arrangement” to the shareholders when an acquisition takes place.

In the statement released under the Companies Act, it is stated the the board of A&L considers the deal set by Santander to be ‘fair and reasonable.’

Shares in Alliance & Leicester increased by 50% when information about the deal was first made public earlier today.

Unions have expressed concerns over the takeover by the company which also owns UK based Abbey National. “Staff at A&L deserve to have answers about their future and we urge the company to be upfront about their intentions,” said Andy Kerr, spokesperson for the Communication Workers Union.

BACKGROUND

The Companies Act 2006 (c.46) is a statute of the United Kingdom regulating companies within that jurisdiction. It received Royal Assent on 8 November 2006.

The Act also has the distinction of being the longest in British Parliamentary history: with 1,300 sections and covering nearly 700 pages, and containing no fewer than 15 schedules. (The index alone is 59 pages long.)

The Act will supersede the Companies Act 1985, although the 1985 Act remains in force until it is repealed in the final implementation order, currently scheduled for 1 October 2009. Several important parts of the Act have already been brought into force, including those on meetings and resolutions and on company directors and secretaries.

The Act provides a comprehensive code of company law for the United Kingdom, replacing almost every facet of the law in relation to companies. The key provisions are:

* the Act codifies certain existing common law principles, such as those relating to director’s duties.
* it implements the European Union’s Takeover and Transparency Obligations Directives
* it introduces various new provisions for private and public companies.
* it applies a single company law regime across the United Kingdom, replacing the two separate (if identical) systems for Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
* it otherwise amends or restates almost all of the Companies Act 1985 to varying degrees.[1]

The Bill for the Act was first introduced to Parliament as “the Company Law Reform Bill” and as intended to make wide ranging amendments of existing statutes. Lobbying from directors and the legal profession ensured that the Bill was changed into a consolidating Act, avoiding the need for cross-referencing between numerous statutes.

The reception of the legal professions in the United Kingdom to the Act has been slightly lukewarm.Concerns have been expressed that too much detail have been inserted to seek to cover every eventuality. Whereas a complete overhaul of company law was promised, the Act seems to very much leave the existing structure in place, and only simplify certain aspects at the margins. In other areas, it is said to have to have complicated and obfuscated previously settled law.

Implementation

The first and second Commencement Orders brought certain provisions into force in January 2007 and April 2007. An implementation timetable for the remainder of the Act was announced in February 2007, by Margaret Hodge, Minister for Industry and the Regions. It is expected to be brought into force in its entirety by October 2009.

The staggered timetable is intended to give companies sufficient time to prepare for the new regime under the Act, rather than implement the 1,300 sections of the Act on one day.

Another reason for the staggered implementation is that, despite the Act’s size, a great many sections provide for subsidiary legislation to be brought in by Secretary of State, which as yet has not been drafted. Although it is unclear how extensive these regulations will be, past experience suggests that they are likely to be equally voluminous.

Implemenation of the Act is the responsibility of the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.

Board of directors

The Act replaces and codifies the principal common law and equitable duties of directors, but it does not purport to provide an exhaustive statement of their duties, and so it is likely that the common law duties will survive in a reduced form. Traditional common law notions of corporate benefit have been swept away, and the new emphasis is on corporate social responsibility. The seven codified duties are as follows:

1. to act within their powers - to abide by the terms of the company’s memorandum and articles of association and decisions made by the shareholders;
2. to promote the success of the company - directors must continue to act in a way that benefits the shareholders as a whole, but there is now an additional list of non-exhaustive factors which the director’s must have regard to. This had been one the most controversial aspect of the new legislation at the drafting stage. These factors are:
1. the long term consequences of decisions
2. the interests of employees
3. the need to foster the company’s business relationships with suppliers, customers and others
4. the impact on the community and the environment
5. the desire to maintain a reputation for high standards of business conduct
6. the need to act fairly as between members
3. to exercise independent judgment - directors must not fetter their discretion to act, other than pursuant to an agreement entered into by the company or in a way authorised by the company’s articles
4. to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence - this must be exercised to the standard expected of someone with both the general knowledge, skill and experience reasonably expected of a person carrying out the functions of the director (the objective test) and the actual knowledge, skill and experience of that particular director (the subjective test)
5. to avoid conflicts of interest - methods for authorising such conflicts by either board or shareholder approval are also to be introduced
6. not to accept benefits from third parties
7. to declare an interest in a proposed transaction with the company - there are to be carve outs for matters that are not likely to give rise to a conflict of interest, or which the directors are already aware of. There will be an additional statutory obligations to declare interests in relating to existing transactions.

Although the changes to director’s duties were the most widely publicised (and controversial) feature of the legislation, the Act also affects directors in various other ways.

* The shareholders’ ability to ratify any conduct of a director (including breach of duty, negligence, default or breach of trust) will be regulated by the statute (instead of common law, as was previously the case). Under the Act the law will change so that directors who are also shareholders will not be entitled to vote in relation to any ratification resolution.
* Existing restrictions on companies indemnifying directors against certain liabilities will be relaxed to permit indemnities by group companies to directors of corporate trustees and occupational pension schemes.
* The Act will give shareholders a statutory right to pursue claims against the directors for misfeasance on behalf of a company (a derivative action), although the shareholders will need the consent of the court to proceed with such a claim.
* Certain transactions between the company and its directors which were previously prohibted by law will become lawful subject to the approval of shareholders (for example, loans from the company to its directors)
* The Act will require at least one director on the board of the company to be a natural person, although corporate directors are still permitted.
* The current age restriction of 70 for directors of public companies will be abolished. A new minimum age of 16 will be introduced for all directors.
* Directors will have the option of providing Companies House with an address for service, which will in future enable their home addresses to be kept on a separate register to which access will be restricted.

General provisions

The Act contains various provisions which affects all companies irrespective of their particular status.

* Company formation - the procedure for incorporating companies will be modernised to facilitate incorporation over the Internet. The restrictions on one persons forming companies other than private companies will be abrogated.
* Constitutional documents - a company’s articles of association will become its main constitutional document, and the company’s memorandum will be treated as part of its articles. The Act will provide for a simplified set of model articles for private companies that are intended to be more reflective of the way that small companies operate, and will replace the existing Table A. Existing companies will be permitted to adopt the new model articles in whole or in part.
* Corporate capacity - under the new Act a company’s capacity will be unlimited unless its articles specifically provide otherwise, thus greatly reducing the applicability of the ultra vires doctrine to corporate law and removing the need for an excessively long objects clause in the Memorandum of Association.
* Execution of documents - Formalities for execution as a deed are to be further revised, so that a single director can execute a document as a deed on behalf of the company by a simple signature in the presence of a witness.
* Share capital - the requirement for an authorised share capital will be abolished. Companies will be able to redenominate their share capital from one currency to another without an order of the court.
* Distributions in kind - The Act addresses the current uncertainty in the law in relation to the transfer of non-cash assets by a company to a shareholder, and whether this should be treated as a distribution.[4]
* Shareholder meetings - shareholder meetings will be able to be held more quickly. Special resolutions will require only 14 days’ notice unless proposed at an AGM.
* Shareholder communications - companies will be able to communicate electronically with their shareholders or by website with the their shareholders by express agreement (which agreement can be obtained under the articles, or by the shareholder failing to indicate that they do not wish to communicate via the website, as well as by more conventional methods).
* Auditor’s liability - auditors will be permitted to limit their liability for claims in negligence, breach of trust or breach of duty so long as:
o the shareholders’ have approved the limitation in advance.
o the court considers the limitation of liability to be ‘fair and reasonable’ [5]

This change was made after intensive lobbying by the accounting profession in the United Kingdom.

Private company limited by shares

One of the more touted aspects of the new legislation will be the simplification of the corporate regime for small privately held companies. A number of the changes brought about by the Act apply only to private companies. Significant changes include:

* Company secretaries - a private company will no longer need to appoint a company secretary, but may do so if it wishes.
* Shareholders’ written resolutions - the requirement for unanimity in shareholders’ written resolutions will be abolished, and the required majority will be similar to that for shareholder meetings - a simple majority of the eligible shares for ordinary resolutions, or 75% for special resolutions.
* Abolition of AGMs - private companies will no longer be required to hold Annual General Meetings, although they can elect to do so in their articles if they wish.
* Short notice of meetings - private companies can convene meetings on short notice where consent is given by 90% in nominal value of shares carrying the right to vote.
* Allotment of shares - where private companies have only one class of shares, the directors will have unlimited authority to allot shares unless the articles otherwise provide.
* Financial assistance - the Act abolishes the prohibition on private companies providing financial assistance for the purchase of their own shares, and the related “whitewash” exemption procedure.
* Reduction of share capital - private companies will be able to reduce their share capital without the need to obtain a court order.
* Filing of accounts - the period in which accounts must be filed has been reduced from 10 months to 9 months from financial year end.

Public limited company

The Act also seeks to promote greater shareholder involvement, and a number of new requirements are introduced for public companies, some of the provisions of which only apply to companies whose shares are listed on the main board of the London Stock Exchange (but, importantly, not to companies whose shares are listed on AIM).

* Business review - the Act imposes additional requirements for companies listed on the main board of the LSE in their annual report and accounts. These now include:

1. main trends and factors likely to affect future development, performance and position of the business;
2. information on environmental matters, employees and social issues; and
3. information on contractual and other arrangements essential to the company’s business.

* AGM and accounts - main list companies will be required to hold their AGM and file accounts within 6 months of the end of the financial year. They will also be required to:

1. publish their annual report and accounts on their website;
2. disclose results of polled votes at general meetings on their website;
3. give certain minority shareholders the right to require independent scrutiny of any polled vote, the results of which must be published on the company’s website.

* Political donations and expenditure - the Act contains simplification and clarification to the existing provisions requiring shareholder approval for political donations and expenditure, and clarifies a number of grey areas (such as expenditure relating to trade unions).
* Enfranchising indirect investors - nominee shareholders of main list companies will be able to nominate persons whom they hold shares on behalf of to receive copies of company communications and annual reports and accounts. All companies will also be able to include provisions in their articles to identify some other party to exercise additional rights of the shareholder. This is to address the concern that shares in publicly listed companies are frequently held in an intermediaries name, which makes it more difficult for them to exercise their rights as shareholder.
* Voting by institutions - the Act empowers the government to introduce regulations in the future that would force institutions to disclose how they have voted. The government has indicated it will only introduce regulation after full consultation and if a voluntary disclosure scheme does not work.
* Paperless share transfers - the Act gives the government power to make regulations requiring (as well as permitting) paper-free holding and transferring of shares in main list companies. Some law firms have expressed reservations as to how paper-free holding and transfers would work in practice.
* Transparency Obligations Directive - the Act brings into force the European Directive imposing obligations on main list companies in relation to financial reporting, disclosure of major acquisitions or disposals of its shares and the dissemination of information about the company to its shareholders and the public generally. The Act gives the Financial Services Authority power to make rules to implement the requirements of the Directive, which would be implemented by way of changes to the existing Listing Rules and Disclosure Rules. The Act also introduces a statutory compensation scheme for misleading or inaccurate statements in reports.
* Takeovers - the EU Takeover Directive was implemented by interim regulations in the United Kingdom in May 2006. The Act extends the statutory basis for the regulations in relation to certain matters, such as the statutory footing of the Takeover Panel, and the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers. It also extended the “minority sweep up” provisions which were introduced by an amendment to the Companies Act 1985, and addresses certain practical problems which had arisen in relation to their operation.

source

Creative Commons Attribution 2.5

source

GNU Free Documentation License.

ShareThis

Many policymakers and lawmakers are critical of the analysis they receive, and both intelligence consumers and producers often share a frustration over its perceived lack of utility and hence lack of impact. This includes local law enforcement commanders who — more than ever — depend on solid information in order to deploy their resources in post-9/11 America.

The best way to ensure high-quality analysis is to bring high quality analysts into the process. Here it helps to think of the challenge as one of improving both the stock and the flow of personnel. Certain stock (career personnel) need to be encouraged to specialize in a geographical area or function and rewarded for excellence. Not everyone need pursue a career with a management component. This is not meant to diminish the value of management skills. To the contrary, the CIA in particular needs to place much more emphasis on formal management and leadership training as well as demonstrated competence as a prerequisite for promotion for those headed for senior levels.

But better analysis will also require reducing the isolation of the intelligence community. A greater flow of talented people into the agency from academia and business is essential. Greater provision ought to be made for lateral and mid-career entry as well as for short-term entry (measured in weeks, months, or years) or even for just a single, short-duration project. In this way the intelligence community could attract and exploit some of the best minds from academia and other sections of society that would otherwise not be available.

Working to improve the quality of analysts, however, is not enough; it is also necessary to change the relationship between intelligence producers and consumers. Intelligence professionals must understand the needs of policymakers and vice versa. One way to do so is through regular rotation of career intelligence officers into positions in the policymaking departments (State, Defense, Treasury, etc.) and the NSC. Temporary assignment to the relevant congressional staffs should also be an option. Sabbaticals as in academia or business would be similarly useful; indeed, such rotations should be required for promotion to senior levels. The same logic argues for assigning careerists normally in the policymaking realm to periodic tours inside the intelligence community.

The danger of politicization — the potential for the intelligence community to distort information or judgment in order to please political authorities — is real. Moreover, the danger can never be eliminated if intelligence analysts are involved, as they must be, in the policy process. The challenge is to develop reasonable safeguards while permitting intelligence producers and policymaking consumers to interact.

The need to protect intelligence from political pressure and parochialism is a powerful argument for maintaining a strong, centralized capability and not leaving decisions affecting important intelligence-related questions solely to the policymaking departments. (Centralization raises the risk of politicization stemming from the DCI. Only the president, senior officials involved in national security, and Congress can help guard against politicization-though they too can try to politicize intelligence.)

Unlike business, in the intelligence business, the customer is not always right.

The intelligence community can protect itself from political pressure through competitive analysis of controversial questions. Guarding against politicization is also a useful function for Congress and the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. (One option to consider in this regard would be to reconstitute to make it selected by and responsible to Congress as well as the president, as was the Aspin-Brown Commission.) Perhaps most important, the leadership of the intelligence community should reinforce the ethic that speaking the truth to those in power is required-and defend anyone who comes under criticism for doing so.

Irrelevance is a related and arguably bigger problem for analysts than politicization. Intelligence analysis rarely impresses itself upon policymakers, who are inevitably busy and inundated with more demands on their time and attention than they can possibly meet. Intelligence officials must draw attention to their product and market their ideas. This is especially true in the case of any early warning or intelligence-related development that has potentially significant consequences for important interests. A phone call, a personalized memorandum, a meeting-any and all are required if the situation is sufficiently serious. Involving relevant policymakers and other consumers in the regular personnel evaluations of the analysts who serve them would underline the importance of such an effort and provide an incentive to individual analysts.

Another serious problem to be avoided is mindset or “groupthink.” Any organization, and the CIA or any intelligence agency is no exception, can fall into the trap of not questioning basic assumptions that affect much subsequent analysis. It is essential t hat competitive or redundant analysis be encouraged. Currently and historically, less than a tenth of what the United States spends on intelligence is devoted to analysis; it is the least expensive dimension of intelligence. Not all duplication is wasteful. This country could surely afford to spend more in those areas of analysis where being wrong can have major adverse consequences.

One other aspect of analysis merits mention, namely, the balance between current intelligence and long-term estimates. For years the culture of the intelligence community, in particular that of the CIA, has favored the latter. But it is precisely in long-term analysis of familiar subjects and broad trends where secret information tends to be less critical and government analysts are for the most part no better and often not as good as their counterparts in academia and the private sector.

Also, many estimates are likely to be less relevant to busy policymakers, who must focus on the immediate. All this suggests that the emphasis placed on such estimates should be reduced. To the extent long-term estimates are produced, they ought to be concise, written by individuals, and sources justifying conclusions ought to be shown as they would in any academic work. If the project is a group effort, differences among participants ought to be sharpened and prominently acknowledged. While it is valuable to point out areas of consensus, it is more important that areas of dispute be highlighted than that all agencies be pressured to reach a conclusion that represents little more than a lowest common denominator

The most important function of the clandestine services-mostly found in the CIA Directorate of Operations — is the collection of human intelligence. Such intelligence can complement other sources and, in certain instances, be the principal or sole source of information.

This tends to be true in closed societies, where decision-making and information is limited to a few, highly valued efforts are meant to be kept secret, and the targeted activity is not easily captured by reconnaissance or eavesdropping. Human intelligence can also help shed light on intentions as well as capabilities. Such knowledge is likely to prove crucial in tracking the activities of terrorists and in determining the status of unconventional weapons programs. Human intelligence is no panacea. Contacts and networks take years to develop, if they can be developed at all-but it holds the often unique potential to provide an integrated look at a subject’s thinking and capability.

A second task for the clandestine services is covert action, that is, the carrying out of operations to influence events in another country in which it is deemed important to hide the hand of the US government. Historically, covert action has included such activities as channeling funds to selected individuals, movements or political parties, media placements, broadcasting, and paramilitary support.

Such operations can be designed to bolster the capabilities of friendly governments in dealing with challenges to them and their societies. Covert measures can also have the opposite purpose, to weaken a hostile government. The capability to undertake these and other tasks-be it to frustrate a terrorist action, intercept some technology or equipment that would help a rogue state or group build a nuclear device, or assist some group trying to overthrow a leadership whose actions threaten US interests-constitutes an important national security tool, one that can provide policymakers a valuable alternative or complement to other policies, including diplomacy, sanctions, and military intervention.

Clandestine operations, whether for collection of foreign intelligence, counterintelligence, or covert action, will often require associating with individuals of unsavory reputations who in some instances may have committed crimes. This differs little from the tradition in law enforcement of using criminals to catch criminals and should be acceptable so long as the likely benefits outweigh the certain moral and potential political costs of the association-a calculation that should not be made solely by the person in the field. The only other word of caution  (in addition to ensuring legality, sufficient control, and adequate oversight) is that any covert action must appear consistent with established US policy so that, if discovered, the purposes behind the effort would be understood.

Clandestine operations for whatever purpose currently are circumscribed by a number of legal and policy constraints. These deserve review to avoid diminishing the potential contribution of this instrument. At a minimum, the Task Force recommended that a fresh look be taken at limits on the use of nonofficial “covers” for hiding and protecting those involved in clandestine activities. In addition, rules that can prohibit preemptive attacks on terrorists or support for individuals hoping to bring about a regime change in a hostile country need to be assessed periodically.

Maintaining and enhancing clandestine capabilities takes time and resources; creating and nurturing such capabilities ought to be a high priority of the intelligence community given the importance of targets that otherwise cannot be reached. Individuals must not only learn the craft but also develop language skills, deep knowledge of a society, and covers to shield their intelligence-related activity. They will also benefit from having available an adequate official US presence; the closing of US embassies and other missions abroad reduces the capacity to collect intelligence and undertake clandestine operations.

On the other hand, one cannot ignore the Directorate of Operations’ record of operating with questionable legality and judgment. Constant vigilance inside the CIA is needed to ensure that the DO is doing quality work consistent with policy priorities, senior officials inside and outside the CIA are kept fully informed, officer’s actions are consistent with existing regulations and laws, senior DO personnel are treating their employees responsibly, and analysts outside the directorate have full access to its product.

In return, those in the operations directorate should know that risk-taking will be supported and they will be politically protected so long as what they do is authorized and legal under US law at the time. Such support is crucial; contrary to widespread impressions, one problem with the clandestine services has been a lack of initiative brought about by a fear of retroactive discipline and a lack of high-level support. This must be rectified if the intelligence community is to continue to produce the human intelligence that will surely be needed in the future.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he’s the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund’s weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us

ShareThis

Landmark’s complaint details how the CEA and the PEA employed union staff members, including PEA’s president and office manager, for several weeks to work full time as de facto campaign managers for the 2004 candidacy of Democrat Bob Bacon for the Colorado State Senate.

The costs associated with the unions’ expenditures on behalf of the campaign (staff
salaries and benefits, travel expenses, etc.) are all required by the IRC to be reported on the unions’ federal tax returns as in-kind political contributions. Neither the CEA nor the PEA reported any political spending for the 2004 tax year.

“The leaders of the CEA and the PEA appear to have turned their unions over lock, stock and barrel to the Bob Bacon for Senate campaign,”explained Landmark President Mark R. Levin.

“Hundreds of man-hours and tens of thousands in tax-exempt, teachers’ dues were used for no other purpose than to elect a candidate who would do the unions’ bidding in the state
Senate,” said the former Justice Department chief of staff and top-rated radio talk host.

Landmark’s complaint is the latest in the organization’s National Education Association (NEA) Accountability Project, an effort that has documented millions of dollars in unreported political expenditures by the national teachers’ union and its state and local affiliates.

Earlier complaints by Landmark to the IRS resulted in a full field audit of the NEA, an investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor, a complete overhaul of reporting requirements for large unions by the Department of Labor, as well as the uncovering of several significant violations of federal and state law by NEA affiliates around the country.

“Colorado’s teachers have a right to know what their leaders are doing when they involve their unions in politics,” Levin said.

“And they have a right to know that their dues are not being used to do an end-around the
law to advance a political agenda. Moreover, the IRS needs to determine whether the CEA is doing the same thing with other local affiliates elsewhere in the state.”

Founded in 1976, Landmark Legal Foundation is one of the nation’s oldest conservative public interest law firms. The Foundation has offices in Kansas City, MO and Leesburg, VA.

ShareThis