Crippled Fukushima reactor to get ice wall

The Japanese government announced Tuesday it is funding a costly, untested subterranean ice wall in a desperate step to stop leaks of radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant after repeated failures by the plant's operator.

Public funding is part of several measures the government adopted Tuesday. Most had already been announced but they are widely seen as a safety appeal before the International Olympic Committee votes on which city will host the 2020 Olympics. Tokyo is a front-runner.

"Instead of leaving this up to TEPCO [Tokyo Electric Power Company], the government will step forward and take charge," Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said after adopting the outline. "The world is watching if we can properly handle the contaminated water but also the entire decommissioning of the plant."

The government plans to spend an estimated $470 million US through the end of 2014 on two projects — the ice wall and upgraded water treatment units that is supposed to remove all radioactive elements but tritium — according to energy agency official Tatsuya Shinkawa.

The government is not paying for urgently needed water tanks and other equipment that TEPCO is using to stop leaks.

The ice wall would freeze the ground to a depth of up to 30 metres through a system of thin pipes carrying a coolant as cold as minus -40 C. It would thus block contaminated water from escaping the facility's immediate surroundings, as well as keep underground water from entering the reactor and turbine buildings, where most contaminated radioactive water has collected.

The project, which TEPCO and the government proposed in May, is set for completion by March 2015.

Worrisome leaks

The operator of the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant says hundreds of tons of radioactive underground water have been leaking into the sea daily since early in the crisis, caused by the 2011 earthquake and tsunami. Several leaks from storage tanks in recent weeks have added to concerns that the plant is unable to manage the radioactive water.

On Monday, Japan's top nuclear regulator raised safety concerns about the hastily built storage tanks and their foundations after signs of new leaks. One was found over the weekend in a connecting pipe, and TEPCO said it suspects three storage tanks where elevated radioactivity was detected also have had leaks.

Nuclear Regulation Authority Chairman Shunichi Tanaka told a news conference that the small leak and possible other leaks have added to concerns about the plant's stability.

They follow a major leak two weeks ago. TEPCO reported a loss of 300 tons of highly radioactive water from a steel tank on Aug. 19, saying most of it is believed to have seeped underground but some might have escaped into the sea. The company has yet to determine the cause or exactly where the water went.

Contaminated water

More than 300 tanks there are of a similar type. About 1,000 tanks hold 330,000 tons of contaminated water at the plant, and the amount grows by 400 tons daily. The water is part of the makeshift system to keep the radioactive material at the plant stable.

Tanaka said he believed the discoveries of the subsequent leak and signs of possible additional leaks were the result of closer inspections after the large leak two weeks ago. That leak was the worst from a tank at the plant, which was badly damaged by a massive March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.

The investigation into the tanks has revealed sloppy record keeping and tank management by TEPCO. The company has acknowledged that it used to assign only two workers to visually inspect all 1,000 tanks in about two hours until the leak, and none of the tanks had water gauges. TEPCO has increased the patrol staff to nearly 60 and is adding other early detection measures.

TEPCO also said it overlooked several signs of leaks — increases of radioactivity near the tanks and higher exposure levels for workers — for more than a month.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria's civil war: No good options and so many 'known unknowns'

Good minds on both sides of the Syria debate find themselves struggling to stake out positions amid a clash of awful alternatives, worst-case scenarios and unknowable consequences.

A civil war of almost unwatchable brutality now provokes a debate of singular complexity. Even for those who firmly believe the regime did use banned chemical weapons, there seem to be no good options.

As British Prime Minister David Cameron found to his shock in Parliament, even some conservative hawks are wavering In the U.S., two sides face their own doubts.

Those ready to justify President Barack Obama's plan to "punish" the Syrian regime for having crossed the so-called red line know the gains may be limited and risks enormous.

On the other hand, those strongly opposed to the military strike at least have to consider the possibility that failure to punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's apparent use of such weapons may encourage their further use, in Syria and elsewhere.

What is so striking about this debate is how little can be known on either side.

There is lots of evidence the regime laced a suburb of Damascus and other areas with lethal chemicals — but not the smoking-gun, absolute proof that critics hoping to prolong inaction insist on.

No quick fix

For their part, supporters of a strike can promise no quick fix. Assad's forces would be hurt, but not too badly. They'd be stung, but not staggered to the point of crumbling before a rebel force Washington does not want to see victorious in this war.

The loose rebel alliance is made up increasingly of Islamist hard-liners, some with links to al-Qaeda. For the U.S. and much of Europe, their victory is one of those worst-case-scenarios in play.

So this means the U.S. strikes will use long-range cruise missiles and other sophisticated weapons all delicately calibrated to ensure Assad forces are damaged but not destroyed. This means the war that has already killed more than 100,000 people and made seven million refugees will continue.

In short, the strikes will exert no outside leverage to halt a war that has for 2½ years destabilized the whole region and given al-Qaeda lush new sanctuaries in northern Syria.

What's more, at this point no one can claim to know how Assad — an enigma to foreign intelligence — will react. (This is surely one of those "known unknowns," to use a famous expression of former U.S. defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld). Some analysts believe Assad will simply shrug off attacks while revelling in the role of one who defies "American bullying."

Others believe he's desperate enough to wreak havoc even against hostile neighbours such as Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon, perhaps even Israel.

Hopes that he might be chastened enough to seek a diplomatic solution to the war seem based on little more than wishful thinking, at least as long as Vladimir Putin's Russia remains in Syria's corner, ready to supply arms and effectively block any United Nations intervention.

Limited deterrent

Defenders of a strike have made a strong argument, convincing to many, that it will at least punish the atrocious use of internationally outlawed chemical weapons and persuade other nations that such use is too dangerous to contemplate. The strike, they argue, is a deterrent, but a limited and short one.

They raise the question: What value will any international restriction on weapons of mass destruction have if their use goes unpunished by the world? And while all might prefer the UN to do the deterring, when it cannot, must not others step in to act?

Every aspect of this debate is haunted by the Iraq war, however, and memories of 2003 and the Bush administration's abuse of similar arguments about weapons of mass destruction that allegedly threatened the world but turned out to be desert mirages.

This is a different time, a different crisis and a profoundly different White House, but still, once shattered, credibility on foreign policy is notoriously hard to repair.

The drumbeat of U.S. intelligence scandals in recent years has only added to world-wide doubts.

In the face of public and political hesitation, those supporting the strike argue that both Obama and America's credibility are at stake and to back down now will only encourage others to test U.S. resolve across the world.

"The world will not see this as prudence, but rather as dithering," writes Vali Nasr, an international scholar and writer at John Hopkins University.

"That will embolden America's adversaries and deject its friends. American could soon find itself alone in standing up to Iran or North Korea, or pushing back against China or Russia."

Lacking credibility

Critics of the strike argue Obama boxed himself into this position by all-too-vague talk of "red lines" without a clear strategy.

They'll further argue that any attack launched with little hope of any gain except to restore a president's shaky credibility won't be all that credible in any case.

If national credibility haunts one side of the debate, however, the other is confronted by a disturbing reality that inaction may, at least arguably, have frightful consequences in years ahead.

In the clear absence of effective diplomatic deterrent, and if the world cannot enforce some enforceable red line against the use of long-banned chemical and biological weapons, a whole range of nightmare scenarios becomes possible.

For what brutal regime in the future need ever fear for its continued existence in the face of mass democracy protests or civilian insurgency when such weapons are at hand?

Whether chemical or biological, these weapons are cheap to make, easy to conceal and, as we've again seen, utterly gruesome in effectiveness.

Who would protest en masse?

The original international bans on the weapons were to suppress their use by armies against armies.

Now that we've seen adults and children writhing in death agonies in Syria, we may consider the more serious threat is their use to suppress populations.

For who anywhere would even dare to gather in large numbers to protest or to rebel in the face of even the threat of such an attack?

The Syria crisis now raises so many issues, doubts and moral uncertainties that the debate over the coming weeks will be fascinating but also deeply troubling.

It comes down to the fact one can be deeply torn at the same time both by the threatened U.S. strike and by the thought of the world again doing nothing to stop the use of such weapons.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Girl, 14, struck and killed by dump truck in Toronto

A 14-year-old girl was struck and killed by a dump truck in Toronto Tuesday morning as thousands of students returned to school.

Police say the girl was hit at the intersection of Sentinel Road and Lamberton Boulevard — which is south of Finch Avenue West and west of Keele Street — just before 8 a.m. ET.

Police inspect a dump truck involved in a collision that killed a 14-year-old girl Tuesday morning. (Linda Ward/CBC)

Paramedics performed CPR on the girl but she was pronounced dead at the scene.

The girl's death came as thousands of students were busy returning to school for the start of the fall semester and on the same morning Toronto police launched a safety blitz to remind drivers to slow down and obey safety rules.

Speaking a few hours after the incident, Ontario Education Minister Liz Sandals called it "a difficult start to the school day" and reminded drivers to take extra care now that summer is over and students are back in class.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Microsoft buys Nokia smartphones, services in $7.6B deal

Microsoft Corp. is buying Nokia Corp.'s lineup of smartphones and a portfolio of patents and services in an attempt to mount a more formidable challenge to Apple Inc. and Google Inc., as more technological tasks get done on mobile devices instead of personal computers.

The $7.6 billion Cdn deal is fuelling speculation that Nokia's CEO, former Microsoft executive Stephen Elop, a Canadian, could emerge as a top candidate to succeed Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer.

The deal announced late Monday marks a major step in Microsoft's push to transform itself from a software maker focused on making operating systems and applications for desktop and laptop computers into a more versatile and nimble company that delivers services on any kind of internet-connected gadget.

Microsoft, which is based in Redmond, Wash., is being forced to evolve because people are increasingly pursuing their digital lives on smartphones and tablet computers, causing the demand for PCs to shrivel. The shift is weakening Microsoft, which has dominated the PC software market for the past 30 years, and empowering Apple, the maker of the trend-setting iPhone and iPad, and Google, which gives away the world's most popular mobile operating system, Android.

Nokia, based in Espoo, Finland, and Microsoft have been trying to make inroads in the smartphone market as part of a partnership forged in 2011. Under the alliance, Nokia's Lumia smartphones has run on Microsoft's Windows software, but those devices haven't emerged as a popular alternative to the iPhone or an array of Android-powered devices spearheaded by Samsung Electronics' smartphones and tablets.

Microsoft is betting it will have a better chance of narrowing the gap if it seizes complete control over how the mobile devices work with its Windows software.

"It's a bold step into the future — a win-win for employees, shareholders and consumers of both companies," Ballmer said in a statement.

Investors in Nokia welcomed the deal and its price, sending shares in the company over 38 per cent higher to €4.10 in early trading Tuesday in Helsinki.

Canadian Elop could vie for top spot at Microsoft

The acquisition is being made at the same time that Microsoft is looking for a new leader. Just 10 days ago, Ballmer, 57, announced he will relinquish the CEO reins within the next year in a move that many analysts regarded as Microsoft's tacit admission that the company needed an infusion of fresh blood to revitalize itself.

Elop, a graduate of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont., will step aside as Nokia's president and CEO to become executive vice-president of Nokia devices and services in preparation for joining Microsoft once the acquisition closes. Chairman Risto Siilasmaa will stay in his current role and assume the duties of interim CEO.

Microsoft hopes to complete the deal early next year. If that timetable pans out, about 32,000 Nokia employees will transfer to Microsoft, which currently has about 99,000 workers.

The proposed price consists of $5.3 billion for the Nokia unit that makes mobile phones, including its line of Lumia smartphones that run Windows Phone software. Another $2.3 billion will be paid for a 10-year licence to use Nokia's patents, with the option to extend it indefinitely.

It will represent the second most expensive acquisition in Microsoft's 38-year history, ranking behind an $8.5 billion purchase of internet calling and video conferencing service Skype. Tony Bates, who ran Skype, is also regarded as a potential successor to Ballmer.

The money to buy Nokia's smartphones and patents will be drawn from the nearly $70 billion that Microsoft held in overseas accounts as of June 30.

Microsoft expansion into mobile devices hasn't fared well so far. Last year, the company began selling a line of tablets called Surface in hopes of undercutting Apple's iPad. The version of Surface running on a revamped version of Microsoft's Windows operating system fared so poorly that the company absorbed a $900 million charge in its last quarter to account for the flop.

Nokia plans to hold a news conference in Finland on Tuesday morning to discuss the deal. Microsoft executives will elaborate on their rationale for the deal shortly after Nokia wraps up its presentation.

With files from The Canadian Press

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Israeli missile test raises tension amid Syria crisis

Israel tested a U.S.-backed missile system in the Mediterranean on Tuesday but did not announce the launch in advance, prompting a disclosure by Russia that kept the world on edge as the United States weighed an attack on Syria.

The morning launch was first reported by Moscow media that quoted Russian defence officials as saying two ballistic "objects" had been fired eastward from the centre of the sea — roughly in the direction of Syria.

The news ruffled financial markets until Israel's Defence Ministry said that it, along with a Pentagon team, had carried out a test-launch of a Sparrow missile. The Sparrow, which simulates the long-range missiles of Syria and Iran, is used for target practice by Israel's U.S.-backed ballistic shield Arrow.

"Israel routinely fires missiles or drones off its shores to test its own ballistic defence capabilities," a U.S. official said in Washington.

Western naval forces have been gathering in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea since President Bashar al-Assad was accused of carrying out an Aug. 21 gas attack in his more than two-year-old conflict with rebels trying to topple him.

Damascus denies responsibility for the incident. U.S. President Barack Obama had been widely expected to order reprisal strikes on Syria last week but put them off to seek support from Washington lawmakers first.

With U.S. action on Syria delayed as Obama confers with Congress, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sought to play up the Jewish state's ability to deal with its foes alone. On Tuesday, the rightist premier spoke of anti-missile systems as a national "wall of iron."

"These things give us the power to protect ourselves, and anyone who considers harming us would do best not to," he said in a speech.

Israeli Defence Minister Moshe Yaalon shrugged off a question from reporters on whether the launch might have been ill-timed. He said Israel had to work to maintain its military edge and "this necessitates field trials and, accordingly, a successful trial was conducted to test our systems. And we will continue to develop and to research and to equip the IDF [Israel Defence Forces] with the best systems in the world."

Tensions are high among Israelis despite calls for calm from the government, according to freelance reporter Irris Makler.

The country's military has noted there is a chance Syria, if attacked by the U.S., might then retaliate against Israel.

"People in the street are nervous. They're lining up to get gas masks, which are government-issued. They're fighting each other in the queues," Makler told CBC News.

Arrow designer Uzi Rabin said tests of the anti-missile system are planned "long, long in advance" and generally go unnoticed. "What apparently made the difference today is the high state of tension over Syria and Russia's unusual vigilance," he told Reuters.

A Russian Defence Ministry spokesman quoted by the Interfax news agency said the launch was picked up by an early warning radar station at Armavir, near the Black Sea, which is designed to detect missiles from Europe and Iran.

RIA, another Russian news agency, later quoted a source in Syria's "state structures" as saying the objects had fallen harmlessly into the sea.

The Russian Defence Ministry declined comment to Reuters.

Moscow is Assad's big-power ally and has mobilized its own navy in the face of U.S. military preparations to punish the Syrian government for its alleged killing of more than 1,400 people in the chemical strike in an embattled Damascus suburb.

Outside intervention

Russia opposes any outside military intervention in Syria's civil war and says it suspects the gassings were staged by rebels seeking foreign involvement in the conflict.

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu informed President Vladimir Putin of the launch but it was not immediately clear how he reacted.

Brent crude oil extended gains to rise by more than $1 per barrel and Dubai's share index fell after Russia said it detected the launches.

Five U.S. destroyers and an amphibious ship are in the Mediterranean, poised for possible strikes against Syria with cruise missiles — which are not ballistic. U.S. officials said the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and four other ships in its strike group moved into the Red Sea on Monday.

"The pressure being applied by the United States causes particular concern," Itar-Tass quoted Russian Defence Ministry official Oleg Dogayev as saying. He said "the dispatch of ships armed with cruise missiles toward Syria's shores has a negative effect on the situation in the region."

The United States sees its underwriting of the Arrow as a means of reassuring Israel and, by extension, of reducing the chance that its ally might launch unilateral attacks on Syria or Iran that could destabilise the wider region.

Netanyahu has reluctantly supported U.S.-led diplomatic efforts to curb Iran's nuclear program. He has been circumspect about the Western showdown with Syria, worrying that should Assad fall to Islamist-led rebels, they could prove more hostile to the Jewish state.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Fukushima radiation levels spike

Radiation near a tank holding highly contaminated water at Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear plant has spiked 18-fold, the plant's operator said on Sunday, highlighting the struggle to bring the crisis under control after more than two years.

Radiation of 1,800 millisieverts per hour — enough to kill an exposed person in four hours — was detected near the bottom of one storage tank on Saturday, Tokyo Electric Power Co , also known as Tepco, said.

An Aug. 22 readings measured radiation of 100 millisieverts per hour at the same tank. Japanese law has set an annual radiation exposure safety threshold of 50 millisieverts for nuclear plant workers during normal hours.

Last month, Tepco revealed that water from the tank was leaking. Japan's nuclear regulator later raised the severity of the leak from a level 1 "anomaly" to a level 3 "serious incident" on an international scale for radiation releases.

The Fukushima Daiichi power plant north of Tokyo was devastated by a tsunami on March 11, 2011, that resulted in fuel-rod meltdowns at three reactors, radioactive contamination of the air, sea and food and the evacuation of 160,000 people.

It sparked the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl a quarter of a century earlier.

While there were no new leaks found at the tank, a Tepco spokesman said another leak had been detected from a pipe connecting two other tanks nearby.

"We have not confirmed fresh leakage from the tank and water levels inside the tank has not changed," the Tepco spokesman said. "We are investigating the cause."

Tepco said the radiation measured was beta rays, which would be easier to protect against than gamma rays.

The Tepco spokesman also said the higher level of radiation from the latest reading was partly because investigators had used a measuring instrument capable of registering greater amounts of radiation.

Instruments used previously had only been capable of measuring radiation up to 100 millisieverts, but the new instruments were able to measure up to 10,000 millisieverts.

Radiation of 220 millisieverts was also recorded near an adjacent storage tank, where a reading of 70 had been registered last month.

Those tanks are built of steel plates stuck together by bolts — the same structure as the tank that was found last month to have leaked 300 tonnes of highly toxic water.

With no one seeming to know how to bring the crisis to an end, Tepco said last week it would invite foreign decommissioning experts to advise it on how to deal with the highly radioactive water leaking from the site.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria: Is an attack on the country legal?

The legal case for the U.S. to strike against Syria in retaliation for its alleged use of chemical weapons against its citizens is straightforward to some international law observers.

Simply put, any attack without UN consent would break international law.

"There are a couple of important points that intervention needs to work around. First, that the United Nation's charter forbids countries from using or threatening force against other countries," said Ian Hurd, an associate professor of political science at Northwestern University in Illinois. "That's a pretty fundamental piece of international law.

"And it's pretty clear in the UN charter ... that you can only use force in self-defence or with [UN] Security Council approval."

And in the case of Syria, Hurd said, "the U.S. using force against Syria without [approval of] the council is very clearly illegal."

Article 2 (4) of the UN charter states that "all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state." But the UN does allow for states to use force for self-defence and, under Chapter 7, authorizes the Security Council to take action "to maintain or restore international peace and security."

It adds that nothing in the charter "shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations."

In an op-ed piece for the Washington Post, Yale Law School professors Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro argue that the desire to make Syrian President Bashar al-Assad pay for his violation of law for allegedly gassing and killing more than 1,000 people is understandable.

Would threaten fundamental principles of international law

"Unleashing even limited military force without UN Security Council authorization would threaten the fundamental principles of the international legal system and, in so doing, put us all at risk," they write.

Even though Syria may have violated the 1925 Geneva protocol by using biological and chemical weapons, "it is a bedrock principle of international law that one state may not unilaterally attack another" except in self-defence or with Security Council authorization, Hathaway and Shapiro wrote.

"No state may play police officer to the world on its own say-so," they write.

The Obama administration is reportedly working on preparing a legal case for intervention. Before the British parliament shot down Prime Minister David Cameron's attempt to get approval for military action, his office had prepared a legal report to justify intervention.

The report claimed that even without UN Security Council approval "the U.K. would still be permitted, under the doctrine of humanitarian intervention, to take exceptional measures including targeted military intervention in order to alleviate the overwhelming humanitarian suffering in Syria."

Responsibility to protect

There has been movement in recent years to justify use of force under the doctrine of "responsibility to protect" (also known as R2P), adopted by UN member states in 2005. The idea has been championed by a number of organizations, including Canadians like former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy, former attorney general Allan Rock and former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.

As Rock and Axworthy recently wrote in a piece for the Globe and Mail, R2P "established the basis for military action, as a last resort, to protect civilian populations from mass murder" and that "R2P can and should be used as the basis for action in Syria."

They believe that the NATO bombing of Kosovo in 1999 to stop Serbian aggression was an appropriate precedent and suggest that R2P trumps the UN charter and any inaction by the Security Council.

"Although the 2005 agreement contemplated a Security Council resolution authorizing military intervention, member states surely did not intend that urgent humanitarian responses would be hostage to vetoes unreasonably exercised out of self-interest by one or more of the permanent five council members," they wrote.

But Hathaway said that's just not so, and that the doctrine does not allow intervention outside of the UN charter. In an email to CBC News, she referred to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who in 2009 said that "the responsibility to protect does not alter, indeed it reinforces, the legal obligations of member states to refrain from the use of force except in conformity with the charter."

"So, yes, if a state attacks another state without Security Council approval but cites 'responsibility to protect,' they would still be breaking international law," Hathaway said.

Ignatieff agreed with Hathaway's legal interpretation of the doctrine but said action should still be taken.

"If the Security Council fails to approve military action against Syria, the action would be illegal, in strict terms, under current international law," Ignatieff, a professor at the Munk School of Global Affairs in Toronto, wrote in an email to CBC News.

But according to the concept of "responsibility to protect," the action could be justified morally, Ignatieff said, on the grounds that all states have a common interest in protecting civilians against the use of such weapons.

"A moral case, according to responsibility to protect doctrine, must include a commitment to confine the operation strictly to deterring future use of chemical weapons and to avoid civilian casualties or harms," he said. "In other words, a moral case faces a high standard of justification in the absence of a legal authorization from the Security Council, but it is a case that can — and in my view — should be made in this case." With files from Sean Davidson and The Associated Press

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

David Frost, veteran British broadcaster, dies at 74

Veteran British journalist and broadcaster David Frost, who won fame around the world for his TV interviews with former President Richard Nixon, has died, his family told the BBC. He was 74.

Frost died of a suspected heart attack on Saturday night aboard the Queen Elizabeth cruise ship, where he was due to give a speech, the family said. The cruise company Cunard said its vessel left the English port of Southampton on Saturday for a 10-day cruise in the Mediterranean.

Known both for an amiable personality and incisive interviews with leading public figures, Frost's career in television news and entertainment spanned almost half a century. He was the only person to have interviewed all six British prime ministers serving between 1964 and 2007 and the seven U.S. presidents in office between 1969 and 2008. Outside world affairs, his roster ranged from Orson Welles to Muhammad Ali to Clint Eastwood.

Prime Minister David Cameron was quick to send his condolences, praising Frost for being an "extraordinary man with charm, wit, talent, intelligence and warmth in equal measure."

"The Nixon interviews were among the great broadcast moments — but there were many other brilliant interviews," Cameron said. "He could be — and certainly was with me — both a friend and a fearsome interviewer."

The BBC said it received a statement from Frost's family saying it was devastated and asking "for privacy at this difficult time."

Frost began television hosting while still a student at Cambridge University. He went on to host the BBC's satirical news show "The Week That Was" in the early 1960s, and, later, a sketch show called "The Frost Report" and a long-running BBC Sunday show, "Breakfast with Frost." His signature, "Hello, good evening and welcome" was often mimicked.

'Off-the-cuff' Nixon interview

While popular in Britain and beginning to launch a career on U.S. television, Frost did not become internationally known until 1977, when he secured a series of television interviews with Nixon.

The dramatic face-to-face was make-or-break both for him and for the ex-president, who was trying to salvage his reputation after resigning from the White House in disgrace following the Watergate scandal three years earlier. At the time, it was the most widely watched news interview in the history of TV.

The interviewer and his subject sparred through the first part of the interview, but Frost later said he realized he didn't have what he wanted as it wound down.

Nixon had acknowledged mistakes, but Frost pressed him on whether that was enough. Americans, he said, wanted to hear him own up to wrongdoing and acknowledge abuse of power — and "unless you say it, you're going to be haunted for the rest of your life."

"That was totally off-the-cuff," Frost later said. "That was totally ad-lib. In fact, I threw my clipboard down just to indicate that it was not prepared in any way.... I just knew at that moment that Richard Nixon was more vulnerable than he'd ever be in his life. And I knew I had to get it right."

After more pressing, Nixon relented. "I let the American people down and I have to carry that burden with me for the rest of my life," he said.

The dramatic face-off went on to spawn a hit play. And in 2008, a new generation was introduced to Frost's work with the Oscar-nominated movie "Frost/Nixon," starring Michael Sheen as Frost and Frank Langella as Nixon.

Frost was born on Apr. 7, 1939, the son of a Methodist preacher. Besides hosting, he set up his own company, which gave birth to many more popular British programs.

"Breakfast with Frost" ran on the BBC for 12 years until 2005, and the game show "Through the Keyhole" from 1987 to 2008. He had recently been working for Al Jazeera International.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Nelson Mandela discharged from hospital

Nelson Mandela, 95, was discharged from hospital on Sunday while still in critical condition and was taken by ambulance to his Johannesburg home where he will receive intensive care, the office of South Africa's president said.

On a sunny but cold morning, an ambulance took the anti-apartheid leader home from the hospital in the capital, Pretoria, about 31 miles away. Mandela had been hospitalized for nearly three months, after being admitted on June 8 for what the government described as a recurring lung infection.

Mandela's condition "is at times unstable," said President Jacob Zuma's statement Sunday.

"His home has been reconfigured to allow him to receive intensive care there," the statement said. "The health care personnel providing care at his home are the very same who provided care to him in hospital. If there are health conditions that warrant another admission to hospital in future, this will be done."

The statement Sunday from Zuma's office said during his stay in hospital Mandela "vacillated between serious to critical and at times unstable" and that "despite the difficulties imposed by his various illnesses, he, as always, displays immense grace and fortitude."

Referring to Mandela by his clan name, the statement added: "Madiba has been treated by a large medical team from the military, academia, private sector and other public health spheres. We thank all the health professionals at the hospital for their dedication."

The government has released few details about Mandela's condition, citing patient confidentiality and appealing for Mandela's privacy and dignity to be respected. But rumours and unconfirmed reports about Mandela's health have persisted on social media and other forums, fuelled in part by a feud within the Mandela family.

Burial sites feud

In a court case stemming from a family dispute over burial sites, some members of Mandela's extended family recently said in court documents that Mandela was being kept alive by a breathing machine and faces "impending death." That account was disputed by Zuma's office, which denied Mandela was "vegetative" but acknowledged his condition was grave.

Mandela has been particularly vulnerable to respiratory problems since contracting tuberculosis during his 27-year imprisonment. The bulk of that period was spent on Robben Island, a prison off the coast of Cape Town where Mandela and other apartheid-era prisoners spent part of the time toiling in a limestone quarry.

There has been an outpouring of concern in South Africa and around the world for the transformative figure who led the tense shift from apartheid's white minority rule to democracy two decades ago in a spirit of reconciliation.

Zuma urged South Africans to accept that Mandela had grown old and frail, saying all they could do was pray for him. During his hospitalization well-wishers delivered flowers and messages of support to the hospital where he was being treated, and prayer sessions were held around the country.

Mandela, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, is feted around the world as a towering figure of reconciliation. Despite being jailed for his prominent role in opposing white racist rule, Mandela was seemingly free of rancour on his release in 1990, becoming the unifying leader who steered South Africa through a delicate transition to all-race elections that propelled him to the presidency four years later.

The United Nations has recognized Mandela's birthday, July 18, as an international day to honour themes of activism, democracy and responsibility embodied by the former leader.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

U.S. has evidence sarin gas was used in Syria, Kerry says

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry asserted Sunday that the United States now has evidence of sarin gas use in Syria and said "the case gets stronger by the day" for a military attack.

A day after President Barack Obama stepped back from his threat to launch an attack, Kerry said in a series of interviews on the Sunday news shows that the administration learned of the sarin use within the past 24 hours through samples of hair and blood provided to Washington by first responders in Damascus.

Kerry also said he was confident that Congress will give Obama its backing for an attack against Syria, but he also said the president has authority to act on his own if Congress doesn't give its approval.

While Kerry stopped short of saying Obama was committed to such a course even if lawmakers refuse to authorize force, he did tell ABC's This Week that "we are not going to lose this vote."

Kerry said Obama has the right to take action against Syria, with or without Congress' approval. But he stopped short of saying Obama was committed to such a course even if lawmakers refuse to authorize force.

Congress is scheduled to return from a summer break on Sept. 9.

Obama, who has talked repeatedly of U.S. reprisals against President Bashar al-Assad for the alleged use of chemical weapons against his own people in Syria's protracted civil war, announced Saturday that he had decided to defer any immediate action in order to seek a congressional authorization.

"The case hasn't changed and the case doesn't change at all. The rationale for a military response is as powerful today" as it has been, Kerry said.

"This case is going to build stronger and stronger," he said on NBC's Meet the Press. But he also said he thinks "the people of America should be celebrating that the president is not acting unilaterally."

U.S. evidence independent of UN investigation

Kerry maintained there is no weakness in the U.S. case underscoring Obama's about-face, saying instead that "the president believes that we are all stronger as a nation when we act together."

The secretary said that Assad "has now joined the list of Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein" in deploying chemical weapons against his population and that "the case remains the same" for a U.S. response. Kerry echoed Obama in saying the world cannot stand by and watch Assad use chemical weapons.

Asked on CNN's State of the Union if the U.S. obtained its new information from UN weapons inspectors who had visited Syria, Kerry responded, "No, it is independent... But it is confirmation of the signatures of sarin."

"In the last 24 hours," he said, "we have learned through samples that were provided to the United States, that have now been tested, from first responders in east Damascus, and hair samples and blood samples have tested positive for signatures of sarin."

He was asked repeatedly what Obama would do in the event that Congress refuses to give its consent, Kerry said, "The president has taken his decision."

"I think this is a smart decision by the president.... He is not trying to create an imperial presidency," Kerry added. "I believe that in the end, Congress will do what is right," Kerry told Fox News Sunday.

Administration officials have said that Obama appeared set on ordering a strike until Friday evening. After a long walk around the White House grounds with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the president told his aide he had changed his mind.

These officials said Saturday that Obama initially drew pushback in a two-hour session attended by Vice President Joe Biden, Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, Director of National Intelligence James Klapper, CIA Director John Brennan, national security adviser Susan Rice and homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco. They declined to say which of the participants had argued against Obama's proposal.

21.49 | 0 komentar | Read More