CBS NEWS April 4, 2018, 6:33 PM
Shooter held bitter grudge against YouTube before opening fire at headquarters
Last Updated Apr 4, 2018 6:57 PM EDT
SAN FRANCISCO -- Police in San Bruno, California, said it was a beef with YouTube that drove a 39-year-old woman to shoot people -- apparently at random -- at the company's headquarters Tuesday. She then turned the gun on herself. Details about the suspect have since come to light.
Online the shooter, Nasim Najafi Aghdam, had already expressed her anger at YouTube.
"I am being discriminated and filtered on YouTube. My new videos hardly get views," she was heard saying on one of her uploaded videos.
Fake news on YouTube shooting spreads, despite recent efforts to clamp down on misinformation
She had been a prolific contributor to the video sharing site, posting videos on fitness, veganism and animal rights.
Nasim Najafi Aghdam SAN BRUNO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Police say Aghdam legally owned the 9 mm semi-automatic handgun she used and visited a shooting range Tuesday morning before going to YouTube's headquarters.
Police said the shooter wounded three people in YouTube's open courtyard and then killed herself.
Investigators covered her body with a yellow tarp.
"Well, we know that she was upset with YouTube, and right now that's the motivation that we've identified," San Bruno Police Chief Ed Barberini said.
Last week, Aghdam's family reported her missing from her home in San Diego. Then Tuesday morning, hours before the shooting, police in Mountain View found her sleeping in her car, about 25 miles south of the YouTube campus. After interviewing her for 20 minutes, authorities alerted her family.
Aghdam's father says he warned officers she had a grudge against YouTube, but in a statement the police said: "At no point did her father or brother mention anything about potential acts of violence."
Investigators visited family homes in Southern California on Wednesday. At her father's house, one relative said Aghdam came from Iran as a refugee at 18, about 21 years ago.
"How come, for getting stupid gun, we don't need mental doctor?" one family member said. "I don't know."
YouTube has not responded to CBS News' request for information about Aghdamn's history with the company and whether any of her videos were blocked.
Shooting at YouTube headquarters wounds several
Shooting at YouTube headquarters wounds several
Barberini confirmed Wednesday they found no links between Aghdam and any of the victims. Two women wounded in the attack were released Wednesday from a San Francisco hospital. The third victim, a 36-year-old man, was upgraded from critical to serious condition.
Officials are serving search warrants at two houses in Southern California associated with Aghdam, reviewing surveillance video and scouring her social media posts, Barberini said.
YouTube shooting: Witness describes helping wounded employees
San Bruno is "no stranger to a crisis," said Mayor Rico Medina, and praised first responders who "ran into an active shooting situation as it occurred."
"No one goes to work thinking this is what will happen to them around their meal time, but it did," Medina said.
Thursday, April 5, 2018
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg to testify before Senate too - CBS News
April 4, 2018, 8:59 PM
Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg to testify before Senate too
WASHINGTON -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has agreed he will testify in a second congressional hearing next week, this time in the Senate. Zuckerberg will appear at a rare joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committees on April 10 -- a day before testifying at the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The social media giant is reeling from a privacy scandal over its data collection following allegations that the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica obtained data on about 87 million Facebook users to try to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.
Mark Zuckerberg says he's not stepping down at Facebook, nobody fired after data scandal
Reps. Greg Walden, R-Oregon, and Frank Pallone, D-New Jersey, said the House panel hearing will focus on the Facebook's "use and protection of user data."
Walden is the House committee's Republican chairman and Pallone is the panel's top Democrat.
"This hearing will be an important opportunity to shed light on critical consumer data privacy issues and help all Americans better understand what happens to their personal information online," Walden and Pallone said.
Their committee is among the congressional panels that requested Zuckerberg's testimony to announce a hearing date.
Walden and Pallone said last month that they wanted to hear directly from Zuckerberg after senior Facebook executives failed to answers questions during a closed-door briefing with congressional staff about how Facebook and third-party developers use and protect consumer data.
Zuckerberg said during a March 21 interview on CNN that he would be "happy" to testify before Congress, but only if he was the right person to do that. He said there might be other Facebook officials better positioned to appear, depending on what Congress wanted to know. Walden and Pallone said a day later that as Facebook's top executive, Zuckerberg is indeed the "right witness to provide answers to the American people."
Their call represented the first official request from a congressional oversight committee for Zuckerberg's appearance as lawmakers demanded that Facebook explain reports that Cambridge Analytica harvested the data of more than 50 million Facebook users.
The company, funded in part by Mr. Trump supporter and billionaire financier Robert Mercer, paired its vault of consumer data with voter information. The Trump campaign paid the firm nearly $6 million during the 2016 election, although it has since distanced itself. Other Republican clients of Cambridge Analytica included Sen. Ted Cruz's failed presidential campaign and Ben Carson, the famed neurosurgeon who also ran unsuccessfully for president in 2016.
The data was gathered through a personality test app called "This Is Your Digital Life" that was downloaded by fewer than 200,000 people. But participants unknowingly gave researchers access to the profiles of their Facebook friends, allowing them to collect data from millions more users.
It's far from certain what action, if any, the GOP-led Congress and the Trump administration might take against Facebook, but the company will almost certainly oppose any efforts to regulate it or the technology business sector more broadly.
As do most large corporations, Facebook has assembled a potent lobbying operation to advance its interests in Washington. The company spent just over $13 million on lobbying in 2017, with the bulk of the money spent on an in-house lobbying team that's stocked with former Republican and Democratic political aides, according to disclosure records filed with the House and Senate. The company sought to influence an array of matters that ranged from potential changes to government surveillance programs to corporate tax issues.
Facebook said Wednesday that the number of users whose data was swept up by Cambridge Analytica could be as high as 87 million, significantly more than the figure of 50 million that was widely reported at the outset of the data scandal more than two weeks ago.
"We only just finalized our understanding of this situation in the last, I think, couple of days on this," CEO Mark Zuckerberg said during a conference call with reporters Wednesday afternoon. "We didn't put out the 50 million number. That came from other parties."
In a blog post, Facebook's Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer said the company believes data from up to 87 million people was "improperly shared" with Cambridge Analytica, the consulting firm who received data on users and their networks from a researcher who developed an app that captured the information. Facebook banned Cambridge Analytica, the researcher and a former employee from the platform in March.
Are we in a trade war yet? - CNN Money
Are we in a trade war yet?
by Chris Isidore @CNNMoney
April 4, 2018: 12:05 PM ET
US trade with China, explained
Are we there yet?
Has Donald Trump started a trade war with China, the world's second largest economy? Wall Street certainly is worried he has. Economists aren't as sure.
This week, the United States announced a range of tariffs on Chinese goods, claiming that China is stealing US intellectual property. China responded with its own tariffs on US goods within hours. The moves follow US tariffs that were imposed earlier this year on Chinese steel and aluminum, which also prompted a response from China.
But economists say the US isn't in a trade war, at least "not yet."
Related: 'Trade wars are good?' Two words — Great Depression
"The odds have gone up considerably," said Bill Reinsch, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.
"What happened so far is what typically happens — we do something, they do something back more or less equivalent, then we glare at each other," he said. "The war starts if they do something in excess of what we've done, or if we counter-retaliate to what we've done."
It's that risk of escalation that has the experts so scared.
"The rhetoric is different this time around," said Jay Bryson, international economist with Wells Fargo. "This is most serious situation I can think of in at least the last 40 or 50 years."
Of course, there have been countless tariffs and trade disputes in the past that never escalated to the status of full-blown trade war. And the latest US tariffs won't even take effect until at least next month. But if the US does get into a full-scale trade war, it would be the first time since the Great Depression.
It's difficult to determine what constitutes a trade war, since there isn't a bright line between a trade dispute and a war. "There isn't a hard and fast definition," said Bryson.
But some developments would clearly signal that we're in a trade war.
"If the Chinese decide to devalue the yuan, if they throw American companies out or make it hard for American companies to come in, if they decide to cut back on direct investment in the US, that's a war," said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics.
Even if the current trade skirmishes don't constitute a full war, they can still cause pain for many US businesses and their employees. That includes companies that can no longer sell goods and services to China, and businesses and consumers who can no longer buy the lower priced Chinese imports they've come to depend upon.
CNNMoney (New York)
First published April 4, 2018: 12:05 PM ET
by Chris Isidore @CNNMoney
April 4, 2018: 12:05 PM ET
US trade with China, explained
Are we there yet?
Has Donald Trump started a trade war with China, the world's second largest economy? Wall Street certainly is worried he has. Economists aren't as sure.
This week, the United States announced a range of tariffs on Chinese goods, claiming that China is stealing US intellectual property. China responded with its own tariffs on US goods within hours. The moves follow US tariffs that were imposed earlier this year on Chinese steel and aluminum, which also prompted a response from China.
But economists say the US isn't in a trade war, at least "not yet."
Related: 'Trade wars are good?' Two words — Great Depression
"The odds have gone up considerably," said Bill Reinsch, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.
"What happened so far is what typically happens — we do something, they do something back more or less equivalent, then we glare at each other," he said. "The war starts if they do something in excess of what we've done, or if we counter-retaliate to what we've done."
It's that risk of escalation that has the experts so scared.
"The rhetoric is different this time around," said Jay Bryson, international economist with Wells Fargo. "This is most serious situation I can think of in at least the last 40 or 50 years."
Of course, there have been countless tariffs and trade disputes in the past that never escalated to the status of full-blown trade war. And the latest US tariffs won't even take effect until at least next month. But if the US does get into a full-scale trade war, it would be the first time since the Great Depression.
It's difficult to determine what constitutes a trade war, since there isn't a bright line between a trade dispute and a war. "There isn't a hard and fast definition," said Bryson.
But some developments would clearly signal that we're in a trade war.
"If the Chinese decide to devalue the yuan, if they throw American companies out or make it hard for American companies to come in, if they decide to cut back on direct investment in the US, that's a war," said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics.
Even if the current trade skirmishes don't constitute a full war, they can still cause pain for many US businesses and their employees. That includes companies that can no longer sell goods and services to China, and businesses and consumers who can no longer buy the lower priced Chinese imports they've come to depend upon.
CNNMoney (New York)
First published April 4, 2018: 12:05 PM ET
A potential trade war is scary, but the US has a legitimate beef with China - CNBC News
A potential trade war is scary, but the US has a legitimate beef with China
Though President Trump has come under fire for his tariff actions, the U.S. has been at the short end of a number of trade deals.
Trump has announced a list of 1,300 Chinese goods subject to tariff, prompting retaliation against U.S. products.
Economist Alan Blinder likens the moves to the brinkmanship practiced during the Cold War.
"A threat of a trade war that doesn't erupt into an actual trade war could conceivably do some good. But it's playing with fire," Blinder says.
Jeff Cox | @JeffCoxCNBCcom
Published April 5, 2018
CNBC.com
Still time for negotiating tariffs and to walk back from where we are, says expert
19 Hours Ago | 05:59
The U.S. is coming off as the agitator in what could turn into a global trade war. Yet in many ways, it is simply responding to what indeed has been an uneven playing field for decades.
Most notably, the U.S. and others around the world have suffered at the hands of China's rampant intellectual property theft. From designer brand knockoffs to technological innovations to the secret sauce that so many companies use to make their brands special, China is notorious for the practice.
What the White House is doing that has caused so much commotion is taking a more aggressive approach than any of its predecessors to put that practice, and others like it, to an end.
The administration has announced a list of 1,300 Chinese products subject to a 25 percent tariff, a move that drew an immediate retaliation and sparked more fears of a protracted international commerce battle.
"People have known for some time that China has sought quite actively to acquire intellectual property through their relationships with foreign businesses," said Lewis Alexander, chief U.S. economist at Nomura Global Economics. "These are not new problems."
What is new is someone willing to push the argument far enough with China to threaten trading relationships.
U.S. President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping leave a business leaders event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on November 9, 2017.
U.S. President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping leave a business leaders event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on November 9, 2017.
"The question really is how big a difference can you make and what the potential consequences of it are," Alexander said. "Is it worth putting the whole global trading system at risk to achieve these objectives?"
President Donald Trump has been railing against the trade deficit the country has with its counterparts around the world, and in particular the bilateral shortfall with China.
Only he knows if the latest round of saber rattling is really about dishwashers and veterinary vaccines and golf carts or any of the other items that can be found here. After all, trying to eradicate a $375 billion annual deficit that has come about mostly because Americans consume more than they make and require cheap imported goods to bridge the gap seems unrealistic.
However, Trump may be able to right some previous wrongs while also playing to his middle-America blue-collar base.
"The analogy is to the arms race with the former Soviet Union," said Princeton economist Alan Blinder, author of the recently released book, "Advice and Dissent: Why America Suffers When Economics and Politics Collide." "We had great success with this under Ronald Reagan, in which he basically threatened a slightly wacky escalation of defense spending and the Russians couldn't match it and they sort of caved."
"It could have had a bad ending if they didn't cave. The analogy here is a trade war. A threat of a trade war that doesn't erupt into an actual trade war could conceivably do some good. But it's playing with fire."
Blinder said it's unclear, though, exactly what Trump hopes to achieve.
Trade deficits usually are a byproduct of a growing economy, and U.S. GDP appears well on its way to achieving the administration's 3 percent annual target. Low levels of American savings also make deficits virtually unavoidable.
"I have not the slightest idea of what Trump thinks he wants to accomplish on this. He talks as if he wants a balance of trade on China. Can he really?" Blinder said. "If what he's after is intellectual property protection, he's been really quiet about it."
The actual release from the U.S. Trade Representative office lists "China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation" as the overriding impetus for the tariffs. There's a 90-day public comment period that also could serve as a chance for the opposing sides to come to the bargaining table.
Trump likely has more than China in his sights, and there are, to be sure, other items besides intellectual property. The U.S. would like to get its cars and trucks sold in more countries, and the administration has slapped global tariffs on aluminum and steel in an effort to promote domestic production of those goods.
During his presidential campaign, he vowed to tear up trade agreements that he didn't think were fair to the U.S., placing the NAFTA pact with Mexico and Canada near the top of his grievance list.
The world, then, will be watching what happens with China.
"It would be a wonderful thing to see if the Chinese government would put more handcuffs so to speak on that ability to pillage other people's intellectual property," said Seth Kaplowitz, finance lecturer at San Diego State University.
"Not everybody likes the president, not everybody supports the president. The one thing everyone recognizes is that they need the United States to trade with to get their goods to market as well as to provide American goods to their markets," he said. "I am sure behind the scenes they're discussing or about to discuss how this could be resolved."
Markets also are watching closely.
The Dow industrials opened Wednesday down more than 500 points as trade war fears percolated, then staged a stunning turnaround on seemingly no news.
The day seemed to symbolize that the market is trying to price in both outcomes: a damaging global trade war, or a Trump victory on a tariff gambit that others wouldn't take.
"We're going to see more nervousness, more noise, more volatility, more turmoil than less over the next few months," said Eric Winograd, senior economist at AllianceBernstein. "This, too, shall pass. Both parties have enough incentive from an economic sense to progress toward free trade rather than walk away from it."
Though President Trump has come under fire for his tariff actions, the U.S. has been at the short end of a number of trade deals.
Trump has announced a list of 1,300 Chinese goods subject to tariff, prompting retaliation against U.S. products.
Economist Alan Blinder likens the moves to the brinkmanship practiced during the Cold War.
"A threat of a trade war that doesn't erupt into an actual trade war could conceivably do some good. But it's playing with fire," Blinder says.
Jeff Cox | @JeffCoxCNBCcom
Published April 5, 2018
CNBC.com
Still time for negotiating tariffs and to walk back from where we are, says expert
19 Hours Ago | 05:59
The U.S. is coming off as the agitator in what could turn into a global trade war. Yet in many ways, it is simply responding to what indeed has been an uneven playing field for decades.
Most notably, the U.S. and others around the world have suffered at the hands of China's rampant intellectual property theft. From designer brand knockoffs to technological innovations to the secret sauce that so many companies use to make their brands special, China is notorious for the practice.
What the White House is doing that has caused so much commotion is taking a more aggressive approach than any of its predecessors to put that practice, and others like it, to an end.
The administration has announced a list of 1,300 Chinese products subject to a 25 percent tariff, a move that drew an immediate retaliation and sparked more fears of a protracted international commerce battle.
"People have known for some time that China has sought quite actively to acquire intellectual property through their relationships with foreign businesses," said Lewis Alexander, chief U.S. economist at Nomura Global Economics. "These are not new problems."
What is new is someone willing to push the argument far enough with China to threaten trading relationships.
U.S. President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping leave a business leaders event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on November 9, 2017.
U.S. President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping leave a business leaders event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on November 9, 2017.
"The question really is how big a difference can you make and what the potential consequences of it are," Alexander said. "Is it worth putting the whole global trading system at risk to achieve these objectives?"
President Donald Trump has been railing against the trade deficit the country has with its counterparts around the world, and in particular the bilateral shortfall with China.
Only he knows if the latest round of saber rattling is really about dishwashers and veterinary vaccines and golf carts or any of the other items that can be found here. After all, trying to eradicate a $375 billion annual deficit that has come about mostly because Americans consume more than they make and require cheap imported goods to bridge the gap seems unrealistic.
However, Trump may be able to right some previous wrongs while also playing to his middle-America blue-collar base.
"The analogy is to the arms race with the former Soviet Union," said Princeton economist Alan Blinder, author of the recently released book, "Advice and Dissent: Why America Suffers When Economics and Politics Collide." "We had great success with this under Ronald Reagan, in which he basically threatened a slightly wacky escalation of defense spending and the Russians couldn't match it and they sort of caved."
"It could have had a bad ending if they didn't cave. The analogy here is a trade war. A threat of a trade war that doesn't erupt into an actual trade war could conceivably do some good. But it's playing with fire."
Blinder said it's unclear, though, exactly what Trump hopes to achieve.
Trade deficits usually are a byproduct of a growing economy, and U.S. GDP appears well on its way to achieving the administration's 3 percent annual target. Low levels of American savings also make deficits virtually unavoidable.
"I have not the slightest idea of what Trump thinks he wants to accomplish on this. He talks as if he wants a balance of trade on China. Can he really?" Blinder said. "If what he's after is intellectual property protection, he's been really quiet about it."
The actual release from the U.S. Trade Representative office lists "China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation" as the overriding impetus for the tariffs. There's a 90-day public comment period that also could serve as a chance for the opposing sides to come to the bargaining table.
Trump likely has more than China in his sights, and there are, to be sure, other items besides intellectual property. The U.S. would like to get its cars and trucks sold in more countries, and the administration has slapped global tariffs on aluminum and steel in an effort to promote domestic production of those goods.
During his presidential campaign, he vowed to tear up trade agreements that he didn't think were fair to the U.S., placing the NAFTA pact with Mexico and Canada near the top of his grievance list.
The world, then, will be watching what happens with China.
"It would be a wonderful thing to see if the Chinese government would put more handcuffs so to speak on that ability to pillage other people's intellectual property," said Seth Kaplowitz, finance lecturer at San Diego State University.
"Not everybody likes the president, not everybody supports the president. The one thing everyone recognizes is that they need the United States to trade with to get their goods to market as well as to provide American goods to their markets," he said. "I am sure behind the scenes they're discussing or about to discuss how this could be resolved."
Markets also are watching closely.
The Dow industrials opened Wednesday down more than 500 points as trade war fears percolated, then staged a stunning turnaround on seemingly no news.
The day seemed to symbolize that the market is trying to price in both outcomes: a damaging global trade war, or a Trump victory on a tariff gambit that others wouldn't take.
"We're going to see more nervousness, more noise, more volatility, more turmoil than less over the next few months," said Eric Winograd, senior economist at AllianceBernstein. "This, too, shall pass. Both parties have enough incentive from an economic sense to progress toward free trade rather than walk away from it."
Zuckerberg Speaks, Oracle and Trump, YouTube Security: CEO Daily for April 5, 2018 - Fortune
Zuckerberg Speaks, Oracle and Trump, YouTube Security: CEO Daily for April 5, 2018
Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc., speaks during the Oculus Connect 3 event in San Jose, California on Oct. 6, 2016.
Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc., speaks during the Oculus Connect 3 event in San Jose, California on Oct. 6, 2016.
David Paul Morris—Bloomberg via Getty Images
By DAVID MEYER 6:37 AM EDT
Good morning. Berlin-based Fortune writer David Meyer here, filling in for Alan today.
Facebook’s share price is up a few percentage points after CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the recent scandals hadn’t made “any meaningful impact” on the business.
The claim came as Facebook confirmed that it scans the links and images sent in private Messenger conversations. The company yesterday also said the data of 87 million, not 50 million, of its users may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica. Oh, and malicious actors had been using a (now removed) tool for finding friends to record people’s public information. “Most people on Facebook could have had their public profile scraped in this way,” Facebook CTO Mike Schroepfer admitted in a blog post.
Given that Facebook’s privacy scandals keep on coming—and the investigations keep piling up—is it reasonable for investors to be buying into the company rather than walking away from it?
There are indeed causes for optimism. First off, if all this stuff comes out now, there are hopefully fewer potential scandals waiting in Facebook’s closet.
More importantly, though, Facebook’s many admissions come in the context of the company making major changes to its systems, so they are more compliant with the European Union’s incoming General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It’s a lot easier to fess up to something when you can promote the cure along with the diagnosis. (Zuckerberg also used a Wednesday conference call with reporters to insist that, contrary to a Reuters report, Facebook will extend GDPR-compliant privacy controls to users around the world, not just in the EU.)
If Facebook didn’t make big changes to get in line with the European privacy law, which comes into effect next month, it would have been risking fines of up to 4% of global annual revenues. It remains to be seen whether EU regulators will be satisfied with the changes Facebook has implemented, but it certainly looks like it’s making a serious effort.
The big question now is how much those changes will affect Facebook’s bottom line. They make it harder for third-party apps to get data on Facebook’s users, potentially making the social network a less attractive platform for some developers. They loosen lucrative ties with data brokers, potentially making for less relevant ads on the platform (something that’s worrying Morgan Stanley’s analysts.) These are reversals of policies that made Facebook what it is today—invasive of privacy, but a big money-spinner.
So when Zuckerberg says there hasn’t been a material impact on Facebook’s business yet, that may not be relevant for long. Yes, most people haven’t jumped on board the #DeleteFacebook bandwagon, but it’s what happens next that counts. Once Facebook has worked to regain people’s trust—if indeed that’s possible—it needs to show that it can still thrive while being respectful of users’ data and privacy.
More news below.
David Meyer
@superglaze
Top News
Dimon Newsletter
JPMorgan Chase chief Jamie Dimon has praised Trump’s policies in his latest newsletter, noting that the deregulation and tax cuts mean more money for the bank. However, he also said the White House should think again about its antipathy to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which has gone ahead without the U.S. Reuters
Oracle and Trump
Oracle co-CEO Safra Catz, whose company is in bigtime competition with Amazon in the cloud computing space, reportedly told President Donald Trump in a private dinner that bidding for a Pentagon cloud contract was unfairly weighted in Amazon’s favor. Trump has it in for Amazon at the moment, but, according to the report, he made no indication to Catz that he would interfere in the bidding process. Bloomberg
YouTube Security
YouTube’s offices around the world are to get a security boost following Tuesday’s shooting at its San Bruno headquarters. Nasim Aghdam, who shot and wounded three people before killing herself, entered the facility through its parking garage. “We are…revisiting this incident in detail and will be increasing the security we have at all of our offices worldwide to make them more secure not only in the near term, but long-term,” the Google-owned operation told its employees. However, it’s not so easy to boost security on open-design tech campuses. Recode
Saudi Cinema
Saudi Arabia lifted its 35-year ban on movie theaters at the end of last year, and now the country has issued its first cinema operating license to the U.S.-headquartered (and Chinese-owned) chain AMC. AMC’s first Saudi cinema will open in Riyadh in a couple weeks’ time. It will likely soon face competition from regional companies such as Vox Cinemas and Novo Cinemas, which are based in the United Arab Emirates. CNN
Advertisement
Around the Water Cooler
Wine Deal
The Carlyle Group is buying Australia’s largest winemaker, Accolade Wines, for $769 million. Accolade is the company behind labels such as Hardy’s and Kumala, and the fifth-largest company in its field globally. Like other Australian winemakers, Accolade has been enjoying brisk trade with China, where the middle classes are increasingly keen on wine. City A.M.
Nike Diversity
Nike’s HR chief has told employees that the company has “failed to get traction” in its efforts to hire more women and minorities. “Our hiring and promotion decisions are not changing senior-level representation as quickly as we have wanted,” Monique Matheson said in a memo leaked to The Wall Street Journal. Only 29% of Nike’s several hundred vice presidents are women. WSJ
Philippine Diversion
Airlines are cancelling flights to the popular Philippine island of Boracay, after the government ordered its closure to protect it. On Wednesday, President Rodrigo Duterte railed against unlicensed developments on the island and highlighted the outflow of raw sewage to the sea around it. Cebu Pacific, Philippine Airlines and AirAsia Philippines are all scaling back flights to Boracay—Cebu Pacific reckons it will lose as much as $5 million over the next six months due to the cancellations. Reuters
Harassment in Congress
Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto wants Congress to overhaul its sexual harassment policies. In a piece for Fortune, she writes: “Four out of 10 female congressional staffers believe that sexual harassment is a problem on Capitol Hill, according to a 2016 CQ Roll Call survey. One out every six of these women say they themselves are survivors of sexual harassment. These numbers show just how widespread sexual misconduct continues to be in Congress. This culture must change.” Fortune
This edition of CEO Daily was edited by David Meyer. Find previous editions here, and sign up for other Fortune newsletters here.
Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc., speaks during the Oculus Connect 3 event in San Jose, California on Oct. 6, 2016.
Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer and founder of Facebook Inc., speaks during the Oculus Connect 3 event in San Jose, California on Oct. 6, 2016.
David Paul Morris—Bloomberg via Getty Images
By DAVID MEYER 6:37 AM EDT
Good morning. Berlin-based Fortune writer David Meyer here, filling in for Alan today.
Facebook’s share price is up a few percentage points after CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the recent scandals hadn’t made “any meaningful impact” on the business.
The claim came as Facebook confirmed that it scans the links and images sent in private Messenger conversations. The company yesterday also said the data of 87 million, not 50 million, of its users may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica. Oh, and malicious actors had been using a (now removed) tool for finding friends to record people’s public information. “Most people on Facebook could have had their public profile scraped in this way,” Facebook CTO Mike Schroepfer admitted in a blog post.
Given that Facebook’s privacy scandals keep on coming—and the investigations keep piling up—is it reasonable for investors to be buying into the company rather than walking away from it?
There are indeed causes for optimism. First off, if all this stuff comes out now, there are hopefully fewer potential scandals waiting in Facebook’s closet.
More importantly, though, Facebook’s many admissions come in the context of the company making major changes to its systems, so they are more compliant with the European Union’s incoming General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It’s a lot easier to fess up to something when you can promote the cure along with the diagnosis. (Zuckerberg also used a Wednesday conference call with reporters to insist that, contrary to a Reuters report, Facebook will extend GDPR-compliant privacy controls to users around the world, not just in the EU.)
If Facebook didn’t make big changes to get in line with the European privacy law, which comes into effect next month, it would have been risking fines of up to 4% of global annual revenues. It remains to be seen whether EU regulators will be satisfied with the changes Facebook has implemented, but it certainly looks like it’s making a serious effort.
The big question now is how much those changes will affect Facebook’s bottom line. They make it harder for third-party apps to get data on Facebook’s users, potentially making the social network a less attractive platform for some developers. They loosen lucrative ties with data brokers, potentially making for less relevant ads on the platform (something that’s worrying Morgan Stanley’s analysts.) These are reversals of policies that made Facebook what it is today—invasive of privacy, but a big money-spinner.
So when Zuckerberg says there hasn’t been a material impact on Facebook’s business yet, that may not be relevant for long. Yes, most people haven’t jumped on board the #DeleteFacebook bandwagon, but it’s what happens next that counts. Once Facebook has worked to regain people’s trust—if indeed that’s possible—it needs to show that it can still thrive while being respectful of users’ data and privacy.
More news below.
David Meyer
@superglaze
Top News
Dimon Newsletter
JPMorgan Chase chief Jamie Dimon has praised Trump’s policies in his latest newsletter, noting that the deregulation and tax cuts mean more money for the bank. However, he also said the White House should think again about its antipathy to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which has gone ahead without the U.S. Reuters
Oracle and Trump
Oracle co-CEO Safra Catz, whose company is in bigtime competition with Amazon in the cloud computing space, reportedly told President Donald Trump in a private dinner that bidding for a Pentagon cloud contract was unfairly weighted in Amazon’s favor. Trump has it in for Amazon at the moment, but, according to the report, he made no indication to Catz that he would interfere in the bidding process. Bloomberg
YouTube Security
YouTube’s offices around the world are to get a security boost following Tuesday’s shooting at its San Bruno headquarters. Nasim Aghdam, who shot and wounded three people before killing herself, entered the facility through its parking garage. “We are…revisiting this incident in detail and will be increasing the security we have at all of our offices worldwide to make them more secure not only in the near term, but long-term,” the Google-owned operation told its employees. However, it’s not so easy to boost security on open-design tech campuses. Recode
Saudi Cinema
Saudi Arabia lifted its 35-year ban on movie theaters at the end of last year, and now the country has issued its first cinema operating license to the U.S.-headquartered (and Chinese-owned) chain AMC. AMC’s first Saudi cinema will open in Riyadh in a couple weeks’ time. It will likely soon face competition from regional companies such as Vox Cinemas and Novo Cinemas, which are based in the United Arab Emirates. CNN
Advertisement
Around the Water Cooler
Wine Deal
The Carlyle Group is buying Australia’s largest winemaker, Accolade Wines, for $769 million. Accolade is the company behind labels such as Hardy’s and Kumala, and the fifth-largest company in its field globally. Like other Australian winemakers, Accolade has been enjoying brisk trade with China, where the middle classes are increasingly keen on wine. City A.M.
Nike Diversity
Nike’s HR chief has told employees that the company has “failed to get traction” in its efforts to hire more women and minorities. “Our hiring and promotion decisions are not changing senior-level representation as quickly as we have wanted,” Monique Matheson said in a memo leaked to The Wall Street Journal. Only 29% of Nike’s several hundred vice presidents are women. WSJ
Philippine Diversion
Airlines are cancelling flights to the popular Philippine island of Boracay, after the government ordered its closure to protect it. On Wednesday, President Rodrigo Duterte railed against unlicensed developments on the island and highlighted the outflow of raw sewage to the sea around it. Cebu Pacific, Philippine Airlines and AirAsia Philippines are all scaling back flights to Boracay—Cebu Pacific reckons it will lose as much as $5 million over the next six months due to the cancellations. Reuters
Harassment in Congress
Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto wants Congress to overhaul its sexual harassment policies. In a piece for Fortune, she writes: “Four out of 10 female congressional staffers believe that sexual harassment is a problem on Capitol Hill, according to a 2016 CQ Roll Call survey. One out every six of these women say they themselves are survivors of sexual harassment. These numbers show just how widespread sexual misconduct continues to be in Congress. This culture must change.” Fortune
This edition of CEO Daily was edited by David Meyer. Find previous editions here, and sign up for other Fortune newsletters here.
Facebook Says Data on Most of Its 2 Billion Users Is Vulnerable - Bloomberg
Facebook Says Data on Most of Its 2 Billion Users Is Vulnerable
By
April 5, 2018, 4:42 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 5, 2018, 2:32 PM GMT+10
Malicious actors scraped users’ public profiles, company says
Shares climb after CEO Zuckerberg defends ad-driven business
Bloomberg’s Emily Chang reports on Facebook’s confirmation of the data shared with Cambridge Analytica.
Facebook Inc. said data on most of its 2 billion users could have been accessed improperly, giving fresh evidence of the ways the social-media giant failed to protect people’s privacy while generating billions of dollars in revenue from the information.
The company said it removed a feature that let users enter phone numbers or email addresses into Facebook’s search tool to find other people. That was being used by malicious actors to scrape public profile information, it said.
“Given the scale and sophistication of the activity we’ve seen, we believe most people on Facebook could have had their public profile scraped in this way,” the company said. “So we have now disabled this feature.”
Facebook also said data on as many as 87 million people, most of them in the U.S., may have been improperly shared with research firm Cambridge Analytica. This is Facebook’s first official confirmation of the possible scope of the data leak, which was previously estimated at roughly 50 million. It has resulted in calls from legislators and policy makers for greater regulation of social media, helping to shave billion of dollars from the company’s market value.
“We didn’t take a broad enough view of what our responsibility was and that was a huge mistake. It was my mistake,” Facebook Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg said on a conference call with reporters. “We’re broadening our view of our responsibility.”
Zuckerberg is scheduled to appear before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committee on April 10 to discuss Facebook’s role in society and users’ privacy. Australia’s government said it has started a formal investigation into whether Facebook breached the country’s privacy laws.
He defended the company’s advertising business model, confirmed he wants to stay in charge and disclosed no "meaningful impact" from an online campaign by some users to delete their Facebook accounts. Facebook stock rose almost 3 percent in extended trading, after closing at $155.10 in New York.
About 270,000 people downloaded a personality quiz app and shared information about themselves and their friends with a researcher, who then passed along the information to Cambridge Analytica, in a move that Facebook says was against its rules. Facebook reached the 87 million figure by adding up all the unique people that those 270,000 users were friends with at the time they gave the app permission. Facebook made the new disclosure in an online posting Wednesday.
Cambridge Analytica, which worked for Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, said it licensed data on 30 million people, countering Facebook’s 87 million estimate. Cambridge Analytica said in a tweet that it “immediately deleted the raw data from our file server, and began the process of searching for and removing any of its derivatives in our system” after Facebook contacted them to let them know data had been improperly obtained.
Facebook says it will tell people, in a notice at the top of their news feeds starting April 9, if their information may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica. But it still hasn’t independently confirmed if the firm currently has the data. The revelation, and the subsequent media questions, hint at the grilling Zuckerberg will likely face when he testifies on the matter before Congress next week: How many other Cambridge Analytica-scale leaks of data are out there?
Zuckerberg, in Wednesday’s call, said he couldn’t be sure. “We’re not going to be able to go out and find every single bad use of data, but what we can do is make it a lot harder for folks to do that going forward,” he said. “I think we will be able to uncover a large amount of bad activity that exists.”
The company has been embroiled in controversy for weeks over the revelation that data was shared and then not deleted. It raised questions over the information Facebook compiles on users, makes available to third parties, and what happens to it afterward. Facebook made the announcement along with an update on its plans to restrict data access through its platform.
Zuckerberg defended gathering user data for a business model that lets advertisers use Facebook’s information and targeting tools to reach specific audiences.
“People tell us that if they’re going to see ads they want the ads to be good,” he said, noting that requires keeping track of what people are interested in.
Either way, he thinks he should remain at the helm of Facebook. “I think life is about learning from mistakes and figuring out what you need to do to move forward,” he said.
By
April 5, 2018, 4:42 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 5, 2018, 2:32 PM GMT+10
Malicious actors scraped users’ public profiles, company says
Shares climb after CEO Zuckerberg defends ad-driven business
Bloomberg’s Emily Chang reports on Facebook’s confirmation of the data shared with Cambridge Analytica.
Facebook Inc. said data on most of its 2 billion users could have been accessed improperly, giving fresh evidence of the ways the social-media giant failed to protect people’s privacy while generating billions of dollars in revenue from the information.
The company said it removed a feature that let users enter phone numbers or email addresses into Facebook’s search tool to find other people. That was being used by malicious actors to scrape public profile information, it said.
“Given the scale and sophistication of the activity we’ve seen, we believe most people on Facebook could have had their public profile scraped in this way,” the company said. “So we have now disabled this feature.”
Facebook also said data on as many as 87 million people, most of them in the U.S., may have been improperly shared with research firm Cambridge Analytica. This is Facebook’s first official confirmation of the possible scope of the data leak, which was previously estimated at roughly 50 million. It has resulted in calls from legislators and policy makers for greater regulation of social media, helping to shave billion of dollars from the company’s market value.
“We didn’t take a broad enough view of what our responsibility was and that was a huge mistake. It was my mistake,” Facebook Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg said on a conference call with reporters. “We’re broadening our view of our responsibility.”
Zuckerberg is scheduled to appear before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce Committee on April 10 to discuss Facebook’s role in society and users’ privacy. Australia’s government said it has started a formal investigation into whether Facebook breached the country’s privacy laws.
He defended the company’s advertising business model, confirmed he wants to stay in charge and disclosed no "meaningful impact" from an online campaign by some users to delete their Facebook accounts. Facebook stock rose almost 3 percent in extended trading, after closing at $155.10 in New York.
About 270,000 people downloaded a personality quiz app and shared information about themselves and their friends with a researcher, who then passed along the information to Cambridge Analytica, in a move that Facebook says was against its rules. Facebook reached the 87 million figure by adding up all the unique people that those 270,000 users were friends with at the time they gave the app permission. Facebook made the new disclosure in an online posting Wednesday.
Cambridge Analytica, which worked for Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, said it licensed data on 30 million people, countering Facebook’s 87 million estimate. Cambridge Analytica said in a tweet that it “immediately deleted the raw data from our file server, and began the process of searching for and removing any of its derivatives in our system” after Facebook contacted them to let them know data had been improperly obtained.
Facebook says it will tell people, in a notice at the top of their news feeds starting April 9, if their information may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica. But it still hasn’t independently confirmed if the firm currently has the data. The revelation, and the subsequent media questions, hint at the grilling Zuckerberg will likely face when he testifies on the matter before Congress next week: How many other Cambridge Analytica-scale leaks of data are out there?
Zuckerberg, in Wednesday’s call, said he couldn’t be sure. “We’re not going to be able to go out and find every single bad use of data, but what we can do is make it a lot harder for folks to do that going forward,” he said. “I think we will be able to uncover a large amount of bad activity that exists.”
The company has been embroiled in controversy for weeks over the revelation that data was shared and then not deleted. It raised questions over the information Facebook compiles on users, makes available to third parties, and what happens to it afterward. Facebook made the announcement along with an update on its plans to restrict data access through its platform.
Zuckerberg defended gathering user data for a business model that lets advertisers use Facebook’s information and targeting tools to reach specific audiences.
“People tell us that if they’re going to see ads they want the ads to be good,” he said, noting that requires keeping track of what people are interested in.
Either way, he thinks he should remain at the helm of Facebook. “I think life is about learning from mistakes and figuring out what you need to do to move forward,” he said.
Russian live missile tests force Latvia to close airspace over Baltic sea - Independent
4/4/2018
Russian live missile tests force Latvia to close airspace over Baltic sea: 'It's hard to comprehend'
'It is a demonstration of force. It is hard to comprehend that it can happen so close to [our] country'
Samuel Osborne @SamuelOsborne93 1
Russian military vessels conduct drills during the joint war games Zapad-2013, in the Baltic Sea
Russia has carried out missile tests in the Baltic Sea, causing Nato member Latvia to shut down part of its commercial airspace.
The Russian defence ministry said its Baltic Fleet, based in the exclave of Kaliningrad, would conduct routine training in the area starting on Wednesday.
It said the drills would involve firing live ammunition to practise hitting air and sea targets.
They are taking place between Sweden, Poland and Latvia – close to the southern Swedish city of Karlskrona, which hosts a key naval base.
Three corvettes and a frigate are taking part, as well as ship-borne helicopters which are conducting training flights and practising hunting enemy submarines.
Drills involve firing of live ammunition to practise hitting air and sea targets
“It is a demonstration of force,” Latvia’s prime minister, Maris Kucinskis, told Reuters. “It is hard to comprehend that it can happen so close to [our] country.”
Russia calls meeting of chemical weapons watchdog over Skripal attack
Trump says ‘stupid people don’t want to get on better with Russia’
Russia has underestimated the West, Nato chief warns
British forced to borrow Nato planes to monitor Russian submarines
Russia simulated full-scale war against Nato, says military commander
The tests are being carried out in Latvia’s exclusive economic zone, an area of the sea just beyond its territorial waters where Latvia has special economic rights, as well as further west in the Baltic Sea.
Riga has closed some of its airspace for the three days of tests, while Sweden issued a warning to civilian sea traffic and said there could be delays and disruption to civilian air traffic.
The tests began a day after the US president, Donald Trump, met the presidents of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia at the White House.
Donald Trump says only ‘very stupid people don’t want to get on better with Russia’
President Trump made the case the US had been “very tough on Russia,” pointing to its support for increased defence spending by Nato countries as a check on Moscow’s aggression.
“Nobody has been tougher on Russia, but getting along with Russia would be a good thing, not a bad thing. And just about everybody agrees to that except very stupid people,” he said in a Cabinet Room meeting with the leaders. “We’ve been very tough on Russia, frankly.”
When President Trump was asked by a reporter if he considered the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, to be a friend or foe, he replied: “We’ll find out. I’ll let you know.”
Latvia’s president, Mr Kucinskis, noted the decision to carry out tests so close to Latvian waters came after the West expelled the largest number of Russian spies since the Cold War, following the military-grade nerve agent attack on former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury.
Latvian officials said Russian drills have never taken place so close to its territory. However, it noted Russia is not breaking any international regulations and has the right to carry them out.
“Drills lasting for three days in the region where there is very intensive aviation traffic, and given everything else that is happening in relations between the West and Russia, I think that it is a rather provocative action,” Latvia’s ambassador to Russia, Maris Riekstins, told Latvian television.
Nato’s secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, said the alliance would follow the tests closely, while noting every nation has the right to carry out military exercises.
“We are staying vigilant and we are also increasing the readiness of our forces, especially in the Baltic region,” he told reporters after meeting the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, in Ottawa.
The missile tests and military drills follow Russia’s massive war games last September, which stretched from the Baltics to the Black Sea.
The exercises unnerved the West because of their scale, scope and what Nato said was a lack of transparency.
Additional reporting by agencies
Russian live missile tests force Latvia to close airspace over Baltic sea: 'It's hard to comprehend'
'It is a demonstration of force. It is hard to comprehend that it can happen so close to [our] country'
Samuel Osborne @SamuelOsborne93 1
Russian military vessels conduct drills during the joint war games Zapad-2013, in the Baltic Sea
Russia has carried out missile tests in the Baltic Sea, causing Nato member Latvia to shut down part of its commercial airspace.
The Russian defence ministry said its Baltic Fleet, based in the exclave of Kaliningrad, would conduct routine training in the area starting on Wednesday.
It said the drills would involve firing live ammunition to practise hitting air and sea targets.
They are taking place between Sweden, Poland and Latvia – close to the southern Swedish city of Karlskrona, which hosts a key naval base.
Three corvettes and a frigate are taking part, as well as ship-borne helicopters which are conducting training flights and practising hunting enemy submarines.
Drills involve firing of live ammunition to practise hitting air and sea targets
“It is a demonstration of force,” Latvia’s prime minister, Maris Kucinskis, told Reuters. “It is hard to comprehend that it can happen so close to [our] country.”
Russia calls meeting of chemical weapons watchdog over Skripal attack
Trump says ‘stupid people don’t want to get on better with Russia’
Russia has underestimated the West, Nato chief warns
British forced to borrow Nato planes to monitor Russian submarines
Russia simulated full-scale war against Nato, says military commander
The tests are being carried out in Latvia’s exclusive economic zone, an area of the sea just beyond its territorial waters where Latvia has special economic rights, as well as further west in the Baltic Sea.
Riga has closed some of its airspace for the three days of tests, while Sweden issued a warning to civilian sea traffic and said there could be delays and disruption to civilian air traffic.
The tests began a day after the US president, Donald Trump, met the presidents of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia at the White House.
Donald Trump says only ‘very stupid people don’t want to get on better with Russia’
President Trump made the case the US had been “very tough on Russia,” pointing to its support for increased defence spending by Nato countries as a check on Moscow’s aggression.
“Nobody has been tougher on Russia, but getting along with Russia would be a good thing, not a bad thing. And just about everybody agrees to that except very stupid people,” he said in a Cabinet Room meeting with the leaders. “We’ve been very tough on Russia, frankly.”
When President Trump was asked by a reporter if he considered the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, to be a friend or foe, he replied: “We’ll find out. I’ll let you know.”
Latvia’s president, Mr Kucinskis, noted the decision to carry out tests so close to Latvian waters came after the West expelled the largest number of Russian spies since the Cold War, following the military-grade nerve agent attack on former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury.
Latvian officials said Russian drills have never taken place so close to its territory. However, it noted Russia is not breaking any international regulations and has the right to carry them out.
“Drills lasting for three days in the region where there is very intensive aviation traffic, and given everything else that is happening in relations between the West and Russia, I think that it is a rather provocative action,” Latvia’s ambassador to Russia, Maris Riekstins, told Latvian television.
Nato’s secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, said the alliance would follow the tests closely, while noting every nation has the right to carry out military exercises.
“We are staying vigilant and we are also increasing the readiness of our forces, especially in the Baltic region,” he told reporters after meeting the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, in Ottawa.
The missile tests and military drills follow Russia’s massive war games last September, which stretched from the Baltics to the Black Sea.
The exercises unnerved the West because of their scale, scope and what Nato said was a lack of transparency.
Additional reporting by agencies
American lawyers urged to use 'burner phones' when travelling abroad to protect information from US border inspection - Telegraph
American lawyers urged to use 'burner phones' when travelling abroad to protect information from US border inspection
Lawyers urged to leave smart phones at home when travelling abroad
Lawyers urged to leave smart phones at home when travelling abroad
David Millward, us correspondent
5 APRIL 2018 • 12:55AM
Lawyers in the US are being advised to use “burner phones” when they travel abroad to protect information from government inspection on re-entering the country.
The advice, given by the New York Bar Association, comes against the backdrop of the Trump administration tightening border security.
Anyone entering the US can be asked to turn over their computers and phones to Customs and Border Protection for inspection.
They will also be expected to disclose passwords to enable officials to examine their correspondence.
Foreigners who refuse to comply can be denied entry into the country while US citizens face having their equipment confiscated temporarily to allow further inspection.
Customs and Border Protection have the right to inspect smart phones
Customs and Border Protection have the right to inspect smart phones CREDIT: CHRIS HONDROS/GETTY IMAGES
The American Bar Association, which has 400,000 members, has been trying to persuade the Department of Homeland Security to devise a policy which will protect lawyer-client privilege.
Last year Linda Klein, the Association’s chairman, appealed to John Kelly, then the Homeland Security Secretary, to permit only cursory inspection of lawyers’ computers and phones.
But no agreement has been reached, leading the New York Bar Association to suggest drastic measures.
It has urged lawyers to use “burner phones” – cheap throwaway devices often seen in modern crime shows.
The Association has also advised lawyers to install software to wipe sensitive information and to disconnect from cloud services.
As things stand, the courts have yet to reach a conclusive decision on the legality of inspecting phones and computers.
Currently 0.017 per cent of people entering the US are subjected to an electronic device search.
Lawyers urged to leave smart phones at home when travelling abroad
Lawyers urged to leave smart phones at home when travelling abroad
David Millward, us correspondent
5 APRIL 2018 • 12:55AM
Lawyers in the US are being advised to use “burner phones” when they travel abroad to protect information from government inspection on re-entering the country.
The advice, given by the New York Bar Association, comes against the backdrop of the Trump administration tightening border security.
Anyone entering the US can be asked to turn over their computers and phones to Customs and Border Protection for inspection.
They will also be expected to disclose passwords to enable officials to examine their correspondence.
Foreigners who refuse to comply can be denied entry into the country while US citizens face having their equipment confiscated temporarily to allow further inspection.
Customs and Border Protection have the right to inspect smart phones
Customs and Border Protection have the right to inspect smart phones CREDIT: CHRIS HONDROS/GETTY IMAGES
The American Bar Association, which has 400,000 members, has been trying to persuade the Department of Homeland Security to devise a policy which will protect lawyer-client privilege.
Last year Linda Klein, the Association’s chairman, appealed to John Kelly, then the Homeland Security Secretary, to permit only cursory inspection of lawyers’ computers and phones.
But no agreement has been reached, leading the New York Bar Association to suggest drastic measures.
It has urged lawyers to use “burner phones” – cheap throwaway devices often seen in modern crime shows.
The Association has also advised lawyers to install software to wipe sensitive information and to disconnect from cloud services.
As things stand, the courts have yet to reach a conclusive decision on the legality of inspecting phones and computers.
Currently 0.017 per cent of people entering the US are subjected to an electronic device search.
Philippines to temporarily close popular tourist island Boracay - BBC News
5/4/2018
Philippines to temporarily close popular tourist island Boracay
Boracay is popular with foreign and local tourists
The Philippine island of Boracay will be closed to tourists for six months following concerns of damage to its once pristine shores.
A spokesperson for President Rodrigo Duterte said the closure would begin on 26 April.
Earlier this year Mr Duterte said Boracay was turning into a "cesspool" and threatened to shut it down.
The island, known for its white-sand beaches, attracted nearly 2 million visitors last year.
The decision has prompted concern for the thousands of people employed in Boracay's busy tourist trade.
The island is home to around 500 tourism-related businesses, which drew in annual revenue of $1.07bn (£760m) last year. The government said affected companies will receive financial aid.
It's not clear how the shutdown will be implemented, though the department of trade and industry had earlier proposed closing the island down in phases, saying a total shutdown would be detrimental to businesses and livelihoods.
Damage fears
The move follows growing concern over the island's environmental health.
Officials had warned businesses had been releasing wastewater into the surrounding waters.
In February, Mr Duterte condemned the island's hotels, restaurants and other tourist businesses, accusing them of dumping sewage directly into the sea.
A mountain of trash sits on a hillside on Boracay
"I will charge you for serious neglect of duty [for] making Boracay a fishpond or a sewer pool," Mr Duterte said at the time.
"Either [you] clean it up or I will close it permanently. There will be a time that no more foreigners will go there."
Philippines to temporarily close popular tourist island Boracay
Boracay is popular with foreign and local tourists
The Philippine island of Boracay will be closed to tourists for six months following concerns of damage to its once pristine shores.
A spokesperson for President Rodrigo Duterte said the closure would begin on 26 April.
Earlier this year Mr Duterte said Boracay was turning into a "cesspool" and threatened to shut it down.
The island, known for its white-sand beaches, attracted nearly 2 million visitors last year.
The decision has prompted concern for the thousands of people employed in Boracay's busy tourist trade.
The island is home to around 500 tourism-related businesses, which drew in annual revenue of $1.07bn (£760m) last year. The government said affected companies will receive financial aid.
It's not clear how the shutdown will be implemented, though the department of trade and industry had earlier proposed closing the island down in phases, saying a total shutdown would be detrimental to businesses and livelihoods.
Damage fears
The move follows growing concern over the island's environmental health.
Officials had warned businesses had been releasing wastewater into the surrounding waters.
In February, Mr Duterte condemned the island's hotels, restaurants and other tourist businesses, accusing them of dumping sewage directly into the sea.
A mountain of trash sits on a hillside on Boracay
"I will charge you for serious neglect of duty [for] making Boracay a fishpond or a sewer pool," Mr Duterte said at the time.
"Either [you] clean it up or I will close it permanently. There will be a time that no more foreigners will go there."
Zuckerberg: I'm still the man to run Facebook - BBC Nwes
Zuckerberg: I'm still the man to run Facebook
Dave Lee
North America technology reporter
5 April 2018
Mr Zuckerberg says he will not step down
Despite the turmoil that continues to surround his company, Mark Zuckerberg has insisted he is still the best person to lead Facebook.
"When you're building something like Facebook which is unprecedented in the world," he said on Wednesday, "there are things that you're going to mess up.
"What I think people should hold us accountable for is if we are learning from our mistakes."
As well as being Facebook's chief executive, Mr Zuckerberg is chairman of the company's board. When asked if his position had been discussed, he replied: "Not that I know of!"
The mere possibility that his leadership is in question is a scenario few would have predicted even a month ago.
But recent reports around improper data gathering by third parties - as well as fake news and propaganda - have prompted some to question Mr Zuckerberg's ability to lead a company that some think has grown beyond his control.
Facebook scandal 'hit 87 million users'
Zuckerberg to testify before US committee
Facebook chief fires back at Apple's Tim Cook
Facebook haunted by 'ugly truth' memo
'By design, he can’t be fired - he can only resign'
Scott Stringer, head of New York City's pension fund, said this week that Mr Zuckerberg should step aside. The fund owns approximately $1bn-worth of the social network.
"They have two billion users," Mr Stringer told CNBC.
"They are in uncharted waters, and they have not comported themselves in a way that makes people feel good about Facebook and secure about their own data."
He called for Mr Zuckerberg to step down in order to let Facebook start a "reputation-enhancing second chapter".
"He doesn’t just lead an institution that touches almost every person on the planet," wrote Felix Salmon.
"He also, thanks to financial engineering, has a majority of shareholder votes and controls the board, and is therefore answerable to no one.
"By design, he can’t be fired - he can only resign. Which is exactly what he should now do."
'A man often criticised as lacking empathy'
Mr Zuckerberg's conference call went as well as the 33-year-old could have expected.
Indeed, at one point he encouraged more time to take more questions.
From his answers we learned a little more about the real toll of the negative publicity and the "deleteFacebook" movement. And so far the answer is: not much.
There has been "no meaningful impact that we’ve observed" he said, before quickly adding: "But look, it's not good!"
Mr Zuckerberg said the "deleteFacebook" movement had had little impact
What we couldn't tell during the call, of course, was to what extent Mr Zuckerberg was being quietly guided by his team in the room.
But for a man often criticised as lacking empathy, it was a strong display lasting almost an hour. Investors certainly thought so - shares were up 3% once the call ended.
Next week he will face a potentially tougher prospect, this time in front of the cameras, when he heads to Washington to testify before Congress.
Cambridge Analytica: The story so far
Indeed, this session with the press was perhaps the ideal dress rehearsal.
The dynamic around Mr Zuckerberg's leadership could change dramatically in the coming months, as investigations - most notably from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) - begin to probe deeper into how Facebook handled the public's data.
If the company is seen to have fallen short of its responsibility, and is hit with a potentially enormous fine, it could increase pressure on Facebook to make serious personnel changes.
So far, despite all of the apologies and admissions of poor judgement, Mr Zuckerberg told reporters that not a single person at the company had been fired over the Cambridge Analytica fiasco.
The buck stops with him, he said - and indeed it might.
Dave Lee
North America technology reporter
5 April 2018
Mr Zuckerberg says he will not step down
Despite the turmoil that continues to surround his company, Mark Zuckerberg has insisted he is still the best person to lead Facebook.
"When you're building something like Facebook which is unprecedented in the world," he said on Wednesday, "there are things that you're going to mess up.
"What I think people should hold us accountable for is if we are learning from our mistakes."
As well as being Facebook's chief executive, Mr Zuckerberg is chairman of the company's board. When asked if his position had been discussed, he replied: "Not that I know of!"
The mere possibility that his leadership is in question is a scenario few would have predicted even a month ago.
But recent reports around improper data gathering by third parties - as well as fake news and propaganda - have prompted some to question Mr Zuckerberg's ability to lead a company that some think has grown beyond his control.
Facebook scandal 'hit 87 million users'
Zuckerberg to testify before US committee
Facebook chief fires back at Apple's Tim Cook
Facebook haunted by 'ugly truth' memo
'By design, he can’t be fired - he can only resign'
Scott Stringer, head of New York City's pension fund, said this week that Mr Zuckerberg should step aside. The fund owns approximately $1bn-worth of the social network.
"They have two billion users," Mr Stringer told CNBC.
"They are in uncharted waters, and they have not comported themselves in a way that makes people feel good about Facebook and secure about their own data."
He called for Mr Zuckerberg to step down in order to let Facebook start a "reputation-enhancing second chapter".
"He doesn’t just lead an institution that touches almost every person on the planet," wrote Felix Salmon.
"He also, thanks to financial engineering, has a majority of shareholder votes and controls the board, and is therefore answerable to no one.
"By design, he can’t be fired - he can only resign. Which is exactly what he should now do."
'A man often criticised as lacking empathy'
Mr Zuckerberg's conference call went as well as the 33-year-old could have expected.
Indeed, at one point he encouraged more time to take more questions.
From his answers we learned a little more about the real toll of the negative publicity and the "deleteFacebook" movement. And so far the answer is: not much.
There has been "no meaningful impact that we’ve observed" he said, before quickly adding: "But look, it's not good!"
Mr Zuckerberg said the "deleteFacebook" movement had had little impact
What we couldn't tell during the call, of course, was to what extent Mr Zuckerberg was being quietly guided by his team in the room.
But for a man often criticised as lacking empathy, it was a strong display lasting almost an hour. Investors certainly thought so - shares were up 3% once the call ended.
Next week he will face a potentially tougher prospect, this time in front of the cameras, when he heads to Washington to testify before Congress.
Cambridge Analytica: The story so far
Indeed, this session with the press was perhaps the ideal dress rehearsal.
The dynamic around Mr Zuckerberg's leadership could change dramatically in the coming months, as investigations - most notably from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) - begin to probe deeper into how Facebook handled the public's data.
If the company is seen to have fallen short of its responsibility, and is hit with a potentially enormous fine, it could increase pressure on Facebook to make serious personnel changes.
So far, despite all of the apologies and admissions of poor judgement, Mr Zuckerberg told reporters that not a single person at the company had been fired over the Cambridge Analytica fiasco.
The buck stops with him, he said - and indeed it might.
Wednesday, April 4, 2018
China Hits Back at Trump’s Trade Tariffs With $50 Billion Hike on U.S. Goods - TIME Business
China Hits Back at Trump’s Trade Tariffs With $50 Billion Hike on U.S. Goods
Posted: 04 Apr 2018 02:36 AM PDT
China announced boosted tariffs on U.S. goods including soybeans, aircraft and vehicles worth an estimated $50 billion Wednesday, retaliating for a similar scale hike on Chinese merchandise proposed by the Trump administration in response to alleged Intellectual Property theft, in the latest salvo of what business leaders fear may now escalate into a full-scale trade war.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration published a list of some 1,300 Chinese products it plans to slap with a 25% tariff. The Chinese Embassy in Washington immediately condemned the move, saying, “Such unilateralistic and protectionist action has gravely violated fundamental principles and values of the WTO.
“It serves neither China’s interest, nor U.S. interest, even less the interest of the global economy,” it continued, adding, “As the Chinese saying goes, it is only polite to reciprocate.”
That riposte took just hours to arrive. It’s notable that the many agricultural products listed would seem to target Trump’s base, and particularly the home constituency of current U.S. Ambassador to China Terry Branstad, the former governor of Iowa, one of whose principle exports is soya.
The U.S. tariffs, in turn, appear targeted, covering a wide range of products including aerospace parts, high-definition color video monitors, electromagnets used in MRIs, as well as machinery to make or process textiles. According to the South China Morning Post, U.S. officials identified items that “benefit from Chinese industrial policies, including Made in China 2025,” referring to China’s strategic gambit to dominate a raft of high-tech industries.
Read more: It’s Not Just China’s Retaliatory Tariffs That Should Worry U.S. Businesses
Reacting to the news on Twitter, Trump said, “We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 billion a year, with Intellectual Property theft of another $300 billion. We cannot let this continue!”
Trump has long justified increasing tariffs on China by saying that unfair trade practices by Beijing has cost 6 million American jobs and caused 60,000 factories to close. However, his campaign bluster had been tempered after coming into office, as the U.S. President has sought assistance from his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to thwart the threat of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal.
But the recent replacement of moderate members of Trump’s inner circle with China hawks seems to have rekindled the bellicosity of the stump. In late March, the real estate mogul announced tariff hikes of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum that American manufacturers have slammed as increasing their production costs.
“We’re in a place where we thought we wouldn’t be back in 2017, when it seemed Trump’s mercantilist instincts had been turned by the ‘economic grownups,’” says Prof. Nick Bisley, an Asia expert at La Trobe University. “But he now seems to have around him enablers.”
Last year, U.S. imported goods from China were worth about $506 billion, with the trade deficit between the world’s two biggest economies rising to a record $375.2 billion. Trump based his volcanic campaign on the specious notion that this imbalance costs American jobs.
However, according to Rob Salomon, associate professor of international management at the NYU Stern School of Business, trade deficits may actually help the U.S. by flowing dollars back into the economy and keeping American interest rates low.
“This makes mortgages less expensive, this makes business loans less expensive, and this makes capital to start businesses less expensive,” he says.
Given the huge trade disparity, the U.S. has the wherewithal to hit China harder via tariffs than the other way around, by virtue that American consumers buy more Chinese goods. But the fear is that Beijing may use American investment in China or geopolitical pressure points as an alternative cudgel.
Read more: How China Could Use ‘America First’ to Its Advantage
On Tuesday, Xu Haidong, assistant to the secretary-general of the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, told China’s state-run Global Times newspaper, “If there were a trade war, U.S. automakers are likely to discover quite quickly that their access to the Chinese market is limited.”
Were the current reciprocal tariff tit-for-tat to spiral, “U.S. exports and imports will fall, punishing millions of Americans, from hog farmer to low-income families living on tight budgets,” says Daniel Griswold, of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. “We should advance our national interest by working cooperatively with our friends, not by provoking an escalation in wealth-destroying tariffs.”
Regarding geopolitics, Chinese sanctions enforcement has been key to getting North Korea Supreme Leader to agree to historic negotiations with South Korean President Moon Jae-in in April and Trump in May. Late last month, Xi hosted Kim for a pomp-filled “unofficial visit” — the young despot’s first with another world leader — despite a deteriorating bilateral relationship in recent years. Analysts say Xi may use this nascent rapprochement as another lever to pressure Washington.
“The hardening of American rhetoric on trade likely led Xi Jinping to open the door up to Kim Jong Un, with whom he’s not happy,” adds Bisley. “Under normal circumstances North Korea would pay a higher price for the kind of visit they had.”
Posted: 04 Apr 2018 02:36 AM PDT
China announced boosted tariffs on U.S. goods including soybeans, aircraft and vehicles worth an estimated $50 billion Wednesday, retaliating for a similar scale hike on Chinese merchandise proposed by the Trump administration in response to alleged Intellectual Property theft, in the latest salvo of what business leaders fear may now escalate into a full-scale trade war.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration published a list of some 1,300 Chinese products it plans to slap with a 25% tariff. The Chinese Embassy in Washington immediately condemned the move, saying, “Such unilateralistic and protectionist action has gravely violated fundamental principles and values of the WTO.
“It serves neither China’s interest, nor U.S. interest, even less the interest of the global economy,” it continued, adding, “As the Chinese saying goes, it is only polite to reciprocate.”
That riposte took just hours to arrive. It’s notable that the many agricultural products listed would seem to target Trump’s base, and particularly the home constituency of current U.S. Ambassador to China Terry Branstad, the former governor of Iowa, one of whose principle exports is soya.
The U.S. tariffs, in turn, appear targeted, covering a wide range of products including aerospace parts, high-definition color video monitors, electromagnets used in MRIs, as well as machinery to make or process textiles. According to the South China Morning Post, U.S. officials identified items that “benefit from Chinese industrial policies, including Made in China 2025,” referring to China’s strategic gambit to dominate a raft of high-tech industries.
Read more: It’s Not Just China’s Retaliatory Tariffs That Should Worry U.S. Businesses
Reacting to the news on Twitter, Trump said, “We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 billion a year, with Intellectual Property theft of another $300 billion. We cannot let this continue!”
Trump has long justified increasing tariffs on China by saying that unfair trade practices by Beijing has cost 6 million American jobs and caused 60,000 factories to close. However, his campaign bluster had been tempered after coming into office, as the U.S. President has sought assistance from his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to thwart the threat of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal.
But the recent replacement of moderate members of Trump’s inner circle with China hawks seems to have rekindled the bellicosity of the stump. In late March, the real estate mogul announced tariff hikes of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum that American manufacturers have slammed as increasing their production costs.
“We’re in a place where we thought we wouldn’t be back in 2017, when it seemed Trump’s mercantilist instincts had been turned by the ‘economic grownups,’” says Prof. Nick Bisley, an Asia expert at La Trobe University. “But he now seems to have around him enablers.”
Last year, U.S. imported goods from China were worth about $506 billion, with the trade deficit between the world’s two biggest economies rising to a record $375.2 billion. Trump based his volcanic campaign on the specious notion that this imbalance costs American jobs.
However, according to Rob Salomon, associate professor of international management at the NYU Stern School of Business, trade deficits may actually help the U.S. by flowing dollars back into the economy and keeping American interest rates low.
“This makes mortgages less expensive, this makes business loans less expensive, and this makes capital to start businesses less expensive,” he says.
Given the huge trade disparity, the U.S. has the wherewithal to hit China harder via tariffs than the other way around, by virtue that American consumers buy more Chinese goods. But the fear is that Beijing may use American investment in China or geopolitical pressure points as an alternative cudgel.
Read more: How China Could Use ‘America First’ to Its Advantage
On Tuesday, Xu Haidong, assistant to the secretary-general of the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, told China’s state-run Global Times newspaper, “If there were a trade war, U.S. automakers are likely to discover quite quickly that their access to the Chinese market is limited.”
Were the current reciprocal tariff tit-for-tat to spiral, “U.S. exports and imports will fall, punishing millions of Americans, from hog farmer to low-income families living on tight budgets,” says Daniel Griswold, of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. “We should advance our national interest by working cooperatively with our friends, not by provoking an escalation in wealth-destroying tariffs.”
Regarding geopolitics, Chinese sanctions enforcement has been key to getting North Korea Supreme Leader to agree to historic negotiations with South Korean President Moon Jae-in in April and Trump in May. Late last month, Xi hosted Kim for a pomp-filled “unofficial visit” — the young despot’s first with another world leader — despite a deteriorating bilateral relationship in recent years. Analysts say Xi may use this nascent rapprochement as another lever to pressure Washington.
“The hardening of American rhetoric on trade likely led Xi Jinping to open the door up to Kim Jong Un, with whom he’s not happy,” adds Bisley. “Under normal circumstances North Korea would pay a higher price for the kind of visit they had.”
China Vows ‘Measures of the Same Strength’ in Response to U.S. Tariff Hikes - TIME
China Vows ‘Measures of the Same Strength’ in Response to U.S. Tariff Hikes
Posted: 03 Apr 2018 07:02 PM PDT
(BEIJING) — China on Wednesday vowed to take measures of the “same strength” in response to a U.S. tariff hike on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods in a spiraling dispute over technology policy that has fueled fears it might set back a global economic recovery.
The Commerce Ministry said it would immediately file a challenge the U.S. move in the World Trade Organization.
“At the same time, we are preparing to take measures of the same strength and same scope against U.S. goods,” said a ministry statement. “These measures will be announced shortly.”
Chinese officials have given no indication what U.S. goods might be targeted but businesspeople and economists have cited Boeing jetliners and soybeans as possible targets.
The dispute has fueled fears it might set back the global recovery if other governments are prompted to raise their own import barriers.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s Office said it took the action in response to Chinese policies that “coerce American companies into transferring their technology and intellectual property to domestic Chinese enterprises.”
On Monday, Beijing announced a tariff hike on a $3 billion list of U.S. goods including pork, apples and steel pipe in response a higher American import duties on steel and aluminum.
The U.S. tariff hike on steel and aluminum has little impact on China but the latest duties will be far more sensitive because they target what Chinese leaders see as important future industries including telecoms and medical technology.
The Chinese measures announced Monday raised tariffs on pork, aluminum scrap and some other products by 25%. A 15% tariff was imposed on apples, almonds and some other goods.
Trump Proposes Tariffs on $50 Billion in Chinese Electronics Imports - TIME
Trump Proposes Tariffs on $50 Billion in Chinese Electronics Imports
Posted: 03 Apr 2018 05:50 PM PDT
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Tuesday escalated its aggressive actions on trade by proposing 25 percent tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese imports to protest Beijing’s alleged theft of American technology.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued a list targeting 1,300 Chinese products, including industrial robots and telecommunications equipment. The suggested tariffs wouldn’t take effect right way: A public comment period will last until May 11, and a hearing on the tariffs is set for May 15. Companies and consumers will have the opportunity to lobby to have some products taken off the list or have others added.
The latest U.S. move risks heightening trade tensions with China, which on Monday had slapped taxes on $3 billion in U.S. products in response to earlier U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum imports.
“China’s going to be compelled to lash back,” warned Philip Levy, a senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and an economic adviser to President George W. Bush.
Indeed, China immediately threatened to retaliate against the new U.S. tariffs, which target the high-tech industries that Beijing has been nurturing, from advanced manufacturing and aerospace to information technology and robotics.
Early Wednesday in Beijing, China’s Commerce Ministry said it “strongly condemns and firmly opposes” the proposed U.S. tariffs and warned of retaliatory action.
“We will prepare equal measures for U.S. products with the same scale” according to regulations in Chinese trade law, a ministry spokesman said in comments carried by the official Xinhua News Agency.
The U.S. sanctions are intended to punish China for using strong-arm tactics in its drive to become a global technology power. These include pressuring American companies to share technology to gain access to the Chinese market, forcing U.S. firms to license their technology in China on unfavorable terms and even hacking into U.S. companies’ computers to steal trade secrets.
The administration sought to draw up the list of targeted Chinese goods in a way that might limit the impact of the tariffs — a tax on imports — on American consumers while hitting Chinese imports that benefit from Beijing’s sharp-elbowed tech policies. But some critics that American will end up being hurt.
“If you’re hitting $50 billion in trade, you’re inevitably going to hurt somebody, and somebody is going to complain,” said Rod Hunter, a former economic official at the National Security Council and now a partner at Baker & McKenzie LLP.
Even representatives of American business, which have complained for years that China has pilfered U.S. technology and discriminated against U.S. companies, were critical of the administration’s latest action.
“Unilateral tariffs may do more harm than good and do little to address the problems in China’s (intellectual property) and tech transfer policies,” said John Frisbie, president of the U.S.-China Business Council.
Even some technology groups contending directly with Chinese competition expressed misgivings.
“The Trump administration is right to push back against China’s abuse of economic and trade policy,” said Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation think tank. “But imposing tariffs on producer goods will inadvertently hurt Americans through reduced capital investment and lower productivity growth.”
At the same time, the United States has become increasingly frustrated with China’s aggressive efforts to overtake American technological supremacy. And many have argued that Washington needed to respond aggressively.
“The Chinese are bad trading partners because they steal intellectual property,” said Derek Scissors, a China specialist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
In January, a federal court in Wisconsin convicted a Chinese manufacturer of wind turbines, Sinovel Wind Group, of stealing trade secrets from the American company AMSC and nearly putting it out of business.
And in 2014, a Pennsylvania grand jury indicted five officers in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army on charges of hacking into the computers of Westinghouse, US Steel and other major American companies to steal information that would benefit their Chinese competitors.
To target China, Trump dusted off a Cold War weapon for trade disputes: Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, which lets the president unilaterally impose tariffs. It was meant for a world in which much of global commerce wasn’t covered by trade agreements. With the arrival in 1995 of the Geneva-based World Trade Organization, Section 301 largely faded from use.
Dean Pinkert of the law firm Hughes Hubbard & Reed, found it reassuring that the administration didn’t completely bypass the WTO: As part of its complaint, the U.S. is bringing a WTO case against Chinese licensing policies that put U.S. companies at a disadvantage.
China has been urging the United States to seek a diplomatic solution and warning that it would retaliate against any trade sanctions. Beijing could counterpunch by targeting American businesses that depend on the Chinese market: Aircraft manufacturer Boeing, for instance, or American soybean farmers, who send nearly 60 percent of their exports to China.
Rural America has been especially worried about the risk of a trade war. Farmers are especially vulnerable targets in trade spats because they rely so much on foreign sales.
“Beijing right now is trying to motivate US stakeholders to press the Trump Administration to enter into direct negotiations with China and reach a settlement before tariffs are imposed,” the Eurasia Group consultancy said in a research note.
“The next couple of weeks will be very interesting,” says Kristin Duncanson, a soybean, corn and hog farmer in Mapleton, Minnesota.
Japan braces for Trump assault on trade, yen policy as summit looms - Reuters
APRIL 4, 2018 / 4:09 PM / UPDATED 3 HOURS AGO
Japan braces for Trump assault on trade, yen policy as summit looms
Leika Kihara, Tetsushi Kajimoto
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese government officials are bracing for Donald Trump to get tough in trade talks, and are particularly anxious that the U.S. president could target Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s weak-yen policies.
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Dollar and Japan Yen notes are seen in this picture illustration June 2, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas White/Illustration/File Photo
The deal Trump clinched with South Korea last month, which was reached in unusually quick negotiations and included a side deal to deter competitive currency devaluation, was the kind of agreement Tokyo fears most.
The officials told Reuters that they worry that similar tactics could be used against Tokyo when Trump meets Abe for a summit at Mar-a-Lago, the president’s Florida resort, later this month.
If Trump forces Bank of Japan and currency policy into discussions, Japanese policymakers don’t have an obvious way to appease him, especially given the unpredictable nature of his attacks.
The biggest risk is if Trump links trade with currency policy and accuses Japan of keeping the yen artificially weak through ultra-easy monetary policy, especially as he seeks to appeal to voters ahead of November’s mid-term U.S. congressional elections. Back in January 2017, Trump alleged that Japan used its “money supply” to weaken the yen and give exporters an unfair advantage.
Any such concerted pressure could bind Tokyo’s hands in dealing with a climb in the yen, which would hurt the nation’s export-reliant economy that has been growing but may not be resilient to such a sideswipe.
“As mid-term elections draw near, it’s possible Washington could put Japan’s currency policy to notice,” said a Japanese government official with knowledge of the negotiations.
Another official said: “It’s hard to predict what Trump would say, so the BOJ’s policy could come under fire. It’s not an immediate risk but something in everyone’s mind.”
WARY OF SENDING SIGNAL
To be sure, the side agreement on the won that South Korea agreed to is not binding and focuses on what Japan already does – disclose details on currency intervention such as how much was spent and when. Still, Japan is wary of sending out any signal to markets that Trump is attacking Japan’s currency policy and that this could in any way prevent Tokyo from acting to restrain excessive yen gains.
When Abe and Trump met in February 2017, they kicked off a bilateral economic dialogue led by their deputies to discuss a series of issues, including trade, infrastructure and technical aid.
By broadening the agenda, Japan has managed so far to avert direct U.S. demands for negotiations over a bilateral trade pact, known as a free trade agreement (FTA).
Japan has long upheld a multilateral framework as its export-reliant economy has benefited greatly from global free trade. This approach helps Japan diffuse direct pressure from countries like the United States to open up its politically sensitive markets, such as agriculture.
Japanese officials say they will resist two-way trade deals with the United States at the summit, even if that reduces the chance of gaining exemptions for Washington’s recently introduced steel and aluminum tariffs. Trump temporarily excluded six trade partners, including Canada, Mexico and the European Union from these import duties. South Korea avoided tariffs but at a cost of agreeing to export quotas.
There are now major questions about whether the Japanese multilateral approach will be good enough for Trump.
The U.S. Trade Representative last week criticized what it said were non-tariff barriers to the Japanese car market and called for greater access to Japan for American beef and rice.
“The United States is only interested in a bilateral deal and probably won’t listen to Japanese calls for a multilateral approach on trade,” said Naoyuki Shinohara, Japan’s former top currency diplomat who retains close contact with incumbent policymakers.
“Japan will eventually have to enter FTA talks” and face U.S. pressure to open up its auto and farm markets, he said.
BOJ’S COMMUNICATION CHALLENGE
Some officials say Japan is in a stronger position than South Korea and won’t have to compromise as much. That is because it still does not have a bilateral FTA, is transparent on currency policy and hasn’t intervened in the currency market since northeastern Japan was hit by a massive earthquake and resulting tsunami in 2011.
“Japan has far more to lose from a bilateral FTA. It doesn’t make sense to do this to avoid tariffs,” said a third government official directly involved in bilateral negotiations. “We’ll never allow currency issues be tied to trade. That’s absolutely unacceptable.”
A renewed attack on Japan’s currency policy will be damaging particularly since Tokyo has hardly any ammunition left to fight another yen spike.
Fears of a trade war have boosted investors’ demand for the safe-haven yen and pushed up the Japanese currency to around 106 against the dollar, significantly stronger than the 109-level on which many exporters base their earnings forecasts for the current fiscal year to March 2019.
Japanese policymakers have warned that the yen’s 7 percent gain against the dollar this year is too volatile a move, though such verbal warnings have had little effect in keeping yen rises in check.
While currency intervention hasn’t been ruled out if the yen spikes to less than 100 to the dollar, gaining U.S. consent for such a move would be extremely hard, the officials say.
That leaves monetary policy as a last resort, though the BOJ too has barely any tools left to fight a currency gain or another recession after BOJ Governor Haruhiko Kuroda’s “bazooka” stimulus that started in 2013.
The BOJ’s huge buying has dried up bond market liquidity and years of near-zero interest rates have eroded bank profits, raising concern that more easing could do more harm than good.
Even maintaining the current policy, which pegs Japanese government bond yields at zero even as U.S. interest rates rise, could draw U.S. heat if Washington perceives it as intended to weaken the yen, some analysts say.
“The BOJ’s current framework is clearly a weak-yen policy. Japan would struggle to explain otherwise if it comes under heat by the United States,” said Yasuhide Yajima, chief economist at NLI Research Institute.
Hiroshi Watanabe, a former top Japanese currency diplomat, said Tokyo could face criticism if the dollar rises to around 115 yen and the U.S.-Japan interest rate gap widens to around 350 basis points.
“The BOJ should be mindful that at some point, the United States could argue that it’s using monetary policy” to keep the yen weak, he said.
Stocks plunge on trade war fear; tech leads selloff
Reporting by Leika Kihara; Editing by Martin Howell
Japan braces for Trump assault on trade, yen policy as summit looms
Leika Kihara, Tetsushi Kajimoto
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese government officials are bracing for Donald Trump to get tough in trade talks, and are particularly anxious that the U.S. president could target Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s weak-yen policies.
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Dollar and Japan Yen notes are seen in this picture illustration June 2, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas White/Illustration/File Photo
The deal Trump clinched with South Korea last month, which was reached in unusually quick negotiations and included a side deal to deter competitive currency devaluation, was the kind of agreement Tokyo fears most.
The officials told Reuters that they worry that similar tactics could be used against Tokyo when Trump meets Abe for a summit at Mar-a-Lago, the president’s Florida resort, later this month.
If Trump forces Bank of Japan and currency policy into discussions, Japanese policymakers don’t have an obvious way to appease him, especially given the unpredictable nature of his attacks.
The biggest risk is if Trump links trade with currency policy and accuses Japan of keeping the yen artificially weak through ultra-easy monetary policy, especially as he seeks to appeal to voters ahead of November’s mid-term U.S. congressional elections. Back in January 2017, Trump alleged that Japan used its “money supply” to weaken the yen and give exporters an unfair advantage.
Any such concerted pressure could bind Tokyo’s hands in dealing with a climb in the yen, which would hurt the nation’s export-reliant economy that has been growing but may not be resilient to such a sideswipe.
“As mid-term elections draw near, it’s possible Washington could put Japan’s currency policy to notice,” said a Japanese government official with knowledge of the negotiations.
Another official said: “It’s hard to predict what Trump would say, so the BOJ’s policy could come under fire. It’s not an immediate risk but something in everyone’s mind.”
WARY OF SENDING SIGNAL
To be sure, the side agreement on the won that South Korea agreed to is not binding and focuses on what Japan already does – disclose details on currency intervention such as how much was spent and when. Still, Japan is wary of sending out any signal to markets that Trump is attacking Japan’s currency policy and that this could in any way prevent Tokyo from acting to restrain excessive yen gains.
When Abe and Trump met in February 2017, they kicked off a bilateral economic dialogue led by their deputies to discuss a series of issues, including trade, infrastructure and technical aid.
By broadening the agenda, Japan has managed so far to avert direct U.S. demands for negotiations over a bilateral trade pact, known as a free trade agreement (FTA).
Japan has long upheld a multilateral framework as its export-reliant economy has benefited greatly from global free trade. This approach helps Japan diffuse direct pressure from countries like the United States to open up its politically sensitive markets, such as agriculture.
Japanese officials say they will resist two-way trade deals with the United States at the summit, even if that reduces the chance of gaining exemptions for Washington’s recently introduced steel and aluminum tariffs. Trump temporarily excluded six trade partners, including Canada, Mexico and the European Union from these import duties. South Korea avoided tariffs but at a cost of agreeing to export quotas.
There are now major questions about whether the Japanese multilateral approach will be good enough for Trump.
The U.S. Trade Representative last week criticized what it said were non-tariff barriers to the Japanese car market and called for greater access to Japan for American beef and rice.
“The United States is only interested in a bilateral deal and probably won’t listen to Japanese calls for a multilateral approach on trade,” said Naoyuki Shinohara, Japan’s former top currency diplomat who retains close contact with incumbent policymakers.
“Japan will eventually have to enter FTA talks” and face U.S. pressure to open up its auto and farm markets, he said.
BOJ’S COMMUNICATION CHALLENGE
Some officials say Japan is in a stronger position than South Korea and won’t have to compromise as much. That is because it still does not have a bilateral FTA, is transparent on currency policy and hasn’t intervened in the currency market since northeastern Japan was hit by a massive earthquake and resulting tsunami in 2011.
“Japan has far more to lose from a bilateral FTA. It doesn’t make sense to do this to avoid tariffs,” said a third government official directly involved in bilateral negotiations. “We’ll never allow currency issues be tied to trade. That’s absolutely unacceptable.”
A renewed attack on Japan’s currency policy will be damaging particularly since Tokyo has hardly any ammunition left to fight another yen spike.
Fears of a trade war have boosted investors’ demand for the safe-haven yen and pushed up the Japanese currency to around 106 against the dollar, significantly stronger than the 109-level on which many exporters base their earnings forecasts for the current fiscal year to March 2019.
Japanese policymakers have warned that the yen’s 7 percent gain against the dollar this year is too volatile a move, though such verbal warnings have had little effect in keeping yen rises in check.
While currency intervention hasn’t been ruled out if the yen spikes to less than 100 to the dollar, gaining U.S. consent for such a move would be extremely hard, the officials say.
That leaves monetary policy as a last resort, though the BOJ too has barely any tools left to fight a currency gain or another recession after BOJ Governor Haruhiko Kuroda’s “bazooka” stimulus that started in 2013.
The BOJ’s huge buying has dried up bond market liquidity and years of near-zero interest rates have eroded bank profits, raising concern that more easing could do more harm than good.
Even maintaining the current policy, which pegs Japanese government bond yields at zero even as U.S. interest rates rise, could draw U.S. heat if Washington perceives it as intended to weaken the yen, some analysts say.
“The BOJ’s current framework is clearly a weak-yen policy. Japan would struggle to explain otherwise if it comes under heat by the United States,” said Yasuhide Yajima, chief economist at NLI Research Institute.
Hiroshi Watanabe, a former top Japanese currency diplomat, said Tokyo could face criticism if the dollar rises to around 115 yen and the U.S.-Japan interest rate gap widens to around 350 basis points.
“The BOJ should be mindful that at some point, the United States could argue that it’s using monetary policy” to keep the yen weak, he said.
Stocks plunge on trade war fear; tech leads selloff
Reporting by Leika Kihara; Editing by Martin Howell
What to Know About Suspected YouTube Shooter Nasim Aghdam - Time
What to Know About Suspected YouTube Shooter Nasim Aghdam
By MAHITA GAJANAN and ELI MEIXLER Updated: April 4, 2018 6:38 AM ET | Originally published: April 3, 2018
One person died and three were injured in a shooting reported Tuesday at YouTube’s headquarters in San Bruno, Calif.
Law enforcement officials identified the shooter as 39-year-old Nasim Aghdam of San Diego, according to the Associated Press, but little is known about her motive. San Bruno police said there is no evidence that the shooter was previously acquainted with any of the victims. Two unnamed law enforcement officials previously said that the shooting was being investigated as a domestic dispute.
The shooter, who was found dead by law enforcement Tuesday, wore glasses and a scarf and carried a “big huge pistol,” according to a YouTube employee who witnessed the incident from a second-floor window.
YouTube employees said they heard shots and saw people running on social media Tuesday afternoon. San Bruno police said they saw employees fleeing the headquarters upon arriving to the area and found one gunshot victim toward the front of the building. Two other shooting victims were found in adjacent businesses. Four victims were transported to local hospitals, police said, including a 36-year-old man who was in critical condition. One of those people, who did not suffer a gunshot wound, was treated for an ankle injury.
San Bruno police said they found Aghdam, who died of what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound, at 12:53 p.m. in a courtyard area inside the YouTube complex.
Nasim Aghdam, who opened fire at YouTube headquarters in San Buno, Calif. on April 3, 2018, seen in an undated photo provided by the San Bruno Police Department.
Nasim Aghdam, who opened fire at YouTube headquarters in San Buno, Calif. on April 3, 2018, seen in an undated photo provided by the San Bruno Police Department. San Bruno Police Department—AP
Aghdam was an animal rights activist, according to AP, who participated in a 2009 protest with the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in Oceanside, California. She was also a prolific YouTube user, posting videos on a range of topics from multiple accounts, according to a report by NBC’s Bay Area Investigative Unit. In a video posted in January, Aghdam alleged that the company “discriminated and filtered” her videos to reduce their number of views; she also published rants attacking the company on her personal website.
Afghdam’s father, Ismail Aghdam, said that he told police earlier this week that Nasim was “angry” at YouTube and “hated” the company. Aghdam had reported his daughter missing on Monday, and early Tuesday morning was informed that she had been found sleeping in her car in Mountain View, about an hour from YouTube’s San Bruno headquarters. Ismail said he warned the police that she might be headed toward YouTube.
The majority of shootings are perpetrated by men, according to a 2014 FBI study of 160 “active shooter incidents” that took place in the U.S. between 2000 and 2013. Women were the shooters in just six of the incidents studied, according to the FBI.
By MAHITA GAJANAN and ELI MEIXLER Updated: April 4, 2018 6:38 AM ET | Originally published: April 3, 2018
One person died and three were injured in a shooting reported Tuesday at YouTube’s headquarters in San Bruno, Calif.
Law enforcement officials identified the shooter as 39-year-old Nasim Aghdam of San Diego, according to the Associated Press, but little is known about her motive. San Bruno police said there is no evidence that the shooter was previously acquainted with any of the victims. Two unnamed law enforcement officials previously said that the shooting was being investigated as a domestic dispute.
The shooter, who was found dead by law enforcement Tuesday, wore glasses and a scarf and carried a “big huge pistol,” according to a YouTube employee who witnessed the incident from a second-floor window.
YouTube employees said they heard shots and saw people running on social media Tuesday afternoon. San Bruno police said they saw employees fleeing the headquarters upon arriving to the area and found one gunshot victim toward the front of the building. Two other shooting victims were found in adjacent businesses. Four victims were transported to local hospitals, police said, including a 36-year-old man who was in critical condition. One of those people, who did not suffer a gunshot wound, was treated for an ankle injury.
San Bruno police said they found Aghdam, who died of what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound, at 12:53 p.m. in a courtyard area inside the YouTube complex.
Nasim Aghdam, who opened fire at YouTube headquarters in San Buno, Calif. on April 3, 2018, seen in an undated photo provided by the San Bruno Police Department.
Nasim Aghdam, who opened fire at YouTube headquarters in San Buno, Calif. on April 3, 2018, seen in an undated photo provided by the San Bruno Police Department. San Bruno Police Department—AP
Aghdam was an animal rights activist, according to AP, who participated in a 2009 protest with the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in Oceanside, California. She was also a prolific YouTube user, posting videos on a range of topics from multiple accounts, according to a report by NBC’s Bay Area Investigative Unit. In a video posted in January, Aghdam alleged that the company “discriminated and filtered” her videos to reduce their number of views; she also published rants attacking the company on her personal website.
Afghdam’s father, Ismail Aghdam, said that he told police earlier this week that Nasim was “angry” at YouTube and “hated” the company. Aghdam had reported his daughter missing on Monday, and early Tuesday morning was informed that she had been found sleeping in her car in Mountain View, about an hour from YouTube’s San Bruno headquarters. Ismail said he warned the police that she might be headed toward YouTube.
The majority of shootings are perpetrated by men, according to a 2014 FBI study of 160 “active shooter incidents” that took place in the U.S. between 2000 and 2013. Women were the shooters in just six of the incidents studied, according to the FBI.
Specter of Full Trade War Returns to Batter Stocks: Markets Wrap - Bloomberg
Specter of Full Trade War Returns to Batter Stocks: Markets Wrap
April 4, 2018, 8:35 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 4, 2018, 8:36 PM GMT+10
U.S. equity futures slump as protectionist moves intensify
Treasuries, European bonds advance; yen gains with gold
China’s response to U.S. tariffs is "smaller than it could have been," says Algebris’s Alberto Gallo.
Fears of a trade war between the world’s two largest economies returned to haunt markets on Wednesday, sending U.S. stock futures tumbling and sinking European and Asian equities. Treasuries climbed while the dollar was steady, and gold jumped.
Hopes that Tuesday’s gains in U.S. equity markets would lead to a more lasting rebound foundered as contracts for the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100 and Dow all slumped alongside both the Stoxx Europe 600 Index and the MSCI Asia Pacific Index. China said it would levy 25 percent tariffs on imports of 106 U.S. products including soybeans, automobiles, chemicals and aircraft, in response to proposed American duties on its high-tech goods. Safe-haven assets including bullion and the Japanese yen rallied, while European bonds tracked the jump in Treasuries.
Terminal users can follow the escalating trade tensions in our live blog.
Markets have been buffeted in recent weeks by everything from a volatility spike and a tech selloff to fears of an all-out trade war, and developments on Wednesday suggest there may be more turbulence to come. Investors are having to weigh the growing protectionist rhetoric between the U.S. and China against the chances of measures having a meaningful effect on the still-upbeat global growth picture.
“Trade uncertainty is the main headwind to the market,” Charles St-Arnaud, an investment strategist at Lombard Odier Asset Management in London, said by phone. “At this juncture we need to be careful. The macro picture hasn’t changed massively yet. Growth remains robust, unless we go into a bigger trade war.”
The trade spat won’t escalate and earnings will stay on track, says JPMorgan Asset Management’s Karen Ward.
Source: Bloomberg
Elsewhere inflation data from Europe matched estimates, and the euro stayed higher. West Texas oil fell as commodities were roiled by the growing trade dispute, while emerging-market stocks tumbled and their currencies dropped.
“This is a tricky one for markets,” said Thomas Thygesen, SEB AB’s head of cross-asset strategy in Copenhagen. “This inherent unpredictability will weigh on global economic growth. Sentiment is quite negative and the one thing that could change this is some sort of signal from central banks that they are willing to adapt their hawkish tone.”
Here are some key events coming up this week:
U.S. employment data are due Friday; the jobless rate probably fell in March after holding at 4.1 percent for five straight months.
The Reserve Bank of India decides on policy Thursday.
These are the main moves in markets:
Stocks
The Stoxx Europe 600 Index sank 1.2 percent as of 11:33 a.m. London time on the largest tumble in almost two weeks.
Futures on the S&P 500 Index declined 1.9 percent to the lowest in more than five months.
The MSCI All-Country World Index dipped 0.4 percent.
The U.K.’s FTSE 100 Index sank 0.7 percent to the lowest in more than a week on the biggest dip in almost two weeks.
Germany’s DAX Index sank 1.7 percent to the lowest in more than a week on the largest tumble in more than a week.
The MSCI Emerging Market Index fell 1.7 percent to the lowest in almost eight weeks on the biggest fall in a week.
The MSCI Asia Pacific Index fell 0.6 percent to the lowest in almost eight weeks.
Currencies
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index increased less than 0.05 percent to the highest in a week.
The euro gained 0.1 percent to $1.2284.
The British pound fell 0.1 percent to $1.4037.
The Japanese yen jumped 0.5 percent to 106.06 per dollar, the largest climb in almost two weeks.
Bonds
The yield on 10-year Treasuries declined two basis points to 2.75 percent.
Germany’s 10-year yield dipped two basis points to 0.48 percent, the lowest in 12 weeks.
Britain’s 10-year yield declined two basis points to 1.359 percent, the lowest in almost 11 weeks.
Commodities
West Texas Intermediate crude decreased 1.9 percent to $62.31 a barrel, the lowest in more than two weeks.
Copper sank 2.5 percent to $2.99 a pound and the biggest tumble in eight weeks.
Gold increased 0.8 percent to $1,343.36 an ounce, the highest in more than a week.
The Bloomberg Commodity Index decreased 1.3 percent to 85.91, the lowest in almost eight weeks on the biggest tumble in almost eight weeks.
— With assistance by Andreea Papuc, Sofia Horta E Costa, and Sheldon Reback
April 4, 2018, 8:35 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 4, 2018, 8:36 PM GMT+10
U.S. equity futures slump as protectionist moves intensify
Treasuries, European bonds advance; yen gains with gold
China’s response to U.S. tariffs is "smaller than it could have been," says Algebris’s Alberto Gallo.
Fears of a trade war between the world’s two largest economies returned to haunt markets on Wednesday, sending U.S. stock futures tumbling and sinking European and Asian equities. Treasuries climbed while the dollar was steady, and gold jumped.
Hopes that Tuesday’s gains in U.S. equity markets would lead to a more lasting rebound foundered as contracts for the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100 and Dow all slumped alongside both the Stoxx Europe 600 Index and the MSCI Asia Pacific Index. China said it would levy 25 percent tariffs on imports of 106 U.S. products including soybeans, automobiles, chemicals and aircraft, in response to proposed American duties on its high-tech goods. Safe-haven assets including bullion and the Japanese yen rallied, while European bonds tracked the jump in Treasuries.
Terminal users can follow the escalating trade tensions in our live blog.
Markets have been buffeted in recent weeks by everything from a volatility spike and a tech selloff to fears of an all-out trade war, and developments on Wednesday suggest there may be more turbulence to come. Investors are having to weigh the growing protectionist rhetoric between the U.S. and China against the chances of measures having a meaningful effect on the still-upbeat global growth picture.
“Trade uncertainty is the main headwind to the market,” Charles St-Arnaud, an investment strategist at Lombard Odier Asset Management in London, said by phone. “At this juncture we need to be careful. The macro picture hasn’t changed massively yet. Growth remains robust, unless we go into a bigger trade war.”
The trade spat won’t escalate and earnings will stay on track, says JPMorgan Asset Management’s Karen Ward.
Source: Bloomberg
Elsewhere inflation data from Europe matched estimates, and the euro stayed higher. West Texas oil fell as commodities were roiled by the growing trade dispute, while emerging-market stocks tumbled and their currencies dropped.
“This is a tricky one for markets,” said Thomas Thygesen, SEB AB’s head of cross-asset strategy in Copenhagen. “This inherent unpredictability will weigh on global economic growth. Sentiment is quite negative and the one thing that could change this is some sort of signal from central banks that they are willing to adapt their hawkish tone.”
Here are some key events coming up this week:
U.S. employment data are due Friday; the jobless rate probably fell in March after holding at 4.1 percent for five straight months.
The Reserve Bank of India decides on policy Thursday.
These are the main moves in markets:
Stocks
The Stoxx Europe 600 Index sank 1.2 percent as of 11:33 a.m. London time on the largest tumble in almost two weeks.
Futures on the S&P 500 Index declined 1.9 percent to the lowest in more than five months.
The MSCI All-Country World Index dipped 0.4 percent.
The U.K.’s FTSE 100 Index sank 0.7 percent to the lowest in more than a week on the biggest dip in almost two weeks.
Germany’s DAX Index sank 1.7 percent to the lowest in more than a week on the largest tumble in more than a week.
The MSCI Emerging Market Index fell 1.7 percent to the lowest in almost eight weeks on the biggest fall in a week.
The MSCI Asia Pacific Index fell 0.6 percent to the lowest in almost eight weeks.
Currencies
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index increased less than 0.05 percent to the highest in a week.
The euro gained 0.1 percent to $1.2284.
The British pound fell 0.1 percent to $1.4037.
The Japanese yen jumped 0.5 percent to 106.06 per dollar, the largest climb in almost two weeks.
Bonds
The yield on 10-year Treasuries declined two basis points to 2.75 percent.
Germany’s 10-year yield dipped two basis points to 0.48 percent, the lowest in 12 weeks.
Britain’s 10-year yield declined two basis points to 1.359 percent, the lowest in almost 11 weeks.
Commodities
West Texas Intermediate crude decreased 1.9 percent to $62.31 a barrel, the lowest in more than two weeks.
Copper sank 2.5 percent to $2.99 a pound and the biggest tumble in eight weeks.
Gold increased 0.8 percent to $1,343.36 an ounce, the highest in more than a week.
The Bloomberg Commodity Index decreased 1.3 percent to 85.91, the lowest in almost eight weeks on the biggest tumble in almost eight weeks.
— With assistance by Andreea Papuc, Sofia Horta E Costa, and Sheldon Reback
Migrants at U.S.-Mexico border say Trump's tough talk won't deter them - Reuters
APRIL 4, 2018 / 8:11 PM / UPDATED 17 MINUTES AGO
Migrants at U.S.-Mexico border say Trump's tough talk won't deter them
Mica Rosenberg
MISSION, Texas (Reuters) - On Tuesday, the same day that U.S. President Donald Trump announced his intention to deploy military to help patrol the U.S.-Mexico border, Edwin Valdez and four other Central American migrants were walking through dense brush at a south Texas wildlife reserve, hoping to escape notice.
A border patrol agent apprehends immigrants who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into the U.S. in the Rio Grande Valley sector, near McAllen, Texas, U.S., April 3, 2018.
The men had illegally crossed into the United States that morning, guided by a smuggler who had since abandoned them. Now they were lost and uncertain how to proceed.
In vehicles nearby, U.S. Border Patrol agents had been alerted to migrants moving through the area, and after detecting movement in the bushes, they swooped in to arrest the men.
It was business as usual in the Rio Grande Valley, one of the busiest crossing points for migrants trying to enter the United States illegally.
In just a few hours that morning, 61 migrants, including Valdez, were rounded up in the area. Ten, including four from China, were caught with the help of a tracking dog in a sugar cane field. Two Hondurans were taken into custody at a public park.
Several of those caught said they were unfazed by tough talk from Trump, who has made headlines around the world with tweets railing about border security and threatening to end the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) unless Mexico does more to “stop the big drug and people flows.”
Trump’s renewed frustration about border security, rekindled over the weekend by news of a “caravan” of Central American migrants moving through Mexico toward the U.S. border, reflects the broader frustration of his administration.
In the months after Trump took office, the number of migrants caught along the U.S.-Mexico border fell dramatically, hitting a low of about 15,700 in April, from more than 42,400 in January 2017, U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows.
Border patrol agents apprehend immigrants who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into the U.S. in the Rio Grande Valley sector, near McAllen, Texas, U.S., April 3, 2018. REUTERS/Loren Elliott
But arrests have crept back up since, and in the first months of 2018 have reached levels at, or near, those seen during the last year of his predecessor, President Barack Obama.
Rising arrests of families and unaccompanied minors along the border are a particular concern.
In March, their numbers surpassed the previous three years and “rivaled fiscal year 2014, when we had a crisis,” Manuel Padilla, chief of the border patrol’s Rio Grande Valley sector, said in an interview with Reuters.
He said about families with children, who are more difficult to deport quickly, form about 49 percent of the current apprehensions in his region. He said they often walk up to the first U.S. officials they find to ask for help.
“It doesn’t matter how many agents are out there,” when it comes to families, he said, “because this population is turning themselves in.”
REVOLVING DOOR
Valdez, 20, who worked as an electrician’s assistant in his home country of El Salvador, said he previously tried to cross the border illegally in 2016.
But he was picked up by border patrol officers after wandering lost and dehydrated in the desert for four days. After six months in detention, he was deported last year, but decided to travel north again after gangs threatened him at his job.
While crossing has become more and more difficult in recent years, Valdez said, need is a powerful spur.
“Necessity forces people to leave their countries so they can bring a better life to their families,” he said. “That’s why people are willing to suffer through all this.”
Slideshow (10 Images)
After his arrest on Monday, Valdez put his personal belongings in a plastic bag, removed his shoelaces and was searched by the agents who arrested him. Then he and his companions were taken to a processing facility.
People who have been previously deported can often be quickly sent home.
Immigrants traveling with small children when caught often spend only a few days in custody, however, because of a shortage of detention facilities suitable for families and court settlements that preclude prolonged detention of minors.
In the Rio Grande Valley, parents are often released with electronic ankle monitors and ordered to appear with their children in court on a specific date for deportation proceedings. Trump has railed against the practice, which he calls “catch and release.”
For migrants like Jose Romero, 27, who made the harrowing days-long trip through Mexico with his 8-year-old daughter in the back of a dark cargo truck, threats from the president are little deterrent.
In his mountain home in Honduras, Romero made just $4 a day as a farm laborer, not enough to feed his family of five, he said. After his arrest and subsequent release to wait court proceedings, he said he doubted if migrants can be deterred.
“They will keep coming,” he said, because of violence and poverty south of the border. “The people are afraid.”
Reporting by Mica Rosenberg; Editing by Sue Horton and Clarence Fernandez
Migrants at U.S.-Mexico border say Trump's tough talk won't deter them
Mica Rosenberg
MISSION, Texas (Reuters) - On Tuesday, the same day that U.S. President Donald Trump announced his intention to deploy military to help patrol the U.S.-Mexico border, Edwin Valdez and four other Central American migrants were walking through dense brush at a south Texas wildlife reserve, hoping to escape notice.
A border patrol agent apprehends immigrants who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into the U.S. in the Rio Grande Valley sector, near McAllen, Texas, U.S., April 3, 2018.
The men had illegally crossed into the United States that morning, guided by a smuggler who had since abandoned them. Now they were lost and uncertain how to proceed.
In vehicles nearby, U.S. Border Patrol agents had been alerted to migrants moving through the area, and after detecting movement in the bushes, they swooped in to arrest the men.
It was business as usual in the Rio Grande Valley, one of the busiest crossing points for migrants trying to enter the United States illegally.
In just a few hours that morning, 61 migrants, including Valdez, were rounded up in the area. Ten, including four from China, were caught with the help of a tracking dog in a sugar cane field. Two Hondurans were taken into custody at a public park.
Several of those caught said they were unfazed by tough talk from Trump, who has made headlines around the world with tweets railing about border security and threatening to end the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) unless Mexico does more to “stop the big drug and people flows.”
Trump’s renewed frustration about border security, rekindled over the weekend by news of a “caravan” of Central American migrants moving through Mexico toward the U.S. border, reflects the broader frustration of his administration.
In the months after Trump took office, the number of migrants caught along the U.S.-Mexico border fell dramatically, hitting a low of about 15,700 in April, from more than 42,400 in January 2017, U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows.
Border patrol agents apprehend immigrants who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into the U.S. in the Rio Grande Valley sector, near McAllen, Texas, U.S., April 3, 2018. REUTERS/Loren Elliott
But arrests have crept back up since, and in the first months of 2018 have reached levels at, or near, those seen during the last year of his predecessor, President Barack Obama.
Rising arrests of families and unaccompanied minors along the border are a particular concern.
In March, their numbers surpassed the previous three years and “rivaled fiscal year 2014, when we had a crisis,” Manuel Padilla, chief of the border patrol’s Rio Grande Valley sector, said in an interview with Reuters.
He said about families with children, who are more difficult to deport quickly, form about 49 percent of the current apprehensions in his region. He said they often walk up to the first U.S. officials they find to ask for help.
“It doesn’t matter how many agents are out there,” when it comes to families, he said, “because this population is turning themselves in.”
REVOLVING DOOR
Valdez, 20, who worked as an electrician’s assistant in his home country of El Salvador, said he previously tried to cross the border illegally in 2016.
But he was picked up by border patrol officers after wandering lost and dehydrated in the desert for four days. After six months in detention, he was deported last year, but decided to travel north again after gangs threatened him at his job.
While crossing has become more and more difficult in recent years, Valdez said, need is a powerful spur.
“Necessity forces people to leave their countries so they can bring a better life to their families,” he said. “That’s why people are willing to suffer through all this.”
Slideshow (10 Images)
After his arrest on Monday, Valdez put his personal belongings in a plastic bag, removed his shoelaces and was searched by the agents who arrested him. Then he and his companions were taken to a processing facility.
People who have been previously deported can often be quickly sent home.
Immigrants traveling with small children when caught often spend only a few days in custody, however, because of a shortage of detention facilities suitable for families and court settlements that preclude prolonged detention of minors.
In the Rio Grande Valley, parents are often released with electronic ankle monitors and ordered to appear with their children in court on a specific date for deportation proceedings. Trump has railed against the practice, which he calls “catch and release.”
For migrants like Jose Romero, 27, who made the harrowing days-long trip through Mexico with his 8-year-old daughter in the back of a dark cargo truck, threats from the president are little deterrent.
In his mountain home in Honduras, Romero made just $4 a day as a farm laborer, not enough to feed his family of five, he said. After his arrest and subsequent release to wait court proceedings, he said he doubted if migrants can be deterred.
“They will keep coming,” he said, because of violence and poverty south of the border. “The people are afraid.”
Reporting by Mica Rosenberg; Editing by Sue Horton and Clarence Fernandez
Mueller claims Trump is not criminal target in his investigation, report says - Fox News
3/4/2018
Mueller claims Trump is not criminal target in his investigation, report says
By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News
Report: Mueller says Trump is not a criminal target
The Washington Post reports the special counsel told Trump's legal team the president remains a subject of the Russian investigation.
Special counsel Robert Mueller told President Trump's attorneys last month that he does not consider Trump to be a criminal target in his investigation of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign, The Washington Post reported Tuesday night.
The paper, citing "three people familiar with the discussions," reported that Mueller made the comments while negotiating with Trump's attorneys about a potential interview with the president. The Post also reported -- citing "two people with knowledge of the conversations" -- that Mueller reiterated his need to interview Trump to determine whether the president intended to halt the Russia investigation while in office.
According to the Post, Trump has "privately expressed relief" at Mueller's description of his legal status, but some advisers have warned that the special counsel may be baiting the president into letting his guard down for any interview.
Mueller also has said he needs to interview Trump in order to complete a report he will present to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the investigation and who could decide to make Mueller's report public.
The report added that John Dowd resigned from Trump's legal team last month after the president ignored Dowd's advice to decline Mueller's request for an interview.
According to the Post, Trump's other attorneys -- Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow -- have told the president that refusing to sit down with Mueller would create an awkward situation since the president has repeatedly described the Russian investigation as a "witch hunt."
Mueller claims Trump is not criminal target in his investigation, report says
By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News
Report: Mueller says Trump is not a criminal target
The Washington Post reports the special counsel told Trump's legal team the president remains a subject of the Russian investigation.
Special counsel Robert Mueller told President Trump's attorneys last month that he does not consider Trump to be a criminal target in his investigation of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign, The Washington Post reported Tuesday night.
The paper, citing "three people familiar with the discussions," reported that Mueller made the comments while negotiating with Trump's attorneys about a potential interview with the president. The Post also reported -- citing "two people with knowledge of the conversations" -- that Mueller reiterated his need to interview Trump to determine whether the president intended to halt the Russia investigation while in office.
According to the Post, Trump has "privately expressed relief" at Mueller's description of his legal status, but some advisers have warned that the special counsel may be baiting the president into letting his guard down for any interview.
Mueller also has said he needs to interview Trump in order to complete a report he will present to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the investigation and who could decide to make Mueller's report public.
The report added that John Dowd resigned from Trump's legal team last month after the president ignored Dowd's advice to decline Mueller's request for an interview.
According to the Post, Trump's other attorneys -- Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow -- have told the president that refusing to sit down with Mueller would create an awkward situation since the president has repeatedly described the Russian investigation as a "witch hunt."
Five Star Wants a Coalition Deal With Anyone But Berlusconi - Bloomberg
Five Star Wants a Coalition Deal With Anyone But Berlusconi
April 4, 2018, 6:48 PM GMT+10
Di Maio blackballs Berlusconi sparking clash with center-right
President Mattarella in two days of talks with party leaders
Bloomberg’s John Follain discusses efforts to form Italy’s Next government.
The anti-establishment Five Star Movement said it’s ready to go into government with any of Italy’s major parties -- except Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia.
As Italy’s president starts talks with political leaders in a bid to break a monthlong deadlock, Five Star leader Luigi Di Maio proposed a government contract with either his fellow populists of the League or the ruling Democratic Party, in an interview with La7 television on Tuesday night, but he also set out his red line: no deal with Berlusconi. Di Maio insisted that he should be premier, a claim that puts him at odds with Matteo Salvini, leader of the anti-immigrant League.
Luigi Di MaioPhotographer: Alessia Pierdomenico/Bloomberg
While Five Star is the biggest single party in the new parliament, the center-right alliance led by the League has the most seats overall. Both Di Maio and Salvini have claimed a mandate to lead the next government, though neither has a majority.
“Salvini has to choose between revolution or restoration,” Di Maio said. “He has to decide whether to ditch Berlusconi and start to change Italy, or stay stuck to Berlusconi and not change anything.”
President Sergio Mattarella, whose task it is to nominate a new premier, meets party leaders on Wednesday and Thursday, his first consultations since general elections a month ago. Mattarella is unlikely to designate a premier after this week’s talks, and may hold a new round next week, according to a senior state official.
Political Brinkmanship
Di Maio’s remarks did nothing to break the impasse, sparking instead a clash with Salvini’s center-right bloc, in which Berlusconi is a junior partner. Five Star sees Berlusconi, who is banned from public office until next year because of a 2013 tax-fraud conviction, as a symbol of the corrupt political class it rebels against.
Salvini wrote in a Facebook post that he won’t get involved with the Democrats, since they were “rejected by the Italians.” He added the center-right had won most votes “and that is the starting point.” Salvini has ruled out breaking with his bloc to join Five Star.
European Parliament head Antonio Tajani, who was Berlusconi’s pick for prime minister before the elections, accused Di Maio of “anti-democratic methods” in an interview with RAI radio Wednesday, adding he “fails to show respect for the almost five million citizens” who voted for Forza Italia.
The center-left Democratic Party also swiftly snubbed Di Maio after he said it must choose whether to stay in opposition. Di Maio said former leader Matteo Renzi had ruled out a role in the next government “to spite me and Five Star.”
“Dear Luigi Di Maio, we don’t lend ourselves to these little games: whoever tries to divide the PD won’t succeed,” acting party leader Maurizio Martina said in a post on Twitter. His party however is divided on whether to take part in government, and faces a leadership contest in coming weeks.
April 4, 2018, 6:48 PM GMT+10
Di Maio blackballs Berlusconi sparking clash with center-right
President Mattarella in two days of talks with party leaders
Bloomberg’s John Follain discusses efforts to form Italy’s Next government.
The anti-establishment Five Star Movement said it’s ready to go into government with any of Italy’s major parties -- except Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia.
As Italy’s president starts talks with political leaders in a bid to break a monthlong deadlock, Five Star leader Luigi Di Maio proposed a government contract with either his fellow populists of the League or the ruling Democratic Party, in an interview with La7 television on Tuesday night, but he also set out his red line: no deal with Berlusconi. Di Maio insisted that he should be premier, a claim that puts him at odds with Matteo Salvini, leader of the anti-immigrant League.
Luigi Di MaioPhotographer: Alessia Pierdomenico/Bloomberg
While Five Star is the biggest single party in the new parliament, the center-right alliance led by the League has the most seats overall. Both Di Maio and Salvini have claimed a mandate to lead the next government, though neither has a majority.
“Salvini has to choose between revolution or restoration,” Di Maio said. “He has to decide whether to ditch Berlusconi and start to change Italy, or stay stuck to Berlusconi and not change anything.”
President Sergio Mattarella, whose task it is to nominate a new premier, meets party leaders on Wednesday and Thursday, his first consultations since general elections a month ago. Mattarella is unlikely to designate a premier after this week’s talks, and may hold a new round next week, according to a senior state official.
Political Brinkmanship
Di Maio’s remarks did nothing to break the impasse, sparking instead a clash with Salvini’s center-right bloc, in which Berlusconi is a junior partner. Five Star sees Berlusconi, who is banned from public office until next year because of a 2013 tax-fraud conviction, as a symbol of the corrupt political class it rebels against.
Salvini wrote in a Facebook post that he won’t get involved with the Democrats, since they were “rejected by the Italians.” He added the center-right had won most votes “and that is the starting point.” Salvini has ruled out breaking with his bloc to join Five Star.
European Parliament head Antonio Tajani, who was Berlusconi’s pick for prime minister before the elections, accused Di Maio of “anti-democratic methods” in an interview with RAI radio Wednesday, adding he “fails to show respect for the almost five million citizens” who voted for Forza Italia.
The center-left Democratic Party also swiftly snubbed Di Maio after he said it must choose whether to stay in opposition. Di Maio said former leader Matteo Renzi had ruled out a role in the next government “to spite me and Five Star.”
“Dear Luigi Di Maio, we don’t lend ourselves to these little games: whoever tries to divide the PD won’t succeed,” acting party leader Maurizio Martina said in a post on Twitter. His party however is divided on whether to take part in government, and faces a leadership contest in coming weeks.
Salisbury poisoning: UK experts cannot prove novichok nerve agent used on Skripals came from Russia, MoD says- Independent
3/4/2018
Salisbury poisoning: UK experts cannot prove novichok nerve agent used on Skripals came from Russia, MoD says
'We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions'
Kim Sengupta
Porton Down: We have 'not identified the source' of nerve agent used in the Salisbury attack
Spielberg beat James Cameron to Jurassic Park film rights by hours
Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway nominated for Bafta TV award
Russell Crowe selling 227 possessions in 'The Art of Divorce' auction
YouTube shooting brings to fore widespread conspiracy theory
Accusations and recriminations between Britain and Russia are set to escalate with the news that scientists at the Porton Down military research facility have been unable to establish exactly where the novichok nerve agent used to carry out the Skripal attack was manufactured.
The admission comes the day before Moscow convenes an emergency meeting of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague in which it is expected to demand access to samples from the Salisbury poisoning for analysis by Russian scientists.
Russia’s embassy in London responded that Porton Down’s assessment “proves that all political declarations on the Russian origin of the crime are nothing but assumptions not stemming from objective facts or the course of the investigation”.
The development also comes after Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, suggested that British intelligence services carried out the attempted assassination of the former MI6 agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia and claimed that it had proved “beneficial” in distracting attention from Theresa May’s government having to make major concessions to the European Union on Brexit.
Russia challenges UK to prove it was behind spy poisoning in court
The OPCW is due to present its own conclusions on the nerve agent in the near future. It remains to be seen whether it will be able to provide definite proof that the novichok came from a Russian government facility or echo the Porton Down position.
Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, Wiltshire, told Sky News that the substance required “extremely sophisticated methods to create something only in the capabilities of a state actor. We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent.”
Aussie Cops Find Their Commodore & Falcon Replacements
CarsGuide
Sandra Bullock's Most Daring Red Carpet Dresses
StyleBistro
Construction Workers That Should Probably Be Fired
Trendchaser
by Taboola Sponsored Links
Mr Aitkenhead went on to say: “We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to the government who have then used a number of other sources,” some of them intelligence-based.
The head of Porton Down denied claims that his research centre had been connected in any way with a “false flag” operation or that the novichok used may have come from it. “There is no way that anything like that would ever have come from us or leave the walls of our facilities,” he said. “We deal with a number of very toxic substances as part of the work that we do.”
There has been no immediate reaction from the Kremlin on the Porton Down assessment, but there is little doubt that it will be used to support its claims that UK has no real evidence to back up the accusation of Russian state culpability in the attack.
porton-down.jpg
The novichok was tested by scientists at Porton Down research laboratory (Reuters)
Speaking of the OPCW emergency meeting, Yury Filatov, the Russian ambassador to Ireland, said: “We hope to discuss the whole matter and call on Britain to provide every possible element of element of evidence they might have on their hands. Russia is interested in establishing the whole truth of the matter and we hope certainly that this meeting will help to return to at least the realm of normality within the realm of international law and decency in international matters.”
A British government spokesperson insisted that the Porton Down assessment was “only part of the intelligence picture”. He continued: “As the Prime Minister has set out in a number of statements to the Commons since 12 March, this includes our knowledge that within the past decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of novichoks, Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and our assessment that Russia views former intelligence officers as targets.
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
Russia says it could have been in UK interests to poison Skripal
Twenty-nine countries and Nato carried out a mass expulsion of almost 150 Russians working under diplomatic credentials after Britain provided information that pointed to Vladimir Putin’s government as responsible for Salisbury attack.
“Unprecedented levels of intelligence” had been divulged to convince these states, said senior government officials, including conclusions of Porton Down and an explanation of how this was obtained.
However, in addition, highly classified information, which is normally shared only between the “Five Eyes” countries – the UK, the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – was supplied to close allies with the national security adviser, Sir Mark Sedwill, taking it to the European Union and the North Atlantic Council. Other countries were given differing levels of intelligence.
US Department of State: There is ‘no justification’ for Russia’s response to expulsions
The development came as a former Russian general warned the response to the Salisbury the attack could trigger “the last war in the history of mankind”.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Evgeny Buzhinsky said the West was “cornering Russia and to corner Russia is a very dangerous thing”.
He added: “If the situation develops in the way it is now, it will end up in a very bad outcome.”
Salisbury poisoning: UK experts cannot prove novichok nerve agent used on Skripals came from Russia, MoD says
'We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions'
Kim Sengupta
Porton Down: We have 'not identified the source' of nerve agent used in the Salisbury attack
Spielberg beat James Cameron to Jurassic Park film rights by hours
Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway nominated for Bafta TV award
Russell Crowe selling 227 possessions in 'The Art of Divorce' auction
YouTube shooting brings to fore widespread conspiracy theory
Accusations and recriminations between Britain and Russia are set to escalate with the news that scientists at the Porton Down military research facility have been unable to establish exactly where the novichok nerve agent used to carry out the Skripal attack was manufactured.
The admission comes the day before Moscow convenes an emergency meeting of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague in which it is expected to demand access to samples from the Salisbury poisoning for analysis by Russian scientists.
Russia’s embassy in London responded that Porton Down’s assessment “proves that all political declarations on the Russian origin of the crime are nothing but assumptions not stemming from objective facts or the course of the investigation”.
The development also comes after Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, suggested that British intelligence services carried out the attempted assassination of the former MI6 agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia and claimed that it had proved “beneficial” in distracting attention from Theresa May’s government having to make major concessions to the European Union on Brexit.
Russia challenges UK to prove it was behind spy poisoning in court
The OPCW is due to present its own conclusions on the nerve agent in the near future. It remains to be seen whether it will be able to provide definite proof that the novichok came from a Russian government facility or echo the Porton Down position.
Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, Wiltshire, told Sky News that the substance required “extremely sophisticated methods to create something only in the capabilities of a state actor. We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent.”
Aussie Cops Find Their Commodore & Falcon Replacements
CarsGuide
Sandra Bullock's Most Daring Red Carpet Dresses
StyleBistro
Construction Workers That Should Probably Be Fired
Trendchaser
by Taboola Sponsored Links
Mr Aitkenhead went on to say: “We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to the government who have then used a number of other sources,” some of them intelligence-based.
The head of Porton Down denied claims that his research centre had been connected in any way with a “false flag” operation or that the novichok used may have come from it. “There is no way that anything like that would ever have come from us or leave the walls of our facilities,” he said. “We deal with a number of very toxic substances as part of the work that we do.”
There has been no immediate reaction from the Kremlin on the Porton Down assessment, but there is little doubt that it will be used to support its claims that UK has no real evidence to back up the accusation of Russian state culpability in the attack.
porton-down.jpg
The novichok was tested by scientists at Porton Down research laboratory (Reuters)
Speaking of the OPCW emergency meeting, Yury Filatov, the Russian ambassador to Ireland, said: “We hope to discuss the whole matter and call on Britain to provide every possible element of element of evidence they might have on their hands. Russia is interested in establishing the whole truth of the matter and we hope certainly that this meeting will help to return to at least the realm of normality within the realm of international law and decency in international matters.”
A British government spokesperson insisted that the Porton Down assessment was “only part of the intelligence picture”. He continued: “As the Prime Minister has set out in a number of statements to the Commons since 12 March, this includes our knowledge that within the past decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of novichoks, Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and our assessment that Russia views former intelligence officers as targets.
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
Russia says it could have been in UK interests to poison Skripal
Twenty-nine countries and Nato carried out a mass expulsion of almost 150 Russians working under diplomatic credentials after Britain provided information that pointed to Vladimir Putin’s government as responsible for Salisbury attack.
“Unprecedented levels of intelligence” had been divulged to convince these states, said senior government officials, including conclusions of Porton Down and an explanation of how this was obtained.
However, in addition, highly classified information, which is normally shared only between the “Five Eyes” countries – the UK, the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – was supplied to close allies with the national security adviser, Sir Mark Sedwill, taking it to the European Union and the North Atlantic Council. Other countries were given differing levels of intelligence.
US Department of State: There is ‘no justification’ for Russia’s response to expulsions
The development came as a former Russian general warned the response to the Salisbury the attack could trigger “the last war in the history of mankind”.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Evgeny Buzhinsky said the West was “cornering Russia and to corner Russia is a very dangerous thing”.
He added: “If the situation develops in the way it is now, it will end up in a very bad outcome.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
