Will Women Register for Selective Service?

Jan 24, 2013 5:53pm

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta today lifted the ban on women serving in combat positions, opening the door to more than 200,000  new military posts and raising a number of important questions, including: Will women eventually be eligible for the draft?

By law, all male U.S. citizens and permanent residents must register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18th birthday. Registration puts those “male persons” on the list the government uses if ever the draft returns and conscription in the military is deemed necessary in a time of war.

As of a 1994 review, women were still exempt from registering because they did not serve in combat positions. Today’s change in Pentagon policy, however, could ultimately result in a change to the law.

But it will take more than just the stroke of the defense secretary’s pen for the Selective Service Act to include mention of women.

With any change to personnel policies, the Defense Department  is “required to provide an analysis of its impact on the Selective Service Act,” said a senior Pentagon official said on the condition of anonymity.  “So that will be part of the notification to Congress.”

But what comes next is  unclear.

“With regard to what will happen from there, I can’t say,” said the official.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta later admitted to reporters that he, too, did not know the potential impact of the change to the Selective Service Act.

“That’s not our operation,” said Panetta.

Known for his use of colorful language, Panetta then said, “I don’t know who the hell controls Selective Service, if you want to know the truth.”

“But, you know,” Panetta added. “Whoever does, they’re going to have to exercise some judgment based on what we just did.”

The Selective Service System is a federal agency independent of the Department of Defense.

SHOWS: World News

Read More..

Cameron promises Britons vote on EU exit

LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron promised Britons a vote on quitting the European Union, rattling London's biggest allies and some investors by raising the prospect of uncertainty and upheaval.

Cameron announced on Wednesday that the referendum would be held by the end of 2017 - provided he wins a second term - and said that while Britain did not want to retreat from the world, public disillusionment with the bloc was at "an all-time high".

"It is time for the British people to have their say. It is time for us to settle this question about Britain and Europe," Cameron said in a speech, adding that his Conservative party would campaign for the 2015 parliamentary election on a promise to renegotiate the terms of Britain's EU membership.

"When we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice to stay in the European Union on these new terms; or come out altogether. It will be an in-out referendum."

A referendum would mark the second time British voters have had a direct say on the issue. In 1975, they decided by a wide margin to stay in, two years after the country had joined.

Most recent opinion polls have shown a slim majority would vote to leave amid bitter disenchantment, fanned by a hostile press, about the EU's perceived influence on the British way of life. However, a poll this week showed a majority for staying.

Cameron's position is fraught with uncertainty. He must come from behind to win the next election, secure support from the EU's 26 other states for a new British role, and hope those countries can persuade their voters to back the changes.

He also avoided saying exactly what he would do if he failed to win concessions in Europe, as many believe is likely.

Critics, notably among business leaders worried about the effect on investment, say that for years before a vote, Britain may slip into a dangerous and damaging limbo that could leave it adrift or effectively pushed out of the EU.

The United States, a close ally, is also uneasy about the plan, believing it will dilute Britain's international clout. President Barack Obama told Cameron last week that Washington valued "a strong UK in a strong European Union" and the White House said on Wednesday it believed Britain's membership of the EU was mutually beneficial.

Some of Britain's European partners were also anxious and told Cameron on Wednesday his strategy reflected a selfish and ignorant attitude. However, Angela Merkel, the leader of EU paymaster Germany, was quick to say she was ready to discuss Cameron's ideas.

FRENCH "NON"

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius was less diplomatic: "If Britain wants to leave Europe, we will roll out the red carpet," he quipped, echoing words Cameron used recently to urge France's rich to escape high taxes and move to Britain.

French President Francois Hollande repeated his refusal of special deals: "What I will say, speaking for France, and as a European, is that it isn't possible to bargain over Europe to hold this referendum," he said. "Europe must be taken as it is.

"One can have it modified in future but one cannot propose reducing or diminishing it as a condition of staying in."

Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti was more positive. He said he agreed with Cameron on the need to make the EU more innovative and welcomed the idea of a British referendum, saying he thought Britons would ultimately vote to stay in the bloc.

Billed by commentators as the most important speech of Cameron's career, his referendum promise ties him firmly to an issue that has bedeviled a generation of Conservative leaders.

In the past, he has been careful to avoid bruising partisan fights over Europe, an issue that undid the last two Conservative prime ministers, John Major and Margaret Thatcher.

His speech appeared to pacify a powerful Euroskeptic wing inside his own party, but deepen rifts with the Liberal Democrats, the junior partners in his coalition. Their leader, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, said the plan would undermine a fragile economic recovery.

Sterling fell to its lowest in nearly five months against the dollar on Wednesday as Cameron was speaking.

"BREXIT"?

Cameron said he would take back powers from Brussels, saying later in parliament that, when it came to employment, social and environmental legislation, "Europe has gone far too far".

But such a clawback - still the subject of an internal audit to identify which specific powers he should target for repatriation to London - is likely to be easier said than done.

If Cameron wins re-election but then fails to renegotiate Britain's membership of the EU, a 'Brexit' could loom.

Business leaders have warned that years of doubt over Britain's EU membership would damage the $2.5 trillion economy and cool the investment climate.

"Having a referendum creates more uncertainty and we don't need that," Martin Sorrell, chief executive of advertising giant WPP, told the World Economic Forum in Davos. "This is a political decision. This is not an economic decision.

"This isn't good news. You added another reason why people will postpone investment decisions."

Cameron has been pushed into taking such a strong position partly by the rise of the UK Independence Party, which favors complete withdrawal from the EU and has climbed to third in the opinion polls, mainly at the expense of the Conservatives.

"All he's trying to do is to kick the can down the road and to try and get UKIP off his back," said UKIP leader Nigel Farage.

Euroskeptics in Cameron's party, who have threatened to stir up trouble for the premier, were thrilled by the speech.

Conservative lawmaker Peter Bone called it "a terrific victory" that would unify 98 percent of the party. "He's the first prime minister to say he wants to bring back powers from Brussels," Bone told Reuters. "It's pretty powerful stuff".

Whether Cameron holds the referendum remains as uncertain as the Conservatives' chances of winning the election. They trail the opposition Labour party in opinion polls, and the coalition is grappling with a stagnating economy as it pushes through unpopular public spending cuts to reduce a large budget deficit.

Labour leader Ed Miliband said on Wednesday his party did not want an in-or-out referendum.

EU REFORM

Cameron said he would campaign for Britain to stay in the EU "with all my heart and soul", provided he secured the reforms he wants. He made clear the Union must become less bureaucratic and focus more on free trade.

It was riskier to maintain the status quo than to change, he said: "The biggest danger to the European Union comes not from those who advocate change, but from those who denounce new thinking as heresy," he said.

Asked whether, if he did not succeed in his renegotiation strategy, would recommend a vote to take Britain out, he said only: "I want to see a strong Britain in a reformed Europe.

"We have a very clear plan. We want to reset the relationship. We will hold that referendum. We will recommend that resettlement to the British people."

Cameron said the euro zone debt crisis was forcing the bloc to change and that Britain would fight to make sure new rules were fair to the 10 countries that do not use the common currency, of which Britain is the largest.

Democratic consent for the EU in Britain was now "wafer thin", he said:

"Some people say that to point this out is irresponsible, creates uncertainty for business and puts a question mark over Britain's place in the European Union. But the question mark is already there: ignoring it won't make it go away."

A YouGov opinion poll on Monday showed that more people wanted to stay in the EU than leave it, the first such result in many months. But it was unclear whether that result was a blip.

Paul Chipperfield, a 53-year-old management consultant, said he liked the strategy: "Cameron's making the right move because I don't think we've had enough debate in this country," he said.

"We should be part of the EU but the EU needs to recognize that not everybody's going to jump on the same bandwagon."

Asked after the speech whether other EU countries would agree to renegotiate Britain's membership, Cameron said he was an optimist and that there was "every chance of success".

"I don't want Britain to leave the EU," he told parliament later. "I want Britain to reform the EU."

In the 1975 referendum, just over 67 percent voted to stay inside with nearly 33 percent against.

(Additional reporting by Paul Taylor in Davos, Alexandra Hudson in Berlin, Brenda Goh in London, Jeff Mason in Washington and James Mackenzie in Rome; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge, David Stamp and Alastair Macdonald)

Read More..

Football: Real Madrid, Sevilla into Spanish Cup semis

MADRID: Real Madrid advanced to the semi-finals of the Spanish Cup on Wednesday after a 1-1 draw at Valencia saw Jose Mourinho's side progress 3-1 on aggregate.

Leading 2-0 from the first leg in Madrid, Karim Benzema gave Real the lead a minute before half-time but Tino Costa levelled for the home side on 52 minutes following Fabio Coentrao's dismissal.

Real also saw Angel di Maria dismissed late on.

Madrid were dealt an early blow when goalkeeper Iker Casillas was forced off a quarter of an hour into the contest with an injured finger, but Benzema ensured Valencia had a mountain to climb as he put the visitors ahead on 44 minutes.

Xabi Alonso's threaded pass found the France striker with just Vicente Guaita to beat and he made no mistake with a composed finish into the far corner.

Madrid were reduced to 10 men four minutes after the break as Coentrao collected a second booking and Costa gave Valencia a glimmer of hope, equalising just moments later.

Valencia sought to capitalise on their man advantage in a frenetic final half hour but Real remained resolute despite having Di Maria sent off for lashing out at Joao Pereira.

Sevilla also clinched their berth in the last four following a 4-0 rout of Real Zaragoza.

After a goalless first leg, Zaragoza's cause was hampered by a 26th-minute red card to Jose Manuel Fernandez as Alvaro Negredo and Ivan Rakitic struck before the interval.

Fran Gonzalez then received his marching orders as Zaragoza were reduced to nine men on 65 minutes before further strikes from Negredo and Manu del Moral completed the demolition.

Barcelona travel to Malaga for the second leg on Thursday after the reverse fixture at the Camp Nou finished 2-2, while Atletico Madrid head to Real Betis with a two-goal advantage.

- AFP/al

Read More..

Is Akbaruddin Owaisi in a bad way?

HYDERABAD: In a development which could give the government sleepless nights, doctors attending on Akbaruddin Owaisi, the jailed MIM legislator, said his health was failing and the 41-year-old leader should be moved, at least, to a prison facility which is close to a multi-speciality hospital.

Owaisi junior is being treated at the Adilabad district hospital, which doctors said did not have modern medical facilities. "According to the last ultrasound done a few months ago, several abdominal adhesions, which are basically fibrous bands between tissues and organs were found and if this is not checked, it can quickly turn into sub-acute obstruction, which would need surgery," said Dr Verghese Muthai, a colorectal surgeon at Yashoda Hospital, Somajiguda.

"If left untreated for a long time, this can lead to full intestinal obstruction which is fatal," he added. Owaisi, who has been arrested for a hate speech delivered in Nirmal town last month, has been made to travel for hundreds of kilometres across three districts to appear before different courts after doctors in Adilabad said he was fit for travel.

Off late, his lawyers are moving bail petition on health grounds, which some observers say is quite common and the fact that he had happily attended party meetings regularly before he was jailed could be a further testimony to his fitness. "His health is not bad. He is okay. The stories of his bad health are being spread to get a quick bail," said a doctor who did not want to be named.

But what is perhaps making the government nervous is the absence of quality healthcare facilities in Adilabad and sources said that perhaps prompted authorities to move him to a guest house from the subjail where he was initially lodged.

Owaisi's case-sheet

Akbar suffering from abdominal adhesions.

Is due for three surgeries: For adhesions and hernia, tendon replacement in left arm and removal of bullet in thigh

Both kidneys working at sub-optimal levels

Also suffers from uticaria, a skin infection

Prone to drug allergies

Doc says should be shifted to a prison facility which is close to a multi-speciality hospital

Read More..

Women have caught up to men on lung cancer risk

Smoke like a man, die like a man.

U.S. women who smoke today have a much greater risk of dying from lung cancer than they did decades ago, partly because they are starting younger and smoking more — that is, they are lighting up like men, new research shows.

Women also have caught up with men in their risk of dying from smoking-related illnesses. Lung cancer risk leveled off in the 1980s for men but is still rising for women.

"It's a massive failure in prevention," said one study leader, Dr. Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society. And it's likely to repeat itself in places like China and Indonesia where smoking is growing, he said. About 1.3 billion people worldwide smoke.

The research is in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine. It is one of the most comprehensive looks ever at long-term trends in the effects of smoking and includes the first generation of U.S. women who started early in life and continued for decades, long enough for health effects to show up.

The U.S. has more than 35 million smokers — about 20 percent of men and 18 percent of women. The percentage of people who smoke is far lower than it used to be; rates peaked around 1960 in men and two decades later in women.

Researchers wanted to know if smoking is still as deadly as it was in the 1980s, given that cigarettes have changed (less tar), many smokers have quit, and treatments for many smoking-related diseases have improved.

They also wanted to know more about smoking and women. The famous surgeon general's report in 1964 said smoking could cause lung cancer in men, but evidence was lacking in women at the time since relatively few of them had smoked long enough.

One study, led by Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto, looked at about 217,000 Americans in federal health surveys between 1997 and 2004.

A second study, led by Thun, tracked smoking-related deaths through three periods — 1959-65, 1982-88 and 2000-10 — using seven large population health surveys covering more than 2.2 million people.

Among the findings:

— The risk of dying of lung cancer was more than 25 times higher for female smokers in recent years than for women who never smoked. In the 1960s, it was only three times higher. One reason: After World War II, women started taking up the habit at a younger age and began smoking more.

—A person who never smoked was about twice as likely as a current smoker to live to age 80. For women, the chances of surviving that long were 70 percent for those who never smoked and 38 percent for smokers. In men, the numbers were 61 percent and 26 percent.

—Smokers in the U.S. are three times more likely to die between ages 25 and 79 than non-smokers are. About 60 percent of those deaths are attributable to smoking.

—Women are far less likely to quit smoking than men are. Among people 65 to 69, the ratio of former to current smokers is 4-to-1 for men and 2-to-1 for women.

—Smoking shaves more than 10 years off the average life span, but quitting at any age buys time. Quitting by age 40 avoids nearly all the excess risk of death from smoking. Men and women who quit when they were 25 to 34 years old gained 10 years; stopping at ages 35 to 44 gained 9 years; at ages 45 to 54, six years; at ages 55 to 64, four years.

—The risk of dying from other lung diseases such as emphysema and chronic bronchitis is rising in men and women, and the rise in men is a surprise because their lung cancer risk leveled off in 1980s.

Changes in cigarettes since the 1960s are a "plausible explanation" for the rise in non-cancer lung deaths, researchers write. Most smokers switched to cigarettes that were lower in tar and nicotine as measured by tests with machines, "but smokers inhaled more deeply to get the nicotine they were used to," Thun said. Deeper inhalation is consistent with the kind of lung damage seen in the illnesses that are rising, he said.

Scientists have made scant progress against lung cancer compared with other forms of the disease, and it remains the leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. More than 160,000 people die of it in the U.S. each year.

The federal government, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the cancer society and several universities paid for the new studies. Thun testified against tobacco companies in class-action lawsuits challenging the supposed benefits of cigarettes with reduced tar and nicotine, but he donated his payment to the cancer society.

Smoking needs more attention as a health hazard, Dr. Steven A. Schroeder of the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in a commentary in the journal.

"More women die of lung cancer than of breast cancer. But there is no 'race for the cure' for lung cancer, no brown ribbon" or high-profile advocacy groups for lung cancer, he wrote.

Kathy DeJoseph, 62, of suburban Atlanta, finally quit smoking after 40 years — to qualify for lung cancer surgery last year.

"I tried everything that came along, I just never could do it," even while having chemotherapy, she said.

It's a powerful addiction, she said: "I still every day have to resist wanting to go buy a pack."

___

Online:

American Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.org

National Cancer Institute: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/tobacco/smoking and http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/lung

Medical journal: http://www.nejm.org

___

Marilynn Marchione can be followed at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP

Read More..

Clinton on Benghazi: Afghanistan Diverted Resources

House Republicans slammed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today for her lack of awareness of State Department cables warning of security threats in Benghazi, Libya, prior to the Sept. 11 attack that killed four Americans, including Amb. Chris Stevens.

In the second congressional hearing of the day reviewing a report by the Accountability Review Board on the State Department's security failures, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, asked Clinton this afternoon why her office had not responded to a notification from Stevens about potential dangers in Libya.

"Congressman, that cable did not come to my attention," Clinton calmly told the House Foreign Affairs Committee hours after her Senate testimony this morning. "I'm not aware of anyone within my office, within the secretary's office having seen that cable."

She added that "1.43 million cables come to my office. They're all addressed to me."

Hillary Clinton's Fiery Moment at Benghazi Hearing

Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., asked Clinton whether she thought that signaled the need for a shifting of priorities to make sure she is notified about these kinds of threats in the future.

"That's exactly what I'm intent on doing," Clinton said. "We have work to do. We have work to do inside the department. We have work to do with our partners in DOD and the intelligence community."

Such answers failed to appease members like Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., who accused Clinton of letting "the consulate become a death trap."

Clinton also told the House committee that an emphasis on security in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past decade diverted resources from other outposts around the world.

She told Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., that legislation he championed reorganizing the State Department in the 19990s had "been very important in protecting our people around the world," but that the need for funding was ongoing and unmet.

Clinton reprised her role as defender of the State Department this afternoon in the second half of congressional testimony on the security failures that led to the deaths of Stevens and the other Americans.

Stevens understood the significance of the mission, she told the committee several hours after a morning Senate appearance.

"That's why Chris Stevens went to Benghazi in the first place," she said. "Nobody knew the dangers better than Chris, first during the revolution and then during the transition. A weak Libyan government, marauding militias, even terrorist groups … a bomb exploded in the parking lot of his hotel. He never wavered. He never asked to come home. He never said let's shut it down, quit, go somewhere else."

Representatives repeatedly asked about U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's assertion on Sunday morning talk shows in September that the attack was fueled by outrage over a video attacking Islam.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Hillary Clinton Cites Lack of Funding in Global Outposts Watch Video

Clinton: Security Request Not Brought to My Attention Watch Video

Hillary Clinton Gets Choked Up at Benghazi Hearing Watch Video

Clinton's response was to refer to the ARB report, which said the motivations behind the attack were complicated and still not all known. She maintained that Rice was speaking based upon talking points given to her by the intelligence community.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., asked why the secretary of state herself did not appear in Rice's place to give those televised explanations to the country.

"Well, I have to confess here in public [that] going on the Sunday shows is not my favorite thing to do. There are other things that I prefer to do on Sunday mornings," Clinton replied. "And I did feel strongly that we had a lot that we had to manage, that I had to respond to. And I thought that should be my priority."

The afternoon appearance followed morning testimony from an energized Clinton, who stood her ground and told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she has overseen plans to secure diplomatic outposts around the world while cuts in State Department funding undermine those efforts.

Citing a report by the department's Accountability Review Board on the security failures that led to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, during an attack last year, Clinton said the board is pushing for an increase in funding to facilities of more than $2 billion per year.

"Consistent shortfalls have required the department to prioritize available funding out of security accounts," Clinton told the Senate this morning, while again taking responsibility for the Benghazi attack. "And I will be the first to say that the prioritization process was at times imperfect, but as the ARB said, the funds provided were inadequate. So we need to work together to overcome that."

Clinton, showing little effect from her recent illnesses, choked up earlier in discussing the Benghazi attack.

"I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews," Clinton said this morning, her voice growing hoarse with emotion. "I put my arms around the mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters."

The outgoing secretary of state was the only witness to giving long-awaited testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee this morning, and appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee at 2 p.m.

The secretary, who postponed her testimony in December, started today by giving context to the terrorist attack.

"Any clear-eyed examination of this matter must begin with this sobering fact," Clinton began. "Since 1988, there have been 19 Accountability Review Boards investigating attacks on American diplomats and their facilities."

But the secretary did not deny her role in the failures, saying that as secretary of state, she has "no higher priority and no greater responsibility" than protecting American diplomats abroad like those killed in Benghazi.

"As I have said many times, I take responsibility, and nobody is more committed to getting this right," Clinton said. "I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger and more secure."

Among the steps Clinton has taken, she said, is to "elevate the discussion and the decision-making to make sure there's not any" suggestions that get missed, as there were in this case.

Clinton testified that the United States needs to be able to "chew gum and walk at the same time," working to shore up its fiscal situation while also strengthening security, and she refuted the idea that across-the-board cuts slated to take place in March, commonly referred to as sequestration, were the way to do that.

"Now sequestration will be very damaging to the State Department and USAID if it does come to pass, because it throws the baby out with the bath," Clinton said, referring to the United States Agency for International Development, which administers civilian foreign aid.

While the State Department does need to make cuts in certain areas, "there are also a lot of very essential programs … that we can't afford to cut more of," she added.

More than four months have passed since the attack killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Libya. These meetings, during which Clinton discussed the report on State Department security failures by the Accountability Review Board, were postponed because of her recent illness.

Clinton told the Senate that the State Department is on track to have 85 percent of action items based on the recommendations in the ARB report accomplished by March, with some already implemented.

Read More..

Netanyahu turns to Iran after narrow election win

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed victory in Israel's parliamentary election, shrugging off surprise losses to centre-left challengers and vowing on Wednesday to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

However, Tuesday's vote, which also disappointed religiously inspired hardliners, may deflect the premier's focus on confronting Tehran and resisting Palestinian demands as Israel's secular, middle-class demanded new attention to domestic issues.

That, in turn, might draw Netanyahu toward a less fractious relationship with his key ally, U.S. President Barack Obama, who himself embarked on a new term this week with great ambitions.

Exit polls showed the Israeli leader's right-wing Likud and the ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beitenu would remain the biggest bloc in the 120-member assembly, but with only 31 seats, 11 fewer than the 42 the two parties held in the last parliament.

If the exit polls compiled by three local broadcasters prove correct - and they normally do in Israel - Netanyahu would be on course for a third term in office, perhaps leading a hardline coalition that would promote Jewish settlement on occupied land.

But his weakened showing in a vote which he had called nine months early in the hope of a strong mandate for his struggle with Iran, could complicate his efforts to forge an alliance with a stable and substantial majority in parliament.

"I am proud to be your prime minister, and I thank you for giving me the opportunity, for the third time, to lead the state of Israel," the 63-year-old leader told a cheering crowd in the early hours of Wednesday at his campaign headquarters.

Netanyahu said he planned to form as broad a governing coalition as possible, suggesting he would seek partners beyond his traditional ultra-nationalist and religious allies. His first call may be to Yair Lapid, a former television anchorman whose centrist, secular party came from nowhere to second place.

"The first challenge was and remains preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said.

Iran denies it is planning to build an atomic bomb, and says Israel, widely believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, is the biggest threat to the region.

Netanyahu views Tehran's nuclear program as a threat to Israel's existence and has stoked international concern by hinting at possible Israeli military action to thwart it.

He has shunted Palestinian peacemaking well down the agenda despite Western concern to keep the quest for a solution alive.

The projections showed right-wing parties with a combined strength of 61-62 seats against 58-59 for the centre-left.

Lapid's Yesh Atid (There is a Future) party should have 18 or 19 seats, exit polls showed - a stunning result for a newcomer to politics in a field of 32 contending parties.

Lapid won support amongst middle-class, secular voters by promising to resolve a growing housing shortage, abolish military draft exemptions for Jewish seminary students and seek an overhaul of the failing education system.

He urged Netanyahu "to build as broad a government as possible so that we can bring about real change in Israel".

The once dominant Labor party led by Shelly Yachimovich was projected to take third place with 17 seats. She described Likud victory claims as "ridiculous" before final results were in.

"There is a very good chance, a very good chance, that tomorrow morning Benjamin Netanyahu will not be able to form a government," she declared at her party headquarters.

Reconciling views to build a cabinet will certainly be hard.

"YESH ATID SWEEP"

Some in Netanyahu's party acknowledged that the election had gone somewhat awry. "We anticipated we would lose some votes to Lapid, but not to this extent. This was a Yesh Atid sweep," Likud campaign adviser Ronen Moshe told Reuters.

Lapid said before the election he would consider joining a Netanyahu-led government. If that happens, the ultra-Orthodox religious parties which often hold the balance of power in parliament might lose some of their leverage.

After a lackluster campaign, Israelis voted in droves on a sunny winter day, registering a turnout of 66.6 percent, the highest since 2003. That buoyed centre-left parties which had pinned their hopes on energizing an army of undecided voters against Netanyahu and his nationalist-religious allies.

"A big majority of middle class Israelis have voted strongly against the priorities of the last government," said Dan Avnon, a political science professor at Hebrew University.

"These are the people who pay the taxes and serve in the army," he said. "I don't think they can be ignored."

Opinion polls before the election had predicted an easy win for Netanyahu, although the last ones suggested he would lose some votes to the Jewish Home party, which opposes a Palestinian state and advocates annexing chunks of the occupied West Bank.

The exit polls projected 12 seats for Jewish Home.

The biggest casualty was the centrist Kadima party, which was projected to win no seats at all. It had gained the highest number in the previous election in 2009, although its then leader Tzipi Livni failed to put together a governing coalition.

Full election results are due by Wednesday morning and official ones will be announced on January 30. After that, President Shimon Peres is likely to ask Netanyahu, as leader of the biggest bloc in parliament, to try to form a government.

WESTERN ANXIETY

Whatever permutation finally emerges, a Netanyahu-led government is likely to resist any push for a peace deal with the Palestinians that would come anywhere near satisfying the moderates who seek a viable independent state alongside Israel.

Naftali Bennet, high-tech millionaire son of American immigrants who leads the hard-right, pro-settler Jewish Home party, was projected to win 12 seats - disappointing for him but still making his group a likely member of a coalition.

Bennet, who advocates annexing West Bank land to Israel, told cheering supporters: "There is only one truth and it is simple. The Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel."

Britain warned Israel on Tuesday it was losing international support, saying Jewish settlement expansion had almost killed off prospects for a two-state solution.

U.S.-brokered peace talks broke down in 2010 amid mutual acrimony. Since then Israel has accelerated construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem - land the Palestinians want for their future state - much to the anger of Western partners.

Netanyahu's relations with Obama have been notably tense and Martin Indyk, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, told the BBC the election was unlikely to change that.

"President Obama doesn't have high expectations that there's going to be a government in Israel committed to making peace and is capable of the kind of very difficult and painful concessions that would be needed to achieve a two-state solution," he said.

But Aaron David Miller, once a senior U.S. adviser on the peace process, said a weakening of the right might improve ties: "The fact is, if (Netanyahu) goes with Lapid and he reaches out to the centre, you're going to end up with an American-Israeli rapprochement to a certain degree," Miller told CNN.

Tuesday's vote was the first in Israel since Arab uprisings swept the region two years ago, reshaping the Middle East.

Netanyahu has said the turbulence, which has brought Islamist governments to power in several countries long ruled by secularist autocrats, including neighboring Egypt, shows the importance of strengthening national security.

Foreign policy issues barely registered during the election campaign, with a poll in Haaretz newspaper on Friday saying 47 percent of Israelis thought social and economic issues were the most pressing concern, against just 10 percent who cited Iran.

A major problem for the next government, which is unlikely to take power before mid-March, is the stuttering economy.

Data last week showed the budget deficit rose to 4.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2012, double the original estimate, meaning spending cuts and tax hikes look certain.

(Reporting by Jerusalem bureau; Editing by Alastair Macdonald)

Read More..

Veteran BBC presenter Stuart Hall charged with rape

LONDON: British police on Tuesday charged veteran BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall with one offence of rape and 14 of indecent assault committed between 1967 and 1986.

The assaults involve 10 girls aged between nine and 16-years-old and the rape charge concerns a woman aged 22 when the alleged offence took place in 1976.

Lancashire Police arrested Hall earlier Tuesday after he attended a police station by appointment. He was bailed to appear before magistrates in Preston, northwest England, on February 7.

"Following consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service an 83-year-old man has this evening been charged with one offence of rape and 14 offences of indecent assault," a Lancashire Police statement said.

The presenter pleaded not guilty to three other charges of indecent assault when he appeared in court earlier this month, and will now answer those charges in crown court.

Hall has been a familiar face and voice in British broadcasting for half a century and was last year awarded an Order of the British Empire (OBE).

His eccentric and distinctive football match summaries have made him a cult figure on BBC radio.

Police have stressed that the charges against him are not part of the investigation into allegations of sexual abuse of children against the late BBC star Jimmy Savile.

-AFP/fl

Read More..

ADR empowers public with financial and criminal data on candidates

NEW DELHI: How many candidates from your constituency were history sheeters in the last election? How many had rape or murder charges against them? Were any of them crorepatis and did any make it to college? If voters today have the answers to these questions, it can be attributed to the work of the Association for Democratic Reforms.

This organization is behind the event that's now routine before every parliamentary and assembly election in India: the criminal past and financial assets of all contesting candidates are made public, igniting a national debate and allowing voters to make an informed choice.

A PIL filed by ADR in 1999 resulted in the landmark Supreme Court order of 2002, making it mandatory for all contesting candidates to file an affidavit with the Election Commission disclosing their criminal, financial and educational background before the election.

After the then government passed legislation undoing the order, ADR went back to the SC, which struck down the Act as unconstitutional and restored its order. ADR began to track the affidavits. Since 2002, its National Election Watch (NEW) programme has covered two Lok Sabha polls, and all state assemblies, as well as Delhi Municipal Corporation.

"We put out this information out in three ways: through a helpline that people can call, through SMA and through the media," says Anil Bairwal, ADR's national coordinator. A small organisation that employs less than 30, ADR works out of a small office in Delhi's Hauz Khas, its phones buzzing continuously and several young heads hunched over Excel spreadsheets.

Set up by a group of IIM professors in 1999, ADR aims to bring about greater transparency and accountability in the electoral process. It relies on a big network of partner organizations (almost 1,200) whose volunteers work for its NEW programme. Bairwal believes ADR has helped make issues of criminalization of politics and the growing power of money part of the national debate. Now it is trying to work with political parties to ensure better intra-party democracy. "All grassroots political workers support this. We need to build public pressure to get the people heading the parties to change their minds," says Bairwal.

Read More..

Flu season fuels debate over paid sick time laws

NEW YORK (AP) — Sniffling, groggy and afraid she had caught the flu, Diana Zavala dragged herself in to work anyway for a day she felt she couldn't afford to miss.

A school speech therapist who works as an independent contractor, she doesn't have paid sick days. So the mother of two reported to work and hoped for the best — and was aching, shivering and coughing by the end of the day. She stayed home the next day, then loaded up on medicine and returned to work.

"It's a balancing act" between physical health and financial well-being, she said.

An unusually early and vigorous flu season is drawing attention to a cause that has scored victories but also hit roadblocks in recent years: mandatory paid sick leave for a third of civilian workers — more than 40 million people — who don't have it.

Supporters and opponents are particularly watching New York City, where lawmakers are weighing a sick leave proposal amid a competitive mayoral race.

Pointing to a flu outbreak that the governor has called a public health emergency, dozens of doctors, nurses, lawmakers and activists — some in surgical masks — rallied Friday on the City Hall steps to call for passage of the measure, which has awaited a City Council vote for nearly three years. Two likely mayoral contenders have also pressed the point.

The flu spike is making people more aware of the argument for sick pay, said Ellen Bravo, executive director of Family Values at Work, which promotes paid sick time initiatives around the country. "There's people who say, 'OK, I get it — you don't want your server coughing on your food,'" she said.

Advocates have cast paid sick time as both a workforce issue akin to parental leave and "living wage" laws, and a public health priority.

But to some business owners, paid sick leave is an impractical and unfair burden for small operations. Critics also say the timing is bad, given the choppy economy and the hardships inflicted by Superstorm Sandy.

Michael Sinensky, an owner of seven bars and restaurants around the city, was against the sick time proposal before Sandy. And after the storm shut down four of his restaurants for days or weeks, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars that his insurers have yet to pay, "we're in survival mode."

"We're at the point, right now, where we cannot afford additional social initiatives," said Sinensky, whose roughly 500 employees switch shifts if they can't work, an arrangement that some restaurateurs say benefits workers because paid sick time wouldn't include tips.

Employees without sick days are more likely to go to work with a contagious illness, send an ill child to school or day care and use hospital emergency rooms for care, according to a 2010 survey by the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center. A 2011 study in the American Journal of Public Health estimated that a lack of sick time helped spread 5 million cases of flu-like illness during the 2009 swine flu outbreak.

To be sure, many employees entitled to sick time go to work ill anyway, out of dedication or at least a desire to project it. But the work-through-it ethic is shifting somewhat amid growing awareness about spreading sickness.

"Right now, where companies' incentives lie is butting right up against this concern over people coming into the workplace, infecting others and bringing productivity of a whole company down," said John A. Challenger, CEO of employer consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Paid sick day requirements are often popular in polls, but only four places have them: San Francisco, Seattle, Washington, D.C., and the state of Connecticut. The specific provisions vary.

Milwaukee voters approved a sick time requirement in 2008, but the state Legislature passed a law blocking it. Philadelphia's mayor vetoed a sick leave measure in 2011; lawmakers have since instituted a sick time requirement for businesses with city contracts. Voters rejected a paid sick day measure in Denver in 2011.

In New York, City Councilwoman Gale Brewer's proposal would require up to five paid sick days a year at businesses with at least five employees. It wouldn't include independent contractors, such as Zavala, who supports the idea nonetheless.

The idea boasts such supporters as feminist Gloria Steinem and "Sex and the City" actress Cynthia Nixon, as well as a majority of City Council members and a coalition of unions, women's groups and public health advocates. But it also faces influential opponents, including business groups, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who has virtually complete control over what matters come to a vote.

Quinn, who is expected to run for mayor, said she considers paid sick leave a worthy goal but doesn't think it would be wise to implement it in a sluggish economy. Two of her likely opponents, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio and Comptroller John Liu, have reiterated calls for paid sick leave in light of the flu season.

While the debate plays out, Emilio Palaguachi is recovering from the flu and looking for a job. The father of four was abruptly fired without explanation earlier this month from his job at a deli after taking a day off to go to a doctor, he said. His former employer couldn't be reached by telephone.

"I needed work," Palaguachi said after Friday's City Hall rally, but "I needed to see the doctor because I'm sick."

___

Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Conn., contributed to this report.

___

Follow Jennifer Peltz at http://twitter.com/jennpeltz

Read More..