Saturday, 27 April 2013

After Dhaka garment factory collapse, chances for supply chain changes low

A factory collapse in Bangladesh left some 300 dead, and prompted calls for improved regulations of the country's sweatshops. But veteran campaigners to improve factory conditions say pushing for change is harder than ever.?

By Ryan Lenora Brown,?Correspondent / April 26, 2013

A Bangladeshi woman weeps as she holds a picture of her and her missing husband as she waits at the site of a building that collapsed Wednesday in Savar, near Dhaka, Bangladesh, Friday.

Kevin Frayer/AP

Enlarge

As Bangladeshi rescue workers continue to pull survivors and bodies from the ruins of a Dhaka, Bangladesh factory where some 300 were killed in a building collapse Wednesday, thousands of protesters took to the streets across the city to express their outrage at?negligence that has racked the world's second-largest garment-exporting country for years.

Skip to next paragraph Ryan Lenora Brown

Correspondent

Ryan Brown edits the Africa Monitor blog and contributes to the national and international news desks of the Monitor. She is a former Fulbright fellow to South Africa and holds a degree in history from Duke University.?

Recent posts

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

Blocking traffic and vandalizing garment factories that stayed open during today?s official day of mourning, protestors smashed cars and clashed violently with police, demanding accountability for what The New York Times is calling ?one of the worst manufacturing disasters in history.?

Among those at the receiving end of the rage are not only unscrupulous local factory owners and lax regulators, but also the Western corporations whose demands for cheaply-made garments have fueled the precarious working conditions in Bangladesh?s 5,000 clothing factories.

Plucked from the rubble of the eight-story factory were labels from several Western brands, including some sold in major chains such as Wal-Mart, JC Penney, and Spanish retailer El Corte Ingles, who immediately began to issue a flurry of sympathetic press releases. British retailer Primark said it was ?shocked and deeply saddened by this appalling incident? and the Canadian retailer Loblaw said it was ?extremely saddened? by the tragedy, the Times reports.

None, however, went so far as to implicate themselves in the disaster.

?These companies have come up with some very effective approaches to distance themselves from responsibility in tragedies like this,? says Heather White, founder of Verite, an independent auditing group.?Indeed, she says, Western companies often bring their garments from factory to store through a tangled and globally sprawled cluster of middlemen ? subcontractors, auditors, consultants ? who not only drive down their prices but also help ensure that responsibility for corporate stumbles are spread thinly.

That leaves many Western consumers, even the most conscientious, flummoxed by how to react to tragedies like the factory collapse, Ms. White says. Short of switching to niche-marketed fair trade brands?think American Apparel or TOMS Shoes ? there?s ?no real way for your average consumer to use their buying power to mobilize around these issues,? she says.

But it wasn?t always that way.

In the late 1990s, a widespread campaign against labor conditions in Nike factories helped shame the company into adopting a code of conduct in its factories for the first time. Responding to massive protests, sit-ins, and hunger strikes, a large number of universities forced the suppliers of their branded athletic apparel to institute labor code reforms in return for their business.

?It was amazing to see how people bought in [to the campaign],? remembers Kirsten Moller, organizing director for the human rights group Global Exchange, which helped lead the Nike campaign. ?They really had no idea what was happening, no idea under what conditions these products they loved were being made.?

So what changed?

As the issue slid from the front page, "people got tired of protesting,? Ms. Moller says.

Many of the activists from the 1990s ? immortalized by their chaotic protests at the 1999 summit of the World Trade Organization ? moved on to new causes, White says, with many becoming deeply involved in anti-war efforts in the early 2000s.?

And perhaps more importantly, the corporations simply caught up. ?They co-opted the language of human rights and social responsibility,? she says, ?because they realized their consumers now cared about that.?

As a result of the Nike movement, she says, most corporations now at least pay lip service to the idea that transnational companies have a responsibility to the people who work for them and the land they work on.

?But we?re nowhere near where we should be,? she says.

In the streets of Dhaka today, it seems there are many who would agree with that.?

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/WJTSJ0l83no/After-Dhaka-garment-factory-collapse-chances-for-supply-chain-changes-low

OJ Murdock Olympics Live Mens Gymnastics Allison Schmitt Olympic Schedule Kyla Ross Montenegro

Video: Earnings Scorecard: Starbucks & Travel Stocks

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/video/cnbc/51665213/

george strait Trey Burke Peyton Siva Hunter Hayes rick warren Final Four 2013 final four

Mailbox Is Working On An iPad App, With Desktop And Android Clients ?On The Roadmap?

mailboxGiven the fairly nutballs hype surrounding the launch of Mailbox for iPhone (and its crazy queues), you could probably assume that they'd bring the app to other devices and platforms ? and you'd be right if you did. The company recently started letting users know of their upcoming projects: an iPad app is in the works, with Android and desktop clients "on the agenda".

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/5ra5rCNmDMQ/

morgan freeman Survivor Philippines Fashion Island shooting Victor Cruz nfl standings Vicki Soto Adam Lanza

Chorus grows against Obama administration's sanctions-heavy Iran policy

America?s nuclear negotiators with Iran got it all wrong, according to a growing chorus of critics arguing that over-reliance on pressure and sanctions may be jeopardizing a diplomatic deal.

The Obama administration has implemented a host of crippling sanctions on Iran targeting its central bank and lifeblood oil exports. The goal has been to pressure Iran into giving up its most sensitive nuclear work, which could be a pathway to an atomic bomb.

But a year of high-profile talks between Iran and world powers has yielded little progress. Now a number of senior former US officials and analysts say a White House obsession with the pressure track may be backfiring, and are calling for a pivot toward the diplomatic track to reestablish balance.

RECOMMENDED: How much do you know about Iran? Take our quiz to find out.

?I was in the [State] Department when they kept talking about the so-called two-track policy, and it was clear the whole thing was nonsense, there never were two tracks,? says John Limbert, the former US deputy assistant secretary of state for Iran from 2009 to 2010.

?The sanctions took all the air out of the room. It was 95 percent sanctions, and that was on a good day.?

THE US 'KNOWS' SANCTIONS

One reason for the sanctions focus is ?we know how to do them. It?s familiar. And to do them, we don?t have to deal with the Iranians; we deal with the British, the United Nations, the Russians, the Chinese,? says Ambassador Limbert, who was also held captive in Iran during the 1979 to 1981 hostage crisis, and speaks fluent Persian.

?Whereas diplomacy with Iran, that?s hard. Nobody knows how to do that, and every time we?ve tried, we?ve failed, and as soon as we fail we?ve given up and gone back to doing what we know how to do.?

Limbert, who now teaches at the US Naval Academy, is among a growing number of people calling for a recalibration of the American strategy on Iran ? a greater emphasis on diplomacy and real incentives, like substantial sanctions relief ? in exchange for real concessions by Iran.

?It is time for the administration to make the sweat equity investment in negotiations equal to what it has done on sanctions and the potential to use military force,? Tom Pickering, the former US Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, said at the launch last week in Washington of a report by The Iran Project, an independent group of former officials and professionals that seeks to improve official US-Iran ties.

?First and foremost we believe the President needs to make that decision ? ?I want a deal? ? and instruct his people to get a deal," he said.

Ambassador Pickering and Limbert were among 35 signatories of the report, which included other veteran diplomats and officials like Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor; Ryan Crocker, former ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and other trouble spots; Lee Hamilton, a former congressman and vice chairman of the 9-11 Commission; and former Central Intelligence Agency chief Michael Hayden.

There are signs that message is getting through. Despite a strong desire on Capitol Hill and in Israel for more sanctions against Iran, Secretary of State John Kerry asked Congress last Thursday to hold off: ?We don?t need to spin this up at this point in time?. You need to leave us the window to try to work the diplomatic channel,? he said.

FEWER OPTIONS

The widening bid for better diplomacy comes after the latest round of nuclear talks in the Kazakh city of Almaty earlier this month failed to narrow differences between Iran and the P5+1 group (the US, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany).

Calling for ?strengthening the diplomatic track in order to seize the opportunity created by the pressure track,? The Iran Project notes that while US policies ?possibly slowed the expansion of Iran?s nuclear program,? they also ?may have narrowed the options for dealing with Iran by hardening the regime?s resistance to pressure.?

The report states that ?it seems doubtful that pressure alone will change the decisions of Iran?s leaders,? though stronger diplomacy ?that includes the promise of sanctions relief in exchange for verifiable cooperation? could lead to a deal. Another risk of current policy, warns the report: ?Sanctions-related hardships may be sowing the seeds of long-term alienation between the Iranian people and the United States.?

The current P5+1 offer, which has been seen by The Christian Science Monitor, calls upon Iran to halt enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity ? which is a few technical steps away from bomb-grade of more than 90 percent ? and ?reduce readiness? of a deeply buried enrichment facility by disconnecting and removing key equipment.

After those steps, the P5+1 would provide partial sanctions relief on gold transfers and petrochemical exports, but not on far more painful financial or oil sanctions. Iran says the offer is unbalanced, and wants a more ?reciprocal? approach.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei stated in February that pressure and sanctions are akin to the US ?pointing a gun at Iran and say[ing] either negotiate or we will shoot.? In March, Khamenei said, ?if the Americans sincerely want? to resolve the nuclear issue ?they should stop being hostile towards the Iranian nation in words and in action.?

Both sides in the nuclear negotiations have staked out positions unacceptable to the other. Iran has signaled repeatedly in the past two years a willingness to cap its 20 percent enrichment, but has balked at the low price on offer.

?I think the answer is probably pretty simple. We?re going to have to sweeten the offer on sanctions relief,? former US assistant secretary of state under the George W. Bush administration and veteran troubleshooter James Dobbins said at the report launch. Sanctions should be suspended, not dropped, he said, until Iran also demonstrates it can hold to its side of any bargain.

?Is the level of mistrust so high, that it doesn?t matter at the end of the day what we offer?? asks Limbert. ?Anything short of a full surrender ? and maybe even that ? the Iranians are going to say, ?Well, obviously this is some trick?we?re not sure how you?re doing it, but we know you are.??

The same applies to US suspicions of Iran, adds Limbert: ?That?s exactly the way the two sides operate. This nuclear issue has gotten so invested with manhood [that] neither side feels it can back down.?

HAS OBAMA ALREADY FAILED?

The Iran Project report is only the latest critique of White House handling of Iran that raises questions about missed opportunities and even the desire to make a deal.

The Atlantic Council earlier this month called for the US to prepare a roadmap that clarifies a ?step-by-step reciprocal and proportionate plan? to lift sanctions as Iran?s makes its own moves. ?To make meaningful concessions, Iran needs to see off-ramps and an endgame,? the Washington think tank concluded.

Likewise, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Federation of American Scientists this month determined: ?Washington?s overwhelming focus on coercion and military threats has backed US policymakers into a rhetorical corner.?

Yet a further report, published by the International Crisis Group in February, noted how Iran and the West ?view the sanctions through very dissimilar prisms.? While the US and Europe count on a ?cost-benefit analysis? such that Iran will eventually cave in to hardship, ?the world looks very different from Tehran [where] the one thing considered more perilous than suffering from sanctions is surrendering to them.?

That disconnect has bedeviled the Obama White House, writes former administration official Vali Nasr in a book published this month, ?The Dispensable Nation.?

?The dual-track policy only gave Iran a reason to dig in deeper and clutch its nuclear ambitions tighter,? writes Mr. Nasr, who is now dean of the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

?In the end, Obama?s Iran policy failed. He pushed ahead with sanctions for the same reason Lyndon Johnson kept up the bombing of North Vietnam ? neither could think of anything else to do," asserts Nasr. "Obama?s sanctions-heavy approach did not change Iranian behavior; instead it encouraged Iran to accelerate its race to nuclear capability.?

Creating a solution may require a change in approach, say the authors of The Iran Project report.

?We have to do something the Iranians aren?t expecting, that gets them to stop and say, ?Wait a minute? maybe the Americans are serious,?? said James Walsh, a non-proliferation expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, at the report launch.

?The only way this hard stuff will get done is if the President of the United States makes it his issue,? added Walsh. ?Absent that, we?re going to continue to do what we?ve done over and over again, only it will get worse.?

Related stories

Read this story at csmonitor.com

Become a part of the Monitor community

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/chorus-grows-against-obama-administrations-sanctions-heavy-iran-162700005.html

kawasaki disease resurrection masters tickets one direction tulsa news scalloped potatoes the ten commandments

Putin says Russia, U.S. work on security after Boston bombs

By Timothy Heritage

MOSCOW (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday the Boston bombing proved his tough line on insurgents in the North Caucasus was justified and that Russia and the United States must step up cooperation on security.

After receiving almost 2 million questions from the Baltic Sea to Russia's far east, Putin used his annual "hotline" dial-in to present the image of a man still in control a year into his third term and not afraid of criticism at home and abroad.

"If we truly join our efforts together, we will not allow these strikes and suffer such losses," he said in the phone-in, which critics say is looking increasingly outdated as he fields often predictable questions from loyal factory workers, airforce pilots and struggling mothers.

But this time he made sure there were some critical voices in the audience, with former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin taking him to task over economic decline. Putin shrugged off his criticism by jokingly calling him a "slacker".

Looking stern and occasionally shifting forward in his chair to make a point, Putin took questions on issues ranging from pensions and roads to the ethnic Chechens suspected of carrying out the Boston Marathon bombings.

He avoided criticizing the U.S. failure to prevent the bombings despite Russian concerns about the brothers, but he took the chance to justify using heavy force against Islamist militants who oppose Russian rule in the North Caucasus.

"We have always said that action is needed and not declarations. Now two criminals have confirmed the correctness of our thesis," the former KGB spy said.

Putin, who first asserted his authority by crushing a Chechen independence bid in a war over a decade ago, has long said the United States underestimates the security threat posed by the Islamist militants and rejected international accusations that Moscow's use of force in the region has been heavy-handed.

His remarks underlined his intention to use heightened concern over security to win closer cooperation with the United States in the run-up to the Sochi Winter Olympics next February.

The Olympics are a pet project for Putin and intended as a showcase of what Russia can achieve. A fatal attack on the Games would put those efforts in doubt.

PM'S DISMISSAL UNLIKELY

Putin, 60, was taking part in his first phone-in with the Russian public since returning to the presidency last May after four years as prime minister.

The phone-in, broadcast nationwide, has been an almost annual event since 2001 - he did not do one last year.

Critics say the format has become outmoded and shows Russia has not moved with the times under Putin, who is accused by the opposition of being out of touch and allowing the country to stagnate economically and politically.

But Putin, whose approval rating still hovers above 60 percent, spoke fluently and looked at ease as he reeled off figures and answered questions - all of which he appeared to expect - as he sat at a desk behind a laptop in a suit and tie.

One of his aims was clearly to show he has reasserted his grip on power, which was undermined just over a year ago during the biggest street protests since he first rose to power.

The protests have since dwindled and the opposition remains disjointed although critics accuse him of violating human rights with a clampdown on dissenters.

Putin also used the call-in to play down suggestions that he disagrees with his government over economic policy and show he will not respond to calls to dismiss Dmitry Medvedev, the long-time ally whom he replaced as president last year.

There has been speculation for months in the media and among political analysts that Putin could make Medvedev a scapegoat if Russia's economy continues to slide towards recession.

But in response to a question, Putin said: "There is no division between the government and the president, or the presidential administration (on the economy)."

He acknowledged there may be many complaints about the government's work but, indicating it needed time to prove itself, he said: "The people have only been in their jobs about a year."

(Additional reporting by Steve Gutterman, Douglas Busvine and Katya Golubkova; Editing by Elizabeth Piper)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/russias-putin-signals-not-sack-pm-over-economy-085841132.html

joe the plumber lra lra eric johnson eric johnson big east tournament ashley olsen

Wednesday, 10 April 2013

Selena Gomez Will 'Blossom' Into 'New J.Lo' On New Album

Producer Jason Evigan says the MTV Movie Awards performer's summer album proves 'she's not a little girl anymore.'
By Jocelyn Vena


Selena Gomez
Photo: Flanigan/ Getty Images

Source: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1705276/selena-gomez-blossom-into-jennifer-lopez.jhtml

reggie wayne taylor allderdice vincent jackson vicki gunvalson pierre garcon brown recluse spider wiz khalifa taylor allderdice

Ancient whales surprise scientists

Ancient DNA shows that bowhead whales bucked the trend to survive the last Ice Age, say scientists.

The demise of cold-adapted land mammals such as mammoths has been linked to rising temperatures around 11,000 years ago.

But researchers were surprised to find a contrasting population boom for whales living off the coast of Britain.

Their study is also the first to discover that the ocean giants lived in the southern North Sea.

Dr Andy Foote from the Natural History Museum of Denmark, based at the University of Copenhagen co-authored the paper published in the journal Nature Communications.

"Based on all previous studies using ancient DNA to estimate the population size... it seems the trend was for cold-adapted species either [to] go extinct or decline in numbers at the end of the Ice Age as the temperature increased," said Dr Foote.

But while the fate of now-extinct land-based Ice Age animals is well documented, little has been known about how marine animals were affected by the rapid temperature warming.

Bowhead whales today are found in Arctic seas and rely on sea ice where they feed on tiny crustaceans.

The research team wanted to find out how the whales fared during the rapid climate change of the Pleistocene-Holocene epoch transition when the essential sea ice retreated from their North Sea habitat.

Scientists analysed ancient DNA of partly-fossilised whale remains found in waters between Britain and Holland and around Denmark and Sweden.

They were able to use the data to create a habitat prediction model and build a picture of the whales' past movements and probability of survival.

On the move

The study showed that bowhead whales shifted their range, moving northwards to more suitable Arctic waters.

"The retreat of the ice in that particular case actually opened up very large areas where you all of a sudden had these ideal habitat conditions for these Arctic species," said Dr Kristin Kaschner, research affiliate at the University of Freiburg, Germany.

Explaining why these marine animals may have thrived at the end of the last Ice Age while many land mammals populations declined, she added: "Most marine mammals are used to migrating very long distances anyway... I think that's one of the things that worked in [the whales'] favour, that they were able to track their habitat."

"And then that combined with the fact that the retreat of ice actually opened up habitat was really favourable for them."

According to the model, the area of suitable habitat for bowhead whales tripled during the transitional period and the species saw a significant population increase at the same time.

The results show that Ice Age bowhead whales can be genetically identified as belonging to the same population found in the Arctic today, with lineages surviving from the late Pleistocene through to the current Holocene period.

Bowhead whales are thought to be the longest-living mammal in the world, with some individuals possibly even reaching up to 200 years of age.

But the north-eastern Atlantic bowhead whale population is now under threat from intense whaling, according to the researchers.

Their study also suggests that climate change today could present an "additional threat" to the whales. The team estimates that the Arctic animals' "core suitable habitat" could almost be halved by the end of the century, potentially influencing future populations.

Join BBC Nature on Facebook and Twitter @BBCNature.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/22027533

atlanta hawks 2012 white house correspondents dinner forrest gump bernard hopkins nfl draft grades devils la riots