Tuesday, July 17, 2007

File:New Zealand money.jpg

The New Zealand dollar (NZD) value rose and, for a short amount of time, was worth US$0.7932, the highest level in New Zealand since the dollar was floated in 1985 — 22 years ago.

The value then dropped a little and as of 11.40 a.m. was trading at US$0.7925. This was due to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand announcing that it will intervene next week at their Official Cash Rate review if the dollar continued to rise.

Economists are predicting that the NZD will now go above US$0.80.

The cause of this rise was mainly due to the release of the June quarter retail sales data. The consumer price index data showed that sales increased by 1.2%, instead of the predicted 0.4%. The bigger than expected sales data were mainly due to supermarket, car and petrol purchases. In May, the core sales figures showed a 0.8% rise, these figures excluded car and fuel sales.

Economist correspondents for Radio New Zealand have also said that a weak US dollar is also to blame for the rising New Zealand dollar. Danika Hampton, currency analyst for the Bank of New Zealand, says the NZD is looking expensive and doubts if it will maintain its current high figure.

Michael Cullen, the finance minister of New Zealand, has said that investors will be hurt when the New Zealand dollar does fall. Dr Cullen personally believes that the NZD is currently overvalued.

The Wellington Chamber of Commerce has called for the New Zealand Government to slow down it’s spending. Charles Finny, from the Chamber of Commerce, says this is one of the core factors, more than the oil and housing markets, despite speculation. Worldwide oil prices are at a current 11-month high.

The retails sales figures also resulted in Government bonds being weakened. The two-year and ten-year Government bonds are at 7.61% and 6.82% respectively.

The Official Cash Rate is currently at 8%, due to other interventions by the Reserve Bank.

The NZD is also trading well against the Australian dollar and Japanese yen.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Scientists have uncovered the largest Neolithic settlement in the United Kingdom at the Durrington Walls and believe that the village was inhabited by the people who built the Stonehenge monument.

Scientists say that the village was built around 2,600 B.C., roughly when Stonehenge was believed to have been constructed, and housed over 100 people.

Inside the areas which would have been the interior of houses at the time, scientists also found outlines of what they think were beds and cupboards or dressers. Pieces of pottery and “filthy” rubbish around the site. Animal bones, arrowheads, stone tools and other relics were also discovered.

“We’ve never seen such quantities of pottery and animal bone and flint. In what were houses, we have excavated the outlines on the floors of box beds and wooden dressers or cupboards,” said Sheffield University archaeologist Mike Parker Pearson.

So far, the dig has revealed at least 8 houses roughly 14-16 feet square, but scientists say that they think there may have been at least 25 altogether.

The site was likely to have been occupied only seasonally rather than year-round and evidence suggests that a lot of “partying” went on at the location.

“The animal bones are being thrown away half-eaten. It’s what we call a feasting assemblage. This is where they went to party – you could say it was the first free festival. The rubbish isn’t your average domestic debris. There’s a lack of craft-working equipment for cleaning animal hides and no evidence for crop-processing,” added Pearson.

The Durrington Walls are approximately 2 miles from the Stonehenge site.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Afghanistan is getting ready for a second-round presidential election between President Hamid Karzai and former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah. The second round comes after the election commission nullified nearly one million votes cast in August’s presidential polls. The investigation brought Mr. Karzai’s vote count below 50 percent, enough to trigger a runoff. The United Nations has begun delivering ballots across Afghanistan to prepare for the November 7 runoff.

U.S. President Barack Obama has said that the runoff reflects the will of the Afghan people and he may withhold his decision on U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan until after the new polls. The remarks followed his meeting with U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, who has just returned from the Afghan capital, Kabul.

“I think you really want to know that this has worked and you want to know what kind of government is coming out of it,” Obama said.

An analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, Haseeb Humayoon, believes Mr. Karzai may win again. “If we look at the numbers and how they have turned out, President Karzai has a much stronger base than Dr. Abdullah Abdullah and that may play a role in the second round as well,” he explained.

But questions remain about the deals Mr. Karzai struck with local powers of remote Afghan regions to win their support.

“I think one has to look at that with a lot of caution, because while electorally those deals might have returns, in terms of government efficiency down the line they are questionable,” Humayoon added.

However Rick Nelson at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. says it is wrong to look at the Afghan political landscape through a Western lens.

“President Karzai has been very aggressive in trying to cut deals and trying to build partnerships,” he noted. “But given the circumstances in which he is trying to operate, if he can cut deals with rival factions and it results in a stable Afghanistan, that is something we may want to support.”

Another scenario presented by some experts is one in which the August election runner up, Mr. Abdullah, wins this time around. Nelson says he may not belong to the Pashtun majority tribe, but he is not that different politically than Mr. Karzai.

“He is not a full Pashtun, he is a little bit Tajik as well, and that may change the dynamics with the United States,” Mr. Nelson added. “But it probably is not going to change the overall U.S. policy too much.”

There is also the chance that the two contenders will come up with some sort of an agreement to share power and avoid the runoff. While some analysts say this is unlikely, Nelson is optimistic.

“If there is a unity government in advance, it certainly puts the whole election legitimacy question aside, and will enable the United States and NATO to move forward in their partnership with Afghanistan,” he said.

In Washington, U.S. officials have said a power-sharing arrangement between the two leaders would be totally up to the Afghans.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

France has dispatched a special envoy to North Korea for talks that are expected to focus on establishing diplomatic ties with Pyongyang and possibly on the country’s nuclear program.

French special envoy Jack Lang arrived in North Korea for a five-day visit that could mark a turnaround in relations with the country. France is the only major European country not to have formal ties with Pyongyang, and it never recognised the country after it split from Korea following the Korean War. Some international observers consider dispatching a high-level envoy like Lang, a former French minister, an unusual move.

France is not a member of the six-party talks aimed to end North Korea’s nuclear-weapons program, but it is one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Lang told news agencies the French government could play a role in reviving the stalled six-party talks. He noted that he would “discuss all the problems, [and] the nuclear question, naturally.”

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Evan Wolfson, the founder of the modern gay marriage movement, tells the waiter he would like an iced decaf and “the usual.” Wolfson, one of Time Magazine’s Most Influential People in the World, is a man who unflinchingly knows what he wants and stays his course, whether it be in his choice of restaurant or in his choice of battle. And others always know when they see Evan coming what it is that he wants.

Since his time at Harvard Law School when he wrote a paper on the topic, what Wolfson wants is the right for gay people to marry. The issue gained national prominence in 1993 when the Hawaii Supreme Court held in Baehr v. Lewin that the government had to show a reason for the denial of the freedom to marry, not just deny marriage licenses to the plaintiff gay couples. Wolfson was co-counsel in the historic 1996 Hawaii trial in which he argued that the government does not have a sufficient reason for excluding same-sex couples from marriage. In 1999, Wolfson contributed to Baker v. Vermont, the case that led to the creation of civil unions; advised the lead attorneys in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, the case that led to same-sex marriage in Massachusetts; and since 2003, when he founded the primary umbrella organization coordinating the efforts to win marriage for gay people, Freedom to Marry, Wolfson has played a role in every marriage equality case in the United States. He is the movement’s founder and leader, and his focus remains square on winning that right. “For years,” said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, “many of us were saying to him, ‘We’re not ready. The country’s not ready. And, by the way, you’re crazy.'”

When I make a statement to him about his devoting his life to gay marriage, he corrects me: “I’ve played a part in cases that span the entire spectrum of eliminating gay people’s exclusions and limitations on who gay people are, and I’ve also written on immigration and economic justice, and I have worked on cases involving race discrimination in jury selection and women’s inequality. I don’t think one has to pick one of these things; they work together.”

Indeed, he has. Wolfson was lead counsel before the Supreme Court in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the case arguing against the expulsion of gay scoutmasters. As an intrepid young assistant district attorney in Brooklyn, Wolfson worked on People v. Liberta to end the exemption that allowed women to be raped by their husbands legally, a right in New York State as early as 1984. And he helped end the practice of choosing jurors based upon their race.

Wolfson’s entire career has been at the center of the most explosive legal and cultural issues of the last 30 years in the United States, and his influence has been profound. David Shankbone sat down with him to discuss some of the recent decisions affecting gay marriage, gender in marriage and reactions in the gay community to his fight for their rights.

Saturday, March 15, 2008

The Internet group Anonymous today held further protests critical of the Church of Scientology.

The global protests started in Australia where several hundred protesters gathered at different locations for peaceful protests.

In a global speech, the Internet protest movement said Scientology “betrayed the trust of its members, [had] taken their money, their rights, and at times their very lives.” The protesters welcomed the public interest their protests have led to, and claimed they witnessed “an unprecedented flood of Scientologists [joining] us across the world to testify about these abuses.” The group said it would continue with monthly actions.

In a press statement from its European headquarters, Scientology accused the anonymous protesters of “hate speech and hate crimes”, alleging that security measures were necessary because of death threats and bomb threats. This also makes the Church want to “identify members” of the group it brands as “cyber-terrorists”.

Wikinews had correspondents in a number of protest locations to report on the events.

Anonymous states that the next protest is scheduled to take place on April 18, which happens to be the birthday of Suri, the daughter of Tom and Katie Cruise.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

A grassroots movement known as Restore the Fourth, dedicated to the protection of the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution, are to hold protests countrywide on July 4. The planned protests come in the wake of information about NSA surveillance leaked last month, notably the PRISM surveillance program and the collection of Verizon phone records. Wikinews interviewed Jett, a national organizer from this recently created movement.

((Wikinews)) First of all, could you explain what Restore the Fourth is all about?

Jett: At its core, RestoreTheFourth is about protecting citizens’ constitutional rights. Specifically, we’re dedicated to bringing awareness and action to the expanding overreach and elimination of the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution.

((WN)) What is your role at Restore the Fourth?

Jett: My job at RestoreTheFourth could be summarized as ‘project coordinator’. Every person who wants to help can help in a tremendous way. I simply make sure that their skills get used in a way that would be most beneficial to the movement: web development, public relations, etc. I also field questions from the press and promote knowledge of our cause.

((WN)) What are your plans for direct action, outreach, etc.?

Jett: Our press release includes a list of ‘demands’ for what we want to see in order to restore our privacy rights, including reform of the PATRIOT Act and increased accountability for public officials. In the very short term, these protests and demonstrations bring awareness to the issue, something that’s really important in enacting reform. In the long term, however, we expect to create a legal organization dedicated to restoring these rights inherent to every American. By partnering with various other organizations that share our moral values, we can further these goals.

On July 4, we will have over 100 protests in all 50 states, showing that the citizens of America are truly serious about protecting their rights.

((WN)) By what means do you hope to achieve such change?

Jett: This movement started only a few weeks ago, and since then we’ve experienced exponential growth and progress. Since the movement is still very young, plans diverge in the long term on what we hope to achieve. Personally, I’d like to see a combination of legislative and litigative action (something like what the ACLU does), and others want to see further plans of action. With organizations such as the BORDC, stopwatching.us and the EFF behind us, I feel that we can achieve all of this and much more.

((WN)) Is the movement US-only or will it extend to other jurisdictions as well? Do you think it would be fair for the US to spy on non-citizens?

Jett: I believe that rights are inherent to all humans, not only United States citizens. In the long term I’d certainly like to see people of all nations protected from the slow elimination of privacy that we’re all experiencing.

((WN)) What do you think about Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing?

Jett: I think that too much attention is being given to his personality instead of what he fought for. He’s being treated as a ‘martyr’ of sorts. It seems to distract from what he truly believed in — transparency for the government and inherent privacy for all Americans.

((WN)) What do you think about his future, given the legal grey zone in which he currently is?

Jett: Hard to say. He may be captured by any number of agencies, or he may live a free man. Whatever happens, he has the eyes of millions of people on him, all of whom will yell very loudly if anything occurs.

((WN)) Thank you very much for your time.

Jett: Thanks for the opportunity.

[edit]