Horse Meat in European Beef Raises Questions on U.S. Exposure





The alarm in Europe over the discovery of horse meat in beef products escalated again Monday, when the Swedish furniture giant Ikea withdrew an estimated 1,670 pounds of meatballs from sale in 14 European countries.




Ikea acted after authorities in the Czech Republic detected horse meat in its meatballs. The company said it had made the decision even though its tests two weeks ago did not detect horse DNA.


Horse meat mixed with beef was first found last month in Ireland, then Britain, and has now expanded steadily across the Continent. The situation in Europe has created unease among American consumers over whether horse meat might also find its way into the food supply in the United States. Here are answers to commonly asked questions on the subject.


Has horse meat been found in any meatballs sold in Ikea stores in the United States?


Ikea says there is no horse meat in the meatballs it sells in the United States. The company issued a statement on Monday saying meatballs sold in its 38 stores in the United States were bought from an American supplier and contained beef and pork from animals raised in the United States and Canada.


“We do not tolerate any other ingredients than the ones stipulated in our recipes or specifications, secured through set standards, certifications and product analysis by accredited laboratories,” Ikea said in its statement.


Mona Liss, a spokeswoman for Ikea, said by e-mail that all of the businesses that supply meat to its meatball maker  issue letters guaranteeing that they will not misbrand or adulterate their products. “Additionally, as an abundance of caution, we are in the process of DNA-testing our meatballs,” Ms. Liss wrote. “Results should be concluded in 30 days.”


Does the United States import any beef from countries where horse meat has been found?


No. According to the Department of Agriculture, the United States imports no beef from any of the European countries involved in the scandal. Brian K. Mabry, a spokesman for the department’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, said: “Following a decision by Congress in November 2011 to lift the ban on horse slaughter, two establishments, one located in New Mexico and one in Missouri, have applied for a grant of inspection exclusively for equine slaughter. The Food Safety and Inspection Service (F.S.I.S.) is currently reviewing those applications.”


Has horse meat been found in ground meat products sold in the United States?


No. Meat products sold in the United States must pass Department of Agriculture inspections, whether produced domestically or imported. No government financing has been available for inspection of horse meat for human consumption in the United States since 2005, when the Humane Society of the United States got a rider forbidding financing for inspection of horse meat inserted in the annual appropriations bill for the Agriculture Department. Without inspection, such plants may not operate legally.


The rider was attached to every subsequent agriculture appropriations bill until 2011, when it was left out of an omnibus spending bill signed by President Obama on Nov. 18. The U.S.D.A.  has not committed any money for the inspection of horse meat.


“We’re real close to getting some processing plants up and running, but there are no inspectors because the U.S.D.A. is working on protocols,” said Dave Duquette, a horse trader in Oregon and president of United Horsemen, a small group that works to retrain and rehabilitate unwanted horses and advocates the slaughter of horses for meat. “We believe very strongly that the U.S.D.A. is going to bring inspectors online directly.”


Are horses slaughtered for meat for human consumption in the United States?


Not currently, although live horses from the United States are exported to slaughterhouses in Canada and Mexico. The lack of inspection effectively ended the slaughter of horse meat for human consumption in the United States; 2007 was the last year horses were slaughtered in the United States. At the time financing of inspections was banned, a Belgian company operated three horse meat processing plants — in Fort Worth and Kaufman, Tex., and DeKalb, Ill. — but exported the meat it produced in them.


Since 2011, efforts have been made to re-establish the processing of horse meat for human consumption in the United States. A small plant in Roswell, N.M., which used to process beef cattle into meat has been retooled to slaughter 20 to 25 horses a day. But legal challenges have prevented it from opening, Mr. Duquette said. Gov. Susana Martinez of New Mexico opposes opening the plant and has asked the U.S.D.A. to block it.


Last month, the two houses of the Oklahoma Legislature passed separate bills to override a law against the slaughter of horses for meat but kept the law’s ban on consumption of such meat by state residents. California, Illinois, New Jersey, Tennessee and Texas prohibit horse slaughter for human consumption.


Is there a market for horse meat in the United States?


Mr. Duquette said horse meat was popular among several growing demographic groups in the United States, including Tongans, Mongolians and various Hispanic populations. He said he knew of at least 10 restaurants that wanted to buy horse meat. “People are very polarized on this issue,” he said. Wayne Pacelle, chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States, disagreed, saying demand in the United States was limited. Italy is the largest consumer of horse meat, he said, followed by France and Belgium.


Is horse meat safe to eat?


That is a matter of much debate between proponents and opponents of horse meat consumption. Mr. Duquette said that horse meat, some derived from American animals processed abroad, was eaten widely around the world without health problems. “It’s high in protein, low in fat and has a whole lot of omega 3s,” he said.


The Humane Society says that because horse meat is not consumed in the United States, the animals’ flesh is likely to contain residues of many drugs that are unsafe for humans to eat. The organization’s list of drugs given to horses runs to 29 pages.


“We’ve been warning the Europeans about this for years,” Mr. Pacelle said. “You have all these food safety standards in Europe — they do not import chicken carcasses from the U.S. because they are bathed in chlorine, and won’t take pork because of the use of ractopamine in our industry — but you’ve thrown out the book when it comes to importing horse meat from North America.”


The society has filed petitions with the Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration, arguing that they should test horse meat before allowing it to be marketed in the United States for humans to eat.


This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 25, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated how many pounds of meatballs Ikea was withdrawing from sale in 14 European countries. It is 1,670 pounds, not 1.67 billion pounds.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 25, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the last year that horses were slaughtered in the United States. It is 2007, not 2006.




Read More..

DealBook: Banks Fear Court Ruling in Argentina Bond Debt

A fierce battle between the government of Argentina and hedge funds and other investors led by a group of hedge funds has already led to the seizure of a naval ship and dragged in the United States Treasury. Now a federal appeals court is hearing the dispute, and how it rules could have a major impact on world debt markets.

The investors — including the hedge fund tycoon Paul E. Singer — sued Argentina seeking payment for $1.3 billion relating to bonds that the country defaulted on in 2001. On Wednesday, the case comes before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which has already sided with the hedge funds on their main arguments.

But the issue that the appeals court is still undecided about is perhaps the most important. It involves devising a method to pressure Argentina to pay up on the disputed bonds. And that has left the investors who hold a majority of Argentina’s foreign debt vulnerable, as well as the banks that process the payments to those investors.

While the hedge funds have grabbed the headlines — winning a temporary court order to seize an Argentine naval ship docked in Ghana, for example — most of the other holders of Argentina’s nearly $100 billion in defaulted debt agreed over the last decade to accept new bonds, taking big losses in the process. The country has since faithfully paid on the exchange bonds.

At the same time, Argentina has vehemently repeated that it will not pay the hedge funds and other holders of its old debt and has passed laws forbidding the government from paying anything to the bondholders who didn’t participate in the exchanges.

But last year, Judge Thomas P. Griesa of the Federal District Court in Manhattan ruled that if Argentina wanted to pay the holders of the restructured debt, it would have to pay the hedge funds and other holders of the defaulted debt, too. The judge included third-party banks in his injunction, and prohibited them from processing payments to holders of the exchange bonds unless all debt holders were paid.

Large banks, investors and the United States Treasury Department have objected to the judge’s order. In short, they say, using the sanction could cause financial losses for innocent bystanders and lead to unnecessary disruption in the bond markets.

“They are trying to block the payments system,” said Vladimir Werning, executive director for Latin American research at JPMorgan Chase. “This is unprecedented in the New York jurisdiction.”

In an e-mail, Kevin Heine, a spokesman for Bank of New York Mellon, which handles bond payments, said the ruling, “will create unrest in the credit markets and result in cascades of litigation, which is precisely the opposite effect that an injunction should have.”

A ruling in favor of the hedge funds would also have ripple effects throughout the debt markets.

“Any time you have something that can change of balance of power, it can matter beyond Argentina,” said Robert Kahn, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Despite the legal worries, investors have so far been keen to hold higher-yielding emerging markets debt, given that interest rates are so low. Apart from Argentine bonds, debt issued by developing countries has performed strongly.

Unlike Argentina, some countries have held their noses and cut deals with holdouts in the past to get on with important economic overhauls, most recently Greece on certain smaller foreign-law bonds.

And in the years since Argentina’s default, most sovereign bonds have special clauses in them that make it much harder for holdouts to succeed. These are called collective action clauses, which state that if a certain majority of bondholders agree to take losses in a bond restructuring, those losses would be forced on all bondholders, even would-be holdouts who don’t agree.

But large amounts of bonds, those issued more than 10 years ago, do not have collective action clauses. And those that do have the clauses may not act as intended if the holdouts win their Argentina case, said Mr. Werning of JPMorgan.

Right now, a bond with a collective action clause might get restructured if 75 percent of the holders agree to it. If Judge Griesa’s ruling is upheld, more bondholders might be reluctant to enter a restructuring and the required majority might not be achieved. Bondholders might not enter the restructuring because they fear holdout litigation depriving them of payments later on.

“This could adversely affect the level of participation in a swap,” Mr. Werning said.

Still, others contend that the market for sovereign debt may be improved if the judge’s ruling is upheld, with the sanction on payments banks mostly intact. Countries like Argentina, they say, have taken advantage of the fact that there is no bankruptcy regime in the sovereign debt market to allow creditors to recoup money in a default. Indeed, Judge Griesa has said the Argentina case is partly about creating safeguards for creditors in the absence of bankruptcy regime.

But Anna Gelpern, a professor at the Washington College of Law at the American University, said that if the federal court’s rulings are upheld, it might just end up underscoring the limitations of the American courts’ power.

“What if Argentina still doesn’t settle? How does the court look then?” she said. “It can only isolate Argentina and Argentina seems content to be isolated.”

While there is a chance that the appellate court’s decision could be appealed to the United States Supreme Court, it is more likely that its ruling will be the final word on the lower court order.

According to that order, if a bank chose to channel payments from Argentina to the owners of the restructured debt, the bank would not be in compliance with his order. A payments bank, Bank of New York Mellon in the case of Argentine exchange bonds, would then decline to process the exchange bond payments, and the bonds could fall into default, inflicting big losses on their holders.

Some market specialists have raised the prospect that Argentina could keep paying the exchange bondholders by avoiding payments banks that operate in the United States. It could, for instance, swap the exchange bonds for new instruments registered under Argentine law that make payments through an Argentine entity.

But the court may decide that, in such a situation, the exchange bondholders themselves would be breaking its injunction. One of the things the appeals court is looking into is how to determine which third parties should sit outside the reach of the district court’s ruling.

It is not just hedge funds who are hoping to gain from an affirmation of the lower court ruling. This group also includes many individual investors, who are now feeling more optimistic about getting their money back as the case comes before the appeals court.

“We are hopeful the ruling will stay as issued,” said Horacio Vázquez, who helps lead a group in Buenos Aires that represents bondholders.

Read More..

DealBook: Barnes & Noble Founder Leonard Riggio to Bid for Bookstore's Retail Business

The founder of Barnes & Noble plans to bid for the retail business of the bookstore chain he started 40 years ago, as the company struggles to deal with the changing competitive landscape.

On Monday, Leonard Riggio told the company’s board that he will make an offer for Barnes & Noble Booksellers, barnesandnoble.com and other retail assets. The proposal would not include the e-book division, Nook Media.

Like many retailers, Barnes & Nobles is dealing with waning profit in its core business, as online players and other competitors gain marketshare. The company recently warned that earnings in the latest quarter would be weak, with losses rising in its Nook Media division.

Conceived as a serious competitor to Amazon.com’s Kindle, the Nook has instead become an also-ran in the race for digital book supremacy. The Kindle remains the top-selling dedicated e-reader, while the iPad consistently leads the competition among tablets.

Amazon’s Kindle app has also maintained a huge lead in popularity, limiting Barnes & Noble’s reach across the broader digital book-selling landscape.

Mr. Riggio, who owns nearly 30 percent of Barnes & Noble, plans to negotiate the price with the board, according to a regulatory filing. The proposal is expected to be mainly in cash.

It is the boldest move yet by Mr. Riggio to try and save the company he built into the nation’s biggest brick-and-mortar bookseller. He has fended off challenges from the likes of the billionaire Ronald Burkle, arguing in large part that the company was well-positioned in the future by betting on the Nook and digital books.

Others believed in the promise of the e-reader as well. Last April, Microsoft paid $300 million for a 17.6 percent stake in the Nook business, valuing it then at $1.7 billion. The technology titan also secured Barnes & Noble’s commitment to produce an e-reader app for its Windows 8 operating system.

And in December, the British publisher Pearson agreed to buy a 5 percent stake for $89.5 million.

Barnes & Noble said in a statement that it has formed a special board committee comprised of three directors — David G. Golden, David A. Wilson and Patricia L. Higgins — to consider Mr. Riggio’s proposal. The trio will be advised by Evercore Partners and the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison.

The retailer’s board had already been weighing whether to spin off its Nook unit.

Read More..

'Argo' wins best picture on scattered Oscar night


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Just as Oscar host Seth MacFarlane set his sights on a variety of targets with a mixture of hits and misses, the motion picture academy spread the gold around to a varied slate of films. "Argo" won best picture as expected, along with two other prizes. But "Life of Pi" won the most awards with four, including a surprise win for director Ang Lee.


"Les Miserables" also won three Academy Awards, while "Django Unchained" and "Skyfall" each took two.


Among the winners were the front-runners throughout this lengthy awards season: best actor Daniel Day-Lewis for his deeply immersed portrayal of Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg's epic "Lincoln," best actress Jennifer Lawrence as a troubled young widow in "Silver Linings Playbook" and supporting actress Anne Hathaway as the doomed prostitute Fantine in the musical "Les Miserables." Christoph Waltz was a bit of a surprise for supporting actor as a charismatic bounty hunter in Quentin Tarantino's "Django Unchained," an award he'd won just three years ago for Tarantino's "Inglorious Basterds."


The 22-year-old Lawrence, who got to show her lighter side in the oddball romance "Silver Linings Playbook" following serious roles in "Winter's Bone" and "The Hunger Games," gamely laughed at herself as she tripped on the stairs en route to the stage in her poufy, pale pink Dior Haute Couture gown. Backstage in the press room, when a reporter asked what she was thinking, she responded: "A bad word that I can't say that starts with 'F.'" Keeping journalists in hysterics, she explained, "I'm sorry. I did a shot before I ... sorry."


That's the kind of raunchiness MacFarlane himself seemed to be aiming for as host while also balancing the more traditional demands of the job. There was a ton of singing and dancing during the three-and-half-hour broadcast — no surprise from the musically minded creator of the animated series "Family Guy" — including a poignant performance from Barbra Streisand of "The Way We Were," written by the late Marvin Hamlisch, during the memorial montage. But MacFarlane also tried to keep the humor edgy with shots at Mel Gibson, George Clooney, Chris Brown and Rihanna.


An extended bit in which William Shatner came back from the future as his "Star Trek" character, Capt. James T. Kirk, had its moments while a joke about the drama "Flight" being restaged entirely with sock puppets was a scream. A John Wilkes Booth gag in reference to "Lincoln" was a bit of a groaner, perhaps intentionally, while MacFarlane relied on his alter ego, the cuddly teddy bear from his directorial debut "Ted," to make a crack about a post-Oscar orgy at Jack Nicholson's house. (MacFarlane already has indicated he's one-and-done with Academy Awards hosting.)


But it was Day-Lewis who came up with the kind of pop-culture riffing that's MacFarlane's specialty. In accepting his record third best-actor award from presenter Meryl Streep, he deadpanned that before they'd swapped roles, he originally was set to play Margaret Thatcher "and Meryl was Steven's first choice for 'Lincoln,' and I'd like to see that version."


Besides best picture, "Argo" won for Chris Terrio's adapted screenplay and for William Goldenberg's film editing. Affleck famously (and strangely) wasn't included in the best-director category for his thrilling and surprisingly funny depiction of a daring rescue during the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis. But as a producer on the film alongside George Clooney and Grant Heslov, he got to take home the top prize of the night.


"I never thought I'd be back here, and I am because of so many of you in this academy," said Affleck, who shared a screenplay Oscar with pal Matt Damon 15 years earlier for their breakout film "Good Will Hunting."


Among the wisdom he's acquired since then: "You can't hold grudges — it's hard but you can't hold grudges."


Lee, who previously won best director in 2006 for "Brokeback Mountain" (which also didn't win best picture), was typically low-key and self-deprecating in victory. His "Life of Pi" is a fable set in glorious 3-D, but Spielberg looked like the favorite for "Lincoln." The film also won for its cinematography, original score and visual effects.


"Thank you, movie god," the Taiwanese director said on stage. Later, he thanked his agents and said: "I have to do that," with a little shrug and a smile.


"Les Miserables" also won for sound mixing and makeup and hairstyling. The other Oscar for "Django Unchained" came for Tarantino's original screenplay. Asked about his international appeal backstage, Tarantino was enthusiastic as usual in saying: "I'm an American, and a filmmaker, but I make movies for the planet Earth."


Speaking of global hits, the James Bond action thriller "Skyfall" won for its original song by the unstoppable Adele (with Paul Epworth). It also tied for sound editing with "Zero Dark Thirty," the only win of the night for Kathryn Bigelow's detailed saga about the hunt for Osama bin Laden.


Among the other winners, "Searching for Sugar Man," about a forgotten musician's rediscovery, took the prize for best documentary feature. Pixar's fairy tale "Brave" won best animated feature.


One of the biggest moments of the night came at the end, as First Lady Michelle Obama announced the winner of the best picture prize. Backstage, Affleck described how surreal it was when he heard her say the word: "Argo."


"I was sort of hallucinating when that was happening," he explained. "In the course of a hallucination it doesn't seem that odd: 'Oh look, a purple elephant. Oh look, Michelle Obama.'"


___


Contact AP Movie Critic Christy Lemire through Twitter: http://twitter.com/christylemire


Read More..

Mediterranean Diet Can Cut Heart Disease, Study Finds





About 30 percent of heart attacks, strokes and deaths from heart disease can be prevented in people at high risk if they switch to a Mediterranean diet rich in olive oil, nuts, beans, fish, fruits and vegetables, and even drink wine with meals, a large and rigorous new study found.




The findings, published on the New England Journal of Medicine’s Web site on Monday, were based on the first major clinical trial to measure the diet’s effect on heart risks. The magnitude of the diet’s benefits startled experts. The study ended early, after almost five years, because the results were so clear it was considered unethical to continue.


The diet helped those following it even though they did not lose weight and most of them were already taking statins, or blood pressure or diabetes drugs to lower their heart disease risk.


“Really impressive,” said Rachel Johnson, a professor of nutrition at the University of Vermont and a spokeswoman for the American Heart Association. “And the really important thing — the coolest thing — is that they used very meaningful end points. They did not look at risk factors like cholesterol of hypertension or weight. They looked at heart attacks and strokes and death. At the end of the day, that is what really matters.”


Until now, evidence that the Mediterranean diet reduced the risk of heart disease was weak, based mostly on studies showing that people from Mediterranean countries seemed to have lower rates of heart disease — a pattern that could have been attributed to factors other than diet.


And some experts had been skeptical that the effect of diet could be detected, if it existed at all, because so many people are already taking powerful drugs to reduce heart disease risk, while other experts hesitated to recommend the diet to people who already had weight problems, since oils and nuts have a lot of calories.


Heart disease experts said the study was a triumph because it showed that a diet is powerful in reducing heart disease risk, and it did so using the most rigorous methods. Scientists randomly assigned 7,447 people in Spain who were overweight, were smokers, had diabetes or other risk factors for heart disease to follow the Mediterranean diet or a low-fat one.


Low-fat diets have not been shown in any rigorous way to be helpful, and they are also very hard for patients to maintain — a reality born out in the new study, said Dr. Steven E. Nissen, chairman of the department of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation.


“Now along comes this group and does a gigantic study in Spain that says you can eat a nicely balanced diet with fruits and vegetables and olive oil and lower heart disease by 30 percent,” he said. “And you can actually enjoy life.”


The study, by Dr. Ramon Estruch, a professor of medicine at the University of Barcelona, and his colleagues, was long in the planning. The investigators traveled the world, seeking advice on how best to answer the question of whether a diet alone could make a big difference in heart disease risk. They visited the Harvard School of Public Health several times to consult Dr. Frank M. Sacks, a professor of cardiovascular disease prevention there.


In the end, they decided to randomly assign subjects at high risk of heart disease to three groups. One would be given a low-fat diet and counseled on how to follow it. The other two groups would be counseled to follow a Mediterranean diet. At first the Mediterranean dieters got more intense support. They met regularly with dietitians while the low-fat group just got an initial visit to train them in how to adhere to the diet followed by a leaflet each year on the diet. Then the researchers decided to add more intensive counseling for them, too, but they still had difficulty staying with the diet.


One group assigned to a Mediterranean diet was given extra virgin olive oil each week and was instructed to use at least 4 tablespoons a day. The other group got a combination of walnuts, almonds and hazelnuts and was instructed to eat about an ounce of them each day. An ounce of walnuts, for example, is about a quarter cup — a generous handful. The mainstays of the diet consisted of at least 3 servings a day of fruits and at least two servings of vegetables. Participants were to eat fish at least three times a week and legumes, which include beans, peas and lentils, at least three times a week. They were to eat white meat instead of red, and, for those accustomed to drinking, to have at least 7 glasses of wine a week with meals.


They were encouraged to avoid commercially made cookies, cakes and pastries and to limit their consumption of dairy products and processed meats.


Read More..

DealBook: Barnes & Noble Founder Leonard Riggio to Bid for Bookstore's Retail Business

The founder of Barnes & Noble plans to bid for the retail business of the bookstore chain he started 40 years ago, as the company struggles to deal with the changing competitive landscape.

On Monday, Leonard Riggio told the company’s board that he will make an offer for Barnes & Noble Booksellers, barnesandnoble.com and other retail assets. The proposal would not include the e-book division, Nook Media.

Like many retailers, Barnes & Nobles is dealing with waning profit in its core business, as online players and other competitors gain marketshare. The company recently warned that earnings in the latest quarter would be weak, with losses rising in its Nook Media division.

Mr. Riggio, who owns nearly 30 percent of Barnes & Noble, plans to negotiate the price with the board, according to a regulatory filing. The proposal is expected to be mainly in cash.

It is the boldest move yet by Mr. Riggio to try and save the company he built into the nation’s biggest brick-and-mortar bookseller. He has fended off challenges from the likes of the billionaire Ronald Burkle, arguing in large part that the company was well-positioned in the future by betting on the Nook and digital books.

Others believed in the promise of the e-reader as well. Last year, Microsoft paid $300 million for a 17.6 percent stake in the Nook business, valuing it then at $1.7 billion. The technology titan also secured Barnes & Noble’s commitment to produce an e-reader app for its Windows 8 operating system.

Barnes & Noble said in a statement that it has formed a special board committee comprised of three directors — David G. Golden, David A. Wilson and Patricia L. Higgins — to consider Mr. Riggio’s proposal. The trio will be advised by Evercore Partners and the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison.

The retailer’s board had already been weighing whether to spin off its Nook unit.

Read More..

Insurgents Launch 4 Attacks in Afghanistan







KABUL — Afghan intelligence agents on Sunday shot and killed a man in a sport utility vehicle that officials said had been packed with explosives, foiling what they described as an attempt to set off a massive explosion in a neighborhood of narrow streets lined with foreign embassies.




At about the same time, Taliban suicide attackers set off three separate car bombs in two provinces near the capital. But the bombs did minimal damage,  officials said, and the toll from the Sunday violence was low. In addition to the two attackers and the suspect, two security guards and a police officer were also killed and five other people wounded, including one attacker who managed to flee.


A spokesman for the Taliban, Zabiullah Mujahid, said the insurgents were behind the three successful bombings. But he disavowed knowledge of the attempt in Kabul, saying Taliban commanders in the city had no plans for an attack on Sunday.


While it is not unusual for the Taliban to deny having a hand in a failed attack, much about the attempted bombing Sunday remained murky, with officials hailing Afghan security forces for acting quickly but offering only the barest details about how the man identified as a bomber was spotted.


The police chief of Kabul, Gen. Mohammed Ayoub Salangi, said the suspect was in a Toyota sport utility vehicle and was trying to pass through a checkpoint when he was recognized by agents from the country’s intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security.


The man “was gunned down,” General Salangi said. The agents had to act quickly, he added, saying that there was no time to inspect the vehicle or question the suspect because that would have given him the chance to detonate the explosives.


General Salangi, who in an earlier statement said there were two men in the car, did not say how or why the agents recognized the man. But he added that the car bomb was quickly defused and carted away.


The bombing attempt, in the Wazir Akbar Khan neighborhood, led some embassies to did briefly lock down the streets on which they are located and on which they control security. The spot where the man was shot were was less than a mile from the United States Embassy and the headquarters of the American-led coalition, neither of which offered any comment.


Earlier in the day, in Jalalabad, a city in eastern Afghanistan, a single bomber in a Toyota Corolla directly targeted the Security Directorate, officials said, detonating his explosive-laden vehicle outside a building used by the intelligence agency. Two guards were killed and a third was wounded, said Hazrat Mohammad Mashraqiwal, a police spokesman in Jalalabad.


Later on Sunday, two people in another car laden with explosives tried to enter the district governor’s compound in Baraki Barak district of Logar Province, south of Kabul. But they were stopped by police officers guarding the compound, prompting one man to jump and make a run for it and the other to set off the car bomb, said Abdul Rahim Amin, the governor.


One police officer was wounded in the attack, along with the man who fled.


Earlier in Logar, around dawn, a minivan packed with explosives was set off at a police post near the provincial capital, Pul-e-Alam. One officer was killed and two others wounded, an official said.


Sharifullah Sahak contributed reporting.


Read More..

Dozens of stars spend Saturday at Oscar rehearsals


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Some dressed down in jeans and hoodies. Others looked camera-ready in suits or chic dresses and spiky stilettos.


But all of the stars who rehearsed Saturday for the 85th Academy Awards seemed excited about being a part of the big show.


They paraded through the Dolby Theatre in 15-minute increments: Meryl Streep. Ben Affleck. Reese Witherspoon. Richard Gere. Jennifer Aniston. John Travolta. Nicole Kidman. Jack Nicholson. And dozens more.


Each practiced their lines in front of an audience of show workers and awarded prop Oscars to rehearsal actors. They also scanned the theater from the stage, searching for their show-night seats.


"Oh, wow. That's a very dramatic picture of me," best-actress nominee Jessica Chastain said after spotting her seat-saving placard. "I'm looking at everyone's headshots. It's kind of incredible."


Affleck confessed his excitement from the stage as he looked out at all the famous faces expected Sunday.


"This is like the most memorable aspect of the Oscars," the "Argo" director said. "You see all these place cards (at rehearsal), then you come back and they're all here!"


Affleck also chatted backstage with the college students who won a contest to serve as trophy carriers during the ceremony.


"I love that," he said. "It's super cool."


Travolta also took time with the students.


"I was there when that idea was born and I said it was the best idea they could possibly come up with," he told the aspiring filmmakers backstage. "And here you are!"


Travolta plans to bring his 13-year-old daughter, Ella Bleu, to the ceremony.


Kidman made rehearsals a family affair. Husband Keith Urban and their eldest daughter, Sunday, watched from the audience as Kidman ran through her lines.


She looked impeccable in a wine-colored dress and tall, metallic shoes, but other stars were decidedly more casual. Kristen Stewart arrived in jeans, sneakers and a backward ballcap. (She also limped on an injured right foot.) Renee Zellweger also opted for comfort in jeans and running shoes.


The cast of "Chicago," including Gere, Zellweger, Queen Latifah and Catherine Zeta-Jones, injected their rehearsal with silliness. Latifah purposely over-enunciated her lines, and when a pair of rehearsal actors claimed an Oscar onstage and gave an acceptance speech, Zeta-Jones started to play them off with an imaginary violin.


"Get outta here!" Gere said with a smile.


Octavia Spencer, who won the supporting actress Oscar last year for her performance in "The Help," also had a little fun.


"I'm going to do a soft-shoe," she said, shuffling off stage.


Streep and Jane Fonda were each wowed by the set design. Fonda snapped a photo of it with her iPhone, and Streep marveled at how far the walk to the microphone was.


"All the way to here?!" she asked. "Oh my God."


Halle Berry literally stumbled during her first rehearsal, her pointy heel catching on part of the stage. She insisted on trying again.


"Woo hoo," she said. "Made it."


___


AP Entertainment Writer Sandy Cohen is on Twitter: www.twitter.com/APSandy .


___


Online:


www.oscars.org


Jane Fonda even took a picture of the stage with her iPhone.


The Academy Awards will be presented Sunday and broadcast live on ABC.


Read More..

The Texas Tribune: Advocates Seek Mental Health Changes, Including Power to Detain


Matt Rainwaters for Texas Monthly


The Sherman grave of Andre Thomas’s victims.







SHERMAN — A worried call from his daughter’s boyfriend sent Paul Boren rushing to her apartment on the morning of March 27, 2004. He drove the eight blocks to her apartment, peering into his neighbors’ yards, searching for Andre Thomas, Laura Boren’s estranged husband.






The Texas Tribune

Expanded coverage of Texas is produced by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization. To join the conversation about this article, go to texastribune.org.




For more articles on mental health and criminal justice in Texas, as well as a timeline of the Andre Thomas case: texastribune.org






Matt Rainwaters for Texas Monthly

Laura Boren






He drove past the brightly colored slides, swings and bouncy plastic animals in Fairview Park across the street from the apartment where Ms. Boren, 20, and her two children lived. He pulled into a parking spot below and immediately saw that her door was broken. As his heart raced, Mr. Boren, a white-haired giant of a man, bounded up the stairwell, calling out for his daughter.


He found her on the white carpet, smeared with blood, a gaping hole in her chest. Beside her left leg, a one-dollar bill was folded lengthwise, the radiating eye of the pyramid facing up. Mr. Boren knew she was gone.


In a panic, he rushed past the stuffed animals, dolls and plastic toys strewn along the hallway to the bedroom shared by his two grandchildren. The body of 13-month-old Leyha Hughes lay on the floor next to a blood-spattered doll nearly as big as she was.


Andre Boren, 4, lay on his back in his white children’s bed just above Leyha. He looked as if he could have been sleeping — a moment away from revealing the toothy grin that typically spread from one of his round cheeks to the other — except for the massive chest wound that matched the ones his father, Andre Thomas (the boy was also known as Andre Jr.), had inflicted on his mother and his half-sister as he tried to remove their hearts.


“You just can’t believe that it’s real,” said Sherry Boren, Laura Boren’s mother. “You’re hoping that it’s not, that it’s a dream or something, that you’re going to wake up at any minute.”


Mr. Thomas, who confessed to the murders of his wife, their son and her daughter by another man, was convicted in 2005 and sentenced to death at age 21. While awaiting trial in 2004, he gouged out one of his eyes, and in 2008 on death row, he removed the other and ate it.


At least twice in the three weeks before the crime, Mr. Thomas had sought mental health treatment, babbling illogically and threatening to commit suicide. On two occasions, staff members at the medical facilities were so worried that his psychosis made him a threat to himself or others that they sought emergency detention warrants for him.


Despite talk of suicide and bizarre biblical delusions, he was not detained for treatment. Mr. Thomas later told the police that he was convinced that Ms. Boren was the wicked Jezebel from the Bible, that his own son was the Antichrist and that Leyha was involved in an evil conspiracy with them.


He was on a mission from God, he said, to free their hearts of demons.


Hospitals do not have legal authority to detain people who voluntarily enter their facilities in search of mental health care but then decide to leave. It is one of many holes in the state’s nearly 30-year-old mental health code that advocates, police officers and judges say lawmakers need to fix. In a report last year, Texas Appleseed, a nonprofit advocacy organization, called on lawmakers to replace the existing code with one that reflects contemporary mental health needs.


“It was last fully revised in 1985, and clearly the mental health system has changed drastically since then,” said Susan Stone, a lawyer and psychiatrist who led the two-year Texas Appleseed project to study and recommend reforms to the code. Lawmakers have said that although the code may need to be revamped, it will not happen in this year’s legislative session. Such an undertaking requires legislative studies that have not been conducted. But advocates are urging legislators to make a few critical changes that they say could prevent tragedies, including giving hospitals the right to detain someone who is having a mental health crisis.


From the time Mr. Thomas was 10, he had told friends he heard demons in his head instructing him to do bad things. The cacophony drove him to attempt suicide repeatedly as an adolescent, according to court records. He drank and abused drugs to try to quiet the noise.


bgrissom@texastribune.org



Read More..

Major Banks Aid in Payday Loans Banned by States





Major banks have quickly become behind-the-scenes allies of Internet-based payday lenders that offer short-term loans with interest rates sometimes exceeding 500 percent.




With 15 states banning payday loans, a growing number of the lenders have set up online operations in more hospitable states or far-flung locales like Belize, Malta and the West Indies to more easily evade statewide caps on interest rates.


While the banks, which include giants like JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo, do not make the loans, they are a critical link for the lenders, enabling the lenders to withdraw payments automatically from borrowers’ bank accounts, even in states where the loans are banned entirely. In some cases, the banks allow lenders to tap checking accounts even after the customers have begged them to stop the withdrawals.


“Without the assistance of the banks in processing and sending electronic funds, these lenders simply couldn’t operate,” said Josh Zinner, co-director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, which works with community groups in New York.


The banking industry says it is simply serving customers who have authorized the lenders to withdraw money from their accounts. “The industry is not in a position to monitor customer accounts to see where their payments are going,” said Virginia O’Neill, senior counsel with the American Bankers Association.


But state and federal officials are taking aim at the banks’ role at a time when authorities are increasing their efforts to clamp down on payday lending and its practice of providing quick money to borrowers who need cash.


The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are examining banks’ roles in the online loans, according to several people with direct knowledge of the matter. Benjamin M. Lawsky, who heads New York State’s Department of Financial Services, is investigating how banks enable the online lenders to skirt New York law and make loans to residents of the state, where interest rates are capped at 25 percent.


For the banks, it can be a lucrative partnership. At first blush, processing automatic withdrawals hardly seems like a source of profit. But many customers are already on shaky financial footing. The withdrawals often set off a cascade of fees from problems like overdrafts. Roughly 27 percent of payday loan borrowers say that the loans caused them to overdraw their accounts, according to a report released this month by the Pew Charitable Trusts. That fee income is coveted, given that financial regulations limiting fees on debit and credit cards have cost banks billions of dollars.


Some state and federal authorities say the banks’ role in enabling the lenders has frustrated government efforts to shield people from predatory loans — an issue that gained urgency after reckless mortgage lending helped precipitate the 2008 financial crisis.


Lawmakers, led by Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, introduced a bill in July aimed at reining in the lenders, in part, by forcing them to abide by the laws of the state where the borrower lives, rather than where the lender is. The legislation, pending in Congress, would also allow borrowers to cancel automatic withdrawals more easily. “Technology has taken a lot of these scams online, and it’s time to crack down,” Mr. Merkley said in a statement when the bill was introduced.


While the loans are simple to obtain — some online lenders promise approval in minutes with no credit check — they are tough to get rid of. Customers who want to repay their loan in full typically must contact the online lender at least three days before the next withdrawal. Otherwise, the lender automatically renews the loans at least monthly and withdraws only the interest owed. Under federal law, customers are allowed to stop authorized withdrawals from their account. Still, some borrowers say their banks do not heed requests to stop the loans.


Ivy Brodsky, 37, thought she had figured out a way to stop six payday lenders from taking money from her account when she visited her Chase branch in Brighton Beach in Brooklyn in March to close it. But Chase kept the account open and between April and May, the six Internet lenders tried to withdraw money from Ms. Brodsky’s account 55 times, according to bank records reviewed by The New York Times. Chase charged her $1,523 in fees — a combination of 44 insufficient fund fees, extended overdraft fees and service fees.


For Subrina Baptiste, 33, an educational assistant in Brooklyn, the overdraft fees levied by Chase cannibalized her child support income. She said she applied for a $400 loan from Loanshoponline.com and a $700 loan from Advancemetoday.com in 2011. The loans, with annual interest rates of 730 percent and 584 percent respectively, skirt New York law.


Ms. Baptiste said she asked Chase to revoke the automatic withdrawals in October 2011, but was told that she had to ask the lenders instead. In one month, her bank records show, the lenders tried to take money from her account at least six times. Chase charged her $812 in fees and deducted over $600 from her child-support payments to cover them.


“I don’t understand why my own bank just wouldn’t listen to me,” Ms. Baptiste said, adding that Chase ultimately closed her account last January, three months after she asked.


A spokeswoman for Bank of America said the bank always honored requests to stop automatic withdrawals. Wells Fargo declined to comment. Kristin Lemkau, a spokeswoman for Chase, said: “We are working with the customers to resolve these cases.” Online lenders say they work to abide by state laws.


Read More..