Football: Millwall condemn Villa to more Cup misery

LONDON: Millwall piled on the misery for beleaguered Aston Villa manager Paul Lambert as John Marquis's late goal gave the Championship club a 2-1 win in the FA Cup fourth round on Friday.

Lambert has endured a torrid time since leaving Norwich to take charge at Villa Park in the close-season, but this week has been a new low for the Scot, whose Premier League team were knocked out of the League Cup semi-finals by fourth tier minnows Bradford on Tuesday.

Villa desperately needed a victory at the Den to get back on track after that humiliation and looked on course when Darren Bent opened the scoring midway through the first half.

But Nigerian defender Danny Shittu headed Millwall level soon after Bent's goal and young striker Marquis punished Villa's defensive frailties with the last minute winner.

Lambert insisted earlier this week that Villa owner Randy Lerner has assured him he won't be sacked, but this latest embarrassment will only increase the pressure on the former Borussia Dortmund star.

While Millwall, FA Cup runners-up in 2004, can celebrate a place in the last 16, their victory was slightly marred when a section of home fans began throwing missiles on to the pitch early in the second half.

After a nervous start, Lambert's side seemed to shake off their timid approach and went ahead in the 22nd minute.

Fabian Delph robbed Liam Feeney of possession and Andreas Weimann capitalised, surging away from Shittu before forcing Millwall goalkeeper David Forde into action for the first time.

Forde could only palm Weimann's effort into the path of England striker Bent, whose miskicked effort crept over the line.

But with Villa's star striker Christian Benteke rested there was a lack of bite about the visitors and Millwall quickly regained a foothold in the game.

Villa have been weak at set-pieces for much of the season and Millwall looked to exploit that through Shittu, who headed onto the roof of the net from James Henry's corner.

Lambert's men failed to heed the warning and the hosts equalised in the 27th minute when Lions captain Shittu met another Henry corner at the far post and powered a header past Shay Given.

Feeney came close to putting Millwall ahead when he fired just wide following a corner before the hosts' momentum was brought to a halt by their own supporters.

The game was stopped for five minutes just before the hour-mark due to a disturbance amongst Millwall fans in one corner of the Dockers Stand, with several bottles thrown in the direction of the assistant referee Mark Scholes after he awarded a free-kick to Villa.

Villa substitute Barry Bannan fired in a shot that Forde pushed away as the visitors launched a rare second-half attack.

But, with a replay at Villa Park within reach, Villa were shattered in the 89th minute when Marquis, making his first start of the season, headed Adam Smith's cross on to the bar before reacting quickest to nod home the rebound.

- AFP/jc

Read More..

Sex addiction is on the rise in India

BANGALORE: Nirmal, 38, is a smooth-talking executive in a Delhi-based software firm. He is married, has two kids and leads a normal life. Except that by now he's had sex with 922 partners, both male and female.

"It started when I was in Class IX," he says. "I found myself suddenly hooked to porn. Then, one day, my friends arranged a girl for me. That was it. By the time I was 35, I had chatted with some 6,500 women. I would leave my number online and then hook up. But it was when I graduated to men that I started feeling mentally tortured. I wanted to stop."

Just that Nirmal, like the growing hordes of sex addicts in a country free, mobile and connected like never before, had nowhere to go for his de-addiction. Sex addiction, which can ruin families and lives, is on the rise in India with bureaucrats, politicians, film stars, doctors and students all falling prey to it. But there are very few clinics in the country that recognize this condition, treated as it is as the hush-hush disease.

Apart from the anxiety of the patients, in a country like India with little security for women (Delhi recorded a 24% rise in rape cases in 2012), it can also be downright dangerous. It's easy for these addicts to turn into sexual predators.

Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard, recently told TOI: "Ordinarily, men woo and seduce women. But in unregulated settings, and when men are desperate, it can lead to harassment and rape." Sex Addicts Anonymous, a book published in the US in 2005, has first-person accounts by sex addicts who committed rape.

Experts are unanimous in that the time has come to accept that the affliction - also called paraphilia, meaning 'beyond love' - exists in substantial numbers in India and deal with it. "Sex addiction cases I get have doubled in the last decade," says Dr Rajan Bhonsle, head of the department of sexual medicine at Seth G S Medical College, Mumbai. "I have 25-30 cases every month and they come from all parts of India." Sexologist Dr Prakash Kothari says he used to get 1-3 patients a month at KEM Hospital earlier. "Now it's 10-12."

That might be minuscule compared to the US where, according to The Society for the Advancement of Sexual Health, 3-5% of the sexually active population has this problem. "But in India, there is a cloak of hypocrisy," says Bhonsle. "The actual cases would be much more." Even conservative Iran has 1,572 members in Sexaholics Anonymous. India? Just 2. This may change, however, with Sex Addicts Anonymous deciding to start its first India meeting in Delhi on January 28.

Bangalore-based Rajiv, 55, who was hooked to pornography from the age of 11, would perhaps be in attendance. "I would collect 20kg of porno magazines and CDs over a mere six months, dispose them off and buy more," says the engineer. "I had no relations with my wife. For four years, I used escort services and spent Rs 10 lakh on them. I recovered in a rehab abroad. But not all of us can go to foreign countries for treatment. We need such places here. We also need to bring it out of the closet."

Read More..

Penalty could keep smokers out of health overhaul

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance because of tobacco penalties in President Barack Obama's health care law, according to experts who are just now teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation.

The Affordable Care Act — "Obamacare" to its detractors — allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums starting next Jan. 1.

For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year. A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums.

Younger smokers could be charged lower penalties under rules proposed last fall by the Obama administration. But older smokers could face a heavy hit on their household budgets at a time in life when smoking-related illnesses tend to emerge.

Workers covered on the job would be able to avoid tobacco penalties by joining smoking cessation programs, because employer plans operate under different rules. But experts say that option is not guaranteed to smokers trying to purchase coverage individually.

Nearly one of every five U.S. adults smokes. That share is higher among lower-income people, who also are more likely to work in jobs that don't come with health insurance and would therefore depend on the new federal health care law. Smoking increases the risk of developing heart disease, lung problems and cancer, contributing to nearly 450,000 deaths a year.

Insurers won't be allowed to charge more under the overhaul for people who are overweight, or have a health condition like a bad back or a heart that skips beats — but they can charge more if a person smokes.

Starting next Jan. 1, the federal health care law will make it possible for people who can't get coverage now to buy private policies, providing tax credits to keep the premiums affordable. Although the law prohibits insurance companies from turning away the sick, the penalties for smokers could have the same effect in many cases, keeping out potentially costly patients.

"We don't want to create barriers for people to get health care coverage," said California state Assemblyman Richard Pan, who is working on a law in his state that would limit insurers' ability to charge smokers more. The federal law allows states to limit or change the smoking penalty.

"We want people who are smoking to get smoking cessation treatment," added Pan, a pediatrician who represents the Sacramento area.

Obama administration officials declined to be interviewed for this article, but a former consumer protection regulator for the government is raising questions.

"If you are an insurer and there is a group of smokers you don't want in your pool, the ones you really don't want are the ones who have been smoking for 20 or 30 years," said Karen Pollitz, an expert on individual health insurance markets with the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "You would have the flexibility to discourage them."

Several provisions in the federal health care law work together to leave older smokers with a bleak set of financial options, said Pollitz, formerly deputy director of the Office of Consumer Support in the federal Health and Human Services Department.

First, the law allows insurers to charge older adults up to three times as much as their youngest customers.

Second, the law allows insurers to levy the full 50 percent penalty on older smokers while charging less to younger ones.

And finally, government tax credits that will be available to help pay premiums cannot be used to offset the cost of penalties for smokers.

Here's how the math would work:

Take a hypothetical 60-year-old smoker making $35,000 a year. Estimated premiums for coverage in the new private health insurance markets under Obama's law would total $10,172. That person would be eligible for a tax credit that brings the cost down to $3,325.

But the smoking penalty could add $5,086 to the cost. And since federal tax credits can't be used to offset the penalty, the smoker's total cost for health insurance would be $8,411, or 24 percent of income. That's considered unaffordable under the federal law. The numbers were estimated using the online Kaiser Health Reform Subsidy Calculator.

"The effect of the smoking (penalty) allowed under the law would be that lower-income smokers could not afford health insurance," said Richard Curtis, president of the Institute for Health Policy Solutions, a nonpartisan research group that called attention to the issue with a study about the potential impact in California.

In today's world, insurers can simply turn down a smoker. Under Obama's overhaul, would they actually charge the full 50 percent? After all, workplace anti-smoking programs that use penalties usually charge far less, maybe $75 or $100 a month.

Robert Laszewski, a consultant who previously worked in the insurance industry, says there's a good reason to charge the maximum.

"If you don't charge the 50 percent, your competitor is going to do it, and you are going to get a disproportionate share of the less-healthy older smokers," said Laszewski. "They are going to have to play defense."

___

Online:

Kaiser Health Reform Subsidy Calculator — http://healthreform.kff.org/subsidycalculator.aspx

Read More..

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..

North Korea to target U.S. with nuclear, rocket tests

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea said on Thursday it would carry out further rocket launches and a nuclear test that would target the United States, dramatically stepping up its threats against a country it called its "sworn enemy".

The announcement by the country's top military body came a day after the U.N. Security Council agreed to a U.S.-backed resolution to censure and sanction North Korea for a rocket launch in December that breached U.N. rules.

North Korea is not believed to have the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead capable of hitting the continental United States, although its December launch showed it had the capacity to deliver a rocket that could travel 10,000 km (6,200 miles), potentially putting San Francisco in range, according to an intelligence assessment by South Korea.

"We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States," North Korea's National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA.

North Korea is believed by South Korea and other observers to be "technically ready" for a third nuclear test, and the decision to go ahead rests with leader Kim Jong-un, who pressed ahead with the December rocket launch in defiance of the U.N. sanctions.

China, the one major diplomatic ally of the isolated and impoverished North, agreed to the U.S.-backed resolution and it also supported resolutions in 2006 and 2009 after Pyongyang's two earlier nuclear tests.

Thursday's statement by North Korea represents a huge challenge to Beijing as it undergoes a leadership transition, with Xi Jinping due to take office in March.

China's Foreign Ministry called for calm and restraint and a return to six-party talks, but effectively singled out North Korea, urging the "relevant party" not to take any steps that would raise tensions.

"We hope the relevant party can remain calm and act and speak in a cautious and prudent way and not take any steps which may further worsen the situation," ministry spokesman Hong Lei told reporters at a regular press briefing.

North Korea has rejected proposals to restart the talks aimed at reining in its nuclear capacity. The United States, China, Russia, Japan and the two Koreas are the six parties involved.

"After all these years and numerous rounds of six-party talks we can see that China's influence over North Korea is actually very limited. All China can do is try to persuade them not to carry out their threats," said Cai Jian, an expert on Korea at Fudan University in Shanghai.

Analysts said the North could test as early as February as South Korea prepares to install a new, untested president or that it could choose to stage a nuclear explosion to coincide with former ruler Kim Jong-il's Feb 16 birthday.

"North Korea will have felt betrayed by China for agreeing to the latest U.N. resolution and they might be targeting (China) as well (with this statement)," said Lee Seung-yeol, senior research fellow at Ewha Institute of Unification Studies in Seoul.

U.S. URGES NO TEST

Washington urged North Korea not to proceed with a third test just as the North's statement was published on Thursday.

"Whether North Korea tests or not is up to North Korea," Glyn Davies, the top U.S. envoy for North Korean diplomacy, said in the South Korean capital of Seoul.

"We hope they don't do it. We call on them not to do it," Davies said after a meeting with South Korean officials. "This is not a moment to increase tensions on the Korean peninsula."

The North was banned from developing missile and nuclear technology under sanctions dating from its 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests.

A South Korean military official said the concern now is that Pyongyang could undertake a third nuclear test using highly enriched uranium for the first time, opening a second path to a bomb.

North Korea's 2006 nuclear test using plutonium produced a puny yield equivalent to one kiloton of TNT - compared with 13-18 kilotons for the Hiroshima bomb - and U.S. intelligence estimates put the 2009 test's yield at roughly two kilotons

North Korea is estimated to have enough fissile material for about a dozen plutonium warheads, although estimates vary, and intelligence reports suggest that it has been enriching uranium to supplement that stock and give it a second path to the bomb.

According to estimates from the Institute for Science and International Security from late 2012, North Korea could have enough weapons grade uranium for 21-32 nuclear weapons by 2016 if it used one centrifuge at its Yongbyon nuclear plant to enrich uranium to weapons grade.

North Korea has not yet mastered the technology needed to make a nuclear warhead small enough for an intercontinental missile, most observers say, and needs to develop the capacity to shield any warhead from re-entry into the earth's atmosphere.

North Korea gave no time-frame for the coming test and often employs harsh rhetoric in response to U.N. and U.S. actions that it sees as hostile.

The bellicose statement on Thursday appeared to dent any remaining hopes that Kim Jong-un, believed to be 30 years old, would pursue a different path from his father, Kim Jong-il, who oversaw the country's military and nuclear programs.

The older Kim died in December 2011.

"The UNSC (Security Council) resolution masterminded by the U.S. has brought its hostile policy towards the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea) to its most dangerous stage," the commission was quoted as saying.

(Additional reporting by Christine Kim in SEOUL, Ben Blanchard and Sui-Lee Wee in Beijing; Writing by David Chance; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan and Ron Popeski)

Read More..

Cameron warns companies must 'pay fair share' of taxes

DAVOS: British Prime Minister David Cameron warned Thursday that corporations must "pay their fair share" of taxes and said he would use Britain's G8 chairmanship to counter tax avoidance.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Cameron said too many global businesses were abusing tax schemes, after Britain last year announced a crackdown on multinationals such as Starbucks, Google and Amazon, claiming they are avoiding huge tax bills.

"When some businesses aren't seen to pay their taxes, that is corrosive to public trust," Cameron said in a speech to the global political and business elite.

"We want to use the G8 to drive a more serious debate on tax evasion and avoidance. This is an issue whose time has come," he said.

He said Britain would use its chairmanship this year of the Group of Eight rich nations to push for cross-border action on tax avoidance.

"Clamp down in one country and the travelling caravan of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus just moves on elsewhere. So we need to act together at the G8," Cameron said.

He insisted such moves were not anti-business.

"I believe in low taxes... I'm a low-tax Conservative. But I'm not a companies-should-pay-no-tax Conservative," Cameron said. "Individuals and businesses must pay their fair share."

Britain last month announced a campaign against "tax dodgers" and "cowboy advisers" to claw back £2 billion a year, after lawmakers alleged that multinationals were involved in "immoral" avoidance of tax.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel stressed that tax evasion and fraud was also an "enormously important issue" for the Group of 20 major economies.

"Every financial instrument, every financial product, every financial market, needs to be placed under regulation," said the chancellor.

"We are very far from that and I can only call on the financial industry to support us on this because another bubble that we create would bring another crisis for the global economy, which would be very difficult to overcome," she added.

Taxand, the world's largest independent global organisation of specialist tax advisors to multinational businesses, hit back saying that harmonisation of rules was not necessarily the best solution to tax fraud.

Multinationals should enter into talks with the relevant tax authorities "to obtain prior agreements for a particular initiative or investment," said Frederic Donnedieu de Vabres, the group's chairman.

"It is this, as opposed to a pursuit of harmonisation, that perhaps poses the best way forward," he added.

- AFP/jc

Read More..

BJP outwits KJP to stay afloat, for now

BANGALORE: The BJP's counter strike seems to have outwitted the B S Yeddyurappa-led Karnataka Janata Party (KJP) and put them on the defensive, at least for now.

By delaying the resignation of 13 rebel BJP MLAs loyal to Yeddyurappa, chief minister Jagadish Shettar has all but outsmarted Yeddyurappa who has been gunning for him. The BJP has not only taken the steam out of the rebels' campaign for the removal of the Shettar government, but also left KJP leaders embarrassed at the tame end likely to their resignation drama.

Rebel ministers Shobha Karandlaje and C M Udasi, who quit the Shettar ministry on Wednesday, appeared anxious the day after as the chief minister hasn't yet accepted their resignations. It's a deliberate plan by the BJP not to accept the resignations as the two ministers are likely to face the threat of being disqualified in case they defy the party whip to attend the budget session which starts on February 4.

This is also true in the case of 11 other MLAs, who are still searching for the elusive Speaker to formally submit their resignations.

Yeddyurappa mellowed down on Thursday when he realized his loyalists were running scared. "I had no intention to pull down the government. Our contention is that Shettar should not conduct any constitutional activities, including presentation of the budget. The BJP government doesn't have the moral right to continue as it had lost the majority following the resignation of two ministers and 11 other MLAs. Shettar should step down immediately to save the assembly's honour," Yeddyurappa said, trying to make amends for his earlier stand.

But he said more BJP MLAs are likely to resign and join his party. "Another BJP MLA Sunil Vallyapure will soon resign his assembly membership and join us. There are many more but I can't say how many," he added. Experts say if Yeddyurappa wants to pull down the government, he can easily do so by asking the rebel BJP MLAs to petition the governor withdrawing their support. But he can't afford to do so as he knows it can backfire as it involves the sentiments of the influential Lingayat community to which he and Shettar belong.

Playing the emotional card, Shettar on warned of a backlash, particularly in North Karnataka, if his government was toppled. "If there's an attempt to bring down a government which is giving good administration, people will not pardon us," he said in his hometown Hubli.

Governor HR Bhardwaj wrote to the assembly secretariat seeking details of the Speaker's whereabouts following a representation from rebel MLAs on Wednesday. The governor also sought tour programme details of assembly secretariat officials.

After their frantic search for the Speaker failed, rebel legislators now plan to petition the high court to seek the Speaker's presence in Bangalore. "We'll wait for two more days. If the Speaker doesn't return to Bangalore, we plan to file a habeas corpus petition in the high court," MLA Nehru Olekar said.

Read More..

Pentagon to Allow Women in Combat

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will lift a longstanding ban on women serving in combat, according to senior defense officials.

The services have until this May to come up with a plan to implement the change, according to a Defense Department official.

That means the changes could come into effect as early as May. The services will have until January 2016 to complete the implementation of the changes.

The military services will also have until Janurary 2016 to seek waivers for certain jobs -- but those waivers will require a personal approval from the secretary of defense and will have to be based on rationales other than the direct combat exclusion rule.

The move to allow women in combat, first reported by the Associated Press, was not expected this week, although there has been a concerted effort by the Obama administration to further open up the armed forces to women.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously recommended in January to Secretary Panetta that the direct combat exclusion rule should be lifted.

"I can confirm media reports that the secretary and the chairman are expected to announce the lifting of the direct combat exclusion rule for women in the military," said a senior Defense Department official. "This policy change will initiate a process whereby the services will develop plans to implement this decision, which was made by the secretary of defense upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey sent Panetta a memo earlier this month entitled, "Women in Service Implementation Plan."

"The time has come to rescind the direct combat exclusion rule for women and to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service," the memo read.

Adek Berry/AFP/Getty Images

"To implement these initiatives successfully and without sacrificing our warfighting capability or the trust of the American people, we will need time to get it right," he said in the memo, referring to the 2016 horizon.

Women have been officially prohibited from serving in combat since a 1994 rule that barred them from serving in ground combat units. That does not mean they have been immune from danger or from combat.

As Martha Raddatz reported in 2009, women have served in support positions on and off the frontlines in Iraq and Afghanistan, where war is waged on street corners and in markets, putting them at equal risk. Hundreds of thousands of women deployed with the military to those two war zones over the past decade. Hundreds have died.

READ MORE: Female Warriors Engage in Combat in Iraq, Afghanistan

Woman have been able to fly combat sorties since 1993. In 2010, the Navy allowed them on submarines. But lifting restrictions on service in frontline ground combat units will break a key barrier in the military.

READ MORE: Smooth Sailing for First Women to Serve on Navy Submarines

READ MORE: Female Fighter Pilot Breaks Gender Barriers

Panetta's decision will set a January 2016 deadline for the military service branches to argue that there are military roles that should remain closed to women.

In February 2012 the Defense Department opened up 14,500 positions to women that had previously been limited to men and lifted a rule that prohibited women from living with combat units.

Panetta also directed the services to examine ways to open more combat roles to women.

However, the ban on direct combat positions has remained in place.

Advocates for equality in the services will be pleased. On Capitol Hill today, retired Chief Master Sgt. Cindy McNally, a victim of sexual assault in the military, said placing women in combat roles would help equalize the services and actually cut down on sexual assaults, which have emerged as a major problem in the military.

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..

'Avatar' director Cameron accused over screenplay

LOS ANGELES: A US judge ordered director James Cameron to hand over drafts of the screenplay for "Avatar" Wednesday, to lawyers for a man claiming he wrote the script on which the 3D blockbuster was based.

Eric Ryder is seeking compensation from Cameron and his production company Lightstorm Entertainment, claiming that the 2009 Oscar-nominated film is based on a story he wrote called "K.R.Z. 2068."

He filed a lawsuit in December 2011, saying he spent two years developing the story. On Wednesday Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Alan Rosenfield ordered Cameron's lawyers to turn over screenplay drafts.

"We have to be careful and sensitive about ideas and information," said the judge.

But he denied a request by Ryder's lawyers to grant access to the personal calendars of Cameron and Jon Landau, the chief operating officer of Cameron's Lightstorm Entertainment Inc.

Ryder's lawyer K. Andrew Kent said his legal team will also get access to backup tapes from computers used by Cameron.

"Avatar," about a paraplegic US marine with split loyalties after being sent to a distant world wanted for its mining potential, was seen as a breakthrough in the use of 3D technology, and has grossed more than US$2.7 billion worldwide.

- AFP/jc

Read More..