Secret Revealed: Facebook Announces New Tool

How you search Facebook is about to change. In fact, just the act of searching Facebook is probably about to start.

Facebook is trying to give Google a run for its money, with a new product called "Graph Search." It turns some of the personal information people have shared on Facebook into a powerful searchable database.

For the social network's 170 million users in the U.S., it's bound to change the way people interact with their Facebook friends. It also could mean lots more time wasted at work.

Facebook allowed ABC News "Nightline" behind the scenes ahead of today's product launch, an event shrouded in secrecy and rife with speculation. Company officials had sent out a tantalizingly vague invitation: "Come and see what we're building."

CEO Mark Zuckerberg has long wanted to develop a social search engine, even hinting back in September that one might be in the works. The new feature gives users the ability to easily search across the network and their friends' information. Company officials say they believe it has the potential to transform the way people use Facebook.

Graph Search: What Is It?
Until now, the search bar you saw when you logged in to your Facebook page wasn't very powerful. You could only search for Timelines -- your friends' pages, other peoples' public pages and business or product pages.

But now, after close to a year and a half of development, the new "Graph Search" will allow you to search and discover more about your friends and other information that's been put on the world's largest social site.

Inside the Crucial 24 Hours Before Facebook's Graph Search Launch: Watch Tonight at 12:35 a.m. on ABC News "Nightline"

The new tool, available only to a limited set of U.S. users at first, turns key information that nearly a billion people have shared on the site -- including photos, places, and things they "like" -- into a searchable database tailored to your individual social network.

The new tool allows you to search across your friends' Timelines, without having to go to each of their Timeline pages to find out if they like a specific place or thing.

"I can just type in a short, simple phrase, like friends who like soccer and live nearby," Facebook product manager Kate O'Neill, told ABC News "Nightline" in an exclusive behind-the-scenes interview. "And now I'm getting the exact group of people that I'm looking for, so I can play soccer and ask them if they want to kick the ball around with me after work." O'Neill was able to narrow down the search in a demonstration only to show women.

MORE: Guide to Facebook's New Privacy Settings

The tool can search your friends' publicly shared interests, photos, places and connections. O'Neill showed ABC News how you can search for different musical artists and see which of your friends like them. She also showed how you can search a company and see which of your friends, or friends of your friends, work there. Additionally, you can search for photos of a specific place -- like Big Sur -- and the Graph Search will return images your friends might have taken of the location.

Right now, you can't search for things that were shared in a Timeline post or an event. However, O'Neill confirmed that this would be added to Graph Search later.

Privacy and Opting Out
The new product raises obvious privacy questions. Will personal information now pop up in the Graph Search, even if you never wanted to share it? How about those photos you never wanted to have on Facebook in the first place, or the ones you thought you were sharing only with your close friends?

"[Privacy] is something, of course, we care a lot about, and so from the very beginning we made it so that you can only search for the things that you can already see on Facebook," Tom Stocky, one of the lead Graph Search senior engineers, told "Nightline."

Stocky also pointed ABC News to Facebook's recent privacy tool changes, which allow you better to see what personal information your friends and others can see on Facebook. O'Neill showed the new Activity Log tools as well as the photo "untag" tool, which lets you contact others who might have a photo of you posted that you'd wish they'd take down.

When asked if users can opt out of the new search in general, Stocky said that they can choose to change the privacy settings on each of their pieces of content.

Read More..

Are gun curbs just symbolism?

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Gun violence recommendations are expected from Vice President Biden on Tuesday


• The proposals are expected to contain substantive and symbolic ideas to curb gun violence


• Presidents use symbolism to shift public opinion or affect larger political or social change

Washington (CNN) -- The pictures told the story: Vice President Joe Biden looked solemn, patrician and in control as he sat at a long table in the White House, flanked by people on both sides of the gun control issue.

The images conveyed a sense that the White House was in command on this issue.

And that's the point. Historically, presidential administrations have used symbolic imagery—at times coupled with marginal actions—to shift public opinion or affect larger political or social change.

"Politics is a risk taking project," said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University historian and CNN contributor. "They put together these commissions in response to some crisis. You try a hundred things and hope something works."

On the eve of the Biden-led gun control task force recommendations to President Barack Obama, political experts say it is important that his administration sends a clear signal that it has things in hand.

That is especially critical in what will likely be an uphill battle to push specific changes, like an assault weapons ban, as part of a broader effort on gun control.

The first move in the image battle will be to appear to move quickly and decisively.

"You have to give the Obama administration credit for one thing: They've learned from history to do things quickly," Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, said of previous task force initiatives that fizzled.

In 2010, Obama appointed a bipartisan commission headed by former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming and Erskine Bowles, a former Democratic White House chief of staff, to come up with a proposal to balance the budget and cut the debt.

Like the gun task force, Simpson-Bowles reviewed current regulations, gathered input from the public and engaged in tense internal conversations. But after months of working on a proposal—a blend of steep revenue increases and spending cuts—the group struggled to agree to a solution. The president did not take up the recommendations.

Obama largely avoided the issue of gun control during his first term.

He wrote an opinion piece two months after the 2011 assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, acknowledging the importance of the Second Amendment right to bear arms. In the piece he also called for a focus on "effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place."

But in the aftermath of that shooting and as the election season loomed, the Justice Department backed off from a list of recommendations that included a measure designed to help keep mentally ill people from getting guns.

For now, at least, there is a sense in Washington that the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting where 26 people -- 20 of them young children -- were slaughtered could lead to meaningful legislative reform.

Public opinion would seem to suggest that the White House efforts are well timed.

In the month since the massacre, a new poll showed the percentage of Americans who said they were dissatisfied with America's gun laws has spiked.

The Gallup survey released on Monday showed 38% of Americans were dissatisfied with current gun regulations, and wanted stricter laws. That represented 13-point jump from one year ago, when 25% expressed that view. "You want to strike while the iron is hot," Sabato said. "We Americans have short attention spans and, as horrible as the Newtown shooting was, will anyone be surprised if we moved along by spring?"

The White House has since worked overtime to show it considers gun control an urgent matter.

The vice president has spent the last week meeting with what the White House calls "stakeholders" in the gun control debate.

On Monday, Biden was to meet with members of a House Democratic task force on guns, along with Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of Health and Human Services.

In a series of face to face discussions on Thursday, Biden sat down with the National Rifle Association and other gun owners groups before conferring with representatives from the film and television industry.

In a sign the White House is prepared to move aggressively on its proposals, Biden made public comments just before meeting with the National Rifle Association, the country's most powerful gun lobby.

"Putting the vice president in charge of (the task force) and having him meeting with these groups is intended to show seriousness and an effort to reach out and respond to concerns and wishes of various groups," said Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University.

Still, the NRA expressed disappointment in its discussion with Biden and later released a statement that accused the administration of mounting "an agenda to attack the Second Amendment."

Organizations seeking tougher gun control laws insist an assault weapons ban is critical to addressing the nation's recent rash of mass shootings. However, such a ban could be difficult in a Congress mired in gridlock.

"The bully pulpit is limited. It's hard for the president to sustain that momentum," Zelizer said of the White House's gun control efforts after the Newtown shootings. "The thing about symbolism is, like the shock over Newtown, they fade quickly."

CNN's Jim Acosta and Kevin Liptak contributed to this report

Read More..

Clinton to testify January 23 on Benghazi attack

WASHINGTON: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will appear before lawmakers on January 23 to be quizzed about the deadly attack on a US mission in Libya, just days before she steps aside as top US diplomat.

The chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ed Royce, announced the date in a statement late Monday. A Republican senator last week said Clinton likely would make her appearance before Congress January 22.

"My intention is for this hearing to focus on why this attack was not better anticipated, what leadership failures at the State Department existed, and what management deficiencies need to be corrected in order to better secure our diplomatic facilities abroad and protect our diplomats serving in them," wrote Royce, a California Republican.

"It is important to learn all we can about what happened in Benghazi because at the end of the day, it could happen again," he added. "After all, Al-Qaeda plans attacks over and over again."

Clinton was to have testified December 20 after a scathing inquiry blamed "grossly inadequate" security at the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi for failing to protect staff there.

But she was forced to cancel her testimony and send in her two deputy secretaries instead when she fell ill with a virulent stomach bug and later suffered a concussion and blood clot.

Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed when heavily-armed militants overran the compound and a nearby annex on September 11 in a bloody and terrifying eight-hour assault.

The Accountability Review Board set up by Clinton to investigate the attack found "systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels within two bureaus of the State Department" responsible for security.

Assistant Secretary Eric Boswell, head of the bureau of diplomatic security, resigned his post after the report was released and was placed on administrative leave along with three other senior staff.

President Barack Obama has tapped the veteran Democratic senator John Kerry to replace Clinton, but his nomination requires confirmation by the Senate, which is in recess until January 21.

- AFP/ck

Read More..

Armstrong apologizes to staff, doesn't mention steroids

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

Lance Armstrong over the years

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

>

>>

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: Sources wouldn't say whether Armstrong admitted to drug use


• NEW: Interview with Oprah Winfrey lasted 2 1/2 hours, talk show queen tweets


• Former cyclist apologizes to cancer foundation workers for their stress

(CNN) -- Lance Armstrong was emotional at times during his interview Monday with talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, a source familiar with the interview told CNN.

The person refused to discuss the specifics of what Armstrong said, including whether he confessed to using performance-enhancing drugs as some media outlets have reported he would.

Armstrong was accompanied to the interview by a group of advisers and close friends, the source said.

Winfrey tweeted after the interview: "Just wrapped with @lancearmstrong More than 2 1/2 hours . He came READY!" The interview will be edited down to 90 minutes, Winfrey has said.

The disgraced cycling legend earlier apologized to the staff of the cancer charity he started, a publicist for Livestrong foundation said.

Armstrong was tearful during the 15-minute meeting and didn't address the issue of steroid use in cycling, Rae Bazzarre, director of communications for the Livestrong Foundation, said.

Bazzarre added that Armstrong offered a "sincere and heartfelt apology for the stress they've endured because of him."

He urged them to keep working hard to help cancer survivors and their families.

Armstrong's sit-down in his hometown of Austin, Texas, with Winfrey was his first interview since he was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles in October in a blood-doping scandal.

Read more: Oprah interview with Lance Armstrong airs January 17

For more than a decade, Armstrong has denied he used performance-enhancing drugs, but he was linked to a doping scandal by nearly a dozen other former cyclists who have admitted to doping.

What Armstrong said or did not say to Winfrey could have ramifications.

Some media outlets have reported that Armstrong has been strongly considering the possibility of a confession, possibly as a way to stem the tide of fleeing sponsors and as part of a long-term redemptive comeback plan.

But such a confession might lend weight to the lawsuits that could await him.

The interview will air at 9 p.m. ET Thursday on the Oprah Winfrey Network. Winfrey has promised a "no-holds-barred" interview, with no conditions and no payment made to Armstrong.

But the speculations swirled Monday.

"I don't think we're going to get an out-and-out confession," says CNN sports anchor Patrick Snell. "I think we're going to get something like, 'This is what went on during this era of trying to compete at the highest level.'"

Snell cautions, though, that a confession may not come at all.

Armstrong, 41, has repeatedly and vehemently denied that he used banned performance-enhancing drugs as well as illegal blood transfusions during his cycling career.

Winfrey will ask Armstrong to address the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's October report, which said there was overwhelming evidence he was directly involved in a sophisticated doping program, a statement from her network said last week.

The International Cycling Union, which chose not to appeal the USADA's lifetime ban, stripped Armstrong of his record seven Tour victories.

The World Anti-Doping Agency also agreed with the sanctions, which means Armstrong may not compete in sports governed by that agency's code.

Before the ban, he was competing in Ironman triathlons and had won two of the five events he had entered.

Since the ban he has entered two non-sanctioned events.

Report: Armstrong offered to donate $250,000 to anti-doping agency

Why now?

So, why would Armstrong choose to make a confession now?

"I would suspect that he sees this as certainly his best way forward," Snell says. "He would have taken strong legal advice, of course. When you look at the kind of stuff that Oprah's done over the years, it's a chance to get ... heartfelt emotions across."

The New York Times has reported that Armstrong was contemplating publicly admitting he used illegal performance-enhancing drugs. Such an admission might lead toward Armstrong regaining his eligibility.

One of his attorneys denied Armstrong was in discussion with the two anti-doping agencies.

Attorney Tim Herman, in a recent e-mail to CNN Sports, did not address whether Armstrong told associates -- as reported by the newspaper -- that he was considering an admission.

But such an admission could open him up to lawsuits, something Armstrong is likely well aware of.

"He is surrounded by the best legal advice, the best legal team," Snell says. "It's very hard for anyone to imagine him going into this without having been fully briefed, made aware of absolutely every scenario."

Drug tests

In the past, Armstrong has argued that he took more than 500 drug tests and never failed.

In its 202-page report that detailed Armstrong's alleged use of performance-enhancing drugs and blood transfusions, the USADA said it had tested Armstrong less than 60 times and the International Cycling Union conducted about 215 tests.

The agency did not say that Armstrong ever failed a test, but his former teammates testified as to how they beat tests or avoided the tests altogether.

The New York Times, citing unnamed associates and anti-doping officials, said Armstrong has been in discussions with USADA officials and hopes to meet with David Howman, chief of the World Anti-Doping Agency. The newspaper said none of the people with knowledge of Armstrong's situation wanted to be identified because it would jeopardize their access to information on the matter.

Under World Anti-Doping Agency rules, an athlete who confesses to using performance-enhancing drugs may be eligible for a reinstatement.

Awaiting Armstrong's 'last word'

Armstrong: The legend and the fall

Armstrong has been an icon for his cycling feats and celebrity, bringing more status to a sport wildly popular in some nations but lacking big-name recognition, big money and mass appeal in the United States.

He fought back from testicular cancer to win the Tour from 1999 to 2005. He raised millions via his Lance Armstrong Foundation to help cancer victims and survivors, an effort illustrated by trendy yellow "LiveSTRONG" wristbands that helped bring in the money.

But Armstrong has long been dogged by doping allegations, with compatriot Floyd Landis -- who was stripped of his 2006 Tour de France title after failing a drug test -- making a series of claims in 2011.

Armstrong sued the USADA last year to stop its investigation of him, arguing it did not have the right to prosecute him. But after a federal judge dismissed the case, Armstrong said he would no longer participate in the investigation.

In October 2012, Armstrong was stripped of his titles and banned from cycling. Weeks later, he stepped down from the board of his foundation, Livestrong.

Kurtz: Can even Oprah save Lance Armstrong?

CNN's Ed Lavandera, Kevin Bohn, Ed Payne, Jillian Martin and Chelsea J. Carter contributed to this report.

Read More..

AP: Armstrong gives tearful apology to Livestrong

AUSTIN, Texas Lance Armstrong apologized to the staff at his Livestrong cancer foundation before heading to an interview with Oprah Winfrey, a person with direct knowledge of the meeting told The Associated Press.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussion was private.

Play Video

Lance Armstrong to "speak candidly" to Oprah Winfrey

38 Photos

Lance Armstrong

Stripped last year of his seven Tour de France titles because of doping charges, Armstrong addressed the staff Monday and said, "I'm sorry." The person said the disgraced cyclist choked up and several employees cried during the session.

The person also said Armstrong apologized for letting the staff down and putting Livestrong at risk but he did not make a direct confession to the group about using banned drugs. He said he would try to restore the foundation's reputation, and urged the group to continue fighting for the charity's mission of helping cancer patients and their families.

After the meeting, Armstrong, his legal team and close advisers gathered at a downtown Austin hotel for the interview.

The cyclist will make a limited confession to Winfrey about his role as the head of a long-running scheme to dominate the Tour with the aid of performance-enhancing drugs, a person with knowledge of the situation has told the AP.

Winfrey and her crew had earlier said they would film the interview, to be broadcast Thursday, at his home but the location apparently changed to a hotel. Local and international news crews staked out positions in front of the cyclist's Spanish-style villa before dawn, hoping to catch a glimpse of Winfrey or Armstrong.

Armstrong still managed to slip away for a run Monday morning despite the crowds gathering outside his house. He returned home by cutting through a neighbor's yard and hopping a fence.

During a jog on Sunday, Armstrong talked to the AP for a few minutes saying, "I'm calm, I'm at ease and ready to speak candidly." He declined to go into specifics.

Armstrong lost all seven Tour titles following a voluminous U.S. Anti-Doping Agency report that portrayed him as a ruthless competitor, willing to go to any lengths to win the prestigious race. USADA chief executive Travis Tygart labeled the doping regimen allegedly carried out by the U.S. Postal Service team that Armstrong once led, "The most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."

Play Video

Anti-doping chief: Armstrong bullied witnesses

In a recent "60 Minutes Sports" interview, Tygart described Armstrong and his team of doctors, coaches and riders as similar to a "Mafia" that kept their secret for years and intimidated riders into silently following their illegal methods.

Yet Armstrong looked like just another runner getting in his roadwork when he talked to the AP, wearing a red jersey and black shorts, sunglasses and a white baseball cap pulled down to his eyes. Leaning into a reporter's car on the shoulder of a busy Austin road, he seemed unfazed by the attention and the news crews that made stops at his home. He cracked a few jokes about all the reporters vying for his attention, then added, "but now I want to finish my run," and took off down the road.

The interview with Winfrey will be Armstrong's first public response to the USADA report. Armstrong is not expected to provide a detailed account about his involvement, nor address in depth many of the specific allegations in the more than 1,000-page USADA report.

In a text to the AP on Saturday, Armstrong said: "I told her (Winfrey) to go wherever she wants and I'll answer the questions directly, honestly and candidly. That's all I can say."

After a federal investigation of the cyclist was dropped without charges being brought last year, USADA stepped in with an investigation of its own. The agency deposed 11 former teammates and accused Armstrong of masterminding a complex and brazen drug program that included steroids, blood boosters and a range of other performance-enhancers.

Play Video

Lance Armstrong offered donation to USADA during investigation

Once all the information was out and his reputation shattered, Armstrong defiantly tweeted a picture of himself on a couch at home with all seven of the yellow leader's jerseys on display in frames behind him. But the preponderance of evidence in the USADA report and pending legal challenges on several fronts apparently forced him to change tactics after more a decade of denials.

He still faces legal problems.

Former teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping, has filed a federal whistle-blower lawsuit that accused Armstrong of defrauding the U.S. Postal Service. The Justice Department has yet to decide whether it will join the suit as a plaintiff.

The London-based Sunday Times also is suing Armstrong to recover about $500,000 it paid him to settle a libel lawsuit. On Sunday, the newspaper took out a full-page ad in the Chicago Tribune, offering Winfrey suggestions for what questions to ask Armstrong. Dallas-based SCA Promotions, which tried to deny Armstrong a promised bonus for a Tour de France win, has threatened to bring yet another lawsuit seeking to recover more than $7.5 million an arbitration panel awarded the cyclist in that dispute.

The lawsuit most likely to be influenced by a confession might be the Sunday Times case. Potential perjury charges stemming from Armstrong's sworn testimony in the 2005 arbitration fight would not apply because of the statute of limitations. Armstrong was not deposed during the federal investigation that was closed last year.

Many of his sponsors dropped Armstrong after the damning USADA report — at the cost of tens of millions of dollars — and soon after, he left the board of Livestrong, which he founded in 1997. Armstrong is still said to be worth about $100 million.

Livestrong might be one reason Armstrong has decided to come forward with an apology and limited confession. The charity supports cancer patients and still faces an image problem because of its association with Armstrong. He also may be hoping a confession would allow him to return to competition in the elite triathlon or running events he participated in after his cycling career.

World Anti-Doping Code rules state his lifetime ban cannot be reduced to less than eight years. WADA and U.S. Anti-Doping officials could agree to reduce the ban further depending on what information Armstrong provides and his level of cooperation.

Read More..

Obama to Congress: 'We Are Not a Deadbeat Nation'

President Obama says the U.S. economy is "poised for a good year" but that progress could be threatened by political brinksmanship over the nation's debt limit.

"While I'm willing to compromise and find common ground over how to reduce our deficits, America cannot afford another debate with this Congress about whether or not they should pay the bills they've already racked up," Obama said at a White House news conference.

"We are not a deadbeat nation," he said. "The consequences of us not paying our bills would be disastrous."

Lawmakers have until the end of February to raise the nation's $16.4 trillion debt limit and address the delayed $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to defense and domestic spending.

Failure to raise the debt limit would set the stage for a U.S. default on its loan obligations or force immediate cuts to government spending that could threaten hundreds of thousands of federal employees and beneficiaries of government aid, including Social Security recipients and active-duty military personnel.

Republican congressional leaders have said they plan to use the debate on a debt-limit increase to extract spending cuts from the Obama administration. They note a legislative precedent, including most recently in 2011, of coupling the debt limit increase with deficit-reduction legislation.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Obama: Responsible Gun Owners Have Nothing to Worry About Watch Video

"The president and his allies need to get serious about spending, and the debt-limit debate is the perfect time for it," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in response to Obama's remarks.

"We are hoping for a new seriousness on the part of the president with regard to the single biggest issue confronting the country," he said. "And we look forward to working with him to do something about this huge, huge problem."

Obama says he will "not negotiate" on an increase to the debt limit, which covers spending obligations that have already been passed into law, insisting that the issue should be independent of a debate on new limits on future spending.

"The financial well-being of the American people is not leverage to be used," Obama said. "The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

Obama Weighs Gun Control Steps

The White House said the news conference would be Obama's last of his first term, coming six days before the inauguration and at a critical juncture in the ongoing fight with Congress on federal deficits and debt.

It also comes as Vice President Joe Biden presents Obama with his task force's recommendations for curbing gun violence in the wake of the deadly Newtown, Conn., shooting.

Obama said he has received a list of "sensible, common-sense steps" that could be taken through executive action or legislation to reduce violence and plans to give the public a "fuller presentation" later this week.

As for the surge in gun sales across the country, including in Connecticut, the president said it was a trend driven by irrational fear about what he's going to do.

"Those who oppose any common-sense gun control or gun-safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that, somehow, the federal government's about to take all your guns away," Obama said.

"And you know, there's probably an economic element to that. It obviously is good for business."

Obama said his administration has not infringed on gun rights and would continue to uphold the rights of responsible gun owners, "people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship. They don't have anything to worry about."

Read More..

Quest: U.S. economy to dominate Davos

The United States and the sorry state of its political and budgetary process will be the center of attention at Davos, writes Quest

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Quest: Davos is a chance to see where the political and economic landmines are in 2013


• Quest: People will be speculating about how dysfunctional the U.S. political process has become


• Quest: Davos has been consumed by eurozone sovereign debt crises for three years

Editor's note: Watch Quest Means Business on CNN International, 1900pm GMT weekdays. Quest Means Business is presented by CNN's foremost international business correspondent Richard Quest. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- It is that time of the year, again. Come January no sooner have the Christmas trees been taken down, as the winter sales are in full vicious flood the world of business start thinking about going to the world economic forum, better known as Davos.

For the past three years Davos has been consumed by the eurozone sovereign debt crises.

As it worsened the speculation became ever more frantic.....Will Greece leave the euro? Will the eurozone even survive? Was this all just a big German trick to run Europe? More extreme, more dramatic, more nonsense.

Can China be the biggest engine of growth for the global economy. Round and round in circles we have gone on these subjects until frankly I did wonder if there was anything else to say short of it's a horrible mess!

This year there is a new bogey man. The US and in particular the sorry state of the country's political and budgetary process will, I have little doubt, be the center of attention.

Read more: More 'cliffs' to come in new Congress

Not just because Congress fluffed its big test on the fiscal cliff, but because in doing so it created many more deadlines, any one of which could be deeply unsettling to global markets... There is the $100 billion budget cutbacks postponed for two months by the recent agreement; postponed to the end of February.

At exactly the same time as the US Treasury's ability to rob Peter to pay Paul on the debt ceiling crises comes to a head.

Read more: Both Obama, GOP set for tough talks ahead

The Treasury's "debt suspension period" is an extraordinary piece of financial chicanery that if we tried it with our credit cards would get us locked up!! Then there is the expiration of the latest continuing resolution, the authority by which congress is spending money.

There is the terrifying prospect that all these budget woes will conflate into one big political fist fight as the US faces cutbacks, default or shutdown!!

I am being alarmist. Most rational people believe that the worst sting will be taken out of this tail....not before we have all been to the edge...and back. And that is what Davos will have on its mind.

People will be speculating about how dysfunctional the US political process has become and is it broken beyond repair (if they are not asking that then they should be...)

They will be pondering which is more serious for risk...the US budget and debt crises or the Eurozone sovereign debt debacle. A classic case of between the devil and the deep blue sea.

The official topic this year is Resilient Dynamism. I have absolutely no idea what this means. None whatsoever. It is another of WEF's ersatz themes dreamt up to stimulate debate in what Martin Sorrell has beautifully terms "davosian language" In short everyone interprets it as they will.

What I will enjoy, as I do every year, is the chance to hear the global players speak and the brightest and best thinkers give us their take on the global problems the atmosphere becomes febrile as the rock-stars of finance and economics give speeches, talk on panels and give insight.

Of course comes of these musings, it never does at Davos. That's not the point. This is a chance to take stock and see where the political and economic landmines are in 2013. I like to think of Davos as the equivalent of Control/Alt/Delete. It allows us to reboot.

We leave at least having an idea of where people stand on the big issues provided you can see through the panegyrics of self congratulatory back slapping that always takes place whenever you get like minded people in one place... And this year, I predict the big issue being discussed in coffee bars, salons and fondue houses will be the United States and its budgetary woes.

Read More..

Benjamin Pwee joins DPP leadership as acting secretary-general

SINGAPORE: Opposition politician Benjamin Pwee has joined the leadership of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)as acting secretary-general.

He was co-opted into the Central Executive Committee (CEC) at a closed-door meeting on Sunday, while six other independents were officially accepted as party members and cadres.

The DPP's secretary-general, Mr Seow Khee Leng, went on leave from the party from Sunday and handed over the leadership reins to Mr Pwee.

The DPP said in a statement that Mr Pwee and his new team will prepare for the party's congress in March, where Mr Pwee will officially take over as secretary-general.

The new team also intends to reach out to other opposition parties through a joint Lunar New Year walkabout, as well as collaboration in various areas.

Mr Pwee is also discussing the possibility of an alliance leadership role to rally the opposition parties to jointly strategise and plan for the next General Election, due in 2016.

The new DPP leadership team will launch several activities, including a day-trip to Pulai and Batu Pahat for residents, monthly "happy hour" at a pub at Clarke Quay and monthly Meet-the-People sessions in selected constituencies.

Also in the CEC are Mr John Chiam (chairman), Mr Mohamad Hamim Aliyas (vice-chairman), Mr Wilfred Leung (assistant secretary-general), Mr Winston Lim (treasurer), Ms Juliana Juwahir (assistant treasurer) Mr Ting Tze Jiang (organising secretary) and Mr Sa'aban Ali (assistant organising secretary).

All, except Mr Lim, are ex-members of the Singapore People's Party.

- CNA/ck

Read More..

Fleischer: Hagel is wrong about Israel

Former Sen. Chuck Hagel was nominated by President Obama for defense secretary.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• In 2006, Hagel said 'the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here'


• Ari Fleischer: The support for Israel isn't because of 'intimidation,' but merit


• Polls show most Americans view Israel favorably, but don't support Iran or Palestinians


• Fleischer: Israel is a steady friend of the U.S. and a tolerant democracy

Editor's note: Ari Fleischer, a CNN contributor, was White House press secretary in the George W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2003 and is the president of Ari Fleischer Sports Communications Inc. He is a paid consultant and board member for the Republican Jewish Coalition, which opposes the Hagel nomination. Follow him on Twitter: @AriFleischer

(CNN) -- "The political reality is ... that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here." -- Senator Chuck Hagel, 2006

As a result of those words and his voting record, former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel's nomination has turned a decades-long, bipartisan confirmation process for secretary of defense into an acrimonious one.

While some leading figures such as the Anti-Defamation League's Abe Foxman and the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Rabbi Abraham Cooper say Hagel's words are borderline anti-Semitism, I'm less worried about anti-Semitism and more worried about the judgment of a potential defense secretary who thinks Israel has won support because of "intimidation," not merit.

Ari Fleischer

Israel is widely supported by the American people because Israel deserves to be supported. Israel is a lonely democratic ally and a steady friend of the United States in a dangerous and tumultuous region. Their people are like the American people -- free, independent, capitalistic and tolerant.

A Gallup poll taken last year showed 71% of the American people view Israel favorably while only 19% view the Palestinian Authority favorably and just 10% view Iran favorably.

In a Pew Research Center study last month, 50% of adults said they sympathize more with Israel in its dispute than with the Palestinians. Just 10% sympathize more with the Palestinians, while about as many (13%) volunteered that they sympathize with neither side.

Contrary to Hagel's logic, Israel doesn't enjoy widespread American support because anyone -- from any faith -- intimidated someone else; Israel earned the support of the American people because of its people's values.

Opinion: Hagel is a friend to Israel

The danger in what Hagel said is if he thinks Israel is supported on Capitol Hill because of intimidation, then it's not hard to see why Hagel is so soft in his support for our ally. He sees himself as an independent voice willing to stand up to intimidation, and he wears his anti-Israel votes as badges of honor.

But Hagel isn't independent. He's alone.

His position on Middle Eastern matters is so outside the mainstream of both parties that almost no one agrees with him.

In 2000, Hagel was one of only four senators who refused to sign a Senate letter in support of Israel.

Peter Beinart: What's behind Hagel nomination fight

The following year Hagel was one of only 11 senators who refused to sign a letter urging President George W. Bush to continue his policy of not meeting with Yasser Arafat until the Palestinian leader took steps to end the violence against Israel.

John Cornyn: Why I can't support Hagel

Contrary to America's longstanding bipartisan position, Hagel has called for direct talks with terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah. In 2007, Hagel voted against labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the group responsible for the death of many American servicemen in Iraq, a terrorist organization.

And in 2008, he was one of two senators on the banking committee to oppose a bill putting sanctions on Iran. One of the measure's biggest backers was an Illinois senator named Barack Obama.

I'm a New Yorker and neither of my senators -- Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand -- supports Israel because someone muscled them into that position through intimidation. They both support Israel because the lobby that wants them to support Israel is an American lobby, made up of people from both parties and all religions and from people with no religion or political party at all.

But if Chuck Hagel believes that it's intimidation and not sound judgment that has caused his colleagues to support Israel, then Chuck Hagel should not be confirmed as our next secretary of defense.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ari Fleischer.

Read More..

Falcons beat Seahawks with last-second field goal

ATLANTA

Matt Bryant kicked a 49-yard field goal with 8 seconds left and the Atlanta Falcons bounced back after blowing a 20-point lead in the fourth quarter, defeating Russell Wilson and the gutty Seattle Seahawks 30-28 in an NFC divisional playoff game Sunday.

31 Photos

2013 NFL Playoffs: Divisional Playoffs

The Falcons (14-3) appeared ready to allow the biggest fourth-quarter comeback in NFL playoff history when Marshawn Lynch scored on a 2-yard run with 31 seconds left.

But Matt Ryan completed two long passes after the kickoff, setting up Bryant's winning kick and sending the Falcons to the NFC championship game for only the third time in franchise history. They will host the San Francisco 49ers next Sunday.

Wilson passed for two touchdowns and ran for another, but it wasn't enough for the Seahawks (12-6).

The rookie finished with 385 yards passing and did all he could to lead the Seahawks back from a 27-7 deficit entering the fourth quarter. When Lynch powered over in the final minute, a play set up by Wilson's brilliant scramble, Seattle celebrated like it would be moving on.

Not so fast.

Ryan, who had struggled in his first three playoff appearances, had just enough time to rally the Falcons. He hooked up with Harry Douglas on a 29-yard pass in front of the Falcons bench, and coach Mike Smith quickly signaled a timeout. Then, Ryan went down the middle to his favorite target, tight end Tony Gonzalez, a Hall of Famer-to-be playing what could've been his final game.

Gonzalez hauled in the 19-yard throw, and Smith called his final timeout with 13 seconds remaining. Instead of risking another play and having the clock run out, he sent Bryant in for the field goal try.

The Seahawks called time just before the ball was snapped, and Bryant's kick sailed right of the upright. That turned out to be nothing more than practice. The next one was right down the middle, giving the Falcons a stunning victory.

Wilson's last throw, a desperation heave into the end zone, was intercepted by Falcons receiver Julio Jones.

Read More..