North Korea has warned America to end its "military hysteria" or face retaliation - as a US strike group, including an aircraft carrier, steams towards the region.
Pyongyang issued the warning as it displayed new submarine-based ballistic missiles in a massive military parade in the city.
The reclusive state said it was prepared to respond to any attacks with "nuclear attacks of our own style", as tension mounted in the region.
China, Pyongyang's sole major ally, has warned that the tensions must be stopped from reaching an "irreversible and unmanageable stage".
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said: "We call on all parties to refrain from provoking and threatening each other.
"One has the feeling that a conflict could break out at any moment.
"Once a war really happens, the result will be nothing but multiple loss. No one can become a winner."
On Saturday, North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un arrived at Pyongyang's main Kim Il Sung Square, named after his grandfather.
He led a military parade marking the "Day of the Sun", the 105th birthday of the state's founding father Kim Il-Sung.
Goose-stepping soldiers and marching bands filled the square, next to the Taedonggang River that flows through Pyongyang.
Tanks, multiple rocket launch systems and other weapons followed, while single-engine planes flew in a 105 formation overhead.
South Korea's military said it believed some of the missiles in the parade included new types of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM).
Saturday, April 15, 2017
Driving test shake-up introduces sat nav into exam
New drivers will have to prove they can operate modern technology, in what could be the last changes to the driving test before the arrival of semi-autonomous cars.
From December examiners will test students to see if they can follow instructions from satellite navigation systems for up to 20 minutes.
The "independent driving" segment of the test will be doubled from its current 10 minutes and drivers will have to demonstrate they can operate equipment like a heated rear window while the car is moving.
Meanwhile new manoeuvres will be introduced, including driving into and out of a parking space, while the old requirement to reverse around a corner will be scrapped.
Junior transport minister Andrew Jones said the changes are designed to improve safety now that half of motorists use satellite navigation.
He said: "Technology is a great facilitator, it has helped us improve our road safety, but the question is, how can we maximise that?"
The changes to the test come as the government is actively promoting the development of driverless cars in the UK, with some "hands off" vehicles expected to be introduced as soon as next year.
Changes are planned to the Highway Code to allow fully autonomous cars on the roads by 2021.
Experts say driver training will have to change again to cope with taking control of a semi-autonomous car in an emergency.
"How are you going to manage that transition from one mode to the other?" asked Paul Knight of Manchester law firm Mills and Reeve.
"It's more than just physical, you actually need to switch on mentally as well," he said.
From December examiners will test students to see if they can follow instructions from satellite navigation systems for up to 20 minutes.
The "independent driving" segment of the test will be doubled from its current 10 minutes and drivers will have to demonstrate they can operate equipment like a heated rear window while the car is moving.
Meanwhile new manoeuvres will be introduced, including driving into and out of a parking space, while the old requirement to reverse around a corner will be scrapped.
Junior transport minister Andrew Jones said the changes are designed to improve safety now that half of motorists use satellite navigation.
He said: "Technology is a great facilitator, it has helped us improve our road safety, but the question is, how can we maximise that?"
The changes to the test come as the government is actively promoting the development of driverless cars in the UK, with some "hands off" vehicles expected to be introduced as soon as next year.
Changes are planned to the Highway Code to allow fully autonomous cars on the roads by 2021.
Experts say driver training will have to change again to cope with taking control of a semi-autonomous car in an emergency.
"How are you going to manage that transition from one mode to the other?" asked Paul Knight of Manchester law firm Mills and Reeve.
"It's more than just physical, you actually need to switch on mentally as well," he said.
'Mother of all bombs' kills 36 Islamic State militants, Afghanistan officials say
Afghanistan officials said 36 Islamic State militants were killed when the U.S. dropped the “mother of all bombs” on a tunnel complex Thursday.
The Afghanistan Ministry of Defense added in a statement Friday that there were no civilian casualties and that several Islamic State caves and ammunition caches were destroyed.
The GBU-43B, a 21,000-pound conventional bomb, was deployed in Nangarhar Province close to the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. The MOAB -- Massive Ordnance Air Blast -- is also known as the “Mother Of All Bombs.” It was first tested in 2003, but hadn't been used in combat before Thursday.
President Trump told media Thursday afternoon that "this was another successful mission" and he gave the military total authorization.
Pentagon spokesman Adam Stump said the bomb had been brought to Afghanistan "some time ago" for potential use. The bomb explodes in the air, creating air pressure that can make tunnels and other structures collapse. It can be used at the start of an offensive to soften up the enemy, weakening both its infrastructure and morale.
"As [ISIS'] losses have mounted, they are using IEDs, bunkers and tunnels to thicken their defense," Gen. John Nicholson, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said in a statement. "This is the right munition to reduce these obstacles and maintain the momentum of our offensive against [ISIS]."
The MOAB had to be dropped out of the back of a U.S. Air Force C-130 cargo plane due to its massive size.
"We kicked it out the back door," one U.S. official told Fox News.
Ismail Shinwari, the governor of Achin district, said the U.S. attack was carried out in a remote mountainous area with no civilian homes nearby. He said there has been heavy fighting in the area in recent weeks between Afghan forces and ISIS militants.
Hakim Khan, 50, a resident of Achin district where the attack took place, welcomed the attack on ISIS, saying: "I want 100 times more bombings on this group."
The strike came just days after a Green Beret was killed fighting ISIS in Nangarhar, however, a U.S. defense official told Fox News the bombing had nothing to do with that casualty.
“It was the right weapon for the right target, and not in retaliation,” the official said.
The U.S. estimates that between 600 to 800 ISIS fighters are present in Afghanistan, mostly in Nangarhar. The U.S. has concentrated heavily on combatting them while also supporting Afghan forces battling the Taliban.
In August, a company of nearly 150 Army Rangers killed "hundreds" of ISISfighters in Nangarhar, though five of the Rangers were shot. Some weapons and equipment, including communications gear and a rocket launcher, were also left behind following the operation.
The Afghanistan Ministry of Defense added in a statement Friday that there were no civilian casualties and that several Islamic State caves and ammunition caches were destroyed.
The GBU-43B, a 21,000-pound conventional bomb, was deployed in Nangarhar Province close to the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. The MOAB -- Massive Ordnance Air Blast -- is also known as the “Mother Of All Bombs.” It was first tested in 2003, but hadn't been used in combat before Thursday.
President Trump told media Thursday afternoon that "this was another successful mission" and he gave the military total authorization.
Pentagon spokesman Adam Stump said the bomb had been brought to Afghanistan "some time ago" for potential use. The bomb explodes in the air, creating air pressure that can make tunnels and other structures collapse. It can be used at the start of an offensive to soften up the enemy, weakening both its infrastructure and morale.
"As [ISIS'] losses have mounted, they are using IEDs, bunkers and tunnels to thicken their defense," Gen. John Nicholson, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said in a statement. "This is the right munition to reduce these obstacles and maintain the momentum of our offensive against [ISIS]."
The MOAB had to be dropped out of the back of a U.S. Air Force C-130 cargo plane due to its massive size.
"We kicked it out the back door," one U.S. official told Fox News.
Ismail Shinwari, the governor of Achin district, said the U.S. attack was carried out in a remote mountainous area with no civilian homes nearby. He said there has been heavy fighting in the area in recent weeks between Afghan forces and ISIS militants.
Hakim Khan, 50, a resident of Achin district where the attack took place, welcomed the attack on ISIS, saying: "I want 100 times more bombings on this group."
The strike came just days after a Green Beret was killed fighting ISIS in Nangarhar, however, a U.S. defense official told Fox News the bombing had nothing to do with that casualty.
“It was the right weapon for the right target, and not in retaliation,” the official said.
The U.S. estimates that between 600 to 800 ISIS fighters are present in Afghanistan, mostly in Nangarhar. The U.S. has concentrated heavily on combatting them while also supporting Afghan forces battling the Taliban.
In August, a company of nearly 150 Army Rangers killed "hundreds" of ISISfighters in Nangarhar, though five of the Rangers were shot. Some weapons and equipment, including communications gear and a rocket launcher, were also left behind following the operation.
Prediction professor’ lays out eight reasons Trump could be impeached
American University Professor Allan Lichtman was one of the few professional prognosticators to call President Trump's win in November.
Using his system of “Keys to the White House,” which postulates that presidential elections are essentially a reflection on the party in power, Lichtman said Trump was headed for the presidency. Then, just before the election, he doubled down.
And he made a second prediction, too (though, this time, without the benefit of his keys) — that Trump will be impeached before his time in office ends.
Now, he's written a whole book explaining how that could happen, titled “The Case for Impeachment,” publishing on April 18. Lichtman lays out eight ways that Trump could get in trouble, set against the historic background of previous presidential impeachments. The Fix sat down with Lichtman at his office at American University in Washington to ask him about his most recent prediction. Our conversation, below, has been edited only for clarity and length.
The Fix: You were one of the only people who called Trump’s win before November — and then you doubled down on your prediction, just before the election, adding that you predict he’ll be impeached. Take me through that process.
Lichtman: First, in September of 2016, and then on a double down in October of 2016, I predicted, against all the pundits and all the pollsters, that Donald Trump would be the next president of the United States. And I have to tell you, I took a lot of flak for that prediction. A lot of people thought I was way off base.
One of the ones who noticed, though, was Donald Trump, who wrote me a note saying, “Congratulations on your prediction.” What he probably didn’t pay attention to was, at the same time, I also predicted that although Donald Trump would be elected, he would also be impeached, becoming the first president to be impeached, of course, since Bill Clinton.
Fix: Your official prediction for the winner of the election was based on a system of keys that you tested over decades, but this latest prediction, of his impeachment, while it’s still based on history, is not based on a refined system or science. So how do you back that up? Not just your gut instinct, what’s your actual evidence?
Lichtman: Well, my prediction of a Trump victory was based on my long-standing prediction system, the Keys to the White House, which I’ve used successfully for the last nine elections since 1984. My prediction of a Trump impeachment was not based on a formal scientific system, but was based on a deep study of the history of (impeachment), the process of (impeachment) and Donald Trump’s own history. He hadn’t become president yet! But he had a long history as a businessman and someone at least peripherally involved in politics. And I put all of that deep historical study together in my new book, “The Case for Impeachment.”
This book looks at the history of impeachment — cases like that of Andrew Johnson in 1868, Richard Nixon, who resigned before he was going to be impeached, Bill Clinton. It looks at how impeachment really works, which is quite different from the way most people think it does. You don’t actually have to commit a crime to be impeached. The House of Representatives basically decides what constitutes impeachment, and it could be any violation of the public trust, whether or not it’s a crime. And finally there’s great depth in Donald Trump’s history, and at least through mid-March, the events of his presidency. And it lays out, believe it or not, eight different grounds on why Donald Trump could be removed from office.
Fix: It’s not actually that uncommon for presidents to be impeached. While it’s certainly a political disaster, it’s not necessarily a national disaster for a president to be impeached either.
Lichtman: It’s not uncommon, and America’s framers kind of believed that impeachment was a critically important element of the Constitution — to be a check on a rogue president who they believe could otherwise smash through even the checks and balances built into our system. And counting Richard Nixon, who resigned before he certainly would have been impeached, one out of every 14 American presidents has faced impeachment. You know, gamblers have gotten rich betting much longer odds than that.
And impeachments have not been national disasters. If you look back at the impeachment of Andrew Johnson in 1868, it was good for the country, not bad, because Johnson had been obstruction to Reconstruction. He had been obstructing the integration of the newly freed slave into American life, and after being chastised by impeachment, even though he wasn’t convicted by the Senate, he moderated his policies.
After the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the presidency emerged stronger than ever. It wasn’t weakened — some might even say too strong. And of course, the near-impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon removed a clear and present danger to our democracy from office. And I believe one of the reasons Trump is vulnerable to impeachment is that he shares many of the same traits as Richard Nixon, and poses the same kind of threat to our constitutional system, our liberties and our freedoms.
Fix: But right now, Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House. Why would House Republicans impeach their own guy?
Lichtman: Well, they’re not going to unless the American people demand it. Yes, the power of impeachment is lodged in the U.S. House of Representatives, but they are the people’s house, and they are responsive to the people.
The Republican Congress could conceivably move to impeachment if they believe Trump is a liability to them, and remember, every member has to stand for reelection in 2018. And Trump has no long-standing relationship with these members of Congress. He hasn’t really been a mainstay of the Republican Party. And there is also the possibility that in 2018 you have a wave election, which gives Democrats control of the House and completely changes the political dynamic.
But barring that, understand, not all Republicans have to be in favor of impeachment. If Democrats want it, and two dozen Republicans, approximately, switch, you have enough votes for impeachment. All it takes is a simple majority.
And finally, remember: Republicans really don’t trust Donald Trump. He’s a loose cannon. But they love Mike Pence. He’s a down-the-line Christian conservative dream president for the Republicans in Congress.
Fix: So what is it that makes you think President Trump could actually be impeached?
Lichtman: I make very clear in The Case for Impeachment that I do not believe Trump should be impeached because he’s an unconventional president, because he’s breaking the molds of tradition, or even because he’s unpopular. Rather, Trump should be impeached if and when he becomes a serious threat to our constitutional order, to our freedoms and liberties, and to the national security of the United States.
And I outline eight areas of potential removal of Donald Trump, based on his early presidency and his many decades of history as a businessman. For example, Trump has repeatedly, as a businessman, flouted the law. He kind of began his career by getting in trouble with the Department of Justice, which had a very strong case against him that he’d broken the Fair Housing Act. Reporting indicated that he’d broken the Cuban embargo in the 1990s, when that was a serious crime. Reporting also indicated that he had broken laws with respect to the employment of illegal immigrants, ironically contradicting his own campaign, and there are certainly laws that he could now break, for example, laws that ban torture.
Over the course of his entire business career, he has a pattern of playing fast and loose with the law, and letting statutes of limitations run out, settling cases, protracting lawsuits, walking away from failed deals. He also has a pattern and practice of not telling the truth. That is not just something that started when he was a candidate.
His overriding pattern is Donald Trump first, and nothing else matters nearly as much. And when you’re not president, you can get away with that, you can walk away from things. But as president, you can’t. You are accountable for what you do and for what you say. And what is the ultimate accountability for a president? That accountability is impeachment.
Using his system of “Keys to the White House,” which postulates that presidential elections are essentially a reflection on the party in power, Lichtman said Trump was headed for the presidency. Then, just before the election, he doubled down.
And he made a second prediction, too (though, this time, without the benefit of his keys) — that Trump will be impeached before his time in office ends.
Now, he's written a whole book explaining how that could happen, titled “The Case for Impeachment,” publishing on April 18. Lichtman lays out eight ways that Trump could get in trouble, set against the historic background of previous presidential impeachments. The Fix sat down with Lichtman at his office at American University in Washington to ask him about his most recent prediction. Our conversation, below, has been edited only for clarity and length.
The Fix: You were one of the only people who called Trump’s win before November — and then you doubled down on your prediction, just before the election, adding that you predict he’ll be impeached. Take me through that process.
Lichtman: First, in September of 2016, and then on a double down in October of 2016, I predicted, against all the pundits and all the pollsters, that Donald Trump would be the next president of the United States. And I have to tell you, I took a lot of flak for that prediction. A lot of people thought I was way off base.
One of the ones who noticed, though, was Donald Trump, who wrote me a note saying, “Congratulations on your prediction.” What he probably didn’t pay attention to was, at the same time, I also predicted that although Donald Trump would be elected, he would also be impeached, becoming the first president to be impeached, of course, since Bill Clinton.
Fix: Your official prediction for the winner of the election was based on a system of keys that you tested over decades, but this latest prediction, of his impeachment, while it’s still based on history, is not based on a refined system or science. So how do you back that up? Not just your gut instinct, what’s your actual evidence?
Lichtman: Well, my prediction of a Trump victory was based on my long-standing prediction system, the Keys to the White House, which I’ve used successfully for the last nine elections since 1984. My prediction of a Trump impeachment was not based on a formal scientific system, but was based on a deep study of the history of (impeachment), the process of (impeachment) and Donald Trump’s own history. He hadn’t become president yet! But he had a long history as a businessman and someone at least peripherally involved in politics. And I put all of that deep historical study together in my new book, “The Case for Impeachment.”
This book looks at the history of impeachment — cases like that of Andrew Johnson in 1868, Richard Nixon, who resigned before he was going to be impeached, Bill Clinton. It looks at how impeachment really works, which is quite different from the way most people think it does. You don’t actually have to commit a crime to be impeached. The House of Representatives basically decides what constitutes impeachment, and it could be any violation of the public trust, whether or not it’s a crime. And finally there’s great depth in Donald Trump’s history, and at least through mid-March, the events of his presidency. And it lays out, believe it or not, eight different grounds on why Donald Trump could be removed from office.
Fix: It’s not actually that uncommon for presidents to be impeached. While it’s certainly a political disaster, it’s not necessarily a national disaster for a president to be impeached either.
Lichtman: It’s not uncommon, and America’s framers kind of believed that impeachment was a critically important element of the Constitution — to be a check on a rogue president who they believe could otherwise smash through even the checks and balances built into our system. And counting Richard Nixon, who resigned before he certainly would have been impeached, one out of every 14 American presidents has faced impeachment. You know, gamblers have gotten rich betting much longer odds than that.
And impeachments have not been national disasters. If you look back at the impeachment of Andrew Johnson in 1868, it was good for the country, not bad, because Johnson had been obstruction to Reconstruction. He had been obstructing the integration of the newly freed slave into American life, and after being chastised by impeachment, even though he wasn’t convicted by the Senate, he moderated his policies.
After the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the presidency emerged stronger than ever. It wasn’t weakened — some might even say too strong. And of course, the near-impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon removed a clear and present danger to our democracy from office. And I believe one of the reasons Trump is vulnerable to impeachment is that he shares many of the same traits as Richard Nixon, and poses the same kind of threat to our constitutional system, our liberties and our freedoms.
Fix: But right now, Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House. Why would House Republicans impeach their own guy?
Lichtman: Well, they’re not going to unless the American people demand it. Yes, the power of impeachment is lodged in the U.S. House of Representatives, but they are the people’s house, and they are responsive to the people.
The Republican Congress could conceivably move to impeachment if they believe Trump is a liability to them, and remember, every member has to stand for reelection in 2018. And Trump has no long-standing relationship with these members of Congress. He hasn’t really been a mainstay of the Republican Party. And there is also the possibility that in 2018 you have a wave election, which gives Democrats control of the House and completely changes the political dynamic.
But barring that, understand, not all Republicans have to be in favor of impeachment. If Democrats want it, and two dozen Republicans, approximately, switch, you have enough votes for impeachment. All it takes is a simple majority.
And finally, remember: Republicans really don’t trust Donald Trump. He’s a loose cannon. But they love Mike Pence. He’s a down-the-line Christian conservative dream president for the Republicans in Congress.
Fix: So what is it that makes you think President Trump could actually be impeached?
Lichtman: I make very clear in The Case for Impeachment that I do not believe Trump should be impeached because he’s an unconventional president, because he’s breaking the molds of tradition, or even because he’s unpopular. Rather, Trump should be impeached if and when he becomes a serious threat to our constitutional order, to our freedoms and liberties, and to the national security of the United States.
And I outline eight areas of potential removal of Donald Trump, based on his early presidency and his many decades of history as a businessman. For example, Trump has repeatedly, as a businessman, flouted the law. He kind of began his career by getting in trouble with the Department of Justice, which had a very strong case against him that he’d broken the Fair Housing Act. Reporting indicated that he’d broken the Cuban embargo in the 1990s, when that was a serious crime. Reporting also indicated that he had broken laws with respect to the employment of illegal immigrants, ironically contradicting his own campaign, and there are certainly laws that he could now break, for example, laws that ban torture.
Over the course of his entire business career, he has a pattern of playing fast and loose with the law, and letting statutes of limitations run out, settling cases, protracting lawsuits, walking away from failed deals. He also has a pattern and practice of not telling the truth. That is not just something that started when he was a candidate.
His overriding pattern is Donald Trump first, and nothing else matters nearly as much. And when you’re not president, you can get away with that, you can walk away from things. But as president, you can’t. You are accountable for what you do and for what you say. And what is the ultimate accountability for a president? That accountability is impeachment.
Nigeria: Boko Haram feeds off corruption
There is a stereotype of bustling internet cafes in Lagos full of opportunist young men earnestly trying to dupe recipients of their messages into supplying their credit card details. Three thousand miles away, a very different breed of Nigerian scammer can be found in the cafes of Knightsbridge, central London, funded by the very tax dollars that are so badly needed to develop their homeland.
Between the two cafes is a web of corruption, in the middle of which are the Chibok schoolgirls, now entering their fourth year of captivity. Dismantling the web will be slow and there is more to be done, not only in Nigeria but also here in the UK, to make that happen.
Three years after the world reeled in shock as 276 female school pupils were kidnapped from their classroom, the media attention may have gone away, the celebrity outrage faded, but the vast majority of those girls still remain in the hands of Boko Haram. Fuelling the original attention was one fundamental question: how on earth can a militant extremist group kidnap hundreds of schoolgirls, and get away with it - for three years and counting?
Nigeria's battles with the scourge of corruption are no secret and its link to insecurity, and in particular the rise in extremism, is increasingly being understood. This is especially true of the defence sector. Defence corruption is more than just a waste of public money - it can actively enable the insurgent.
War on corruption
In Nigeria, corruption fuels Boko Haram's narrative that the state is corrupt, and that only with Islamic law can Nigeria provide a fair and just society. The conclusion is shaky, but the premise that state corruption in Nigeria is a problem isn't; more than $15bn of Nigerian procurement funds are missing at the hands of military officers. This is money that was needed to address Boko Haram 10 years ago, and that is still needed now to contain them. Training, intelligence, administration and communications have all been hindered, and in return Boko Haram has killed thousands of Nigerians and captured many more.
President Muhammadu Buhari was elected in 2015 on an anti-corruption platform, but his results have been mixed. His "war on corruption" borrowed its nomenclature from Bush's "war on terror" and Nixon's "war on drugs", and like its predecessors, results have reflected neither the vociferousness of its proponents nor the industriousness of its foot soldiers. Criticisms of his efforts have ranged from politically motivated prosecutions to ineffective reforms. The scale and depth of the problem makes setting priorities for reform difficult - last year, we published our recommendations for how to tackle the problem. And some positive change has happened, including the amendment of the Public Procurement Act so that defence is included alongside other sectors, instead of being treated as a secretive exception.
OPINION: Can Nigerian youth destroy Boko Haram's caliphate?
At the 2016 Anti-Corruption summit in London, David Cameronwhispered of Nigeria's status as a "fantastically corrupt" country. Buhari's response to the gaffe was accurate, if deflective: "I am not going to demand an apology," he said, "I am demanding a return of assets." He had a point.
Between the two cafes is a web of corruption, in the middle of which are the Chibok schoolgirls, now entering their fourth year of captivity. Dismantling the web will be slow and there is more to be done, not only in Nigeria but also here in the UK, to make that happen.
Three years after the world reeled in shock as 276 female school pupils were kidnapped from their classroom, the media attention may have gone away, the celebrity outrage faded, but the vast majority of those girls still remain in the hands of Boko Haram. Fuelling the original attention was one fundamental question: how on earth can a militant extremist group kidnap hundreds of schoolgirls, and get away with it - for three years and counting?
Nigeria's battles with the scourge of corruption are no secret and its link to insecurity, and in particular the rise in extremism, is increasingly being understood. This is especially true of the defence sector. Defence corruption is more than just a waste of public money - it can actively enable the insurgent.
War on corruption
In Nigeria, corruption fuels Boko Haram's narrative that the state is corrupt, and that only with Islamic law can Nigeria provide a fair and just society. The conclusion is shaky, but the premise that state corruption in Nigeria is a problem isn't; more than $15bn of Nigerian procurement funds are missing at the hands of military officers. This is money that was needed to address Boko Haram 10 years ago, and that is still needed now to contain them. Training, intelligence, administration and communications have all been hindered, and in return Boko Haram has killed thousands of Nigerians and captured many more.
President Muhammadu Buhari was elected in 2015 on an anti-corruption platform, but his results have been mixed. His "war on corruption" borrowed its nomenclature from Bush's "war on terror" and Nixon's "war on drugs", and like its predecessors, results have reflected neither the vociferousness of its proponents nor the industriousness of its foot soldiers. Criticisms of his efforts have ranged from politically motivated prosecutions to ineffective reforms. The scale and depth of the problem makes setting priorities for reform difficult - last year, we published our recommendations for how to tackle the problem. And some positive change has happened, including the amendment of the Public Procurement Act so that defence is included alongside other sectors, instead of being treated as a secretive exception.
OPINION: Can Nigerian youth destroy Boko Haram's caliphate?
At the 2016 Anti-Corruption summit in London, David Cameronwhispered of Nigeria's status as a "fantastically corrupt" country. Buhari's response to the gaffe was accurate, if deflective: "I am not going to demand an apology," he said, "I am demanding a return of assets." He had a point.
North Korea 'ready for nuclear attack' amid show of force
North Korea has warned the US not to take provocative action in the region, saying it is "ready to hit back with nuclear attacks".
The comments came as North Korea marked the 105th anniversary of the birth of its founding president, Kim Il-sung.
A huge parade in Pyongyang was held amid speculation current leader Kim Jong-un could order a new nuclear test.
Among the hardware on display appeared to be new intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.
The show of strength comes amid mounting tension, with a US aircraft carrier group steaming towards the region.
North Koreans celebrate leader amid tensions
Trump's steep learning curve
Read more about North Korea's missile programme
"We're prepared to respond to an all-out war with an all-out war," said Choe Ryong-hae, believed to be the country's second most powerful official.
"We are ready to hit back with nuclear attacks of our own style against any nuclear attacks," he said.
Rows of military bands and goose-stepping and sword-wielding soldiers marched through Pyongyang's main Kim Il-sung square for the "Day of the Sun" celebrations, as a black-suited Kim Jong-un watched on.
He saluted an honour guard and took his place on the podium. At times he appeared relaxed and laughed with aides.
Military planes created the number 105 in the sky.
With concerns that North Korea is getting closer to successfully producing a nuclear arsenal, Saturday's parade was an opportunity for Mr Kim to broadcast North Korea's current military capabilities.
On display for the first time were what appeared to be the Pukkuksong submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), which have a range of more than 1,000 km (600 miles).
Weapons analysts said there also appeared to be two new types of intercontinental ballistic missiles in canister launchers, but it remains unclear whether they have been tested.
The event made clear how vital the state's nuclear programme is to its future ambitions as it continues to ignore growing pressure from the US to abandon its nuclear weapons programme.
North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests and a series of missile launches. Experts and government officials believe it is working to develop nuclear-warhead missiles that can reach the US.
On Friday, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned that "conflict could break out at any moment", adding that if war occurred there could be no winner.
Unlike at previous Pyongyang parades there did not appear to be any Chinese representatives present.
The comments came as North Korea marked the 105th anniversary of the birth of its founding president, Kim Il-sung.
A huge parade in Pyongyang was held amid speculation current leader Kim Jong-un could order a new nuclear test.
Among the hardware on display appeared to be new intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.
The show of strength comes amid mounting tension, with a US aircraft carrier group steaming towards the region.
North Koreans celebrate leader amid tensions
Trump's steep learning curve
Read more about North Korea's missile programme
"We're prepared to respond to an all-out war with an all-out war," said Choe Ryong-hae, believed to be the country's second most powerful official.
"We are ready to hit back with nuclear attacks of our own style against any nuclear attacks," he said.
Rows of military bands and goose-stepping and sword-wielding soldiers marched through Pyongyang's main Kim Il-sung square for the "Day of the Sun" celebrations, as a black-suited Kim Jong-un watched on.
He saluted an honour guard and took his place on the podium. At times he appeared relaxed and laughed with aides.
Military planes created the number 105 in the sky.
With concerns that North Korea is getting closer to successfully producing a nuclear arsenal, Saturday's parade was an opportunity for Mr Kim to broadcast North Korea's current military capabilities.
On display for the first time were what appeared to be the Pukkuksong submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), which have a range of more than 1,000 km (600 miles).
Weapons analysts said there also appeared to be two new types of intercontinental ballistic missiles in canister launchers, but it remains unclear whether they have been tested.
The event made clear how vital the state's nuclear programme is to its future ambitions as it continues to ignore growing pressure from the US to abandon its nuclear weapons programme.
North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests and a series of missile launches. Experts and government officials believe it is working to develop nuclear-warhead missiles that can reach the US.
On Friday, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned that "conflict could break out at any moment", adding that if war occurred there could be no winner.
Unlike at previous Pyongyang parades there did not appear to be any Chinese representatives present.
Heroin linked to four deaths in 24 hours
The unexplained deaths of four people in less than 24 hours may be related to heroin, police believe.
Three of the deaths were reported on Friday morning and a fourth was reported on Friday evening, all in South Yorkshire.
Two men, 33 and 40, were found dead at two different addresses in Barnsley and a 47-year-old woman was found at a house in Grimethorpe.
On Friday evening, a 31-year-old man was found dead in Barnsley.
Police said: "An early line of inquiry is to establish if the deaths are linked to heroin use, although the results of post-mortem examinations and toxicology tests are awaited."
While officers are not formally linking the deaths, they have warned users of heroin or its derivatives to be cautious.
Temporary Chief Inspector Ian Proffitt said the force was "very concerned" by the deaths.
"For four deaths to occur in similar circumstances in a small time period and in a relatively small geographical area is unusual.
"We are currently exploring to establish if they are linked to the strength or content of heroin being used locally.
"The public should exercise caution if they come into contact with controlled drugs, particularly heroin, or heroin derivatives.
"If you experience any unusual symptoms after taking drugs, seek medical attention immediately."
Two men, 37 and 42, have been arrested on suspicion of being concerned in the supply of controlled drugs but they have been released pending further inquiries.
Anyone with information about the deaths or the illegal supply of drugs can contact South Yorkshire Police on 101, quoting incident number 164 of 14 April or call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.
Anyone concerned about their heroin use should seek advice from a medical professional or contact the NHS to get help with their addiction.
Three of the deaths were reported on Friday morning and a fourth was reported on Friday evening, all in South Yorkshire.
Two men, 33 and 40, were found dead at two different addresses in Barnsley and a 47-year-old woman was found at a house in Grimethorpe.
On Friday evening, a 31-year-old man was found dead in Barnsley.
Police said: "An early line of inquiry is to establish if the deaths are linked to heroin use, although the results of post-mortem examinations and toxicology tests are awaited."
While officers are not formally linking the deaths, they have warned users of heroin or its derivatives to be cautious.
Temporary Chief Inspector Ian Proffitt said the force was "very concerned" by the deaths.
"For four deaths to occur in similar circumstances in a small time period and in a relatively small geographical area is unusual.
"We are currently exploring to establish if they are linked to the strength or content of heroin being used locally.
"The public should exercise caution if they come into contact with controlled drugs, particularly heroin, or heroin derivatives.
"If you experience any unusual symptoms after taking drugs, seek medical attention immediately."
Two men, 37 and 42, have been arrested on suspicion of being concerned in the supply of controlled drugs but they have been released pending further inquiries.
Anyone with information about the deaths or the illegal supply of drugs can contact South Yorkshire Police on 101, quoting incident number 164 of 14 April or call Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.
Anyone concerned about their heroin use should seek advice from a medical professional or contact the NHS to get help with their addiction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)