An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
James Brien Comey, Jr. (52), former United States Deputy Attorney General, has been appointed a Director of HSBC Holdings plc with effect from 4 March 2013. He will be an independent non-executive Director and a member of the Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee.
… million has been committed to NELP from CPC, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley. In 2009, Deutsche … City of New York Pratt Institute HSBC Holdings Amalgamated Bank …
… to install rainwater harvesting systems. With funding from HSBC, Isla Urbana is developing and testing different implementation strategies … Without Borders Temo Foundation HSBC Philanthropic Programs …
… and government leaders that includes the leaders of BP and HSBC (the world’s second largest bank). Its core coalition quickly grew to … BSkyB, British Telecom, Catalyst, Cheyne Capital Management, HSBC Holdings Plc, Interface, Johnson & Johnson, Munich Re Group, Starbucks, …
Clinton foundation received up to $81m from clients of controversial HSBC bank
Leaked files reveal identities of wealthy donors with accounts in Geneva
Donors gave as much as $81m to Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation
Hillary Clinton expected to make inequality a key issue of any 2016 campaign
The charitable foundation run by Hillary Clinton and her family has received as much as $81m from wealthy international donors who were clients of HSBC’s controversial Swiss bank.
Leaked files from HSBC’s Swiss banking division reveal the identities of seven donors to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation with accounts in Geneva.
They include Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate and one of the foundation’s biggest financial backers, and Richard Caring, the British retail magnate who, the bank’s internal records show, used his tax-free Geneva account to transfer $1m into the New York-based foundation.
Hillary Clinton has expressed concern over growing economic inequality in the US and is expected to make the issue a cornerstone of her widely anticipated presidential campaign in 2016. However, political observers are increasingly asking whether the former secretary of state’s focus on wealth inequality sits uncomfortably with the close relationships she and her husband have nurtured with some of the world’s richest individuals.
Giustra’s Swiss HSBC account, created in 2002, contained up to $10m in the 2006-2007 period. Lawyers for the mining magnate said that he held the account for investment purposes, and that it was in compliance with Canadian laws that required disclosure of foreign assets. More from Guardian
State Department Purged Emails About Secret Anti-Netanyahu Campaign
Key emails deleted despite requirement to archive
FreeBeacon: A State Department official deleted emails that included information about a secret campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the country’s last election, according to a Senate investigatory committee that determined the Obama administration transferred tax funds to anti-Netanyahu groups.
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations disclosed in a massive report on Tuesday that the Obama administration provided U.S. taxpayer dollars to the OneVoice Movement, a liberal group that waged a clandestine campaign to smear and oust Netanyahu from office.
OneVoice, which was awarded $465,000 in U.S. grants through 2014, has been under congressional investigation since 2015, when it was first accused of funneling money to partisan political groups looking to unseat Netanyahu. This type of behavior by non-profit groups is prohibited under U.S. tax law.
The investigation determined that OneVoice redirected State Department funds to anti-Netanyahu efforts and that U.S. officials subsequently erased emails containing information about the administration’s relationship with the non-profit group.
The disclosure comes amid a massive effort by Congress to reform the State Department’s email practices in light of former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential frontrunner’s Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified materials.
The Washington Free Beaconrevealed early Tuesday that new legislation would ban all State Department officials from using private email accounts and servers, as well as mandate annual reports about the leak of classified information.
A senior State Department official admitted to congressional investigators that he deleted several emails pertaining to the administration’s coordination with OneVoice.
“The State Department was unable to produce all documents responsive to the Subcommittee’s requests due to its failure to retain complete email records of Michael Ratney, who served as U.S. Consul General in Jerusalem during the award and oversight of the OneVoice grants,” the report states.
Investigators “discovered this retention problem because one important email exchange between OneVoice and Mr. Ratney … was produced to the Subcommittee only by OneVoice,” the report continues. “After conducting additional searches, the Department informed the Subcommittee that it was unable to locate any responsive emails from Mr. Ratney’s inbox or sent mail.”
Ratney was ultimately forced to tell investigators that “[a]t times I deleted emails with attachments I didn’t need in order to maintain my inbox under the storage limit.”
While Ratney had the option to archive emails—as required by the department—he did not do this. Ratney claimed he was not aware of the rule, stating he “did not know [he] was required to archive routine emails.”
The deletion of the email chains appears to be a violation of the Federal Records Act, which mandates official records be archived for future disclosure purposes.
One source with intimate knowledge of the situation told the Free Beacon that the deletion of these emails is highly suspicious given the seriousness of the claims about the administration’s behavior.
“The Obama administration had the money, skills, and personnel to build a gigantic campaign infrastructure that was used to try to defeat the prime minister of an ally,” the source said. “But apparently they didn’t have what they needed to store the emails in which they did all of those things. That’s certainly a lucky break for the State Department.”
State Department officials did not immediately respond to a request for further information about the investigation and the deletion of emails.
****
Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) each signed off on the investigation, which was conducted by Portman’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. In releasing the report, Portman criticized the State Department for lax oversight and for undermining a U.S. ally.
“The State Department ignored warning signs and funded a politically active group in a politically sensitive environment with inadequate safeguards,” Portman said. “It is completely unacceptable that U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to build a political campaign infrastructure that was deployed — immediately after the grant ended — against the leader of our closest ally in the Middle East.”
The investigation is notable for its bipartisan sheen. McCaskill highlighted the conclusion that it showed “no wrongdoing” by President Barack Obama’s administration but said the report “certainly highlights deficiencies in the Department’s policies that should be addressed in order to best protect taxpayer dollars.” Read more from Politico
In a victory for the Philippines, an international tribunal ruled China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea are illegal, setting the stage for more tension in one of the world’s flashpoints.
US Navy Base Japan
ForeignPolicy: An international tribunal delivered a stinging rebuke to China on Tuesday, ruling unanimously that Beijing has no historic title to the huge swathe of the South China Sea that it claims.
The decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague represents the first explicit, legal repudiation of China’s claims to the waters of the South China Sea, a territorial land grab that has in recent years soured relations between Beijing and many of its neighbors, especially the Philippines. China refused to recognize the tribunal and has repeatedly said that it will ignore the decision, which is binding and not subject to appeal.
The much-awaited decision will almost certainly further inflame tensions in the South China Sea, which has seen frequent clashes between Chinese coast guard ships and fishermen and vessels from other countries. The United States has over the past year sought to uphold international law and freedom of navigation in one of the world’s busiest waterways by dispatching navy ships to sail through waters that Beijing has tried to fence off.
As expected, Beijing dismissed the ruling. China’s state-run Xinhua news agency said the “law-abusing tribunal” had handed down an”ill-founded award.”
China’s defense ministry said its troops would “unswervingly safeguard state sovereignty, security, maritime rights and interests,” according to state broadcaster CCTV.
Wary of China’s reaction to the verdict, the Philippines called for “restraint.”
“Our experts are studying this award with the care and thoroughness that this significant arbitral outcome deserves,” Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay told reporters.
“We call on all those concerned to exercise restraint and sobriety. The Philippines strongly affirms its respect for this milestone decision,” he said.
In the wake of the ruling by the panel, which China has spent months trying to discredit, experts said Beijing could respond in a variety of ways. It could send more fighter jets to bases it is building on the disputed islets, or it could declare an air defense identification zone in part of the South China Sea, much as it did in 2013 in the East China Sea.
China could also ratchet up the fight with the Philippines by carrying out dredging and reclamation work at Scarborough Shoal, one of the features close to the Philippine coast and a reef at the center of the spat between the two countries. Or China could even try to blockade Philippine marines currently stationed at one of the tiny atolls, potentially threatening a showdown with the United States, which has a mutual defense treaty with Manila.
“The only person who knows what China’s response will be is Xi Jinping. It’s going to be his decision and nobody else’s,” said Gregory Poling, director of the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative and a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and an expert on the South China Sea disputes.
The ruling, capstone to a 2013 complaint brought by the Philippines, considered three broad issues. Does China, as it maintains through its proclamation of a so-called “nine dash line,” have “historic rights” to the waters around the Spratly Islands, hundreds of miles from the Chinese coast? Do those tiny reefs and rocks actually amount to islands, which would give their owner exclusive claim to the economic resources nearby? And has China, in its rush to dredge coral atolls to build artificial islands and fence off the area from the Philippines, violated the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea?
The panel found that while Chinese fishermen have in the past plied the waters around the Spratlys, that does not amount to any sort of legal claim to the resources there today.
“There was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources,” the panel ruled, “within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’.”
The tribunal also determined that none of the features in the Spratly Islands — with names like Mischief Reef and Fiery Cross Reef — amount to actual islands. That means that, regardless of which country has sovereignty over those rocks and atolls (a question the Hague panel did not consider), they do not grant any legal entitlement to a 200-mile wide exclusive economic zone in the surrounding waters.
Finally, the panel found that China had violated the Philippines’ rights in the waters off its coast, by, for example, interfering with Manila’s ability to drill for oil or fish in seas that by law belong to the Philippines.
“The Tribunal therefore concluded that China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights with respect to its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf,” the panel noted in its nearly-500 page ruling.
The tribunal also determined that China had violated environmental provisions of the international law of the sea by tearing up coral reefs to build artificial islands. And the panel also found in the past three years China has aggravated the dispute with the Philippines due to its land reclamation campaign and aggressive and illegal behavior by Chinese ships.
The panel concluded that both countries, since they ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty, are bound to comply with Tuesday’s decision.
Venezuelans flee to Mexico to escape economic crisis
Kimberly-Clark: Venezuela seizes and re-opens US-owned factory
BBC: The government of Venezuela has said it has seized a factory owned by the US firm Kimberly-Clark.
The firm had said it was halting operations in Venezuela as it was unable to obtain raw materials.
But the labour minister said on Monday that the factory closure was illegal and it had re-opened “in the hands of the workers”.
Kimberly-Clark, which makes hygiene products including tissues and nappies, said it had acted appropriately.
Over the weekend it became the latest multinational to close or scale back operations in the country, citing strict currency controls, a lack of raw materials and soaring inflation.
Reuters: No to the closure” read graffiti on the firm’s gates over the weekend
General Mills, Procter & Gamble and other corporations have reduced operations in Venezuela as the country is gripped by economic crisis and widespread shortages of basic household goods.
Labour Minister Oswaldo Vera, from the ruling Socialist Party (PSUV), visited the factory in Maracay and said it was illegal.
Almost 1,000 workers had asked him to re-start production, he said.
Mr Vera said: “Kimberly-Clark will continue producing, now in the hands of the workers.
“We’ve just turned on the first engine.”
The Texas-based company said in a statement: “If the Venezuelan government takes control of Kimberly-Clark facilities and operations, it will be responsible for the well-being of the workers and the physical asset, equipment and machinery in the facilities going forward.”
In just 12 hours, more than 35K Venezuelans cross Colombian border to buy food, medicine
FoxNewsLatino – Cucuta – In just 12 hours, more than 35,000 Venezuelans crossed the border into Colombia on Sunday to buy food and medicines in the city of Cucuta, when the Venezuelan government agreed to opened border crossings for one day only.
People began crossing the Simon Bolivar international bridge at 5:00 a.m. to purchase products that are scarce in Venezuela.
“We’re from here in San Antonio (and), honestly, we don’t have any food to give our children, so I don’t think it’s fair that the border is still closed,” a Venezuelan woman told EFE in Cucuta.
The woman, who preferred to not give her name, crossed the international bridge with her husband and children ages 5 and 2.
The border crossings between Tachira state and Norte de Santander province were closed on Aug. 19, 2015, by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who said he took the measure to fight smuggling and prevent members of paramilitary groups from entering Venezuela.
Maduro later ordered all crossings along the 1,378-mile border closed.
Tachira Gov. Jose Gregorio Vielma Mora said Saturday that the border would be opened on Maduro’s orders.
After the announcement, hundreds of Venezuelans began lining up to cross the Simon Bolivar international bridge.
“A second entry by Venezuelans into Colombia was planned by the Venezuelan right, with the pretext of buying food and medicines,” Vielma Mora said.
The governor was apparently referring to an incident last Tuesday, when about 500 Venezuelans from the city of Ureña crossed the closed Francisco de Paula Santander international bridge and went into Cucuta to buy food.
Norte de Santander Gov. William Villamizar, for his part, said in a Twitter post after visiting the border crossings that the humanitarian corridor “has benefited 25,000 people” who were able to buy “food and medicines.”
Villamizar spoke with some of the people streaming across the border and posed for photos with a family carrying a poster that read, “Colombia, gracias por su solidaridad con Venezuela” (Colombia, Thanks for Your Solidarity with Venezuela).
“This is super nice on Colombia’s part, very good,” Rosalba Jaimes, a San Antonio resident, told EFE.
Betty Rojas, a Venezuelan already heading home, said she and others planned to cross whenever the border was open.
“We bought rice, pasta, sugar, toilet paper, butter, everything we could bring back. We had enough for lots of stuff,” Rojas told EFE, adding that she wanted to tell the Colombian government “thank you.”
Cucuta police chief Col. Jaime Barrera said officers would “guarantee security in Cucuta’s business districts for the thousands of people coming from Venezuela.
Officers have been posted at the border crossings and at businesses across the border city, the provincial police chief said.
Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and Foreign Minister Maria Angela Holguin visited Cucuta on Wednesday.
The president said he would try to negotiate with Maduro in an effort to reopen the border crossings.
Venezuela: Decree Grants New Powers To President, Defense Minister
Stratfor: Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro issued a presidential decree July 11 granting new, sweeping powers to himself and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, Sumarium reported. Maduro said the decree establishes a new program that concentrates economic and political power at the very top of government, which will enable the country to correct its economic woes and get production back on track. Moreover, all government institutions and ministries in the country will now fall under the direct control of the president and the defense minister. The president said that he will provide more information about the decree, which effectively makes Padrino Lopez a second head of state in Venezuela, within the coming days.
David Cameron Confirms He Will Resign On Wednesday, Theresa May Next Prime Minister
Zerohedge:With Theresa May the last (wo)man standing, it should not be totally surprising that David Cameron has just confirmed he will officially resign as British prime minister on Wednesday after Prime Minister’s Questions. Early strength in sterling is holding.
David Cameron says he will resign by Wednesday, Theresa May to be next British Prime Minister.
She will be tasked with either triggering the Article 50 process for the UK’s departure from the EU, or trying to undo the entire process.
**** Larry is staying however at 10 Downing Street. Who is Larry?
A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said: “It’s a civil servant’s cat and does not belong to the Camerons – he will be staying.”
Larry, who was rehomed from Battersea Dogs and Cats Home in 2011, was said to have a “strong predatory drive” that suggested he would be well suited to the task of rat catching. Guardian
At least Theresa May is on the right side of a major issues, radical and militant Islam.
Published on Mar 23, 2015
An extensive wish list of counter-extremism measures has been reeled off by the Home Secretary in her last major speech before the start of the general election campaign. From launching an investigation into the use of Sharia law to promoting “British values” through social media, and from an inspection of police responses to honour crimes to stricter English language requirements, Theresa May set out how a Conservative majority government would deal with extremism. The Home Secretary used the speech to warn radical Islamists that the “game is up” and that they are no longer tolerated in Britain, but also called on British Muslims to help tackle extremism.
Regarding the recent vote on Brexit:
Factbox: Theresa May’s plans for a Brexit ministry and who might lead it
MAY’S BREXIT MINISTRY
Reuters: “Nobody should fool themselves this process will be brief or straightforward. Regardless of the time it takes to negotiate an initial deal, it is going to take a period lasting several years to disentangle our laws, rules and processes from the Brussels machinery,” May said on June 30 when she launched her candidacy to be prime minister.
“That means it is going to require significant expertise and a consistent approach. I will therefore create a new government department responsible for conducting Britain’s negotiation with the EU and for supporting the rest of Whitehall in its European work.
“That department will be led by a senior Secretary of State — and I will make sure that the position is taken by a member of parliament who campaigned for Britain to leave the EU.”
CANDIDATES TO BE MAY’S BREXIT NEGOTIATOR
DAVID DAVIS
A senior Conservative lawmaker who was beaten by David Cameron in the party’s 2005 leadership election contest, Davis has been in parliament since 1987 and is a former junior Foreign Office minister.
Davis was born in York and grew up in south London. He first worked as an insurance clerk before spending 17 years at global food ingredients provider Tate & Lyle.
He has served as Conservative Party chairman and was also the party’s home affairs spokesman in opposition.
In an article for Conservative grassroots website Conservative Home on Monday, Davis said Britain should take its time before triggering Article 50. The government should first work out its negotiating strategy and begin the formal process of leaving the EU “before or by the beginning of next year”.
“We need to take a brisk but measured approach to Brexit. This would involve concluding consultations and laying out the detailed plans in the next few months,” he said.
LIAM FOX
Fox ran for the Conservative leadership himself before backing May when he was eliminated in the process of winnowing the candidates down to two.
During the leadership contest, Fox said he would trigger Article 50 by the end of this year, with the intention of a full British exit from the EU by Jan. 1, 2019.
Long a figure on the right wing of the Conservative Party, Fox was born and raised in Scotland and attended the local state school before studying medicine at the University of Glasgow.
He worked as a doctor and civilian army medical officer before becoming a Conservative lawmaker in 1992.
Fox was defense secretary from 2010-2011, when he resigned over his relationship with a businessman who acted as his adviser. A government investigation found he had breached the ministerial code by allowing an “inappropriate blurring of lines between official and personal relationships”.
He has also held the posts of junior foreign office minister and Conservative Party chairman.
MICHAEL GOVE
Gove was a leading Brexit campaigner who ran for the party’s leadership but was eliminated in the second round of voting.
He had been expected to support former London mayor Boris Johnson for the leadership but made a surprise announcement hours before Johnson was due to launch his bid that he did not believe Johnson was up to the job and would run himself instead.
Gove was brought up in Scotland and studied at Oxford University before becoming a journalist. He worked at the BBC and the Times newspaper, where he was assistant editor.
He was also chairman of the center-right thinktank Policy Exchange before being elected to parliament in 2005.
Under outgoing Prime Minister David Cameron he has served as Education Secretary and Justice Secretary.
CHRIS GRAYLING
Grayling, currently the leader of Britain’s lower house of parliament, was May’s campaign manager during the leadership contest. A former Justice Secretary and minister in the Work and Pensions department, Grayling has been in parliament since 2001.
Before becoming a lawmaker he worked in television production and marketing.
Last month he told Reuters he expected Britain to have informal talks with the EU about its future relationship before triggering Article 50, which he said should only be done when Britain is ready.
CANDIDATES TO BE MAY’S FINANCE MINISTER
PHILIP HAMMOND
Currently Foreign Secretary, Hammond campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU. A lawmaker since 1997, he is also a former defense minister and minister for transport.
While the Conservatives were in opposition, he was a junior spokesman for the party on finance.
Before entering parliament he had a career in business including working for companies in manufacturing, consultancy, property, construction, and oil and gas.
Last week Hammond said the government was not yet in a position to begin substantive negotiations and therefore should not begin the process by triggering Article 50.
He also said the economic and fiscal impact of Brexit in the short term would reduce government revenues, making it harder to significantly boost funding for trade negotiation resources.
SAJID JAVID
A lawmaker since 2010, Javid has been Business Secretary since last May’s election. He also previously served in two junior minister roles at the Treasury.
The son of a bus driver, Javid had been promised the role of finance minister by leadership candidate Stephen Crabb, who pulled out after the first round of voting. Both have working-class roots, leading them to be dubbed the “blue collar ticket” by some newspapers.
Before joining parliament he worked at Chase Manhattan Bank in New York and then at Deutsche Bank, where he focused on helping raise investment in developing countries.
Javid, who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU, has said securing access to the bloc’s single market should be the top goal in Brexit negotiations.
He has said he would lead a series of trade missions this year, and last week began preliminary talks with India on an eventual bilateral trade deal.
GEORGE OSBORNE
It is not certain May will replace Osborne, the current finance minister, immediately. One possibility is that he stays on in the short-term while the dust settles, and continues to represent Britain at upcoming international gatherings such as this month’s G20 finance minister meeting in China.
Reuters: No to the closure” read graffiti on the firm’s gates over the weekend
Images from