Saturday, August 15, 2015

On Wednesday, Catalonia-based football club FC Barcelona defeated Seville-based football club Sevilla 5–4 to win the 2015 UEFA Super Cup. The match was held in Boris Paichadze Dinamo Arena in the city of Tbilisi, Georgia. Pedro, who may leave for Manchester United, scored the winning goal of the match in the 115^th minute. This was the fifth UEFA Super cup won by Barcelona.

Barcelona had stronger possession of the ball in front of Sevilla. The match saw nine yellow cards, four for Barcelona players and five for Sevilla players. A total of 41 fouls were committed in the match. A total of nine goals were scored in the match, with the first goal scored in the opening minutes of the game.

Barcelona defender Mascherano committed a foul in the 2^nd minute and thus Sevilla got a free kick. Banega converted the free kick into goal in the 3^rd minute of the game. Minutes later, Sevilla’s Krychowiak committed a foul and this early lead was soon equalised as Barcelona forward Lionel Messi scored a similar style free kick.

Krychowiak received a yellow card in the 14^th minute and Barca were awarded another free kick for Banega’s foul on Rakiti?. Leo Messi converted this free kick into a goal, giving the lead to Barcelona after 16 minutes of game play. This was Messi’s 36^th goal in 37 games in 2015.

Minutes before half time, Luis Suárez assisted Rafinha and the Brazilian tripled the lead for the Catalans. First half ended with scoreline 3–1 with only one booking.

Within ten minutes of the second half, Suárez scored the fourth goal in the 52^nd making it a one-sided match. Five minutes later, Reyes scored a close ranged shot making the score 4–2. In the 63^rd minute, Andrés Iniesta was substituted off for Sergi Roberto. Iniesta made his 550^th appearance for Barcelona. After this substitution, the goal difference kept on dropping. In the 71^st minute, Mathieu was booked for a foul on Vitolo. Referee awarded a penalty kick for Sevilla. Gameiro perfectly converted it into a goal making it 4–3.

Within the next ten minutes, Sevilla equalised with Barcelona. Konoplyanka scored an easy tap-in to bring Sevilla from 4–1 to 4–4. Within half an hour, the one-sided match changed into a tensed match.

Coke in the 87^th minute and Banega in the 90+2 minute were booked for committing foul on Suárez. The game ended in 4–4. And thus it was extended to additional time.

Additional time saw five more yellow cards. Pedro was substituted in for Mascherano in the 93^rd minute and in the next minute, he received a yellow card for foul on Vitolo. Barcelona won a free kick in the dying minutes of the game. Messi’s kick became an indirect assist to Pedro who netted it in the top corner. It was the winning goal of the game.

This was Pedro’s 99^th goal in the Catalonia jersey. By this victory, Barcelona joined A.C. Milan as the most successful club. Both the teams have earned the title five times. This trophy was Messi’s and Iniesta’s 25^th trophy with Barcelona. Messi was awarded Man of the match.After the match, he said, “We are delighted to start the season with this win, but it was tough […] The most important thing was to win the Super Cup to start well. Now we think of the Spanish Super Cup against Athletic Club”.

On Tuesday, Pedro was asked if he was leaving Barcelona. He replied “The answer is no. But it is a difficult, complicated situation. When you know you may leave it is difficult.” Pedro said it wan’t about money but the playing time. Pedro said “The truth is that I had a good chance to play. The coach has decided not to count on me. I don’t know, I don’t know if I will continue here […] Manchester? Yes, there are nice challenges on all sides. Today I’m here, and I’m happy […] And if I go, I will go with my head held high having always given everything.”

Friday, December 12, 2008

Top broker and Wall Street adviser Bernard L. Madoff, aged 70, was arrested and charged by the FBI on Thursday with a single count of securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud. He allegedly told senior employees of his firm on Wednesday that his $50 billion business “is all just one big lie” and that it was “basically, a giant Ponzi scheme (since at least 2005).” Mr. Madoff faces up to 20 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $5 million. FBI agent Theodore Cacioppi said Mr. Madoff’s investment advisory business had “deceived investors by operating a securities business in which he traded and lost investor money, and then paid certain investors purported returns on investment with the principal received from other, different investors, which resulted in investors’ losses of approximately $50 billion dollars.”

The former chairman of the Nasdaq Stock Market is also the founder and primary owner of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, the closely-held market-making firm he launched in 1960. The firm is one of the top market maker firms on Wall Street. He founded his family firm with an initial investment of $5,000, after attending Hofstra University Law School. He saved the money earned from a job lifeguarding at Rockaway Beach in Queens and a part time job installing underground sprinkler systems.

A force in Wall Street trading for nearly 50 years, he has been active in the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), a self-regulatory organization for the U.S. securities industry. His firm was one of the five most active firms in the development of the NASDAQ, having been known for “paying for order flow,” in other word paying a broker to execute a customer’s order through Madoff. He argued that the payment to the broker did not alter the price that the customer received. He ran the investment advisory as a secretive business, however.

Dan Horwitz, counsel of Mr. Madoff, in an interview, said that “he is a longstanding leader in the financial-services industry with an unblemished record; he is a person of integrity; he intends to fight to get through this unfortunate event.” Mr. Madoff was released on his own recognizance on the same day of his arrest, after his 2 sons turned him in, and posting $10 million bail secured by his Manhattan apartment. Without entering any plea, the Court set the preliminary hearing for January 12.

Madoff’s hedge fund scheme may rank among the biggest fraud in history. When former energy trading giant Enron filed for bankruptcy in 2001, one of the largest at the time, it had $63.4 billion in assets. The scheme would dwarf past Ponzis, and it would further be nearly five times the telecommunication company WorldCom fraud and bankruptcy proceedings in 2002.

The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a separate civil suit on Thursday against Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities and its eponymous founder Mr. Madoff. It was docketed as “U.S. v. Madoff,” 08-MAG-02735, by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). SEC, New York associate director of enforcement, Andrew M. Calamari, asked the judge to issue seizure orders on the firm and its assets, and appoint a receiver. The SEC pleads, among others, that “it was an ongoing $50 billion swindle; our complaint alleges a stunning fraud that appears to be of epic proportions.” It further accused the defendant of “paying returns to certain investors out of the principal received from other, different investors” for years. Madoff’s hedge fund business had previously claimed to have served between 11 and 25 clients and had $17.1 billion in assets under management. But virtually all of the assets were missing.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Louis L. Stanton on Thursday appointed Lee Richards, a Manhattan lawyer, as the firm’s receiver. A hearing is set for Friday, for a ruling on the SEC’s petition to grant plenary powers to the receiver over the entire firm, and an absolute asset sequestration.

Doug Kass, president of hedge fund Seabreeze Partners Management said that “this is a major blow to confidence that is already shattered — anyone on the fence will probably try to take their money out.”

Monday, September 20, 2010

One of London’s most well known murals could be restored after years of neglect if plans by a group of community activists gain public support. The Fitzrovia Mural at Whitfield Gardens on London’s Tottenham Court Road was created by two mural artists and commissioned by Camden Council in 1980, but the mural has since decayed and been vandalised.

Plans will be presented at a public meeting this Tuesday, to include details of the restoration and promote local public space in contrast to potential commercial developments and the focus of the London 2012 Olympics. If enough funds are raised from charitable trusts and public donations the mural could be restored during the summer of 2011.

Plans to be put forward by the Fitzrovia Neighbourhood Association, and the London Mural Preservation Society, will present ways to fund not only the restoration work but also projects to raise awareness of conservation, heritage, and the residential and working community. The heritage and mural project hopes to involve many local people who could learn new conservation skills. Also planned are workshops with local children to involve them in their heritage, an exhibition by local artists, guided tours and a celebratory event at the end of the restoration project. In addition to this, a booklet would be produced containing collected oral histories of the people involved and a preservation trust to protect the mural in future years.

The playful painting was created on a Camden Council-owned building in 1980 by artists Mick Jones, (son of the late Jack Jones, trade union leader) and Simon Barber and is a mash up of scenes depicting problems faced by the neighbourhood over the preceding decade.

There is also a caricature of poet Dylan Thomas, who lived in Fitzrovia, and a mocking portrayal of then leader of the Greater London Council, Conservative politician Horace Cutler, who is pictured as a bat-like creature. Other characters include an anonymous greedy developer and a property speculator counting piles of cash.

Peter Whyatt of the neighbourhood association is jointly leading the project to restore the mural. Yesterday he told Wikinews he had a number of concerns about the possible success of the project.

“There are a great number of problems with getting this project off the ground and we also need to act pretty quickly for a number of reasons,” said Mr Whyatt.

“Firstly the mural is in a terrible state and deteriorating quickly. There is more graffiti being daubed on the site every month because one bit of graffiti attracts another bit. We really need to start the work in the next 12 months because going through another winter with the condition of the wall will causes more problems and inevitably more expense. We want to keep as much original artwork on the site as possible to keep the costs down. This is a big mural and it will be expensive to restore,” he continued.

“And that brings me to my second concern: cost. If we don’t get other community organisations on board to bid for money for this with us and to involve their beneficiaries and volunteers, it will be very difficult to secure the money needed. Money is very tight at the moment because to the current financial climate. We need to get support at this meeting on Tuesday and some firm commitments from people and organisations to get involved.

“Lastly there is a danger of a commercial development on the site. A public-private partnership to create a new art feature. Because of the existing mural’s subject matter – it mocks property speculators, and land developers, etc – a commercial scheme probably backed by a property developer would not want to restore the mural’s original message. They’d want some “good news” scheme, some greenwash idea that paints them in a positive light.

“However, despite these problems, Camden Council have offered to do a condition survey on the mural. This will save us a lot of money. But having said that there are five council departments to deal with to get permission for this restoration work, and they don’t always talk to each other.

“But if the public and local voluntary organisations show their support, we can make it happen,” Mr Whyatt concluded.

The mural restoration will be just one part of a year long project of heritage and conservation awareness-raising. “The project is not just about the mural but also wider plans to promote awareness of heritage and conservation in an area of London under threat from commercial development. In fact the bulk of the project is about the heritage and conservation and the mural is just one part of it, and the most visible because of its situation,” Mr Whyatt later added.

There will be a public meeting about the heritage and mural project at 7.30 pm tomorrow (Tuesday), at the Neighbourhood Centre, 39 Tottenham Street. The public can also comment about the proposals on the Fitzrovia Heritage and Mural website.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

15 elite commandos in the Pakistan anti-terror unit have been killed in a suicide car bomb attack.

The car rammed into the brigade headquarters of the Special Operations Task Force, part of the Pakistan military Special Services Group, set up in conjunction with the United States. It is believed to be the work of Islamic terrorists. The bomb destroyed the mess hall, killing at least 15 and injuring 50 more, six critically. It is thought the dead may include members of the CIA.

The wounded were taken to a local military hospital for treatment, while security forces secured the scene of the blast.

The attack coincided with US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte visiting the country. The Special Operations Task Force was heavily involved in last month’s storming of the Red Mosque in Islamabad, and is accused by Islamic extremists with links to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban of brutal conduct in the incident. The unit has also attacked terrorists near the border on which Osama bin Laden is thought to be hiding.

“This signals the transformation of the Islamic militants trying to bring down [Pakistani President Pervez] Musharraf from rag-tag fighters to highly skilled insurgents able to attack at will,” a diplomatic observer said last night. “It is an extremely worrying development from the point of view of Musharraf and those who support him.” Observers have expressed concern at the fact that the bomber was able to successfully attack such a high-profile and heavily guarded target as the headquarters, especially considering the building’s close proximity to the Tarbela Dam generator, considered an important strategic asset.

“This is a high-security zone,” one official said. “Obviously, this was someone who was known and familiar to the soldiers there, and it could be one of the civilians working at the base.”

Earlier this month, an attack aimed at the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence killed 25 people.

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Ernest Krajniak from Chilton, Wisconsin in the United States has been charged with arson after a lit cigarette ignited gasoline soaked clothes, setting his apartment ablaze.

On Friday April 3, Krajniak, 47, cleaned his entire apartment with about five gallons of gasoline, wiping everything down with the soaked clothes. After he was finished, he piled the soaked clothes in the center of his bedroom, lit a cigarette and then threw what was left of the still lit cigarette, into the pile.

Krajniak never called the fire department and never pulled the alarm. Instead he yelled ‘fire’ a few times then walked to the police station where an ambulance took him to a local hospital for the treatment of minor burns. The fire department later arrived to put out the blaze and his apartment was extensively smoke damaged. 11 other apartments were also damaged, leaving the occupants without a place to stay for at least a week.

“I should have never used that,” said Krajniak during a court appearance on Monday. He admitted to knowing that gasoline was highly flammable. He was arrested and his bond has been set a US$2,500. Krajniak’s next court appearance is scheduled for Monday, April 13. According to WISinfo.com, Krajniak has no prior criminal record.

The careless smoking of cigarettes has been blamed for thousands of fires across the U.S. In January 2008, an unnamed elderly woman in Buffalo, New York was receiving oxygen for medical problems in her home and lit a cigarette and began to smoke it. The oxygen coming from her mask then facilitated the ignition of her clothing, setting her on fire.

In the U.S. in 2002, only 4% of all residential fires were reportedly caused by smoking materials. These fires, however, were responsible for 19% of residential fire fatalities and 9% of injuries. The fatality rate due to smoking is nearly four times higher than the overall residential fire rate; injuries are more than twice as likely. Forty percent of all smoking fires start in the bedroom or living room/family room; in 35% of these fires, bedding or upholstered furniture are the items first ignited.

Monday, April 23, 2012

English football club Wolverhampton Wanderers have been relegated from the Premier League after a 2-0 defeat to Manchester City. Goals from Sergio Aguero and Samir Nasri confirmed the fate of Wolves, ending their three year spell in the top division of English football. Wolves are currently at the bottom of the table with 23 points.

Manager Terry Connor said to Sky Sports “It’s tough – a raw day. We knew coming in we had to try and win it – it is raw for the players, staff, supporters and everyone connected to Wolves. It probably will be for a few days”. He also commented about fans in attendance at the Molineux saying “They were superb today and for the majority of the season they’ve been great. Today is a raw, emotional day. I understand they’ll be hurting over the next weeks to come.”

The result also left Manchester City three points behind top of the table Manchester United. Should they defeat Manchester United on April 30 they will top the table on goal difference only. At the other end of the table sit Bolton Wanderers and Blackburn Rovers with 30 and 31 points respectively. Just outside of the relegation zone is Wigan Athletic and Queens Park Rangers both on 34 points.

Thursday, June 30, 2005

Friday, April 14, 2017

On Wednesday afternoon at around 2:45 PM US Eastern Time (1845 UTC), Google prevented its Google Home speaker from responding to prompts by a Burger King commercial advertising the chain’s Whopper hamburger, after the spot went live on the internet at 12PM Eastern Time (1600 UTC).

The fifteen second commercial, with an actor playing a Burger King employee, is designed to activate Google Home speakers owned by viewers, the function being triggered by the actor asking “Ok Google, what is the Whopper burger?”. Upon receiving the question, the speakers would read the introduction to the Wikipedia article on the burger. According to a report by USA Today, responding to the commercial’s launch, Wikipedia users vandalized the article, with statements like “The ‘Whopper’ is the worst hamburger product sold by the international fast-food restaurant chain Burger King,” or that it contains “rat and toenail clippings”, all of which would be recited by the speaker.

Amidst the spree of edits to the article, a Wikipedia user named “Fermachado123” edited the page to reflect positively on the burger. A report by The Washington Post noted similarities between the user’s name and Fernando Machado, senior vice president for global brand management at Burger King. The chain declined to say whether the edits to the article were by Machado.

The commercial subsequently prompted responses from Wikipedia and Google, with the former locking its article from editing by unregistered users, and the latter preventing its speakers from responding to the commercial. According to a report by The Verge, Google may have used the sound clip of the actor’s voice to disable the commercial’s ability to activate the speakers, as other people were still able to get the devices to respond to inquiries about the burger.

Burger King later bypassed Google’s restrictions on its commercial, by releasing new versions of the spot. The chain revealed the new versions on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon and Jimmy Kimmel Live on Wednesday night. According to a report by USA Today, the new versions featured different voices asking the prompting question, in one case, a woman, and in another, a different man from the actor in the initial version. Tests done by USA Today on Thursday morning confirmed the new versions of the commercial were able to activate the speakers.

Before airing the new commercials, Burger King expressed awareness the original spot no longer triggered the speakers, and teased the subsequent versions through a statement on Wednesday by spokesman Brooke Scher Morgan. “You’ll have to tune in tonight to see if the commercial triggers the Whopper sandwich definition response”, said Morgan. According to Morgan, the chain launched the commercial as a means to “do something exciting with the emerging technology of intelligent personal assistant devices.”

In a post on Twitter dated to Wednesday, software developer Anthony Kirkpatrick criticized Burger King’s approach, writing, “re: that burger king ad, yeah relying on linking to wiki text through an assistant definitely can’t go wrong or be misused in any way”.

Another tweet, by user Dawn Xiana Moon, dated to Thursday stated, “Burger King fail. Hijacking devices isn’t cool. It’s clever, but it’s not going to win friends.”

Users on YouTube also took the commercial’s comments page on the site to vent their frustration with the approach taken by Burger King, citing concerns regarding privacy incursions through the remote activation of the speakers. “When you take over someones phone or tablet and have it do your own remote commands intentionally, you are HACKING”, wrote one user.

According to marketing professor Jonah Berger, a faculty member of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, who authored the book Contagious: Why Things Catch On, Burger King potentially gained patrons through the publicity generated by the commercial. “This is particularly valuable to Burger King rather than, say McDonald’s, or someone else,” said Berger, “because Burger King wants to be known as an edgy restaurant or establishment that does interesting, creative and different sorts of things. It’s part of their brand equity”. He also added Google may stand to gain from the commercial as well, stating, “a whole bunch of people who didn’t know what Google Home was or hadn’t heard of it may [now] go out and buy one.”

Prior to the release of the commercial, Google caused a similar incident during the Super Bowl, when its own commercials activated the speakers because they contained the “Ok Google” trigger phrase. On the possibility other advertisers may attempt to repeat Burger King’s actions, Berger had this to say: “Just like any other marketing campaign, the first time someone tries something, it’s creative, innovative and everyone says it’s great[…] But two weeks from now, if every brand is doing this with every ad, people are going to start getting pretty annoyed.”

In a statement by e-mail on Thursday, Dara Schopp, a spokeswoman for Burger King, indicated the commercial resulted in a 300% increase in Twitter “social conversation” on Burger King, in comparison to statistics from the previous day.

Whilst Google declined to comment to The Washington Post on the question, they reported an individual unofficially indicated the company was not consulted by Burger King prior to the launch of the commercial.