Tlah kucoba melupakan dirimu Namun kau tak mengerti Kuberharap semua kan berakhir Karena ku tlah berdua Chorus: Ku akui a

Tlah kucoba melupakan dirimu Namun kau tak mengerti Kuberharap semua kan berakhir Karena ku tlah berdua Chorus: Ku akui aku masih menyayangimu Namun semuanya tak mungkin lagi Hidupku bukanlah hanya Memikirkan cinta Dan tak harus slalu memiliki Sudah biarkan saja cinta itu ada Bersemi dihati saja Kisah lama dan membawa ke luka Berurai air mata Kusadari jalannya cinta kita Tak seindah dengannya Chorus Hidupku bukanlah hanya Memikirkan cinta Dan tak harus slalu memiliki Sudah biarkan saja cinta itu ada Bersemi dihati Hidupku bukanlah hanya Memikirkan cinta Dan tak harus slalu memiliki Sudah biarkan saja cinta itu ada Bersemi dihati saja http://musiklib.org/Bunga_Citra_Lestari-Simpan_Di_Hati_Saja-Lirik_Lagu.htm

“Aktivasi Otak Tengah” sebenarnya adalah aktivasi bagian otak yang bertanggungjawab terhadap kontrol INTUISI, DAYA P

“Aktivasi Otak Tengah” sebenarnya adalah aktivasi bagian otak yang bertanggungjawab terhadap kontrol INTUISI, DAYA PREDIKSI & KEMAMPUAN PERSPEKTIF (disebut “Kompetensi Bawah Sadar”/ Subconscious Mind Competence) dan kontrol memori jangka pendek dan jangka panjang, penyimpanan ingatan dari pengalaman hidup, pemertahanan homeostatis, emosi pertahanan dan perlindungan diri (Buzan, 2005:43).

Mengaktifkan bagian otak ini berarti menumbuhkembangkan kemampuan anak dalam mengingat (menggali memori jangka pendek dan jangka panjang), pengelolaan ingatan/ memori pengalaman hidup sekaligus kemampuan anak dalam menggunakan intuisi, daya prediksi dan kemampuan perspektif. Sangat POWERFUL bila digunakan dalam BELAJAR !

Secara kasat mata, seorang anak yang telah aktif “otak tengah”-nya, ia mampu mendeteksi, mengetahui objek-objek (bahkan membaca) dengan mata tertutup !

Maaf, jika Anda berpikiran berhenti sampai pada kemampuan ini telah dianggap selesai, Anda akan bingung tentang MANFAAT SESUNGGUHNYA dari aktivasi bagian otak ini. Mungkin Anda akan berkata “aahh.. apa gunanya, lha wong punya mata kok susah-susah banget membaca sambil merem (tutup mata)…”. Bukan “kehebatan” anak bisa “melihat” dengan mata tertutup atau mampu membaca dengan mata tertutup itu sebagai tujuan akhir. Ini justru baru PERMULAAN (prasyarat) bagi TEKNIK MIRACLE LEARNING !

Aktivasi bagian otak ini BERHUBUNGAN ERAT dengan TEKNIK LANJUTAN untuk mendayagunakannya dalam BELAJAR yang luar biasa ! Yakni MIRACLE LEARNING !

MIRACLE LEARNING adalah program bimbingan belajar berbasis terapi dan pendayagunaan subconscious mind competence (kecerdasan bawah sadar). Dalam program ini anak dibimbing dengan menggunakan kurikulum Miracle Learning yang di-setting secara khusus. Dalam program ini, anak terlebih dahulu diaktifkan “kompetensi bawah sadar”-nya. Dalam aktivasi ini dipastikan terlebih dahulu bahwa emosi anak benar-benar stabil. Jika pada tahap ini emosi anak tidak stabil (mungkin ada kecenderungan ketidakstabilan emosi, dsb) maka gangguan ini diterapi terlebih dahulu. Jika telah beres maka dilanjutkan aktivasi. Setelah “kompetensi bawah sadar” anak telah aktif, maka dilanjutkan dengan penerapan materi-materi lain (dijelaskan dalam sesi training).

saco-indonesia.com, Jelang menjamu Chelsea di Etihad Stadium semalam (01/02), Manchester City telah menyandang sejumlah rekor im

saco-indonesia.com, Jelang menjamu Chelsea di Etihad Stadium semalam (01/02), Manchester City telah menyandang sejumlah rekor impresif di laga kandang. Mereka juga selalu mencetak gol dalam 61 laga kandang terakhir dan belum pernah kehilangan poin saat bermain di Etihad musim ini. Namun kedua rekor mentereng tersebut patah saat The Citizens dibekuk The Blues dengan skor 0-1.

Manajer Chelsea, Jose Mourinho juga mengaku senang bisa mencatatkan cleansheet untuk melawan tim paling produktif di Premier League. Secara khusus, ia telah memuji performa para pemain bertahan dan juga kiper Petr Cech.

"Kami telah bertahan dengan sangat baik dan disiplin. Kemenangan ini akan bisa terwujud karena Petr telah melakukan sejumlah penyelamatan fantastis. Begitu pula lini belakang kami yang tampil sangat baik," kata pria berusia 51 tahun ini.

"Namun secara keseluruhan, barisan gelandang kami juga bekerja sangat keras. Kemenangan ini juga telah terjadi karena striker kami menunjukkan kontribusi. Seluruh pemain melakukan yang terbaik untuk tim."

Kemenangan tersebut telah membuat Chelsea menyamai poin 53 yang diukir City. Keduanya bersanding di posisi kedua dan ketiga, tertinggal dua angka dari Arsenal yang memuncaki klasemen.

Editor : Dian Sukmawati

saco-indonesia.com, Empat kali beraksi, kawanan perampok truk telah dibekuk oleh aparat Jatanras Polda Metro Jaya. Dalam aksinya

saco-indonesia.com, Empat kali beraksi, kawanan perampok truk telah dibekuk oleh aparat Jatanras Polda Metro Jaya. Dalam aksinya komplotan bandit yang beranggotakan empat orang ini kerap menyasar truk yang bermuatan barang dengan modus berpura-pura menumpang.

Kasubdit Jatanras Polda Metro Jaya AKBP Herry Heryawan juga menyebutkan keempat pelaku yang dibekuk masing-masing, Erwandi alias Andi, 29, Iwan Setiawan alias Iwan, 23, Kusnadi alias Engkus, 21, dan Juli Erwan, 20. Aksi terakhir kawanan garong ini telah dilakukan terhadap truk kontainer yang bermutan sabun dan sampo pada 26 September 2013 lalu.

“Mereka naik truk dari Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan, Pulogadung dengan berpura-pura menumpang,” kata Herry. Kemudian sebelum truk masuk ke jalan tol, mereka mulai beraksi. Satu pelaku yang telah membawa senjata tajam  berupa clurit, menodong sopir dan kernet. Sementara pelaku lain mengikat dan melakban awak truk. “Kemudian, kemudi diambil alih oleh pelaku “Korban kemudian dibuang di pinggir tol, sementara para pelaku telah membawa truk tersebut,” kata Herry.

Truk yang bermuatan perlengkapan mandi itu kemudian telah diarahkan oleh para pelaku ke daerah Pondok Gede, Bekasi untuk dapat dijual muatannya. “Para pelaku kita bekuk pada 15 Desember lalu setelah korban melaporkan kejadian itu,”. Dalam pemeriksaan kawanan bandit ini juga mengaku sudah  4 kali beraksi. “Tersangka Juli pernah ditahan di LP Paledang karena kasus penodongan dengan senjata tajam, kemudian pembunuhan, curas dan kepemilikan senjata tajam,” tutur Herry.

Editor : Dian Sukmawati

saco-indonesia.com, Tebu merupakan tanaman yang terkenal sebagai bahan penghasil gula. Uniknya, minum jus tebu ternyata sangat b

saco-indonesia.com, Tebu merupakan tanaman yang terkenal sebagai bahan penghasil gula. Uniknya, minum jus tebu ternyata sangat baik bagi penderita diabetes. Kenapa bisa begitu?

Kandungan nutrisi
Tebu yang belum diolah juga mengandung kolesterol dan sodium rendah. Selain itu, tidak ada lemak jenuh yang terkandung di dalamnya. Nutrisi lain yang terkandung dalam jus tebu adalah fosfor, zat besi, kalium, kalsium, dan magnesium.

Indeks glikemik rendah
Menurut Live Strong, indeks glikemik adalah cara untuk mengukur peningkatan gula darah dalam tubuh. Namun jus tebu justru juga memiliki kadar indeks glikemik yang relatif rendah. Sehingga minum jus tebu justru juga bisa mengontrol gula darah.

Penyakit kuning
Jus tebu adalah obat alami untuk dapat mengatasi penyakit kuning. Penyakit kuning sendiri juga disebabkan oleh adanya billirubin di dalam darah. Fungsi hati terganggu dan akhirnya muncullah penyakit kuning.

Infeksi
Beberapa jenis infeksi seperti saluran kemih, penyakit menular seksual, dan inflamasi pada lambung juga bisa diredakan dengan minum segelas jus tebu setiap hari.

Batu ginjal
Salah satu obat efektif untuk mengatasi batu ginjal adalah minum jus tebu, demikian menurut Boldsky. Sebab jus tebu juga mampu untuk membantu tubuh menghancurkan batu ginjal.

Flu dan demam
Siapa bilang minum jus tebu bisa bikin pilek? Jus tebu malah juga bisa meredakan flu, demam, dan radang tenggorokan.

Dehidrasi
Malas minum air putih? Coba konsumsi jus tebu. Minuman ini juga bisa mencegah dehidrasi karena bisa memberikan asupan cairan menyehatkan bagi tubuh.

Itulah beberapa manfaat kesehatan dari minum jus tebu. Apakah Anda suka mengonsumsi minuman tersebut?

Editor : dian sukmawati

saco-indonesia.com, Juru bicara KPK Johan Budi juga telah menyatakan, penyitaan terhadap kendaraan milik Wawan adalah penyitaan

saco-indonesia.com, Juru bicara KPK Johan Budi juga telah menyatakan, penyitaan terhadap kendaraan milik Wawan adalah penyitaan dengan nilai tertinggi yang pernah dilakukan oleh KPK. Memecahkan rekor sebelumnya, yaitu ketika KPK telah menyita 31 kendaraan yang diduga milik bekas Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) Akil Mochtar.

Tak ada tempat khusus untuk dapat menyimpan mobil-mobil tersebut. Kendaraan tersebut telah diparkir berdempetan dengan mobil sitaan milik Akil. Cuma KPK-line warna merah hitam yang telah memisahkan mobil Wawan dengan Akil. Sedangkan, motor gede Harley Davidson telah disimpan di basement gedung KPK.

Wakil Ketua KPK Bambang Widjojanto juga menyatakan, penyitaan tersebut juga terkait dengan tindak pidana pencucian uang (TPPU) yang diduga telah dilakukan oleh adik Gubernur Banten Ratu Atut Chosiyah itu. “Sampai sekarang pelacakan aset masih dilakukan oleh penyidik,” kata Bambang, di kantornya.

Bambang juga menyatakan, KPK sejak Senin (27/1) siang telah menggeledah tujuh tempat terkait dengan perkara Wawan. Tujuh tempat itu ialah,

o. Rumah Wawan di Jalan Denpasar IV Nomor 35 dan Nomor 43 Jakarta Selatan,

o. Rumah dinas Wali Kota Tangerang Selatan Airin Rachmy Diani yang juga istri Wawan di Jalan Sutera Narada V Nomor 16 Alam Sutera, Tangerang Selatan.

o. Rumah Yayah Rodiah, karyawan Wawan di PT Bali Pasific Pragama di Kompleks Grand Serang Asri Blok A3-4, Cipocok Jaya-Serang, dan Kompleks Girya Serang Asri K5 Nomor 7 Serang Banten.

o. Rumah Direktur Utama PT Mikindo Adiguna Pratama Dadang Prijatna di Taman Graha Asri Blok H5-9,

o. Rumah orang kepercayaan Wawan, Dadan Sumpena di Taman Graha Asri Blok CC5 Nomor 13, Serang, Banten.

DIPROTES KUASA HUKUM

Dadang Prijatna sendiri juga telah ditetapkan sebagai tersangka bersama Wawan dalam kasus dugaan tindak pidana korupsi pengadaan alat kesehatan Tangerang Selatan Anggaran 2012.

Kuasa hukum Wawan, Maqdir Ismail juga mengklaim belasan mobil yang telah disita oleh penyidik KPK juga merupakan hasil usaha kliennya sebagai pengusaha. Ia pun juga menampik bahwa penyitaan itu terkait dengan TPPU.

“Beliau ini pengusaha, dan itu bukan baru-baru kemarin. Ini juga sudah puluhan tahun. Jadi mestinya mereka (KPK) tunjukkan pada kita kaitan apa barang-barang yang disita ini dengan perbuatan yang hendak disangkakan dengan Pak Wawan ini harus jelas,” kata Maqdir di Gedung KPK, Selasa (27/1).

Menurutnya, Wawan bergabung ke dalam usaha yang dibangun oleh ayahnya. Ia juga telah mengatakan Wawan memiliki banyak unit usaha, termasuk beberapa perusahaan konstruksi berskala besar. “Enggak, enggak ada yang fiktif. Semua ada kok perusahaan itu,” ucapnya.

Ia juga menjelaskan, perusahaan yang telah dimiliki oleh Wawan mengikuti proses pelelangan sesuai prosedur. Ia pun juga tidak mempermasalahkan kedekatan adik Gubernur Banten Atut Chosiyah itu dengan beberapa pejabat di lingkungan DPRD dan dinas di Banten. Maqdir pun tak yakin bahwa KPK telah memiliki bukti permulaan yang cukup untuk menjerat Wawan dengan TPPU. Ia beralasan tindak pidana asal (predicate crime) kasus kliennya terkait TPPU belum jelas.

Wawan dikenai sangkaan TPPU dengan ancaman pidana paling lama 20 tahun dan denda paling banyak Rp10 miliar. Wawan juga telah menjadi tersangka untuk tiga perkara dugaan tindak pidana korupsi, yaitu pemberian suap terkait dengan Pilkada Lebak dan korupsi Alkes Kedokteran Umum di Puskesmas Kota Tangerang Selatan Tahun Anggaran 2012 dan korupsi pengadaan alkes Provinsi Banten.

Editor : Dian Sukmawati

saco-indonesia.com, Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Teroris atau BNPT menduga Pelaku bom bunuh diri di Mapolres Poso merupakan satu jaringan dengan teroris di Jakarta, Bandung, Solo, NTT, Aceh, yang merupakan anak buah dari Abu Umar, Abu Roban, Kodrat, Sofyan dan Jamil.

Bandung, Saco- Indonesia.com, Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Teroris atau BNPT menduga Pelaku bom bunuh diri di Mapolres Poso merupakan satu jaringan dengan teroris di Jakarta, Bandung, Solo, NTT, Aceh, yang merupakan anak buah dari Abu Umar, Abu Roban, Kodrat, Sofyan dan Jamil.

Demikian hal itu dikatakan Kepala BNPT, Ansyad Mbai, Selasa (4/6) hari ini.

Ansyad mengatakan, aparat kepolisian dari mabes polri terus melakukan identifikasi terkait pelaku bom bunuh diri yang terjadi di Poso, dan hal ini perlu dilakukan untuk mengetahui jaringan-jaringan mana. Karena saat ini jaringan teroris tersebut mencari bibit-bibit baru untuk dijadikan sel-sel teroris.

Editor:Liwon Maulana

Sumber:Elshinta

At the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Suzman’s signature accomplishment was the central role he played in creating a global network of surveys on aging.

Public perceptions of race relations in America have grown substantially more negative in the aftermath of the death of a young black man who was injured while in police custody in Baltimore and the subsequent unrest, far eclipsing the sentiment recorded in the wake of turmoil in Ferguson, Mo., last summer.

Americans are also increasingly likely to say that the police are more apt to use deadly force against a black person, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll finds.

The poll findings highlight the challenges for local leaders and police officials in trying to maintain order while sustaining faith in the criminal justice system in a racially polarized nation.

Sixty-one percent of Americans now say race relations in this country are generally bad. That figure is up sharply from 44 percent after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown and the unrest that followed in Ferguson in August, and 43 percent in December. In a CBS News poll just two months ago, 38 percent said race relations were generally bad. Current views are by far the worst of Barack Obama’s presidency.

The negative sentiment is echoed by broad majorities of blacks and whites alike, a stark change from earlier this year, when 58 percent of blacks thought race relations were bad, but just 35 percent of whites agreed. In August, 48 percent of blacks and 41 percent of whites said they felt that way.

Looking ahead, 44 percent of Americans think race relations are worsening, up from 36 percent in December. Forty-one percent of blacks and 46 percent of whites think so. Pessimism among whites has increased 10 points since December.

Continue reading the main story

Do you think race relations in the United States are generally good or generally bad?

60

40

20

0

White

Black

May '14

May '15

Generally bad

 

 

Continue reading the main story

Do you think race relations in the United States are getting better, getting worse or staying about the same?

Getting worse

Staying the same

Getting better

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

44%

37

17

46

36

16

41

42

15

 

 

The poll finds that profound racial divisions in views of how the police use deadly force remain. Blacks are more than twice as likely to say police in most communities are more apt to use deadly force against a black person — 79 percent of blacks say so compared with 37 percent of whites. A slim majority of whites say race is not a factor in a police officer’s decision to use deadly force.

Overall, 44 percent of Americans say deadly force is more likely to be used against a black person, up from 37 percent in August and 40 percent in December.

Blacks also remain far more likely than whites to say they feel mostly anxious about the police in their community. Forty-two percent say so, while 51 percent feel mostly safe. Among whites, 8 in 10 feel mostly safe.

One proposal to address the matter — having on-duty police officers wear body cameras — receives overwhelming support. More than 9 in 10 whites and blacks alike favor it.

Continue reading the main story

How would you describe your feelings about the police in your community? Would you say they make you feel mostly safe or mostly anxious?

Mostly safe

Mostly anxious

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

75%

21

3

81

16

3

51

42

7

 

 

Continue reading the main story

In general, do you think the police in most communities are more likely to use deadly force against a black person, or more likely to use it against a white person, or don’t you think race affects police use of deadly force?

Police more likely to use deadly force against a black person

Police more likely to use deadly force against a white person

Race DOES NOT affect police use of deadly force

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

44%

37%

79%

2%

2%

1%

46%

53%

16%

9%

8%

4%

 

 

Continue reading the main story

Do you favor or oppose on-duty police officers wearing video cameras that would record events and actions as they occur?

Favor

Oppose

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

92%

93%

93%

6%

5%

5%

2%

2%

2%

 

 

Asked specifically about the situation in Baltimore, most Americans expressed at least some confidence that the investigation by local authorities would be conducted fairly. But while nearly two-thirds of whites think so, fewer than half of blacks agree. Still, more blacks are confident now than were in August regarding the investigation in Ferguson. On Friday, six members of the police force involved in the arrest of Mr. Gray were charged with serious offenses, including manslaughter. The poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday; results from before charges were announced are similar to those from after.

Reaction to the recent turmoil in Baltimore, however, is similar among blacks and whites. Most Americans, 61 percent, say the unrest after Mr. Gray’s death was not justified. That includes 64 percent of whites and 57 percent of blacks.

Continue reading the main story

As you may know, a Baltimore man, Freddie Gray, recently died after being in the custody of the Baltimore police. How much confidence do you have that the investigation by local authorities into this matter will be conducted fairly?

A lot

Some

Not much

None at all

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

29%

31

22

14

5

31

33

20

11

5

20

26

30

22

 

 

In general, do you think the unrest in Baltimore after the death of Freddie Gray was justified, or do you think the unrest was not justified?

Justified

Not justified

Don't know/No answer

All adults

Whites

Blacks

28%

61

11

26

64

11

37

57

6

 

 

WASHINGTON — A decade after emergency trailers meant to shelter Hurricane Katrina victims instead caused burning eyes, sore throats and other more serious ailments, the Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of regulating the culprit: formaldehyde, a chemical that can be found in commonplace things like clothes and furniture.

But an unusual assortment of players, including furniture makers, the Chinese government, Republicans from states with a large base of furniture manufacturing and even some Democrats who championed early regulatory efforts, have questioned the E.P.A. proposal. The sustained opposition has held sway, as the agency is now preparing to ease key testing requirements before it releases the landmark federal health standard.

The E.P.A.’s five-year effort to adopt this rule offers another example of how industry opposition can delay and hamper attempts by the federal government to issue regulations, even to control substances known to be harmful to human health.

Continue reading the main story

 

Document: The Formaldehyde Fight

Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that can also cause respiratory ailments like asthma, but the potential of long-term exposure to cause cancers like myeloid leukemia is less well understood.

The E.P.A.’s decision would be the first time that the federal government has regulated formaldehyde inside most American homes.

“The stakes are high for public health,” said Tom Neltner, senior adviser for regulatory affairs at the National Center for Healthy Housing, who has closely monitored the debate over the rules. “What we can’t have here is an outcome that fails to confront the health threat we all know exists.”

The proposal would not ban formaldehyde — commonly used as an ingredient in wood glue in furniture and flooring — but it would impose rules that prevent dangerous levels of the chemical’s vapors from those products, and would set testing standards to ensure that products sold in the United States comply with those limits. The debate has sharpened in the face of growing concern about the safety of formaldehyde-treated flooring imported from Asia, especially China.

What is certain is that a lot of money is at stake: American companies sell billions of dollars’ worth of wood products each year that contain formaldehyde, and some argue that the proposed regulation would impose unfair costs and restrictions.

Determined to block the agency’s rule as proposed, these industry players have turned to the White House, members of Congress and top E.P.A. officials, pressing them to roll back the testing requirements in particular, calling them redundant and too expensive.

“There are potentially over a million manufacturing jobs that will be impacted if the proposed rule is finalized without changes,” wrote Bill Perdue, the chief lobbyist at the American Home Furnishings Alliance, a leading critic of the testing requirements in the proposed regulation, in one letter to the E.P.A.

Industry opposition helped create an odd alignment of forces working to thwart the rule. The White House moved to strike out key aspects of the proposal. Subsequent appeals for more changes were voiced by players as varied as Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, and Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, as well as furniture industry lobbyists.

Hurricane Katrina in 2005 helped ignite the public debate over formaldehyde, after the deadly storm destroyed or damaged hundreds of thousands of homes along the Gulf of Mexico, forcing families into temporary trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The displaced storm victims quickly began reporting respiratory problems, burning eyes and other issues, and tests then confirmed high levels of formaldehyde fumes leaking into the air inside the trailers, which in many cases had been hastily constructed.

Public health advocates petitioned the E.P.A. to issue limits on formaldehyde in building materials and furniture used in homes, given that limits already existed for exposure in workplaces. But three years after the storm, only California had issued such limits.

Industry groups like the American Chemistry Council have repeatedly challenged the science linking formaldehyde to cancer, a position championed by David Vitter, the Republican senator from Louisiana, who is a major recipient of chemical industry campaign contributions, and whom environmental groups have mockingly nicknamed “Senator Formaldehyde.”

Continue reading the main story

Typical

laminate

flooring

CLEAR FINISH LAYER

Often made of melamine resin

PATTERN LAYER

Paper printed to resemble wood,

or a thin wood veneer

GLUE

Layers may be bound using

formaldehyde-based glues

CORE LAYER

Fiberboard or other

composite, formed using

formaldehyde-based adhesives

BASE LAYER

Moisture-resistant vapor barrier

What is formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a common chemical used in many industrial and household products as an adhesive, bonding agent or preservative. It is classified as a volatile organic compound. The term volatile means that, at room temperature, formaldehyde will vaporize, or become a gas. Products made with formaldehyde tend to release this gas into the air. If breathed in large quantities, it may cause health problems.

WHERE IT IS COMMONLY FOUND

POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS

Pressed-wood and composite wood products

Wallpaper and paints

Spray foam insulation used in construction

Commercial wood floor finishes

Crease-resistant fabrics

In cigarette smoke, or in the fumes from combustion of other materials, including wood, oil and gasoline.

Exposure to formaldehyde in sufficient amounts may cause eye, throat or skin irritation, allergic reactions, and respiratory problems like coughing, wheezing or asthma.

Long-term exposure to high levels has been associated with cancer in humans and laboratory animals.

Exposure to formaldehyde may affect some people more severely than others.

Sources: Consumer Product Safety Commission; Minnesota Department of Health

 

By The New York Times

By 2010, public health advocates and some industry groups secured bipartisan support in Congress for legislation that ordered the E.P.A. to issue federal rules that largely mirrored California’s restrictions. At the time, concerns were rising over the growing number of lower-priced furniture imports from Asia that might include contaminated products, while also hurting sales of American-made products.

Maneuvering began almost immediately after the E.P.A. prepared draft rules to formally enact the new standards.

White House records show at least five meetings in mid-2012 with industry executives — kitchen cabinet makers, chemical manufacturers, furniture trade associations and their lobbyists, like Brock R. Landry, of the Venable law firm. These parties, along with Senator Vitter’s office, appealed to top administration officials, asking them to intervene to roll back the E.P.A. proposal.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which reviews major federal regulations before they are adopted, apparently agreed. After the White House review, the E.P.A. “redlined” many of the estimates of the monetary benefits that would be gained by reductions in related health ailments, like asthma and fertility issues, documents reviewed by The New York Times show.

As a result, the estimated benefit of the proposed rule dropped to $48 million a year, from as much as $278 million a year. The much-reduced amount deeply weakened the agency’s justification for the sometimes costly new testing that would be required under the new rules, a federal official involved in the effort said.

“It’s a redlining blood bath,” said Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown University Law School professor and a former E.P.A. official, using the Washington phrase to describe when language is stricken from a proposed rule. “Almost the entire discussion of these potential benefits was excised.”

Senator Vitter’s staff was pleased.

“That’s a huge difference,” said Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Mr. Vitter, of the reduced estimated financial benefits, saying the change was “clearly highlighting more mismanagement” at the E.P.A.

The review’s outcome galvanized opponents in the furniture industry. They then targeted a provision that mandated new testing of laminated wood, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. (The California standard on which the law was based did not require such testing.)

But E.P.A. scientists had concluded that these laminate products — millions of which are sold annually in the United States — posed a particular risk. They said that when thin layers of wood, also known as laminate or veneer, are added to furniture or flooring in the final stages of manufacturing, the resulting product can generate dangerous levels of fumes from often-used formaldehyde-based glues.

Industry executives, outraged by what they considered an unnecessary and financially burdensome level of testing, turned every lever within reach to get the requirement removed. It would be particularly onerous, they argued, for small manufacturers that would have to repeatedly interrupt their work to do expensive new testing. The E.P.A. estimated that the expanded requirements for laminate products would cost the furniture industry tens of millions of dollars annually, while the industry said that the proposed rule over all would cost its 7,000 American manufacturing facilities over $200 million each year.

“A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate what a lot of these requirements do to a small operation,” said Dick Titus, executive vice president of the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association, whose members are predominantly small businesses. “A 10-person shop, for example, just really isn’t equipped to handle that type of thing.”

Photo

 

Big industry players also weighed in. Executives from companies including La-Z-Boy, Hooker Furniture and Ashley Furniture all flew to Washington for a series of meetings with the offices of lawmakers including House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and about a dozen other lawmakers, asking several of them to sign a letter prepared by the industry to press the E.P.A. to back down, according to an industry report describing the lobbying visit.

Within a matter of weeks, two letters — using nearly identical language — were sent by House and Senate lawmakers to the E.P.A. — with the industry group forwarding copies of the letters to the agency as well, and then posting them on its website.

The industry lobbyists also held their own meeting at E.P.A. headquarters, and they urged Jim Jones, who oversaw the rule-making process as the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to visit a North Carolina furniture manufacturing plant. According to the trade group, Mr. Jones told them that the visit had “helped the agency shift its thinking” about the rules and how laminated products should be treated.

The resistance was particularly intense from lawmakers like Mr. Wicker of Mississippi, whose state is home to major manufacturing plants owned by Ashley Furniture Industries, the world’s largest furniture maker, and who is one of the biggest recipients in Congress of donations from the industry’s trade association. Asked if the political support played a role, a spokesman for Mr. Wicker replied: “Thousands of Mississippians depend on the furniture manufacturing industry for their livelihoods. Senator Wicker is committed to defending all Mississippians from government overreach.”

Individual companies like Ikea also intervened, as did the Chinese government, which claimed that the new rule would create a “great barrier” to the import of Chinese products because of higher costs.

Perhaps the most surprising objection came from Senator Boxer, of California, a longtime environmental advocate, whose office questioned why the E.P.A.’s rule went further than her home state’s in seeking testing on laminated products. “We did not advocate an outcome, other than safety,” her office said in a statement about why the senator raised concerns. “We said ‘Take a look to see if you have it right.’ ”

Safety advocates say that tighter restrictions — like the ones Ms. Boxer and Mr. Wicker, along with Representative Doris Matsui, a California Democrat, have questioned — are necessary, particularly for products coming from China, where items as varied as toys and Christmas lights have been found to violate American safety standards.

While Mr. Neltner, the environmental advocate who has been most involved in the review process, has been open to compromise, he has pressed the E.P.A. not to back down entirely, and to maintain a requirement that laminators verify that their products are safe.

An episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes” in March brought attention to the issue when it accused Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer, of selling laminate products with dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The company has disputed the show’s findings and test methods, maintaining that its products are safe.

“People think that just because Congress passed the legislation five years ago, the problem has been fixed,” said Becky Gillette, who then lived in coastal Mississippi, in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina, and was among the first to notice a pattern of complaints from people living in the trailers. “Real people’s faces and names come up in front of me when I think of the thousands of people who could get sick if this rule is not done right.”

An aide to Ms. Matsui rejected any suggestion that she was bending to industry pressure.

“From the beginning the public health has been our No. 1 concern,” said Kyle J. Victor, an aide to Ms. Matsui.

But further changes to the rule are likely, agency officials concede, as they say they are searching for a way to reduce the cost of complying with any final rule while maintaining public health goals. The question is just how radically the agency will revamp the testing requirement for laminated products — if it keeps it at all.

“It’s not a secret to anybody that is the most challenging issue,” said Mr. Jones, the E.P.A. official overseeing the process, adding that the health consequences from formaldehyde are real. “We have to reduce those exposures so that people can live healthy lives and not have to worry about being in their homes.”

A former member of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, Mr. Smedvig helped found the wide-ranging Empire Brass quintet.

Ms. Meadows was the older sister of Audrey Meadows, who played Alice Kramden on “The Honeymooners.”

UNITED NATIONS — Wearing pinstripes and a pince-nez, Staffan de Mistura, the United Nations envoy for Syria, arrived at the Security Council one Tuesday afternoon in February and announced that President Bashar al-Assad had agreed to halt airstrikes over Aleppo. Would the rebels, Mr. de Mistura suggested, agree to halt their shelling?

What he did not announce, but everyone knew by then, was that the Assad government had begun a military offensive to encircle opposition-held enclaves in Aleppo and that fierce fighting was underway. It would take only a few days for rebel leaders, having pushed back Syrian government forces, to outright reject Mr. de Mistura’s proposed freeze in the fighting, dooming the latest diplomatic overture on Syria.

Diplomacy is often about appearing to be doing something until the time is ripe for a deal to be done.

Now, with Mr. Assad’s forces having suffered a string of losses on the battlefield and the United States reaching at least a partial rapprochement with Mr. Assad’s main backer, Iran, Mr. de Mistura is changing course. Starting Monday, he is set to hold a series of closed talks in Geneva with the warring sides and their main supporters. Iran will be among them.

In an interview at United Nations headquarters last week, Mr. de Mistura hinted that the changing circumstances, both military and diplomatic, may have prompted various backers of the war to question how much longer the bloodshed could go on.

“Will that have an impact in accelerating the willingness for a political solution? We need to test it,” he said. “The Geneva consultations may be a good umbrella for testing that. It’s an occasion for asking everyone, including the government, if there is any new way that they are looking at a political solution, as they too claim they want.”

He said he would have a better assessment at the end of June, when he expects to wrap up his consultations. That coincides with the deadline for a final agreement in the Iran nuclear talks.

Whether a nuclear deal with Iran will pave the way for a new opening on peace talks in Syria remains to be seen. Increasingly, though, world leaders are explicitly linking the two, with the European Union’s top diplomat, Federica Mogherini, suggesting last week that a nuclear agreement could spur Tehran to play “a major but positive role in Syria.”

It could hardly come soon enough. Now in its fifth year, the Syrian war has claimed 220,000 lives, prompted an exodus of more than three million refugees and unleashed jihadist groups across the region. “This conflict is producing a question mark in many — where is it leading and whether this can be sustained,” Mr. de Mistura said.

Part Italian, part Swedish, Mr. de Mistura has worked with the United Nations for more than 40 years, but he is more widely known for his dapper style than for any diplomatic coups. Syria is by far the toughest assignment of his career — indeed, two of the organization’s most seasoned diplomats, Lakhdar Brahimi and Kofi Annan, tried to do the job and gave up — and critics have wondered aloud whether Mr. de Mistura is up to the task.

He served as a United Nations envoy in Afghanistan and Iraq, and before that in Lebanon, where a former minister recalled, with some scorn, that he spent many hours sunbathing at a private club in the hills above Beirut. Those who know him say he has a taste for fine suits and can sometimes speak too soon and too much, just as they point to his diplomatic missteps and hyperbole.

They cite, for instance, a news conference in October, when he raised the specter of Srebrenica, where thousands of Muslims were massacred in 1995 during the Balkans war, in warning that the Syrian border town of Kobani could fall to the Islamic State. In February, he was photographed at a party in Damascus, the Syrian capital, celebrating the anniversary of the Iranian revolution just as Syrian forces, aided by Iran, were pummeling rebel-held suburbs of Damascus; critics seized on that as evidence of his coziness with the government.

Mouin Rabbani, who served briefly as the head of Mr. de Mistura’s political affairs unit and has since emerged as one of his most outspoken critics, said Mr. de Mistura did not have the background necessary for the job. “This isn’t someone well known for his political vision or political imagination, and his closest confidants lack the requisite knowledge and experience,” Mr. Rabbani said.

As a deputy foreign minister in the Italian government, Mr. de Mistura was tasked in 2012 with freeing two Italian marines detained in India for shooting at Indian fishermen. He made 19 trips to India, to little effect. One marine was allowed to return to Italy for medical reasons; the other remains in India.

He said he initially turned down the Syria job when the United Nations secretary general approached him last August, only to change his mind the next day, after a sleepless, guilt-ridden night.

Mr. de Mistura compared his role in Syria to that of a doctor faced with a terminally ill patient. His goal in brokering a freeze in the fighting, he said, was to alleviate suffering. He settled on Aleppo as the location for its “fame,” he said, a decision that some questioned, considering that Aleppo was far trickier than the many other lesser-known towns where activists had negotiated temporary local cease-fires.

“Everybody, at least in Europe, are very familiar with the value of Aleppo,” Mr. de Mistura said. “So I was using that as an icebreaker.”

The cease-fire negotiations, to which he had devoted six months, fell apart quickly because of the government’s military offensive in Aleppo the very day of his announcement at the Security Council. Privately, United Nations diplomats said Mr. de Mistura had been manipulated. To this, Mr. de Mistura said only that he was “disappointed and concerned.”

Tarek Fares, a former rebel fighter, said after a recent visit to Aleppo that no Syrian would admit publicly to supporting Mr. de Mistura’s cease-fire proposal. “If anyone said they went to a de Mistura meeting in Gaziantep, they would be arrested,” is how he put it, referring to the Turkish city where negotiations between the two sides were held.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon remains staunchly behind Mr. de Mistura’s efforts. His defenders point out that he is at the center of one of the world’s toughest diplomatic problems, charged with mediating a conflict in which two of the world’s most powerful nations — Russia, which supports Mr. Assad, and the United States, which has called for his ouster — remain deadlocked.

R. Nicholas Burns, a former State Department official who now teaches at Harvard, credited Mr. de Mistura for trying to negotiate a cease-fire even when the chances of success were exceedingly small — and the chances of a political deal even smaller. For his efforts to work, Professor Burns argued, the world powers will first have to come to an agreement of their own.

“He needs the help of outside powers,” he said. “It starts with backers of Assad. That’s Russia and Iran. De Mistura is there, waiting.”

WASHINGTON — The former deputy director of the C.I.A. asserts in a forthcoming book that Republicans, in their eagerness to politicize the killing of the American ambassador to Libya, repeatedly distorted the agency’s analysis of events. But he also argues that the C.I.A. should get out of the business of providing “talking points” for administration officials in national security events that quickly become partisan, as happened after the Benghazi attack in 2012.

The official, Michael J. Morell, dismisses the allegation that the United States military and C.I.A. officers “were ordered to stand down and not come to the rescue of their comrades,” and he says there is “no evidence” to support the charge that “there was a conspiracy between C.I.A. and the White House to spin the Benghazi story in a way that would protect the political interests of the president and Secretary Clinton,” referring to the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

But he also concludes that the White House itself embellished some of the talking points provided by the Central Intelligence Agency and had blocked him from sending an internal study of agency conclusions to Congress.

Photo

 

“I finally did so without asking,” just before leaving government, he writes, and after the White House released internal emails to a committee investigating the State Department’s handling of the issue.

A lengthy congressional investigation remains underway, one that many Republicans hope to use against Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election cycle.

In parts of the book, “The Great War of Our Time” (Twelve), Mr. Morell praises his C.I.A. colleagues for many successes in stopping terrorist attacks, but he is surprisingly critical of other C.I.A. failings — and those of the National Security Agency.

Soon after Mr. Morell retired in 2013 after 33 years in the agency, President Obama appointed him to a commission reviewing the actions of the National Security Agency after the disclosures of Edward J. Snowden, a former intelligence contractor who released classified documents about the government’s eavesdropping abilities. Mr. Morell writes that he was surprised by what he found.

“You would have thought that of all the government entities on the planet, the one least vulnerable to such grand theft would have been the N.S.A.,” he writes. “But it turned out that the N.S.A. had left itself vulnerable.”

He concludes that most Wall Street firms had better cybersecurity than the N.S.A. had when Mr. Snowden swept information from its systems in 2013. While he said he found himself “chagrined by how well the N.S.A. was doing” compared with the C.I.A. in stepping up its collection of data on intelligence targets, he also sensed that the N.S.A., which specializes in electronic spying, was operating without considering the implications of its methods.

“The N.S.A. had largely been collecting information because it could, not necessarily in all cases because it should,” he says.

The book is to be released next week.

Mr. Morell was a career analyst who rose through the ranks of the agency, and he ended up in the No. 2 post. He served as President George W. Bush’s personal intelligence briefer in the first months of his presidency — in those days, he could often be spotted at the Starbucks in Waco, Tex., catching up on his reading — and was with him in the schoolhouse in Florida on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, when the Bush presidency changed in an instant.

Mr. Morell twice took over as acting C.I.A. director, first when Leon E. Panetta was appointed secretary of defense and then when retired Gen. David H. Petraeus resigned over an extramarital affair with his biographer, a relationship that included his handing her classified notes of his time as America’s best-known military commander.

Mr. Morell says he first learned of the affair from Mr. Petraeus only the night before he resigned, and just as the Benghazi events were turning into a political firestorm. While praising Mr. Petraeus, who had told his deputy “I am very lucky” to run the C.I.A., Mr. Morell writes that “the organization did not feel the same way about him.” The former general “created the impression through the tone of his voice and his body language that he did not want people to disagree with him (which was not true in my own interaction with him),” he says.

But it is his account of the Benghazi attacks — and how the C.I.A. was drawn into the debate over whether the Obama White House deliberately distorted its account of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens — that is bound to attract attention, at least partly because of its relevance to the coming presidential election. The initial assessments that the C.I.A. gave to the White House said demonstrations had preceded the attack. By the time analysts reversed their opinion, Susan E. Rice, now the national security adviser, had made a series of statements on Sunday talk shows describing the initial assessment. The controversy and other comments Ms. Rice made derailed Mr. Obama’s plan to appoint her as secretary of state.

The experience prompted Mr. Morell to write that the C.I.A. should stay out of the business of preparing talking points — especially on issues that are being seized upon for “political purposes.” He is critical of the State Department for not beefing up security in Libya for its diplomats, as the C.I.A., he said, did for its employees.

But he concludes that the assault in which the ambassador was killed took place “with little or no advance planning” and “was not well organized.” He says the attackers “did not appear to be looking for Americans to harm. They appeared intent on looting and conducting some vandalism,” setting fires that killed Mr. Stevens and a security official, Sean Smith.

Mr. Morell paints a picture of an agency that was struggling, largely unsuccessfully, to understand dynamics in the Middle East and North Africa when the Arab Spring broke out in late 2011 in Tunisia. The agency’s analysts failed to see the forces of revolution coming — and then failed again, he writes, when they told Mr. Obama that the uprisings would undercut Al Qaeda by showing there was a democratic pathway to change.

“There is no good explanation for our not being able to see the pressures growing to dangerous levels across the region,” he writes. The agency had again relied too heavily “on a handful of strong leaders in the countries of concern to help us understand what was going on in the Arab street,” he says, and those leaders themselves were clueless.

Moreover, an agency that has always overvalued secretly gathered intelligence and undervalued “open source” material “was not doing enough to mine the wealth of information available through social media,” he writes. “We thought and told policy makers that this outburst of popular revolt would damage Al Qaeda by undermining the group’s narrative,” he writes.

Instead, weak governments in Egypt, and the absence of governance from Libya to Yemen, were “a boon to Islamic extremists across both the Middle East and North Africa.”

Mr. Morell is gentle about most of the politicians he dealt with — he expresses admiration for both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama, though he accuses former Vice President Dick Cheney of deliberately implying a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq that the C.I.A. had concluded probably did not exist. But when it comes to the events leading up to the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq, he is critical of his own agency.

Mr. Morell concludes that the Bush White House did not have to twist intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s alleged effort to rekindle the country’s work on weapons of mass destruction.

“The view that hard-liners in the Bush administration forced the intelligence community into its position on W.M.D. is just flat wrong,” he writes. “No one pushed. The analysts were already there and they had been there for years, long before Bush came to office.”