What the FT found:

“When the UK’s financial regulator slapped a £26 million fine on Barclays for lax controls related to the gold fix, the UK financial regulator offered more ammunition to critics of the near-century-old benchmark. But it also gave precious metal traders in the City of London plenty to think about. While the Financial Conduct Authority says the case appears to be a one off – the work of a single trader – some market professionals have a different view. They claim the practice of nudging a tradeable benchmark in order to protect a “digital” derivatives contract – as a Barclays employee did – was routine in the industry."

The most recent headlines involve GSK’s former head in China, Mark Reilly of the UK, who is accused of ordering staff to carry out the widespread campaign of bribery and subsequent cover-up. The Wall Street Journal’s May 14, 2014 report, “Glaxo’s Ex-China Chief Accused of Ordering Staff to Commit Bribery,” would claim, “Gao Feng, a ministry official spearheading the probe of the UK pharmaceutical company, said revenue that came from alleged bribery amounted to several billion yuan since Mr Reilly joined Glaxo’s China operation in 2009.

Glaxo pushed up the prices of drugs in China — in some instances as much as seven times the price compared with other countries — to fund its own bribery, Mr Gao alleged.”

It is clear that despite what big-pharma and its champions across the media claim, they are not operating in the public’s best interests. They are operating purely for profit and are determined to obtain that profit not through producing superior pharmaceuticals, but through bribery and corruption that ensures no matter how useless or dangerous their drugs are, an army of doctors and healthcare officials will be on hand to promote and prescribe them.

The digs, he said, were likely to topple the Mosque. Abbas also demanded that Arab nations do something to protect the Temple Mount from ongoing “invasions” by Jews, who were too often being permitted to ascend the Temple Mount in his opinion. The speech was a preview of what can be expected at the annual Islamic conference in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, about “threats” to the Mosque.

“Terrorism does not begin with an attack on a bus or a café. That is how terrorism ends. Terrorism begins when its perpetrators are indoctrinated with words and thoughts of hate,” said Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, in the letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

“It’s going to be impossible for them to flow prisoners out of Gitmo now without a huge backlash,” Graham said. “There will be people on our side calling for his impeachment if he did that.” Graham served as a House prosecutor during former President Clinton’s 1998 impeachment trial.

Congress tried to build in a safeguard against Obama making unilateral decisions on releasing terrorist detainees by including language in the National Defense Authorization Act requiring the administration to alert Congress of such moves at least 30 days in advance. Obama did not follow that law when he swapped five senior Taliban commanders for Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl.

This fine Thursday morning, Isru Chag Shavuot, apparently Jews are being let up, while the Muslims aren’t. The police have apparently implemented this solution as Jewish visitors have been repeatedly harassed and attacked by Muslim rioters on the Temple Mount during their visits.

It was recently uncovered that Hamas, a partner in the Palestinian Unity Government (PUG), has been paying Arabs on the Temple Mount to scream, curse and attack Jews who visit the Temple Mount in order to discourage and ruin their visits to the Jewish holy site. Now, all the police have to do is let Jews pray while up there.

If true, then Bergdahl not only stands accused of desertion: there is a case that, by joining a sworn enemy of the US, he would have committed an act of high treason. Any lingering hope the 28-year-old may have entertained of returning home to a hero’s welcome has evaporated amid the bitter and acrimonious exchanges his release has provoked in the US – to the extent that Hailey, his Idaho home town, has been forced to cancel its plans for a homecoming celebration later this month, which was to include a guest appearance by the singer Carole King.

The controversy surrounding the circumstances of Sergeant Bergdahl’s disappearance – and the suggestion that six American soldiers subsequently lost their lives in a failed rescue mission – has certainly taken the gloss off an event the Obama administration believed would be a rare good news story for the White House. Talk about misjudging the public mood. For, far from being hailed from all quarters for striking a good deal, Mr Obama now finds himself under attack, not only for securing the release of a soldier who is widely condemned as a deserter, but for the way he set about doing the deal in the first place.

The President’s eagerness to secure Sergeant Bergdahl’s freedom led him to overlook a key, bipartisan principle of American foreign policy which dates back to the Reagan era: namely, that Washington does not negotiate with terrorists

Scientists at the University of Southern California say the discovery could be particularly beneficial for people suffering from damaged immune systems, such as cancer patients on chemotherapy. It could also help the elderly whose immune system becomes less effective as they age, making it harder for them to fight off even common diseases.

The researchers say fasting "flips a regenerative switch" which prompts stem cells to create brand new white blood cells, essentially regenerating the entire immune system. "It gives the 'OK' for stem cells to go ahead and begin proliferating and rebuild the entire system," said Professor Valter Longo, Professor of Gerontology and the Biological Sciences at the University of California. "And the good news is that the body got rid of the parts of the system that might be damaged or old, the inefficient parts, during the fasting."

The US team behind the study say the human body was not designed to process this combination of sugars. As a result, they say the drinks can contribute to the development of diabetes, cardiovascular disease and liver disease. This is because unlike glucose, that is converted into energy, fructose is processed by the liver into fat.

The study, by the Childhood Obesity Research Centre at Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, examined the ratio of fructose to glucose in 34 popular brands by analysing their chemical composition. The research, published online in the journal Nutrition, found that beverages and juices made with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) all contain 50 per cent more fructose than glucose.

Dr Michael Goran said the blend called into question claims that sugar and HFCS are essentially the same. He said: ‘We found what ends up being consumed in these beverages is neither natural sugar nor HFCS, but instead a fructose-intense concoction that could increase one’s risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease and liver disease.

At the height of the eurozone crisis, Mr Juncker was described as the “master of lies” for organising a meeting of finance ministers to talk about whether Greece could remain in the single currency and then trying to deny it was taking place. Germany's Suddeutsche Zeitung accused Mr Juncker of “taking the lead on the deception” and warned he had managed “to fritter away the last remaining trust the people of Europe still have”.

Mr Juncker has never hidden his view that the compromises and deals being worked out in EU meetings or leaders or ministers need be protected from public scrutiny, by lies if necessary. "When it becomes serious, you have to lie," he said. In May 2011, he told a meeting of the federalist European Movement that he often “had to lie” and that eurozone monetary policy should be discussed in “secret, dark debates”.

He also sparked controversy by suggesting that the eurozone economic policy was incompatible with democracy. “We all know what to do, we just don't know how to get re-elected after we've done it,” Mr Juncker cynically quipped last year. Mr Juncker was also closely linked to the EU constitution, before the French referendum on it in 2005 he predicted, correctly, that Europe would ignore any popular rejections. “If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue’,” he said.

Mr Juncker went on to play a leading role in the resurrection of the EU constitution in the form of the Lisbon Treaty and advised Gordon Brown, then Prime Minister, to mislead the British public over "transfers of sovereignty". “Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?” he said of Mr Brown and British calls for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The extent to which those two questions are inextricably linked became clear last week when Prime Minister David Cameron refused to recognize the results of the European election and nominate winner Jean-Claude Juncker as president of the European Commission, the EU's executive. Most countries and leaders in the European Council, the powerful body representing EU leaders, had previously agreed to this procedure. It was a significant promise to the people of Europe - they were to be provided with a greater say and they were supposed to be given a sign that their vote counts, that it has concrete effects. But Cameron threw a spanner in the works.

The crisis in European democracy is also the consequence of an unsettled relationship. Both the EU and Britain have perceived their relations as a burden in recent years. People in Brussels suffer under a London that is constantly thwarting European unity, that has slammed the brakes on progress and has doggedly prevented a deepening of relations.

In Britain, people suffer under the EU itself. It is a chronic suffering, one without any prospects of relief. During the May 25 European election, the anti-EU UKIP party garnered 27.5 percent of the vote, making it the strongest British party in the new European Parliament. And this, despite the fact that Britain's other political parties - with the exception of the Liberal Democrats - are about as EU-friendly as Germany's euroskeptic AFD.

Great Britain and the EU are like a couple that make each other unhappy but shy away from doing anything about it. Regardless, Europe has taken British sensitivities and particularities into account for long enough. The EU has allowed itself to be blackmailed and made to look like a fool time and again. It was patient to the point of self-denial. For decades England was forgiven for every veto it cast; every special wish was granted. When Margaret Thatcher shouted in 1984, "I want my money back," the EU granted her the "British rebate," which the country still profits from today.

None of this did anything to change the Brits' view of things, and the country is more distant from the EU today than it has ever been. The time has now come for a clarification. And it's even possible the European Union will have to decide what is most important: a more democratic Europe or having Britain remain a member. This clarification must come now - with the appointment of the future European Commission president.