Monday, November 28, 2011

Samsung Galaxy S II LTE arrives in Japan, NTT DoCoMo offers up its first course of 4G phones

Japan has got it's first taste of an LTE smartphone, and this one's Galaxy-flavored. Oh yes, Samsung's Galaxy S II LTE has made an appearance on NTT DoCoMo, running on the Japanese carrier's next-generation Xi network and promising top download speeds of around 37.5Mbps. The latest member to the carrier's top-drawer Next series will set you back around $260 (¥20,000) on a two-year contract. DoCoMo is aiming to reach the hands of 30 million customers by 2015, with another as-yet unnamed 4G device already penned for release before the end of the year. Perhaps the pair of data-loving handsets will help to fill that iPhone-shaped hole in the carrier's phone catalog.

Samsung Galaxy S II LTE arrives in Japan, NTT DoCoMo offers up its first course of 4G phones originally appeared on Engadget on Sat, 26 Nov 2011 06:04:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink The Verge, Asahi Shimbun (translated)  |  sourceNTT DoCoMo  | Email this | Comments

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/26/samsung-galaxy-s-ii-lte-arrives-in-japan-ntt-docomo-offers-up-i/

weather san antonio weather san antonio jerry brown dream act roger williams roger williams tyler bray

Rep. Charlie Gonzalez to retire (Offthekuff)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories Stories, RSS Feeds and Widgets via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/166647857?client_source=feed&format=rss

juan manuel marquez juan manuel marquez penn state stanford oregon joe paterno velasquez vs dos santos velasquez vs dos santos

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Pope calls for responsible, credible climate deal (AP)

VATICAN CITY ? Pope Benedict XVI called Sunday for delegates attending this week's U.N. climate change conference in South Africa to craft a responsible and credible deal to cut greenhouse gases that takes into account the needs of the poor.

Some 25,000 government officials, lobbyists and scientists are expected to attend the two-week conference that opens Monday in Durban. The immediate focus is the pending expiration of the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 agreement requiring 37 industrialized countries to slash carbon emissions to 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.

Western governments are expected to try to get China and other growing economies to accept legally binding curbs on greenhouse gases, as well. Poor countries want the signatories to accept further reductions in a second commitment period up to at least 2017.

Benedict, who has been dubbed the "green pope" for his environmental concerns, launched an appeal Sunday to government representatives attending the Durban conference to craft a responsible revised Kyoto deal.

"I hope that all members of the international community agree on a responsible and credible response to this worrisome and complex phenomenon, taking into account the needs of the poorest and future generations," he said during his traditional Sunday blessing from his studio overlooking St. Peter's Square.

Benedict denounced the failure of world leaders to agree to a successor treaty to Kyoto during a 2009 U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen. He said then that world peace depends on safeguarding God's creation.

The 84-year-old German pope has voiced increasing concern about protecting the environment in his encyclicals, during foreign trips, speeches to diplomats and in his annual peace message. Under Benedict's watch, the Vatican has installed photovoltaic cells on its main auditorium to convert sunlight into electricity and has joined a reforestation project aimed at offsetting its CO2 emissions.

For the pontiff, it's a moral issue: Church teaching holds that man must respect creation because it's destined for the benefit of humanity's future. He has argued that climate change and natural catastrophes threaten people's rights to life, food, health and ultimately peace.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/religion/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111127/ap_on_re_eu/eu_vatican_climate

yu darvish hope solo dancing with the stars hope solo dancing with the stars jack wagner matt jones snow white and the huntsman trailer snow white and the huntsman trailer

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Vending machine offers DIY banners at Dutch airport

Ever wanted to meet and greet your loved ones at the airport to be sure they don't miss you in the crowds?

Then try Amsterdam's Schiphol airport, which now has the world's first vending machine capable of printing out personalized giant canvas banners in just a few minutes.

You can pick your message, whether that is "Missed you Mummy," "I love you," "Will you marry me?," or anything else that makes you stand out from the crowd, choose the font and background design, pay between four and 15 euros ($19.98)depending on the length of the banner, and hit the button.

"We came up with the idea because when we were at the airport we'd see all these people welcoming their friends and family with their own banners made of bed sheets and we thought what a hassle using sheets, wouldn't it just be easier to make the banner at the airport," BannerXpress's co-founder Thibaud Bruna told Reuters Thursday.

Bruna's first machine, which was three years in the making, made its debut at Schiphol Thursday. If the waterproof banners prove popular, he hopes to install the vending machines in other locations.

"We hope have them in other airports, but also in stadiums for sporting and music events," Bruna said.

(Reporting By Roberta B. Cowan, editing by Paul Casciato)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45429522/ns/travel-destination_travel/

sukkot sukkot chia seeds aziz ansari aziz ansari corn maze icloud

What You Missed While Not Watching the GOP National Security Debate (Time.com)

0 minutes. They call it a campaign, but it's really a reality TV show with eight contestants who compete for nearly a year. Each week or so, they get on a stage, and are prodded to attack each other, equivocate and regurgitate sound bites. Dreadful stuff. At the end, viewers vote for one winner, who gets to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States. Welcome to Episode 11. American democracy as cheesy prime time programming. CNN's Foreign Policy Debate in Washington, D.C.

1 minute. After a quick introduction by CNN's Wolf Blitzer, we are lost in montage. Lots of images of war and dead Presidents. Voices from the past: A date that will live in infamy. Tear down this wall. Etc. Then the candidates get introduced, each with a sort of James Bond computer graphic that looks like an electronic on-screen dossier from Dr. Evil's secret lab, if Dr. Evil's secret lab was built in 1993.

3 minutes. Blitzer is back, delivering the requisite mumbo jumbo about Twitter and Facebook. He says tonight will be "unlike any debate so far in this presidential campaign." This is what is known in the political/advertising business as "The Big Lie." If you are selling belly button lint, you might as well call it a mink coat. People will try to touch.

4 minutes. The candidates walk out on stage CNN-style, which means in a fashion designed to draw out the process as long as possible. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman is perky, having traded his pink tie for a red tie. Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann says, "Good to see you, Wolf," as she passes him on stage. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich lumbers slowly. "Hey Wolf," says former Pizza company executive Herman Cain. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney gets the loudest applause, but walks as if his back is in a brace. Texas Gov. Rick Perry shoots Blitzer with his hand pistol. Texas Rep. Ron Paul could care less. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum looks like Woody from ToyStory. (Read "The Snooki Effect: Why the GOP Debates Now Matter Less.")

6 minutes. The national anthem is sung by a guy from the Washington, D.C., production of Jersey Boys. His voice cracks at "rockets' red glare." If this were a more popular reality show, a British judge would follow the performance by telling the singer to jump in a lake because he sounds like a frog. If only.

8 minutes. Blitzer finally allows the candidates to stand behind their podiums, and they all immediately start to scribble things on notepads. Except for Cain. He apparently doesn't have any complex things he needs to remember. Blitzer prattles on a while longer. Then he asks the candidates for a brief introduction, like "I'm Wolf Blitzer, and yes that's my real name."

10 minutes. Santorum goes first with a joke. "If you like what Barack Obama has done to our economy, you'll love what he's done to our national security." High sarcasm. No one seems to get it. Paul says he is against "needless and unnecessary wars." Perry introduces his wife, Anita, and talks about their 29 years of "wedded bliss." Romney says, "I'm Mitt Romney and yes, Wolf, that's also my first name." Except it isn't. Romney's first name is Willard. Typical. Facts be damned.

12 minutes. Cain declares "our national security has indeed been downgraded," as if it were an investment-grade bond. Gingrich says his dad was in the military, and that at the age of 15 he "decided that national survival was worth a lifetime of study." No doubt he was just as much of a showoff then. Bachmann praises the men and women in uniform overseas. Huntsman gives a quick bio, noting that he has two kids in the U.S. Navy.

14 minutes. Finally the first question. Should the Patriot Act get a long-term extension? Gingrich gives a long answer about why terrorists should not be treated as criminals, but as enemies on the battlefield, without really answering the question.

15 minutes. Blitzer tries again. "Just to clarify, you wouldn't change the Patriot Act?" Gingrich says, "No, I would not change it. I'm not aware of any specific change it needs. And I'd look at strengthening it." Of course, strengthening would be a change, but no one notices this because Gingrich quickly follows by describing a nuclear bomb exploding in an American city. The image clears the mind.

16 minutes. Paul, of course, disagrees with Gingrich, and says criminal law is a fine way to deal with terrorists."Timothy McVeigh was a vicious terrorist," he says. "He was arrested." This is a bad example to choose, since McVeigh's bombing of a building in Oklahoma City killed 168 people. (See "What You Missed While Not Watching the CNBC "Oops" Debate.")

17 minutes. Gingrich pounces. "Timothy McVeigh succeeded. That's the whole point," he says. "I don't want a law that says after we lose a major American city, we're sure going to come and findyou. I want a law that says, you try to take out an American city, we're going to stop you." Score one for Gingrich. But Paul then one-ups Gingrich's end-times imagery. "This is like saying that we need a policeman in every house, a camera in every house because we want to prevent child- beating and wife-beating," he says. "You can prevent crimes by becoming a police state." They will have to agree to disagree.

18 minutes. Bachmann is asked if she is with Paul or Gingrich on the Patriot Act. "I'm with the American people, with the Constitution, and with the job of the commander-in-chief as the number one duty of the President of the United States," she says. Bold. Meaningless. Then she attacks Obama. "Our CIA has no ability to have any form of interrogation for terrorists," she says, which is not really true, since the CIA remains involved in interrogations, according to the most reputable press reports.

19 minutes. Huntsman is asked to state his Patriot Act position. He talks about the balancing act between liberty and security, and the need to share information. Another non-answer.

21 minutes. Romney is asked to comment on TSA pat downs at airports. "Violation of civil liberty or a necessity to ensure national security?" He doesn't answer. Says there are ways to improve TSA, and that Gingrich is right about the limits of criminal law.

22 minutes. Perry says that he would disband TSA unions, and extend the Patriot Act. Then he says the Obama administration "has been an absolute failure when it comes to expending the dollars and supporting the CIA and the military intelligence around the world." He offers no evidence for this, nor does he try to deal with the evidence against it, like the recent killing of Osama bin Laden.

23 minutes. Blitzer asks Santorum if he supports ethnic or religious profiling of passengers on planes, to pick outpotential terrorists. "Obviously, Muslims would be, would be someone you'd look at, absolutely," Santorum says. Then he ads, "as well as younger males." No need to worry about alienating constituencies when you are polling at 2%. (Read "New Patriot Act Controversy: Is Washington Collecting Your Cell-Phone Data?")

25 minutes. Paul starts waving his arms in disbelief. "That's digging a hole for ourselves. What if they look like Timothy McVeigh?" This is a better use of the McVeigh as an example.

26 minutes. Cain is asked about religious profiling of Muslims at TSA. He says he supports "targeted identification." Wolf asks, "What does that mean?" Cain says, "We can do targeted identification." A Cain tautology. Blitzer tries again. Cain calls him "Blitz," says he would let intelligence agencies figure out what he means. Then Cain apologizes. "I'm sorry, Blitz, I meant Wolf, OK?" says Cain. Make it your ringtone.

28 minutes. New question about whether the drone campaign should be expanded in Pakistan. Huntsman responds with lots of facts and fancy pronunciation. "You have not President Zardari in charge but General Kayani over the military, which also is responsible for ISI," Huntsman says. He says he supports an expanded drone campaign.

30 minutes. Bachmann is asked if Pakistan should continue to receive U.S. aid. Bachmann says yes, because of the national security interests there. Perry disagrees. "I understand where she's coming from, but the bottom line is that they've showed us time aftertime that they can't be trusted. And until Pakistan clearly shows that theyhave America's best interests in mind, I would not send them one penny, period," Perry says. Since Pakistan, which is riven by internal factions, has never done anything "clearly," this suggests Perry is ready to cut off Pakistan. "To write a check to countries that are clearly not representing American interests is nonsensical," he says. In this, he rejects pretty much the entire history of American foreign policy.

33 minutes. Bachmann says, "With all due respect to the governor, I think that's highly na?ve." It's an understatement. Perry says he just wants to stop writing blank checks. Bachmann points out that the U.S. is not writing blank checks. Perry looks down at the podium. He has soundbites, but is not ready to engage on substance.

36 minutes. Romney is asked about Afghanistan, and basically embraces President Obama's entire approach to the region. "Our effort there is to keep Afghanistan from becoming a launching point for terror against the United States. We can't just write off a major part of the world."

37 minutes. Huntsman says, "I totally disagree," and then says that the U.S. does not need to be nation building in Afghanistan with 100,000 troops. Then some exciting tit-for-tat ensues. "Are you suggesting, Governor, that we just take all our troops out next week or what ? what's your proposal?" Romney asks. "Did you hear what I just said?" shoots back Huntsman. "I said we should draw down from 100,000. We don't need 100,000 troops." It is a memorable moment, because Romney has been playing the role of Alpha dog at these debates, and Huntsman just barked back a bit.

38 minutes. Romney looks flustered, and tries again to get behind the Obama policy. "I stand with the commanders in this regard and have no information that suggests that pulling our troops out faster than that would do anything but put at ? at great peril the extraordinary sacrifice that's been made."

39 minutes. Huntsman attacks again. "At the end of the day, the President of the United States is commander-in-chief," he says. "I also remember when people listened to the generals in 1967 and we heard a certain course of action in South Asia that didn't serve our interests very well." Huntsman was seven years old in 1967. Romney tries to come back, but he has lost this round. For the first time in all the debates, Huntsman has gotten to him.

40 minutes. Blitzer tries to surprise Gingrich. He doesn't even ask a question. He just says, "Speaker?" Gingrich responds with pseudo-academic throat clearing. "Well, Wolf, I'm a little confused about exactly what we're currently debating, because I think ? I think we tend to get down to these narrow questions that ? that, in a sense, don't get at the ? at the core issues," he says, before saying he would change rules of engagement in Afghanistan and care less about the opinions of the Pakistanis.

42 minutes. Santorum then sides with Romney, but does it better than Romney did it. "You're doing exactly what all of the radical leaders are saying that America will do, that we are not in this to win, we are going to play politics with this, and then we will find this problem in Afghanistan on our shores in a very short order," Santorum says to Huntsman.

43 minutes. Blitzer interrupts, saying he wants to get to "Congressman Cain in a minute" but first has to take a commercial break. Sounds like retribution, since Cain, who is not a Congressman, called Blitzer "Blitz." But the break comes before Cain can blitz Blitzer back. Say that 10 times fast.

Read "Impact of U.S. Troop Drawdown in Afghanistan Already Being Felt."

47 minutes. We are back with a question from the audience, except there is no question from the audience. An awkward minute or so later, a questioner appears: "If Israel attacked Iran to prevent Tehran from getting nuclear weapons, would you help Israel launch the attack or support it otherwise?" Cain answers without any answer. "I would first make sure that they had a credible plan for success, clarity of mission and clarity of success. Remember, when you talkabout attacking Iran, it is a very mountainous region." Imagine President Cain on the phone with the Israeli Prime Minister. "We will attack at dawn," says the prime minister. "Have you considered the mountains?" inquires President Cain.

49 minutes. Would Paul support a bombing of Iran? "No. I wouldn't do that." Saw that one coming.

51 minutes. Cain still talking about "the mountainous terrain in Iran." Note to American enemies: If Cain wins the White House, take Switzerland first.

54 minutes. Perry is asked if he would support new sanctions against Iran. He sure would, especially against the Iranian Central Bank. Then Blitzer points out that sanctions against the Iranian Central Bank would stop most oil exports, and deal a potentially crippling blow to an already weak European economy. Perry is not going to touch that one. So Gingrich goes. He says he would still support sanctions on the central bank, because the alternative is war, nuclear or otherwise. "I agree with all of that," says Bachmann. "And energy independence is something that President Obama certainly has avoided." Just follow the bouncing ball. (Read "Why GOP Presidential Hopefuls Miss the Point on Iran's Nuclear Program.")

57 minutes. Paul Wolfowitz asks the next question, introducing himself as "a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute" and not "the former Defense Department official who testified that the U.S. could secure Iraq after Saddam's fall without additional forces." He asks if the candidates support continued funding to fight AIDS and malaria in Africa. Santorum says yes, noting that "Africa was a country on the brink. On the brink of complete meltdown and chaos," before the funding appeared. A country.

59 minutes. Cain is asked directly if he would support the current foreign assistance programs for AIDS and malaria in Africa. "It depends upon priorities. Secondly, it depends upon looking at the program and asking the question, has that aid been successful," he says. By inserting the word "secondly" in his answer, Cain gives the impression that he knows what he is talking about. But he has no idea.

60 minutes. Ron Paul? "I think all aid is worthless."

61 minutes. Instead of dealing with the question, Romney goes on a rant about the defense budget being cut by Obama. "They're cutting a trillion dollars out of the defense budget, which just happens to equal the trillion dollars we're putting into ObamaCare," he says. This is doubly misleading. ObamaCare is expected to save money over the first decade of its existence, not cost $1 trillion. And the defense cuts are still speculative.

62 minutes. Paul knows nonsense when he hears it. "Well, they're not cutting anything out of anything. All this talk is just talk," he says. If the debates could be killed, that last line would be written on their tombstone.

62 minutes. First Huntsman, now Paul. What's going on? Romney may have missed his weekly testosterone shot. He tries to get back at Paul by rattling off numbers, but his numbers admit that most of the cuts he is speaking of are speculative. So for good measure, Romney says, "The right course in America is to stand up to Iran with crippling sanctions, indict Ahmadinejad for violating the Geneva ? or the Genocide Convention." Ahmadinejad has not committed genocide, but has said he wants to get rid of the state of Israel and he has denied the Holocaust. This is not the same as saying he wants to commit genocide. But why quibble over the details when discussing mass murder. (Read "Can the U.S. Contain Iran's Nuclear Ambitions?")

63 minutes. Newt gets a question about defense budget cuts in a time of high deficits. He says he will try to cut the military, then pivots. "Let me make a deeper point," he begins. Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, Lean Six Sigma, the Millennium Challenge and more oil drilling in the U.S. all get mentions. Hard now not to think of a 15-year-old Gingrich trying this same act out on a girl in the high school hallway.

66 minutes. Huntsman says everything has got to be on the table. Then he evokes the long passed spirit of Sarah Palin. "It used to break my heart sitting in Beijing, the second largest embassy in the world, looking at neighboring Afghanistan," he says.

68 minutes. Perry is asked if he would compromise with Democrats to avoid budgetary gridlock when he becomes President. Perry doesn't answer. Instead he calls Obama a failure in a few different ways, and says Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta would "resign in protest" if he were "an honorable man." So Perry just questioned the honor of the man in charge of U.S. armed forces in a time of war. We will see if that one pays off down the road.

71 minutes. Santorum gives a much more reasonable answer. He says that it is okay to compromise, it just depends on the details.

73 minutes. A new question gives Gingrich a chance to ring the Chilean Social Security reform bell. "I think you can have a series of entitlement reforms that, frankly, make most of this problem go away without going through the kind of austerity and pain that this city likes." Haven't mention this, but in many of Gingrich's answers, he is speaking "frankly." It's like a tic.

76 minutes. Second break.

80 minutes. We're back. Quick live shot of Tahrir Square in Cairo. The crowd at Constitution Hall has clearly been forced to stand and applaud as Blitzer says there will be more commercials. (See photos of the clash between police and protestors in Cairo.)

83 minutes. We're back. Immigration time. You know how it goes. Secure the borders, etc. Perry says he would do it, because he knows how to do it.

86 minutes. Paul sees a chance to say that the war on drugs is a "total failure." "Why don't we handle the drugs like we handle alcohol?" he says. "Alcohol is a deadly drug. What about ? the real deadly drugs are the prescription drugs. They kill a lot more people than the illegal drugs."

88 minutes. Cain says that Mexico is in trouble and then offers a four point plan to deal with it, none of which have anything to do with Mexico. He would, wait for it, secure the borders, enforce immigration laws, empower states, and "promote the current path to citizenship." Not clear what kind of promotion he has in mind. Bunting? Signage?

90 minutes. Another question with already answered potential: What about highly skilled immigrants? Everyone on stage is in favor of attracting more highly skilled immigrants.

91 minutes. Blitzer interrupts the inanity with a direct question about the topic no one wants to talk about. What to do about the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country. Gingrich says, "If you're here ? if you've come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home. Period. If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going toseparate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out." This is what will eventually happen. But it is generally verboten to discuss this publically in the Republican Party. Gingrich is putting himself out there.

93 minutes. Bachmann pounces. "Well, I don't agree that you would make 11 million workers legal, because that, in effect, is amnesty," she says. "And I also don't agree that you would give the DREAM Act on a federal level." Gingrich struggles to explain himself, but does not back down.

95 minutes. Romney pounces. "Look, amnesty is a magnet," Romney says. It's a good bumper sticker answer. It's one Romney has used before. It does not explain what Romney would do with the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

97 minutes. Gingrich still holds his ground. "I'm prepared to take the heat for saying, let's be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families," he says.

98 minutes. Question gets pushed to Perry, who already stepped in this issue big time a few debates back. He is cautious. But he still agrees with Gingrich, and says there is a way to "keep those families together."

100 minutes. Blitzer returns to Romney, who is now admitting that he might make an exception forthose who have been in the U.S. for 25 years. "You would let them stay?" Blitzer asks. Here Romney reveals himself a bit. "I'm not going to start drawing lines here about who gets to stay and who get to go," says Romney. This is an admission that lines would be drawn. Romney is playing it safe. Clearly he does not want to say what he really thinks.

101 minutes. Commercial break. There is a reason other reality shows tend not to last this long. Or if they do, they involve people wearing much less clothing.

105 minutes. We're back. Question about Syria. What are the U.S. interests? Would you support a no-fly zone? Cain has no real idea. He says he is against a no-fly zone, but can't say why. "The most effective tools that we have in any of these situations are a strong military, which it is getting weaker, unfortunately, and our own economic strength," he says. Then he tries to pivot to a discussion of the domestic economy.

106 minutes. Perry came up with the idea for a no-fly zone, even though rebels in Syria are not being bombed from the air. He calls it, "one of a multitude of sanctions and actions" he would support. Huntsman then weighs in, showing that he is basically the anti-Cain, in that he knows stuff about foreign policy. Paul talks about the threat from "the al Qaeda," which is redundant. Romney grabs an opportunity to attack Obama for just about everything. Then Romney points out that the Syrian regime is not using planes but tanks on its own people. "Maybe a no-drive zone," Romney jokes, but he doesn't support that either. Just sanctions.

114 minutes. Final questions. The candidates are asked to mention the foreign policy issue they are most concerned about that has not been talked about. Santorum says socialists and radical Islamists in Central America. Paul says more U.S. wars. Perry releases his talking points on "Communist China." Romney, always the safe one, says both China and Latin America. Cain says cyber attacks. Gingrich says cyber, nuclear or an electromagnetic pulse attack. Bachmann says homegrown radical Islam. Huntsman says he could say China, but the biggest problem is right here at home. "It's called joblessness," he says. "It's called lack of opportunity. It's called debt, that has become a national security problem in this country. And it's also called a trust deficit, a Congress that nobody believes in anymore, an executive branch that has no leadership, institutions of power that we no longer believe in." True that.

119 minutes. We're done. Until next time. There will be a next time.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/gop/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/time/20111123/us_time/httpswamplandtimecom20111123whatyoumissedwhilenotwatchingthegopnationalsecuritydebatexidrssfullnationyahoo

ford evos ford evos ides of march starship troopers starship troopers the skin i live in charlie daniels band

Friday, November 25, 2011

T-Mobile Vivacity launches in the UK

T-Mobile Vivacity

T-Mobile UK today announced the launch of the launch of a mid-end Android smartphone, the Vivacity. It's got a 3.5-inch display at WVGA resolution, a 5-megapixel camera, Wifi, GPS and all that jazz. It's going for just £10 per month on a 24-month plan, or for £99 on Pay As You Go.

We've got the full presser after the break.

More: T-Mobile UK

read more



Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/androidcentral/~3/rq_fCQeJLWM/story01.htm

oklahoma state best buy black friday 2011 ads broncos jets jessie james clayton kershaw osu basketball dale sveum

94% 50/50

All Critics (154) | Top Critics (40) | Fresh (144) | Rotten (10)

Still, it's Gordon-Levitt's choices that continue to impress. Sure, he owned one of the most jaw-dropping sequences in last summer's blockbuster Inception. But the actor remains drawn to profoundly human-scale hurts and quiet triumphs.

Gordon-Levitt is an agreeably undemonstrative actor who plays well opposite the burbly Rogen.

Chances are about 90/10 that you'll enjoy 50/50.

Scene by scene, 50/50 can be both amusing and moving, with the tightly wound Gordon-Levitt and the boundaryless Rogen forming an oddly complementary pair. But as a whole the movie never quite coheres.

In other hands, Adam might well be hard to take. But as the comedy in 50/50 turns darker, Gordon-Levitt, who's maybe the most natural, least affected actor of his generation, makes prickly plenty engaging.

An everyman tale with plenty of heart and honesty, the serious subject matter is regularly enlivened with jolts of genuine hilarity, some of it in delightfully questionable taste.

It's not a major landmark on anybody's r?sum?, but it's nothing to be ashamed of either.

The Gordon-Levitt-Rogen bromance is one of the most exciting and fun ones in recent comedy history, and the pair have a wonderful natural rift ...

Seth Rogen might be there to puts bums on seats, but it's Joseph Gordon-Levitt who will keep you watching.

It may be a marketing nightmare, but as examinations of mortality go, few come funnier, wiser or more astutely acted.

Whether you're after a comedy-drama about cancer or a Rogen laugh-fest with added heart, this does a remarkable job of balancing the odds.

This is the terminal illness weepie for people who don't watch terminal illness weepies, and it's much the better for it.

It's refreshing to see a movie that embraces the ugly side of what happens to complicated personal relationships. Its quite uncomfortable at times, and the frank exploration of the cancer patient journey makes the comedy even funnier.

It is tough to make a comedy about cancer, since it touches us all. It is not funny. When you have Seth Rogen in a film, however, anything can be funny.

The elements of 50/50 that do work are strong enough to carry the film along and affecting enough to bring losers like me to tears in their cinema seats.

Tackles a distressing subject with a healthy dose of humour, thanks to a sharply observed script, well-rounded, likeable characters, astute direction and a trio of terrific performances from Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Seth Rogen and Anna Kendrick.

There couldn't be a more serious subject, yet Gordon-Levitt and especially Rogen (who co-produced the movie) make the comedy seem both spontaneous and organic.

Nimbly switching gears between heartful drama and uproarious comedy, 50/50 tackles the near-impossible and makes a film about cancer that'll have you crying like a baby one minute and laughing so hard your sides hurt the next.

Jonathan Levine directs a film that may be one of the year's best but still makes one yearn for the serious and uncompromising films of the 1950s and 1960s.

Yes, cancer can be funny. Sort of.

Films about cancer aren't generally this funny. And while this movie isn't a comedy, beyond its generous dose of realistic humour, it has a smart, personal script that dares to face a difficult situation head on.

Life is hard. Cancer is hard. Relationships are hard. Family is hard. '50/50' managed to find the power in all of those things and give us plenty of laughs so we're not simply in a ball crying.

A near-great movie made out of the hardest-to-thread, most oxymoronic genre imaginable - "cancer comedy."

a good movie with a moderate sense of daring that ultimately spends too much time telling the wrong story

With its excellent cast and emotionally intelligent script, 50/50 isn't necessarily a feel good movie about cancer, but is an exceptional telling of one man's story, mixed with a perfect balance of sympathy and laughs.

More Critic Reviews

Source: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/5050_2011/

paul mccartney adam savage adam savage mos def jack o lantern jack o lantern dave thomas

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Tiny flame shines light on supernovae explosions

ScienceDaily (Nov. 22, 2011) ? Starting from the behavior of small flames in the laboratory, a team of researchers has gained new insights into the titanic forces that drive Type Ia supernova explosions. These stellar explosions are important tools for studying the evolution of the universe, so a better understanding of how they behave would help answer some of the fundamental questions in astronomy.

Type Ia supernovae form when a white dwarf star -- the left-over cinder of a star like our Sun -- accumulates so much mass from a companion star that it reignites its collapsed stellar furnace and detonates, briefly outshining all other stars in its host galaxy. Because these stellar explosions have a characteristic brightness, astronomers use them to calculate cosmic distances. (It was by studying Type Ia supernovae that two independent research teams determined that the expansion of the Universe was accelerating, earning them the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics).

To better understand the complex conditions driving this type of supernova, the researchers performed new 3-D calculations of the turbulence that is thought to push a slow-burning flame past its limits, causing a rapid detonation -- the so-called deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT). How this transition might occur is hotly debated, and these calculations provide insights into what is happening at the moment when the white dwarf star makes this spectacular transition to supernova. "Turbulence properties inferred from these simulations provides insight into the DDT process, if it occurs," said Aaron Jackson, currently an NRC Research Associate working in the Laboratory for Computational Physics and Fluid Dynamics at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. At the time of this research, Jackson was a graduate student at Stony Brook University on Long Island, New York.

Jackson and his colleagues Dean Townsley from the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa, and Alan Calder also of Stony Brook, presented their data at the American Physical Society's (APS) Division of Fluid Dynamics (DFD) meeting in Baltimore, Nov. 20-22, 2011.

While the deflagration-detonation transition mechanism is still not well understood, a prevailing hypothesis in the astrophysics community is that if turbulence is intense enough, DDT will occur. Extreme turbulent intensities inferred in the white dwarf from the researchers' simulations suggest DDT is likely, but the lack of knowledge about the process allows a large range of

outcomes from the explosion. Matching simulations to observed supernovae can identify likely conditions for DDT.

"There are a few options for how to simulate how they [supernovae] might work, each of which has different advantages and disadvantages," said Townsley. "Our goal is to provide a more realistic simulation of how a given supernova scenario will perform, but that is a long-term goal and involves many different improvements that are still in progress."

The researchers speculate that this better understanding of the physical underpinnings of the explosion mechanism will give us more confidence in using Type Ia supernovae as standard candles, and may yield more precise distance estimates.

Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:

Other bookmarking and sharing tools:


Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Physical Society.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111122113214.htm

tuscaloosa earthquake california earthquake california crimson tide crimson tide wake forest wake forest

Tucson shooter appeals forced medication ruling (Reuters)

TUCSON, Ariz (Reuters) ? Tucson shooting rampage suspect Jared Loughner is appealing an order to allow doctors to forcibly medicate him against his will, papers lodged with an appellate court showed on Monday.

Loughner is accused of shooting dead six people outside a Tucson supermarket in January and wounding 13 others including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat who had been holding a meeting there with constituents at the time.

Giffords was shot through the head and is recovering.

Loughner has been receiving antipsychotic medication since July at a facility for federal prisoners in Missouri, in a bid to restore him to mental competency.

Loughner's lawyers lodged the motion with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. It argued that a previous district court order issued in August denied their client a "prompt post-deprivation hearing" on emergency forced medication.

The 23-year-old college dropout was diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia, disordered thinking and delusions, and was in May declared incompetent to stand trial.

Loughner has pleaded not guilty to 49 charges, including first degree murder.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/meds/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20111122/hl_nm/us_tucson_shooter

duke basketball natalie wood christina aguilera vince young vince young tony stewart amas

How the Original Facebook Phone Failed [Facebook]

Facebook is working on a phone! But Facebook has been working on a phone. What's new? Well, it's a completely different project because their first top secret effort crashed and burned. It's a sordid history of employee jealousy, secret plans, power struggles and just plain failure. More »


Source: http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~3/8hYywgEssN8/how-the-original-facebook-phone-failed

gold rush gold rush chili recipe chili recipe grimm jello shots tashard choice

Tiny Travel Power-Strip Packs Three Outlets, USB Port

Ugh. Much as it pains me to give any attention to the litigation-happy Monster Cable (previously seen harassing Monster Mini Golf for trademark infringement and generally overpricing everything), this power adapter looks genuinely useful for the lightweight traveler.
It’s a tiny U.S power-strip which triples the available sockets and also adds in a USB socket. This [...]

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/GearFactor/~3/o57dibSnyWs/

steve jobs bill gates frances bean cobain bill gates michael lewis palin occupy wall street second time around

Connecticut killer calls self "most hated" man (Reuters)

NEW HAVEN, Conn (Reuters) ? Convicted killer Joshua Komisarjevsky told a judge presiding over a jury deciding whether he should face the death penalty on Wednesday that he believes he is "one of the most hated people in America."

Objecting to a defense plan to show his 9-year-old daughter's videotaped testimony to the jury, Komisarjevsky said the move would hurt her more than it would help him.

"Her memorialized words will affect her emotionally and psychologically in the future if she believes she is party to assisting the effort to put me to death," Komisarjevsky told Judge Jon Blue while the jury was outside the courtroom in New Haven Superior Court.

The girl has already received death threats, according to her attorneys.

Komisarjevsky, 31, was convicted of murder, rape and arson in the deaths of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her two daughters Hayley and Michaela, and of beating Dr. William Petit, the sole survivor of the brutal home invasion in Cheshire, Connecticut in July 2007.

The jury that convicted him is deciding whether to sentence him to death or life in prison without parole.

His accomplice Steven Hayes was convicted separately of similar charges and has been sentenced to death.

Speaking for the first time in his two-month trial, Komisarjevsky objected in court on Wednesday to showing the jury his daughter's videotaped testimony because he did not want her to have to justify statements that "help one of the most hated people in America."

Komisarjevsky, dressed in a black suit, defied his attorney's advice and in a deep calm voice asked that the child be spared further emotional harm that would be caused by playing the videotape for the jury.

A recorded interview with the girl was made with the help of social workers. Komisarjevsky's lawyer hopes her testimony will help sway a jury to spare his life.

Judge Blue denied the objection, saying Komisarjevsky's attorney should be allowed to represent his client as he sees fit.

The jury was later shown the videotape, which was hidden from the public to protect the child's identity.

(Editing by Barbara Goldberg and Greg McCune)

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/us/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20111123/us_nm/us_crime_connecticut_murders

osu reno news syracuse denver broncos shonn greene oklahoma state plane crash syracuse basketball

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

PFT: Suh says Lions at same level as Packers

Kyle OrtonAP

It?s a nice, feel-good Thanksgiving week story.? Bears quarterback Jay Cutler breaks a thumb.? The Broncos have cut a former Bears quarterback who?d like to play in Chicago again.? And there?s nothing more natural than a homecoming on the fourth Thursday in November.

The only problem?? At least 22 teams can provide the flight delay and/or the traffic jam that prevents Kyle Orton from scarfing down sausage with the Superfans.

After the trading deadline, all players who are released must pass through waivers.? Priority is determined by record.? And so every team higher than the Bears in the pecking order will have dibs on Orton, if they choose to exercise it.

The Bears reportedly are No. 30 on the list.? Which means that every team except the 49ers and Packers will be able to grab him.

It doesn?t matter whether Orton ?wants? to play for the Bears.? If another team claims him, he has 2.5 million reasons to show up.

At the top of the stack, what better way to test whether the Colts are in full-blown ?Suck for Luck? mode than to see whether they?d bring in a quarterback who is significantly better than Curtis Painter or Dan Orlovsky?? They?d be crazy not to make a claim.? Unless they?re truly crazy for Andrew Luck.

The 4-6 Chiefs also need help, given the performance of Tyler Palko on Monday night.? (And with the Chiefs playing the Broncos again on January 1, there could be some strategic benefit to having him around.)? Ditto for the Redskins, whose head coach could be coaching for his job, with Rex Grossman and John Beck as the blanks in the bazooka.

And how about NFC teams that hope to pick off a wild-card berth if/when the Bears slide with Caleb Hanie or Nathan Enderle?? The 7-3 Lions, 6-4 Falcons, the 6-4 Cowboys (whose primary backup, Jon Kitna, is banged up), the 6-4 Giants, the 4-6 Bucs, and even the 4-6 Dream Team would have an incentive to block the Bears from getting their way.

Let?s also not forget about the Texans, who may not be completely sold on Matt Leinart, despite the decision to put all their eggs in a beer bong.

Finally, it would be foolish to overlook good, old-fashioned spite.? In 2002, Deion Sanders wanted to emerge from retirement and hop onto the silver-and-black bandwagon.? So the Redskins released his rights.? And former Redskins coach Marty Schottenheimer, the man whose presence in 2001 prompted Sanders to pick retirement over playing, put in a waivers claim on Sanders, short-circuiting his plan.? With three NFC North teams on track to make it to the playoffs, maybe the 2-8 Vikings would be tempted to keep the Bears from getting Orton, in the hopes that they?ll have company in the non-playoff party.

That?s highly unlikely.? But the point is that there are many possible motivations, and just because the Bears want Orton and Orton wants the Bears, it doesn?t mean he?ll end up there.? Indeed, the fact that the Bears and Orton are trying to rendezvous could be the tiebreaker for a team that is thinking about disrupting that plan.

UPDATE 10:35 p.m. ET:? As a reader pointed out on Twitter, claiming Orton has another benefit.? When he leaves as a free agent in March 2012, the team that employs him for six weeks would be in line for a compensatory draft pick.? So there?s one more good reason to consider doing it.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/22/ndamukong-suh-packers-arent-perfect-lions-are-at-their-level/related/

baby lisa baby lisa paranormal activity west virginia football west virginia football wvu football meteor shower tonight

Current Developments: Innovative Ideas on How to Make Electric Cars Cost-Efficient Take Shape

News | Technology

Expensive batteries and limited recharging stations are the big impediments to making EVs cost-competitive with non-hybrid internal combustion vehicles, but new electricity pricing and distribution models may help break the logjam


electric, charge, vehicleWHICH WAY TO CHARGE?: One model for recharging has private companies installing and owning individual battery recharging stations. Drivers could be charged on a per-use basis or via a monthly fee for access to the recharging network. Here a Reva i/G-Wiz is charged on a street in London. Image: Courtesy of Frankh, via Flickr

It's easy to knock electric vehicles (EVs): It takes too long to recharge the batteries and there are too few places to do it. And besides, who will pay for all the new recharging stations that would be needed if the cars catch on? The International Energy Agency?s most optimistic scenario puts (pdf) plug-in hybrids or EVs at 15 percent of all cars on the road by 2020; other projections predict a mere 3 percent.

The dubious outlook for EVs has much do to with uncertainty over what role utility companies should play in providing the electricity needed for large fleets of these vehicles. At a recent conference, however, industry analysts put several options on the table.

Utilizing utilities
One idea is for private companies to install and own individual battery recharging stations and charge drivers on a per-use basis, said Brett Perlman, president of utility industry management consulting firm Vector Solutions. Perlman, who served as commissioner of the Public Utility Commission of Texas from 1999 to 2003, was one of several speakers November 15 at the "Electric Vehicles, Fact or Fiction?" forum in New York City, hosted by PA Consulting Group. Another approach would be for these vendors to create a network of recharging stations and charge drivers a monthly service fee for access (much like the mobile phone industry).

Perlman thinks utility companies should play a more active role, however. "We need a private utility infrastructure and a public charging infrastructure, something that regulators are starting to look at, starting with those in California," he said.

Texas is also experimenting with this model. NRG Energy's eVgo Complete charging program in Houston includes unlimited fueling services both from a home charging dock and across the NRG-owned eVgo public network for a fixed monthly price of $89. A progressive move on NRG's part, but one that could backfire if regulators decide down the road to limit the role of utilities in establishing a universal recharging scheme. "One of the greatest impediments to EVs is that much of the legislation defining how drivers and their vehicles interact with the grid will be decided on a state level," Perlman said. This means each state could develop its own approach to recharging, which could make life difficult for interstate drivers.

Better battery
The battery is at the heart of the issue, Hugh McDermott, global vice president of Better Place, said during the forum. The firm is building drive-through battery exchange stations that use robots to swap out depleted batteries for newly charged ones within minutes. The stations are not meant to serve as the primary source of recharging?that should be done at home overnight, McDermott said. Instead, these stations provide a way to recharge when a driver is unable to charge at home. Whereas today's high cost for batteries will come down over time, the price of oil will only grow more expensive, he added.

McDermott said that Better Place has gotten traction for its model in several countries, including China, Denmark and Israel. The firm will have 40 stations installed in Israel by the end of 2012, carrying a total inventory of 500 batteries. "In Israel a policy of oil independence is a national security imperative providing incentive to seek out alternatives to combustion automobiles," McDermott said. "The challenge in the U.S. is, it's like dealing with 50 different countries."

Comparing cost
The costs of owning an EV cannot yet compete with non-hybrid combustion-powered cars. Earlier this year a team of researchers led by Wally Tyner, a Purdue University agricultural economics professor, compared the economics of driving a Chevrolet Volt, a Toyota Prius and a Chevy Cobalt. The researchers determined that the Volt, a plug-in hybrid, would be less economical than the Toyota Prius, a hybrid that does not charge its battery through a plug, or the Chevrolet Cobalt, which has only an internal combustion engine.

When oil prices are high, the Prius would be the most economical, with the advantage going to the Cobalt when oil prices are low. Tyner said to make the Volt more economical than either the Prius or the Cobalt, oil prices would have to rise to between $171 and $254 per barrel, depending on the electricity pricing system used. This disparity is because the Volt has a higher purchase price and will cost more in electricity than gasoline over the life of the vehicle.

There was a bit of encouraging news for EVs at PA Consulting's forum. During the question-and-answer session, Michael Niggli, president and chief operating officer of San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), reported that San Diego's EV and plug-in hybrid pilot program was progressing well. In fact, of the 850 cars involved, pure plug-in EVs like the Nissan Leaf outnumbered plug-in hybrids by a ratio of six to one, he said. This was likely due in part because San Diego was also one of the pilot cities where Nissan first released its all-electric Leaf. Niggli also pointed out that 85 percent of his SDG&E's EV and plug-in customers were recharging their vehicles during "super off-peak" hours (midnight to 6 A.M.), when rates are lowest.

Source: http://rss.sciam.com/click.phdo?i=3d48482c180ac1685dbb7552db92560a

dream house dream house the patriot taylor martinez taylor martinez o brother where art thou o brother where art thou

AP Exclusive: Spies outed, CIA suffers in Lebanon (AP)

WASHINGTON ? The CIA's operations in Lebanon have been badly damaged after Hezbollah identified and captured a number of U.S. spies recently, current and former U.S. officials told The Associated Press. The intelligence debacle is particularly troubling because the CIA saw it coming.

Hezbollah's longtime leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, boasted on television in June that he had rooted out at least two CIA spies who had infiltrated the ranks of Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers a terrorist group closely allied with Iran. Though the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon officially denied the accusation, current and former officials concede that it happened and the damage has spread even further.

In recent months, CIA officials have secretly been scrambling to protect their remaining spies ? foreign assets or agents working for the agency ? before Hezbollah can find them.

To be sure, some deaths are to be expected in shadowy spy wars. It's an extremely risky business and people get killed. But the damage to the agency's spy network in Lebanon has been greater than usual, several former and current U.S. officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about security matters.

The Lebanon crisis is the latest mishap involving CIA counterintelligence, the undermining or manipulating of the enemy's ability to gather information. Former CIA officials have said that once-essential skill has been eroded as the agency shifted from outmaneuvering rival spy agencies to fighting terrorists. In the rush for immediate results, former officers say, tradecraft has suffered.

The most recent high-profile example was the suicide bomber who posed as an informant and killed seven CIA employees and wounded six others in Khost, Afghanistan in December 2009.

Last year, then-CIA director Leon Panetta said the agency had to maintain "a greater awareness of counterintelligence." But eight months later, Nasrallah let the world know he had bested the CIA, demonstrating that the agency still struggles with this critical aspect of spying and sending a message to those who would betray Hezbollah.

The CIA was well aware the spies were vulnerable in Lebanon. CIA officials were warned, including the chief of the unit that supervises Hezbollah operations from CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and the head of counterintelligence. It remains unclear whether anyone has been or will be held accountable in the wake of this counterintelligence disaster or whether the incident will affect the CIA's ability to recruit assets in Lebanon.

In response to AP's questions about what happened in Lebanon, a U.S. official said Hezbollah is recognized as a complicated enemy responsible for killing more Americans than any other terrorist group before September 2001. The agency does not underestimate the organization, the official said.

The CIA's toughest adversaries, like Hezbollah and Iran, have for years been improving their ability to hunt spies, relying on patience and guile to exploit counterintelligence holes.

In 2007, for instance, when Ali-Reza Asgari, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps of Iran, disappeared in Turkey, it was assumed that he was either killed or defected. In response, the Iranian government began a painstaking review of foreign travel by its citizens, particularly to places like Turkey where Iranians don't need a visa and could meet with foreign intelligence services.

It didn't take long, a Western intelligence official told the AP, before the U.S., Britain and Israel began losing contact with some of their Iranian spies.

The State Department last year described Hezbollah as "the most technically capable terrorist group in the world," and the Defense Department estimates it receives between $100 million and $200 million per year in funding from Iran.

Backed by Iran, Hezbollah has built a professional counterintelligence apparatus that Nasrallah ? whom the U.S. government designated an international terrorist a decade ago ? proudly describes as the "spy combat unit." U.S. intelligence officials believe the unit, which is considered formidable and ruthless, went operational in about 2004.

Using the latest commercial software, Nasrallah's spy-hunters unit began methodically searching for spies in Hezbollah's midst. To find them, U.S. officials said, Hezbollah examined cellphone data looking for anomalies. The analysis identified cellphones that, for instance, were used rarely or always from specific locations and only for a short period of time. Then it came down to old-fashioned, shoe-leather detective work: Who in that area had information that might be worth selling to the enemy?

The effort took years but eventually Hezbollah, and later the Lebanese government, began making arrests. By one estimate, 100 Israeli assets were apprehended as the news made headlines across the region in 2009. Some of those suspected Israeli spies worked for telecommunications companies and served in the military.

Back at CIA headquarters, the arrests alarmed senior officials. The agency prepared a study on its own vulnerabilities, U.S. officials said, and the results proved to be prescient.

The analysis concluded that the CIA was susceptible to the same analysis that had compromised the Israelis, the officials said.

CIA managers were instructed to be extra careful about handling sources in Lebanon. A U.S. official said recommendations were issued to counter the potential problem.

But it's unclear what preventive measures were taken by the Hezbollah unit chief or the officer in charge of the Beirut station. Former officials say the Hezbollah unit chief is no stranger to the necessity of counterintelligence and knew the risks. The unit chief has worked overseas in hostile environments like Afghanistan and played an important role in the capture of a top terrorist while stationed in the Persian Gulf region after the attacks of 9/11.

"We've lost a lot of people in Beirut over the years, so everyone should know the drill," said a former Middle East case officer familiar with the situation.

But whatever actions the CIA took, they were not enough. Like the Israelis, bad tradecraft doomed these CIA assets and the agency ultimately failed to protect them, an official said. In some instances, CIA officers fell into predictable patterns when meeting their sources, the official said.

This allowed Hezbollah to identify assets and case officers and unravel at least part of the CIA's spy network in Lebanon. There was also a reluctance to share cases and some files were put in "restricted handling." The designation severely limits the number of people who know the identity of the source but also reduces the number of experts who could spot problems that might lead to their discovery, officials said.

Nasrallah's televised announcement in June was followed by finger-pointing among departments inside the CIA as the spy agency tried figure out what went wrong and contain the damage.

The fate of these CIA assets is unknown. Hezbollah treats spies differently, said Matthew Levitt, a counterterrorism and intelligence expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Studies who's writing a book about the terrorist organization

"It all depends on who these guys were and what they have to say," Levitt said. "Hezbollah has disappeared people before. Others they have kept around."

Who's responsible for the mess in Lebanon? It's not clear. The chief of Hezbollah operations at CIA headquarters continues to run the unit that also focuses on Iranians and Palestinians. The CIA's top counterintelligence officer, who was one of the most senior women in the clandestine service, recently retired after approximately five years in the job. She is credited with some important cases, including the recent arrests of Russian spies who had been living in the U.S. for years.

Officials said the woman was succeeded by a more experienced operations officer. That officer has held important posts in Moscow, Southeast Asia, Europe and the Balkans, important frontlines of the agency's spy wars with foreign intelligence services and terrorist organizations.

___

Contact the Washington investigative team at DCInvestigations(at)ap.org

Follow Apuzzo and Goldman at http://twitter.com/mattapuzzo and http://twitter.com/goldmandc

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/topstories/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111121/ap_on_go_ot/us_hezbollah_cia

x factor voting “do a barrel roll” oakland texas judge texas judge tom brokaw maria shriver

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

South Africa: Lawmakers adopt secrets bill (AP)

JOHANNESBURG ? The governing African National Congress pushed a bill through South Africa's parliament Tuesday to protect state secrets, despite strong objections from opposition politicians who included white conservatives and black nationalists who were enemies under apartheid.

Opponents, who include church and business leaders and Nobel laureates, say the measure will keep government corruption under wraps, stifle whistle-blowing and undermine the hard-won democracy created with apartheid's end 17 years ago. The ANC says South Africa needed to update apartheid-era legislation defining secrets and setting out punishments for divulging them, and that it has no intention of trampling on free expression and a muckraking media.

Opponents had expected parliament, where the ANC has a large majority, to approve the bill. They were already preparing to challenge the measure at the Constitutional Court if it becomes law.

Tuesday's 229-107 vote, during a lively session that saw ANC and opposition politicians trading barbs, came after months of fierce debate. The bill's critics included two Nobel prizewinners: retired Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a peace laureate, and literature laureate Nadine Gordimer.

The office of Nelson Mandela, South Africa's first post-apartheid president and also a Nobel peace laureate, also has expressed reservations about the bill.

Parliament's upper house could ask for revisions, but that rarely happens. President Jacob Zuma will have to sign the bill to make it law, and while his legal advisers may ask for revisions, he was expected to approve the measure.

Critics donned black and staged protests at the ANC's downtown Johannesburg headquarters during morning rush hour Tuesday, and in the afternoon outside parliament in Cape Town as lawmakers voted, saying the bill's weaknesses include its lack of a provision allowing those who break the law to avoid going to jail if they could argue they acted in the public interest.

Activists fear the adoption of the measure in a country known for one of the continent's freest and most open constitutions could influence other governments in the region.

Mukelani Dimba, a South African democracy activist who has lobbied against the bill, said post-apartheid lawmakers were initially eager to differentiate themselves from white racist politicians, adopting not only the constitution but a range of liberal laws. But over the years, he said, progressive ideals have waned.

"We have a ruling power that wants to retain power, and we have to admit that information is power," Dimba said, adding politicians may also resent constant newspaper articles about their wrongdoing.

If implemented, the bill "will unacceptably curtail both the right to access information and freedom of expression, which are the foundation of a democratic society," said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "The manner in which the government pushed this bill through parliament, instead of proceeding with consultations as promised, as well as the secrecy embedded in this legislation, send very worrying signs about the government's commitment to transparency."

In a statement late Monday, Tutu said it is "insulting to all South Africans to be asked to stomach legislation that could be used to outlaw whistle-blowing and investigative journalism ... and that makes the state answerable only to the state."

Tutu won a Nobel Peace Prize for his nonviolent opposition to white rule. In more recent years, he has been a sharp critic of ANC moves he sees as undermining rule of law and weakening South Africa's fledgling democracy.

Prominent ANC members also have opposed the bill, among them a former state security minister.

The ANC bill says "information that is accessible to all is the basis of a transparent, open and democratic society," but says secrecy is sometimes necessary to "save lives, to enhance and to protect the freedom and security of persons, to bring criminals to justice, to protect the national security and to engage in effective government and diplomacy."

While the bill makes it a crime to divulge state secrets, it also makes it a crime for an official to withhold information to conceal wrongdoing or incompetence, or merely to avoid embarrassment.

In June, the ANC backed down on some of its original proposals, removing mandatory prison sentences for possessing and publishing secrets ? though reporters and others could still be jailed for publishing information that officials want kept secret. The ANC also agreed to limit the power to classify secrets to state security agencies, and proposed that an independent official review appeals of state security rulings on classified information.

At times, the rhetoric about the bill appears to have less to do with its merits than with a distrust of government on one side after a series of corruption scandals involving high-ranking officials, including the national police chief; and complaints from politicians of witch hunts by a biased media.

In a speech to parliament last week, State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele even raised the possibility that demonstrators who have held peaceful marches to rally opposition to the bill were somehow being used by South Africa's enemies.

The secrets bill is separate from another ANC proposal that has raised concerns ? the possible creation of a tribunal that could discipline journalists, with powers to punish that have not yet been spelled out.

Relations between the ANC and the media long have been tense. Last week one of the country's most prominent newspapers, the Mail & Guardian, said it had been unable to publish details about corruption allegations against Mac Maharaj, who was imprisoned on Robben Island alongside Mandela for his anti-apartheid activities and who recently took on the job of presidential spokesman, because of threats of criminal prosecution. Maharaj later announced he was asking police to investigate whether the paper and its journalists had broken the law in their reporting.

___

Donna Bryson can be reached on http://twitter.com/dbrysonAP

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/africa/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111122/ap_on_re_af/af_south_africa_secrets_bill

man up wayne newton naomi wolf ron paul 2012 mitt romney columbus dispatch social security increase

Obama targets GOP in New Hampshire as he pushes for extension of payroll tax cut (Star Tribune)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories News, RSS Feeds and Widgets via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/165159696?client_source=feed&format=rss

david nelson frank gore frank gore frank miller 60 minutes duggar family cyber monday 2011

China tells US to avoid politicizing investment

BEIJING (AP) -- China appealed to Washington on Friday to avoid politicizing investment after a congressional panel said it would look into whether Chinese technology firms operating in the United States pose a security threat.

A foreign ministry spokesman, Liu Weimin, said Chinese companies operating abroad obey the law and act according to market principles.

"We hope the U.S. side will not politicize our economic cooperation," Liu said at a regular news briefing.

The U.S. House of Representatives intelligence committee said Thursday it will investigate whether allowing Chinese companies to expand in the United States might aid Chinese electronic spying. It cited Huawei Technologies Ltd. and rival ZTE Corp., makers of telecommunications gear, as being among the companies to be examined.

The House panel said it will look into the role Chinese companies play in supplying components for U.S. telecoms systems and whether access to those systems might allow foreign governments to gather information.

A U.S. government report issued this month accused China and Russia of systematically stealing American high-tech and economic data. It said such cyberattacks were increasing and were a "persistent threat" to American economic security.

Huawei, founded in the 1980s by a former Chinese army engineer, has grown into one of the world's biggest suppliers of telecoms gear. It efforts to expand in the United States have been hampered by security concerns.

In February, Huawei said it would unwind its purchase of a U.S. computer company, 3Leaf Systems, after it failed to win approval from a panel that reviews foreign acquisitions for possible security threats.

Following that setback, Huawei publicly invited U.S. authorities to investigate the company. It rejected allegations that it has ties to China's military and might be a threat to American national security.

In 2008, Huawei and an American partner, Bain Capital, withdrew a request for U.S. government approval of a bid to buy 3Com. The companies said they failed to satisfy national security concerns.

Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_CHINA_US_TECH_PROBE?SITE=INELK&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

jack o lantern jack o lantern dave thomas mean girls houston weather peter king hank williams jr