More children and partners likely to be cross-examined in court by alleged assailants, Manifesto for Family Justice claims An increasing number of victims of domestic abuse, including children, will be cross-examined in court by their alleged assailants if the government goes ahead with plans to cut legal aid, a coalition of family and children’s charities has warned. In a manifesto sent to all MPs, the group – which includes the Bar Council, the children’s commissioner, Liberty, Women’s Aid and Gingerbread – calls on ministers to protect vulnerable children and partners in divorce and family proceedings. The legal aid, sentencing and punishment of offenders bill, which will save £350m a year from the legal aid budget, has completed its committee stage in the Commons and will be debated on the floor of the house next week. The justice secretary, Ken Clarke, has said he wants to do away with “compensation culture”. Restrictions are being imposed on access to legal aid in divorce and family proceedings. The Ministry of Justice has said legal aid will be preserved for those who suffer violence and psychological abuse in domestic disputes. Family charities and the legal profession claim the definition remains too narrow and that alleged perpetrators will not be entitled to legal representation, resulting in many conducting personal cross-examinations. This already happens on rare occasions but is likely to become far more widespread under the proposed reforms, according to the Manifesto for Family Justice. Stephen Cobb QC, chairman of the Family Law Bar Association, said: “We will see an increasing number of people going to court on their own without representation. “That is DIY justice, not access to justice. We face the very real prospect that many children and women who have been victims of domestic abuse will have to endure the further trauma of being cross-examined by their alleged perpetrator, who will not be eligible for legal aid. “We are facing a disturbing new landscape in which 600,000 people will no longer receive legal aid, 68,000 children will be affected by the removal of legal aid in family cases, 54,000 fewer people will be represented in the family courts annually and there will be 75% fewer private law cases in court. “When the government consulted on these proposals, virtually no one supported them. The civil legal aid cuts will be bad for children, bad for women and bad for families.” The Bar Council represents barristers in England and Wales. The manifesto states that the “narrow definition of domestic abuse [used in the bill] is more restrictive than that used by the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers and will limit legal aid to victims of certain types of abuse”. Itsuggests that because of problems likely to be created for the courts, the government may not save money and could even be faced with increased costs. Fiona Dwyer from Women’s Aid said: “A lot of people will end up being cross-examined by their ex-partner. We have increasing evidence of that, but it’s going to be much worse in future if men are not going to be able to access legal aid. “Women are going to be pressurised into making informal arrangements which will place them at risk of harm. We would be concerned that more children would be at risk.” Jane Wilson of Resolution, which represents family lawyers, said: “We are really worried that the bill will reduce access to justice for the poorest in society.” Other signatories of the manifesto include the Association of Lawyers for Children, Co-ordinated Action Against Domestic Abuse, and the National Federation of Women’s Institutes. Domestic violence Legal aid Family law UK criminal justice Kenneth Clarke Charities Voluntary sector Owen Bowcott guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Malcolm Grant, the government’s choice to run the powerful NHS commissioning board, makes remarkable admission The health secretary will “franchise” the running of the NHS to a quango for up to three years at a time – a move that will result in an unelected academic and the nation’s 38,000 family doctors, rather than ministers, being accountable for the day-to-day running of the health service, according to leaked documents obtained by the Guardian. In unpublished evidence to the health select committee last week, Malcolm Grant, the government’s choice to run the powerful NHS commissioning board, outlined “an extraordinary transformation of responsibility” that appears to undermine claims by ministers that the proposed legislation will not dilute the government’s constitutional responsibilities to the health service. At present, the cabinet minister for health has a “duty to provide a national health service” in England, but that disappears in the NHS bill’s proposals. Grant, a law professor who runs University College London, told MPs that, under the new system, the secretary of state “mandates” the commissioning board to run the NHS every “two … possibly three years” and then retreats into the shadows. The board will hand over taxpayers’ cash to groups of GPs to buy services on behalf of patients. He admitted there would be “a fundamental change of responsibility and accountability under the bill” because about £80bn of public money would be transferred to the board and GPs. He said these two groups – not politicians – would run the NHS and ensure patients received an adequate level of health provision in England. “If [GPs] are dissatisfied with what happens in a hospital, they need to deal with it and not simply complain to a secretary of state who no longer has this responsibility, nor to the commissioning board which has given them the responsibility, but to complain to the hospital and get it sorted, and, if it is not sorted, to use their commissioning power to ensure that it is.” With peers beginning line-by-line scrutiny of the coalition’s NHS bill on Tuesday, the government has been attempting to rebut detractors of all political persuasions influenced by the powerful Lords constitutional committee. The committee warned last month about the “extent to which the chain of constitutional responsibility as regard to the NHS [will be] severed”. In what is perceived as a sign of panic over the level of peers’ opposition, a 72-page letter from ministers sent to all peers last week conceded a “necessary amendment” might be needed to rectify the impression the government would not be “responsible and accountable” for the NHS. However, Grant, who is expected to take up the post later this month, confirmed the bill’s critics’ worst fears in a combative parliamentary performance last week. In a remarkable admission, Grant told MPs that, from April 2013, in the event of a “crisis” in the health service. either he, nurses, GPs or hospital medical directors would be taking to the airwaves as the health secretary would not have responsibility for the daily running of the NHS. “It is no longer going to be the case that the secretary of state is wheeled in front of the TV cameras,” he told MPs. “Responsibility has to go back to where it is. It has to go back to within those hospitals. Who is the chief nurse? Who is the medical director. Where is the CEO?” MPs questioned how the public would be informed how well the NHS was faring by asking who “will be the person doing Panorama?” Grant replied: “I said this job was full of risks and probably that ends up being one of them.” Parliamentary scrutiny will also become a thing of the past. After the bill is passed, the health secretary will no longer have to answer MPs’ questions every month but will just put forward an annual report on how the board is doing once a year. The secretary of state will also, in effect, lose “powers of direction” over the health service, depriving the minister of the power to order NHS services to improve. The government would find it difficult to repeat Labour’s 2007 act of ordering a “deep clean” of NHS hospitals to tackle a rising tide of MRSA infections. Lady Thornton, Labour’s shadow health minister in the Lords, said: “This completely undermines the 1948 and 2006 acts. The whole point of the debate we’ve been having is that the secretary of state has to be accountable to parliament for the provision of a national health service, and you can’t just start franchising out that role.” To smoke out the government, Labour has also put down a probing amendment before peers which asks the house to concede that the principles of the NHS should be to “promote quality, equity, integration and accountability, not the market”. A Department of Health spokesman said: “The secretary of state will remain responsible for promoting a comprehensive health service and retains the ultimate accountability for securing the provision of services, through his relationship with NHS bodies.” NHS Health Public services policy Health policy Andrew Lansley Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Malcolm Grant, the government’s choice to run the powerful NHS commissioning board, makes remarkable admission The health secretary will “franchise” the running of the NHS to a quango for up to three years at a time – a move that will result in an unelected academic and the nation’s 38,000 family doctors, rather than ministers, being accountable for the day-to-day running of the health service, according to leaked documents obtained by the Guardian. In unpublished evidence to the health select committee last week, Malcolm Grant, the government’s choice to run the powerful NHS commissioning board, outlined “an extraordinary transformation of responsibility” that appears to undermine claims by ministers that the proposed legislation will not dilute the government’s constitutional responsibilities to the health service. At present, the cabinet minister for health has a “duty to provide a national health service” in England, but that disappears in the NHS bill’s proposals. Grant, a law professor who runs University College London, told MPs that, under the new system, the secretary of state “mandates” the commissioning board to run the NHS every “two … possibly three years” and then retreats into the shadows. The board will hand over taxpayers’ cash to groups of GPs to buy services on behalf of patients. He admitted there would be “a fundamental change of responsibility and accountability under the bill” because about £80bn of public money would be transferred to the board and GPs. He said these two groups – not politicians – would run the NHS and ensure patients received an adequate level of health provision in England. “If [GPs] are dissatisfied with what happens in a hospital, they need to deal with it and not simply complain to a secretary of state who no longer has this responsibility, nor to the commissioning board which has given them the responsibility, but to complain to the hospital and get it sorted, and, if it is not sorted, to use their commissioning power to ensure that it is.” With peers beginning line-by-line scrutiny of the coalition’s NHS bill on Tuesday, the government has been attempting to rebut detractors of all political persuasions influenced by the powerful Lords constitutional committee. The committee warned last month about the “extent to which the chain of constitutional responsibility as regard to the NHS [will be] severed”. In what is perceived as a sign of panic over the level of peers’ opposition, a 72-page letter from ministers sent to all peers last week conceded a “necessary amendment” might be needed to rectify the impression the government would not be “responsible and accountable” for the NHS. However, Grant, who is expected to take up the post later this month, confirmed the bill’s critics’ worst fears in a combative parliamentary performance last week. In a remarkable admission, Grant told MPs that, from April 2013, in the event of a “crisis” in the health service. either he, nurses, GPs or hospital medical directors would be taking to the airwaves as the health secretary would not have responsibility for the daily running of the NHS. “It is no longer going to be the case that the secretary of state is wheeled in front of the TV cameras,” he told MPs. “Responsibility has to go back to where it is. It has to go back to within those hospitals. Who is the chief nurse? Who is the medical director. Where is the CEO?” MPs questioned how the public would be informed how well the NHS was faring by asking who “will be the person doing Panorama?” Grant replied: “I said this job was full of risks and probably that ends up being one of them.” Parliamentary scrutiny will also become a thing of the past. After the bill is passed, the health secretary will no longer have to answer MPs’ questions every month but will just put forward an annual report on how the board is doing once a year. The secretary of state will also, in effect, lose “powers of direction” over the health service, depriving the minister of the power to order NHS services to improve. The government would find it difficult to repeat Labour’s 2007 act of ordering a “deep clean” of NHS hospitals to tackle a rising tide of MRSA infections. Lady Thornton, Labour’s shadow health minister in the Lords, said: “This completely undermines the 1948 and 2006 acts. The whole point of the debate we’ve been having is that the secretary of state has to be accountable to parliament for the provision of a national health service, and you can’t just start franchising out that role.” To smoke out the government, Labour has also put down a probing amendment before peers which asks the house to concede that the principles of the NHS should be to “promote quality, equity, integration and accountability, not the market”. A Department of Health spokesman said: “The secretary of state will remain responsible for promoting a comprehensive health service and retains the ultimate accountability for securing the provision of services, through his relationship with NHS bodies.” NHS Health Public services policy Health policy Andrew Lansley Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
As the full extent of the damage on Sunday’s earthquake in Turkey became clear, desperate survivors dug into the rubble, trying to rescue the trapped and the injured. Scientists estimated that up to 1000 people could already be dead. (Oct. 23)
Continue reading …
As the full extent of the damage on Sunday’s earthquake in Turkey became clear, desperate survivors dug into the rubble, trying to rescue the trapped and the injured. Scientists estimated that up to 1000 people could already be dead. (Oct. 23)
Continue reading …Reliable Sources Panel Defend Firing of NPR Host and Attack MSNBC’s Ratigan for Support of #OWS
October 23, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Apparently Dylan Ratigan inserting himself into the Occupy Wall Street has got the folks over at TeaNN terribly upset, since Howard Kurtz decided to spend a segment carping about it on his show that claims to report on media bias, Reliable Sources. And apparently Kurtz believes someone who was a former Trent Lott staffer and now an anchor on Glenn Beck’s GBTV, Amy Holmes, qualifies as some sort of objective “journalist” to weigh in on Ratigan’s advocacy of the #OWS protests. Kurtz’s panel also included The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank and PBS’ Terence Smith, who like Holmes thought it was just awful that someone who appears on a “news network” like Ratigan would openly show support for the Wall Street protesters, also defended the firing of Lisa Simeone from NPR for openly advocating for the protesters as well. So much for free speech. James Fallows at The Atlantic has more on that here as well . They also discussed the AstroTurf “tea party” being openly supported by pundits over at Fox “News”, but what was missing here was any mention whatsoever of the fact that CNN was every bit as big of a cheerleader for that “movement” as anyone at Fox was. They sent their reporters to be embedded on their buses and if you had twenty of these people showing up anywhere, there were CNN reporters there to cover it and make sure those protests or town hall meetings made it into the national spotlight. And what other network besides CNN has allowed the “tea party” to co-host their presidential primary debates? None. But they’re going to talk about Fox supporting them as though that happened in a vacuum and their network wasn’t participating in propping up that Koch brothers, FreedomWorks, Dick Armey, and friends corporate sponsored fiasco as well. Matt Taibbi responded to the recent dust-up over the hacked emails from himself, Ratigan and others at his Rolling Stone blog here — Why Rush Limbaugh Is Freaking Out About Occupy Wall Street . Full transcript below the fold. KURTZ: The media coverage has intensified since the “Occupy Wall Street” protests have gone global. And there have been more clashes with police. A hundred people arrested last night in Chicago. But the carping by conservative commentators and surely by some liberal types makes you wonder whether they’re looking at the same demonstrators. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BILL O’REILLY, FOX NEWS: These people — they’re not winning and they’re not going to win. They’re loons. ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC: My Virginia public school education tells me the 99 percent movement is twice as popular as the nut jobs in the Tea Party. ERIC BOLLING, FOX NEWS: These communist, Nazi — BOB BECKEL, FOX NEWS: I haven’t called the Tea Party people fascists. BOLLING: — pot smoking, sex addicted morons. And you compared them to the Tea Party? (LAUGHTER) KURTZ: Let’s keep the debate on this high level, shall we? Dana Milbank, you went down to the protests here in D.C. When you look at those kinds clips, are the lefty pundits and righty pundits projecting their views on these Wall Street protesters, almost like a war shock test? MILBANK: I’m insulted you came to me immediately after sex- addicted morons. But, yes. I mean, they are. This is exactly, look, we’re seeing a mirror image of the complaints from the left about the Tea Party and sort of the fueling by FOX News on the right. Now, we’re seeing the exact same thing happen on the other side. The complaints, they’re not saying it’s Astroturf. They’re saying — they have other insults for it, and we’re seeing the same sort of behaviors at MSNBC. KURTZ: Now, Amy Holmes, you went to the demonstrations in New York. Are the mainstream media treating “Occupy Wall Street” a bit more sympathetically than they did the Tea Party? HOLMES: I think they are at GBTV, if I can give us a plug, we have been following, you know, who is behind this, who is funding it, where do these beautifully produced, you know, sort of faux newspapers come from. So, I notice that haven’t gotten coverage, you see this hodge-podge of leftist causes and posters, seem that don’t make sense, people doing some customs and it’s pretty right down there, that you don’t see any representation or any representative from feminist causes, which surprised me. No wage gap ceiling, not talk about women if they were bankers, maybe Wall Street would be a friend leer place. And now, we’re getting reports of sexual assaults there, and the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters are advising people not to go to the police. KURTZ: OK. You know, there’s a pretty good story in “The Washington Post” this morning about interviewing both Wall Street protesters and Tea Party protesters. But I think the challenge for journalists, Terry, is figuring out what the protesters want because there’s no established leadership. And it’s easy to focus on a few crazy people with signs or people who are engaging in appropriate behavior. But it’s harder to make judgments on the movement as a whole. SMITH: I think that’s right. And actually I think mainstream media were slow to pick up on this story. It is a phenomenon that has gone global. I went down to the demonstration in Freedom Square here in Washington and looked at this rather benign scene to tell you the truth. But this is — I mean, this is a phenomenon. And if it’s unformed and if the issues are ill-defined, it’s still worthy of substantial reporting. And the commentary will come at it from two directions. But I think it’s a phenomenon that will get more attention, not less. KURTZ: And speaking of mainstream media, some people will actually have some involvement with the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters. One of them is Lisa Simeone, the host of a show called “The World of Opera,” that was distributed by National Public Radio. NPR is now dropping distribution of it. It was distributed by someone else. And she had no documentary show she was fired from because Lisa Simeone also serving as an “Occupy Wall Street” spokesperson. Does that overlap? HOLMES: Well, two key points here when I read about her getting fired. First, she was fired from the show, not by NPR. KURTZ: Right. HOLMES: NPR distributes the show. KURTZ: Right. HOLMES: And I think the key point here was because a programming director complained and as someone from the radio world, you listen to your programming directors because they’re the ones making decision whether or not you’ll be on the air. Secondly, NPR is in the middle of a fund-raising drive. So, they certainly don’t want this when they’re asking listeners for money. KURTZ: On “The Opera Show,” Simeone had a great quote. She says, “What is NPR afraid I’ll do — insert a seditious comment into synopsis of Madame Butterfly?” But on the other hand MILBANK: That’s right. But if that person — excuse me — at “The Washington Post” had done the same thing, I think there may have been a similar reaction. KURTZ: Even if it was a music critic? MILBANK: Yes, because that’s the policy. And NPR has a big target on it right now because of mistakes they made in the past. So, they overreacted to Juan Williams, they’re going to overreact to a lot of things because of the target. SMITH: You know, it’s worth pointing out she was also an anchor on the weekend edition before on NPR. In other words, if you’re on an organization that presents news, whether you’re doing it that moment or not, steer clear of this sort of thing. KURTZ: Setting me up for the next question about MSNBC anchor Dylan Ratigan who has spoken frequently on the air with some sympathy for the Wall Street protesters. Let me show you a clip and we’ll have the question on the other side. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DYLAN RATIGAN, MSNBC ANCHOR: I was there after the 700 arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge. And the energy that night at the general assembly that Tim was just talking about was loving and warm and more courageous, more resolute. (END VIDEO CLIP) KURTZ: So there’s some leaked E-mails, Terry, obtained by the conservative side of the government in which Dylan Ratigan is obviously helping to shape the message. Here’s one for him to focus on, simple shared principles and unique strength. And here’s another E-mail from another person saying, “Here it is, a statement the group is going to put out with Dylan suggesting revisions the ending needs smoothing out. Is that troubling? SMITH: Totally inappropriate. Absolutely wrong and not new. Journalists have fallen into the trap of telling politicians how to shape their message, now protesters how to shape their message. It is a big mistake. They shouldn’t do it. It is crossing the line. KURTZ: But this is – you know, it’s one thing if you want to go on the air and say, “Look, I have been talking to these people, and here is my advice.” This is behind the scenes. It’s not something MSNBC would know anything about. MILBANK: But this is the world we live in now. So I don’t think – you may not like it. Nobody should be surprised by it. And this sort of thing goes on. The line has been blurred between activism and between journalism. I mean, I suppose if we’re going to look at gradations and, you know, shades of gray here, it is perhaps better to be fomenting a movement like “Occupy Wall Street” or the Tea Party event actually getting in and helping a political candidate. So – HOLMES: I think it is very problematic, and Fox had a flare-up where one of their executives was advising the Bush campaign. That person was fired. But we do see – KURTZ: Advising? HOLMES: I believe so. There were e-mails going back and forth. What we do see this blurring, and here at CNN, James Carville and Paul Begala, it was reported, were having morning phone conversation with Rahm Emanuel when he was chief of staff. KURTZ: Which they say were friendly calls, but both of them – look, the people who are outside contributors – they help parties raise money – HOLMES: You can say that about this host Simeone, that she said she was an independent person with an independent show being distributed by NPR. So why should she have to – KURTZ: But here in the case of Dylan Ratigan, we have a guy who is a host, who is on everyday at 4:00 in the afternoon, part of MSNBC corporate family, who was involved in E-mails with a group that he is covering. Would the media coverage – we’re running a little short of time here – have been different if this had been a host at Fox News having E-mails with the tea party? HOLMES: Absolutely. Absolutely. SMITH: The only defense is that he is commentator, really, and entertainer, not news deliverer, and that’s not much of a defense. HOLMES: But how can you ever hope to have, you know, somebody regarded as fair when he has a politician, someone is running for office, that they’re going to have fair sit-downs. KURTZ: I don’t see him as an entertainer at all and I think it is a mistake as well. Amy Holmes, Dana Milbank and Terrence Smith, thanks for stopping by this morning.
Continue reading …Reliable Sources Panel Defend Firing of NPR Host and Attack MSNBC’s Ratigan for Support of #OWS
October 23, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Apparently Dylan Ratigan inserting himself into the Occupy Wall Street has got the folks over at TeaNN terribly upset, since Howard Kurtz decided to spend a segment carping about it on his show that claims to report on media bias, Reliable Sources. And apparently Kurtz believes someone who was a former Trent Lott staffer and now an anchor on Glenn Beck’s GBTV, Amy Holmes, qualifies as some sort of objective “journalist” to weigh in on Ratigan’s advocacy of the #OWS protests. Kurtz’s panel also included The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank and PBS’ Terence Smith, who like Holmes thought it was just awful that someone who appears on a “news network” like Ratigan would openly show support for the Wall Street protesters, also defended the firing of Lisa Simeone from NPR for openly advocating for the protesters as well. So much for free speech. James Fallows at The Atlantic has more on that here as well . They also discussed the AstroTurf “tea party” being openly supported by pundits over at Fox “News”, but what was missing here was any mention whatsoever of the fact that CNN was every bit as big of a cheerleader for that “movement” as anyone at Fox was. They sent their reporters to be embedded on their buses and if you had twenty of these people showing up anywhere, there were CNN reporters there to cover it and make sure those protests or town hall meetings made it into the national spotlight. And what other network besides CNN has allowed the “tea party” to co-host their presidential primary debates? None. But they’re going to talk about Fox supporting them as though that happened in a vacuum and their network wasn’t participating in propping up that Koch brothers, FreedomWorks, Dick Armey, and friends corporate sponsored fiasco as well. Matt Taibbi responded to the recent dust-up over the hacked emails from himself, Ratigan and others at his Rolling Stone blog here — Why Rush Limbaugh Is Freaking Out About Occupy Wall Street . Full transcript below the fold. KURTZ: The media coverage has intensified since the “Occupy Wall Street” protests have gone global. And there have been more clashes with police. A hundred people arrested last night in Chicago. But the carping by conservative commentators and surely by some liberal types makes you wonder whether they’re looking at the same demonstrators. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BILL O’REILLY, FOX NEWS: These people — they’re not winning and they’re not going to win. They’re loons. ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC: My Virginia public school education tells me the 99 percent movement is twice as popular as the nut jobs in the Tea Party. ERIC BOLLING, FOX NEWS: These communist, Nazi — BOB BECKEL, FOX NEWS: I haven’t called the Tea Party people fascists. BOLLING: — pot smoking, sex addicted morons. And you compared them to the Tea Party? (LAUGHTER) KURTZ: Let’s keep the debate on this high level, shall we? Dana Milbank, you went down to the protests here in D.C. When you look at those kinds clips, are the lefty pundits and righty pundits projecting their views on these Wall Street protesters, almost like a war shock test? MILBANK: I’m insulted you came to me immediately after sex- addicted morons. But, yes. I mean, they are. This is exactly, look, we’re seeing a mirror image of the complaints from the left about the Tea Party and sort of the fueling by FOX News on the right. Now, we’re seeing the exact same thing happen on the other side. The complaints, they’re not saying it’s Astroturf. They’re saying — they have other insults for it, and we’re seeing the same sort of behaviors at MSNBC. KURTZ: Now, Amy Holmes, you went to the demonstrations in New York. Are the mainstream media treating “Occupy Wall Street” a bit more sympathetically than they did the Tea Party? HOLMES: I think they are at GBTV, if I can give us a plug, we have been following, you know, who is behind this, who is funding it, where do these beautifully produced, you know, sort of faux newspapers come from. So, I notice that haven’t gotten coverage, you see this hodge-podge of leftist causes and posters, seem that don’t make sense, people doing some customs and it’s pretty right down there, that you don’t see any representation or any representative from feminist causes, which surprised me. No wage gap ceiling, not talk about women if they were bankers, maybe Wall Street would be a friend leer place. And now, we’re getting reports of sexual assaults there, and the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters are advising people not to go to the police. KURTZ: OK. You know, there’s a pretty good story in “The Washington Post” this morning about interviewing both Wall Street protesters and Tea Party protesters. But I think the challenge for journalists, Terry, is figuring out what the protesters want because there’s no established leadership. And it’s easy to focus on a few crazy people with signs or people who are engaging in appropriate behavior. But it’s harder to make judgments on the movement as a whole. SMITH: I think that’s right. And actually I think mainstream media were slow to pick up on this story. It is a phenomenon that has gone global. I went down to the demonstration in Freedom Square here in Washington and looked at this rather benign scene to tell you the truth. But this is — I mean, this is a phenomenon. And if it’s unformed and if the issues are ill-defined, it’s still worthy of substantial reporting. And the commentary will come at it from two directions. But I think it’s a phenomenon that will get more attention, not less. KURTZ: And speaking of mainstream media, some people will actually have some involvement with the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters. One of them is Lisa Simeone, the host of a show called “The World of Opera,” that was distributed by National Public Radio. NPR is now dropping distribution of it. It was distributed by someone else. And she had no documentary show she was fired from because Lisa Simeone also serving as an “Occupy Wall Street” spokesperson. Does that overlap? HOLMES: Well, two key points here when I read about her getting fired. First, she was fired from the show, not by NPR. KURTZ: Right. HOLMES: NPR distributes the show. KURTZ: Right. HOLMES: And I think the key point here was because a programming director complained and as someone from the radio world, you listen to your programming directors because they’re the ones making decision whether or not you’ll be on the air. Secondly, NPR is in the middle of a fund-raising drive. So, they certainly don’t want this when they’re asking listeners for money. KURTZ: On “The Opera Show,” Simeone had a great quote. She says, “What is NPR afraid I’ll do — insert a seditious comment into synopsis of Madame Butterfly?” But on the other hand MILBANK: That’s right. But if that person — excuse me — at “The Washington Post” had done the same thing, I think there may have been a similar reaction. KURTZ: Even if it was a music critic? MILBANK: Yes, because that’s the policy. And NPR has a big target on it right now because of mistakes they made in the past. So, they overreacted to Juan Williams, they’re going to overreact to a lot of things because of the target. SMITH: You know, it’s worth pointing out she was also an anchor on the weekend edition before on NPR. In other words, if you’re on an organization that presents news, whether you’re doing it that moment or not, steer clear of this sort of thing. KURTZ: Setting me up for the next question about MSNBC anchor Dylan Ratigan who has spoken frequently on the air with some sympathy for the Wall Street protesters. Let me show you a clip and we’ll have the question on the other side. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DYLAN RATIGAN, MSNBC ANCHOR: I was there after the 700 arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge. And the energy that night at the general assembly that Tim was just talking about was loving and warm and more courageous, more resolute. (END VIDEO CLIP) KURTZ: So there’s some leaked E-mails, Terry, obtained by the conservative side of the government in which Dylan Ratigan is obviously helping to shape the message. Here’s one for him to focus on, simple shared principles and unique strength. And here’s another E-mail from another person saying, “Here it is, a statement the group is going to put out with Dylan suggesting revisions the ending needs smoothing out. Is that troubling? SMITH: Totally inappropriate. Absolutely wrong and not new. Journalists have fallen into the trap of telling politicians how to shape their message, now protesters how to shape their message. It is a big mistake. They shouldn’t do it. It is crossing the line. KURTZ: But this is – you know, it’s one thing if you want to go on the air and say, “Look, I have been talking to these people, and here is my advice.” This is behind the scenes. It’s not something MSNBC would know anything about. MILBANK: But this is the world we live in now. So I don’t think – you may not like it. Nobody should be surprised by it. And this sort of thing goes on. The line has been blurred between activism and between journalism. I mean, I suppose if we’re going to look at gradations and, you know, shades of gray here, it is perhaps better to be fomenting a movement like “Occupy Wall Street” or the Tea Party event actually getting in and helping a political candidate. So – HOLMES: I think it is very problematic, and Fox had a flare-up where one of their executives was advising the Bush campaign. That person was fired. But we do see – KURTZ: Advising? HOLMES: I believe so. There were e-mails going back and forth. What we do see this blurring, and here at CNN, James Carville and Paul Begala, it was reported, were having morning phone conversation with Rahm Emanuel when he was chief of staff. KURTZ: Which they say were friendly calls, but both of them – look, the people who are outside contributors – they help parties raise money – HOLMES: You can say that about this host Simeone, that she said she was an independent person with an independent show being distributed by NPR. So why should she have to – KURTZ: But here in the case of Dylan Ratigan, we have a guy who is a host, who is on everyday at 4:00 in the afternoon, part of MSNBC corporate family, who was involved in E-mails with a group that he is covering. Would the media coverage – we’re running a little short of time here – have been different if this had been a host at Fox News having E-mails with the tea party? HOLMES: Absolutely. Absolutely. SMITH: The only defense is that he is commentator, really, and entertainer, not news deliverer, and that’s not much of a defense. HOLMES: But how can you ever hope to have, you know, somebody regarded as fair when he has a politician, someone is running for office, that they’re going to have fair sit-downs. KURTZ: I don’t see him as an entertainer at all and I think it is a mistake as well. Amy Holmes, Dana Milbank and Terrence Smith, thanks for stopping by this morning.
Continue reading …
BERLIN — A defunct German research satellite crashed into the Earth somewhere in Southeast Asia on Sunday, a U.S. scientist said – but no one is still quite sure where. Most parts of the minivan-sized ROSAT research satellite were expected to burn up as they hit the atmosphere at speeds up to 280 mph (450 kph), but up to 30 fragments weighing a total of 1.87 tons (1.7 metric tons) could have crashed, the German Aerospace Center said. Jonathan McDowell of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, said the satellite appears to have gone down over Southeast Asia. He said two Chinese cities with millions of inhabitants each, Chongqing and Chengdu, had been in the satellite’s projected path during its re-entry time. “But if it had come down over a populated area there probably would be reports by now,” the astrophysicist, who tracks man-made space objects, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. Calculations based on U.S. military data indicate that satellite debris must have crashed somewhere east of Sri Lanka over the Indian Ocean, or over the Andaman Sea off the coast of Myanmar, or further inland in Myanmar or as far inland as China, he said. The satellite entered the atmosphere between 0145 GMT to 0215 GMT Sunday (9:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. Saturday EDT) and would have taken 15 minutes or less to hit the ground, the German Aerospace Center said. Hours before the re-entry, the center said the satellite was not expected to land in Europe, Africa or Australia. There were no immediate reports from Asian governments or space agencies about the fallen satellite. The satellite used to circle the planet in about 90 minutes, and it may have traveled several thousand kilometers (miles) during its re-entry, rendering exact predictions of where it crashed difficult. German space agency spokesman Andreas Schuetz said a falling satellite also can change its flight pattern or even its direction once it sinks to within 90 miles (150 kilometers) above the Earth. Schuetz said the agency was waiting for data from scientific partners around the globe. He noted it took the U.S. space agency NASA several days to establish where one of its satellites had hit last month. The 2.69-ton (2.4 metric ton) scientific ROSAT satellite was launched in Cape Canaveral, Florida, in 1990 and retired in 1999 after being used for research on black holes and neutron stars and performing the first all-sky survey of X-ray sources with an imaging telescope. ROSAT’s largest single fragment that could have hit is the telescope’s heavy heat-resistant mirror. “The impact would be similar to, say, an airliner having dropped an engine,” said McDowell. “It would damage whatever it fell on, but it wouldn’t have widespread consequences.” A dead NASA satellite fell into the southern Pacific Ocean last month, causing no damage but spreading debris over a 500-mile (800-kilometer) area. Since 1991, space agencies have adopted new procedures to lessen space junk and having satellites falling back to Earth. NASA says it has no more large satellites that will fall back to Earth uncontrolled in the next 25 years. ___ Online: The German space agency on ROSAT: http://bit.ly/papMAA
Continue reading …
BERLIN — A defunct German research satellite crashed into the Earth somewhere in Southeast Asia on Sunday, a U.S. scientist said – but no one is still quite sure where. Most parts of the minivan-sized ROSAT research satellite were expected to burn up as they hit the atmosphere at speeds up to 280 mph (450 kph), but up to 30 fragments weighing a total of 1.87 tons (1.7 metric tons) could have crashed, the German Aerospace Center said. Jonathan McDowell of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, said the satellite appears to have gone down over Southeast Asia. He said two Chinese cities with millions of inhabitants each, Chongqing and Chengdu, had been in the satellite’s projected path during its re-entry time. “But if it had come down over a populated area there probably would be reports by now,” the astrophysicist, who tracks man-made space objects, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. Calculations based on U.S. military data indicate that satellite debris must have crashed somewhere east of Sri Lanka over the Indian Ocean, or over the Andaman Sea off the coast of Myanmar, or further inland in Myanmar or as far inland as China, he said. The satellite entered the atmosphere between 0145 GMT to 0215 GMT Sunday (9:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. Saturday EDT) and would have taken 15 minutes or less to hit the ground, the German Aerospace Center said. Hours before the re-entry, the center said the satellite was not expected to land in Europe, Africa or Australia. There were no immediate reports from Asian governments or space agencies about the fallen satellite. The satellite used to circle the planet in about 90 minutes, and it may have traveled several thousand kilometers (miles) during its re-entry, rendering exact predictions of where it crashed difficult. German space agency spokesman Andreas Schuetz said a falling satellite also can change its flight pattern or even its direction once it sinks to within 90 miles (150 kilometers) above the Earth. Schuetz said the agency was waiting for data from scientific partners around the globe. He noted it took the U.S. space agency NASA several days to establish where one of its satellites had hit last month. The 2.69-ton (2.4 metric ton) scientific ROSAT satellite was launched in Cape Canaveral, Florida, in 1990 and retired in 1999 after being used for research on black holes and neutron stars and performing the first all-sky survey of X-ray sources with an imaging telescope. ROSAT’s largest single fragment that could have hit is the telescope’s heavy heat-resistant mirror. “The impact would be similar to, say, an airliner having dropped an engine,” said McDowell. “It would damage whatever it fell on, but it wouldn’t have widespread consequences.” A dead NASA satellite fell into the southern Pacific Ocean last month, causing no damage but spreading debris over a 500-mile (800-kilometer) area. Since 1991, space agencies have adopted new procedures to lessen space junk and having satellites falling back to Earth. NASA says it has no more large satellites that will fall back to Earth uncontrolled in the next 25 years. ___ Online: The German space agency on ROSAT: http://bit.ly/papMAA
Continue reading …
CNN reports that a 7.2 earthquake has struck Eastern Turkey, making it the most powerful earthquake to hit the country in ten years. The quake was felt in the provinces of Diyarbakir, Erzurum, Siirt, Mus and Agri, according to Bloomberg News. UPDATE: The USGS reports a second earthquake of 6.0 magnitude, this time in Eastern Turkey. More from the Associated Press: By SELCAN HACAOGLU and SUZAN FRASER, Associated Press ANKARA, Turkey — Cries of panic and horror filled the air as a 7.2-magnitude earthquake struck eastern Turkey, killing at least 88 people as buildings pancaked and crumpled into rubble. Tens of thousands fled into the streets running, screaming or trying to reach relatives on cell phones as apartment and office buildings cracked or collapsed. As the full extent of the damage became clear, survivors dug in with shovels or even their bare hands, desperately trying to rescue the trapped and the injured. “My wife and child are inside! My 4-month-old baby is inside!” CNN-Turk television showed one young man sobbing outside a collapsed building in Van, the provincial capital. The hardest hit area was Ercis, an eastern city of 75,000 close to the Iranian border, which lies on one of Turkey’s most earthquake-prone zones. The bustling city of Van, about 55 miles (90 kilometers) to the south, also sustained substantial damage. Highways in the area caved in and Van’s airport was damaged, forcing flights to be diverted. TRT television reported that 59 people were killed and 150 injured in Ercis, 25 others died in Van and four people, including a child, died in the nearby province of Bitlis. It said at least nine people were pulled out of debris alive. Up to 80 buildings collapsed in Ercis, including a dormitory, and 10 buildings collapsed in Van, the Turkish Red Crescent said. Some highways also caved in. Authorities advised people to stay away from any damaged homes, warning they could collapse in the aftershocks. U.S. scientists recorded over 100 aftershocks in eastern Turkey within ten hours of the quake, including one with a magnitude of 6.0. Residents in Van and Ercis lit camp fires, preparing to spend the night outdoors while the Red Crescent began setting up tents in a stadium. Others fled to seek shelter with relatives in nearby villages. Rescue efforts went deep into the night under generator-powered floodlights. Workers tied steel rods around large concrete slabs in Van, then lifted them with heavy machinery. Residents sobbed outside the ruins of one flattened eight-story building, hoping that missing relatives would be found. Witnesses said eight people were pulled from the rubble, but frequent aftershocks hampered search efforts. By late evening, some joy emerged as a ninth, a teenage girl, was pulled out alive. Around 1,275 rescue teams from 38 provinces were being sent to the region, officials said, and troops were also assisting search-and-rescue efforts. In Ercis, heavy machinery stopped working and people were ordered to keep silent as rescuers tried to listen for possible survivors inside a seven-story building housing 28 families, NTV reported. Some inmates escaped a prison in Van after one of its walls collapsed. TRT television said around 150 inmates had fled, but a prison official said the number was much smaller and many later returned. Many buildings also collapsed in the district of Celebibag, near Ercis, including student dormitories, hotels and gas stations. “There are many people under the rubble,” Veysel Keser, the mayor of Celebibag, told NTV. “People are in agony, we can hear their screams for help.” Nazmi Gur, a legislator from Van, said his nephew’s funeral ceremony was cut short due to the quake and he rushed back to help. “We managed to rescue a few people, but I saw at least five bodies,” Gur told The Associated Press.”It was such a powerful temblor. It lasted for such a long time,” “But now we have no electricity, there is no heating, everyone is outside in the cold,” he added. Authorities had no information yet on remote villages but the governor was touring the region by helicopter and the government sent in tents, field kitchens and blankets. The earthquake also shook buildings in neighboring Armenia and Iran. In the Armenian capital of Yerevan, 100 miles (160 kilometers) from Ercis, people rushed into the streets in fear but no damage or injuries were reported. Armenia was the site of a devastating earthquake in 1988 that killed 25,000 people. Sunday’s quake caused panic in several Iranian towns close to the Turkish border and caused cracks in buildings in the city of Chaldoran, Iranian state TV reported. Leaders around the world conveyed their condolences and offered assistance. “We stand shoulder to shoulder with our Turkish ally in this difficult time, and are ready to assist,” President Barack Obama said. Israeli President Shimon Peres telephoned Turkish President Abdullah Gul to offer assistance. “Israel shares in your sorrow,” Peres said in a statement. “Israel is ready to render any assistance that may be required anywhere in Turkey, at any time.” The offer came despite a rift in relations following an 2010 Israeli navy raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that left nine Turks dead. Greece, which has a deep dispute with Turkey over the divided island of Cyprus, also offered to send in a special earthquake rescue team. Turkey lies in one of the world’s most active seismic zones and is crossed by numerous fault lines. In 1999, two earthquakes with a magnitude of more than 7 struck northwestern Turkey, killing about 18,000 people. More recently, a 6.0-magnitude quake in March 2010 killed 51 people in eastern Turkey, while in 2003, a 6.4-magnitude earthquake killed 177 people in the southeastern city of Bingol. Istanbul, the country’s largest city with more than 12 million people, lies in northwestern Turkey near a major fault line. Experts have warned that overcrowding and shoddy construction in Istanbul could kill tens of thousands if a major earthquake struck.
Continue reading …