Six men in total – all from Birmingham – charged over terrorism offences after arrests in city last week Three men from Birmingham who were arrested a week ago as part of a major operation by counter-terrorism police in the Midlands have been charged with plotting a suicide bombing campaign in the UK. Two of them, Irfan Nasser and Irfan Khalid, aged 30 and 26 and from the Sparkhill and Sparkbrook areas, also face charges of making a martyrdom film, travelling to Pakistan for training in terrorism – including bomb making, weapons and poison making – collecting money for terrorism, and constructing a home-made explosive device. Ashik Ali, 26, from Balsall Heath, was charged with collecting money for terrorism, stating an intention to be a suicide bomber, and involvement in recruiting others for terrorist acts. A fourth man, Rahin Ahmed, 25, from Mosely, was charged with assisting others to travel to Pakistan for terrorism training, and investing and managing money for terrorist acts. It is alleged that between Christmas Day 2010 and 19 September this year, they were preparing, or helping others prepare, to commit acts of terrorism. Two other men, Bahader Ali and Mohammed Rizwan, aged 28 and 32 and from Sparkbrook, were also charged with failing to disclose information. It is alleged that between 29 July and 19 September this year, both had information which they knew may help prevent the commission of an act of terrorism. Bahader Ali, who is Ashik Ali’s brother, was also charged with terrorist fund raising. Last week’s arrests were unarmed, pre-planned and intelligence-led, according to West Midlands police, which added that a seventh man from Birmingham, aged 20, continues to be questioned. Officers have until Thursday to charge him, release him, or apply for a further warrant of detention. The six charged men will appear at West London magistrates court in Hammersmith on Monday. The arrests took place from 11.30am on Sunday 18 September, with the last suspect detained at about 1am on the Monday morning. The raids took place in several deprived areas of the city that have sizeable Muslim populations. The operation involved MI5, with officers from Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism command supporting the Birmingham-based force. West Midlands police said last week the “large-scale operation” had been running for some time and had been subject to regular review, adding that the action was necessary “in order to ensure public safety”. UK security and terrorism Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Media is temporarily unavailable Saturday Night Live opened their new season by having a bit of fun with the recent GOP presidential debates.
Continue reading …
Brussels has until November’s G20 summit to work out how best to turn the €440bn bailout fund into €2tn war chest The International Monetary Fund has warned that the immense firepower of the European Central Bank (ECB) would be needed to “scare” the financial markets and prevent an intensification of the turmoil threatening to send the global economy back into recession. With investors poised to give their verdict tomorrow on the weekend talks in Washington of finance ministers and central bank governors, European policymakers insisted that fresh moves to scale up the fighting fund to support struggling members of the single currency were in the offing. Brussels has a deadline of the Cannes G20 summit in early November to flesh out its proposals but is waiting for a key vote in the German parliament this week on the expansion of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) before deciding how best to turn the €440bn (£380bn) pot of capital into a €2tn war chest. “We need to find a mechanism where we can turn one euro in the EFSF into five, but there is no decision on how we could do that yet,” one senior European official said. Some European countries, including Germany, are sceptical about using the ECB to provide the leverage but the International Monetary Fund (IMF) insisted there was no alternative. Antonio Borges, head of the IMF’s European division, said: “It is very important that we see a combination of the ECB and the EFSF. Anyone who thinks that the EFSF will be a miraculous solution to the problem is making a very big mistake. “The ECB is the only agent which can really scare the markets.” Privately, many officials at the IMF and in its 187 member governments accept the inevitability of a Greek default and now see the priority as preventing the two much bigger economies of Italy and Spain being dragged down. Greece’s finance minister, Evangelos Venizelos, said Greece would not default before talks with the IMF about the next €8bn instalment of its rescue package due next month. Sources in Washington said Greece would get the money in the hope that Europe would buy itself enough time to piece together a convincing anti-contagion strategy. The likeliest time of a Greek default is thought to be in late 2011 or early 2012. Prices of shares and commodities plunged last week as dealers took fright at Europe’s intensifying debt crisis and signs of a marked slowdown in the world economy. The managing director of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, said the world was in a “very dangerous place” while the president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, said there was a risk of the contagion spreading to emerging economies, which have been performing more strongly than the rich western nations. “The numbers emerging out of developing countries over the past month are shaking and shaky,” Zoellick said. European policymakers in Washington responded to the pressure put on them by the US, Britain and emerging country members of the G20 group. Brazil’s finance minister, Alexandre Tombini, said his country’s experience showed the need to act with “overwhelming force”, while Tim Geithner, the US treasury secretary, said: “Decisions as to how to conclusively address the region’s problems cannot wait until the crisis gets more severe.” Justine Greening, economic secretary to the Treasury, said Britain had been urging Europe to get to grips with the crisis for several weeks. “I think we’ve had some positive steps taken this weekend towards the eurozone being able to do that in terms of both recapitalising the banks in Europe that are under stress but also [by] putting in place a bailout fund that is big enough to give confidence to the markets,” she said. Olli Rehn, Europe’s commissioner for economic and financial affairs, said the eurozone needed to do more. “We need to build a bridge and I think this bridge will be developed on the basis of the current reform of the EFSF and as one part of that next stage we are contemplating the possibility of leveraging the EFSF resources to have more firepower and thus have a stronger financial firewall to support our member states doing the right thing.” One option to increase the potency of the EFSF currently under discussion would be for the ECB to commit large amounts of funding, with the capital in the EFSF used to cover potential losses. German finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, said he was open to the idea of leveraging Europe’s rescue fund but said that did not necessarily mean the ECB should provide the extra firepower. Mohamed el-Erian, co-chief investment officer of the giant bond fund Pimco, said: “It is encouraging that … European officials are signalling a better appreciation of the depth and potential consequences of the crisis. “Now they need to translate this into decisive actions underpinned by a common vision of what they want the eurozone to look like in five years’ time.” European debt crisis European banks Europe European Central Bank IMF Economics Global economy Stock markets Financial crisis Global recession Banking G20 Market turmoil Timothy Geithner Larry Elliott guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …PM David Cameron Denounces ‘Looting,’ ‘Criminality.’ No, Of Course He’s Not Talking About Bankers Who Crashed Global Economy
September 25, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media British Prime Minister David Cameron was a guest today on This Week with Christiane Amanpour, and it left me flabbergasted. How much pure crap can one man spew in such a short period of time? Let’s be clear about this one thing: Austerity measures in the UK (and everywhere else) are not about “making our economy pay properly for itself.” It’s about picking up the staggering casino tab for the bankers, and anyone with two synapses to rub together knows it: AMANPOUR: Let’s switch to the economy and to what we all saw in England during August, the riots on the street. CAMERON: Well, first of all, I don’t think it was in any way linked to the economy. These were not protests. They were not political arguments. They weren’t political demonstrations. It was, quite simply, looting. It was criminality. AMANPOUR: You’ve instituted austerity measures. The economic growth is not there. People are saying now, as they look at austerity, that perhaps your governments are focusing on the wrong thing and that it should be about growth and employment. What do you say to that? CAMERON: Well, we obviously need growth and employment in our country. And actually, the British economy has grown this year. We have created jobs since the election, particularly jobs in the private sector. But the key point is this: You have to remember that Britain was forecast to have a bigger budget deficit than Greece. It was forecast to have the biggest budget deficit in the whole of the G-20. If we haven’t got on top of our deficit and shown the world we had a plan to make our economy pay properly for itself , then we would have seen interest rates go up, we would have seen confidence sapped out of our economy. You can see in other parts of Europe where exactly that has happened. We have to understand, this is a debt crisis. It’s not a traditional cyclical recession, where you just turn on the money taps. You’ve got to deal with the debts. You’ve got to show the world you can pay for your debts, as well as having a very strong growth strategy. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that these riots took place in a time of severe austerity cuts, right? And let’s just gloss over the fact that a police killing kicked off the cycle of violence, because polite people still pretend that cops don’t routinely brutalize people. The thing that the people at the top so blithely ignore is that social programs are holding what’s left of the lower classes together. What seems like a small number on the spreadsheet translates to severe hardship and even death at the bottom of the social ladder, and to slash the safety net while the bankers go unpunished is just asking for trouble: “I don’t think the implications of this have been fully thought through or accepted yet,” said Pepe Egger, western Europe analyst for London-based consultancy Exclusive Analysis. “What we have here is the result of decades of growing divisions and marginalization, but austerity will almost certainly make it worse. Yes, the police can restore control with massive force but that is not sustainable either in the long term. You have to accept that this may happen again.” Speaking to Reuters late on Tuesday, looters and other local people in east London pointed to the wealth gap as the underlying cause, also blaming what they saw as police prejudice and a host of recent scandals. Spending cuts were now hitting the poorest hardest, they said, and after tales of politicians claiming excessive expenses, alleged police corruption and bankers getting rich it was their turn to take what they wanted “They set the example,” said one youth after riots in the London district of Hackney. “It’s time to loot.” And what an example it was, and continues to be.
Continue reading …
Liberal minister says he will quit if Medvedev becomes PM after announcement that caught many off guard The fallout from Vladimir Putin’s announcement that he plans to return to the Kremlin is being felt throughout Russia, with a key liberal official indicating that he plans to quit the government. The finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, a darling of the west because of his commitment to the free market and fiscal conservatism, said he would refuse to serve under Dmitry Medvedev, who is due to replace Putin as prime minister. His departure would deal a severe blow to liberal elements inside the ruling regime. “I do not see myself in a new government,” Kudrin said during a visit to Washington. “The point is not that nobody has offered me the job; I think that the disagreements I have [with Medvedev] will not allow me to join this government.” The reformist minister said disputes about spending were to blame and it was unclear why he blamed Medvedev when Putin has the final say over the country’s economic path. Although Putin’s return to the presidency was widely expected, the announcement, at a congress of the ruling United Russia party on Saturday, caught many off guard – even Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who said in an interview: “We were totally unprepared for what was announced. It was their bilateral decision
Continue reading …
Labour leader justifies policy as an attack on ‘fast-buck’ culture but critics say the change would not help poorer students A pledge by Ed Miliband, which would see the maximum university tuition fee cut by a third to £6,000, came under fire from across the political spectrum on the first day of the Labour conference. Amid confusion over whether the party would still advocate a graduate tax at the next general election, the National Union of Students joined forces with the coalition to warn that the change would do nothing to benefit poorer students. Miliband received a rough ride after he moved to reach out to disillusioned Liberal Democrat voters by announcing, at the annual conference, held in Liverpool for the first time, a plan for the cap on student tuition fees to be lowered from £9,000 to £6,000. The £800m cost of the fees change, outlined by the Labour leader in an Observer interview , would be paid in two ways. A cut in corporation tax for the banks would be reversed. (George Osborne announced in the budget in March that the tax would drop from 28% in 2010-11 to 23% in 2014-15.) And graduates later earning more than £65,000 would have to pay higher interest rates on their loans. Miliband told The Andrew Marr Show on BBC1 that the change would help Britain move away from the “fast-buck” economy. “We face big choices and tough choices in this country. Do we cut taxes for financial services, do we carry on with a fast-buck economy, or do we change course? Do we say invest in the future of our young people? I think we’ve got to put an end to the fast-buck era. “I don’t think the priority for Britain is to cut taxes for financial services, and it’s a big choice … a big difference between ourselves and the government.” The Labour leader was accused overnight of a U-turn, since he opposed an increase in tuition fees last year and advocated a graduate tax. Coalition ministers pointed out that the new policy was a step back from a graduate tax and would lead to a doubling of fees from the amount bequeathed by Labour when it left office. David Willetts, the universities minister, said: “Ed Miliband has now accepted that tuition fees should be doubled to £6,000 a year. He has consistently supported a graduate tax and Labour MPs were whipped to vote against higher fees at the end of last year. This monumental U-turn is evidence of weak leadership.” Miliband explained that the new policy was designed to form the centrepiece of a manifesto if an early election were held. He indicated that it remained his ambition to move towards endorsing a graduate tax by the time of the next general election if the present parliament lasted until 2015. “If we can do more by the time of the election [in 2015], we will,” he told the BBC. “But this is an important first step.” Willetts questioned whether the cut in the cap would benefit poorer students. In a letter to John Denham, the shadow business secretary, Willetts said: “Will graduates enjoy lower monthly repayments under your proposals? As you do not appear to be planning any changes to the repayment terms, it seems that monthly repayments will remain the same. “Moreover, there will be no benefit to the lowest-earning graduates because their entire outstanding debt is written off after 30 years, irrespective of its size. So your proposal jeopardises the funding of universities without reducing the monthly repayments paid by graduates.” Liam Burns, president of the National Union of Students, echoed the remarks by the Tory minister when he told Sky News that the changes would do nothing to help poorer students and would end up benefiting more affluent students. Burns said: “This was a long-term policy. You have to think who this benefits. Because of the 30-year cut-off – in which your debt would be written off under the system being proposed – actually taking the cap down to £6,000 would benefit the richest the most.” The NUS judgment was based on figures which showed that the alteration made no difference for students earning under £35,000. Under a £9,000 or £6,000 cap, students earning under £35,000 would be exempted from paying off the full debt. One coalition source said: “The winners from this policy, relative to government policy, are the highest-paid graduates because they are the group that pay off the whole debt. If you cut the total debt they enjoy benefit.” Labour sources insisted there was no confusion about Miliband’s commitment to endorsing a graduate tax, regarded by the Labour leader as being more fair. “This is a step towards a graduate tax,” one source said. “We would like to go further but we can only do what is affordable.” Denham said: “What we wanted to do was to show there is an alternative available to this government now that would cap fees – [it] would mean that universities would get all the money they have been expecting to get under the new system. It would also get away from this very pernicious ‘core and margins’ system where 60,000 places would get auctioned off. “It gives a sense of the direction of travel we want to go in for the next election … we are proposing a more progressive payment system because we are saying there should be lower fees and we are turning our back on some of the market the Tories are trying to put into place. But the direction of travel, we have always said, should be towards a graduate tax … [which] could only take place over a period of time.” Student finance Ed Miliband Higher education Labour conference 2011 Liberal-Conservative coalition Labour Labour conference Students Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham is calling for cuts to Social Security and lower tax rates, but at the same time he worries that the Department of Defense will be “destroyed” by deficit reduction measures. If the Super Committee fails to find $1.2 trillion worth of deficit reduction by Nov. 23, it will trigger an equal amount of cuts from domestic programs and defense spending. President Barack Obama has introduced his own plan reduce the nation’s debt by more than $2 trillion, about half of that coming from increased taxes on high-income earners. Fox News’ Chris Wallace asked Graham Sunday if it was really fair to balance the budget on the backs of the poor while asking nothing of the top earners. “Well, what you do with Medicare and Medicaid reforms, you do what Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill did: you work together to protect near-term retirees,” Graham explained. “[Obama has] had a lot of input and advice in a bipartisan fashion from the Gang of Six, but he’s going down a partisan route. He’s trying to elevate class warfare… He’s using, in my view, a strategy of class warfare, divide and conquer in order to survive this next election. It won’t work.” “If Congress is so divided and the congressional Super Committee only has only two months to come up with another trillion dollars in cuts, what are the chances for a compromise?” Wallace wondered. “See if you can flatten the tax code — something I support — lower rates, flatten the tax code, do entitlement reform in a way that doesn’t hurt near-term retirees and get our fiscal house in order,” Graham suggested. “At the end of the day if this commission fails, there is a trigger cutting defense by $600 billion if they can’t perform their job.” “I will introduce legislation, Chris, to protect the Defense Department from devastating cuts… I want an across-the-board cut as a trigger, the whole government being on the table with a five percent reduction for the whole government, and cut our pay by 10 percent rather than devastating the Defense Department. I hope the Super Committee works, but if it fails let’s don’t destroy the Defense Department.”
Continue reading …Netanyahu Tells NBC’s Gregory ‘You’re Trying to Throw Me Under the Bus of American Politics’
September 25, 2011 No Comment
NBC's David Gregory on Sunday did his darnedest to get Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to say Israel has had no better friend in the White House than President Obama. As the “Meet the Press” host continued to force the issue, Netanyahu finally said, “David, you're trying to throw me under the bus of American politics. And guess what, I'm not going to be thrown there” (video follows with transcript and commentary): DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Back in 2002, you said Israel has had no better friend in the White House than George W. Bush. Would you say the same about President Obama? ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: They've all been great friends of Israel. You know why? MR. GREGORY: You said, “No better friend in the White House than George W. Bush.” PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: When did I say that? MR. GREGORY: 2002 on this program. PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: OK. Well, they keep moving. They keep adding new people to–you know, that's the peculiar thing about our system, the leaders, the leaders keep changing. MR. GREGORY: So George W. Bush and President Obama are equivalent in your mind. PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: God, I'm not going… MR. GREGORY: I'm asking–no, but I'm asking you a serious question. PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: I'm not going to start ranking. I'll tell you what, they're all… MR. GREGORY: You did rank. But, Prime Minister, you did rank. And you said that America was behind you; and, in fact, this has been a frosty relationship between this administration and your administration. And the reality is that there's politics in this country and a presidential campaign. Just this week, you had Mitt Romney, a Republican, say of Obama that he threw Israel under the bus. Rick Perry described Obama's Middle East policy as naive, arrogant, misguided and dangerous. Do you disagree with those statements? PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: David, you're trying to throw me under the bus of American politics. And guess what, I'm not going to be thrown there. So I'll tell you what… MR. GREGORY: You didn't mind disagreeing with President Clinton's analysis this week about the Middle East. PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Sure. MR. GREGORY: Do you disagree with these Republican candidates? Advertise | AdChoices PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: I think the important thing to understand is this, and, and this is the truth about America, Israel enjoys tremendous bipartisan support, tremendous. And, and, and, you know, you just have to walk around the breadth and length of this country, it's–or fly, it's a big country–and everywhere you go, you see this tremendous, tremendous sympathy and affinity for Israel. This is what, I think, is one of the great blessings that Israel has in the, in the 21st century. So–and I think that bipartisan support is expressed by any person who happens to be the president of the United States… MR. GREGORY: Are you concerned that partisanship is being injected into this? PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: …including President Obama. Every one of the U.S. presidents represents and acts on the tremendous innate friendship of the American people to Israel. And by the way, a piece of news, Israel is the one country in which everyone is pro-American, opposition and coalition alike. And I represent the entire people of Israel who say, “Thank you, America.” And we're friends of America, and we're the only reliable allies of America in the Middle East. Indeed. So why did Gregory think it was important to act as the Obama administration's emissary to improve relations between the White House and one of America's strongest allies? Is it possible he's concerned that Jewish support for Obama is plummeting, and he felt he needed to get Netanyahu on the record as saying something positive about the President that could reverse this? As NewsBusters reported, Gregory told GOP strategist Alex Castellanos last Sunday, “Republicans have been talking about the Jewish vote going Republican for a long time. It never happens.” Was Gregory a week later trying to help make that a self-fulfilling prophecy? You have to admit that irrespective of his declining poll numbers, it must be a great comfort for Obama to know that he's got friends like the host of “Meet the Press” always looking out for him.
Continue reading …
Amos Richards fell in same canyon where climber cut off his arm with pocketknife in 2003, as depicted in 127 Hours A 64-year-old man who broke his leg while hiking crawled through the Utah desert for four days near Canyonlands national park before rangers rescued him. Amos Wayne Richards, from Concord, North Carolina, is now recovering at home. He was hiking alone on 8 September in the rugged Maze District when he fell 10ft (3 metres). Chief park ranger Denny Ziemann says a search started the next day after Richards’ camping spot was found unattended. His car was seen near Little Blue John Canyon on 11 September, and rangers found Richards a few hours later. Richards fell in the same canyon where climber Aron Ralston cut off his arm with a pocketknife after being trapped by a boulder in 2003. Ralston’s story was later adapted into the Oscar-nominated film 127 Hours. Utah North Carolina United States guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
British journalism facing ‘dangerous period’, BBC chief warns, but privacy worries must not hinder exposure of wrong-doing The BBC director-general has warned that British journalism is facing a “dangerous period” because of attempts by police to force news organisations to hand over confidential sources. Mark Thompson was speaking the week after Scotland Yard dropped its attempt to obtain a production order, which would have compelled the Guardian to disclose the source of a story revealing that a mobile phone belonging to Milly Dowler was hacked by the News of the World. In a speech in Taiwan on Sunday morning, Thompson said the affair was part of a “disturbing trend” for “police forces in many parts of the UK routinely to demand that journalists disclose sources and hand over journalistic materials”. He added: “At the BBC, we receive an ever-growing number of demands for untransmitted news rushes which the police seem to regard as having no more privilege or protection attached to them than CCTV pictures.” The police asked broadcasters to pass them footage of rioters in the summer, a request which most of them said they were happy to comply with providing the police obtained court orders requiring them to do so. Thompson said it was vital that good journalism carried out in the public interest is not damaged in the wake of the News of the World scandal, as lawmakers decide how to answer the questions it raises about newspaper ethics. He said: “It would be easy to respond to the completely unacceptable actions of some journalists at the News of the World by adopting such a draconian approach that even the best journalism is constrained. “It would be easy for concern over the appalling invasions of privacy revealed by the phone-hacking scandal to spill over into legislation or regulation which enables wrongdoers to escape journalistic exposure.” Police investigating phone hacking had been due to attend a court hearing last Friday to pursue an application for a production order on the Guardian and reporter Amelia Hill requiring them to reveal the sources of the Dowler story. When it was published in July, it provoked a wave of public revulsion and lead to the resignations of several senior executives at Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp media empire. The Met dropped the action after an outcry from newspapers and leading politicians. Thompson said: “I can think of no better example of a journalistic disclosure being in the public interest than the Milly Dowler story in the Guardian. “That anyone in the Metropolitan police should ever have thought otherwise is not only incomprehensible but disturbing.” He also argued it would be wrong to respond to the hacking scandal by creating a single regulator to oversee all news organisations. He said he was “sceptical of the view that newspapers should be regulated in the same way as broadcasters like the BBC who reach into every household in the land. “Plurality of regulation is a good thing. One of the safeguards that broadcasters in the UK have is the presence of a far less regulated press which can draw attention to any attempt by the authorities or anyone else to misuse their powers when it comes to broadcasting. “To put all journalism under a singled converged regulator would potentially mean that, if ever the state wished to limit media freedom, it would have a single lever with which to do so.” Broadcasters must comply with a strict code enforced by Ofcom which requires their news coverage to be fair and balanced. Similar editorial guidelines are in place at BBC and overseen by the BBC Trust. Thompson argued the press should continue to regulate itself, and defended the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), which was lambasted by political leaders, including the prime minister and Ed Miliband for its failure to censure the News of the World. “The current British model of self-regulation of the press is not to be dismissed out of hand,” he said. “The PCC has a good record in arbitrating complaints and disputes. The PCC was not established as a regulator as such and it is not reasonable to criticise it for not doing things it is not designed or empowered to do.” The Leveson inquiry, which will begin taking evidence from witnesses next month, has been charged with recommending how the newspaper industry should be regulated in the future. The director-general added that the system of self-regulation should be radically reformed, however. “In particular”, he said, “the self-regulatory body would have to be given the power to conduct unfettered investigations into complaints and, in cases where serious complaints are upheld, to impose fines or other sanctions on guilty parties”. He said one possibility would be for Ofcom, which has the power to levy fines, to conduct inquiries into alleged wrongdoing at newspapers at the request of the press industry’s own regulator. Thompson also said it was vital for the public interest to be properly defined if it is to be used to defend intrusion by the press and the use of techniques including subterfuge. “The important thing is that the industry accepts a common definition so that, when we mount a public interest justification, everyone – courts, regulators, public – know that we are all talking about the same thing”. Thompson also used the speech to attack newspapers who were initially reluctant to cover the phone-hacking story. “Many national newspapers – and not just News International titles – showed a remarkable lack of interest in the phone-hacking story until it was simply too big to ignore”, he said. “Often there were more column inches attacking the BBC for its coverage of the story than there were on phone-hacking itself.” Mark Thompson Metropolitan police Police Milly Dowler Phone hacking Privacy & the media Media law The Guardian News International National newspapers Newspapers Newspapers & magazines BBC Ofcom Press Complaints Commission James Robinson guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …