HCL reveals News International’s various requests for deletion but tells MPs it knew of nothing untoward The technology firm HCL has told the home affairs select committee it was aware of the deletion of hundreds of thousands of emails at the request of News International between April 2010 and July 2011, but said it did not know of anything untoward behind the requests to delete them. HCL has sent the letter to the home affairs select committee chairman, Keith Vaz , revealing it had been involved in nine separate episodes of email deletion. HCL says it is not the company responsible for emails on the News International system that are older than a couple of weeks. It says another unnamed vendor is responsible, but confirms it has co-operated with this vendor in deleting material. Through a letter from HCL’s solicitors Stuart Benson, the firm says: “My client is aware of nothing which appeared abnormal, untoward or inconsistent with its contractual role.” It adds: “It is entirely for News International, the police and your committee as to whether there was any other agenda or subtext when issues of deletion arose and that is a matter on which my client cannot comment and something you will no doubt wish to explore direct with News International.” It stressed that since it was not the company that stored News International’s data “any suggestion or allegation that it has deleted material held on behalf of News International is without foundation”. HCL identified three sets of email deletions in April 2010, including a deletion of a public folder of a live email system that “was owned by a user who no longer needed the emails”. A further 200,000 emails stuck in an outbox were deleted in May 2010 to restore email functionality. In September 2010 a further pruning of historic emails occurred to help stabilise the email archival system, which had been having “frequent outages” since November 2009. In January 2011 HCL was asked about its ability to truncate a particular database in the email archival systems. HCL “answered in the negative and suggested assistance from the third party vendor”. HCL stated no reason as to why it was unable to assist. In February 2011 emails were deleted in an older version of Microsoft. Finally, in July 2011 HCL helped delete emails from the live system as relocation errors had occurred during migration from one system to the other. HCL said it did not have the resources to review every set of deletions. Separately, a firm of solicitors drawn into the News International phone-hacking scandal is expected to reply shortly to the home affairs select committee as to how it came to write a key letter to the newspaper group that was then used by the company to contend that phone hacking had not been widespread. The firm, Harbottle and Lewis, is consulting the Metropolitan police before deciding how to reply to requests from the select committee to spell out how it came to write a letter taken to mean that only one reporter was aware of phone hacking at the paper. The New York Times reported at the weekend that the letter sent by Harbottle and Lewis to the culture, media and sport select committee was redrafted more than once. The firm had been hired to review the email of the tabloid’s royal reporter, Clive Goodman, who had pleaded guilty to hacking the mobile phone messages of royal household staff members. The letter said “no reasonable evidence” had been found that senior editors knew about the reporter’s “illegal actions”. The New York Times alleges that the letter sent to the culture select committee in May 2007 was constructed to give the company a clean bill of health over phone hacking, but was silent on the issue of payments to the police. The home affairs select committee asked: • “What was the exact remit given to Harbottle and Lewis when it was instructed by News International in 2007?” • “The contents of emails and information held in the file you mentioned in your letter.” • “What advice was provided from Harbottle and Lewis to News International in 2007 following examination of the emails and information?” • “Why the evidence you had in 2007 that was later examined by Lord McDonald in 2011 was not acted upon sooner?” Phone hacking News International Newspapers & magazines News of the World Newspapers Computing Email Media business Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Agreement criticised on both sides of the political divide, amid concern it may fail to be approved by Congress America has moved away from the brink of a catastrophic default after a deal was reached overnight to raise its debt ceiling. Stock markets around the world rallied on Monday, in relief that the world’s largest economy would probably avoid running out of cash this week. But the agreement, which includes around $2.5 trillion of spending cuts over the next decade, has been criticised by some on both sides of the political divide, and will probably not save America’s triple-A credit rating. There is also concern that the deal could still fail to be approved by Congress, which is due to vote on the package on Monday night. Some liberals are angry that the plan, which has been hailed as a triumph for the Tea Party movement, relies on spending reductions rather than tax rises to reduce the US budget deficit. The Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, has already warned that some Democrats may be unwilling to support the deal. Under the plan, announced by Barack Obama late on Sunday, the US debt ceiling will be raised by about $2.4tn, in two stages. In return, the US government deficit will be reduced by a similar amount over the next decade. “This process has been messy and taken too long,” said Obama, who also admitted that the weeks of frustratingly slow negotiations in Washington had not delivered the deal he wanted . “This compromise does make a serious down-payment on the deficit reduction we need, and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year,” Obama said. The Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, and his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell, both indicated they were optimistic that Congress will approve the deal. McConnell, who will meet with Republican senators on Monday, said: “We can assure the American people … that the United States of America will not for the first time in our history default on its obligations.” The full details of the plan have not been released. However, a fact sheet released by the White House showed that spending would be capped by $900bn over the next ten years. A bi-partisan committee will then be set up to agree a further $1.5tn of deficit reduction measures, which could include tax rises. If this committee cannot agree a deal, then an “enforcement mechanism” will trigger around $1.3tn of spending reductions beginning in 2013. Paul Krugman, the Nobel prizewinning US economist, accused Obama of surrendering to Republican opponents. “The deal itself, given the available information, is a disaster, and not just for President Obama and his party. It will damage an already depressed economy; it will probably make America’s long-term deficit problem worse, not better; and most important, by demonstrating that raw extortion works and carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road to banana republic status.” Markets rally, but AAA rating under threat Many economists believe that America could soon lose its triple-A credit rating, despite a deal being agreed. Standard & Poor’s, the rating agency, recently said that a credible fiscal plan would need to include $4tn of deficit reduction measures. “Avoiding the worst case scenario of a default on US Treasury obligations will not prevent a downgrade of the triple-A sovereign rating,” predicted Kevin Daly, emerging market debt portfolio manager at Aberdeen Asset Management. “So it’s time for us all to figure out just what it means when the US gets downgraded.” Stuart Gulliver, chief executive of HSBC, said the progress made over the US debt ceiling was “very welcome”, but also warned that America could see its credit rating cut. Wall Street is expected to open around 1% higher when trading begins on Monday. In London the FTSE 100 rallied by almost 1.5%, jumping 83 points to 5898, as traders welcomed the news that the US would probably not run out of cash. “Investors have breathed a collective sigh of relief that the risk of default has been avoided – albeit a few weeks ago nobody would have expected it to go down to the wire like this,” said David Jones, chief market strategist at IG Index. “It still has to be approved by Congress, so there is always the potential for a stumble here, but market reaction today seems confident that it will pass.” Most major commodities gained ground, pushing the cost of a barrel of Brent crude oil up by $2 to $119.40. Gold, which has benefited from the crisis as investors looked for safe havens, fell by 1%. Overnight, Asian stock markets rose strongly on the news. The Japanese Nikkei was up more than 2% at one stage, closing up 1.34% at 9,965 having broken through the 10,000 barrier earlier. United States Barack Obama US economy Republicans Democrats US politics Tea Party movement US economic growth and recession Ewen MacAskill Alex Hawkes guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Late last night, President Obama announced that Democrat and Republican leaders had agreed on a plan with Obama's approval to raise the debt ceiling. The plan would prevent any possible defaults that could occur on August 2 if the deal is not passed in Congress. The plan is still subject to congressional approval, and many Democrats and Republicans are already speaking out against it. Check out a summary of the deal after the break, and let us know your thoughts in the comments. As the Daily Caller's Amanda Carey explained , the deal has a similar framework to House Speaker John Boehner's original plan. According to a summary of the bill provided by Speaker of the House John Boehner’s office, the plan immediately cuts discretionary spending by $917 billion over ten years, and raises the debt ceiling by $900 billion. There are no tax hikes included. The debt limit increase is expected to last until February. Like the Boehner plan that was tabled in the Senate on Friday, the current plan requires a vote on a balanced budget amendment after October 1, but before the end of the year. In February 2012, the president can request another debt limit increase of $1.5 trillion, if either a newly created Joint Committee authorizes spending cuts greater than the hike, or a budget amendment has been passed by the states. ( For a more detailed summary, visit Reuters ) In addition to Boehner's approval, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell both lent their support to the plan as well. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi was not as enthusiastic, explaining she would review the plan with her caucus today. Many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle shared Pelosi's lack of enthusiasm. Some Democrats believe it does not ask enough of the rich, while many Republicans believe the budget cuts are not sweeping enough. Senator Bernie Sanders explained, “I cannot support legislation like the Reid proposal which balances the budget on the backs of struggling Americans while not requiring one penny of sacrifice from the wealthiest people in our country. That is not only grotesquely immoral, it is bad economic policy.” Rep. Raul Grijalva echoed Sanders, saying, “This deal does not even attempt to strike a balance between more cuts for the working people of American and a fairer contribution from millionaires and corporations.” Tea Party Republicans, including Senators Rand Paul and Mike Lee, have been voicing their concerns for a plan without a balanced budget amendment all week. Senator Ron Johnson explained, “It may be a step in the right direction but it is not fixing the problem. And you know, again it’s not about the August 2 deadline. It’s about the amount of spending and debt that this country is incurring…We have way too much debt for the size of our economy.” Rep. Allen West took a different approach, tweeting last night, “Before conservatives go criticising [sic] this agreement consider what would have happened if Pelosi, Reid and Obama were still in control.” What do you think of the plan? Do you think it will pass through Congress?
Continue reading …Sharpton Pushed for Comcast/NBC Merger – And Now Is In Line for Show on MSNBC
August 1, 2011 No Comment
Remember how Al Sharpton was among the first black leaders to speak out in favor of Comcast's acquisition of NBC Universal? My recollection of this was vague at best, tending as I do to dismiss nearly everything coming from Sharpton as insignificant, predictable or clownish. Then after FCC approval of the merger back in January, Sharpton began appearing more often as a guest on MSNBC, a cable network subsidiary of NBC that performs yeoman's work in public relations for the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. A July 27 article at The Daily Beast by Wayne Barrett, “Sharpton's Affirmative-Action Win,” asks whether Sharpton's expected new show on MSNBC is “payback” for supporting Comcast's merger with NBC Universal. Barrett's article leaves little doubt as to the answer. Barrett points out that Michael Copps, a Democrat serving on the FCC since 2001, voted against the merger, saying it “erodes diversity, localism and competition” and was a “stake in the heart of independent content production.” Barrett writes — But Mignon Clyburn, the daughter of South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn and the only minority member of the FCC, threw her decisive support behind the deal, citing a comprehensive diversity memorandum of agreement (MOU)
Continue reading …
RIM’s 7-inch PlayBook may be lovely to hold, and that gesture area along the bezel is downright genius, but the QNX-powered slate hasn’t had the easiest time taking on the likes of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Apple’s iPad 2. Still, RIM’s following is amongst the most loyal in the industry, and those who wouldn’t leave the house sans a BlackBerry handset may have been inclined to give this guy a go. If that’s you, we’re overly interested in hearing how you’d do things differently. Would you have preferred a larger screen? Android app support right out of the box? A beefier software store? Go on and get creative in comments below — something tells us RIM isn’t exactly in a position to turn a deaf ear. How would you change RIM’s BlackBerry PlayBook? originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 31 Jul 2011 22:53:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
I was not a gay divorcee. No, that wasn’t to happen for many years down the road. I was a very unhappy, self-centered divorcee, resorting to all the worst tactics therapists warn against: using the children as pawns, bad-mouthing the other parent and terminal self-pity. I particularly recall one daughter’s high school graduation in the early ’90s where I refused to attend the dinner party in her honor because her father would be attending. He and I were two years into a bitter and contentious divorce and child custody battle in which I felt demeaned and powerless; I brought all my agony and vitriol to her commencement celebration. I demanded she have another dinner afterward with me, support me because I was the victim in these legal hostilities. I was so in the drama of my drama. (Poor baby..she was so caught in the web of parental dictums. I had divorced him but she hadn’t.) I think back on how I made her take care of me, with no consideration of the burden this put on her. I came to understand all this in the following years as I got sober, reflected back on my behaviors and decided to change. I had a rollicking opportunity to make a living amends to her at her June wedding just a few years ago. She was getting married at an historic church in Martha’s Vineyard, with an elaborate dinner reception at the romantic and pastoral Lambert’s Cove Inn, where many of the wedding guests were staying. Since my stepdad had a house a short distance away in Edgartown, the bride and groom, the bridesmaids, my younger children and I, were going to stay there; my ex and his girlfriend would be at Lambert’s Cove, a gorgeous place but, to him, not in the inner circle. A snit was made about his being left out, marginalized, while everyone else got to be together. Now I have to admit, I wouldn’t have wanted to be in his shoes. I have five children and I experience my kids as a great rowdy bunch. There’s a lot of fun, wrestling, singing, laughing when we’re together; we are where you want to be. But there was no extra bedroom at the house for their dad; ironically, there was only room at the Inn. My daughter was obviously feeling the normal bridal anxiety and pressure of managing the out of town visitors, the ever-expanding dinner list, floral mismanagement, musician cancellations. I didn’t want her to be stressed about trying to appease her father; no one wanted to risk the ensuing criticism if he were displeased. I was afraid she would be sagging under the kind of intimidation that had so hampered my married years and that I, too, in my self-indulgence, had in the past inflicted on her. It was clear to me that my ex felt left out. He was the father of the bride but, of the two parents, only he wasn’t at the house with the wedding party. It also occurred to me that if I wanted the best day for my daughter, if I wanted to forestall any possible pressure from my ex-husband, I should do what I could to make him happy. I packed up my bag (leaving my baggage behind) and moved to the Inn as an equalizing measure. I welcomed my ex and his girlfriend, whom I quite liked, and suggested we work together on some reception activity. We all drove together to the wedding rehearsal and he and I went over the pre-arranged plan of us both escorting the bride down the aisle. I was gladly part of his small family luncheon. I sought his input on a few reception seating arrangements, hoping he felt a part of, useful and included. I had to put away the angry mom if I wanted my daughter to have a happy dad. And here’s the happy news…it was all fine. I felt like a grown-up. I was liking this better self. We were all having a wonderful time at the wedding. The church was stunningly decorated; the bride’s four siblings, equally stunning, stood at the front ready to receive their sister. The groom stood, expectant and hopeful, as he looked towards us at the back of the church as the processional began. Our moment was upon us, mother and father, our radiant child between us. At the prearranged moment, I sallied forth but he waited a few beats, holding onto his daughter. I looked around, puzzled to be sallying solo. It was at that point that they followed behind me, he alone escorting her down the aisle. Well. Okay then. The rest of the ceremony went off beautifully, seamlessly even. I wept copiously, which felt appropriate. It was a sensational day and that was the only thing that mattered. So, I found out I don’t need to like someone to treat them well which, at the time, was a relatively new concept for me. I have learned to want for him, because it has a ripple effect, touching everyone, even coming back to me. I work on wanting that every day. It costs nothing to be kind and surprisingly, it makes me feel better. I don’t’ often feel the cruel bitterness that in the past had dogged my days. My actions changed my thinking. I feel whole, full of peace, love and willingness. Twenty years ago, I hadn’t even known to want any of that.
Continue reading …
CNN’s Don Lemon had a very testy exchange with Sen. Rand Paul about the debt ceiling drama on Saturday night. As the House and Senate again failed to reach an agreement on how to raise the debt ceiling, Paul appeared on CNN to explain the Tea Party position on the talks. Lemon started off the interview by asking him to chat “without talking points.” He also began aggressively trying to get Paul to answer his questions, asking him repeatedly how he had voted on the so-called “Cut, Cap and Balance” bill from the House. Lemon then wondered whether Paul’s insistence on measures like a balanced budget amendment were isolating him. “The Democrats have made many concessions when it comes to what’s going on here, and even the Tea Party position it appears to most people remains rigid,” Lemon said. “The question is, have you made your point? And by continuing to go on with this, do you feel like you’re overreaching and that you’re going to lose the clout?” Paul started talking about how he didn’t want to add any more debt to the country’s finances. Lemon cut him off. “Hang on, hang on,” he said. “Can we just stick to that–we’re going to get to that–” “Let me finish my thought,” Paul said. “Hold on, please, be respectful here,” Lemon responded. “I’m trying to answer your question, you’ve interrupted my answer,” Paul said. “If you answer the question, I’ll give you plenty of time,” Lemon said. The two clashed again when Lemon asked who Paul thinks will be to blame if the U.S. defaults on its debt obligations. Again, Paul didn’t answer the question directly, and, again, Lemon pressed him on it. There was yet another contentious back-and-forth when Lemon asked Paul about whether he understood that the public is frustrated with Washington, and Paul started talking about measures he had introduced in the Senate. “I don’t want talking points, with all due respect, I’m asking you, do you feel the public sentiment in Washington?” Lemon asked. “This isn’t a talking point, I’m trying to tell you what we did 30 minutes ago in the Senate,” Paul shot back. “I’m not asking you what you did, sir. With all due respect, I’m asking you if you feel how the public feels in Washington,” Lemon replied. Later, Lemon said that he hadn’t gone after Paul because he is a conservative. “It’s not ideological to ask someone to stick to the question presented,” he said. “It’s just being respectful of you–the viewer the voter.” Watch the exchange at the top of the post (via Mediate) Watch Lemon’s explanation:
Continue reading …One week ago, two stories dominated the news. In Norway, a madman had murdered dozens, while in the U.S., the debt-limit debate raged. In Kosland, however, the Norwegian terrorist attacks and the Washington wrangling were to a large extent the same story, since both centered on, you guessed it, out-of-control right-wing extremism. And Anders Breivik wasn't even the most despicable person or entity to which Kossacks likened the Tea Party this past week — see below for the disgusting details. As usual, each headline is preceded by the blogger's name or pseudonym. Leftwing Noise Machine: Fear unites Breivik, tea-partiers …[V]isit a Tea Party website…and you find the very same obsessions that haunted Breivik: fear of being emasculated by feminism, fear of Muslims, fear of nonwhites, fear of multiculturalism, fear of complex economies, fear of science, fear of educated people. Fear… …The Rightwing Noise Machine is belching huge volumes of smoke trying to deal with the obvious connections between Breivik and Tea Party ideology. But it’s all rather hapless…If you have to take pains to distinguish yourself from a man who blew up Norway’s parliament, got a gun and killed dozens of “liberal” teenagers, because otherwise the public might get confused, then maybe you’re espousing the wrong things… Is Breivik insane? Of course he is. Only a lunatic kills dozens of innocent people. And that what’s so chilling: his crazy violent views are not very different from Breitbart’s, or Ferah’s, or O’Reilly’s, or Bachmann’s. And we must never let them forget that. Swellsman: The Tea Party is short on impulse control …Sometimes it seems to me that America is becoming more and more a nation of adolescents. Even scarier, there seems to be an increasing likelihood that these adolescents have actually seized control of the country. The Teabaggers, or course, are the most visible example of this… Of course, there is always the danger of violence when adolescent passion is wed to political causes. We saw that with the Weatherman bombings a generation ago. We witnessed it to a tragic degree just four days ago, in Oslo. But as terrible — and as tragic — as sudden outbreaks of violence can be, their capacity to do real and lasting damage to any nation as a whole is as nothing compared to the amount of damage that can be wrought when adolescent passion is able to seize actual political power… Bare Left: The Tea Party is basically the KKK… …[T]he Tea Party…is really nothing more than the Fourth Ku Klux Klan dressed up as political rhetoric and “anti-government” fervor… John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor (et tu, Jewish guy?), and the rest of that deplorable gang of all-white Republican hate-mongers who call themselves the “Leadership,” are just as guilty, though perhaps they are not quite as “in touch with their feelings” as some of the cruder, more raucous elements they share a bed with. Nevertheless, they all share the same idea: No black man shall be raised to a position of importance and succeed. Not if they can help it… Vyan: …is more dangerous than al-Qaeda… …These people are absolutely off their NUT. Reason doesn't work with these people. Facts Don't Matter… And we thought al Qeada was dangerous to the nation? Not hardly compared to these people… Steven D: …and identifies with a certain Old Testament figure …I imagine [Tea Party congressmen] identify most strongly with as Samson in the Temple of the Philistines, destroying his enemies in a bloody mass murder in order to save his own “people.” They don't look at liberals, Democrats, African Americans, Hispanics, the disabled or members of the LGBT community as part of America, part of the people who need saving. They imagine that government is rigged to benefit these groups and harm their own followers, the “Real Americans” as Sarah Palin so unabashedly called them… Kos: If Obama, House Dems win next year, watch out for the bloody backlash …[W]hat'll happen in 2012 if Obama is reelected and the Democrats retake the House, as is more likely than not? This frothy mix of paranoia, gun fetishization and the belief that violence is a solution will inevitably lead to violence… Mark Sumner: The GOP is a hate group …[Republicans] just hate you. Honestly hate you. Of course, they hate President Obama even more. A thousand blazing supernovas with a side order of big bang? Barely an ember next to how much they hate him, and really, they're completely honest about that. The Tea Party formerly-known-as-Republicans is all about the hate. …[T]hey've done the math — they hate the president much, much more than they love the country. By a factor of, oh, twenty zillion to one… …If the economy flags, if jobs are lost, if there is blood in the streets, its all dandy so long as these guys can look over and see that this will hurt Obama…
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media (h/t Heather for video ) I’m working on fumes right now, but President Obama just announced that Boehner, McConnell and Reid have reached an agreement on the debt ceiling bill so now it’s off to Congress to see if it will get passed. President Obama discussed the framework in a public statement at the White House Sunday evening, and urged members of both parties to support the plan. He also criticized Congress for touching off this crisis, and for being unable to arrive at a single grand bargain to improve the country’s fiscal situation (with spending cuts and tax increases) and raise the debt limit as well. “Is this the deal I would have preferred? No,” Obama said. “But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need.” The announcement came just as House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) hosted a conference call with his own, unruly caucus, to sell them on the same plan. Passing this bill will be a heavier lift in that caucus, where scores of Democrats and Republicans are expected to defect. Luke Russert has been all over MSNBC talking about Boehner’s conference call and saying it was like a pep-rally, you know..he had to go all Vince Lombardi on his members to try and persuade them to vote for this deal. VICTORY! Stevie B: The final hurdle was Speaker Boehner, who fought to lower the ratio on the trigger, away from a 50-50 split on the trigger we talked about earlier. As it turns out, Boehner lost that fight, and the White House told him there would be movement on this point, and the Speaker conceded the point. (He’d already won on so many other points, this was a minor setback.) And here (pdf), by the way, is the presentation Boehner made available to his caucus after endorsing the agreement. The Speaker clearly doesn’t love the plan, but in a hilarious twist, Boehner said failing to pass it would lead to a “job-killing default.” That would be the same default Boehner has been willing to pursue for the last several months. This plan still unfortunately kicks the can down to another frakkin’ Cat Food Committee in November where we’ll be debating the same stuff all over again. I’m hearing that the cuts tied to the trigger will be 50-50 on defense and non-defense spending and that the Big Three safety Net programs won’t have benefits cut. We’ll find out more hard info tomorrow. On FOX, Baier and Rosen were discussing the Balanced Budget amendment that will be voted down immediately as Rosen described it as a poison pill in the whole debt ceiling debate. Huckabee was saying what a wonderful idea it would be to alter the Constitution. Sorry, Huck, that sucks. I’m too burnt to write much more on this tonight myself. Nobody is happy with this deal, even the Tea Party cult because many of them want the US to default and the world markets to unravel. The NY Times has more info on the triggers and reactions from Senators and leaders from both parties.
Continue reading …
Gagarazzi: Lady Gaga Is Stalking You. Delores Restaurant VidCon 2011 Canon A480 iamahoneybee says: I checked in at Corey’s Catsup & Mustard (623 Main St) on # Yelp http://bit.ly/bXjltZ
Continue reading …