‘Significant and tenacious’ attempt made to breach information systems network Lockheed Martin, the US government’s top IT provider, has thwarted a “significant and tenacious” cyber-attack made on its information systems network. A spokeswoman said no personal data had been compromised, thanks to “almost immediate” protective action taken after the attack was detected on 21 May. She said the company, the world’s biggest aerospace company and the Pentagon’s top supplier by sales, was working around the clock to restore employee access to the targeted network while maintaining the highest security level. There has been no information about where the attack may have originated. The US defence department said it was working with Lockheed to determine the scope of the attack. US air force Lieutenant Colonel April Cunningham said the incident’s impact on the department was “minimal and we don’t expect any adverse effect”. She declined to specify the nature of the impact. Lockheed makes the F-16, F-22 and F-35 fighter jets as well as warships and other multibillion-dollar arms systems sold worldwide. Military contractors’ systems contain technical specifications on weapons under development as well as those in use. A homeland security official said the US government had offered to help Lockheed analyse “available data in order to provide recommendations to mitigate further risk”. A person with direct knowledge told Reuters on Friday that unknown attackers had broken into sensitive networks of Lockheed and several other US military contractors. Boeing and Northrop Grumman, the Pentagon’s other leading suppliers, declined to discuss matters involving corporate security. Data and computer security Computing Hacking United States US military US national security guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …NBC's David Gregory on Sunday accused Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) of not having said publicly if he's for Congressman Paul Ryan's (R-Wisc.) Medicare plan. This oddly came four days after McConnell and 39 other Republicans voted for the proposal on the floor of the Senate (video follows with transcript and commentary): DAVID GREGORY, HOST: But, leader, my question is if there's going to be a deal on the debt ceiling on Medicare reform… SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KENTUCKY): Mm-hmm. MR. GREGORY: …would you concede it's got to look a lot different than the Ryan plan? SEN. McCONNELL: No! I–it's on the table. We're going to discuss what ought to be done. Everybody agrees something ought to be done, except the Democrats in the Senate, who have no plan at all. MR. GREGORY: But you're not even… SEN. McCONNELL: We had four… MR. GREGORY: …you haven't even said publicly whether you're for the Ryan plan. So you're not behind that version of Medicare reform. SEN. McCONNELL: I voted for the–I, I voted for the Ryan budget this week. D'oh! Did McConnell's answer stop Gregory from pursuing this foolish line of questioning? Hardly: MR. GREGORY: You didn't whip up your colleagues, though. You didn't try to get additional support. SEN. McCONNELL: Well, we, we had, we had competing versions in the Senate. Senator Toomey, a Republican senator in the Senate, had a plan. Senator Paul had a plan. The only people who didn't vote for any plan at all–we–by the way, we had a vote on the president's budget, didn't get a single solitary vote. Not a single Democratic senator voted for the president's budget. MR. GREGORY: Fair–but do you support Ryan's reforms? SEN. McCONNELL: And the guy, the guy that you're going to have on after me thinks that all we're doing right now is positioning for the 2012 election. What about the country? What about the next generation, not the next election? MR. GREGORY: I'm just trying to understand where you are particularly on how to change Medicare so… SEN. McCONNELL: Well, let me tell you. MR. GREGORY: You're not–you don't believe that the Ryan plan is the basis of where you're going to get agreement. SEN. McCONNELL: I, I voted for the Ryan budget this week. So voting for a bill doesn't mean you're actually for it? That's some interesting logic. Of course, it was obvious what Gregory was doing. Since Newt Gingrich foolishly called the Ryan plan “right-wing social engineering” on “Meet the Press” a few weeks ago, the media have been trying to convince the public that all Republicans feel the same way. As such, they've been characterizing Wednesday's vote in the Senate as a major defeat to Medicare reform all because five Republicans joined the Democrats in opposing it. However, four of those so-called Republicans are “in name only,” and the fifth was Rand Paul (R-Ky.) who doesn't think Ryan's plan cuts spending far enough. With this in mind, it seemed no matter how many times McConnell was going to say he voted for the plan, Gregory was going to spin it as though the Minority Leader really opposes it. In effect, Gregory was just refusing to take “Yes” for an answer. And that's the way things work on agenda-driven political talk shows these days when “Yes” isn't what the host is looking for.
Continue reading …Paveway bombs weighing 2,000lbs to be loaded onto RAF jets for possible strikes on Gaddafi command centres Britain has ratcheted up the pressure on Colonel Muammar Gaddafi by preparing to load heavy “bunker buster” bombs on RAF jets ready to attack his compounds in and around Tripoli. Paveway bombs, weighing 2,000lbs, the largest in the RAF’s arsenal, have been dispatched to Gioia del Colle in southern Italy where RAF Tornado and Typhoon jets are based. While the Apache’s cannon and Hellfire missiles are used against small or moving targets, the Paveway bombs are expected to be used against bunkers underneath the Gaddafi regime’s Bab al-Azizia compound in Tripoli and elsewhere. The MoD said on Sunday the enhanced Paveway III bombs, are designed “to punch through the roof or wall of a hardened building”. The bombs join smaller laser or satellite-guided Paveway bombs, Brimstone missiles and Tomahawk submarine-launched cruise missiles, with which the army and navy have been attacking targets in Libya for more than two months. The enhanced Paveway III “gives the RAF an additional capability to attack hardened structures in Libya like command centres or communications nodes”, the MoD said. Gaddafi had “a lot of bunkers”, Liam Fox, the defence secretary, said on Sunday. The facilities were used “partly for accommodation” but “largely for military control”, he told the Andrew Marr show on BBC One. Those who used “dual use facilities” would be vulnerable if they were in the bunkers’, Fox added. Libya Defence policy Liam Fox Andrew Marr Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …• President free to stand alone for re-election • Full details on the hearing on our blog Fifa will open a “full-blown” investigation into allegations that Mohamed bin Hammam and Jack Warner offered financial incentives to members of the Caribbean Football Union and has provisionally suspended them from all football activity, the world football’s governing body has confirmed. Sepp Blatter, Fifa’s current president, however, will not face an investigation into the allegations that he knew about the payments. He will be free to stand for re-election unopposed at Wednesday’s presidential vote after Bin Hammam withdrew from the race on Saturday night. “No investigation against Blatter is warranted,” said the deputy chairman of the ethics committee Petrus Damaseb, who chaired the meeting that heard the evidence. The ethics committee said there was sufficient evidence further to investigate allegations that Bin Hammam and Warner offered $40,000 bribes to delegates at a Caribbean football association meeting on 10-11 May in Trinidad. The payments were allegedly made to secure votes for Bin Hammam in his campaign to unseat Blatter as the head of football’s governing body. The evidence was submitted to Fifa by the American executive committee member Chuck Blazer. “We are satisfied that there is a case to be answered,” said Damaseb. Bin Hammam, who alongside Warner denied any wrongdoing, had asked the ethics panel to investigate Blatter on grounds that he knew of alleged bribe attempts and did nothing about it. But the Fifa panel said there was no evidence to take action against Blatter. Two officials from the Caribbean Football Union, Debbie Minguell and Jason Sylvester, who were alleged to have handed over the money, have also been suspended pending a full inquiry. Jérôme Valcke, Fifa’s general secretary, was asked whether the investigation into the claims against Bin Hammam, the Qatari president of the Asian football confederation, would also lead to an inquiry into the decision to award Qatar the 2022 World Cup. “It was not discussed by the committee,” replied Valcke. Fifa has also announced that the Football Association has cleared the Fifa members Ricardo Teixeira and Worawi Makudi of allegations of bribery made by Lord Triesman relating to England’s failed 2018 World Cup bid. Fifa Mohamed bin Hammam Sepp Blatter Jack Warner Football politics Tom Bryant guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Instead of running away from Paul Ryan’s disastrous budget plan and the Republicans’ extremely unpopular proposal to turn Medicare into a voucher system, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell decided to double-down in support of Ryan’s plan instead. So the Republican’s irresponsible hostage taking on raising the debt ceiling continues. McConnell: Ryan Medicare plan ‘on the table’ : The top Republican in the Senate said Sunday that a controversial House Medicare plan is “on the table” as President Barack Obama and his GOP rivals wrestle over budget cuts to enact this summer. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said on NBC’s “Meet The Press” that he supports the controversial plan by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to transform Medicare into a voucher-like system in which future beneficiaries — those 54 and younger — would get subsidies to buy health insurance rather than have the government directly pay their doctor and hospital bills. The House plan has come under a sustained assault from Democrats, who charge it would “end Medicare as we know it.” Democrats successfully used the charge is winning a House special in a strongly Republican district in upstate New York last week. Asked whether he would concede that the Ryan Medicare plan won’t be part of any budget deal this year, McConnell said: “No. It’s on the table.” McConnell was referring to budget talks led by Vice President Joe Biden and senior lawmakers in both parties over what spending cuts to add to must-pass legislation to allow the government to continue to borrow to fund federal programs and prevent a market-rattling, first-ever default on U.S. bonds But McConnell seemed to acknowledge that with a Democrat in the White House, the Ryan plan is effectively dead for now. The measure by the Wisconsin GOP congressman also fell well short in a Senate vote last week. “I’m personally very comfortable with the way Paul Ryan would structure it,” McConnell said. “But we have a Democratic president. We’re going to have to negotiate with him on the terms of changing Medicare so we can save Medicare.” And by save it, he means turn it over to the insurance industries. And of course he was still saying that any tax increases were off the table and unnecessary. Update: Full transcript below the fold. MR. GREGORY: The problem is huge, and the entitlement program… SEN. McCONNELL: Yeah. MR. GREGORY: …is really the heart of it. But I ask the same question, which is, is Medicare the third rail? Look, you said, reportedly, to the speaker of the House John Boehner, “I wouldn’t push this Ryan proposal because poetical it’s going to hurt the party.” SEN. McCONNELL: Well, I don’t know where that quote came from. But the point is, what are we going to do about the problem? We, we know that–what–let’s–oh, you want to talk about Medicare? The president says Medicare needs to be on the table, the vice president says Medicare needs to be on the table. Steny Hoyer, the number two Democrat in the House, says Medicare needs to be on the table. It is on the table in the discussions related to the debt ceiling. So… MR. GREGORY: But not in its current form. If it passes… SEN. McCONNELL: Well, look, we’re… MR. GREGORY: …as part of the debt ceiling vote… SEN. McCONNELL: The Democrats… MR. GREGORY: …it’s got to be different, does it not, than the Ryan plan? SEN. McCONNELL: As you pointed out from my comments in the lead-in, the Democrats have no plan at all. We had, we had four votes in the Senate this week… MR. GREGORY: Fair enough. But, leader, my question is if there’s going to be a deal on the debt ceiling on Medicare reform… SEN. McCONNELL: Mm-hmm. MR. GREGORY: …would you concede it’s got to look a lot different than the Ryan plan? SEN. McCONNELL: No! I–it’s on the table. We’re going to discuss what ought to be done. Everybody agrees something ought to be done, except the Democrats in the Senate, who have no plan at all. MR. GREGORY: But you’re not even… SEN. McCONNELL: We had four… MR. GREGORY: …you haven’t even said publicly whether you’re for the Ryan plan. So you’re not behind that version of Medicare reform. SEN. McCONNELL: I voted for the–I, I voted for the Ryan budget this week. MR. GREGORY: You didn’t whip up your colleagues, though. You didn’t try to get additional support. SEN. McCONNELL: Well, we, we had, we had competing versions in the Senate. Senator Toomey, a Republican senator in the Senate, had a plan. Senator Paul had a plan. The only people who didn’t vote for any plan at all–we–by the way, we had a vote on the president’s budget, didn’t get a single solitary vote. Not a single Democratic senator voted for the president’s budget. MR. GREGORY: Fair–but do you support Ryan’s reforms? SEN. McCONNELL: And the guy, the guy that you’re going to have on after me thinks that all we’re doing right now is positioning for the 2012 election. What about the country? What about the next generation, not the next election? MR. GREGORY: I’m just trying to understand where you are particularly on how to change Medicare so… SEN. McCONNELL: Well, let me tell you. MR. GREGORY: You’re not–you don’t believe that the Ryan plan is the basis of where you’re going get agreement. SEN. McCONNELL: I, I voted for the Ryan budget this week. MR. GREGORY: But do you believe it’s really the big–because it failed. SEN. McCONNELL: What I’m not going to do… MR. GREGORY: It’s not going anywhere. SEN. McCONNELL: …is negotiate the deal with you, David, with all due respect. The president of the United States, the only person in America who can sign a bill into law, is at the table through the vice president, and we are discussing a package that will begin to deal with deficit and debt in connection… MR. GREGORY: But, leader, I’m not asking you to negotiate. I’m just asking you to help in the interest of what I assume you want, which is building some kind of political consensus around reform. Having a discussion publicly on television like this and saying, what are the contours of that that could actually get some Democratic support? SEN. McCONNELL: Well, this is not the place to do that. The place to do it is in the discussions with the one individual out of 307 million Americans who can sign a bill into law. And those discussions are under way, and I can assure you, David, that to get my vote to raise the debt ceiling, for whatever that’s worth, my one vote, Medicare will be a part of it. The details of that are yet to be negotiated with the guy who can sign something into law. MR. GREGORY: But do you have to keep the basis of the Medicare program in place? Is that your view? Because that’s not what Ryan is proposing. And then you could do other things. SEN. McCONNELL: And no matter how many times you ask me to, to kind of craft what the Medicare fix should be like, I’m not going to give that answer to you today because that’s a subject to be negotiated with the president of the United States. MR. GREGORY: But do you understand that the currents here in the Republican Party–when Newt Gingrich was on this program and called Ryan’s plan right-wing social engineering, conservatives flocked to his aid and said, “No, no, the Ryan plan is a litmus test for conservatives in America.” What you’re saying is not that. You voted for it, but you didn’t rally your colleagues behind it and it failed. So there seems to be a split in the party about what it is should constitute actual reform. SEN. McCONNELL: Actually, there’s very little split in the party at all. We all know Medicare’s going to change. It’s got to change. David, the trustees of Medicare and Social Security, who are appointed by the president of the United States, that includes some members of his own Cabinet, just said a couple of weeks ago that Medicare’s going broke. The one thing we know we can’t do is nothing. And our Democratic friends in the Senate have no plan at all. The president, to his credit, is at the table discussing with us the way in which you save Medicare. Medicare is going down. Doing nothing is not a plan. And we’re going to negotiate the contours of the plan in these negotiations. I’m personally very comfortable with the way Paul Ryan would structure it in the out years. But we have a Democratic president. We’re going to have to negotiate with him on the terms of changing Medicare so we can save Medicare. MR. GREGORY: Are you confident that the debt ceiling will ultimately be raised? SEN. McCONNELL: I’m confident that unless we do something really significant about debt and deficit, it’s not going to be raised. It’s not going to get my vote unless we deal with the problem raised by the request of the president to raise the debt ceiling. In other words… MR. GREGORY: Does Medicare–is it… SEN. McCONNELL: This is, this is an opportunity. MR. GREGORY: Yeah. SEN. McCONNELL: You know, rather than play scare tactics about what if and, you know, what if you do this or what if you do that, the point is use this opportunity to come together on a bipartisan basis like Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill did in 1983 to save Social Security for another generation. They came together, made an important adjustment–and, by the way, the–you know, all this talk about next year’s election, after participating in raising the age limit for Social Security, Reagan the next year carried 49 out of 50 states. Anything we agree to do together, David, will not be an issue in next year’s election. But this is about the future of the country. MR. GREGORY: Hm. SEN. McCONNELL: Not about the election a year and a half from now.
Continue reading …Sam Alexander and Ollie Augustin were killed by a blast from an improvised explosive device in Helmand province The families of two Royal Marines who died in an explosion in Afghanistan have paid tribute to them . Marine Sam Alexander, 28, from Hammersmith, west London, and 23-year-old Lieutenant Ollie Augustin, from Kent, were killed by an improvised explosive device in Helmand province on Friday. The men, both from Juliet Company 42 Commando Royal Marines, had been on patrol in the Loy Mandeh area of the Nad-e Ali district. In 2009, Alexander was awarded the Military Cross for gallantry during a previous tour of Afghanistan. Earlier that year, he charged at a Taliban position with his pistol to save a wounded colleague. Colleagues described him as an example to all who worked with him. His wife, Claire, said: “He risked his safety for his friends, but never batted an eyelid. It was his job, and a job he did well. “Sam was a loving husband and a wonderful father. He was our rock and my best friend. He has been taken from me all too soon.” Alexander also leaves a son, Leo, and parents, Stuart and Serena. The commanding officer of 42 Commando Royal Marines, Lieutenant Colonel Ewen Murchison, said Alexander had joined “the legends, the bravest of the brave”. Augustin, who was leading Friday’s patrol, was said to have made a considerable impact within the unit despite only passing for duty six months ago, having trained to join the marines as a commissioned officer. His parents, Jane and Sean, said he was “a much loved and cherished son”. “His warmth and humour lit a room and infected all around him,” they said. “He dealt with people in a thoughtful and compassionate way. His independence and sense of adventure meant that he embraced life and his chosen path.” Augustin also leaves behind a sister, Sarah. Murchison described him as an “inspirational, passionate and selfless” leader. Military Afghanistan Haroon Siddique guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Darko Mladic makes claim as his father fights extradition from Serbia to face UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague Ratko Mladic denies ordering the 1995 massacre of 8,000 Muslim men and boys in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica, his son has said. “Whatever was done in Srebrenica, he has nothing to do with it. His orders were to evacuate the wounded, the women and the children and then the fighters,” Darko Mladic said as his father fought extradition from Serbia to face the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague. “Whatever was done behind his back, he has nothing to do with that.” The family intends to demand on Mondaythat a Serbian court orders an independent medical checkup to counter Friday’s decision that Mladic is fit to stand trial . “His basic human rights are being violated,” his son said. Prosecutors have dismissed such moves as a delaying tactic. Ratko Mladic’s lawyer, Milos Saljic, said: “It is impossible to talk to him sensibly about usual things, to talk about his defense case … He is really in bad shape psychologically.” The alleged war criminal, who has previously suffered at least two minor strokes, also said he wanted to be visit the grave of his daughter, who killed herself in 1994. “He says if he can’t go there, he wants his daughter’s coffin brought in here,” Saljic added. “His condition is alarming.” Meanwhile, Serbian authorities stepped up security ahead of an ultra-nationalist rally scheduled to take place in the capital, Belgrade, later on Sunday. Previous rallies have resulted in violent clashes between the police and rightwing extremists. Earlier, it emerged that officials involved in Mladic’s capture had faced a tirade of abuse when he was brought to court. Mladic accused them of “working for the CIA”, and later told one prominent official he could have had him killed on two occasions. Mladic, who has refused to recognise the authority of the war crimes tribunal in The Hague, denied being a killer, adding that all Serbs bore a shared guilt for voting for President Slobodan Milosevic, the architect of the Balkan wars. Mladic’s behaviour since being brought to court in Belgrade was disclosed in the most detailed account yet of the state of mind of the man charged with orchestrating the Srebrenica massacre and the siege of Sarajevo during the Bosnian war. It came as a source close to Serbia’s intelligence service, the BIA – or Security Information Agency – said Mladic had been living openly for several years, although “not continuously”, in the village of Lazarevo, where he was found. A BIA team observing the house of his cousin Branko Mladic, where Ratko Mladic was found – one of two addresses he had been using in the area – had watched him going about “everyday activities”, including attending village celebrations. “Personally speaking, I think some officials knew where he was living,” the source said. “It was peculiar, too, that when the house was raided there were no personal possessions there.” Bruno Vekaric, a deputy prosecutor at the war crimes prosecutor’s office, who has met Mladic twice since his arrest, described Mladic’s behaviour: “He was really angry at first. He recognised me from television and said: ‘You’re in the CIA!’ He knew my name and asked me: ‘Are you a Serb?’ You know, because it is not a common Serbian name. “I told him my father was from Dubrovnik [in Croatia]. He felt like a great Serb and was angry at the way he was being treated on that first day.” Vekaric added that examination of Mladic by court-appointed medical experts confirmed he had suffered at least two minor strokes, perhaps more, but was coherent and fit to stand trial. That was confirmed by Mladic’s wife, Bosiljka, speaking after visiting him, who said he had suffered a stroke in 2008. “He was stubborn and resistant. He did not want to co-operate with the judge at all on the first day,” Vekaric said. “He spoke about his career. And what was interesting, on that first day, was that he said to me: ‘Bruno, I am not a killer. But the people who killed, they should be held responsible.’” Vekaric gave his account in his court office above the cells where Mladic is being held in a block on his own, watched 24 hours a day by two guards through an open door. He said: “He’s always observed, but he’s told the guards: ‘You don’t have to worry. I’m not going to commit suicide.’” Mladic emerges as a man who has a desperate need to explain himself. “He needs to speak. To communicate,” said Vekaric. “He was alone for so long, he needs to speak.” Although they had never met before, Mladic made clear to Vekaric that he had followed his statements over the years on television. “The first day, he was very tired,” Vekaric said. “He was stressed and aggressive. The second time I saw him in court, he apologised to me for his outburst.” What has been visible since then is a more familiar Mladic, arrogant and demanding, insisting not only on his own innocence but on the shared guilt of all of the Serbian people. “He said: ‘You elected [Slobodan] Milosevic, not me. You are all guilty, not me.’” During his time in court, speaking to officials involved in proceedings to extradite him to The Hague for trial, some details have emerged of how Mladic has lived. He has had no mobile phone, not trusting mobiles or the internet. The television channels he watched were local Serbian ones, and he described cable television as “fed by the CIA”. Mladic also complained about how his family has been treated during the long manhunt. “He asked for his pension [cut off in 2004] to be reinstated. He said: ‘You destroyed everything. Because of you my daughter-in-law lost her job. They destroyed the financial connections of my son, Darko’” Vekaric said. He added that as well as asking for strawberries and a television, which has been delivered to his cell, Mladic had also asked if he could see his grandchildren. Vekaric said Mladic had suffered increasingly straitened circumstances since 2006, when he narrowly evaded arrest in the village of Ljuba. This was as a result of the targeting of those in his support network, including financiers, and increased supervision of family members, who had been followed closely by the BIA. “He only had relatives who could look after him,” said a source familiar with the BIA operation. “None of his close family visited him in Lazarevo while the house was being observed. They were being watched too closely.” Vekaric said: “When you see him, you see a man who has not looked after himself well in the last three to four years. He looks like someone who has not had proper medical attention in a long time.” Ratko Mladic Serbia Bosnia and Herzegovina Europe War crimes James Meikle Peter Beaumont guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Time magazine's Joe Klein this weekend claimed President Obama has a better relationship with the military than George W. Bush did when he was Commander-in-Chief. Such hypocritically was said on “The Chris Matthews Show” just moments before Klein noted that the military were “very much opposed” to attacking Libya (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): JOE KLEIN, TIME MAGAZINE: The other thing is there’s still tension between [President Obama] and Petraeus about what exactly, how exactly to close out Afghanistan. I'd say the relationship is pretty good, very, better than it was with Bush because the military hated the fact that he wasn't really doing the job in Iraq. Got that? The military’s relationship is better with Obama because they supposedly hated that Bush wasn’t really doing the job in Iraq. However, watch what happened when Matthews brought up Libya: CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: What’s the reaction of the military in these campaigns? ELISABETH BUMILLER, NEW YORK TIMES: The military was not behind the Libya campaign. KLEIN: Very much opposed to it. BUMILLER: Yeah, Gates was opposed to it. They went in kicking and screaming. Did what they had to do. MATTHEWS: That was a Hillary push, right? BUMILLER: Well, they, Hillary and a few others. They did what they had to do in the first few days, which was take out the air defenses, and then they said, “Okay, NATO’s problem now. We have two wars going on. We don’t need a third.” So, in Klein's sycophantic Obama-loving view, the military have a better relationship with the current president than the former one despite them being “very much opposed” to him getting them involved in a third war. That's liberal logic for you.
Continue reading …Civil service minister Georges Tron denies allegations made by two women who worked for him in Draveil, near Paris A French minister has resigned from Nicolas Sarkozy’s government after he was put under investigation for allegedly sexually assaulting two women who worked for him. The departure of the civil service minister, Georges Tron – who denies the allegations – was announced by the prime minister, François Fillon, on Sunday. French prosecutors have opened a preliminary investigation into the accusations of sexual aggression and rape against Tron, whose lawyer, Olivier Schnerb, described the women as “inveterate liars” and said the accusations were “pure defamation” and “balderdash”. It happened two weeks after the arrest of the Socialist presidential hopeful, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who is facing sexual assault charges in New York. Tron’s government position became untenable after the foreign minister, Alain Juppé, told a television programme that although he was “presumed innocent”, he should consider resigning because “government ministers had to be above all suspicion”. The two women, aged 34 and 36, have lodged complaints with the public prosecutor, claiming Tron assaulted them between 2007 and 2010 while they worked at the town hall in Draveil, south of Paris, where he is the mayor. They say they were encouraged to come forward after Strauss-Kahn’s arrest a fortnight ago. “When I see that a little chambermaid is capable of taking on Dominique Strauss-Kahn, I told myself I did not have the right to stay silent,” one of the women told a French newspaper. “Other women have perhaps suffered what I have suffered. I have to help them. We have to smash this omerta.” Last week a women’s association claimed one of the women had come forward in November last year with a “credible” complaint against Tron. In a statement, the European Association Against Violence Against Women at Work, said: “Her credibility is not in question from our point of view.” The 53-year-old Tron claims the women have a vendetta against him after being sacked from their jobs. “I am not naive – they are trying to echo an affair taking place the other side of the Atlantic,” he told Reuters last week. In an interview prior to his resignation, he said: “The accusations against me are fantasy” but added that he was thinking about resigning, saying: “I don’t want to become an embarrassment [to the government].” France Europe Kim Willsher guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …