True extent of investigator Glenn Mulcaire’s activities only now becoming apparent as Operation Wheeting continues The Metropolitan police holds evidence that could prove hundreds of people had their phones hacked by the News of the World, Scotland Yard told the high court, a far greater number than had previously been believed. Barristers for the Metropolitan police said notes seized from Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator on the paper’s books, showed he made a note of 149 mobile phone pin numbers and around 400 unique voicemail numbers. Both are used to access messages left on mobile
Continue reading …Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani finished his trip to Beijing today, and he’s getting quite the parting gift: 50 brand new JF-17 Thunder fighter jets. Pakistan and China have developed and built the JF-17 jointly, in a program dating back to 1999, but this batch will sport advanced avionics,…
Continue reading …Bad news, boys. A Georgia man has set the “unique wedding proposal” bar very, very high. In a video that has received more than 5 million hits on YouTube in a matter of days, Ginny Joiner sits in a movie theater watching what she thought was a pre-film trailer … but…
Continue reading …
Documents seized from Pakistan compound discuss ‘aspirational’ plot designed to provoke economic crisis in west Documents seized from Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan reveal that al-Qaida considered hijacking and blowing up oil tankers to provoke an “extreme economic crisis” in the west, the US government has said. According to the documents, al-Qaida sought information on the size and construction of oil tankers in non-Muslim seas. The terrorist group had established it would be easier to destroy the vessels by taking bombs on board, due to the strength of the hulls, and test runs had been recommended, the FBI said. However, US officials said there was no “specific or imminent threat”. The department of homeland security said: “In 2010 there was continuing interest by members of al-Qaida in targeting oil tankers and commercial oil infrastructure at sea.” The plot was described as “aspirational” and in its early stages. The US government said it was not raising the nation’s terrorism alert level but a warning had been sent to companies in the oil and gas industries. There has been no immediately significant effect on oil markets. West Texas Intermediate crude oil, the benchmark for oil prices in the US, fell by 2% early in the day. The government encouraged companies to continue random screening, warn employees about possible threats and establish procedures for reporting suspicious activity. The threat to oil tankers suggests that al-Qaida was adopting the strategy of Somali pirates, who have had remarkable success in recent years using small boats to race alongside and board large commercial ships off the East African coast. They hold the cargo and crew for economic ransom. Al-Qaida attacked the USS Cole in October 2000, using a small boat loaded with explosives while the warship was docked in the port of Aden in Yemen, just across the Gulf of Aden from Somalia. Seventeen sailors were killed. The US government said al-Qaida hoped the destruction of a tanker, together with the cleanup and salvage costs and market effects would result in “extreme economic crisis” in the West. But experts said al-Qaida probably overestimated what the loss of a single oil tanker might be on the industry. Concerns about the safety of individual oil tankers from pirate activity or terrorism had not really affected oil prices, said Jim Ritterbusch, president of Ritterbusch and Associates, who has been trading oil contracts since 1983. A tanker holds about two million barrels of oil, enough to supply world demand for only about a half hour. al-Qaida Global terrorism Osama bin Laden US national security United States Oil Damien Pearse guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Social networks accused of making ‘an ass of the law’ as injunction spirals into online battle over freedom of speech Attempts to identify a famous footballer hiding behind a privacy injunction have spiralled into an online battle over freedom of speech, as internet users responded to high court action by repeatedly naming him on Twitter. The high court granted a search order against the US-based microblogging site on Friday as the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, warned that “modern technology was totally out of control” and called for those who “peddle lies” on the internet to be fined. The attempt to compel Twitter to identify those responsible for the breaches comes after a number of its users earlier this month purported to reveal the name of the player who allegedly had an affair with the model Imogen Thomas. The footballer’s legal team began its action in London on Wednesday. There is a suspicion that a media company may be linked to the postings on Twitter, which were put up nearly two weeks ago. But the name of the footballer was spreading even more rapidly across Twitter in defiance of the court injunction, setting the stage for a confrontation between the judiciary and cyberspace. Earlier Lord Judge – welcoming a juridical report on superinjunctions – said readers placed greater trust in the content of traditional media than those “who peddle lies” on websites. He urged that ways be found to curtail the “misuse of modern technology”, in the same way that those involved with online child pornography were pursued by the police. “Are you really going to say that someone who has a true claim for protection perfectly well made has to be at the mercy of modern technology?” he asked. The lawsuit lists the defendants as “Twitter Inc and persons unknown”. The “persons unknown” are described as those “responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accounts”. Lawyers have applied for a court order that could force Twitter to hand over the name, email address and IP address of the person behind the account, the Guardian understands. The orders – known as a Norwich Pharmacal orders – are commonly used in illegal filesharing cases. The Guardian understands that the claim form, filed to the high court by the footballer’s legal team, will not be made public until next week. Earlier this month, an unknown person or individuals published on a Twitter account the names of various people who had allegedly taken out gagging orders to conceal sexual indiscretions. The account rapidly attracted more than 100,000 followers. Twitter said: “We are unable to comment.” The London-based law firm representing the footballer had also not responded to a request for comment at time of publication. Twitter and other social networks were accused of making “an ass of the law” by the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, and politicians after a number of celebrities with injunctions were allegedly exposed online. The socialite Jemima Khan was among those alleged on Twitter to have obtained an injunction. Khan described as a “bloody nightmare” rumours suggesting falsely that she had obtained a gagging order to prevent publication of “intimate photos” of herself and the TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson. Twitter has in the past said that it “strive[s] not to remove tweets on the basis of their content”, but that it would remove “illegal tweets and spam”. Previous defamation claims against the search engine Google failed on the grounds that it is not a publisher and not responsible for the contents of the blogs and articles listed in its search results. Richard Hillgrove, the owner of Hillgrove PR, which provides advice to celebrities, said that Twitter needed to be made as accountable as any other medium. “It has gone from ‘the back bedroom’ to mainstream medium. “Celebrities are being held to account if they Tweet commercial interests. It works both ways,” he said. Challenge to media, page 4 Twitter Freedom of speech Privacy & the media Superinjunctions Internet Privacy Owen Bowcott Josh Halliday guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Anton Hammerl, the South African photographer who went missing in Libya last month along with three other journalists, was likely killed on April 5, his family announced on Facebook . Hammerl, 41, was shot by Moammar Gadhafi’s forces in an “extremely remote location” and could not survive his critical injuries without…
Continue reading …Nobody is going to receive the $25 million bounty attached to Osama bin Laden, government officials say. The raid that killed bin Laden was the result of electronic intelligence, not information provided by human informants, so the money offered under the Rewards for Justice program will go unclaimed, officials tell…
Continue reading …Tokyo Electric Power Co. President Masataka Shimizu said today he was stepping down in disgrace after reporting the biggest financial losses in company history. Shimizu, criticized for his low profile during the early days of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant disaster, said he was resigning to take “responsibility” but vowed…
Continue reading …
US and Israeli leaders at odds over 1967 reference, leaving Obama to discuss issue with Cameron in London Barack Obama and the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, have publicly admitted to rifts over a Middle East peace process after lengthy talks at the White House. Although both sides adopted a conciliatory tone, both also acknowledged that differences remain over approaches to a peace deal. Netanyahu, speaking afterwards, stressed that Obama’s public backing for a deal based on the border that existed before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war was a major point of difference. The Israeli leader said he was prepared to make concessions but the 1967 border was “indefensible”. The talks, originally scheduled to last 50 minutes, ran over by 90 minutes. The two tend to be polite and diplomatic in public while keeping their disagreements private. Obama described the discussion as useful. “We agreed there is a moment of opportunity that could be seized as a result of the Arab Spring,” he said. Netanyahu said Palestinian leaders would have to choose between a pact with Hamas or peace with Israel. The meeting in the Oval Office came the day after Obama became the first president to endorse explicitly and in public the Palestinian demand for a state based on the border before Israel’s occupation in 1967 of East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank. This would be the starting point for negotiating a possible series of land swaps. Netanyahu, who replied to that by saying the 1967 border would make Israel indefensible, told reporters travelling with him to the US on Thursday night that he felt strongly about this. “There are things that can’t be swept under the carpet,” he said. His aides elaborated, saying that Obama did not fully understand Israel’s security predicament. “There is a feeling that Washington does not understand the reality, Washington does not understand what we face,” an official said. Washington has become increasingly frustrated at the failure of the Israelis and Palestinians to enter into serious negotiations. The lack of progress prompted the resignation last week of the US special envoy George Mitchell , who had become so disenchanted that he had not visited the region since December. The New York Times reported White House aides saying that Obama had concluded a peace deal is not possible with Netanyahu in power. Obama could have a difficult time when he speaks on Sunday morning to about 6,000 people expected to attend the annual conference in Washington of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the powerful Jewish lobbying organisation. Officials, without naming the president, have urged participants to treat all speakers with respect. A White House national security spokesman, Ben Rhodes, said Obama would discuss the Israeli-Palestinian issue with David Cameron in London next week. He expected the two to discuss the point that the “foundation for successful negotiations should begin with territorial security to include the 1967 borders plus swaps as a basis on territory, and to include affirmation and assurances related to Israel’s security”. The White House had been debating whether to include the reference to 1967 in the speech, with some saying it was an inopportune moment given the upheaval in the Middle East, and suggesting waiting until later in the year. But those arguing to do it now prevailed. Netanyahu was only told shortly before Obama spoke. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton informed him. He attempted to have the reference removed, according to US officials, but the White House ignored him. The Quartet Group, made up of the UN, the European Union, Russia and the US, issued a statement backing Obama’s speech and calling on the Israelis and Palestinians “to overcome the current obstacles and resume direct negotiations and mutual agreement on all core issues”. In an interview with the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, to be broadcast on Sunday, Obama elaborates on the 1967 statement. “The basis for negotiations will involve looking at that 1967 border, recognising that conditions on the ground have changed and there are going to need to be swaps to accommodate the interests of both sides,” he said. “So, our argument is, let’s get started on a conversation about territory and about security. That doesn’t resolve all the issues. You still end up having the problem of Jerusalem and you still end up having the problem of refugees. “But if we make progress on what two states would look like, and a reality sets in among the parties that this is how it’s going to end up, then it becomes easy for both sides to make difficult concessions to resolve those two other issues.” Binyamin Netanyahu Obama administration United States US politics Israel Middle East Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …President Obama is taking some heat for his speech on Middle Eastern policy , particularly the section on Israel, in which he advocated a return to Israel’s pre-1967 borders . “President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus,” Mitt Romney declared in a statement. “He has disrespected Israel and undermined its ability…
Continue reading …