The Real Richard III


It's a question that actors from Laurence Olivier to Kevin Spacey have grappled with: What did Richard III, the villainous protagonist of Shakespeare's famous historical drama, really look and sound like?

In the wake of this week's announcement by the University of Leicester that archaeologists have discovered the 15th-century British king's lost skeleton beneath a parking lot, news continues to unfold that helps flesh out the real Richard III.

The Richard III Society unveiled a 3D reconstruction today of the late king's head and shoulders, based on computer analysis of his skull combined with an artist's interpretation of details from historical portraits. (Related: "Shakespeare's Coined Words Now Common Currency.")

"We received the skull data before DNA analysis confirmed that the remains were Richard III, and we treated it like a forensic case," said Caroline Wilkinson, the University of Dundee facial anthropologist who led the reconstruction project. "We were very pleasantly surprised by the results."

Though Shakespeare describes the king as an "elvish-marked, abortive, rooting hog," the reconstructed Richard has a pleasant, almost feminine face, with youthful skin and thoughtful eyes. His right shoulder is slightly higher than the left, a consequence of scoliosis, but the difference is barely visible, said Wilkinson.

"I think the whole Shakespearean view of him as being sort of monster-like was based more on his personality than his physical features," she reflected.

Look back at 125 years of National Geographic history

People are naturally fascinated by faces, especially of historical figures, said Wilkinson, who has also worked on reconstructions of J.S. Bach, the real Saint Nicholas, the poet Robert Burns, and Cleopatra's sister.

"We make judgments about people all the time from looking at their appearance," she said. "In Richard's case, up to now his image has been quite negative. This offers a new context for considering him from the point of view of his anatomical structure rather than his actions. He had quite an interesting face."

A Voice From the Past

Most people's impression of Richard's personality comes from Shakespeare's play, in which the maligned ruler utters such memorable lines as "Now is the winter of our discontent/Made glorious summer by this son of York," and "A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!"

But how would the real Richard III have expressed himself? Did he have an accent? Was there any sense of personality or passion in his choice of words?

To find out more about the mysterious monarch, Philip Shaw, a historical linguist at University of Leicester's School of English, analyzed the only two known examples of Richard III's own writing. Both are postscripts on letters otherwise composed by secretaries—one in 1469, before Richard became king, and one from 1483, the first year of his brief reign.

Shaw identified a quirk of spelling that suggests that Richard may have spent time in the West Midlands, or perhaps had a tutor who hailed from there.

"I was looking to compare the way he spells things with the way his secretaries spell things, working on the assumption that he would have been schooled to a fairly high level," Shaw explained.

Read about National Geographic explorers on our Explorers Journal blog

In the 1469 letter, Richard spells the word "will" as "wule," a variation associated with the West Midlands. But Shaw also notes that by 1483, when Richard wrote the second letter's postscript, he had changed his spelling to the more standard "wyll" (the letters 'i' and 'y' were largely interchangeable during that period of Middle English).

"That could suggest something about him brushing up over the years, or moving toward what would have been the educated standard," Shaw said, noting that the handwriting in the second example also appears a bit more polished. "One wonders what sort of practice and teaching he'd had in the interim."

Although it's hard to infer tone of voice from written letters, there is certainly emotion in the words penned by Richard III.

In the 1469 letter, the 17-year-old seeks a loan of 100 pounds from the king's undertreasurer. Although the request is clearly stated in the body of the letter, Richard adds an urgent P.S.: "I pray you that you fail me not now at this time in my great need, as you will that I show you my good lordship in that matter that you labour to me for."

That could either be a veiled threat (If you don't lend me the money, I won't do that thing you asked me to do) or friendly cajoling (Come on, I'm helping you out with something, so help me out with this loan).

"His decision to take the pen himself shows you how important that personal touch must have been in getting people to do something," Shaw said.

The second letter, written to King Richard's chancellor in 1483, also conveys a sense of urgency. He had just learned that the Duke of Buckingham—once a close ally—was leading a rebellion against him.

"He's asking for his Great Seal to be sent to him so that he can use it to give out orders to suppress the rebellion," Shaw said. "He calls the Duke 'the most untrue creature living. You get a sense of how personally let down and betrayed he feels."

Shaw said he hopes his analysis—in combination with the new facial reconstruction—will help humanize Richard III.

"He probably wasn't quite the villain that Shakespeare portrays, though I suspect he was quite ruthless," he said. "But you probably couldn't afford to be a very nice man if you wanted to survive as a king in those days."


Read More..

US Postal Service to End Saturday Mail Delivery





Feb 6, 2013 8:28am


Weekend mail delivery is about to come to an end.


The U.S. Postal Service will stop delivering mail on Saturdays, but will continue to deliver packages six days a week, the USPS announced at a news conference this morning.


While post offices that open on Saturdays will continue to do so, the initiative, which is expected to begin the week of August 5, will save an estimated $2 billion annually. The USPS had a $15.9 billion loss in financial year 2012.


“America’s mailing habits are changing and so are their shipping habits,” Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe said. “People will say this is a responsible decision. It makes common sense.”


The service reduction is the latest of Postal Service steps to cut costs as the independent agency of the U.S. government struggles with its finances.


To close its budget gap and reduce debt, it needs to generate $20 billion in cost reductions.


USPS officials have pushed for eliminating mail and package delivery on Saturdays for the past few years, but recent data showing growth in package delivery, which is up by 14 percent since 2010, and projected additional growth in the coming decade made them revise their decision to continue package delivery only.


Saturday mail delivery to P.O. boxes will also continue.


Research by the post office and major news organizations indicated that 7 out of 10 Americans support switching to five-day service.


Since 2006, the Postal Service has reduced annual costs by $15 billion, cut the career force by 28 percent and consolidated 200 mail-processing locations.


The USPS announced in May it was cutting back on the number of operating hours instead of shuttering 3,700 rural post offices. The move, which reduced hours of operation at 13,000 rural post offices from an eight-hour day to between two and six hours a day, was made with the aim of saving about $500 million per year.


The cutback in hours last year resulted in 9,000 full-time postal employees’ being reduced to part time plus the loss of their benefits, while another 4,000 full-time employees became part time but kept their benefits.


gty us postal service lpl 130206 wblog U.S. Postal Service to End Saturday Mail Delivery

                                              (Image Credit: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images)



SHOWS: Good Morning America







Read More..

Engineering light: Pull an image from nowhere


* Required fields






















Password must contain only letters and numbers, and be at least 8 characters






Read More..

BP profits slide on US oil spill fallout






LONDON: British energy giant BP on Tuesday said its net profits slumped by more than half last year on fines and asset sales linked to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster, ahead of a US trial later this month.

Earnings after tax tumbled 54 percent to $11.58 billion (8.6 billion euros) in 2012, compared with $25.7 billion in 2011, BP said in a results statement.

Adjusted net profit, stripping out fluctuations in the value of inventories, plunged by almost 50 percent to $11.99 billion.

The London-listed group took a pre-tax charge of $4.1 billion for the fourth quarter in relation to the Gulf of Mexico disaster, taking its total clean-up bill to $42.2 billion.

Profits were hit also by divestments, including the sale of BP's 50-percent stake in the troubled Russian joint venture TNK-BP to the main Russian oil producer Rosneft.

BP added it was still assessing the impact of the deadly attack at its joint venture in the In Amenas gas site in Algeria last month, but remained committed to the country.

The energy major also revealed it had reached its target to sell $38 billion of assets a year earlier than originally planned, as it sought to meet the bill for the oil spill costs.

However, the sell-offs pushed annual production lower. Output sank more than five percent to 2.319 million barrels of oil equivalent per day, excluding TNK-BP's output.

The results were issued one week after a US judge approved a $4.5-billion deal in which BP pleaded guilty to criminal charges from the 2010 oil spill.

The devastating blast on the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on April 20, 2010 killed 11 people and unleashed some 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Later this month, BP will face a mammoth trial consolidating scores of remaining lawsuits stemming from the worst environmental disaster to strike the United States.

It must also still resolve a civil case on environmental fines which could amount to as much as $18 billion if gross negligence is found. BP also remains on the hook for billions in economic damages, including the cost of environmental rehabilitation.

Despite plunging profits, chief executive Bob Dudley argued that the group was well positioned for long-term growth.

"We have moved past many milestones in 2012, repositioning BP through divestments and bringing on new projects. This lays a solid foundation for growth into the long-term," said Dudley in Tuesday's earnings release.

"Moving through 2013 we will deliver further operational milestones and remain on track for delivery of our ten-point strategic plan, including our target for operating cash flow growth, by 2014," he added.

BP shares rose 1.67 percent to stand at 469.75 pence in late trading on London's FTSE 100 index, which was up 0.71 percent to 6,291.47 points.

The company's results were meanwhile published three weeks after a fatal Islamist attack on the BP-operated In Amenas gas plant, in a hostage-taking siege that ended with the deaths of almost 40 captives, mostly foreigners.

"We are working with our partners to assess the impact of the incident and intend to resume activities when it is safe to do so," BP said on Tuesday.

"BP remains committed to operating in Algeria, where we have high-quality assets and have been present for over 60 years."

The In Amenas gas field is a joint venture between BP, Norwegian group Statoil and Algerian state-owned oil firm Sonatrach.

-AFP/ac



Read More..

5 consequences of Dell's $24.4 billion deal to go private



Will Dell PCs make a comeback?



(Credit:
Dell)


Dell's $24.4 billion deal to go private is a sign of the times. The PC market is collapsing, Microsoft is trying to save it, and the IPO isn't what it used to be.


The company is about to get a major transformation. Once the deal is completed (with a $2 billion loan from Microsoft as part of the financing), it will be owned by Silver Lake Partners and Dell founder Michael Dell. But what exactly does going private mean for the company? What impact will it have on the markets?


Here are a few potential consequences of the deal:


1. Dell be nimble, Dell be quick


Part of the reason Dell decided to go through the trouble of a leveraged buyout was that it would help it become a nimbler company. Without the public markets, analysts, and the Securities and Exchange Commission to answer to, Dell CEO Michael Dell can theoretically make quicker decisions that will let it respond to Apple and Google.


It remains to be seen whether Dell will actually become more nimble -- it is still a multibillion-dollar corporation, after all -- but if Dell didn't do anything drastic, it was never going to make a significant recovery.


There is another potential benefit to going private: Dell can now implement long-term strategies that may eat up short-term profits. Dell would be hammered on the public markets for declining profit margins, even if they were going to help long-term, but the company will face no such problem as a private entity.



Michael Dell

Michael Dell



(Credit:
Dell )


2. Microsoft's awkward relationship with OEMs becomes more awkward


One of the most interesting parts of the deal is that Microsoft chipped in a $2 billion loan to help get the deal done. In the past, Microsoft just offered the software (Windows) and the OEMs provided the hardware to go with it. Microsoft didn't play favorites or hold stakes in any of its partners.


Of course, that was thrown out the proverbial window (ha) when it created its own competing hardware -- the Surface
tablet. It resulted in strained relationships with HP, Dell, and many of its longtime partners, and I doubt the Dell deal will help, even if Microsoft promises total independence.


3. Can anyone stop the decay of the PC ecosystem?


Let's face it: the PC ecosystem is in free fall. Sales dropped by 6.4 percent from the fourth quarter of 2011 to the fourth quarter of 2012. Dell itself was down a mind-blowing 20.8 percent from the last holiday quarter. This isn't a new phenomenon -- PC growth has been declining since the iPad was released.


Dell's move would not have come if the foundations of the PC ecosystem weren't crumbling.
Windows 8 sales are lagging, despite what the people in Redmond would like you to believe. The move to privatize could give it leeway to try riskier strategies, such as adopting other operating systems (despite Microsoft's $2 billion loan).


I doubt this move will change the state of the PC ecosystem, though. Everyone sees the decline, and PC tablets probably won't be enough to stem it.


4. Michael Dell's legacy


Michael Dell is one of the most successful entrepreneurs of our generation. He created a multibillion dollar company from his garage and became a billionaire in the process. He strongly identifies with the company that bears his name. But his return to the helm after he stepped down as CEO in 2004 has not been smooth, and it certainly can't be compared to Steve Jobs' return to Apple.


Some speculate that Michael Dell is preparing to step down as CEO, but I don't see the evidence. Why step down when you have the greatest opportunity in your life to make an impact at the company you founded?


The company going private will define his legacy, and he knows it. If the privatization deal succeeds, he will be known as one of the great CEOs of our time. If he can't turn things around, he will be a footnote in the history books.

5. Is this the beginning of the end of the IPO?


In the past, the IPO was the culmination of an entrepreneur's hard work, building an empire from the ground up. But now, companies are finding ways to avoid the IPO and the regulatory nightmare that accompanies it.


It's well-known that Mark Zuckerberg never wanted to take Facebook public, but essentially had no choice. And who can blame him? Quarterly financial reports, stock market roller coasters, and hostile takeovers just aren't fun.


Dell's move to privatize just underscores how burdensome being a public company actually can be. And with recent SEC rule changes making it easier to stay private for longer, why go public?


Let's be clear: most companies will still go public, because the early investors expect it. But don't be surprised if that mindset changes over the next decade. We may have to rewrite all the rules of the IPO if this trend continues.


Read More..

Meow! Claws out on Facebook Over Killer Cat Stats


"Good for them, go cats!"

"Sorry cats but you've gotta go."

"Do you get paid to write this?"

Well, nobody ever said cat lovers were mellow. But I was taken by surprise to see the number (and intensity) of comments on National Geographic's Facebook page and Daily News website after I wrote a story about a new study on the hunting habits of the domestic cat.

To recap: Cats stand accused of killing between 1.4 billion to 3.7 billion birds and 6.9 billion to 20.7 billion mammals in the continental United States each year.

There were hundreds of comments. One reader is "sick to death of watching my neighbors cats killing migratory songbirds."

"I don't think there should be an all encompassing feline genocide," said another, "but i feel something definitely needs to be done about feral populations."

Others found the study results far from newsworthy: "Yes, all of my cats are killers. That is why I brought them home in the first place" and "I love you National Geographic, but seriously... of course my cat is gonna kill some birds."

The study has sparked strong dialogue among bird and cat groups as well.

In a press release the American Bird Conservancy called the study a "wake-up call" and said "the carnage that outdoor cats inflict is staggering and can no longer be ignored or dismissed."

Alley Cat Allies and Best Friends Animal Society both questioned the study's estimates and suggested the researchers had ulterior motives. Alley Cat Allies, which calls itself "the only national advocacy organization dedicated to the protection and humane treatment of cats," said the study was a "veiled promotion by bird advocates to ramp up the mass killing of outdoor cats." The vice-chairman of Best Friends Animal Society, a group with projects throughout the U.S., claimed "the authors and the anti-free-roaming cat contingent want stray and feral cats to be rounded up and killed." He added that "scapegoating cats is a huge and, sadly, lucrative business."

The Humane Society of the United States also weighed in, reiterating their support for the "thousands of organizations and individuals who manage cat colonies through trap-neuter-return (TNR) programs," while adding that there would be no support in those quarters for a campaign to euthanize cats.

But maybe this was never about cat people and bird people after all. "Me thinks the dog lovers came up with those figures," suggested one National Geographic reader.


Read More..

Boy Rescued in Ala. Standoff 'Laughing, Joking'













The 5-year-old boy held hostage in a nearly week-long standoff in Alabama is in good spirits and apparently unharmed after being reunited with his family at a hospital, according to his family and law enforcement officials.


The boy, identified only as Ethan, was rescued by the FBI Monday afternoon after they rushed the underground bunker where suspect Jimmy Lee Dykes, 65, was holding him. Dykes was killed in the raid and the boy was taken away from the bunker in an ambulance.


Ethan's thrilled relatives told "Good Morning America" today that he seemed "normal as a child could be" after what he went through and has been happily playing with his toy dinosaur.


"He's happy to be home," Ethan's great uncle Berlin Enfinger told "GMA." "He's very excited and he looks good."


Click here for a psychological look at what's next for Ethan.


"If I could, I would do cartwheels all the way down the road," Ethan's aunt Debra Cook said. "I was ecstatic. Everything just seemed like it was so much clearer. You know, we had all been walking around in a fog and everyone was just excited. There's no words to put how we felt and how relieved we were."


Cook said that Ethan has not yet told them anything about what happened in the bunker and they know very little about Dykes.


What the family does know is that they are overjoyed to have their "little buddy" back.










Ala. Hostage Standoff Over: Kidnapper Dead, Child Safe Watch Video









Alabama Hostage Standoff: Jimmy Lee Dykes Dead Watch Video





"He's a special child, 90 miles per hour all the time," Cook said. "[He's] a very, very loving child. When he walks in the room, he just lights it up."


Officials have remained tight-lipped about the raid, citing the ongoing investigation.


"I've been to the hospital," FBI Special Agent Steve Richardson told reporters Monday night. "I visited with Ethan. He is doing fine. He's laughing, joking, playing, eating, the things that you would expect a normal 5- to 6-year-old young man to do. He's very brave, he's very lucky, and the success story is that he's out safe and doing great."


Ethan is expected to be released from the hospital later today and head home where he will be greeted by birthday cards from his friends at school. Ethan will celebrate his 6th birthday Wednesday.


Officials were able to insert a high-tech camera into the 6-by-8-foot bunker to monitor Dykes' movements, and they became increasingly concerned that he might act out, a law enforcement source with direct knowledge told ABC News Monday. FBI special agents were positioned near the entrance of the bunker and used two explosions to gain entry at the door and neutralize Dykes.


Who Is Jimmy Lee Dykes?


"Within the past 24 hours, negotiations deteriorated and Mr. Dykes was observed holding a gun," the FBI's Richardson said. "At this point, the FBI agents, fearing the child was in imminent danger, entered the bunker and rescued the child."


Richardson said it "got tough to negotiate and communicate" with Dykes, but declined to give any specifics.


After the raid was complete, FBI bomb technicians checked the property for improvised explosive devices, the FBI said in a written statement Monday afternoon.


The FBI had created a mock bunker near the site and had been using it to train agents for different scenarios to get Ethan out, sources told ABC News.


Former FBI special agent and ABC News consultant Brad Garrett said rescue operators in this case had a delicate balance.


"You have to take into consideration if you're going to go in that room and go after Mr. Dykes, you have to be extremely careful because any sort of device you might use against him, could obviously harm Ethan because he's right there," he said.






Read More..

Lefty nonsense: When progressives wage war on reason






















Conservatives rightly get a bad rap for anti-science policies. But progressives can be just as bad, say Alex Berezow and Hank Campbell





















Editorial: "Challenge unscientific thinking, whatever its source"













IN 2007, fresh off an election victory in both chambers of Congress, the Democratic party set out to fulfil its campaign promise to make the US more sustainable - starting with the building they had just gained control of.












With their "Green the Capitol" initiative, the Democrats planned to make the building a model of sustainability and an example to us all. They replaced light bulbs and bathroom fixtures, but perhaps most significantly, they took the step of greening the congressional cafeteria. Cost was no object. Good thing, too.












The problem, as they saw it, was an excessive reliance on environmentally wasteful styrofoam containers and plastic utensils. And so they issued a decree: from now on, the cafeteria would use biodegradable containers and utensils.












They claimed science was on their side: the utensils could be composted, and would thus be better for the environment. The result was a miracle of sustainability, at least according to internal reports, which claimed to have kept 650 tonnes of waste out of landfill between 2007 and 2010.












The only problem was that the "green" replacements were worse for the environment. The spoons melted in soup, so people had to use more than one to get through lunch. The knives could barely cut butter without breaking. And instead of composting easily, they had to be processed in a special pulper and then driven to Maryland in giant trucks.












In 2010 an independent analysis found that the saving was equivalent to removing a single car from the road - at a cost of $475,000 per year. Wary of disappointing their environmentally concerned supporters, Democrats waited until the Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in 2011 - and then suggested that the programme be killed. Republicans duly instructed the cafeteria to revert to using utensils and containers that actually worked.












Deposed Democrat speaker Nancy Pelosi saw an opportunity, and took it: "GOP brings back Styrofoam & ends composting - House will send 535 more tons to landfills," she tweeted.












Did progressives call her to account? No, but they should have. According to the Democrats' own figures their programme only saved about 200 tonnes of waste per year. Where did Pelosi get 535 tonnes from?












This anecdote is both illuminating and chilling: if an environmental story is being told about people on the right of the political spectrum, anything goes. But if progressives play fast and loose with the facts, they are given a free ride.











Conservatives' sins against science - objections to stem cell research, denial of climate science, opposition to evolution and the rest - are widely reported and well known. But conservatives don't have a monopoly on unscientific policies. Progressives are just as bad, if not worse. Their ideology is riddled with anti-scientific feel-good fallacies designed to win hearts, not minds. Just like biodegradeable spoons, their policies often crumble in the face of reality and leave behind a big mess. Worse, anyone who questions them is condemned as anti-science.












We have all heard about the Republican war on science; we want to draw attention to the progressive war on reason.













We recognise that the term "progressive" is potentially troublesome, so let us lay our cards on the table. In the US, "progressive" and "liberal" are often used interchangeably. But the two should not be confused.












Liberalism, as defined by John Locke, means the pursuit of liberty. By that definition progressives are not liberal. Though they claim common cause with liberals (and most of them are Democrats because very few progressives are Republican), today's progressive movement is actually socially authoritarian.












Unlike conservative authoritarians, however, they are not concerned with banning "immoral" things like sex, drugs and rock and roll. They instead seek dominion over issues such as food, the environment and education. And they claim that their policies are based on science, even when they are not.











For example, progressive activists have championed the anti-vaccine movement, confusing parents and causing a public health disaster. They have campaigned against animal research even when it remains necessary, in some cases committing violence against scientists. Instead of embracing technological progress, such as genetically modified crops, progressives have spread fear and misinformation. They have waged war against academics who question their ideology, and they are opposed to sensible reforms in science education.













We do not want not to demonise all progressives. Some are genuinely pro-science. We recognise the huge value some progressive ideas have had, and that vilifying an entire philosophy based on the actions of its radical ideologues would be unfair.












But we do want to demonise the lunatic fringe. We contend that there is a disturbing and largely unreported trend among influential progressive activists who misinterpret, misrepresent and abuse science to advance their ideological and political agendas.












Of all of today's political philosophies, progressivism stands as the most pressing problem for science. Progressives, not conservatives, are the ones most likely to replace scientific research with unscientific ideology.


















Conservatives who endorse unscientific ideas are blasted by the scientific community, yet progressives who do the same get a free pass. It is important the problem be recognised, and that free pass revoked.












This article appeared in print under the headline "Science left out"




















Alex Berezow is editor of RealClearScience.com





Hank Campbell is founder of Science 2.0. Berezow and Campbell are authors of Science Left Behind: Feel-good fallacies and the rise of the anti-scientific left (PublicAffairs, 2012)



































If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

















































































All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.


If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.








Read More..

Israel preparing for post-Assad Syria chaos






JERUSALEM: Israel has implicitly confirmed it carried out an air strike in Syria, sparking a warning from Iran, but the Jewish state's next step in anticipation of a post-Bashar al-Assad era remains a mystery.

Defence Minister Ehud Barak told a defence conference in Munich on Sunday that an air raid last week that Syria said targeted a military complex near its capital was "another proof that when we say something we mean it."

He reiterated that Israel would not allow advanced weapon systems to fall into the hands of Lebanon's Shiite militant group Hezbollah, an ally of Damascus.

The minister stopped short of giving explicit confirmation of the air strike and there has still been no official comment from either the Israeli military or the government.

The New York Times, citing a senior US military official, reported Sunday that the air strike may have damaged Syria's main research centre on biological and chemical weapons.

Barak's comments came a day after US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta said Washington was increasingly concerned that "chaos" in Syria could allow Hezbollah to obtain sophisticated weapons from the Damascus regime.

"The chaos in Syria has obviously created an environment where the possibility of these weapons, you know, going across the border and falling into the hands of Hezbollah has become a greater concern," Panetta told AFP.

The Israeli raid on Wednesday targeted surface-to-air missiles and an adjacent military complex believed to house chemical agents, according to a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity. Syria has threatened to retaliate.

In a sign of increased border tensions, Israel has moved three of its Iron Dome missile defence batteries to its north, from where they can cover possible fire from Syria or Lebanon.

Iran's security chief Saeed Jalili, on a visit to Damascus on Monday, implicitly warned that Israel would be made to regret its actions.

"Just like it regretted all its wars... the Zionist entity will regret its aggression against Syria," said Jalili, who heads Iran's Supreme National Security Council.

"The Muslim world supports Syria," Jalili said. "Syria is at the forefront of the Muslim world's confrontation" with Israel.

Ephraim Halevy, a former head of Mossad, the Israeli foreign intelligence agency, wrote Monday in top-selling daily Yediot Aharonot that his country had no intention of becoming embroiled in Syria's internal turmoil.

"Israel is not involved in the Syrian civil war or in the Iranian warfare on Syrian soil," he wrote.

"From all standpoints, it would have preferred that this conflict had not broken out in the first place, and for Israel to continue to enjoy the absolute quiet along the armistice lines drawn between the two states following the (1973) Yom Kippur War."

"This is the reason that it has displayed restraint both in its actions and in its dearth of official statements," Halevy added.

The raid "shows how the new security situation in Israel is complex and complicated," military analyst Avi Issacharof wrote on the news site Walla. "This new year will be decisive for Israel, not only in the context of the Iranian nuclear programme."

Israeli leaders fear a possible transfer of Syrian chemical and biological weapons to Hezbollah, but also that a general destabilisation of the country could turn it into a preserve of radical Islamist groups.

"A number of ideologically radical groups affiliated with Al-Qaeda have infiltrated the governmental vacuum (in Syria) that contributes to the chaos," said Issacharof.

Israeli leaders, particularly Barak, have repeatedly predicted President Assad's imminent fall and the military is planning its response.

Israel plans to declare a buffer zone inside Syria border to prevent radical groups from getting too close to its territory when the embattled Damascus regime topples, security sources told AFP on Sunday.

- AFP/jc



Read More..

Privacy groups tell U.S. to stop lobbying EU on data law changes



A coalition of privacy groups has written to leading U.S. politicians to seek assurances that policymakers "advance the aim of privacy" in Europe, rather than hinder the development of new European data protection and privacy laws.


The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), and more than a dozen other groups are seeking to meet with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, and U.S. Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank, to ensure that new European data law proposals are bolstered and not weakened.


When made final, the European Union's Data Protection Regulation will govern the data and privacy laws of Europe's 27 member states.


In the letter (PDF) sent today, the 18 groups claim that U.S. and European citizens' privacy and personal data are "being abused by both the commercial sector and governments" and that the "line is increasingly blurred as personal data passes between both with few restrictions."


While European politicians continue to debate ever-amended drafts to the new EU Data Protection Regulation -- which seeks to replace an outdated 1995 directive -- U.S. policymakers are "mounting an unprecedented lobbying campaign to limit the protections that European law would provide," the letter states.


"The U.S. should not stand in the way of Europe's efforts to strengthen and modernize its legal framework," the letter states.


Administration 'working to protect' the lobby?
The new EU data protection and privacy law is meant to further protect the 500 million-plus European citizens' rights in an ever-globalizing world and borderless cloud.


A major concern is the extra-territorial effect of U.S. law on European citizens, notably with the FISA Amendments Act 2008 and sections of the Patriot Act for monitoring communications between Americans and foreigners.



One leading U.S. consumer protection and privacy organization warned that EU officials are being pressured by the U.S. to weaken the proposed privacy protections in the EC's draft data protection laws.


Center for Digital Democracy Executive Director Jeff Chester told ZDNet that despite the pro-privacy tone from President Obama, his administration is "working to protect the U.S. data lobby."


The privacy groups also noted that government access to communications data under the U.S. Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) "must be pursuant to a rigorous legal process."


The letter notes that updating ECPA -- in which authorities need only a subpoena approved by a federal prosecutor, rather than a judge, to obtain electronically stored messages six months old or older -- "would be a good start for the strengthening of U.S. law and policy" to bring the country in compliance with international human rights norms.


EU 'fed up' with U.S. lobbying
A year ago, EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding said the lobbying effort had been "absolutely fierce" and unprecedented in scale, according to The Telegraph.


On Sunday, the head of an influential pan-European industry group criticized "intensifying pressure from U.S. lobbyists on behalf of Google and Facebook," in order to suit the needs of Silicon Valley technology companies, according to the Financial Times of London.


Jacob Kohnstamm, chairman of the EU's Article 29 Working Party -- a group of data protection officials from each of the EU's member states -- said European lawmakers are "fed up" with U.S. lobbying.


In sharp words aimed at the Americans, he said: "You're not going to change your Fourth Amendment because of a business model in Europe, are you?"


The European Parliament is expected to vote on the draft regulation around the end of April, according to the EC.


Read more
of "Privacy groups call on U.S. government to stop lobbying against EU data law changes" at ZDNet.


Read More..