Upside Down News

Four U.S. Soldiers Die in Iraq; War Toll Is at 4,000

2008-03-24T02:45:00.000-07:00

By Aaron Sheldrick

March 24 (Bloomberg) -- Four U.S. soldiers were killed in a bomb attack in Baghdad, taking the American death toll in the Iraq War to at least 4,000, according to the independent icasualties.org group that tallies fatalities in the conflict.

The Multi-National Division - Baghdad soldiers were on patrol in the south of the capital yesterday when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb, the U.S. military said today in an e-mailed statement. More

Source: bloomberg.com

3 US Soldiers Killed Near Baghdad

2008-03-11T04:00:00.000-07:00

By BRADLEY BROOKS

BAGHDAD (AP) — The U.S. military said Tuesday that three soldiers were killed the day before by a roadside bomb north of Baghdad, bringing to eight the number of troops who died that day.
An interpreter was also killed Monday along with the three soldiers when they were hit by the bomb in eastern Diyala province, a military statement said. Another soldier was injured in the attack. No other details were provided.

In another attack Monday in Baghdad, five American soldiers on a foot patrol were killed when a suicide bomber detonated his explosives vest after approaching them, the military said.
The names of the soldiers killed were withheld pending notification of their families, military officials said.

The attack showed the insurgents' ability to strike in the heart of the heavily fortified capital, as well as in restive Diyala province.

The attacks marked the deadliest day for American forces in Iraq since Sept. 10, when eight soldiers died in two road accidents and two Marines were killed fighting insurgents in Anbar province.

In the Baghdad attack, four of the soldiers died at the scene, and the fifth died later from wounds, the military said. Three other American troops and an Iraqi interpreter were wounded in the attack.

Iraqi police said two civilians were also killed in the bombing — the deadliest single attack against the U.S. military since Jan. 28 when five soldiers were killed in a roadside bomb in the northern city of Mosul.

The suicide bomber hit the soldiers after they had left their Humvees and were chatting with shop owners, an Iraqi police officer who witnessed the attack said on condition of anonymity as he wasn't authorized to speak to the media.

As part of the military's counterinsurgency plans, U.S. bases are now inside neighborhoods and more U.S. soldiers are getting out of their armored vehicles to patrol Baghdad on foot.

While the face-to-face contact builds goodwill, it also gives suicide bombers, who often slip past security vehicle checkpoints by walking, better access to striking soldiers.

According to military figures, attacks in Baghdad are down 75 percent since June 2007, largely because of a boost in U.S. troops, a cease-fire by the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia and the role of former Sunni militants and tribal groups who have switched sides to join U.S. forces against al-Qaida in Iraq.

But some fear that violence in Baghdad and elsewhere will accelerate after the withdrawal of thousands of American troops.

The drawdown began last December with the departure of one brigade, numbering about 5,000 troops, dropping the overall U.S. troop level in Iraq to 158,000. More troops are set to leave by July, though it has yet to be decided whether further reductions will be made after that.

Monday's suicide bombing in Baghdad and the roadside bomb in Diyala were two of several deadly attacks across the country.

Earlier in the day, a female suicide bomber killed a U.S.-backed Sunni leader who formed a group to fight against al-Qaida insurgents in central Iraq after his guards ushered her into the home without searching her.

A rare suicide car bomb Monday evening in the northern Kurdish city of Sulaimaniyah outside a hotel killed at least two people and wounded more than a dozen, hospital officials said.
In another attack, police on Monday found the bullet-riddled body of Basra's only neurologist — kidnapped earlier by gunmen.

On Tuesday in the northern city of Mosul, four police officers were killed by gunmen at a checkpoint, a provincial police official said on condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the media.

Gunmen also opened fire on a car carrying the deputy head of Mosul University, another police officer said on condition of anonymity. The academic escaped unharmed.

Source: AP Associated Press

24 People Killed, 100 Hurt, in Lahore Suicide Bombs

2008-03-11T03:50:00.000-07:00

By Farhan Sharif and James Rupert

March 11 (Bloomberg) -- At least 24 people were killed and another 100 injured in twin bomb explosions in Pakistan's eastern city of Lahore, the government said.

``These were both suicide attacks by unknown people in cars loaded with explosives,'' Pervez Khusro, the interior secretary for Punjab province, said in a telephone interview from Lahore.
There were two bomb blasts within moments of each other, the government's emergency service said. The first explosion took place in the building of the Federal Investigation Agency, a government office, and the second blast occurred in a house in the residential area of Model Town.

It was the second attack in Lahore this month. At least four people, including two members of the navy, were killed in a twin suicide attack in the city on March 4. The number of people killed in terrorist attacks in Pakistan more than doubled to 2,116 last year, according to the interior ministry.

The Model Town neighborhood is home to former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Pakistan Peoples Party leader Asif Ali Zardari. The house where the explosion took place was owned by Ijaz Batalvi, Sharif's former lawyer. Batalvi's son ran an advertising company from the house.

Death Toll

``The death toll is expected to rise sharply,'' Hafiz Faisal, a spokesman for Edhi Foundation, the nation's biggest ambulance service, said on the telephone from Lahore. ``Some people died on the spot from the impact. We are still trying to recover bodies from the debris.''

The first explosion, which killed 18 people, took place when a car full of explosives hit the gates of the building, the emergency service said. The second bomb, which killed four others, exploded on a motorbike.

``Most of the injured are very badly hurt because of the impact of the bomb blast,'' Fiyaz Ahmed Ranjha, medical superintendent at Mayo Hospital in Lahore, said by telephone. ``The death toll could rise further.''

Cars were set ablaze and windows of nearby buildings were shattered by today's blasts, GEO television reported. The building of the Federal Investigation Agency could collapse at any time after the blast, Dawn News reported, citing police.

The country has been placed on ``high alert'' to guard against further attacks, Interior Ministry Spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema told reporters in Islamabad today.

To contact the reporter on this story: Farhan Sharif, in Karachi, Pakistan at fsharif2@bloomberg.net

Source: Bloomberg.com

Scandal Puts Spitzer's Career in Danger

2008-03-11T03:35:00.000-07:00

By AMY WESTFELDT

NEW YORK (AP) — Gov. Elliot Spitzer's prostitution scandal came just over a year since he stormed into the governor's office, vowing to root out corruption in New York government.
But his first year in office was pockmarked by tumult, and the latest scandal raised questions about whether he can make it through a second year.

The first-term Democrat was caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet a prostitute from a call-girl business, according to a law enforcement official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the investigation is still going on.

Spitzer allegedly paid for the call girl to take a train from New York to Washington — a move that opened the transaction up to federal prosecution because she crossed state lines.

The governor has not been charged, and prosecutors would not comment on the case Monday. A spokesman for Spitzer said the governor has retained a large Manhattan law firm.

At a Manhattan news conference, a glassy-eyed Spitzer, his shellshocked wife Silda at his side, apologized to his family and the people of New York.

"I have acted in a way that violates my obligations to my family and violates my — or any — sense of right and wrong," he said. "I apologize to the public, whom I promised better."
He did not say what he was apologizing for and ignored reporters' shouted questions about whether he would resign — 14 months after he boldly proclaimed at the start of his term, "Day One, Everything Changes."

Spitzer, the 48-year-old father of three teenage girls, retreated from his Manhattan offices to his Upper East Side home. Republicans immediately called for him to quit.

"He has to step down. No one will stand with him," said Rep. Peter King, a Republican from Long Island. "I never try to take advantage or gloat over a personal tragedy. However, this is different. This is a guy who is so self-righteous, and so unforgiving."

Attention turned to the state's lieutenant governor, David Paterson, who automatically becomes governor if Spitzer quits. There was no immediate comment from Paterson, who would become New York's first black governor.

Spitzer seized the governor's office with a historic margin of victory on Jan. 1, 2007, vowing to stamp out corruption in New York government in the same way that he took on Wall Street executives with a vengeance while state attorney general.

In his previous position, Spitzer uncovered crooked practices and self-dealing in the stock brokerage and insurance industries and in corporate board rooms; he went after former New York Stock Exchange chairman Richard Grasso over his $187.5 million compensation package.
Spitzer become known as the "Sheriff of Wall Street." Time magazine named him "Crusader of the Year," and the tabloids proclaimed him "Eliot Ness." The square-jawed graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law was sometimes mentioned as a potential candidate for president.

But he apparently became embroiled last year in a financial probe by the Internal Revenue Service into a high-end prostitution ring. The investigation into the Emperors Club VIP gathered more than 5,000 telephone calls and text messages, and more than 6,000 e-mails, along with bank records, travel and hotel records and surveillance.

It was unclear whether Spitzer was a target from the start or whether agents came across his name by accident while amassing evidence.

In an affidavit filed in Manhattan federal court last week, Spitzer appeared as "Client 9," according to the law enforcement official. Client 9 personally made several cell phone calls to Emperors Club VIP to arrange a Feb. 13 tryst at a Washington hotel, the official said.

Client 9 wanted a high-priced prostitute named Kristen to come to Washington on a 5:39 p.m. train from Manhattan. The door to the hotel room would be left ajar. Train tickets, cab fare, room service, and the minibar were all on him.

"Yup, same as in the past. No question about it," the caller told Kristen's boss, when asked if he would make his payment to the same business as usual, a federal affidavit said. The client paid $4,300 to Kristen, touted by the escort service as a "petite, pretty brunette," according to court papers.

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, noted that prostitution customers are often not charged, and said charges against Spitzer might be unlikely.

"Especially if he resigns, he may just be left alone. It may be that the public is satisfied by his resignation as governor," Tobias said.

Spitzer's term as governor has been fraught with problems, including an unpopular plan to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and a plot by his aides to smear his main Republican nemesis.

It would not be the first time that a high-profile politician became ensnared in a prostitution scandal. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana acknowledged in July that his Washington phone number was among those called several years ago by an escort service.

Scandals also recently derailed neighboring Connecticut Gov. John Rowland and New Jersey's Jim McGreevey. And Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct after being arrested last June in a Minneapolis airport restroom.

Spitzer's cases as attorney general included a few criminal prosecutions of prostitution rings and tourism involving prostitutes. In 2004, he took part in an investigation of an escort service in New York City that resulted in the arrest of 18 people on charges of promoting prostitution and related charges.

Associated Press Writers Larry Neumeister in New York, Michael Gormley in Albany and Devlin Barrett in Washington contributed to this report.

Source: AP Associated news

Gay-marriage foes face tough questions from California high court

2008-03-04T18:02:00.000-08:00

By Mike Swift and Howard MintzMercury News

The California Supreme Court heard three hours of legal arguments today over a constitutional challenge to the state's ban on same-sex marriage. Here's the latest update from the courthouse.

12:45 p.m.: Justices probe opponents' tradition, purpose-of-marriage arguments

A group of lawyers arguing to continue the current system received some tough questioning from the justices, particularly Moreno, George and Kennard.

Christopher E. Krueger, of the state attorney general's office, argued that the state has a rational basis to reserve marriage for heterosexual couples, in part because it has an interest in preserving that traditional definition.

"This is a definition of marriage that has proven durable for the state," Krueger told the justices. "It's not just any line that was drawn here."

Krueger's argument, however, immediately ran into pointed questioning from Justice Joyce Kennard, who wanted to know why earlier "traditional definitions of marriage that prohibited people of different races from marrying, or defined a wife as the property of her husband" shouldn't similarly be allowed to stand, simply because they were traditional.

Krueger countered that California's law prohibiting interracial marriage, struck down by the California Supreme Court in 1946, "was specifically only for the invidious purpose of racial discrimination. Here, yes it is a distinction that same-sex couples aren't allowed to marry under our laws, but that is not the same kind of exclusional statute."

In making that statement, Krueger sparked questions from the justices about whether California's prohibition of gay marriage was a version of the "separate but equal" segregated public schools struck down by U.S. Supreme Court's Brown vs. Board of Education decision.

Referring to the difference between domestic partnership and marriage, Justice Moreno asked Krueger, if he was "saying that separate is equal here?"

"There are parallel institutions," Krueger began.

"But that separate is equal?" Moreno persisted.

"Here there is equality."

"And what distinguishes this," from laws that prohibited interracial marriage "is that there's no animus against gays and lesbians?"

"There's no animus."

"That that didn't motivate the creation of the law?" Moreno asked, doubt in his voice.

"It's not just that there's a lack of animus," Krueger said, arguing that the original conception of marriage couldn't have included hatred of homosexuals because no one could foresee such a thing as gay marriage so far in the past.

"Intimate relations between same-sex couples have been around for centuries, if not for thousands of years, is that correct? Does anybody dispute that?" Moreno said.

"It's pretty plain that when the marriage laws were created, when they were taken into our culture . . . they knew what marriage was," Krueger said.

Glen Lavy, a lawyer representing the Proposition 22 Legal Defense Fund, told the justices that they did not have the authority to define marriage outside of the legislative process.

"At most this Court could say the marriage laws are unconstitutional," Lavy told the justices. "I don't think this court has the constitutional authority to rewrite the laws."

Another lawyer arguing against same-sex marriage, Mathew D. Staver of the Campaign for California Families said the state has a compelling interest in protecting heterosexual marriage - the procreation of children.

Same-sex marriage "would undermine opposite-sex marriage . . . it would lose its meaning. . . . it would create a new system that is no longer recognizable as marriage," Staver said.

But when Staver said that children do best when raised by their biological parents, he drew an immediate rejoinder from Chief Justice George.

"Do you mean adoptive parents are not as adept at raising their children?" a visibly dubious George asked.

10:20 a.m.: Justices begin questioning attorneys right from the start:

Therese Stewart, San Francisco's chief deputy city attorney, was the first lawyer to present her arguments in the case, but the justices jumped in with questions less than a minute after she began speaking.

Stewart argued that domestic partnership and marriage are not exact legal equivalents, and that there is no constitutional justification to exclude lesbians and gay men from exactly sharing those rights.

But almost immediately, Stewart faced pointed questioning from Chief Justice Ronald M. George and all six other justices. The justices conceded the point that society's view of marriage is evolving. But Justice Carol Corrigan, referring to the state's vote in Proposition 22 in 2000, that limited marriage to a man and a woman, questioned why the Supreme Court should overrule the people's decision.

"Who decides where we are as California in this evolution of our understanding - of marriage? Is it for this Court to decide, or is it for the people of California to decide?"

Stewart answered that is the Supreme Court's responsibility to critically judge the Constitutionality of laws - whether they are passed by the Legislature or by initiative.

"The Court doesn't leave decisions like that to the political process," Stewart answered.

"We have raised the issue today," Stewart told the justices, responding to questions from Justices Marvin Baxter and Kathryn Werdegar about why the Court should be compelled to consider the moving forward that evolution of the legal definition of marriage now.

"The state has to look at the standards of equality that exist in contemporary society."

One line of questioning the justices followed was to ask if by enacting domestic partnership, and bestowing virtually all the rights and responsibilities of marriage on same-sex partnerships, had the state opened itself to the possibility that there is no legal reason not to bestow the exact same rights on gay couples.

Stewart argued, and the justices appeared inclined to agree, that marriage was more than "a bundle of rights," but a status and identity bestowed by society.

"Hasn't this boiled down to the use of the 'M word' - marriage?" asked Justice Carlos Moreno.
"Words matter; names matter," Stewart said.

As the Justices continued their questioning of the next lawyer arguing for the plaintiffs, Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, they grappled with some of the most basic questions about sexuality and marriage:

Is sexual orientation an immutable characteristic, like race or gender? Is sexual orientation a form of gender discrimination, or are these two concepts different? Have gay people always had the abstract right to marry, but were those rights simply not recognized by the institutions of government? And what is marriage, anyway?

8:55 a.m.: Crowd of supporters and opponents gathers
Vocal advocates on both sides of the gay marriage issue had already claimed the curb outside the California Supreme Court building more than an hour before arguments began, with signs like "Re-Criminalize Sodomy" dueling with "Stop Using Jesus to Promote Hatred."

Media attention was strong, with the Supreme Court getting credential requests from more than 30 media outlets, including CNN and U.S. News and World Report.

Victor Choban, who drove from Sacramento to protest against the possibility of legalizing marriage for same-sex couples, noted that Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans just two days before the city was to hold a gay pride parade.

"I believe the Bible, that God condemns homosexuality," Choban said. "This nation is going down morally and God's judgment is very close."

In New Orleans, "God swept the streets clean," Choban said. "We're here to warn the people of San Francisco."

At the entrance to the Supreme Court building, gay marriage protester Luke Otterstad of Placerville debated what Thomas Jefferson's position on same-sex couples with Kerry Coles of San Franciso, who held up a sign saying, "Your religion is not my government."

"I'm out here so there isn't just a one-sided argument," Coles said. "It's not just about being a gay man, it's about equality, and having the same rights as any other citizen in the United States."

6 a.m.: Lawyers, advocates, opponents ready for gay marriage hearing
In a long-awaited showdown, the seven justices of the state's high court will review a divided 2006 state appeals court ruling that upheld California laws restricting marriage to a union between a man and a woman.

During today's hearing in San Francisco, the Supreme Court will hear from civil rights lawyers for gay couples who argue that the same-sex marriage ban violates their equal protection rights because they do not get the same treatment as heterosexual couples. The San Francisco city attorney's office, led by chief deputy city attorney Therese Stewart, will also argue in favor of gay marriage.

Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger will lead the state's defense of the current law, arguing that gay couples already essentially enjoy equal treatment because of California's strong domestic partners law.

In addition, conservative organizations opposed to same-sex marriage will argue that traditional marriage would be undermined if California permits gay couples to wed. Lawyers for those groups, led by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, insist that marriage is meant to foster procreation and therefore must be limited to heterosexual couples.

The justices have 90 days from today's arguments to rule in the case, and they typically take most or all of that time when addressing hot-button issues.

Source: MercuryNews.com

Lies, Damned Lies and Memoirs

2008-03-04T17:55:00.000-08:00

by Patt Morrison

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on … who? The author, and who else? Publishers? Readers?
Margaret Jones, white/native American foster child growing up with black family amid gangbangers in South LA, pens acclaimed memoir. Now she’s outed as a fake – not just any fake, but Margaret Seltzer, a privately schooled white girl from Sherman Oaks, who, as ``Jones,’’ even gave broadcast interviews about her book in tough-girl cadences.
Been there, done that, homegirl. Twenty-five years ago, East LA homeboy Danny Santiago wrote his own story, a novel called ``Famous All Over Town,’’ about his get-down life running with the wild boys. It was a very good book. It won awards; it was part of a song lyric; it was required reading in schools, literature from a real East LA life.
And it too, was fake. Danny Santiago was Daniel James, a once-blacklisted screenwriter who had worked on the Chaplin tour de force, ``The Great Dictator.’’ He had also done social work in the 1950s and ‘60s among Latinos, which is how he knew something of what he wrote. Margaret Seltzer says she did her research by listening to friends’ stories, and tapping out her book sitting among Black Panthers and just regular kids at a Starbucks in South LA.
Both authors were outed – Seltzer, after the glowing reviews for ``Love and Consequences’’ started coming out but before her book tour was to begin this week, but James, not for a long while, not until the novel had won awards and been acclaimed as an authentic new Latino voice.
We expect actors to make us think he is someone or something else. We don’t mind when female novelists write feelingly about male characters, and vice versa. Old writers create touching young characters, and sometimes vice versa. But we know the author’s age, and gender, and that it’s a novel we’re reading.
Only the memoir that sets itself and us up for hopes and disappointment. Would ‘’Love and Consequences’’ have been published and praised if it had been called a novel? Especially one written by a privileged white woman? Does our hunger for ‘’true stories’’ feed this phony memoir machine?
The judges who gave ‘’Famous’’ a literary prize were to have considered only literary merit, but supposedly admitted that if they’d known the author was an old white guy and not a young Latino, they might have had second thoughts.
What’s the difference? And why does it matter to us?
You tell me.

Source: OPINION L.A

Dannielynn Named Anna Nicole's Sole Heir

2008-03-04T17:51:00.000-08:00

By Natalie Finn

Dannielynn Hope Marshall Birkhead has been handed the keys to the castle.

Larry Birkhead's 18-month-old daughter with Anna Nicole Smith was declared the sole beneficiary to the late model's estate Tuesday, after a Los Angeles judge approved Howard K. Stern's petition to clarify his departed paramour's earthly intentions.

"We and Mr. Stern always believed that Anna Nicole never intended to disinherit her daughter," Stern's attorney, Bruce S. Ross, said after court Tuesday. "I'm pleased to say this chapter in the saga is closed."

L.A. Superior Court Judge Mitchell Beckloff's ruling also establishes a trust on Dannielynn's behalf, with her father and Stern serving as cotrustees.
(View the documents.)

The once litigious pair were not present in court, but Ross said that neither had any particular disagreement as far as Dannielynn's financial future was concerned. DNA confirmed that Birkhead is Dannielynn's biological father about two months after Smith's death.

Smith's assets at the time of her passing were estimated at $710,000, but Tuesday's ruling leaves Dannielynn poised to inherit millions if the decade-plus legal battle between Smith (and now Smith's estate) and the family of her late husband, billionaire oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II, turns in her favor.

Marshall, who was 90 and had been married to Smith for 14 months when he died in 1995, left most of his fortune to his widow, a decision his family has been raging against ever since.
Stern filed papers Oct. 18 seeking to having Dannielynn singled out as Smith's heir, presuming the former Playboy Playmate would have certainly provided for her daughter had she drawn up a more recent will.

Smith died Feb. 8, 2007, of an accidental prescription drug overdose in Hollywood, Florida. She was 39.

The will filed in probate court was made out in 2001 and named Smith's son, Daniel, who died several days after Dannielynn's birth in September 2006, as the sole heir. The document also said, however, that the assets in Daniel's trust should be divided equally among any siblings if Smith had other children.

"As a matter of law, Dannielynn is a pretermitted heir," Stern's petition stated, meaning she was an accidental omission, or someone who likely would have been named in the will except for the fact that the person drawing up the will didn't know her at the time.

An ongoing inquest into Daniel's death is scheduled to resume Mar. 17 in the Bahamas. Birkhead and Stern are expected to be called to testify about his close relationship with his mother and the days leading up to the 20-year-old's death, also of an accidental Rx overdose.

Source: E News

Clashes erupt as IDF vehicles enter south Gaza

2008-03-04T17:35:00.000-08:00

By Yuval Azoulay, Mijal Grinberg and Avi Issacharoff

Some 25 Israel Defense Forces armored vehicles advanced into southern Gaza after nightfall yesterday, and troops clashed with militants, Palestinian witnesses said, just a day after the IDF ended its offensive in northern Gaza against Palestinian rocket squads.

The Palestinians said the armored column entered Gaza through the Kissufim crossing. Israeli defense officials said it was a pinpoint operation targeting Gaza militants. Helicopters circled overhead near the southern Gaza city of Khan Yunis as IDF soldiers surrounded the home of a militant. The Hamas-allied Islamic Jihad movement said the man was a leader of its armed wing.

IDF tanks reportedly fired shells while the fighter helicopters fired missiles. A one-month-old baby girl was killed by a ricocheting bullet, Gazan medical officials said. Also, six militants and three civilians were wounded, none of then seriously, the officials said.

An IDF spokeswoman confirmed there was a military operation under way in Gaza and that a senior figure in Islamic Jihad, Yusuf Samiri, had been killed.

Earlier yesterday, two Palestinian militants were killed in two separate IAF strikes on the Gaza Strip, shortly after a Qassam rocket scored a direct hit on a house in the western Negev town of Sderot.

The IDF said the strikes, which were carried out north of Jabalya and east of Gaza City, targeted militants who were engaged in firing Qassam rockets at Israel.

One of the militants was identified as Ayman Cahouji, a member of Hamas.

No injuries were reported in the rocket attack on Sderot, but the building, which was empty at the time, sustained severe damage.

Meanwhile, Israel allowed dozens of trucks carrying food and medical supply to enter the Strip yesterday through Kerem Shalom Crossing.

Three truckloads were donated by the Jordanian government, and another two were ordered by the Palestinian health minister from the Teva pharmaceutical conglomerate.

Siren replaces Color Red in Ashkelon

A wailing siren will now be heard in Ashkelon every time a rocket is fired at the southern city from the Gaza Strip, instead of the Color Red alert system previously installed to warn against imminent strikes.

Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai yesterday decided to replace the existing system after receiving several complaints from Ashkelon residents who said they did not hear the Color Red alert prior to rocket strikes on the city.

Also yesterday, censorship was lifted on the fact that a Katyusha rocket fired in recent days from the Gaza Strip struck near the home of Public Security Minister Avi Dichter in Ashkelon.

Source:HAARETZ.com

Cold Remedy Airborne Settles Lawsuit

2008-03-04T17:29:00.000-08:00

Maker of Airborne Will Pay Refunds for Product That Was Marketed as a Cold Preventive

By Kathleen Doheny
WebMD Medical News

Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

March 4, 2008 -- If you bought Airborne, the popular herbal and vitamin formula originally touted as a cold preventive, you're due for a refund.

The makers of Airborne have agreed to refund money to consumers as part of a $23.3 million settlement of a class-action lawsuit for false advertising. It does not admit wrongdoing or illegal conduct.

Products included are the Airborne Effervescent Health Formula, Airborne On-the-Go, Airborne Power Pixies, Airborne Nighttime, Airborne Jr., Airborne Gummi, and Airborne Seasonal (formerly sold as Airborne Seasonal Relief).

Airborne: The Road to the Lawsuit
Initially, Airborne ads touted its line of products as a way to prevent and treat colds; Airborne later toned down those claims and now calls the formulas immune boosters.

In February 2006, a report on national television questioned the validity of a clinical trial touted by Airborne as a study that offered proof that its products work. Soon after, the false advertising lawsuit was filed in 2006 by California law firms representing a consumer who protested that the formula did not work as advertised.

"One of their more outrageous claims is that you take it before entering a germy environment and you're instantly protected," David Schardt, senior nutritionist for the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), tells WebMD.

The CSPI, a nonprofit consumer watchdog group, joined the lawsuit in late 2006 when asked to do so by the California law firms representing the plaintiff. "It's just a mixture of vitamins, herbs, and minerals," Schardt says. "There is nothing particularly special about this mixture." The company is also under scrutiny by about 24 state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), according to The CSPI, although the FTC won't confirm an investigation.
A spokesperson for Airborne, who declined to be quoted by name, says, "Airborne is an immune booster. We are pleased to have reached this settlement." The company refers the media and consumers to the settlement web site, airbornehealthsettlement.com, for more information.
Airborne products were created by Victoria Knight McDowell, a former second-grade teacher whose motivation to find the formula was triggered by her exposure to germy students, according to the company web site.

The product line includes several formulas, but the basic formula includes vitamins A, C, and E and magnesium, zinc, selenium, herbs, and other ingredients. It is called Airborne because it is meant to combat airborne viruses and germs, according to the company web site.

Watchdog Group Investigates
In 2007, the CSPI, which regularly looks at dietary supplements to determine their effects, evaluated Airborne as part of an investigation on cold remedies "and found little or no evidence that the product works," Schardt tells WebMD.

According to Schardt, there is ''no credible evidence" that the Airborne formula can prevent colds or protect people from germy environments.

1 2
Next Page >

Source:WEBMD

Exit Polls: Voters Seek 'Change' in Wisconsin

2008-02-19T17:14:00.000-08:00

ANALYSIS by GARY LANGER

Preliminary exit poll results in the Wisconsin primaries underscore both differences and similarities between the two parties in the state.

Around nine in 10 voters, in both the Democratic and Republican contests, are white. But a substantial majority of Democratic voters are women, more than usual for a Wisconsin Democratic primary, while on the Republican side a substantial majority are men, considerably more than in most GOP primaries this year. (It'll take updated data to see if that comes out as a high for the cycle.)

In the Democratic race, nearly half the voters are liberals -- up from 2004.
Among Republican voters, six in 10 are conservatives. Both are in the mid-range for primaries this year.

The preliminary results also indicate that more seniors than usual are voting in the Democratic race -- up from their 2004 level, and also potentially a high for Democratic voters this cycle, though again it'll take final data later tonight to see that holds.

As in previous contests, the top issue for Democrats and Republicans alike is the economy -- around four in 10 call it the most important issue facing the country. (It's been considerably higher for Democrats in some other states.)

On candidate attributes, again as in the past, someone who can "bring about needed change" is tops by far for Democrats; among Republicans, as in previous primaries, it's someone who "shares my values."

Just over a third of GOP voters in these preliminary results identify themselves as evangelical Christians, about the norm for a non-Southern state this year.

Turnout by independents in the Republican race looks to be down from the last primary for which we have comparable data, in 1996.

In the Democratic contest, about four in 10 voters have college degrees -- another important factor in voting decisions this year. That's a bit under the norm in primaries so far.

In one further similarity, about one in 10 Democratic and Republican voters alike say they made their final decision today. At the other end of the spectrum, a third of Republicans, and nearly half of Democrats, say they decided more than a month ago.

Source: ABC news

Former Teacher Sentenced in Sex Case

2008-02-19T17:00:00.000-08:00

By KATRINA A. GOGGINS

LAURENS, S.C. - A former middle school teacher was sent to prison for six years Tuesday for having sexual encounters with five teenage boys. Authorities said Allenna Ward, 24, met 14- and 15-year-old boys at the school where she taught as well as at a motel, a park and behind a restaurant.

"I apologize from the depths of my heart," Ward said in court.

Police began investigating last year after school officials found a note believed to have been written by Ward to one of the boys. Some of the victims were students at Bell Street Middle School in Clinton, where Ward taught. She was fired about a year ago.

Ward pleaded guilty in September to three counts of second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor and three lewd acts on a minor.

Forensic psychiatrist Donna Schwartz-Watts said Ward is not a pedophile, but rather a childlike victim suffering from personality disorders and a repressed childhood. Schwartz-Watts said the minister's daughter lived a sheltered life but really was a "free spirit" who never got a chance to break away from her family.

Prosecutors painted Ward's crimes in a harsher light and said she violated the trust that parents place in teachers.

Some of the victims' families attended the sentencing but did not speak during the court hearing."I just feel like justice has been served," the sister of one victim said after the hearing.

"We're just glad that it's all over."The Associated Press does not normally identify victims of sexual crimes.

Ward's lawyer Donald Hocker cited the psychiatric testimony in asking for home imprisonment for his client. Hocker said Ward will be vulnerable to physical and emotional abuse at the hands of other prisoners.

"It's an awful case with awful consequences, but Allenna Ward is not an awful woman," Hocker said in court. He declined to speak to a reporter after the hearing.

Ward was sentenced to 15 years in prison for each lewd act count, but the punishments were suspended to six years. She also was sentenced to six years on each second-degree criminal sexual conduct count. The sentences are to run concurrently.

A service of the Associated Press(AP)

Source: Trib.com

Australia PM said most popular for 20 years

2008-02-18T17:55:00.000-08:00

by Michael Perry and Sanjeev Miglani

CANBERRA (Reuters) - Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is the country's most popular leader in two decades after apologising to Aborigines for past injustices and ratifying the Kyoto climate pact, a poll showed on Tuesday.

Labor's Rudd, who ended 11 years of conservative government rule last November, was preferred leader for 70 percent of voters, said a Newspoll in the Australian newspaper.

The reading was the highest since the survey was first published in 1987 and also showed 69 percent of voters supported Rudd's apology to Aborigines for past injustices, a move which overturned the previous conservative government's opposition to saying sorry to the disadvantaged indigenous population.

Conservative opponents said the result reflected saturation coverage of Wednesday's apology, which was watched by Australians on huge outdoor television screens in cities across the country.

"Newly elected governments go through this sort of honeymoon and with the apology, the prime minister has received enormous publicity," opposition spokesman Nick Minchin told local radio.

Opponents say Rudd has been making "grand gestures" like the apology and December's decision to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, again overturning the previous government policy, to maintain momentum in the wake of his crushing election win.

But the conservatives remain in disarray after the exit from politics of former prime minister John Howard, who lost his seat in the landslide to Rudd after almost 12 years in power.

A television programme screened on Monday had senior members of the former government telling how they secretly pressured Howard to retire from mid-2006 to rejuvenate the party.

The Newspoll showed support for new opposition leader Brendan Nelson was at just 9 percent. Nelson's poor reading will add to divisions over the conservative leadership, with lawmakers split between the former doctor and Australia's richest MP, former investment banker Malcolm Turnbull, who narrowly lost to Nelson.

Source: REUTERS

Musharraf allies headed for defeat

2008-02-18T16:48:00.000-08:00

By Zeeshan Haider

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - The main party that backs Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was headed for defeat on Tuesday after voters rallied to the opposition, raising questions about the future of the U.S. ally who has ruled since 1999.
As president, former army chief Musharraf did not contest Monday's parliamentary elections aimed at completing a transition to civilian rule, but the outcome could seal his fate.
A hostile parliament could try to remove Musharraf, who took power as a general in a 1999 coup and emerged as a crucial U.S. ally in a "war on terror" that most Pakistanis think is Washington's, not theirs.
The election was relatively peaceful after a bloody campaign and opposition fears of rampant rigging by Musharraf's supporters appeared unfounded.
The election was postponed from January 8 after the assassination of former prime minister and opposition leader Benazir Bhutto in a suicide attack on December 27.
The death of Bhutto, the most progressive, Western-friendly politician in a Muslim nation rife with anti-American sentiment, raised concern about the stability of the nuclear-armed country.
Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) has been expected to reap a sympathy vote after her murder but some analysts said the decisive factor in the election was Musharraf.
In a major blow for the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) which backs Musharraf, its president, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, a former prime minister, was defeated in his Punjab province constituency by a rival from Bhutto's party, television networks said, citing unofficial Election Commission tallies. Continued...

Source: REUTERS

Fayed says UK royals wanted to "get rid of" Diana

2008-02-18T16:40:00.000-08:00

By Paul Majendie

LONDON (Reuters) - Luxury storeowner Mohamed al-Fayed said on Monday the death of Princess Diana and his son Dodi in a 1997 Paris car crash was murder and accused the British royal family of wanting to "get rid" of Diana.

In an emotional appearance at the inquest into their deaths, al-Fayed accused Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth's husband and Diana's former father-in-law, of being a "Nazi" and a "racist."
"You want to know his original name -- it ends with Frankenstein," al-Fayed told the court.
He said Diana, divorced from heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, had "suffered for 20 years from this Dracula family".

After waiting more than a decade for his day in court, al-Fayed came close to tears, shaking his head and taking a tissue out of his pocket as his voice cracked.

But then later the Egyptian-born tycoon, who alleges that the British security services murdered Diana on Prince Philip's orders, turned angrily on one of the lawyers, accusing him of talking "out of your backside".

French and British police investigations have both concluded their deaths were tragic accidents caused by a speeding driver who was found to have been drunk. Both inquiries rejected al-Fayed's conspiracy theories.

Al-Fayed said of Diana's former husband, Prince Charles: "He participated and I'm sure he knew what was going to happen."

Source: REUTERS

Pakistani troops fan out ahead of polls

2008-02-12T03:52:00.000-08:00

By MUNIR AHMAD, Associated Press Writer

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Tens of thousands of troops fanned out across Pakistan on Tuesday to bolster security ahead of next week's parliamentary elections, but senior military officials say they would not try to interfere with the vote.

Underscoring concerns that violence could mar the election, at least nine people were wounded Tuesday in a bomb blast near the office of a candidate in the southwestern province of Baluchistan. It was the latest in a string of attacks that have overshadowed the campaign.

"The bomb was planted in a bicycle parked near the election office where Sardar Aslam Bizenjo was preparing to address a press conference," said Hamid Shakeel, the police chief in Khuzdar, 185 miles south of Quetta.

The candidate was unhurt and there were no immediate claims of responsibility.

There are concerns that militants could launch attacks during the Feb. 18 vote, seen as key to Pakistan's transition to democracy after eight years of military rule under President Pervez Musharraf, a key U.S. ally in the war against terrorism.

But the main fear is a major outbreak of political violence if there are allegations of vote rigging.

Interior Ministry spokesman, Jawed Iqbal Cheema said provincial officials had asked for the troops to help maintain peace and order during the election, but promised that none would be stationed at voting stations — a move which could serve to intimidate voters.

The army had earlier said it would only deploy if it was asked to do so by civilian authorities.

Arif Ahmad Khan, the home secretary in the southern province of Sindh, said around 24,000 troops would be deployed there alone.

Furqan Bahadur, home secretary in Baluchistan, said security forces there would be placed on standby, responding only if violence flared.

"We do not want to reach a point where we have to say the situation is out of our control," Khan said.

Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani has sought to refocus the military away from politics since he took over the top job last November when Musharraf resigned gave up the post.

Last month, Kayani issued a directive barring officers from unauthorized meetings with politicians and said last week the army would limit its role in the elections to providing security.

Over the weekend, dozens of people were killed in a suicide bombing and an attack Monday wounded a candidate while he was campaigning.

Security forces also were searching for Pakistan's ambassador to Afghanistan, who was missing and feared kidnapped as he traveled in a volatile Pakistani tribal region.

The security threat has heightened at a time when public support for Musharraf has plunged to an all-time low. Opposition parties loyal to the late Benazir Bhutto and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appear poised for a landslide victory, recent polls showed.

Musharraf is not a candidate but needs commanding majority in the new parliament to block any moves to impeach him.

He is grappling with rising Islamic extremism in his country, especially in northwest regions bordering Afghanistan.

He also faces political dissent following his move late last year to oust Supreme Court judges seen as a challenge to his rule, raising fresh questions Tuesday about the credibility of the vote.

The deposed chief justice, Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry, and his family remain under house arrest in Islamabad. Several other senior independent-minded judges are also restricted to their homes.

"Days before Pakistan goes to the polls, its lawful chief justice and his children remain under illegal house arrest, as do many lawyers who would likely challenge election-rigging in the courts," Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement released Tuesday.

"Musharraf's systematic destruction of legal institutions has seriously compromised the upcoming elections."

Source: Yahoo news

Tom Lantos, 80; congressman survived Holocaust

2008-02-12T00:38:00.000-08:00

By Johanna Neuman

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Burlingame), the only Holocaust survivor ever to serve in Congress, died Monday of complications from cancer of the esophagus at Bethesda Naval Medical Center in Maryland, his staff said. He was 80.

A champion of civil liberties, Lantos founded the Congressional Human Rights Caucus and supported human rights struggles against both right-wing and left-wing regimes in China, Russia, Myanmar, Darfur and wherever official pressure could, as he put it, "prevent another Holocaust." He also was passionate about animal rights, working to stop seal hunts, dog killings in foreign countries, and horse slaughter, bear baiting and the operation of puppy mills at home.

He also used his post as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to highlight human rights violators. He argued that nations with bad records had no place on the U.N. Human Rights Commission, that Beijing should not be awarded the 2008 Olympics because of its human rights record, and that corporations had an obligation to protect individuals and press freedoms. When executives of Yahoo Inc. appeared before the committee last year to defend their role in the jailing of a journalist by Chinese officials, Lantos said, "While technologically and financially you are giants, morally you are Pygmies."

Vigilant against appeasement in foreign policy -- whether the culprit was Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin or Saddam Hussein -- Lantos was a supporter of the Iraq war even though his 12th Congressional District, stretching from southwest San Francisco down the peninsula to take in much of San Mateo County, was overwhelmingly opposed. Although he led the debate for authorization of the campaign to oust Hussein in 2002, he later became disillusioned with faulty prewar intelligence and called for an independent investigation into what went wrong.

"The American people have not sent us here just to be an amen cho- rus for this administration," he said when he finally rose to criticize the war. "There are serious problems and we should be debating serious solutions."

Last year he opposed the surge of extra troops in Iraq, telling Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, who was lobbying Congress for support: "Our efforts in Iraq are a mess, and throwing in more troops will not improve it."

Lantos, a staunch supporter of Israel, led a U.S. walkout from a United Nations conference on racism in Durban, South Africa, in 2001 over its anti-Semitic language. But he also was an advocate of talking to renegade regimes. He was among the first members of Congress to visit Libya in 2004, lauding Moammar Kadafi's renunciation of weapons of mass destruction. And when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) met with Syrian President Bashar Assad last year, Lantos was at her side. "Dialogue," he said, "is not appeasement."

Pelosi, calling his death "a profound loss for the Congress and for the nation and a terrible loss for me personally," said in a statement Monday that Lantos had used his chairmanship "to empower the powerless and give voice to the voiceless throughout the world. Having lived through the worst evil known to mankind, Tom Lantos translated the experience into a lifetime commitment to the fight against anti-Semitism."

Born Feb. 1, 1928, to a middle-class family in Budapest, Hungary, Lantos was 16 when Nazis occupied the city in 1944. Sent to a labor camp in a nearby village, he escaped, was recaptured and beaten. After he escaped a second time, he took refuge with his aunt in one of the safe houses maintained by Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat who saved the lives of thousands of Jews during the Holocaust. With his blue eyes and blond hair, Lantos often served as a courier, delivering food to Jews in hiding and working for the anti-Nazi underground.

After the war he learned that his mother had died in the gas chambers of Auschwitz and that other relatives had died as well. He located his childhood sweetheart, Annette Tilleman, a cousin of the glamorous Gabor sisters. He came to the United States in 1947, earning a degree in economics from the University of Washington and a doctorate from UC Berkeley. Tilleman arrived in 1948 to finish high school in Seattle. They were married in 1950.

Lantos, calling himself "an American by choice," took a quixotic path to Congress. Before his election, his resume was that of an academic who had taught economics at San Francisco State University, served as president of the Millbrae School District board, and been an occasional advisor to Congress on economic and foreign policy. But in 1978, Democrat Leo J. Ryan became the first and only congressman ever slain in the line of duty, killed in Guyana, where he went to investigate whether Americans were being held against their will by cult leader Jim Jones. Ryan was gunned down just before Jones engineered a mass suicide among his followers.

Republican Bill Royer won a special election to serve out Ryan's term. But in 1980, Lantos surprised Royer with an upset victory to take the seat. Despite an attempted return by Royer and later efforts to oust Lantos for his hawkish foreign policy views, he had won reelection with comfortable margins of more than 65% ever since.

His first major bill in Congress was to give honorary American citizenship to Wallenberg, whom Lantos called "the central figure in my life."

Lantos, an avid swimmer who never smoked, announced last month that he had been diagnosed with cancer and would retire at year's end.

"It is only in the United States that a penniless survivor of the Holocaust and a fighter in the anti-Nazi underground could have received an education, raised a family and had the privilege of serving the last three decades of his life as a member of Congress," he said. "I will never be able to express fully my profoundly felt gratitude to this great country."

With his mane of white hair and his Hungarian-accented English, Lantos cut a dashing figure on Capitol Hill. But he could also be a sarcastic, partisan inquisitor. When Samuel Pierce Jr., the former secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said he needed more time to prepare for hearings because he was having trouble finding an attorney, Lantos said, "I can understand not being able to find affordable housing in Washington but not an attorney."

Lantos did not attend the United Nations' annual commemoration of the Holocaust last month. His remarks were delivered by his daughter, Katrina Lantos Swett.

In his speech, Lantos called on the world community, "on this day dedicated to one of the worst episodes in human history," to "re-dedicate ourselves to stopping current tragedies such as the genocide in Darfur -- and there is no other proper word for this atrocity -- and to preventing such inhuman cruelty in the future." Saying that "the veneer of civilization is paper thin," Lantos added, "we are its guardians, and we can never rest."

He is survived by his wife, Annette, their children, Katrina Lantos Swett of New Hampshire and Annette Lantos Dick of Colorado, as well as 17 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren.

Source: Los Angeles Times

NIGHT OF RHYTHM & 'SNOOZE'

2008-02-11T02:51:00.000-08:00

By DAN AQUILANTE

February 11, 2008 -- WHAT do you get an awards ceremony for its 50th birthday? How about a little excitement, because last night's Grammys sure could have used a shot of adrenaline.

Right up front, Alicia Keys was at the baby grand doing a beyond-the-grave duet with Frank Sinatra.

The message was clear: This was going to be a classy affair, even if it was going to render America unconscious.

Andrea Bocelli and Josh Groban did their Sominex best with operatic bellows; Herbie Hancock played "Rhapsody in Blue" (all of it) while the Foo Fighters dulled its edge with a symphonic backing.

Kanye West - the artist who went to the awards with the most nominations, at eight - found the audience's pulse 45 minutes into the show with his robotic rap "Stronger." West, still grieving his mother (who died from complications after plastic surgery last year), then dropped into tear-gear with "Hey Mama."

After Beyoncé's much-anticipated duet with Tina Turner on "Proud Mary" - the night's best performance - it was Amy Winehouse's turn to try to jump-start the awards.

Winehouse had the presence of an 800-pound Grammy-grabbing gorilla.

She's a better writer and singer than live performer, and proved it. Beamed from London, she was jittery and dropped a line from her song "Rehab."

Still it was Amy's party and she didn't get to go. Now that could drive a girl to drink.

dan.aquilante@nypost.com

Source: NewYorkPost

Panthers' Richard Zednik Is Stable After Skate Blade Cuts Neck

2008-02-11T02:47:00.000-08:00

By Erik Matuszewski

Feb. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Richard Zednik of the Florida Panthers is in stable condition in a Buffalo, New York, hospital after having his neck accidentally cut by a teammate's skate blade during a National Hockey League game last night.

Zednik underwent surgery at Buffalo General Hospital to close a laceration in his neck, according to the NHL's Web site. No other information was immediately available.

Midway through the third period of Florida's 5-3 loss in Buffalo last night, Jokinen was upended by Sabres defenseman Brian Campbell. As Jokinen fell, his right skate flew up and caught Zednik in the neck, causing blood to gush onto the ice at HSBC Arena. Zednik immediately skated to the Panthers' bench, where trainers attended to him and rushed him to the hospital.

The game was delayed for more than 15 minutes as Zednik's blood was cleaned from the ice.

``As soon as he got into the dressing room, I think they were able to stabilize him and stop the bleeding, which was probably crucial,'' Panthers coach Jacques Martin said at a post-game news conference.

Martin said Zednik, 32, was conscious when he was taken to the hospital. Zednik has 15 goals and 11 assists in 53 games for the Panthers this season.

Zednik's injury came 19 years after former Sabres goaltender Clint Malarchuk almost died when his jugular vein was cut by a skate blade in a goal-mouth collision between St. Louis winger Steve Tuttle and Buffalo defenseman Uwe Krupp.

To contact the reporter on this story: Erik Matuszewski in New York at matuszewski@bloomberg.net

Source: Bloomberg.com

Gates Warns Europe on Afghan Danger

2008-02-10T02:38:00.000-08:00

By THOM SHANKER and NICHOLAS KULISH

MUNICH — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates issued a stark warning Sunday to the people of Europe, saying that their safety from terrorist attack by Islamic extremists is directly linked to NATO’s success in stabilizing Afghanistan.

After weeks of calling on alliance governments to send more combat troops and trainers to Afghanistan, Mr. Gates made his case directly to populations across the continent in a keynote address to the Munich Conference on Security Policy, an international security conference. Mr. Gates summoned the memory of Sept. 11, 2001, to say that Europe is at risk of becoming victim to attacks of the same enormity.

"I am concerned that many people on this continent may not comprehend the magnitude of the direct threat to European security,” Mr. Gates said. “For the United States, Sept. 11 was a galvanizing event, one that opened the American public’s eyes to dangers from distant lands.”
In a hall filled with government officials, legislators and policy analysts from around the world, Mr. Gates added: “So now I would like to add my voice to those of many allied leaders on the continent and speak directly to the people of Europe. The threat posed by violent Islamic extremism is real and it is not going to go away.”

Mr. Gates cited terrorist attacks in Madrid, London, Istanbul, Amsterdam, Paris and Glasgow, and said that other attacks, some complex, had been disrupted before they could be carried out in Belgium, Germany and Denmark and in airliners over the Atlantic.

“Just in the last few weeks, Spanish authorities arrested 14 Islamic extremists in Barcelona suspected of planning suicide attacks against public transport systems in Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, and Britain,” he said.

“I am not indulging in scare tactics,” Mr. Gates stated. “Nor am I exaggerating either the threat or inflating the consequences of a victory for the extremists. Nor am I saying that the extremists are 10 feet tall.”

He said the task facing Europe, the United States and allies around the world “is to fracture and destroy this movement in its infancy — to permanently reduce its ability to strike globally and catastrophically, while deflating its ideology

The “best opportunity as an alliance to do this,” he stated, “is in Afghanistan.”

Mr. Gates said that some terrorist cells in Europe are funded and receive inspiration from abroad. “Many who have been arrested have had direct connections to Al Qaeda,” he said. “Some have met with top leaders or attended training camps abroad. Some are connected to Al Qaeda in Iraq.”

He said that the Barcelona terrorist cell appeared to have links with a terrorist network commanded by extremists in Pakistan who are thought to be affiliated with the Taliban and Al Qaeda and have been blamed for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

many NATO governments “appreciate the importance of the Afghan mission, European public support for it is weak,” Mr. Gates said. “Many Europeans question the relevance of our actions and doubt whether the mission is worth the lives of their sons and daughters.”
But they “forget at our peril that the ambition of Islamic extremists is limited only by opportunity,” he added.

Mr. Gates said that in Afghanistan, “the really hard question the alliance faces is whether the whole of our effort is adding up to less than the sum of its parts.”

In specific policy initiatives, Mr. Gates called for a common set of training standards for every soldier and civilian deployed to Afghanistan, and for the appointment of a high-level European to serve as civilian administrator to coordinate international assistance.

Echoing U.S. lessons from the exhausting effort to suppress insurgents and terrorists in Iraq after the swift invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, Mr. Gates said NATO must better coordinate military operations and civilian reconstruction and “put aside any theology that attempts clearly to divide civilian and military operations. It is unrealistic.”

During a lively question-and-answer period after the speech, a member of the Russian Parliament, Alexey Ostrovskiy, asked Mr. Gates whether the blame for Al Qaeda did not lie at the feet of the U.S. intelligence community for funding the mujahedeen in Afghanistan who resisted the Soviet occupation during the 1980s. Many of those anti-Soviet fighters went on to become Islamic extremists and members of the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

“After that, when the Soviet troops left, for all intents and purposes, people who were created by you were idle,” said Mr. Ostrovskiy.

“If we bear a particular responsibility for the role of the mujahedeen and Al Qaeda growing up in Afghanistan, it has more to do with our abandonment of the country in 1989 than our assistance of it in 1979,” Mr. Gates answered.

Source: Europe

Macy's regroups, will cut jobs

2008-02-07T03:07:00.000-08:00

BY JOHN ECKBERG JECKBERG@ENQUIRER.COM

Rocked by weak holiday sales and facing a critical spring 2008 fashion season, Macy's Inc. on Wednesday moved to turn around its slumping share price by announcing layoffs of up to 2,300 employees, eliminating three divisions and creating a new district management structure.

"When you have to come out and be at a division that is no longer going to exist, it's never easy," said Terry J. Lundgren, chief executive of the Cincinnati-based retail giant and architect of the new initiative. "I really dislike this part of the job. But it's the reality of the business. If it was just a consolidation, well, I'd say we've done that and been there. This is something quite different."

None of the job losses will hit Cincinnati, Macy's promised, although other areas of the nation won't be so lucky.

Macy's, the downtown Cincinnati-based retailer with 850 Macy's and Bloomingdale's stores and a surging online arm in Macys.com, expects layoffs to save the company $100 million beginning in 2009.

Relocation assistance for executives, severance and outplacement services will cost the company about $150 million in 2008.

The company plans to create a new district structure that could add 250 jobs - an approach that is modeled, in part, upon the packaged goods industry, Lundgren said in an interview Wednesday, one hour after the announcement.

"We are in the fashion business," Lundgren said. "We are not just selling tissues. You can't have the same shirt in 800 stores and assume success. Being in the fashion business, the product changes every few months and you have to anticipate. You need a hands-on organization."
Called "My Macy's," the localization initiative creates 20 districts of about 10 stores each.

Cincinnati will be the base for one district that could bring up to 40 jobs here.

The new approach, based upon customer research and developed over the past year, is an effort to accelerate sales growth with a custom-tailored shopping experience.

More managers will concentrate on bringing a better assortment of apparel to local markets based on shopping habits of customers in that region, Lundgren said.

"If we continue on the exact same course, we won't have dramatically different results," Lundgren said.

"If you want different results, you don't keep trying the same thing over and over again.
"We are actually putting more money and more investment into the local market with this structure," he said.

Lundgren said high gasoline prices and a nationwide housing slump have taken a toll on department store customers, making them more cautious.

Those were the macro issues," Lundgren said. "I suspect they will not be sorted out over the next couple of quarters. That's what the best minds are suggesting in Washington."

The company also said Wednesday that same-store, year-to-year sales, considered the best measure of a retailer's health, fell by 7.1 percent over 2006 results for the final four weeks of fiscal 2007.

company had advised shareholders that same-store sales for that period would be off by 4 percent to 6 percent.

For the 13-week fourth quarter of 2007, Macy's sales were $8.59 billion, down 6.1 percent from $9.16 billion reported for the same period in 2006.

Macy's will take a one-time pre-tax charge of $150 million in 2008 related to the consolidation.
Macy's also said Wednesday it will no longer offer guidance for quarterly sales or earnings. It expects the range of same-store sales for 2008 to be down 1 percent to up 1.5 percent.

, it told investors the company no longer expects to reach a goal of earnings as a percentage of sales before income tax, depreciation and amortization in the range of 14 percent to 15 percent in 2008-2009.

for 2007 were $26.31 billion, down 2.4 percent from sales of $26.97 billion in 53 weeks of the fiscal 2006 calendar.

On a same-store basis, sales were down by 1.3 percent in 2007 compared with 2006.
Macy's expects fourth-quarter earnings per diluted share to be between $1.75 and $1.80, which excludes merger integration costs of about $70 million.

Job losses will occur when Macy's consolidates its Minneapolis-based Macy's North into the New York-based Macy's East, its St. Louis-based Macy's Midwest into Atlanta-based Macy's South and its Seattle-based Macy's Northwest into Macy's West. The Atlantadivision will be renamed Macy's Central.

Al Ferara, national director of retail services for BDO Seidman, an accounting and consulting firm based in New York City, said Macy's, which has headquarters in New York City, had no choice but to slash the payroll because of the tough economic climate. "I expect that sales for the upcoming year are not so glossy," Ferara said. "You have to react to that, and now is the perfect time."

in Macy's closed Wednesday at $23.94, down $1.16 or 4.62 percent.

Source: local business

McCain and conservatives seek common purpose

2008-02-07T02:39:00.000-08:00

By Frank Davies

WASHINGTON - Memo to conservative activists: Do the math. John McCain will be the Republican presidential nominee, so get with the program.

Memo to McCain: Work harder to win over conservative skeptics in the party.
That summarizes much of the advice coming from Republicans and political analysts Wednesday as they weigh how a fractured party can reunite after McCain won a string of victories - and snagged scores of party delegates - from New York to California on Super Tuesday, giving him a formidably large lead for the nomination.

primaries and caucuses in 28 states since early January, the Arizona senator has secured 703 convention delegates, almost 60 percent of the 1,191 needed to become the nominee, according to the Associated Press. Mitt Romney has 260, Mike Huckabee has 190. Ron Paul is running a distant fourth with 14.

On Wednesday, though, Romney and Huckabee weren't taking the bait about the need to unify behind a single candidate. Both told supporters they would continue campaigning and that there was still time to catch and beat McCain, despite his stellar showing Tuesday.

California played a major role in McCain's ascendancy. Boosted by an endorsement from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, McCain won 42 percent of the statewide vote to Romney's 34 percent. More important, McCain took all but three or four of the state's 53 congressional districts, giving him at least 147 delegates.

Rep. Dan Lungren, a Republican from

the Sacramento area who backed the Arizona senator more than a year ago, said he was stunned by McCain's comeback and the scope of his victory in California. The McCain campaign "spent almost no money in California until a little the last week, so I didn't know what to expect. I would not have predicted this when polls closed yesterday."

But exit polls show that the GOP has some deep fissures. Social conservatives and evangelicals around the country are still leery of McCain, and they voted for Huckabee in the South and for Romney in some Western states. In California, evangelicals split almost evenly among the top three candidates, the exit polls said.

Talk radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and conservative bloggers who channel the more rigid posture of the GOP's right wing have blistered McCain on issues from immigration to global warming.

"There has been a backlash against McCain from conservatives, but they didn't have enough time before Super Tuesday" to stop him, said David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union.

Good of the party

strategists say McCain and conservative activists are going to have to find a way to reconcile for the good of the party and improve their chances in the general election. This year Democrats are energized by large primary turnouts and what they see as voters' weariness of President Bush.
"McCain has always been able to reach out to swing voters, independents and moderates, but he still needs the party's conservative base to win in the fall," said political strategist Dan Schnur, who worked on McCain's 2000 campaign.

Schnur, who is neutral in this race, said McCain's choice of a running mate would send "a strong signal to the base," and his continued emphasis on national security helps "because it's a policy area where he's in complete sync with conservative voters."

And some point out that McCain and conservatives agree on some core principles.
Lungren said that while the candidate's position on immigration reform and willingness to work with Democrats "irritates many conservatives, there is agreement on the war, the threat of Islamo-fascism and the need to hold the line on spending."

"As far as the talk show hosts, what they're saying is not evidently getting through to many voters," Lungren added.

"I think (critics) have made their case against me pretty eloquently," McCain said Wednesday, adding caustically, "if that's the right word." He said that Ronald Reagan tried to reach out to Democrats, as he has done.

"I do hope that at some point we would just calm down a little bit and see if there are areas that we can agree on for the good of the party and for the good of the country," McCain said.
The conservative blogosphere is alive with debate over what to do about McCain. Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, a McCain backer, suggested on Fox News that pressure would build on Romney and Huckabee to withdraw for the good of the party.

so fast, say other conservatives.

"The question is not whether conservatives can find a way to reconcile themselves to vote for McCain," wrote commentator Mark Tapscott. "That's just another way of saying the same old cliche that conservatives have no place to go. They do if they choose to, and how they choose will be determined now by McCain."

McCain has made an effort at reconciliation in recent days, and today he speaks to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, a gathering of activists that he skipped last year.

Tapscott said that when McCain speaks to the conservative group, "he must make it clear that he is the guy who needs them more than they need him."

points

Blogger Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters wrote that McCain "has to start negotiating for support in part on the terms of conservatives. He will likely do so on judicial nominations, pork-barrel spending and budget reductions."

But McCain's big win in California may offer a different model for victory in the fall, by attracting moderates, independents and enough conservatives to form a new majority. Bruce Cain, a University of California-Berkeley political scientist who has studied state politics, said California Republicans are conservatives - but also pragmatists who want to win. And he suspects the same may be true elsewhere.

The "Schwarzenegger model" of reaching out to moderates could work in other states, Cain said. And conservatives would also be highly motivated if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee.
"Nothing unites a group more than someone they regard as such a negative figure," Cain said.

Source: mercury.com

Italy looks likely to hold early election

2008-02-04T19:13:00.000-08:00

By Silvia Aloisi and Robin Pomeroy

ROME, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Italy seems likely to call an election by mid-April after the Senate speaker gave up trying to form a temporary government to end a political standoff triggered by Romano Prodi's resignation as prime minister.

Centre-right opposition leader Silvio Berlusconi wants an early election because he is riding high in opinion polls and hopes to return to the office of prime minister he has held twice before.
Many economists say another government elected under current electoral rules will prove just as unstable as Prodi's, and some worry another free-spending Berlusconi government will undo the centre-left's work on cutting the budget deficit.

Senate speaker Franco Marini, who had been asked by President Giorgio Napolitano to seek cross-party backing for an interim administration to reform the electoral system ahead of an election, said on Monday there was no such support.

"I could not find a significant majority on a precise electoral reform," Marini said as he left Napolitano's office after handing back his mandate on forming a new government.
Napolitano appears to have little choice now but to dissolve parliament and call an election. He could theoretically ask Marini or someone else to try again but that is considered unlikely as the centre-right is sure to reject further advances.

"We hope ... the head of state will call elections immediately because the country quickly needs an efficient government to solve its grave problems," Berlusconi, a 71-year-old media tycoon, told reporters.

Business leaders have pleaded for stability since Italy's 61st post-war government collapsed last month after Prodi lost a confidence vote in parliament following defections from his centre-left coalition. He had been in power for only 20 months.

Source: Reuters

Candidates Blitz States as Big Day Looms

2008-02-04T18:56:00.000-08:00

By MICHAEL COOPER

The presidential candidates from both parties campaigned frenetically on Monday, making their final pushes with a series of rallies and blitzes of television commercials for a last bout of November-style campaigning before more than 20 states vote in Tuesday’s virtual national primary.

Several candidates — including Senators Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain — focused their time on the delegate-rich Northeast. But the tightening race in the biggest prize of all, California, was underscored when Mitt Romney and Mr. McCain both made changes to their schedules to add 11th-hour visits there.

The final day of campaigning before Feb. 5 showed how the dynamic of the race had shifted in the last month. Mrs. Clinton, who was long considered the Democratic favorite, found herself locked in a series of races in several states with Mr. Obama. On the Republican side, which only weeks ago had seemed wide open, Mr. McCain sought to ride his recent victories and rising poll numbers to the nomination, while Mr. Romney sought to win enough delegates to keep his campaign alive.

Mr. Romney spent much of the day trying to cast doubts on Mr. McCain’s conservatism — a theme that echoed loudly among conservative talk-radio commentators suspicious of his past positions on taxes and immigration.

“We’re going to hand the liberals in our party a little surprise,” Mr. Romney boasted in Atlanta, predicting victories in California and other states.

Mr. McCain responded with a national television advertisement showing Mr. Romney, in a previous campaign, saying: “Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” The announcer says: “Mitt Romney was against Ronald Reagan before he was for him.”

The candidates embarked on a final frenzy of campaigning. Mr. Romney began a grueling 24-hour tour to try to block Mr. McCain from sewing up the Republican nomination. Mrs. Clinton had an emotional moment during a nostalgic visit to Yale, where she graduated from law school 35 years ago. And, in the psychological warfare department, Mr. McCain swaggered into the heart of Romney country with a rally at Faneuil Hall in Boston, while Mr. Obama held a rally in East Rutherford, N.J., across the Hudson River from Mrs. Clinton’s home state of New York.

“We have a real choice to make,” Mr. Obama said at a rally at the Izod Center in the Meadowlands, where he filled about a third of the seats for a rally where he appeared with Senator Edward M. Kennedy. “It is a choice, not between black and white, not between genders and regions or religions, but a choice between the past and the future. And if I’m running against John McCain, I want to be making the argument for the future, not for the past. I want to be going forwards, not backwards.”

Mr. Obama was accompanied by Robert DeNiro (his tough-guy endorser, in a year in which Mike Huckabee got a boost from Chuck Norris and Mr. McCain from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California).

Mr. Obama also received a free publicity boost by way of a music video created in his honor that spread in viral fashion throughout the Web with an intensity that was high even by the standards of this Internet-focused campaign season. The video was created by the singer will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas, and featured celebrities singing along to Mr. Obama’s New Hampshire concession speech on Jan. 8. Released on Friday, the digital video had already been viewed more than one million times on YouTube alone by Monday evening.

Mrs. Clinton — whose emotional, eye-welling response to a question just before the New Hampshire primary was credited by some analysts with humanizing her and helping her win there — showed emotion during a campaign stop on Monday morning at the Yale Child Study Center, where she had volunteered as a law student.

“I said I would not tear up — already, we’re not on that path,” a moist-eyed Mrs. Clinton said, drawing laughs after Penn Rhodeen, a lawyer who worked with her as a student, recalled the day she showed up on his doorstep in purple bell bottoms.

Later, at a rally in Worcester, Mass., Mrs. Clinton took aim at Mr. Obama. “You know, change is hard,” she said, in a reference to Mr. Obama’s frequent campaign message. “I wish all you had to do was just say it’s going to happen and it’ll materialize. But it’s going to take hard work. It’s going to take every one of us.”

The Obama-Clinton competition over fund-raising has also intensified as both candidates seek fresh support from donors. But it appears that Mr. Obama has been out front recently: His campaign reported raising $32 million in January, while Terry McAuliffe, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, said on MSNBC on Monday that her team raised about $13.5 million last month.

And other groups are pumping money into this election cycle. A new group, financed in part by the billionaire George Soros and called Fund for America, has raised $6.75 million on behalf of Democratic candidates and the party. The group will be working outside of the official Democratic candidates and campaigns.

Mr. McCain, buoyed by strong national poll numbers, brimmed with confidence at his rally in Boston. Asked by a reporter about his foray into Massachusetts, where Mr. Romney was governor, Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, said: “He’s certainly welcome to come to Arizona if he likes. The weather’s very nice.”

Mr. McCain went on to campaign in New Jersey and in Grand Central Terminal in New York, where he collected the endorsement of George E. Pataki, the former governor.

Mr. Romney, stumping in the South, tried to seize on doubts about Mr. McCain’s conservatism. In Nashville, hoarse from the frenzied race to the finish, Mr. Romney led a call-and-response about Mr. McCain’s deviations from Republican orthodoxy that has become a standard part of his stump speech.

“Do you want a nominee who voted against the Bush tax cuts?” Mr. Romney asked.
“Nooo!” the crowd roared back.

Later, in Atlanta, Mr. Romney added another one about Mr. McCain’s vote in the Senate against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

The questions have resonated on talk radio. Rush Limbaugh, who has been especially vocal in his criticisms of Mr. McCain in recent days, complained that Mr. McCain had “stabbed his own party in the back” on several occasions.

And Mr. Romney, who was himself considered a moderate when he was governor of Massachusetts, was challenged on his own conservative credentials by Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, who campaigned in the South and who called himself a candidate who “hasn’t just decided this year where he stands on the Second Amendment,” an apparent dig at Mr. Romney.

Mr. Romney seemed pleased to have drawn Mr. McCain back to California; after Mr. Romney added a Monday-night stop there, Mr. McCain added a stop on Tuesday. The Romney campaign is focusing its television advertising budget on California and cable television, deciding against running commercials in Missouri and Georgia.

“I understand that we’ve now brought Senator McCain back to California, too,” Mr. Romney said at a news conference in Nashville on Monday morning. “He’s like, ‘Oh wow, Romney’s there. I better go back there and see if I can’t shore up the race there.’ But he’s sliding in California.”

Reporting was contributed by Julie Bosman from New Haven; Jeff Zeleny from East Rutherford, N.J.; Michael Luo from Nashville; Elisabeth Bumiller, Patrick Healy, Leslie Wayne and Jim Rutenberg from New York City; and Ariel Alexovich from Washington.

Source: Politics

Manning Keeps Cool, and Keeps a Drive Alive

2008-02-04T06:46:00.000-08:00

By JOE LAPOINTE

GLENDALE, Ariz. — After winning the Most Valuable Player award in Super Bowl XLII for leading the Giants to a 17-14 victory over the New England Patriots, quarterback Eli Manning seemed as composed as he did on the field when he brought his team from behind twice in the fourth quarter with drives that ended in touchdown passes.

A smile played about his face, which looks younger than his 27 years, and he kept fighting it off the way he dodged tacklers, especially those who almost sacked him late in the game in the moments before he completed that 32-yard pass to David Tyree that kept alive a drive that will live forever in Giants’ lore.

Manning did not want to brag, but sometimes a man just has to tell the truth. “You can’t write a better script,” he said. “You’re going up against a team that’s unbeaten, the best team in the league at the time, and we beat them. We played better than they did.”

Manning is now the second brother in the family to win the Super Bowl and its M.V.P. trophy. His older brother Peyton did it last year with the Indianapolis Colts. Their father, Archie Manning, also was an N.F.L. quarterback, but his teams never won this game.

“I told him I that I was proud of him, I couldn’t be prouder,” Archie Manning said. When asked whether he expected such success for both of his sons, Archie said: “I never thought about them even playing college ball, much less pro football, much less winning Super Bowls or M.V.P.’s. It wasn’t in the plan.”

More than Eli’s 5-yard scoring pass early in the fourth quarter to Tyree, more than his 13-yard scoring pass to Plaxico Burress in the final minute, the play that will be replayed and discussed endlessly came when Manning scrambled on third-and-5 from the Giants’ 44-yard line with about a minute left.

It seemed as if he was about to be sacked, and that would have been devastating. Would-be tacklers grabbed at him, clutching his shirt and tugging it. “You try to get small and see if you can squeak through,” Manning said.

He kept moving to his left, ducked out of a scrum, found open space and launched a soaring pass toward Tyree at the Patriots’ 25-yard line. “The ball hung up there,” Manning said with great understatement.

Tyree leaped in the air and brought it down with his hands, which pressed the ball against his helmet. The Giants had a first down with 59 seconds left. Four plays later they scored to beat a team that was 18-0. “I’m really happy for the kid; No. 10 proved his mettle,” Tyree said. “Everyone tried to put him to shame the past three years. He’s always cool. We love him. He was a shining leader today.”

Tyree was not speaking with hyperbole. Until the end of the regular season, Manning was doubted by some teammates, fans and news media skeptics.

Peyton Manning, referring to his brother’s pivotal play, said: “The scramble will go down as one of the greatest plays of all time. It was fun to say you were here to witness it, and the fact that I’m related to the quarterback who threw it makes it pretty neat as well.”

Was Eli Manning really a first-rate N.F.L. quarterback? Would he ever be as good as his brother? In the playoffs, against Tampa Bay, Dallas and Green Bay, Manning seemed to find his stride and his teammates could sense it, too.

Center Shaun O’Hara called Manning unstoppable and said that before the final drive, Manning stalked the sideline telling his teammates that this is what they play for. Regarding Manning’s escape of the sack on third down, O’Hara said: “I saw Eli break a tackle, which I don’t think he has ever done before. It was very Steve Young- and Joe Montana-like. I don’t know how he had the composure.”

Michael Strahan, the defensive end, said: “He’s not Peyton Manning’s little brother. He’s not Eli who slumps. He’s a champion.” Referring to his third-down scramble and pass, Strahan said: “That play alone took a few years off my life.”

Manning completed 19 of 34 passes for 255 yards and 2 touchdowns. He had one interception, but it was among the three balls that his receivers caught and dropped.

More than his statistics, however, Manning seemed to show poise under pressure, which is often the difference between good players and great ones.

When asked about the final drive, when his team trailed by 4 points and knew that a field goal was of no use, Manning let that smile play again across his face.

“This is where you want to be, honestly,” he said. “You kind of like being down 4. You have to score a touchdown.”

Source: Pro Football

Energetic Mika erupts in colorful glitz

2008-02-04T06:41:00.000-08:00

By Sarah Rodman

If energetic glee, unironic thumping disco beats, and unshakable melodies were valued commodities in the current US musical mainstream then Mika's stock would be as prized as that of someone like John Mayer.

That it isn't mattered not a whit to the 2,800 able-voiced members of the audience that packed the Orpheum Theatre Friday night to champion and nearly drown out the Beirut-born, London-bred pop singer, whose debut album "Life in Cartoon Motion" has become an international hit.
From the liberating opener "Relax (Take it Easy)" to the world's-best-birthday-party meets new-year's-celebration giddiness of closer "Lollipop" Mika proved as tireless a performer as he is a gifted melody-maker. The diverse crowd matched the booty-moving, call-and-response rhapsody of the singer-songwriter and his five-person band from start to finish, gamely responding, even when Mika called in an increasingly cartoonish, yet impressively tuneful falsetto.

The theatrical proceedings - like the zaftig go-go gals hoofing it up during "Big Girl (You are Beautiful)" and later falling snow, manic trash can drum solos, giant puppets, blow-up dolls and headdresses - mixed camp and rock concert glitz but never obscured the songs or Mika's sincerity in delivering them.

A throbbing, revved-up cover of Eurythmics' "Missionary Man" augmented album tracks like the bouncing "Grace Kelly" and new similarly candy-coated tunes.

Whether pounding on his keyboard while banging his curly head of teen heartthrob-worthy locks or shimmying across the stage to piercing shrieks - a shirtless interlude predictably raised the decibels - Mika was clearly enjoying himself. He crowed about the upgrade in venue size since his last visit to the Hub and basked in the adoring response to "Billy Brown," a song concerning a man's questions over his sexual identity that Mika was told by his record label would never fly in the United States.

The night climaxed in an explosion of multicolored confetti, streamers and balloons in arena-size portions with the band dressed up in furry animal costumes dancing onstage with what seemed like half the audience who left with cotton candy-sated smiles like kids departing the circus.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.

Source: boston.com

Israel Hit by First Suicide Attack in a Year

2008-02-04T05:56:00.001-08:00

By ISABEL KERSHNER

DIMONA, Israel — One of two suicide bombers who may have snuck into Israel from the Egyptian Sinai blew himself up at a shopping center in this southern desert town on Monday, and medical officials said he killed an Israeli woman and wounded 11 others. It was the first suicide attack in Israel in more than a year.

The second bomber failed to detonate his explosive belt and was shot dead by a police officer at the scene, a police spokesman said.

The identities and nationalities of the attackers were not immediately clear but militant Palestinian groups claimed responsibility and speculation in Israel immediately focused on whether they were Gazans who had entered the country through the Egyptian border.
Over the previous 11 days, residents of Gaza had been able to move in and out of Egypt with relative ease because of a temporary breach in the sealed Gaza-Egypt border, which the Egyptian military resealed on Sunday.

The last suicide attack in Israel came in January 2007 in the southern city of Eilat, killing three Israelis.

In the hours after Monday’s attack, police officers lined the streets of Dimona and closed off the area of the bombing to the public.

Esther Peretz, 41, who had been running an errand at the shopping center, said she heard the bomb explode at around 10:30 a.m. and arrived at the scene a few minutes later to see pieces of flesh on the road and people gathering outside the City Hall. “It’s the first time a bomb has gone off like this in Dimona,” she said. “I can’t quite absorb it. There is a very hard feeling today.”
Kobi Moor, 34, the police officer who shot the second attacker, said he approached the militant, who was apparently injured from the first blast and was lying on the ground, and shot him four times in his head when he saw him move his hand toward his explosive belt strapped to his stomach.

“His hand was twitching,” Mr. Moor said, speaking to reporters. “He raised it again. So I shot four bullets into his head and neutralized him.”

Following the bombing, the police services went on high alert in various areas of the country, and near Dimona police officers were stationed at main junctions on roads leading to the city.
Dimona, a remote working class town in the Negev desert, is best known for its proximity to Israel’s nuclear reactor. The attack took place several miles from the site of the heavily guarded reactor.

The groups that claimed responsibility for the attack included one loosely affiliated with the mainstream Fatah movement of President Mahmoud Abbas. It was not immediately clear how credible those early claims were.

The Israeli authorities had warned in recent days that Palestinian militants took advantage of the breach of the border between Gaza and Egypt after members of the Hamas movement that runs Gaza blasted sections of a wall between the two on Jan. 23 to cross from Gaza into Egypt and from Egypt into Gaza.

The Egyptian authorities have reported the arrest of more than a dozen Palestinian militants carrying weapons and explosives in the Sinai peninsula, close to the border with Gaza, over the past few days.

“Palestinian terror groups continue to strike at Israeli civilians,” said David Baker, an Israeli government spokesman, after the attack Monday. “Israel will continue to take the requisite steps to defend its people,” he said, without elaborating on any likely response.
Earlier Monday, Israeli forces killed two Islamic Jihad militants in an exchange of fire during an arrest raid in the village of Qabatiya in the northern West Bank.

Mr. Abbas’s Palestinian Authority issued a statement on Monday condemning both the Qabatiya raid and the attack in Dimona.

The Israeli air force later said it had also carried out an attack in Gaza against militants it said had been responsible for rocket attacks on Israel. Reuters reported that a senior Palestinian militant and several others were injured in the attack, citing a source in Hamas.

At Sunday’s cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, the head of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service warned that militants had smuggled advance weaponry into Gaza while the border was down, including long-range missiles and anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

The defense minister, Ehud Barak, told the cabinet there was an urgent need to build a fence along the porous border between Israel and Egypt.

Source:World Special

'Boston Globe' Hikes Newsstand Price to 75 Cents -- Job Cuts Coming?

2008-02-04T05:56:00.000-08:00

By E&P Staff

NEW YORK The Boston Globe announced today its newsstand price will increase to 75 cents from 50 cents on Feb. 4.

Home delivery and Sunday remain unchanged.

The increase applies to newspapers sold in Greater Boston. The daily Globe is already priced at 75 cents at locations beyond 30 miles from the city.

Meanwhile, the president of the Boston Newspaper Guild fired off a letter to Globe executives after the Metro newspaper said layoffs were coming. It opened: "The Boston Newspaper Guild is disgusted to have read the Metro story about possible layoffs at the Boston Globe with no prior mention of reductions by Globe representatives to The Boston Newspaper Guild.

"A Globe spokesman, Al Larkin, executive denied the Metro story -- or at least the size of the layoffs, with this statement: "Metro Boston's front page story today claiming that the Boston Globe is planning 'hundreds of layoffs' is factually incorrect. There are no plans for a staff reduction of the size cited in the Metro. As we have said many times in the past, we are always looking for operational efficiencies and will make staff reductions in accordance with those efforts when and if appropriate."

Source: Muller Martini

Boston Globe delivery to resume this week

2008-02-04T05:48:00.000-08:00

by Anna Webster

The Boston Globe said an "oversight with delivery" of newspapers to Boston University dorms accounted for the absence of the broadsheet around campus this semester, in an email to Boston University.

Webb Lancaster, director of operations in the BU Auxiliary Services Department, said the Globe apologized for confusion about resuming delivery after it was suspended over break and said the newspapers, available to students for free, should be back on campus by Wednesday.

BU will continue to receive the Globe for the rest of the semester, and Lancaster emphasized the friendly relationship between the university and the newspaper.

"I always get a kick out of seeing free papers in the student residences," said BU spokesman Colin Riley. "There's a benefit for it.

"The Daily Free Press first reported the newspapers were missing from their stands Friday.

"Nobody contacted any of the administrative offices or Residence Life to notify that the papers were not coming," Lancaster said in the Feb. 1 article. "I didn't realize the papers were not being delivered, and I don't think anybody else did.

"The missing newspapers sparked confusion and questions from students and professors in the College of Communication, in particular, as many journalism classes require students to obtain hard copies for assignments.

"It is not always easy for students to buy the paper," said journalism department Chairman Lou Ureneck. "For a journalism department, the newspaper is essential."

Source: The Daily Free Press

Dave's Super Spot-light: Fifth break

2008-02-03T17:57:00.000-08:00

by Dave Walker, TV columnist

Grass grows wherever Derek Jeter goes. Peyton Manning, too, it turns out. The ad's for G2, a new beverage from Gatorade.
GoDaddy.com paid $2.7 million to tell people about a commercial only airing at GoDaddy.com. I'd say, Don'tGoDaddy.com, but there was a viewer discretion warning. On the Internet. Imagine.

A Dell notebook will win you admirers, not to mention bruises.

Great big carrier pigeons are competing with FedEx. Clever, weird, not funny.

Plan B for a guy who did his research at Cars.com involved a crazy guy and burning rocks. I'll take the bus.

For Tide's stain stick, a brilliant spot about a talking shirt stain. Just weird enough, and the point is crystal clear: Your sloppy spills do all your talking for you.

Source: Living

Origin of false fire reports not clear

2008-02-03T04:59:00.000-08:00

by Norm Clarke

A news alert e-mailed by KVBC-TV, Channel 3 about 18 minutes after the Monte Carlo fire erupted Jan. 25 might have been the source of the false reports of mass hotel evacuations by local and national outlets.

Vegas Confidential obtained a copy of the news alert, which was sent at 11:15 a.m.

It read: "Guests of the Monte Carlo, Bellagio and New York-New York are being evacuated because of the blaze atop the Monte Carlo. Stay with News 3 for the latest."

KVBC news director Deborah Clayton said the station's webmaster indicated that "it appears to be one of our e-mails. It should have read 'Guests of the Monte Carlo are being evacuated to Bellagio and New York-New York,' which is how we correctly reported it on air."

The source of the trapped workers report isn't quite clear, although Holly Steuart, vice president and general manager at KVVU-TV, Channel 5, indicated in an e-mail last week that "our reporting of workers on the roof was sourced on reports coming from our network, Fox News, and (Fox 5 anchor Monica Jackson) attributed the information correctly."

KLAS-TV, Channel 8 anchor Gary Waddell, a veteran of the 1980 MGM Grand fire, delivered some of the most restrained reporting.

About 45 minutes into the fire, at 12:40 p.m., he told viewers, "There are some reports that people are trapped and we're hearing that the Bellagio and MGM Grand are being evacuated and those are not correct."

Between 1 p.m. and 1:15 p.m. he stated on air that national mentions of trapped workers were "not confirmed, not corroborated and I'm sort of doubting that."

Waddell called me last week to say that he did not criticize KVVU-TV, Channel 5, which had mentioned the trapped workers and evacuations.

When I called Waddell last Saturday to discuss the fire coverage, I asked him to confirm that he had criticized "Fox coverage." I was referring to the local Fox station, which is an affiliate of Fox News network, not Fox News Channel, the cable network.

Waddell assumed I was referring to Fox Network and confirmed he had questioned the coverage but declined to elaborate. Hence, the mix-up.

FNC briefly aired Jackson's audio with KTNV-TV, Channel 13's video feed.

KLAS captured the final Nielsen ratings, winning seven quarter hours to runner-up KVBC's four. KTNV-TV, Channel 13 won one quarter hour. KVVU, the only station without a helicopter, was shut out.

THE SCENE AND HEARD

That Siegfried & Roy tell-all by former employee Jim Lavery has been delayed to this spring. The author, Henrietta Tiefenthaler, co-authored "Train Wreck: The Life and Death of Anna Nicole Smith" with Donna Hogan, Smith's half sister.

There's buzz in the restaurant world that star chefs Mario Batali and Paul Bartolotta, who both have Las Vegas restaurants, squared off on "Iron Chef" last May. The episode will air in June.

Batali just launched Carnevino, at Palazzo after opening B&B Ristorante and Enoteca San Marco at The Venetian last year. Bartolotta Ristorante di Mare is one of the most successful restaurants at Wynn Las Vegas.

SIGHTINGS

Barry Bonds, roundly booed when he was shown on the scoreboard Saturday at UFC 81 at Mandalay Bay. Also in the crowd: Ken Griffey Jr., Jay-Z with Chuck Liddell and George St. Pierre and pro wrestling legends "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, The Undertaker and Kurt Angle to watch Brock Lesnar's battle against Frank Mir. ... Derek Jeter, playing blackjack at $800 a hand at the Playboy Club (Palms) early Saturday. ... In a VIP skybox at the 40/40 club: Sacramento Kings co-owner Gavin Maloof, watching the Kings-Bulls game with Bonds, one of just four players in baseball's exclusive 40-40 club (40 homers and 40 stolen bases). ... Siegfried and Roy, in the audience at "Variety Live! Direct from The London Palladium" (Suncoast) on Friday. ... Dominic Allen of Foreigner, joining the Scintas on stage Friday at the Hilton for "Hot Blooded."

Source: reviewjournal

Reviewing TNA Impact - the importance of titles

2008-02-03T04:55:00.000-08:00

By James Caldwell

Updated Friday, February 1

Here's TNA Impact in its weekly nutshell. The first three reader reax scores for last night's episode were 5.0, 0.0, and 8.5. You either love it or you hate it, or you just can't figure out what to do with this show.

The thing about TNA is that TV ratings are steady, with signs of slight growth. House show business is pretty strong with management happy with recent turn-outs in Texas and Ohio. But, they're not committed to selling PPVs or establishing the importance of titles, which drives PPV business in pro wrestling.

Looking at the title situation, the importance of the belts is virtually non-existent. TNA World champ Kurt Angle has a title defense against Christian Cage at the next PPV. On last night's episode, Christian had exactly five seconds of TV time and all he did was talk about Tomko. As for Angle's character, there is no concern for Christian as a threat, because the only concern is A.J. Styles and Tomko.

Most egregious was the booking of Jay Lethal. He lost the X Division Title last week to Johnny Devine (who already had possession of the title), but instead of trying to get his title back, Lethal was scripted in to play a parody role in a parody of a parody skit on a parody show instead of trying to get his title back.

In the tag division, B.G. James and Bob Armstrong are training for something, but it wasn't ever made clear last night that they're going after the tag titles. B.G. is such a threat that his "old man" - Jeff Jarrett's favorite term for his father - is showing him up in a training video, which is essentially a parody of the Shawn Michaels and Jose Lothario training videos. And the tag champs of Styles & Tomko are so concerned about their title defense that they haven't even acknowledged the existence of B.G. & Bob.

Which leaves the Women's Division, which, as usual, is the only division with competent storytelling. Awesome Kong is the champ. ODB is the #1 contender. ODB is on a hot streak. Kong is annoyed by ODB's invasion. Let's have a match. Simple and effective.

So, the result is that TNA continues to book TV that leads into the next TV episode, with the PPVs simply being an extra show once-a-month on Sunday nights. The same 30,000 people or 2 percent of their TV audience is going to buy the PPVs, and TNA is happy to have them on board.

If it works, then it works. But, they're leaving a ton of money on the table every month with weak PPV build-up and a lack of focus on the importance of titles, the holders of titles, and the chase for the title.

Updated Thursday, January 31

Over the past several weeks, the Brock Lesnar UFC fight hype has been all over the Internet. Major news and sports outlets have been covering Lesnar's UFC debut. Some press has been positive, same has been with the usual raised eyebrow for anyone with "the stain" of WWE. It's like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry's car stinks so bad that no one who has been inside the car can wash out the smell. Poor Elaine.

But, most interesting about the hype for Brock has been WWE's involvement in promoting Saturday's fight. They've granted UFC access to WWE video for their hype commercials. They've promoted the fight on their website with a splash background on the main page and a prominently displayed hype video. Granted, they didn't air anything Brock-related on their TV shows this week, but UFC did have advertising during commercial breaks on Raw and ECW.

The most-common answer for why WWE is promoting a fight for a former wrestler who wants nothing to do with WWE is that WWE believes UFC is in a different market. WWE has said that before on investor conference calls, while at the same time acknowledging that UFC has the most formidable business model of the MMA promotions to keep a share of the MMA pie without watering down the PPV market.

But, there are two more reasons I believe WWE is involved in the UFC marketing. One reason is that WWE believes they still have ownership over Brock. Ownership in the sense that WWE believes they made Brock into a mega-star by giving him a platform on TV and PPVs.

With the UFC 81 hype, WWE has one foot in the water and one foot on the edge of the pool. On one hand, they've allowed UFC to use their footage. On the other hand, they haven't openly promoted the PPV on TV.

If the PPV does big business, WWE will be able to take a measure of credit because they believe they created Brock into a mega-star and they are allowing UFC to use their footage in the hype videos. If the PPV bombs, WWE will be able to say Brock is just another former WWE star who isn't a big name without the full investment of the WWE hype machine. It's basically a win-win situation for WWE.

Another reason is the possibility of UFC getting a broadcast TV slot. UFC playing that WWE footage on CBS, ABC, NBC, or FOX with the WWE logo in the corner of the screen is a subtle (and maybe subliminal) piece of advertising for WWE's product. Hey, look, wasn't this guy in WWE a few years ago? I wonder what's going on in WWE these days!

It's similar to WWE promoting the NWA brand on their WWE 24/7 service. Half of the classic footage on 24/7 is from the NWA era that people associate with Ric Flair, who is still current on Raw. It's basically free advertising by association.

So, for wrestling fans who may have been Brock Lesnar fans during his WWE run or simply want to see a former WWE wrestler in the octagon, what are your plans for Saturday night? Are you more or less inclined to order the PPV or visit a sportsbar to watch it? Send in your feedback and vote in the two Torch polls I just put up asking the questions for this weekend's pre-Super Bowl UFC fight.

Updated Wednesday, January 30

6:55 p.m. Everyone likes a list (perhaps), so I'm debuting a Top 25 weekly ranking of the Top 5 wrestlers from each of the five U.S. pro wrestling "brands" (Raw, Smackdown, ECW, TNA, and ROH). WWE Raw could probably have 10 wrestlers in the Top 25, but to keep things even, I'm only picking the top 5 wrestlers from each brand. I'll run this every Wednesday evening here in the Cube.

Since pro wrestling is highly subjective, I've established three criteria points to evaluate the rankings, in the family of the Most Influential list compiled yearly in the Torch Newsletter. 1) Quality of TV/PPV time spent on the wrestler. 2) Quality of in-ring and "storyline" performance. 3) Is the wrestler in a position to draw money or ratings for the company?

The other consideration, much like college basketball rankings, is how much weight to place on wrestlers from WWE (high-end BCS schools) against wrestlers from TNA (low-end BCS schools) and ROH (mid-major schools).

Your feedback is certainly welcome. To the rankings...

(1) John Cena - Raw #1. Major surprise return to win Royal Rumble. In main event of WWE's next PPV. Highly-rated opening segment on 1/28 Raw. WWE's most-protected investment.

(2) Edge - SD #1. Current World Hvt. champion following Rumble victory. Given majority of Smackdown's key TV time. In Smackdown's top match at next PPV.

(3) Triple H - Raw #2. Finalist in Royal Rumble match. In Elimination Chamber match at next WWE PPV. Expected to be in a WrestleMania main event with Triple H DVD coming out just before Mania.

(4) Kurt Angle - TNA #1. Current TNA World Hvt. champion. Headlining TNA's next PPV and most visible wrestler on TNA Impact, with majority of TV time devoted to his storylines.

(5) Randy Orton - Raw #3. Current WWE champion with significant victory over hard-charging Jeff Hardy at Royal Rumble. Left KO'ed at the end of Jan. 28 Raw.

(6) Jeff Hardy - Raw #4. Mega-push leading to Royal Rumble subsided slightly on Jan. 28 Raw. Still in the headline Elimination Chamber match and a serious WWE player.

(7) Nigel McGuinness - ROH #1. Current ROH World champ. Headlining ROH's next New York City show against Bryan Danielson on Feb. 23.

(8) Bryan Danielson - ROH #2. Considered one of the best wrestlers in the world. Will face Nigel for the ROH Title on Feb. 23 NYC show.

(9) Tomko - TNA #2. Seriously being pushed for main event position as top babyface in the company. Survived two-on-one odds on Jan. 24 Impact to retain TNA Tag Titles.

(10) Ric Flair - SD #2. Scored clean victory over MVP at the Rumble PPV, and given respectable amount of TV time leading to PPV. In headline match against Mr. Kennedy at next PPV.

(11) C.M. Punk - ECW #1. Former ECW champion had upper hand over current ECW champion on Jan. 29 show. Beat formidable opponent, Elijah Burke, for a significant bounce-back win.

(12) Christian Cage - TNA #3. Main eventing second consecutive TNA PPV against Kurt Angle. Not booked like a serious threat to Angle's title, though.

(13) Rey Mysterio - SD #3. Lost to Edge at Royal Rumble, but will be in Smackdown's main event at WWE's next PPV in the re-match.

(14) MVP - SD #4. Clean loss to Ric Flair at Rumble set MVP back slightly. Still one of the most entertaining wrestlers on TV. In Smackdown's Elimination Chamber match, but not considered a serious threat to win.

(15) Shawn Michaels - Raw #5. Played lackey to Triple H as flashback to Michaels's role as a comedy figure in the DX 2006 era. Could be major player in the Elimination Chamber match.

(16) The Undertaker - SD #5. Eliminated earlier than expected from Royal Rumble. In position for WrestleMania main event, but currently without TV program.

(17) Samoa Joe - TNA #4. Position at next TNA PPV unclear, while regaining momentum in program with Nash antagonizing Jim Cornette.

(18) Chavo Guerrero - ECW #2. Current ECW champion, but has more losses than wins since coming to ECW. Not viewed as credible champion on a weak brand that isn't put in position to draw money for WWE.

(19) Austin Aries - ROH #3. Won blow-off match against Roderick Strong at ROH's most recent PPV. Being positioned as babyface leader. Faces Go Shiozaki in NYC on Feb. 23.

(20) The Briscoes - ROH #4. Booked as top tag team in pro wrestling despite recent tag title loss. Semi-main evented ROH's most recent PPV.

(21) The Miz & John Morrison - ECW #3. Current WWE tag champions. Returned to form with decisive victory over Colin Delaney to restore strong position.

(22) A.J. Styles - TNA #5. Given plenty of TV time alongside Kurt Angle, but turned into comedy heel figure. In no position to be taken seriously as PPV draw.

(23) Erick Stevens - ROH #5. Current FIP champion and being groomed for main event slot on future cards. Faces test against Go Shiozaki at ROH's next show on Feb. 22.

(24) Shelton Benjamin - ECW #4. Solid opening match against Kane on Jan. 29 TV. Sense of a real future for Shelton in ECW's main event position, despite poor showing at Rumble.

(25) Colin Delaney - ECW #5. Greatness. Given quality TV time to build-up program that led to Tommy Dreamer saving him from another beating on Jan. 29 show.

Others who would have received votes: Batista (SD #6), Mr. Kennedy (Raw #6), JBL (Raw #7), Chris Jericho (Raw #8), Roderick Strong (ROH #6).

***

11:15 a.m. ECW had one of its better offerings in several weeks last night. A good, solid show with quality wrestling and key storylines advanced. (Specifically, the Colin Delaney storyline picked up some steam, so that's an automatic thumbs up.)

ECW is really at its best not trying to be flashy, but just producing a fundamentally-strong one hour show. It's like a good first-hour PPV match. You don't want the match to steal the show; you just want a solid, memorable mid-card match. ECW usually has the fundamentals down, but the problem is that it's easily forgotten during the week.

The show is easily skippable for WWE fans, as the show draws less than half of the Raw audience. But, with the sharper set and some intriguing storylines developing, it might be worth another look. (Specifically for Colin Delaney.)

Compared to Raw two nights ago, ECW actually had a better wrestling product outside of Raw's main event. Shelton vs. Kane was a very good opener. If anything, it was good to see him last longer in the ring against Kane than he did during the Rumble match. Cat-leap. Superkick. Out you go.

And WWE can do a finish like Shelton walking out of the match after a competitive battle because it makes sense in Week 2 of the feud. So, Shelton felt like January 29 wasn't his day to beat Kane in a one-on-one match. Well, WWE doesn't enforce a penalty for walking out of a match in the storylines, so come back next week or the week after and see if that's a better day.

Now, specifically related to Colin Delaney, the show went from good to great. There's just something about the way Colin looks pathetic on camera that makes for great TV. And then, the way he takes a beating is tremendous. It's been written before that Colin's program is great not only because he's great, but because WWE has a reason for booking squash matches every week.

Miz & Morrison looked like a million bucks as heels tearing apart Colin. On Smackdown last week, they looked like a folded-up $5 bill when they were completely ignored during the Noble-Palumbo-Michelle angle. Bam. One Colin Delaney segment later and they're back to an acceptable level as tag team champions. Now, with Tommy Dreamer helping out Colin Whipwreck, they have a tag team program ripe for a lengthy run.

As for the C.M. Punk and Chavo Guerrero interaction, it was fine. I can go either way on it, as Punk's character seemed desperate with him dressing up as a Mariachi player to sneak attack Chavo. Punk did have a nice rebound win against Elijah Burke, so it's a wash. Punk chasing Chavo and the ECW Title should make for good TV going forward, though.

Updated Tuesday, January 29

12:10 p.m. Last night's Raw was an OK show, but it fell into that trap of having a letdown after a big PPV. Based on nothing more than memory, it seems like the Raw after a newsworthy PPV starts off hot to follow-through on the big news coming out of the PPV, but then slowly slides into mediocrity.

The classic example is the traditional Raw after WrestleMania where WWE wants to strike while the iron is hot to transition into the next series of storylines, but everyone is too hung over - in some cases, literally - to produce a good show. The writers, wrestlers, producers, and announcers have been driving for eight weeks on the road to Mania, and then they're expected to get behind the wheel right after finishing a long road trip to drive another 500 miles. (Don't hate on the analogy, as I'm simply prepping everyone for Michael Cole and Coach's 18,000 "Road to WrestleMania" clichés between now and Mania.)

From a creative perspective, there were plenty of unanswered questions and head-scratching storyline progressions on Raw last night that may have been caused by Rumble letdown. That is, unless the writers are one step ahead and have all the explanations figured out for Raw next week. Explanations for things such as ... Why Triple H was able to pick his own partner in a tag match, how Cena was allowed into the Rumble without qualifying, and how Regal suddenly had graphics ready for the Elimination Chamber match three minutes after convincing Vince of the idea.

From WWE's perspective, the top story coming out of the show was John Cena cashing in his Money in the...er...Royal Rumble opportunity at No Way Out, then taking out Orton after the main event to get his message across. Same song, different year. But, the story most fans were probably looking for was how Jeff Hardy would be portrayed after losing the title match.

I'd say it was a wash. Hardy made his first appearance of the show in the sixth quarter-hour, with the line about the title loss not being the end of the road, but only the beginning of his quest. Jim Ross then really helped his cause by saying Hardy had the most quality statement of the night.

The main event left Hardy in a second-fiddle position, though, when Cena came out to save the day after the match while Hardy was selling an injury. The message was clear that Hardy is back to the second tier, with Cena on top again. There was definitely a sense of the mega-push for Hardy subsiding.

Of course, the Cena-Hardy symbolism that transferred over from the Rumble opens the door for a mega-match down the road. Cena would obviously be the aggressor in the feud, with the anti-Cena fans making it easy for him to play more of a heel role, especially with the unspoken message that he returned from injury to steal Hardy's opportunity at the WWE Title.

Based on our current Torch poll, you want that Cena vs. Hardy match in the main event at Mania more than any other possible match from the Raw brand. I was initially in that camp on Monday morning, but I believe the Cena vs. Hardy match could mean a lot more if WWE held off their first encounter until Summerslam or even next year's Mania. The risk on holding off that long is that Hardy cools off, and the match down the road wouldn't have as much intrigue. It's all great speculation until the Mania matches are set.

Updated Monday, January 28

3:35 p.m. What an interesting 20 hours. First of all, check out Jeremy Maes and Justin Parker's blogs on the Rumble and reaction to the big stories coming out of the Rumble. Two excellent blogs in the Specialist section.

Standing back for a second to survey the scene, there are two things I'm certain of. One is that WWE's roster is back to full-strength after 2007 was about injuries and Wellness depleting the roster. The other thing I'm certain of is that WWE caught everyone, including myself, off guard in more than one way.

They caught everyone off guard with the Cena surprise, which Cena orchestrated like a true pro in his mainstream interviews last week. They also got people, including myself, worked up on Hardy not winning the belt to distract from one thing we should all be most concerned about.

During the JBL vs. Jericho match, there was an unprotected chair shot to the head from Jericho to JBL. There was also Jericho hanging JBL with a TV cord across the top rope, with the imagery of JBL having the life choked out from him.

WWE tested the audience last night - consciously or not - to see how much we really care about concussions and the Benoit family tragedy. They played that Hardy card so strong on Raw leading to the Rumble, that anything short of a title change at the Rumble PPV would have created serious outrage.

So, do we care as much about JBL taking an unprotected chair shot to the head as Hardy not winning the belt? Are we as outraged about the TV cable being used in the JBL-Jericho feud as we are about Hardy not winning the belt?

I'll be the first to admit I failed the test. Reminds me of that Calculus class in college. I should have seen the test coming, too, as a Torch reader sent me an email last week questioning whether we really care about the serious issues in wrestling when Jeff Hardy was being glorified, despite putting his body at risk with the "30-foot" Swanton bomb and "playing hurt" with a laundry list of injuries he talked about in his pre-Rumble interviews.

Setting aside the "wrestling debate" of whether Hardy or Orton should be holding the WWE Title, the serious question is whether Hardy should have been put in a position to carry the company as the top wrestler by virtue of holding the WWE Title.

As a babyface champion, carrying the belt adds significant responsibility above and beyond holding the IC Title. More appearances, more house shows, more little things necessitated to wave the WWE banner across the globe. Only Hardy knows if he would have been able to physically handle that responsibility. If we really care about the serious injuries in wrestling then it should be acceptable that Hardy didn't win the belt (I'll keep trying to tell myself that), with there still being an opportunity for Hardy to remain a key player on Raw going forward.

WWE exposed where my priorities were last night. And I would bet the number of hate mail to WWE on Hardy not winning the belt far, far, far exceeded any concern over JBL taking that chair shot to the head. WWE, the master of the mind games, won twice last night for Cena's surprise and exposing misaligned priorities.

***

12:15 p.m. Oh, the Rumble. What a tangled web that shall surely begin to unfold tonight on Raw as they start traversing the road to WrestleMania. Clearly, the top story coming out of last night's show was John Cena's surprise entry in the Rumble. That was a rather significant surprise after he did interviews in the week leading to the Rumble that he wouldn't even be part of WrestleMania.

The other top story is WWE not going with Jeff Hardy as champion. In the interviews, leading to the Rumble, Hardy seemed to softening the blow of him not winning the title. He talked about wanting to be in Money in the Bank, or wrestling Rey Mysterio, or working a program with Matt Hardy. (I half-expected Matt to turn on Jeff last night to cost him the title.)

I hear the argument of sticking with the Mania plans and not going with Hardy, but I don't buy the argument. Looking at what a Hardy title reign could have meant, I'll make a case purely on the potential Mania title matches that Hardy would have created.

Unless plans change and Hardy wins the belt on a Raw or the No Way Out PPV before Mania, the following fresh and significant match-ups can be thrown out the window. Hardy vs. Triple H. Hardy vs. Cena. Hardy vs. Undertaker. Hardy and Hunter already have a back-story, with Hardy having the Rumble title match opportunity after defeating Hunter in December. Hunter could get his revenge by winning the belt at Mania, followed by Hardy chasing until Summerslam if he remains hot on TV. (Guest reviewer Jason Hess and I discuss that scenario in our post-Rumble audio update.)

Hardy vs. Cena would have been a match-up of two of the top babyfaces in the company from the last 12 months, forcing fans to pick their allegiance. Hardy vs. Taker would really bring Hardy full-circle from the closest he ever came to winning the WWE Title in that 2002 ladder match when Taker was riding a bike and Hardy was on his first WWE run.

Based on our current Rumble poll, the votes are in (70 percent) that Jeff Hardy winning the belt was the most-desirable scenario for Torch readers. Instead, the possibilities for Mania are straight from the recycling bin, although WWE could turn a recycled feud into a hot angle just as easily as they turned Jeff Hardy into the top star in the company in three weeks.

Unless Cena loses the title opportunity between now and Mania - with his surprise appearance and Rumble victory simply being an attempt to off-set the negative reaction to Hardy not winning the belt - we're looking at repeat feuds. There is one very intriguing feud out there in the form of Cena vs. Undertaker, but the most-likely candidates are Orton vs. Cena or Orton vs. Hunter. Been there, done that, got that PPV t-shirt.

Tonight's Raw will paint a clearer picture of where WWE is going with the top matches at Mania. If there's one thing WWE can take away from three weeks of Hardy build-up, it's that his popularity is at an all-time high. If they're not going with Hardy as champion, it's imperative to keep him strong and in the main event picture. I'm looking three, six, nine months down the road when he can help sell PPVs (if WWE didn't lose some of their audience when Hardy didn't win the belt) with a significant and well-established second-from-the-top feud.

And now for a closing thought on John Cena from Keith in Orlando, Fla.: Can someone please explain the logic behind John Cena being in the Rumble as a surprise 30th entrant? Triple H had to go through hell and high water to get in. C.M. Punk had to win a qualifying match. And not only does Cena just walk in without qualifying, but he gets the highly coveted 30th spot? It’s the exact reason the 18+ crowd grew tired of Cena. He gets shoved down our throats. How often are we supposed to believe his Superman, "overcoming the odds" bit? It only makes me feel better about not purchasing tickets to Mania even though it’s in town for me for the first time ever. So he decides to return, and just in time to kill Hardy’s push. Jeff, that 30-foot Swanton will be completely forgotten, except as a highlight-reel fond memory.

Source: PWTORCH

Mir Capitalizes on Early Error by Lesnar in UFC 81

2008-02-03T04:31:00.000-08:00

By Ryan Mink

In less than a minute, Frank Mir already had a cut stretching across his face and about a dozen of Brock Lesnar's fist prints on it.

But just when it looked like Mir was going to be mauled by the former World Wrestling Entertainment superstar, Mir showed why there's a lot more to mixed martial arts and the Ultimate Fighting Championship than just brute size and strength. It's about know-how and experience.

From his back and with Lesnar looming above him, Mir grabbed onto Lesnar's foot and submitted Lesnar 1 minute 30 seconds into the first round with a knee bar yesterday in UFC 81 from Mandalay Bay Events Center in Las Vegas.

Mir (11-3), a six-year UFC veteran and former heavyweight champ, was greeted and sent off to a huge ovation as UFC fans booed Lesnar, who was making his UFC debut.

"I had Brock Lesnar, see that beast over there," Mir said in a television interview, making sure people noticed the glaring difference in muscle tone between two men weighing just 10 pounds apart, "dropping blows on my head and I still held on for a submission."

Lesnar took down Mir in just eight seconds and similarly to his only other mixed martial arts bout, a K1 fight on June 2 that lasted just 1:09, started pummeling his shocked opponent. The fight was paused and Lesnar was given a warning for punching Mir in the back of the head. By that point, Mir was already battered and only 30 seconds had elapsed.

Lesnar stood up and wasn't careful about where his legs were. Mir grabbed Lesnar's right foot, drawing it into his body and applying pressure by twisting. Lesnar, realizing he was in trouble, tried to leap out of the hold but Mir had enough strength to bring the hulk down. Only a couple seconds passed before Lesnar passionately tapped out.

"I was just trying to get a bunch of shots on him," said Lesnar, who claimed he will be back to fight again in the UFC. "I left my leg out there. No excuses. He's a top notch Jiu-Jitsu guy and he was the better fighter tonight."

Mir's fighting career nearly ended soon after he defeated Tim Sylvia to become the UFC heavyweight champion on June 19, 2004. Less than three months later, Mir was hit by a car while riding his motorcycle, breaking his femur and tearing all the ligaments in his knee.

Mir returned to the UFC on Feb. 4, 2006, more than a year-and-a-half after the accident, and lost two of his next four bouts.

"Part of coming back from an injury and competing at a high level is also having to put the mental game back on," Mir said in a pre-fight teleconference. "And that was one thing that I guess I hadn't really paid attention to. Because of the injury, everything was more from the physical aspect [rehabilitating]."

Mir could be in line for a title fight against Minotauro Nogueira, who beat Sylvia in last night's interim heavyweight title fight with a guillotine choke 1:28 into the third round. Nogueira became the first fighter to own both a PRIDE championship and UFC title.

Nogueira (31-4-1) was nearly knocked out in the first round by a few hard Sylvia punches that bloodied and dazed Nogueira. But once he regained his composure, Nogueira took the 6-foot-8 Sylvia (26-4) to the mat and secured the victory.

Source: Washington Post

411's UFC 81: Breaking Point Roundtable Preview

2008-02-03T04:01:00.000-08:00

by Caleb Newby

UFC 81 is here LIVE from Las Vegas, and everyone wants to know, is Brock Lesnar for real? 411mania’s MMA team is here to break down that very question as “The Next Big Thing” takes on a very tough test in former UFC Heavyweight Champion Frank Mir. Speaking of championships, Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira faces the man everyone loves to hate, Tim Sylvia, for the interim title. All this and much, much more on 411’s Roundtable breakdown!

Welcome one and all to our preview of UFC 81: Breaking Point (and a very special welcome to you pro wrestling fans checking out this MMA nonsense for the first time). And if you are indeed ordering this Saturday's event and are not familiar with the world of mixed martial arts, please let me STRONGLY encourage you to watch the March 2 event. With Anderson Silva facing Dan Henderson for the middleweight championship, we are going to have the legit top two fighters in a weight class going at it, a rare treat. Not to mention Silva is one of the most exciting strikers you'll ever see.

You know, with all this hype for Brock Lesnar, you have to wonder if the UFC has considered putting it on last as the main event. I mean who wants to end a PPV with Tim Sylvia holding the title anyway? That's not sending the fans home happy. But I digress. We have a lot of fights to get to and a whole lot of interest surrounding it. So without further ado, I'll turn it over to the best MMA team on the net!

Keita Nakamura vs. Rob Emerson

Michael Huckaby: How can you not root for a guy who was part of a rich white boy gang that went around the suburbs attacking innocent couples? Does he kick puppies too? He's every parent's dream. I kid, I'm just glad he's out of jail and back to the one-on-one fighting he's not that great at that he'll soon be doing at a local saloon MMA show near you. K-Taro got thrown to the wolves (baby wolves maybe?) with Fickett and Larson and I think (hope) he'll get back on track and send Malibu's Most Wanted out of the UFC.
Winner: K-Taro Nakamura, sub, Rd3

Dustin James: This fight is kind of interesting. Why? Because Emerson showed some pretty decent skills during his stint on The Ultimate Fighter. Besides being a major tool, Emerson can take some punishment. However, Nakamura is undefeated in MMA.......except for when he fights in the UFC. See, Nakamura is 14-2-2 as a pro, but is 0-2 in the UFC. Maybe Nakamura's losses are because he was fighting on Spike TV and not PPV? Either way I would look for Nakamura to finally get on the winning side of things in the UFC.
Winner: Keita Nakamura - Submission, Rd 2

Randy Harrison: Nakamura has had a tough go of it in the UFC so far, with two losses to Brock Larson and Drew Fickett in two previous Fight Night undercard fights. This time he moves to the undercard of a PPV with a MUCH easier opponent. Emerson has a .500 record and I'm looking for it to go sub-.500 as Nakamura's two UFC losses have been his only losses in his career. In an odd statistical anomaly, every single one of Nakamura's submission wins has come via the rear naked choke. Look for him to take Emerson's back and choke him out in round two.
Winner: Keita Nakamura, Submission, Rd 2

Jeremy Lambert: This is Nakamura's 3rd fight in UFC, posting losses in his other 2. Emerson hasn't fought since the Double KO with Gray Maynard. Despite his 2 losses in UFC, Nakamura is a good fighter who hasn't lost outside the UFC. I think Emerson is a mediocre fighter who was losing that fight with Maynard before the Double KO. Emerson is a tough guy to finish though so even if Nakamura gets the fight to the ground, he may not be able to finish. I think Nakamura will score takedowns, work some ground and pound, go for submissions, and win a decision.
Winner: Keita Nakamura, Decision

Morgan Marx: For UFC 81, my favorite pre-fight information goes to the Nakamura v. Emerson fight, hands down. From the UFC profile on Emerson casually mentioning "a short sting in jail in 2007," to Nakamura citing Emerson's penchant for street fighting (or assault, depending on how you look at it) and vowing to punish Emerson "like his mama did," it's pure comic gold. Emerson can talk about becoming a "new and improved" fighter all he wants, but I'm more impressed that Nakamura went a combined 6 rounds with Brock Larson and Drew Fickett. At 155, I like Nakamura's chances at coming out on the right side of a decision.
Winner: K-Taro (Unanimous Decision)

Bren Oliver: Yo, yo, yo...I be pickin Rob Emerson, or R-ob as we in the street call him, cause he's pretty fly for a white guy! Actually, I'm gonna go with K-Taro on this one, as I've yet to be impressed by Emerson's work in the cage. Nakamura may be 0-2 in the Octagon, but both of his losses came against Welterweights (talented ones at that in Fickett/Larson) whereas he's more naturally suited for Lightweight. I don't think either man has the power or technical skill to finish the other off and the high number of "decision" victories on each man's record backs up my gut feeling.
Winner: Keita Nakamura, Judges' Decision

David Heath vs. Tim Boetsch

Michael Huckaby: I'm not really comfortable picking this as I see a very good chance of a split decision that I'll no doubt pick incorrectly. They're ridiculously evenly matched right down to losing a plodding, boring decision that wasn't their fault (Machida and Matyushenko, respectively). I think Heath might be able to finish but I'll go the easy route.
Winner: David Heath, decision

Dustin James: Tim Boetsch is making his UFC debut here, and it's coming against a guy who is on a 2 fight losing streak in the UFC. Heath is 2-2 in the UFC with his 2 losses coming to Renato Sobral and Lyoto Machida. That's not bad at all. Boetsch is the kind of fighter who doesn't let his fights go to decision, while Heath has only fought to two decision himself. I'd have to favor the UFC veteran in this fight.
Winner: David Heath - KO, Rd 3

Randy Harrison: Heath and Boetsch have both shown the ability to finish and the ability to have boring fights, so it's really a crapshoot as to what we're going to see Saturday night. Heath's two losses in his career are to Lyoto Machida and Babalu, so he's not a slouch by any means, while Boetsch's only loss is to IFL Light Heavyweight Champion Vladimir Matyushenko. The difference in this one might come down to the dreaded "Octagon jitters" and Heath won't have them based on his huge experience advantage in the UFC. Heath will probably end up outworking Boetsch and earning the decision. If not, he might quickly find his way out of the UFC.
Winner: David Heath, Decision

Jeremy Lambert: GANGREL~! Heath hasn't fought since the Babalu incident where he was pretty much dominated. Boetsch is fresh off an IFL loss, the first of his career. Boetsch has heavy hands so I expect him to want to keep the fight standing and look for the knockout. Heath is a decent fighter but nothing special with average rounded skills. I think Boetsch knocks him out early.
Winner: Tim Boetsch, TKO, Round 1

Morgan Marx: No real insight in this one. Boetsch has a slight advantage in that he's an unknown commodity and Heath will be under a lot of pressure to win what with two consecutive losses in the UFC. Boetsch survived against Vladimir Matyushenko, which says something of his ability to minimize damage if not his ability to escape a plodding wrestler. Heath probably can't afford to fight conservatively (a boring fight would be as bad as a loss) so he might slip up and allow Boetsch to land the one big punch.
Winner: Tim Boetsch (TKO, Rd 2)

Bren Oliver: David Heath must have upset the Zuffa brass after drawing Renato Sobral and Lyoto Machida as his last two opponents, but I believe Tim Boetsch will allow the Oklahoman to get his UFC career back on track. Boetsch is an above average fighter, having only lost in his last match and having never been finished, but I see Heath as the superior Mixed Martial Artist and I believe his experience in the Octagon will give him an advantage over newcomer Boetsch.
Winner: David Heath, Judges' Decision

Marvin Eastman vs. Terry Martin

Michael Huckaby: If I do not see this on my television I will be upset. If you're going to up the PPV price it's really the least they could do. It's a battle of semi-awkward striking but Martin has proven he has the better KO power, whether he's dominating or getting dominated. The problem becomes as this hits the 2nd and 3rd rounds Martin loses steam on his strikes and is apt to get caught. I'll take Martin, I like him, and like most people that like him I'm not sure why.
Winner: Terry Martin, (T)KO, Rd3

Dustin James: Terry Martin is a very talented fighter, don't get me wrong. Unfortunately he doesn't have a good chin, that or he just likes getting knocked out. Martin is 16-3 as a pro and all 3 of his losses have come by KO. BUT, 10 of his wins have come by KO as well. So you know the dude loves to throw. Eastman on the other hand, is a pretty decent fighter. He just seems to slip up whenever he fights a big name. But Eastman did beat Rampage Jackson in Eastman's first MMA fight. I'd look for Terry Martin to want to keep the fight standing, where his strength to throw should allow him to prevail.
Winner: Terry Martin - KO, Rd 2

Randy Harrison: Two guys that are almost mirror images of each other and they're going to be bringing the stand-up in this one. They'll both stand and trade and slug it out in the middle of the cage and it should make for a great fight. Eastman has been proven to have a chin that is a little suspect and Martin is going to be looking to redeem himself after his loss to Chris Leben. This could spell a quick night for Eastman and a possible highlight reel KO for Martin.
Winner: Terry Martin, TKO, Rd 1

Jeremy Lambert: Eastman won his last fight but lost his last fight in UFC to current champ Quinton Jackson. Martin had Chris Leben beat, only to get knocked out. I expect both guys to want to stand and bang and put on an entertaining fight for the crowd. I think Eastman is more technical but Martin has heavier hands. If Martin doesn't knockout Eastman quickly, he'll likely get frustrated and end up losing this fight either by TKO or decision.
Winner: Marvin Eastman, TKO, Round 3

Morgan Marx: There won't be any surprises in this one. Terry Martin rarely goes to a decision. Either he'll put Eastman out cold or the Corrections officer is going to land a nasty elbow that cuts Martin. While Eastman should be commended for an ungodly work ethic and commitment to the sport, I don't think he'll survive 15 minutes taking damage from Martin. Still, I like Eastman at 185, and I think he may have something up his sleeve to catch Martin.
Winner: Marvin Eastman (TKO, Rd 2)

Bren Oliver: Both these men love to throw leather so I will likely soil my boxer-briefs if this fight ends in a Submission. Eastman has shown he can still fight even on the plus-side of 35, while Martin has shown flashes of brilliance both in his striking and in defeat. Few fighters can claim the distinction of being on the losing side of two "highlight reels" but Martin certainly is able to wear that feather in his cap thanks to James Irvin's flying knee and Chris Leben's comeback knockout at Fight Night XI last September. I believe this fight has a good chance of making the televised card based on the fighters' styles. I'm only picking Martin based on his youth and power, but I won't blink twice of Eastman ends up putting him to sleep before the third round wraps.
Winner: Terry Martin, RD 2, TKO

Chris Lytle vs. Kyle Bradley

Michael Huckaby: Every card there is one of these fights where you have nothing to say and the outcome is basically pre-determined.
Winner: Chris Lytle, sub, Rd2

Dustin James: I'm not going to lie to you. I'm not the biggest fan of Chris Lytle. Don't get me wrong, the guy is talented....it just seems that whenever he gets his chance to step it up, he can't back it up. This fight however, has the feel of the UFC feeding Lytle somebody. Bradley is making his UFC debut and is 13-4 as a pro. He is on a 7 fight win streak with 5 of those fights ending by KO. Will he be able to KO Lytle? Probably not.
Winner: Chris Lytle - Submission, Rd 1

Randy Harrison: Bradley has a decent 14-4 record but it's mainly as a can-crusher as any step up in his level of competition has led to losses. Lytle is a huge step up in competition for him and Lytle is a hit-and-miss fighter for the most part, but he's going to score a big hit here at the expense of the debuting Bradley.
Winner: Chris Lytle, Submission, Rd 2

Jeremy Lambert: I've never seen Bradley fights but based on his record, it looks like he likes to stand and trade, something that got Lytle in trouble last fight. This fight seems like a "thank you" to Lytle for not bitching about the stoppage in his last fight and for allowing Matt Hughes to blanket him a year ago. Lytle takes him down and finishes early.
Winner: Chris Lytle, Submission, Round 1

Morgan Marx: This is a tailor made fight for Lytle. He should have little trouble taking Bradley where he wants to be. Bradley may have the boxing ability to stand with Lytle, but I'm sure Lytle can outclass the UFC newcomer on the ground. The problem for Lytle is that he comes up short against the top 10 fighters. Still, this could be a KO or submission of the night contender.
Winner: Chris Lytle (Submission, Rd 1)

Bren Oliver: In losing a decision to Matt Hughes, Chris Lytle won my respect and I doubt I'm alone in my admiration for his performance. I believe he's well-rounded and intelligent which tend to make for a winning combo in MMA. I don't know much about Bradley other than he's won seven in a row and finished six of those opponents. He will no doubt want to strike given his hands' reputation for leaving opponents TKO'd. However, I think Lytle will be too much for him in the fight, and he'll eventually find a way to sink in a Rear-Naked Choke or perhaps even pull guard and lock in a Triangle.
Winner: Chris Lytle, RD 2, Submission

Gleison Tibau vs. Tyson Griffin

Michael Huckaby: I really like this fight and while the resulting ways may not show it, Tibau is really growing as a fighter. That said, he's running into Tyson Griffin who I really can't see Tibau finishing and there is little way he'd win a decision outside of complete domination out of nowhere. They'll stand, they'll go the ground, they'll stand, they'll go the ground, but Griffin will get the better of it a majority of the time and take this in a close, but not that close, fight.
Winner:: Tyson Griffin, decision

Dustin James: Ladies and gentlemen, your fight of the night? It seems like Tyson Griffin always likes to bring a show for the fans it all just comes down to Tibau. Tibau is 3-1 in the UFC with his only loss coming to Nick Diaz. Griffin is also 3-1 in the UFC with his only loss coming to the undefeated Frank Edgar. Me, personally. I feel that Griffin is one of the most underrated Lightweight fighters in MMA. He always bring his "a" game and hell, he has a win over Urijah Faber on his record. THE DUDE IS GOOD! Oh, and he trains with Xtreme Couture. DERF??
Winner: Tyson Griffin - Decision

Randy Harrison: Tibau is double-tough, but Griffin is on a roll and will be looking to use his wrestling and ground-and-pound to keep that roll going. Tibau will want to keep this fight standing but there's no way that's going to happen. There will be lots of scrambling and lots of fighting on the mat, and that's Griffin's world, which he will dominate. Tibau is a gamer but he's just managed to be unlucky enough to be the next guy in Griffin's path. An exciting fight but I don't expect to see a finish.
Winner: Tyson Griffin, Decision

Jeremy Lambert: Why is this fight not televised according to UFC.com? Seriously, why? It's impossible for Tyson Griffin to have a boring fight and hopefully this fight makes TV. The only reason I can think as to why it wouldn't be on TV is because Randy Couture will likely corner Griffin and they don't want to show him since he should be in the main event on this show. Anyway, this fight will rule, Tyson Griffin is awesome, and he'll win.
Winner: Tyson Griffin, Decision

Morgan Marx: There's nothing Tibau can throw at Griffin that Thiago Tavares didn't already try. Tibau may be a former welterweight, but Griffin's odd physiology (forgive me if I omit any references to Griffin's backside) makes him a deceptively huge lightweight. I think Griffin outpaces Tibau until the ATT fighter wears down, then pounds out a victory. Up next will be a top 7 fighter for Griffin and a chance to firmly establish himself as a future title contender.
Winner: Tyson Griffin (TKO, Rd 3)

Bren Oliver: Tyson Griffin is one of the UFC's most exciting fighters and gets everything he can out of his 5'6" frame. I expect the bout between he of Xtreme Couture training and Gleison Tibau to be "Fight of the Night", though that's not saying much given the UFC Lightweight Division's history when it comes to leaving fans breathless. Tibau is riding a four-fight winning streak and will come prepared based on his affiliation with American Top Team. Griffin is as well-rounded, if not a bit more powerful, and will absolutely test Tibau's conditioning. I think he will ultimately outwork the Brazilian and it will show on the judges' scorecards. The subplot to this scrap is whether or not Randy Couture will corner Griffin, or more to the point, whether or not the UFC will allow him to.
This has nothing to do with the actual fight, but I felt the need to mention Tibau lost to a fighter named "Anaconda Anaconda" in 2004 in the giant snake-snake's first and only career win, then followed up that disappointing performance by beating a fellow named "Anderson Bad Boy" in his next bout. Seriously.
Winner: Tyson Griffin, Judges' Decision

Ricardo Almeida vs. Rob Yundt
With Rob Yundt being a late replacement for Alan Belcher, and the majority of the 411mania staff doing their roundtable surprisingly early and on time, most had Belcher in their analysis. Thus the short breakdown. The more you know.

Morgan Marx: Had Alan Belcher not been forced to withdraw from this bout, I would have predicted a tough return for Almeida. But against Yundt, Cachorrao gets a reprieve. Yundt has never fought on a stage as bright as the IFL or WEC, let alone the biggest of them all. His last three victories all came against opponents making their MMA debut. Now, he gets to face a world class grappler. Belcher could have troubled Almeida with his size and striking. Yundt will probably play into Almeida's submission expertise, allowing the UFC to keep dreaming that Almeida is a credible threat to Anderson Silva.
Winner: Cachorrao (Submission, Rd 1)

Bren Oliver: This is an interesting fight and Yundt is a actually a decent last-minute replacement for Alan Belcher. He's undefeated in his six professional MMA fights and has finished five of his opponents. Almeida, on the other hand, hasn't seen action in more than three-and-a-half years, though he ended things on a strong note with three consecutive victories over Ryo Chonan, Nathan Marquardt, and Kazuo Misaki. I think Almeida's jiujitsu, and experience, will be the determining factor in this fight.
Winner: Ricardo Almeida, RD 1, Submission

Nathan Marquardt vs. Jeremy Horn

Michael Huckaby: I think the fight and preparation for his fight with Santiago showed that Horn is no longer really into the game. From an idiot's point of view (in this case, mine) he seems like another road warrior going wherever will have him for a decent sized check and fighting with only his natural ability of the past that gives him a shot to win. While this would work on a smaller show it just won't work with Nate Marquardt, who really should dominate most of this fight but probably won't be able to put him away. Horn's name in the future will be linked more with training than top level fighting.
Winner: Nate Marquardt, decision

Dustin James: And Jeremy Horn returns to the UFC for his 80 millionth fight. It's too bad he draws Marquardt as an opponent. Marquardt is a talented fighter who was on a nice roll in the UFC until he ran into the freight train known as Anderson Silva. Now Marquardt looks to get back into the winning side of things with a win over a solid UFC veteran in Jeremy Horn. It's been over a year since we have seen Horn in the UFC, and it will be nice to see ol Gumby fighting in a UFC ring again.
Winner: Nathan Marquardt - Submission, Rd 3

Randy Harrison: Horn is an MMA legend, partially for his skills and partially for his exhaustive record of fights. He's coming in 3-3 in his last six fights and hasn't been able to get any positive momentum going in his career for a while. Marquardt is going to be looking to prove himself after getting beaten down and finished by Anderson Silva, and I think he's going to do it here at the expense of Horn. Marquardt will get this fight to the ground and he will take over on Horn from the top position to earn the submission duke.
Winner: Nate Marquardt, Submission, Rd 2

Morgan Marx: Everything I've heard from Horn has sent up warning flags. Hoping that Nate Marquardt, a Greg Jackson fighter, hasn't been training properly leading up to the show sounds like a faulty game plan. Horn looked entirely disinterested in his loss to Jorge Santiago. He's 3-3 in his last 6 fights and is already referencing the fact that taking the fight on short notice hampered his preparation. While Horn has the skill to always surprise, I think Marquardt pounds him out much like Matt Lindland did. While Marquardt is not on Anderson Silva's level, he's one of the top middleweights on the UFC roster, not someone to take lightly at all.
Winner: Nate Marquardt (TKO, Rd 1)

Bren Oliver: I appreciate Jeremy Horn stepping in to replace Thales Leites but he's in for a rough night unless Marquardt has for some reason decided to take him lightly. I saw Horn in his last fight (at "Art of War 3" last September) and he was less-than impressive in his submission loss to Jorge Santiago. Horn looked out of shape and didn't seem very motivated to compete. Marquardt is a step up from Santiago and is hungry to fight as he's been on the shelf since losing to Anderson Silva almost seven months ago. I see him coming in and overwhelming Horn from the get go. I'm only picking it to go a full three rounds because it will be difficult for Marquardt to knock Horn out, who has only been TKO'd twice in one hundred professional fights, and I don't see "Nate the Great" having the jiujitsu prowess to tap Horn out.
Winner: Nate Marquardt, Judges' Decision

Frank Mir vs. Brock Lesnar

Michael Huckaby: I feel really awkward in these situations because it's incredibly rare you face me with a 50/50 tossup. Even if I'm wrong at least I know who should win. We all know how this is going to go, Lesnar is going to immediately shoot and take Mir to the ground with relative ease. The rest of the fight will be the question of whether Brock can turn Mir's head into hamburger meat before Mir slaps on a triangle choke or armbar. If this were 2004 I'd say no, but since it's 2008 I have to think Lesnar will be able to pull this off. As always my opinion of a Frank Mir fight might change the day before when I see what kind of shape he's in at the weigh-in.
Winner: Brock Lesnar, (T)KO, Rd2

Dustin James: Oh man, oh man, oh man! Here it is! The long awaited debut of Brock Lesnar in MMA! I've been a fan of Lesnar's since before he appeared on WWE TV. I'm talking since I was obtaining copies of video tapes of a "big guy doing shooting star presses in OVW". I was also there LIVE at Wrestlemania 19 when he tried his only Shooting Star Press in the WWE and landed on his fucking head. So needless to say, I have some history with Brock. However, he is in over his head here. Brock must feel that he has the talent needed to beat Frank Mir. And he might. But however, I think if he accomplishes that feat it will either be with a lucky punch or his ability to wrestle Mir to the ground for octagon control and a decision victory. Anything other then that, and it's Frank Mir all the way.
Winner: Frank Mir - Submission, Rd 2

Randy Harrison: This is the fight that everyone is interested in seeing, MMA fans and non-fans alike. Mir is still trying to find the form he had pre-accident, while Lesnar is going to be out to prove that he is worth all of the hype that he has had going into this fight and that he is also serious about his MMA career. Lesnar is going to rely on his wrestling background heavily, and his ground and pound, but let's hope that he's also been working his submission defense in the time that he's been training or Mir WILL catch him in something and rip an arm off. Mir is more than comfortable from his back and will be looking to submit the MMA newcomer and send him out of the cage humbled. I don't think it's going to happen though as I think that Brock will avoid the submissions and wrestle out the decision win.
Winner: Brock "So you broke Tim Syliva's arm, WHO CARES?" Lesnar, Decision

Jeremy Lambert: This is the main event correct? Might as well be. Lesnar is a mystery to the MMA world, much like Houston Alexander and Sokodujou were. I didn't fall into the Alexander trap, smartly picking Silva but I did fall into the Sokodujou trap, taking him over Machida. The difference with that is that I think Lesnar is better than Houston and Soko and I don't think Mir is as well rounded as Silva and Machida. For that reason, I've got to take Lesnar in this fight. Even if Lesnar is not as good as Soko or Houston and Mir is better than Silva and Machida, mystery fighters usually get 2 fights before being exposed and this is Brock's second.
Winner: Brock Lesnar, TKO, Round 1

Morgan Marx: I'm glad that most predictions about this fight reference the fact that we really have no idea how it will play out. I do think that people are sleeping on Frank Mir. For some reason, people keep pointing to his losses against Marcio Cruz and Brandon Vera. Anyone fighting at 60-70% is going to look terrible, especially against a top 10 heavyweight like Vera. If Mir believes that his leg is close to 100% we'll see a much different fighter. I love how analytical Mir is. He seems to be well prepared for this fight. He won't be surprised when Lesnar puts him on his back and he seems to be preparing to capitalize on any openings Lesnar leaves. If the two fought 10 times, I think Lesnar would take a majority. But Lesnar has a lot of pressure to put on a good show, and all Frank Mir needs is one slip up, one exposed limb, to force the submission. I don't think it will be as easy as his armbar on Tim Sylvia, but I like Mir's chances of reestablishing himself as a true threat in the heavyweight division.
Winner: Frank Mir (Submission, Rd 1)

Bren Oliver: Could the UFC please show the clip of Frank Mir breaking Tim Sylvia's arm more often? Seriously, I think I've seen it about twenty times in the past week and it was included 3-4 times in the opening package for the UFC 81 countdown show on Spike TV. The forearm-snapping highlight is bordering on crossing over into "Jeep Liberty 'Rock Me Baby' Commercial" territory. STOP THE MADNESS!!!
I've wrestled back and forth with picking the winner of this fight, unfortunately without a pre-scripted McMahon-driven result at my fingertips. I like Brock's strength and amateur background. However, I believe he is overconfident, and I think it's a mistake for him to have isolated himself in Minnesota as a matter of convenience. There is a reason camps like American Top Team, Greg Jackson Submission Fighting, American Kickboxing Academy, and Xtreme Couture are successful. In each you have solid fighters training with their peers, as well as well-rounded, world class instructors. I don't doubt there are excellent folks in Brock's camp but I believe he's limiting his potential by not training with the cream of the crop. Mir seems to have gotten himself back in shape both mentally and physically, plus he's an underdog in the fight which relieves him of a lot of pressure to win. I think he is going to be prepared for Brock to shoot and I won't be surprised if he catches him with a knee on the way in which sets up a final sequence to the fight. I know I'm going out on a limb to not take Mir by submission, but then again this is Mixed Martial Arts so anything can happen.
Winner: Frank Mir, TKO, RD 1

Tim Sylvia vs. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira

Michael Huckaby: This pains me so much. Nogueira deserves to be rated higher than Sylvia in the Top 10 and he's better than Sylvia in the fact he could beat more top level guys than Sylvia could. HOWEVER, this is a horrible matchup for Nog. I think Nog would have an easier time with Randy Couture than he would Sylvia. How can Nogueira win this fight? Mir-like armbar. That's about it. I don't see how he can win a decision and while Nog's boxing has improved it's not quite to the point where I think he could KO Sylvia or anything. Nog needs an armbar and I think Captain Clinch Tim Sylvia will be able to keep it standing a majority of the time and while he'll eat some punches he should get the better of it. Man, I'm picking a lot of decisions.
Winner: Tim Sylvia, decision

Dustin James: Alright, everybody say it with me now........UGH! Why, Randy, why? Why must you leave the UFC and then leave us with THIS? I'm a huge fan of Big Nog, not so much of Sylvia. But I can see Sylvia attempting to go for a decision victory and surprising NOBODY.
Winner: Tim Sylvia - Decision

Randy Harrison: Sylvia will fight his usal fight of jabs, clinches and backpedalling, which will be a real treat for us all. The only hope is that Nogueira can get this fight down to the mat and use the top position to keep Sylvia from boring us to tears. Along with that, with the top position he can more than likely us some ground and pound to force Tim to transition to where he leaves himself open for a submission. I doubt that there will be a finish in this fight though, and I'm left to just hope that the guy who won't have terrible fights defending the title will win.
Winner: And NEW UFC Heavyweight Champion (interim or otherwise), Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira

Jeremy Lambert: Ugh. Even though I like Nogueira, I just can't stand Tim Sylvia and I just can't be excited for a Sylvia fight. Both guys are coming off of lackluster 3 round decision victories, with Sylvia, of course, looking more lackluster of the two. Nog is great on the ground and throws good combos on the feet. Sylvia has the reach and the power, a good sprawl, and a decent ground game. You know what that means right? Sylvia jabs Nog away, sprawls, clinches, and dry humps Nog for 25 minutes en route to another boring title reign. YAY~!
Winner: Tim Sylvia, Decision

Source:
Morgan Marx: Against anyone else in the UFC's heavyweight division, I would love Nogueira's odds. But Sylvia's size and striking ability is a lot to deal with. Sure, Nogueira probably has the best submission skills of any heavyweight currently fighting. But Jeff Monson and Randy Couture have some submission skills, and neither could finish Sylvia when the fight hit the mat. Nogueira's gameplan of absorbing punishment until a submission opportunity presents itself won't work on a striker like Sylvia. Sylvia has also shown that he has the cardio to go 5 rounds, even when semi-conscious. If Nogueria wins I think he'll make a fine champion. But I think he's once again stuck. In Pride, Nogueira couldn't quite escape from Fedor's shadow. In the UFC, that shadow has 8" and 40 lbs on the Russian.
Winner: Tim Sylvia (TKO, Rd 4)

Bren Oliver: It seems Tim Sylvia is the favorite in this fight and it's difficult to argue the point. His striking is superior to Nogueira's, though I think Nog's ability to stand is underestimated simply because of his jiujitsu wizardry, and Tim-meh knows how to grind out a win if necessary. That being said, I still question his mental strength, and his recent comments about wearing the belt 24/7 if he wins show me his mindset is the same as it was when Couture took advantage. However, where people are saying Sylvia's size will work to his advantage, I actually believe those long arms and legs will work against him. Nogueira is a submission master and we've seen Sylvia tapped out before which can't be said for "Minotauro". If Nog can keep things on the ground he should eventually find an opening to latch onto Sylvia and finish the fight.
I also wonder if perhaps Randy Couture might reconsider his desire to only fight Fedor Emelianenko if Nogueira performs at a high level and finishes "The Maine-iac".
Winner: "Minotauro" Nogueira, RD 3, Submission

Source: 411 Mania