Carrier IQ: More privacy alarms, more confusion

Controversy over a mobile data-logger called Carrier IQ escalated today, with a U.S. senator raising an alarm and Apple and Verizon distancing themselves, even though it's still unclear how the software works.
An Android developer, Trevor Eckhart, reported last month that Carrier IQ software phoned home with details about how the phone was being used and where it was. Earlier this week, Eckhart posted a video elaborating on his claims, which was followed by another report that the software has been found on iPhones.
Apple responded today by saying it hasn't used Carrier IQ since it released iOS 5 last month and will remove it entirely from its products "in a future software update," the company said in a statement reported by GigaOm:

We stopped supporting Carrier IQ with iOS 5 in most of our products and will remove it completely in a future software update. With any diagnostic data sent to Apple, customers must actively opt-in to share this information, and if they do, the data is sent in an anonymous and encrypted form and does not include any personal information. We never recorded keystrokes, messages or any other personal information for diagnostic data and have no plans to ever do so.

BlackBerry maker Research in Motion also said it has neither pre-installed Carrier IQ on its devices nor authorized carriers to do so, according to a statement it provided to All Things D.
Smartphone manufacturer HTC went further, saying that Carrier IQ is "required on devices by a number of U.S. carriers," and directed users to the carriers themselves. Verizon spokesman Jeffrey Nelson said on Twitter today that "Carrier IQ is *not* on" the company's phones.
For its part, Sprint circulated a statement denying that it uses Carrier IQ to look at the "contents" of communications, a important legal point, but didn't provide specifics of how the software is configured:

Carrier IQ provides information that allows Sprint, and other carriers that use it, to analyze our network performance and identify where we should be improving service. We also use the data to understand device performance so we can figure out when issues are occurring. We collect enough information to understand the customer experience with devices on our network and how to address any connection problems, but we do not and cannot look at the contents of messages, photos, videos, etc., using this tool. The information collected is not sold and we don't provide a direct feed of this data to anyone outside of Sprint.

Al Franken, who heads a U.S. Senate panel on privacy, sent a letter (PDF) today to Carrier IQ asking pointed questions, including what data are logged, what data are transmitted, and whether the company believes its software complies with federal privacy laws that prohibit wiretapping. Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, asked for a response by December 14.
Carrier IQ, based in Mountain View, Calif. has not responded to a series of questions that CNET posed this week. A spokeswoman said today that she is "only one person and have been unable to respond to the thousands of incoming requests."
What remains unclear is exactly what is transmitted, a key point that will determine whether Carrier IQ is a privacy and security threat (and, secondarily, if anyone has been lying).
Security researcher Dan Rosenberg posted a note saying that he's reverse-engineered Carrier IQ and found "no evidence that they are collecting anything more than what they've publicly claimed: anonymized metrics data." There's "no code in CarrierIQ that actually records keystrokes for data collection purposes," he said.
If Rosenberg is correct, it wouldn't be the first time that there was a widespread Internet panic over false or unverified accusations. It happened earlier this year when Samsung was cleared of false allegations lodged by a security specialist in a now-deleted NetworkWorld article that claimed keylogging software was installed on two of the company's laptops.

Hungary outlaws homeless in move condemned by charities

A new legal regulation has come into force in Hungary making homelessness punishable by a fine of around $600 (£384) or prison.

MPs from the ruling conservative party proposed the regulation, on the grounds that Budapest could not cope with the large number of people on the streets.
Critics, including charities for the homeless, say it is unenforceable and that hostels lack sufficient places.
The Hungarian capital is said to have some 10,000 homeless people.
According to an amendment to the local government act, passed by a strong majority in parliament last month, those found sleeping on the streets will first receive a warning.
They can subsequently be imprisoned or ordered to pay the fine.
'Stretched to the limits' The move has provoked widespread criticism, including from Hungary's human rights ombudsman, the BBC's Nick Thorpe reports.
Miklos Vecsei, deputy head of the Hungarian Maltese Charity Service, said the law had not been passed on the basis of any rational or professional criteria but because the public were fed up with the homeless.
Budapest's capacity had been stretched to the limits but deep poverty needed to be cured, not banned, he argued.
The author of the law, Mate Kocsis, is an MP from the ruling Fidesz party and a district mayor in the city.
He argues that local councils should take responsibility for tackling homelessness, and points to new schemes and places in homeless hostels.
Homeless charities argue that this will still leave between 1,000 and 3,000 homeless people without shelter.
A series of demonstrations against the new law is planned.

Should animals be stunned before slaughter?

BBC News, Amsterdam

In today's Magazine

• 10 of your ear stretching stories
• How do you survive a month adrift at sea?
• Is it easy to live on £40,000 a year?
• Your Letters

The slaughter of conscious animals was widely abandoned in the 20th Century and is now practised mainly in the Jewish and Muslim communities. Consumers increasingly expect animals to be stunned before death - but would banning other slaughter methods be an unacceptable violation of religious rights?

The sound of pistons and mechanics fills the air as the last calf of the day steps into a holding box.
A device the size of a hand-held drill is brought to the animal's head, a trigger pulled and a four-inch bolt shot into its brain, causing it instantly to collapse. The unconscious calf is hoisted upside down and slaughtered seconds later with a massive cut to its throat, showering the floor with a torrent of crimson blood.
"Killing animals is never friendly," says Paul Meeuwissen, director of the Vitelco abattoir in the central town of s'-Hertogenbosch, "but what we do is done in the most animal-friendly way possible."

Religious slaughter

• Jewish method called shechita
• Muslim method called dhabiha
• Stunning prohibited in Jewish law, which says animals must be healthy and uninjured at the time of slaughter
• Islamic law also says animals must be uninjured, but some authorities allow a form of stunning (in the UK, dhabiha usually involves stunning)

• Viewpoints: The right way to slaughter?

The plant - the second-biggest veal abattoir in Europe - has used stunning on all its calves - some 300,000 a year - since 2008. Before then it performed some religious slaughter without stunning for the Jewish and Muslim communities, but changing public attitudes towards animal welfare forced a rethink.

The Federation of Veterinarians of Europe took the position in 2002 that "the practice of slaughtering animals without prior stunning is unacceptable under any circumstances", and the issue has gradually become more central for animal welfare campaigners, and for politicians.
"We decided to stop 'ritual' killing because the idea didn't fit us," says Mr Meeuwissen. "My customers are very critical on how we produce our meat, and the large supermarket chains no longer want any meat which is produced ritually."
In the Netherlands and elsewhere, most of the remains of an animal slaughtered by the Jewish method (shechita) end up on supermarket shelves as regular meat products, because parts of the carcass are forbidden to Jews under their dietary laws.

Marianne Thieme, Party for Animals: 'If you have humane techniques you should use them'

But if these parts of the animal are not sold, the operation becomes less economically viable.
Later this month, a bill that would effectively ban the slaughter of unstunned animals goes to the upper house of the Dutch parliament.
Sponsored by the Party for the Animals, it has already been approved in the lower house, where it was backed by the anti-Islamic Freedom Party and opposed only by the Christian parties, which took a stand in defence of religious freedom. Most observers expect it to become law.
'Friendly for humans'
Jewish and Muslim leaders see a worrying global trend, with the Netherlands a critical test case.

They are fighting a battle on two fronts - to dispel the idea there is anything inhumane about their traditional methods of slaughter, and to defend their right to live according to their religious beliefs.
Both faiths put great emphasis on animal welfare, and adhere to a one-cut method of slaughter, intended to ensure the animal's rapid death.
Under Jewish and Islamic law, animals for slaughter must be healthy and uninjured at the time of death, which rules out driving a bolt into the brain - though some Muslim authorities accept forms of stunning that can be guaranteed not to kill the animal.
"What I think is that stunning is friendly for the human being and our way of slaughtering is friendly for the animals," says Motti Rosenzweig, Holland's only Jewish slaughterer (shochet).
Under shechita, the animal's neck is cut with a surgically sharp knife, severing its major arteries, causing a massive drop in blood pressure followed by death from loss of blood. Supporters say unconsciousness comes instantaneously - the cut itself stunning the animal. A similar procedure is used in Islamic slaughter, or dhabiha.
"In one second - maybe two if it's a bull - the animal is gone," says Mr Rosenzweig, who trained for years in Israel and now slaughters once a week, under the observation of a state veterinary official, at the Amsterdam Abattoir.
"In my opinion [conventional] stunning is torture. Just because it can't say 'moo' or move anymore, it's very nice for the human eye, but the animal is alive and the scientists don't actually know if it's suffering or not. If I have to make my choice, my choice is clear."

Chief Rabbi Benjamin Jacobs: 'I believe our method of slaughter is friendlier to animals'

A Dutch Muslim umbrella group, the Contact Body for Muslims and the Government (CMO), accused the Party for the Animals of leading an "emotional" campaign based on misleading information which "wrongly created the impression that Muslim and Jewish methods of slaughter are barbaric and outdated".
"They use the words 'ritual slaughter' but there's nothing ritual about it," says Dutch Chief Rabbi Benjamin Jacobs.
"It's not dancing around a cow, it's a method, but by using the word 'ritual' a lot of people are getting very upset."
Scientific dispute
Positions on religious slaughter vary around the world - in the US, for instance, it is specifically defined as a humane method in the Humane Slaughter Act (1958) - but elsewhere several countries have already restricted or banned slaughtering unstunned animals.

Moves on stunning in 2011

• Dutch lower house passes bill against non-stunning - upper house to vote on issue
• European Parliament starts considering mandatory labelling of meat from unstunned animals, so consumers know when they are eating it
• US court rejects suit claiming religious slaughter unconstitutional
• New Zealand ban on religious slaughter without stunning suspended pending legal challenge
• Australian agriculture ministers considering removing exemption allowing slaughter without stunning in Victoria

Stunning has been obligatory in the European Union since 1979 in order to spare animals "avoidable pain or suffering", though most member states make exceptions for religious communities.

A study of the issue commissioned by the Dutch government in 2008 concluded that "ritual slaughter has a number of negative aspects for the animals when compared to conventional procedures where a stun is performed prior to slaughter".
Its findings were mirrored in a 2010 report by a consortium of scientists for an EU-funded project, which concluded that "it can be stated with the utmost probability that animals feel pain during the throat cut without prior stunning".
It said research showed most cattle seemed to lose consciousness between five and 90 seconds after the cut, and were sometimes subjected to "potentially painful manipulations", including follow-up cuts, while still conscious.

“Start Quote

There are some scientists who are unconvinced, but they haven't done the research”

Dr Bert Lambooij Wageningen University

Both reports, though, have been dismissed as flawed by Jewish and Muslim groups, who argue that the research was done by scientists opposed to religious slaughter to begin with.

"It is still unproven that slaughtering with stunning is a better method," says CMO chairman Yusuf Altuntas.
In the case of shechita, Jewish authorities say no investigations of the issue in Europe have actually involved the first-hand study of animal slaughter by a trained shochet using a chalef (shochet's knife), which differs from an ordinary abattoir knife in shape, length and sharpness.
"One has to assume that these people have a political agenda and it comes through time and time again in Europe," says Dr Joe Regenstein, an animal slaughter expert at Cornell University in the USA, who is preparing a report for the Dutch Jewish community to challenge the slaughter bill.
"They are going in there with what I'd call a scientific enlightened secular religion that says stunning must be better than unstunned slaughter."

Stunning of livestock

• Introduced in England in 1929 with mechanically operated humane stunner device
• Mandatory in EU since 1979, but member states can grant exemptions for religious slaughter
• Method enables abattoirs to process animals more quickly
• Mis-stuns involving captive bolt occur "relatively frequently", according to 2004 European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) report - which leaves the animal conscious and in pain
• Animals can also regain consciousness

In contrast, Dr Bert Lambooij of Wageningen University, a co-author of the Dutch report and consultant in the EU-backed project, says the evidence against religious slaughter is clear.

"There are some scientists who are unconvinced, but they haven't done the research," he says.
One scientist who has observed closely the work of trained shochets is Dr Temple Grandin of Colorado University, a renowned expert on the humane treatment and slaughter of livestock.
Her verdict is that conventional slaughter with preliminary stunning, and religious slaughter without stunning, are both acceptable when conducted properly.
"There's good and bad stunning but the research shows very clearly that when you stun an animal properly with a well-maintained captive bolt, unconsciousness is instantaneous - it's like turning off a light switch," she told the BBC.
"Similarly when I've seen shechita on a cow done really right by a really good shochet, the animal seemed to act like it didn't even feel it - if I walked up to that animal and put my hand in its face I would have got a much bigger reaction than I observed from the cut, and that was something which really surprised me."
Religious fears
Animal rights groups see the Dutch bill as a stepping stone towards further bans on religious slaughter.
"The Netherlands is a very important example, but for us it's just a battle, not the war," says Dr Michel Courat of Eurogroup for Animals, a federation of animal protection groups.
"We need to win lots of other battles after this one to make sure more countries stop this practice."

This is the big fear among Europe's Jewish and Muslim communities.

Continue reading the main story

Campaigners' views

"We fully respect everyone's right to practise their religion but this should not extend to permitting the use of slaughter methods assessed as inhumane by scientific research." Peter Stevenson, Compassion in World Farming
"The vast majority of Halal meat in the UK is pre-stunned. In the Jewish community, in a small number of cases, animals are stunned immediately after the cut, which reduces the animal's suffering. We think stunning should take place before the cut, but it is better afterwards than not at all." Julia Wrathall, RSPCA

"We're afraid that other countries in Western Europe will follow the Dutch example," says Mr Altuntas.

"We heard from our Muslim council partners in Germany, Belgium and France that parties there are watching it closely and are preparing to take a position."
If the Dutch bill becomes law, Jewish and Muslim leaders say they will fight it in the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that it is a violation of the right to freedom of religion.
"If the Party for the Animals proposed a law which said there shouldn't be any slaughtering of animals any more and everyone should be vegetarian, I could understand it better," says Rabbi Jacobs.
"But it's a vote against religion. The new religion is anti-religion and people get fanatical about this. What worries me is what might come next."

RELIGIOUS SLAUGHTER RESTRICTIONS
Policy	Country

Non-stunning allowed only under certain conditions Australia (Victoria, S Australia) Austria Denmark Estonia Slovakia Non-stunning banned Australia (bar Victoria, S Australia) Finland Iceland Latvia New Zealand (suspended pending legal challenge) Norway Sweden Switzerland
Source: Dialrel; Eurogroup for Animals

Legal row over Carrier IQ 'surveillance' app claims

A hidden application found on millions of smartphones can log almost everything a user does, claims a US security researcher.

Trevor Eckhart unearthed the Carrier IQ application that runs largely unseen on Android, Nokia and Blackberry handsets.
Mr Eckhart said the software could log locations, websites visited, key presses and many other parameters.
Carrier IQ denied its code was spying. It threatened Mr Eckhart with legal action but later backed down.
Advanced skills Mr Eckhart said he found Carrier IQ via work he had done on a security program, called Logging Test, which spotted which apps were running on an Android phone.
His analysis revealed that Carrier IQ could be set up to record almost anything and everything done on a smartphone.
The code has been found on Nokia, Blackberry and Android smartphones and tablets. A cut down version has also been seen running on some Apple phones.
In response, Carrier IQ defended its software, saying it was not spying on users.
It said the code was used by mobile operators as a diagnostic tool to spot what was causing calls to drop, texts to go astray and battery power to be drained.
Mr Eckhart claimed Carrier IQ was buried deep in the core code for a smartphone to prevent it being found and, on some phones, was customised to prevent users changing what it logged. In some cases, he said, only those with "advanced skills" would be able to find it.
He put a video on YouTube which showed Carrier IQ logging button presses, search queries and locations. Much of the data had been grabbed without consent, he said.
Fair use The expose led Carrier IQ to start legal action against Mr Eckhart in the form of a "cease and desist" letter which demanded the removal of its training manuals and product information from his website.
This led to the intervention of digital rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) which agreed to represent Mr Eckhart in the legal spat.

 

In April 2011, Apple was accused of logging users' locations without their consent.

 

In its response, the EFF said: "We have now had a chance to review your allegations against our client, and have concluded that they are entirely baseless."
It said Mr Eckhart's work was "sheltered by both the fair use doctrine and the First Amendment".
Soon after, Carrier IQ withdrew its legal action and said it was "deeply sorry for any concern or trouble" it had caused.
"We sincerely appreciate and respect EFF's work on his behalf, and share their commitment to protecting free speech in a rapidly changing technological world," it said in a statement.
It reiterated that its software was used for diagnosis and disputed Mr Eckhart's claim that it had logged keystrokes and had tracked where people went.
It said it looked forward to a "healthy and robust" discussion with EFF and Mr Eckhart about its software and the uses to which it had been put.
Senate hearing The news is the latest in a series of reports by security researchers flagging up different smartphone applications that keep an eye on users.
In April, Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden found that Apple iPhones and tablets running iOS4 regularly recorded a phone's location.
Apple denied it was tracking users and said the data was uploaded to phones to help locate nearby wi-fi and cell phone towers.
In addition, Google played down claims that phones running its Android system were logging locations. It said it gave people a clear choice about whether the information should be gathered.
Both firms were summoned to appear before the US Senate to explain their actions.

Action Comics Superman debut copy sells for $2.16m

 

Action Comics No 1 sold originally for 10 cents

A copy of the first issue of Action Comics, featuring Superman's debut, has become the world's most expensive comic, fetching $2.16m (£1.4m).

It was auctioned online for a starting bid of just $1, with a reserve price of $900,000.
The buyer or seller's name was not disclosed, but there is speculation it was owned by actor Nicolas Cage.
It is the first time a comic book has broken the $2m barrier. The issue was published in 1938 and cost 10 cents.
About 100 copies of Action Comics No 1 are thought to be in existence, and only a handful of those are in good condition.
Another copy of the same issue sold for a then record-breaking $1.5m in March last year.
But that one was not in as good condition as the copy that sold on Wednesday through New York-based ComicConnect.
It is said to have been stolen in 2000 and was thought lost until recovered in a California storage shed in April this year - just like an issue owned by Nicolas Cage.
The Hollywood star - who has a son called Kal-El, the Man of Steel's birth name - bought his copy of Action Comics No 1 for $150,000 in 1997.
Connoisseurs of the comic world say this type of investment has become popular during troubled economic times because rare collectibles hold their value more reliably than property or shares.

Concerns over rising settler violence in the West Bank

By Jon Donnison BBC News, West Bank
 

 

Palestinians in Awarta say their olive trees have been deliberately destroyed by settlers

Palestinian UN membership bid

• Q&A: Bid explained
• Palestinians score points at UN
• Showdown at UN
• Israeli view

"These trees are holy to me. They're so old you can't put a value on them," says Nidam Qaraweq, a Palestinian olive farmer from the West Bank village of Awarta.

He pokes at the blackened, and gnarled trunks which are hundreds of years old. A large piece of what is now charcoal breaks off in his hand.
"They're all dead," he says angrily.
Last month, around 20 of Mr Qaraweq's olive trees were destroyed by fire.
He says Jewish settlers from the adjacent settlement of Itamar deliberately set his fields alight in an arson attack.
Some of Mr Qaraweq's other olive groves lie in land that has been taken over by the Itamar settlement as it expanded.
A high metal fence surrounds the settlement and Israeli soldiers patrol the gate denying Palestinians entry.
Mr Qaraweq says the land has been stolen.
Each olive harvest, the Israeli army escorts Palestinian farmers into Itamar to allow them to pick their olives for a few days.
When this happened in October, the Palestinian say settlers attacked them with sticks.
Israeli soldiers had to intervene and the Palestinians were forced to leave.

There's been a big rise in Jewish Settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.

The situation around Awarta is especially tense after two Palestinian teenagers from the village were convicted of murdering a family of five settlers including two children and a baby in March this year.
But the broad picture is that settler violence is on the increase across the West Bank.
'Shameful' inaction The United Nations says the number of attacks by extremist Jewish settlers on Palestinians resulting in either injury or damage to property has roughly tripled since 2009.
The UN says so far in 2011 around 10,000 Palestinian-owned olive trees have been destroyed or damaged in attacks by settlers.

 

There were clashes between Itamar settlers and Palestinians during the annual olive harvest

 

"They've made life very difficult for Palestinians in the West Bank," says Ramesh Rajasingham, Head of the United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
"You have settler attacks on Palestinian property, on shepherds. In some cases, they attack kids going to school."
In June this year, I visited a mosque in the Palestinian village of al-Mughriah near Ramallah, which had suffered an arson attack.
Burning tyres had been thrown into the mosque and the walls had been sprayed with graffiti in Hebrew.
The imam told me he believed settlers were almost certainly to blame.
It has been just one of several attacks on mosques in the West Bank this year.
The UN says in 90% of complaints filed to the Israeli police by Palestinians against settlers, nobody is ever indicted.

UN statistics:

• Weekly average of settler attacks resulting in Palestinian casualties and property increased by 40% in 2011 compared to 2010, and by over 165% compared to 2009
• In 2011, three Palestinians have been killed and 167 injured by Israeli settlers
• One Palestinian has been killed and 101 others injured by Israeli soldiers during clashes with settlers in 2011
• Eight Israeli settlers have been killed and 30 injured by Palestinians in 2011. In the same period in 2010, five were killed and 43 injured

• Full UN report

"For a country such as Israel which has such excellent capacities in terms of rule of law, this level of inaction is really shameful," says Ramesh Rajasingham.

"If you have this level of impunity, people will free to do it. If people feel they can get away with it then they have all the opportunity to continue such attacks."
Revenge attacks Some attacks by settlers are referred to as "price tagging".
This is a policy of revenge carried out by Jewish extremists if any action is taken by the Israeli government or security forces against settlement expansion.
Typically price tagging happens after the Israeli authorities move to dismantle settler "outposts", small Jewish communities build on occupied Palestinian land which even the Israeli government regards as illegal.
Usually it is Palestinians or their property which are attacked in revenge but occasionally action is taken against Israel's security forces.
In October, an Israeli army patrol was surrounded and assaulted by a group of extremist settlers in the West Bank.

 

Extremist settlers have set fire to West Bank mosques and daubed their walls with graffiti

 

The attack on the soldiers came after a Jewish teenager was arrested on suspicion of carrying out an arson attack on a Palestinian mosque.
In clashes between settlers and Palestinians it is the Israeli army who have to intervene, often using tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse stone throwing Palestinian youths.
But some soldiers express frustration at the more extremist settlers.
"Both sides are as stupid as the other," an exasperated looking Israeli commanding officer told me as his troops stepped in to stop fighting between settlers and Palestinians near Nablus last month.
The man who recently left his post as Israeli army commander of the West Bank, Nitzan Alon, went much further.
Brigadier General Alon said not enough had been done to tackle Jewish extremism referring to price tag attacks as "terror".
"These acts not only should be condemned for their folly and wrongdoing but we should also have done more to prevent them and to arrest the perpetrators," he said in his outgoing speech.
'Exaggerated' reports However many settler leaders say he is wrong.
"I think that Commander Alon is exaggerating. He's making a mistake, not being careful with his words," says David Haivri, a settler and spokesperson for the Shomron Regional Council in the West Bank.
Mr Haivri says Nitzan Alon went too far with his accusations and argues there is not as much tension between settlers and Palestinians as people make out. He says the United Nations figures on settler violence are wrong.

 

Israeli soldiers are brought in to stop clashes between settlers and Palestinians

 

"It seems that so-called human rights organisations are bouncing numbers off each other, building up statistics that don't reflect what I see in the area where I live. There have been much more tense years than this one," says Mr Haivri.
Around 500,000 Jewish settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, land that has been occupied by Israel since 1967.
Settlements are illegal under international law although Israel disputes this.
Many settlers believe they have a religious right to the land.
The vast majority of settlers are non-violent but some within the Israeli government acknowledge a growing problem with extremists.
This month, the Israeli Education Minister, Gideon Saar, strongly condemned the "price tag" policy conducted by extremist settlers.
"The price tag gangs that harass innocent people, damage property, attack Israeli soldiers and security forces, burn mosques and terrorise political opponents are a violent and dangerous cancerous growth that must be uprooted," he said.
Mr Saar was speaking at a memorial service for the former Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, who was assassinated in 1995 by a Jewish extremist opposed to the Oslo Peace Accords that Mr Rabin had signed with the Palestinians two years earlier.
Settlement growth For Palestinians, settlement expansion in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is an obstacle to peace. They say it makes a future Palestinian state less and less viable.
The United States, the European Union and virtually the entire international community feels the same.
The Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas refuses to return to peace talks with Israel until settlement expansion stops completely.
The Israeli government disagrees with his position and says settlement growth is a symptom of the Palestinians' refusal to engage in talks.
The survival of the right wing coalition government is, at least to some extent, dependent on political parties that draw much of their support from people who favour settlement expansion on occupied Palestinian territory.
But if ever there is to be a Palestinian state, both Israeli and Palestinian leaders know that tens of thousands of settlers would have to be removed from their homes.
That would not happen easily and the number of settlers and their influence over Israeli government policy is growing by the day.

Unwrapping the ancient Egyptian animal mummy industry

By Jane O'Brien BBC News, Washington
 

Jane O'Brien looks around the Smithsonian's collection of mummified animals

The ancient Egyptian animal mummification industry was so large it put some species in danger of extinction. But as a new exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington DC shows, the Egyptians believed they were doing the animals a great honour.

Egypt in the 7th Century BC was not a healthy place to be if you were a cat or a dog.
Puppy farms and other animal breeding programmes were a huge industry - not to produce pets, but to provide a stock of animals to be killed and mummified.
The Egyptians believed that animals held a unique position in the afterlife. They could keep the dead company, they represented the gods, and they were well received as offerings by the gods, Egyptologists say.
Millions mummified Such was the enthusiasm for animal slaughter that experts say it contributed to the extinction in Egypt of at least one bird species. The Sacred Ibis were mummified in the millions because they were sacred to Thoth, the god of wisdom and writing, says Selima Ikram, professor of Egyptology at the American University in Cairo.

 

Many baboon mummies were actually forgeries - no animal harmed

 

Others, including hawks and falcons, saw their populations dwindle.
"It's easier to say which animals the Egyptians didn't mummify," says Prof Ikram, who helped curate the Smithsonian's largest mummy exhibition to date.
"There are no mummified pigs as far as we know, no mummified hippos, and I think that's about it - because almost every other creature at some time or another has been mummified."
At the exhibit, visitors can see a range of mummified animals, including the Sacred Ibis, and gain an insight into the industry that became a driving force of the economy of ancient Egypt.
When animals in the wild started dying out, extensive breeding programmes were launched by the temples and surrounding villages.
'Obsessed with life' The programmes began as early as 3,000BC and peaked from 650BC to 200AD, when the mummification industry was "phenomenally large", says Prof Ikram.

 

Cats were bred not as pets, but for ritual mummification

 

Mummification represented a culture of life, not of death, says exhibition curator Melinda Zeder.
"The ancient Egyptians weren't obsessed with death - they were obsessed with life," says Ms Zeder. "And everything they did to prepare for mummification was really looking at life after death and a way of perpetuating oneself forever.
"The priests would sacrifice the animal for you, mummify it and then place it in a catacomb in your name. So this was a way of obtaining good standing in the eyes of whatever god it was."
While many animals were bred specifically to be killed on demand, others were worshiped as deities themselves.
The museum has a rare bull mummy which, as a manifestation of the sun god Re, would have been allowed to live out its life in luxury.
During its life the bull would have received daily massages and paraded through adoring crowds while priests studied its movements and tried to divine messages from the gods.
When the bull died of old age - probably after 20 years - it was mummified, placed in an immense sarcophagus and put into a catacomb.
"Some might have died of heart attacks because they were overfed by the priests," says Prof Ikram.
Other animals did not fare even that well.
Another species killed to the point of extinction in Egypt was the baboon.
When none were left, the Egyptians manufactured fake baboon offerings, creating mummies that looked real on the outside but which CT scans have recently revealed to be elaborate forgeries.
"If you wanted to have a baboon as an offering, you make it look like a baboon - and if you say it is a baboon, then it magically becomes a baboon," says Prof Ikram.
"The real ones were very expensive and hard to come by and that's why the whole genre of fake mummies started."
Animal lovers today might be appalled that such large scale slaughter took place in the name of religion and ritual burials.
But Egyptologists say the ancients believed it was a great honour for the animals involved: They were bred for a higher purpose and would spend eternity with the gods.
"They believed there were going on to a better life," says Prof Ikram, "although their short term life might not have been fantastic."

Myth that antibiotics cure coughs and colds still rife

 

Antibiotics "will not cure viruses"

Related Stories

• The drugs don't work - so what will?
• Europe 'losing' superbugs battle
• Are we losing the fight against superbugs?

A quarter of people wrongly believe antibiotics work on most coughs and colds, a Health Protection Agency survey has found.

However antibiotics cannot treat viruses, which cause most respiratory tract infections.
The HPA poll of 1,800 people in England also found one in 10 people keep leftover antibiotics - and many would self-medicate next time they got ill.
A leading GP said antibiotics were not a "cure all".
The HPA's Dr Cliodna McNulty said self-medicating was unsafe and could fuel drug resistance.
Dr McNulty, head of primary care for the HPA, said: "The majority of people can treat themselves at home using over-the-counter medicines to relieve symptoms."
Of those polled, 500 had been prescribed antibiotics in the previous year, with 11% reporting they had leftovers and 6% saying they might take them if they had future infections.
Speaking on European Antibiotics Awareness Day, Dr McNulty said that while the numbers might appear small, they could translate into large numbers given that 30% of people take antibiotics every year.
She said: "There is evidence that the more antibiotics you have, the more likely you are to develop resistance. And you're also more likely to develop antibiotic-related diarrhoea."
But 70% were aware of the problem of antibiotic resistance in hospitals, and a similar number were aware that they or their family could be affected.
'Not a cure-all' The HPA says health professionals must learn to resist demands from patients for treatments they know have little or no effect on coughs and colds. It found 97% of those questioned said that the last time they had asked their GP or nurse for an antibiotic, they were prescribed one.

TOP TIPS FROM THE HPA

• Most coughs and colds get better on their own - antibiotics will not speed recovery
• Talk to your GP about whether you need them
• Coughing up phlegm on its own is not a reason to need an antibiotic - even if it is yellow
• A sore throat plus runny nose with phlegm suggests the infection is less likely to respond to antibiotics
• A high temperature, red throat and feeling really ill means you probably need an antibiotic
• If you feel able to stop taking them early, you may well not have needed them
• Always take all doses for as long as instructed
• Never keep any leftovers - what's prescribed for one infection might not work for the next
• GPs can give a delayed antibiotic prescription for you to take only if things get worse
• In cases of severe illness, antibiotics can save lives

Dr McNulty added: "Despite many years of public health campaigns advising people that antibiotics don't work against coughs, colds and flu, our research results show that these myths prevail.

"We understand people feel very unwell with coughs, sore throats, flu and colds, but for the majority of people these symptoms are unpleasant but short-lived."
The Department of Health issued fresh guidance on antibiotic prescribing in hospitals on Friday, with doctors and nurses being urged to "think twice" before offering them to patients.
Dr Clare Gerada, chair of the Royal College of GPs, said: "Antibiotics are a wonderful thing when used properly, but they are not a cure-all for every condition, and should not be seen, or used, as such.
"The opposite is often true and, when used excessively or inappropriately, they can actually do more harm than good - reducing a patient's immunity to illnesses, or building up an immunity to antibiotics, both of which can have negative consequences for good health."
Writing in the Lancet medical journal, Prof Laura Piddock of the school of immunity and infection at the University of Birmingham warned there were global implications from the misuse of antibiotics, and drug companies' failures to develop new ones.
She warned: "The demise of antibacterial drug discovery brings the spectre of untreatable infections."

Pakistan telecoms authority to block 'obscene' texts

 

The list has caused confusion and amusement among many Pakistani mobile phone users

The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) has told mobile phone companies to begin blocking text messages containing "obscene" words.

Mobile phone companies Telenor Pakistan and Ufone confirmed to the BBC
that the PTA has sent them a "dictionary" of banned words and expressions.
The PTA has reportedly ordered operators to begin screening text messages by 21 November.

Ufone say they are now working on how to block the offending words.
A letter dated 14 November, apparently written by Muhammad Talib Doger, an official at the PTA, has been leaked to Pakistani media.

It states that mobile phone operators should begin screening the words, provided on a list attached to the letter, within seven days.

"We have received both the dictionary and the memo and we're discussing a way forward," said Anjum Nida Rahman, corporate communications director for Telenor Pakistan.

Some of the allegedly banned words

• Athlete's foot
• Flatulence
• Jesus Christ
• Monkey crotch
• Back door
• Bewaquf (foolish)
• Bakwaas (nonsense)
• Wuutang (a presumed reference to American rap group the Wu-Tang Clan)

The ban is a reaction to consumers' complaints of receiving offensive text messages, Mohammad Younis, a spokesman for the PTA, told The Guardian newspaper.

"Nobody would like this happening to their young boy or girl," he said. He added that the list was not finished and that the authority would continue to add to it.
'What am I missing?' An unconfirmed version of the PTA's list is being circulated online, containing hundreds of words and expressions in both English and Urdu.
According to this version, the entries range from those too obscene to repeat to the bizarre.
Some of the choices on the list have baffled Pakistani mobile phone users, many of whom have taken to Twitter to ridicule the move.
Syed Adnan Yousuf, tweeting as @AdnanWhy, asked: "Why is 'head lights' banned? What am I missing here?"
Some people have suggested bypassing the ban by replacing words with their number on the PTA's list.
Pakistan has seen a big increase in mobile phone use in recent years - 100m Pakistanis are now estimated to be mobile phone users.

Middle-aged man attacks boy over Call of Duty video game

A MIDDLE-aged man carried out a real-life revenge attack on the teenager who killed his character in an online video game.
Mark Bradford, 46, saw red when the boy gloated after gunning him down while playing Call of Duty: Black Ops.
A court heard how Bradford stormed out of his bedsit and assaulted the 13-year-old who was playing the war game at a friend’s home nearby.

The pal’s mum had to come to the terrified boy’s rescue after Bradford marched into the front room and grabbed the boy’s throat with both hands.
The lad, who cannot be identified, said last night: “I was just sat playing. We’d had a bit of a joke and then he stormed in and grabbed me. I didn’t know what was going on.”
Jobless Bradford and the teenager had been playing the violent game on PlayStations and were talking to each other on microphones over the internet.
Plymouth magistrates heard that the dad-of-three walked away without saying a word after the attack in July. The victim was left with a scratch. His mum, 33, said last night: “It’s pathetic that a grown man would attack a defenceless child like this.
“If you can’t handle losing to a child then you shouldn’t be playing games.
“I know Mark and went straight round when I found out what had happened. I was fuming. But rather than have it out with him I got the police involved.”
Bradford, of St Budeaux, Plymouth, admitted assault and was freed on bail to be sentenced on October 24.
He said yesterday: “I’d been playing the whole day and he was baiting me and just would not shut up.
“I just lost it. In a moment of madness I went round to the house. I didn’t know what I was going to do.
“It wasn’t malice. I just grabbed him. I’ve seen him since and apologised. The injuries weren’t that bad but I do regret it.”

'I'd like to axe Human Rights Act,' declares Home Secretary as she risks explosive rift with Lib Dem colleagues

By David RichardsLast updated at 1:07 PM on 2nd October 2011

Theresa May risked angering Liberal Democrat Cabinet colleagues today by throwing her weight behind calls for the Human Rights Act to be scrapped.

In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, the Home Secretary said she would 'personally' like to see it go because of the problems it has presented the Home Office.

Her comments, on the eve of the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, will endear her to many Tories infuriated by its use by foreign criminals to avoid deportation.

But senior Lib Dems, including Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Energy Secretary Chris Huhne, have pledged that the Act will stay.

Ms May said: 'I'd personally like to see the Human Rights Act go because I think we have had some problems with it.'

She added: 'I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects. Obviously we've seen it with some foreign criminals who are in the UK.'


Mr Clegg promised Lib Dem delegates at his party's conference last month that the Human Rights Act, which enshrines the European Convention on Human Rights in UK law, was 'here to stay'.

Mr Huhne suggested the issue, if forced, could topple the coalition.

'If Conservative backbenchers persist in wanting to tear up the European Convention on Human Rights, then I can foresee a time when this party would be extremely uncomfortable in coalition,' he said.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights organisation Liberty, said: 'Modern Conservatives should think again about human rights values that were truly Churchill's legacy.

'Only a pretty "nasty party" would promote human rights in the Middle East whilst scrapping them at home.'

David Cameron said he and the Home Secretary shared a concern that the Commission would work 'more slowly' than the Tories wanted.

But he said action was already being taken to help end the 'chilling culture' which the Act had fostered among people fearful they would fall foul of it.

Speaking on BBC1's Andrew Marr Show, Mr Cameron cited the recent example of a prison van driven nearly 100 miles to transfer a defendant the short walk to a court.

'I agree that it would be good to replace the Human Rights Act with a Bill of Rights. I think that is the right thing to do.'

There was a concern however that it would 'go more slowly than Theresa and I would want'.

Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan accused Mrs May of 'pandering to the Tory right' and said Government policy on the Human Rights Act was 'a shambles'.

Mr Khan said: 'Theresa May's comments show just how two-faced and weak this Government's commitment to human rights is.

'The Human Rights Act is the most significant defence for ordinary people against state power ever passed into law.

'Simply scrapping it is a lazy and incoherent position to hold. Two weeks ago the Deputy Prime Minister said of the Human Rights Act: 'It is here to stay'.

'Now the Home Secretary is saying his words aren't worth the paper they were written on. Government policy is a shambles.

'Someone in the Government now needs to be clear exactly what the policy is. Either the Deputy Prime Minister has been overruled, or this is another fantasy policy from Theresa May.'