Archive | December, 2012

Movie Review: War Horse (2011)

31 Dec

By Samantha R. Selman

There is no combat in the early scenes of “War Horse,” Steven Spielbergs sweeping adaptation of the popular stage spectacle, but the film opens with a cinematic assault as audacious and unsparing as the Normandy landing in Saving Private Ryan.” With widescreen, pastoral vistas dappled in golden sunlight and washed in music (by John Williams) that is somehow both grand and folksy, Mr. Spielberg lays siege to your cynicism, bombarding you with strong and simple appeals to feeling.

You may find yourself resisting this sentimental pageant of early-20th-century rural English life, replete with verdant fields, muddy tweeds and damp turnips, but my strong advice is to surrender. Allow your sped-up, modern, movie-going metabolism, accelerated by a diet of frantic digital confections — including Mr. Spielberg’s just-released “Adventures of Tintin” — to calm down a bit. Suppress your instinctive impatience, quiet the snarky voice in your head and allow yourself to recall, or perhaps to discover, the deep pleasures of sincerity.

If you can fake that, as the old Hollywood adage goes, you’ve got it made. But while “War Horse” is, like so many of Mr. Spielberg’s films, a work of supreme artifice, it is also a self-conscious attempt to revive and pay tribute to a glorious tradition of honest, emotionally direct storytelling. Shot the old-fashioned way, on actual film stock (the cinematographer is Mr. Spielberg’s frequent collaborator Janusz Kaminski), the picture has a dark, velvety luster capable of imparting a measure of movie-palace magic to the impersonal cavern of your local multiplex.

The story, in its early chapters, also takes you back to an older — you may well say cornier — style of entertainment. Joey, the fleet-footed, headstrong half-Thoroughbred of the title, is purchased at auction by Ted Narracott (Peter Mullan), a proud and grouchy Devon farmer with a tendency to drink too much. His household includes a loving, scolding wife, Rosie (Emily Watson); a cantankerous goose; and a strapping lad named Albert (Jeremy Irvine), who forms an immediate and unbreakable bond with Joey. The teenage boy trains the horse to pull a plow and together they ride through the stunning scenery.

But this pastoral is darkened by memories of war — Ted fought the Boers in South Africa, an experience so terrible he cannot speak of it to his son — and by social divisions. The Narracotts are tenant farmers at the mercy of their landlord (David Thewlis), and if “War Horse” pays tribute to solid British virtues of decency and discipline it also, like a Thomas Hardy novel, exposes the snobbery and economic oppression that are, if anything, even more deeply rooted in that nation’s history.

So it is not entirely a simpler, more innocent world that is swept away by the war but rather a way of life whose contradictions are as emphatically presented as its charms. And what follows, as Joey is taken across the English Channel to the battlefields and trenches of Flanders and France, is a nightmare of cruelty that is not without its own sinister magic. Like most movies with an antiwar message, “War Horse” cannot help but be enthralled by the epic scale and transformative power of military conflict. “The war has taken everything from everyone” — the truth of this reckoning, uttered more than once by characters on screen, is self-evident, but it is complicated by the visceral charge and cathartic relief that an effective war movie gives to its audience.

The extreme violence of the slaughter in World War I is implied rather than graphically depicted. Mr. Spielberg steps back from the bloody, chaotic naturalism of “Saving Private Ryan” — this is an animal fable for children, after all, with echoes of “E. T.” and Carroll Ballard’s “Black Stallion” — but his ability to infuse action sequences with emotional gravity has hardly diminished.

An early battle scene dramatizes the modernization of warfare with remarkable and haunting efficiency. A British cavalry unit attacks a German encampment, charging through the enemy ranks with swords in what appears to be a clean and devastating rout. But then, at the edge of the field, the German machine guns begin to fire, and the British horses crash into the forest, suddenly riderless and instantly obsolete. Joey, who of course never sought out heroism in the first place, is relegated to a life of brutal labor that seems fated to end in an ignoble death.

He is kept alive by instinct, human kindness and the companionship of a regal black horse named Topthorn. Joey’s episodic journey takes him from British to German hands and back again, with a sojourn on a French farm owned by an elderly jam-maker (Niels Arestrup) and his young granddaughter (Celine Buckens).

Albert, meanwhile, makes his own way to the war, and his and Joey’s parallel experiences — harrowing escapes, the loss of friends, the terror and deprivation brightened by flickers of tenderness or high spirits — give the story texture and momentum, as well as giving Mr. Spielberg an opportunity to show off his unmatched skill at cross-cutting. (The large cast, mostly British and almost entirely male, acquits itself admirably, with a few moments of maudlin overacting and many more of heartbreaking understatement.)

Mr. Spielberg and the screenwriters, Lee Hall and Richard Curtis, have wisely avoided attempting to reproduce the atmosphere and effects of the stage production, in which Joey and the other horses are portrayed by huge puppets. He prefers to translate the tale, which originates in a novel by Michael Morpurgo, into a fully cinematic idiom. And “War Horse” turns out to have a central Spielbergian theme — perhaps the dominant idea in this director’s body of work — namely the fraught and fascinating relationship between the human and the nonhuman.

What do they — sharks, horses, aliens, dinosaurs, intelligent machines — mean to us? What are we supposed to do with them? The boundary can be hard to maintain: sometimes, as in “E. T.”, nonhuman beings are virtually impossible to distinguish from humans; at other times, as in “Schindler’s List,”self-evidently human beings are denied that status. Sometimes the nonhuman is a threat, at other times a comfort, but it always presents a profound ethical challenge based in a stark existential mystery: Who are we?

Mr. Spielberg’s answers to this question tend to be hopeful, and his taste for happy, or at least redemptive endings is frequently criticized. But his ruthless optimism, while it has helped to make him an enormously successful showman, is also crucial to his identity as an artist, and is more complicated than many of his detractors realize. “War Horse” registers the loss and horror of a gruesomely irrational episode in history, a convulsion that can still seem like an invitation to despair. To refuse that, to choose compassion and consolation, requires a measure of obstinacy, a muscular and brutish willfulness that is also an authentic kind of grace.

War Horse” is rated PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned). The violence is intense and upsetting, though not especially gory by present-day standards.

2012 Apocalypse Myths Debunked: Five Mayan Doomsday Predictions & Why They’re Wrong

21 Dec

1

By Samantha R. Selman
On Friday, Dec. 21, some say, the Mayan apocalypse will arrive and the world will end. Fortunately, it won’t.

A bold claim, we know, but if it’s good enough for NASA, it’s good enough for us. The space agency has already issued a press release dated Dec. 22 entitled “Why the World Didn’t End Yesterday.”

The Mayan apocalypse predictions arise from a misunderstanding of the ancient Maya Long Count Calendar, which wraps up a 400-year cycle called a b’ak’tun on Dec. 21, 2012, the day of the winter solstice. This just so happens to be the 13th b’ak’tun in the calendar, a benchmark the Maya would have seen as a full cycle of creation.

Did you catch that? Cycle. In other words, the Maya had a cyclical view of time and would not have seen the end of their calendar cycle as the end of the world. It wasn’t until Westerners began reinterpreting the calendar in the past couple decades that it got its apocalyptic overtones.

Mayan apocalypse rumors have proliferated on the Internet, running the gamut from beliefs that Dec. 21 will bring a new era of peace and universal understanding to predictions of a devastating astronomical event. We’re all in favor of world peace, but we’re here to put your fears to rest about the likelihood of planetary annihilation. Read on for five common Mayan apocalypse fears and why they won’t come true.

 

 

MTYH: The Sun Will Kill Us All

Much has been made by Mayan doomsday fear-mongers of the fact that the sun is currently entering a maximum activity phase. The sun rotates through periods of quiet and activity that peak roughly every 11 years; active periods are marked by an increase in solar storms and flares.
Some of these flares can indeed influence Earth. When the sun releases electromagnetic particles in such a way that they interact with our atmosphere, solar storms can disrupt telecommunications, though there are ways to protect satellites and other electronics. These charged particles are also responsible for the aurora — the Northern and Southern Lights.
Predictions of a Dec. 21 solar storm that will devastate the planet are not based in reality, according to NASA scientists. This particular solar maximum is one of the “wimpiest” in recent history, according to NASA heliophysicist Lika Guhathakurta, who spoke during an online panel on the Mayan apocalypse on Nov. 28. In other words, scientists have no reason to expect solar storms capable of disrupting our society.
MYTH: The Earth’s Magnetic Poles Will Flip
What is it with the Mayan apocalypse and electromagnetism? This rumor holds that the North and South Poles will suddenly and catastrophically change places on Dec. 21.
The idea isn’t as totally leftfield as it sounds: The Earth’s magnetic field does actually flip-flop occasionally, though not in the course of a day. The pole swaps happen over the course of hundreds of thousands of years, according to NASA. The switching of magnetic poles could lead to a slight increase in cosmic radiation, but previous flip-flops have not disrupted the life seen in the fossil record.
Predicting the magnetic-pole switch is also tough. The last swap occurred about 780,000 years ago, which puts the planet about due for another change in the next several thousand years. However, there has been at least one period where the magnetic poles stayed put for 30 million years.
MYTH: Planet X Will Collide With Earth
Planet X, sometimes known as Nibiru, does not exist. Nevertheless, some doomsday theorizers have predicted that on Dec. 21, this “rogue planet” will slam into Earth, annihilating all life.
Planet X rumors got their start in 1976, when the late author Zecharia Sitchin claimed to have translated a Sumerian text to rediscover the lost planet Nibiru, which allegedly orbits the sun once every 3,600 years — supposedly explaining why modern man and telescope had failed to notice this planetary neighbor. In 2003, self-described psychic and alien-channeler Nancy Lieder warned that this planet would collide with Earth. When that didn’t happen, the date got pushed back to 2012 to coincide with Mayan apocalypse myths.
Of course, a planet set on a collision course with Earth in mere days would be extremely visible to the naked eye. In fact, Nibiru should have shown up as nearly as bright as Mars in the night sky by April 2012, if that scenario were true. Given NASA’s capacity to peer into deep space, a nearby planet headed for Earth is not going to escape detection.
“We would have seen it years ago,” said Don Yeomans, the manager of NASA’s Near-Earth Object program office in Pasadena, Calif.
MYTH: The Planets Will Align
Another fear is that the planets will align on Dec. 21, somehow impacting our planet. This one is easy to debunk. Take it away, NASA:
“There are no planetary alignments in the next few decades,” according to the space agency’s 2012 doomsday myths webpage. “[E]ven if these alignments were to occur, their effects on the Earth would be negligible.”

There have been planetary alignments in 1962, 1982 and 2000, according to NASA, and we’re all still here.

MYTH: Total Earth Blackout
This rumor, circulating in spam emails, claims that NASA is predicting a total Earth blackout between Dec. 23 and Dec. 25. Way to ruin Christmas!
Some emails claim that this blackout will occur as the result of the sun and Earth aligning for the first time, while others spin a wild tale about Earth entering “a still ring” called the Photonic belt. Whatever the alleged cause, this is simply not going to happen, according to NASA.

“There is no such alignment,” agency officials write.

Owner of OpenTV slaps Netflix with patent lawsuit

19 Dec

 

By Samantha R. Selman

 

The owner of interactive television pioneer OpenTV sued Netflix Inc on Wednesday, alleging the company infringed on patents that cover technology underpinning the fast-growing Internet video sector.

Switzerland-based Kudelski SA, which owns OpenTV, said in its lawsuit that Netflix infringed on seven U.S. patents covering aspects of over-the-top TV technology (OTT), including: the use of viewer information to make recommendations; digital rights management; and video playback.

Kudelski tried for about a year to encourage Netflix to discuss licensing its patents, but the video streaming company has so far not played ball, according to the lawsuit, which was filed on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, a common venue for patent cases.

“Companies like Netflix have, in essence, stood on the shoulders of giants, largely focusing their R&D efforts on aggregating these previously patented technologies and using them to provide a rich customer experience,” Kudelski said in the complaint.

Netflix spokesman Joris Evers declined to comment.

Netflix shares fell 1.7 percent to close at $93.9785 on Wednesday.

The suit comes amid a boom in digital TV shows and movies delivered over the Internet to smart TVs, tablets and smart phones. Netflix, whose iconic red envelopes have come to symbolize the DVD delivery-by-mail market, introduced video streaming in 2007, 10 years after the company was founded, and quickly grew into a market leader.

But the market is getting crowded, and Netflix is being chased by Amazon.com Inc and Wal-Mart Stores Inc’s Vudu service, as well as streaming video website Hulu, which is owned by Walt Disney Co, News Corp and Comcast Corp.

Apple Inc, the world’s largest computer maker by market value, is also widely expected to enter the smart TV market, spurring further growth.

The Internet TV sector shares some attributes of the smartphone business, with over a decade of innovation and patents produced by companies that are no longer dominant.

Grant Moss, CEO of patent broker and advisory firm Adapt IP Ventures, expects a repeat of the recent smartphone patent wars, but on a smaller scale.

“The frequency of these cases will increase dramatically” because of recent, high-profile Internet video content distribution deals, new ways of making money in the sector and new entrants,” Moss said.

“But I don’t see the financial value of the individual cases being as significant as those in the smartphone market,” he added.

Kudelski, which has developed and acquired a range of movie and digital TV technologies over several decades, generates more than $700 million in annual revenue and employs about 3,000 people worldwide. The company is a player in streaming video by virtue of its 2010 acquisition of San Francisco-based OpenTV.

OpenTV, which began in 1996 as a joint venture between Thomson Multimedia and Sun Microsystems, develops software that helps run more than 200 million TV set-top boxes. It competes with NDS, which was acquired by Cisco Systems Inc for $5 billion in July.

Thomson Multimedia is not related to Thomson Reuters.

In May, Kudelski hired Joe Chernesky from Intellectual Ventures, a patent investment firm, to run an intellectual property unit managing a portfolio of more than 3,000 of the company’s patents. OpenTV owns more than 800 of these patents.

“We have been developing technologies for over 20 years to enable the delivery of video content and have an early and broad patent portfolio in the field,” said Chernesky. “We intend to aggressively defend our patents.”

NETFLIX PATENTS

Netflix owns 14 patents that focus mostly on technology supporting its DVD-by-mail business, such as online ordering and assembling an online movie queue. The company has one U.S. patent with claims related to video streaming, while Amazon has 22 U.S. patents with claims related to multimedia streaming, according to an early November review conducted by patent advisory and research firm Envision IP.

It usually takes several years to win approval for patents to support new technology, which is whyNetflix currently has more intellectual property backing its older business, according to Envision IP founder Maulin Shah.

Shah said Netflix has 32 pending patent applications that cover technologies to improve on-demand streaming video delivery. Netflix earlier this year also hired T.J. Angioletti, Oracle Corp’s chief intellectual property counsel, to help with its patent push.

Still, pending patents are usually of limited use in patent litigation and it is unclear whether Netflix’s applications will be approved, Shah added.

“It doesn’t really help them in lawsuits because they can’t use pending patents to counter-sue and fight back,” Shah said.

The lawsuit follows a string of negative news surrounding Netflix over the last year, including missed subscriber growth targets, an ill-fated attempt to split the DVD and streaming operations and a swooning stock price.

However, Netflix shares jumped earlier in December after the company unveiled a first-of-its-kind movie deal with Disney.

Kodak in $525 million patent deal, eyes bankruptcy end

19 Dec

By Richard Best

Eastman Kodak Co agreed to sell its digital imaging patents for about $525 million, a key step to bringing the photography pioneer out of bankruptcy in the first half of 2013.

The deal for the 1,100 patents allows Kodak to fulfill a condition for securing $830 million in financing.

The patent deal was reached with a consortium led by Intellectual Ventures and RPX Corp, and which includes some of the world’s biggest technology companies, which will license or acquire the patents.

Those companies are Adobe Systems Inc, Amazon.com Inc, Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Fujifilm, Google Inc, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, HTC Corp, Microsoft Corp, Research In Motion Ltd, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and Shutterfly Inc, according to court documents.

Kodak still must sell its personalized and document-imaging businesses as part of the financing package, and also has to resolve its UK pension obligation.

Kodak said the patent deal puts it on a path to emerge from Chapter 11 in the first half of 2013.

“Our progress has accelerated over the past several weeks as we prepare to emerge as a strong, sustainable company,” said Antonio Perez, chairman and chief executive of the Rochester, New York-based company.

The patent portfolio was expected to be a major asset for Kodak when it filed for bankruptcy in January. An outside firm had estimated the patents could be worth as much as $2.6 billion.

Kodak’s patents hit the market as intellectual property values have soared and technology companies have plowed money into patent-related litigation.

For example, last year Nortel Networks sold 6,000 wireless patents in a bankruptcy auction for $4.5 billion and earlier this year Google spent $12.5 billion for patent-rich Motorola Mobility.

But Kodak’s patent auction dragged on beyond the initial expectation that it would be wrapped up in August. One patent specialist blamed those early, overly optimistic valuations, which he said encouraged Kodak’s team to set their sights too high.

“Unfortunately (Kodak management) was misled into thinking it was worth billions of dollars and it wasn’t,” said Alex Poltorak, chairman of General Patent Corp, a patent licensing firm. “I think they sold them at a very good price.”

He said after Google acquired Motorola, the search engine company no longer needed patents at any price, deflating the intellectual property market.

Kodak traces its roots to the 19th century and invented the handheld camera. But it has been unable to successfully shift to digital imaging.

It will likely be a different company when it exits bankruptcy, out of the consumer business and focused instead on providing products and services to the commercial imaging market.

The patent sale is subject to approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.

The Kodak bankruptcy case is in Re: Eastman Kodak Co. et al, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-10202.

State Department responds to claims that Clinton faked illness

19 Dec

By Mike Krumboltz

The State Department has rebutted another claim that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton faked herconcussion while suffering from a stomach virus to avoid testifying Tuesday about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, earlier this year.

The latest assertion came from former U.S. diplomat John Bolton, who, during the Dec. 17 edition of Fox News’ “On the Record,” insinuated that Clinton’s “diplomatic illness”—in diplomatic circles, this is the feigning of an  illness to avoid an engagement—kept her from testifying.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Bolton’s suggestion was “completely untrue.”

Nuland continued: “We put out such a full statement Saturday of exactly what was going on because people speculate wildly. I can assure you, [Bolton is] not privy to any inside information. … It’s really unfortunate that in times like this people make wild speculation based on no information.”

Bolton’s claims came on the heels of an article in The Daily Caller by Jim Treacher, who wrote, “If she has a concussion, let’s see the medical report. Let’s see some proof that she’s not just stonewalling. If it’s true, then we can all wish her a speedy recovery. But it’s ridiculous to expect us to take her word for it.”

Conservative blogger Lucianne Goldberg earlier had tweeted a message comparing Clinton to a kid playing hooky. “Hillary has given us a great new excuse. Don’t call in with a cold or a bad tooth. Just say you have a concussion. It can last for days.”

And an opinion piece from the New York Post calls Clinton’s illness “one of the most transparent dodges in the history of diplomacy.”

On Tuesday, an independent U.S. panel faulted the State Department for systemic failures and “criticized senior U.S. State Department management for failing to react to security concerns raised by U.S. diplomats in Libya.” Following the report, Clinton began sending more security forces to diplomatic missions around the world.

Boehner to Obama: ‘Get serious’ about ‘fiscal cliff’

19 Dec

 

By Samantha R. Selman

 

Republican House Speaker John Boehner warned President Barack Obama on Wednesday that he can either accept a GOP alternative to a comprehensive “fiscal cliff” compromise or “be responsible for the largest tax increase in American history.”

“I hope the president will get serious soon about providing, and working with us on, a balanced approach,” Boehner told reporters in a brief public appearance at which he took no questions.

The verbal hardball tactics came one day before the Republican-led House of Representative was to vote on the speaker’s “Plan B,” which would extend Bush-era tax cuts on income up to $1 million but would raise tax rates above that. His plan also keeps in place deep automatic defense and domestic spending cuts—the so-called sequester—that key Republicans have spent months denouncing as unacceptable and dangerous to national security.

“Tomorrow, the House will pass legislation to make permanent tax relief for nearly every American—99.81 percent of the American people,” Boehner said. “Then the president will have a decision to make: He can call on Senate Democrats to pass that bill or he can be responsible for the largest tax increase in American history.”

The speaker’s remarks hinted at the pitched public relations battle over the fiscal cliff—across-the-board income tax hikes and deep government spending cuts that will be triggered if the White House and congressional Republicans can’t reach a deal. The combination of spending cuts and tax hikes could plunge the fragile economy into a new recession. Both would go into effect Jan. 1 barring aneleventh-hour compromise.

Republicans have squirmed for months in the face of opinion polls showing the public sides with Obama, who has accused the GOP of holding tax cuts that chiefly benefit the middle class hostage to secure tax cuts for the richest Americans. The president first called for extending tax cuts on income up to $250,000 annually per household, then in a concession to Republicans raised that to $400,000.

Boehner’s gambit also highlighted how he is in a political bind. Many conservatives in the House oppose any tax increase at all. On Wednesday, the anti-tax Club for Growth interest group warned House members to vote against the speaker’s plan. And some House Republicans remain opposed to the automatic defense cuts they say risk endangering national security.

But it’s also not lost on anyone that Boehner’s “Plan B” could turn out to the be the legislative vehicle for any final compromise deal. Once received by the Senate, lawmakers there could amend the package and send it back to the House—though that may be easier said than done.

(Roll Call ace reporter Niels Lesniewski lays out the parliamentary details here with characteristic clarity and thoroughness, noting that “Plan B” might actually prove to be “a much-needed Christmas present” to Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.)

In some ways, Obama seems to be playing along with the idea that the time for talking is over and its now time to vote. During a press conference at the White House shortly before Boehner’s comments, the president signaled that he was done negotiating. “Take the deal,” he said.

As for a negotiated compromise? “I think the speaker would like to get that done,” Obama said.

At Least 4 Dead In Apparent Longmont Murder-Suicide

19 Dec

Police say a man who killed his ex-girlfriend and two of her relatives before fatally shooting himself had been accused of kidnapping the woman and released from jail just hours before the attack.

The Weld County Sheriff’s Department says 31-year-old Daniel Sanchez was released from the Boulder County Jail at 10 p.m. Monday.

At about 4 a.m. Tuesday, a 911 dispatcher received a desperate call from a woman who could be heard saying, “no, no, no” before the sound of a gunshot.

Authorities say Sanchez then took phone and told the emergency operator he shot three people. The dispatcher then heard another gunshot.

Killed were Sanchez’s ex-girlfriend, 25-year-old Beatriz Cintora-Silva; her sister, 22-year-old Maria Cintora-Silva; and her sister’s husband, 32-year-old Max Aguirre Ojeda.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

Emergency phone line operators heard the sound of gunfire early Tuesday as a Colorado woman called 911 and was apparently killed by a man who then picked up the phone and told dispatchers he was going to kill himself before they heard the sound of another shot, authorities said.

Investigators think the unidentified woman and man were among four people found dead at a home near Longmont, about 35 miles north of Denver, in what police are characterizing as a murder-suicide.

Operators heard the woman scream “no, no, no,” cries that were immediately followed by what sounded like a gunshot, Weld County sheriff’s spokesman Tim Schwartz said. A man then took the phone and apparently shot himself as dispatchers remained on the line, Schwartz said. That was the end of the call, he said.

Authorities have not identified the victims or the man they suspect as the shooter. The dead included two men and two women. Police said they are convinced the gunman was among those killed.

There were no apparent survivors, Schwartz said.

It was unclear whether all four lived in the home, Schwartz said.

Investigators think they have uncovered a motive for the shootings, Schwartz said. He refused to release such details, however.

A handgun believed to be murder weapon was recovered.

As investigators searched the home, a woman slipped under the crime tape and ran toward the house. The unidentified woman was restrained by police, fell to the ground on her knees and began crying before being led away.

A pickup truck with Texas license plates, meanwhile, sat idling in the driveway while police waited for permission to enter the vehicle. A neighbor said it had been running since morning.

Several neighbors described what happened around 4 a.m. Tuesday.

Joyce Vibbert said she heard three gunshots and a woman’s voice.

“It was just screaming. I couldn’t hear what she was saying. It was just screaming,” she said.

Vibbert said she couldn’t see what was happening from her bedroom window.

Kathy Tubb said she heard the shots at about the same time.

She said when her husband went outside to warm up the car to go to work he saw a policeman wearing a helmet and armed with a rifle standing in the street. Tubb said her husband was worried there might be a gunman still on the loose.

Desirae Swazoe said she awoke shortly after 4 a.m. and heard repeated shouting, “Weld County Sheriff’s Department! Open the back door! Do it now!”

Fear of Being Committed May Have Caused Connecticut Gunman to Snap

19 Dec

By Bob Dillan

The gunman who slaughtered 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school may have snapped because his mother was planning to commit him to a psychiatric facility, according to a lifelong resident of the area who was familiar with the killer’s family and several of the victims’ families.

Adam Lanza, 20, targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown after killing his mother early Friday because he believed she loved the school “more than she loved him,” said Joshua Flashman, 25, who grew up not far from where the shooting took place. Flashman, a U.S. Marine, is the son of a pastor at an area church where many of the victims’ families worship.

“From what I’ve been told, Adam was aware of her petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed,” Flashman told FoxNews.com. “Adam was apparently very upset about this. He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry. I think this could have been it, what set him off.”

A senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation confirmed that Lanza’s anger at his mother over plans for “his future mental health treatment” is being looked at as a possible motive for the deadly shooting.

 

“He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry.”

– Joshua Flashman, Newtown resident familiar with Lanza family

 

Flashman was told Nancy Lanza had begun filing paperwork to get conservatorship over her troubled son, but that could not be confirmed because a court official told FoxNews.com such records are sealed. The move would have been necessary for her to gain the legal right to commit an adult to a hospital or psychiatric facility against his will. A competency hearing had not yet been held.

Adam Lanza attended the Sandy Hook School as a boy, according to Flashman, who said Nancy Lanza had volunteered there for several years. Two law enforcement sources said they believed Nancy Lanza had been volunteering with kindergartners at the school. Most of Lanza’s victims were first graders sources believe Nancy Lanza may have worked with last year.

Flashman said Nancy Lanza was also good friends with the school’s principal and psychologist—both of whom were killed in the shooting rampage.

“Adam Lanza believed she cared more for the children than she did for him, and the reason he probably thought this [was the fact that] she was petitioning for conservatorship and wanted to have him committed,” Flashman said. “I could understand how he might perceive that—that his mom loved him less than she loved the kids, loved the school. But she did love him. But he was a troubled kid and she probably just couldn’t take care of him by herself anymore.”

The Washington Post reported that the distraught mother had considered moving with her son to Washington state, where she had found a school she thought could help him. Either way, according to Flashman, Nancy Lanza was at her wit’s end.

A separate neighborhood source also told FoxNews.com that Nancy Lanza had come to the realization she could no longer handle her son alone. She was caring for him full-time, but told friends she needed help. She was planning to have him involuntarily hospitalized, according to the source, who did not know if she had taken formal steps.

Multiple sources told FoxNews.com Adam Lanza suffered from Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism, and unspecified mental and emotional problems.

Adam Lanza has also been described by those who knew him as highly intelligent, and a spokesman for Western Connecticut State University told The Associated Press he took college classes there when he was 16, earning a 3.26 grade point average and excelling at a computer course.

Alan Diaz, 20, who was friends with Adam Lanza at Newtown High School, said the Lanza he knew was ill-at-ease socially, but not a monster.

“He was a wicked smart kid,” Diaz told FoxNews.com by email. “When I first met him, he wouldn’t even look at you when you tried to talk to him. Over the year I knew him, he became used to me and my other friends, he eventually could have full conversations with us.

“I’ve heard him laugh, he has even comforted me once in a hard time I had,” Diaz said. “A big part of me wishes I never dropped contact with him after he left high school, felt like I could have done something.”

Flashman said nobody will completely understand why Adam did what he did.

“No one can explain Adam Lanza besides God and Adam Lanza, and I don’t even think Adam Lanza could explain Adam Lanza, to be honest with you.”

Richard Engel freed, but news blackout debate remains

18 Dec

In this image made from video, NBC chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel shakes hands with an unidentified person after crossing back into Turkey, after Engel and his team were freed unharmed following a firefight at a checkpoint after five days of captivity inside Syria, in Cilvegozu, Turkey, Tuesday, Dec. 18.

By Richard Best

Richard Engel, NBC‘s chief foreign correspondent, and at least two colleagues, were released from five days as captives in Syria yesterday in what appears to have been a rescue operation by a Syrian rebel unit. Their escape followed an extended news blackout participated in by most of the Western press.

Mr. Engel, cameraman John Kooistra, and producer Ghazi Balkiz were abducted after an ambush near the village of Ma’arrat Misreen, just north of Idlib, while traveling with a group of Syrian rebels.

“We were driving in Syria about five days ago in what we thought was a rebel controlled area, we were with some of the rebels and as we were moving down the road a group of gunmen just literally jumped out of the trees and bushes on the side of the road,” Engel told NBC News this morning in an interview from Turkey. “There were probably about 15 gunmen wearing ski masks. They were heavily armed, they dragged us out of the car, they had a container truck positioned waiting by the side of the road. They put us into that container truck … with some gunmen, some rebels who were escorting us, they executed one of them on the spot.”

Engel said the group was moved from safe house to safe house during their captivity, and endured threats of murder, mock executions, and taunting from their captors that they should pick among themselves who would die first. At around 11 p.m. last night in Syria, as they were being moved again not far from the initial abduction, their captors ran into a rebel road block, and two of the captors were killed in the ensuing firefight. Others may have been freed in that gun battle, but NBC and other participants are being tight lipped for now.

Engel said the captors were shabiha, Syrian civilian militias loyal to the government of Bashar al-Assad, and his description of what he takes to be their loyalties and background is as good a capsule description of the complexities at play in the Syrian civil war as you’ll find.

“These are people who are loyal to president Bashar al-Assad, they are Shiite, they were talking openly about their loyalty to the government, openly expressing their Shia faith, they are trained by Iranian Revolutionary Guard, they are allied with Hezbollah,” he said. “We were told that they wanted to exchange us for four Iranian agents and two Lebanese people who were from the Amal Movement and these were other shabiha members who were captured by the rebels, they captured us in order to carry out this exchange, and that’s what they were hoping to do, they were going to bring us to a Hezbollah stronghold inside Syria.”

Amal, like Hezbollah, is a Lebanese Shiite political movement and militia. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are in many ways the shock troops of that country’s Islamic revolution. They are interested to see Mr. Assad, a member of the tiny Alawite sect, a long-ago offshoot of Shiite Islam, retain power in the face of his country’s majority Sunni Arab population, since a victory for Sunnis in Syria would deprive Iran of an ally, and provide the Sunnis of Lebanon a potentially powerful new friend.

News of the abduction was kept quiet by dozens of news outlets over the weekend, both at the urging of NBC and as part of evolving ethos among press outlets over how to handle the abduction of colleagues. A number of news operations in Turkey reported that Engel and a Turkish journalist were missing in Syria, and that story was picked up by the UK’s Daily Mail and websites like Gawker. But, for the most part, NBC and an informal group of reporters and aid workers jaw-boned most of their colleagues into not following the story, arguing that reporting could put them in danger.

Attempting to maintain a news blackout after an abduction has long been a common practice, both for journalists and other people working in war zones. The idea is generally that a frenzy of questions and attention can make a quick negotiation for release tougher, either by spooking captors, or by raising their perception of the financial or propaganda value of their captive.

In some cases too much silence can be dangerous. If kidnappers know they’ve got someone high profile, like Engel, and then there’s no news, they can get to wondering if their captive is actually a spy working under journalist cover. In others, obviously, publicity can be very dangerous. Every situation has its different particulars. In this instance it appears that people working with the situation on the ground were seeking to buy time for rebels to find the group before they were moved to a part of Syria under government control.

But as always is in these cases, expect a robust media ethics debate, and discussion of possible double standards from the press. Does the media do more to protect its own than other people? Consider how some US press carried pictures of a man they identified, wrongly, as the Sandy Hook Elementary School murderer on Dec. 14.

And while the safety of Engel and others today can be taken as evidence the blackout “worked,” that doesn’t prove they wouldn’t have been freed if more outlets had reported on events yesterday. When Jill Carroll, then a reporter for this paper, was kidnapped in Iraq in 2006, the Monitor tried to keep a lid on the news, though only managed to keep a hold on it for about 24 hours. With newspapers like The New York Times insisting that they couldn’t sit on a major international story for much longer, the Monitor was forced to go public more quickly than it would have liked.

But as that situation evolved, a high-profile strategy within the Iraqi press was adopted to present Ms. Carroll as a sympathetic, honest person who cared deeply about that country and its people. She was eventually released unharmed after three months of terrifying captivity in the hands of an Iraqi group close to that country’s offshoot of Al Qaeda. Did the media strategy help secure her eventual release? I’d like to think so. But it’s hard to prove. Likewise in the case of David Rohde, a New York Times reporter whose seven-month abduction in Afghanistan was kept mostly quiet by the world’s press because the Times was worried heavy attention would lead to higher ransom demands for Rohde. The Times said Rohde eventually escaped his captivity, and expressed satisfaction with the blackout.

In this case, some of the blackout efforts had the feeling of closing the barn doors after the horses had bolted.

For instance, The Atlantic website had a story up for hours yesterday afternoon titled “If Richard Engel is missing in Syria, nobody kept it a secret” but pulled it down upon request in the early evening. Reporting on war often brings up ethical conflicts between protecting lives and informing the public, but is vanishing a story down a memory hole after it has probably been viewed tens of thousands of times (it was on the top of The Atlantic’s most viewed list at the time it was deleted) the right thing? (For what it’s worth, the headline was wrong. Literally dozens of people had kept a lid on this story for days, astonishing in a community whose jobs and personal compulsions are to share information).

In online forums, reporters who cover conflict have been debating the ethics of all this for days, with the majority of opinion coming down on the side of suppressing information if there’s any hope it can save lives. But some, including me, have misgivings. Do such practices erode already low public trust in journalists? Are they sometimes potentially counterproductive, if captors are desperate for publicity and enraged when they don’t get it?

For now, this story has a happy ending for Kooistra, Balkiz, and Engel. But it’s a partial one. Austin Tice, an American freelancer, has been missing and presumed captive in Syria since August. There are others who are missing whose cases have been kept more quiet. And the bloody Syrian civil war, with tens of thousands of civilian Syrians dead already, has also been rough on journalists. In a report out today, the Committee to Protect Journalists says 23 journalists were killed in combat situations this year, the highest number since 1992. Syria, and the proliferation of citizen journalists there, were responsible for that number.

“NBC was fantastic in informing our families and keeping everyone up to date, keeping the story quiet. Obviously there are many people who are still not at liberty to do this kind of thing. There are still hostages, there are still people who don’t have their freedom inside Syria and we wish them well,” Engel said.

His colleague Balkiz summed up: “When we first got captured for me at least it was a moment of disbelief … there were fumes of despair, at least for me, thinking of my family, my brother, my parents, my wife and I was feeling bad about what I’ve been putting them through … and I must say that when we were freed yesterday by the rebels it was one of the happiest moments of my life.”

Mr. Engel, cameraman John Kooistra, and producer Ghazi Balkiz were abducted after an ambush near the village of Ma’arrat Misreen, just north of Idlib, while traveling with a group of Syrian rebels.

“We were driving in Syria about five days ago in what we thought was a rebel controlled area, we were with some of the rebels and as we were moving down the road a group of gunmen just literally jumped out of the trees and bushes on the side of the road,” Engel told NBC News this morning in an interview from Turkey. “There were probably about 15 gunmen wearing ski masks. They were heavily armed, they dragged us out of the car, they had a container truck positioned waiting by the side of the road. They put us into that container truck … with some gunmen, some rebels who were escorting us, they executed one of them on the spot.”

Engel said the group was moved from safe house to safe house during their captivity, and endured threats of murder, mock executions, and taunting from their captors that they should pick among themselves who would die first. At around 11 p.m. last night in Syria, as they were being moved again not far from the initial abduction, their captors ran into a rebel road block, and two of the captors were killed in the ensuing firefight. Others may have been freed in that gun battle, but NBC and other participants are being tight lipped for now.

Engel: captors loyal to Assad

Engel said the captors were shabiha, Syrian civilian militias loyal to the government of Bashar al-Assad, and his description of what he takes to be their loyalties and background is as good a capsule description of the complexities at play in the Syrian civil war as you’ll find.

“These are people who are loyal to president Bashar al-Assad, they are Shiite, they were talking openly about their loyalty to the government, openly expressing their Shia faith, they are trained by Iranian Revolutionary Guard, they are allied with Hezbollah,” he said. “We were told that they wanted to exchange us for four Iranian agents and two Lebanese people who were from the Amal Movement and these were other shabiha members who were captured by the rebels, they captured us in order to carry out this exchange, and that’s what they were hoping to do, they were going to bring us to a Hezbollah stronghold inside Syria.”

Amal, like Hezbollah, is a Lebanese Shiite political movement and militia. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are in many ways the shock troops of that country’s Islamic revolution. They are interested to see Mr. Assad, a member of the tiny Alawite sect, a long-ago offshoot of Shiite Islam, retain power in the face of his country’s majority Sunni Arab population, since a victory for Sunnis in Syria would deprive Iran of an ally, and provide the Sunnis of Lebanon a potentially powerful new friend.

News of the abduction was kept quiet by dozens of news outlets over the weekend, both at the urging of NBC and as part of evolving ethos among press outlets over how to handle the abduction of colleagues. A number of news operations in Turkey reported that Engel and a Turkish journalist were missing in Syria, and that story was picked up by the UK’s Daily Mail and websites like Gawker. But, for the most part, NBC and an informal group of reporters and aid workers jaw-boned most of their colleagues into not following the story, arguing that reporting could put them in danger.

Roots of blackouts

Attempting to maintain a news blackout after an abduction has long been a common practice, both for journalists and other people working in war zones. The idea is generally that a frenzy of questions and attention can make a quick negotiation for release tougher, either by spooking captors, or by raising their perception of the financial or propaganda value of their captive.

In some cases too much silence can be dangerous. If kidnappers know they’ve got someone high profile, like Engel, and then there’s no news, they can get to wondering if their captive is actually a spy working under journalist cover. In others, obviously, publicity can be very dangerous. Every situation has its different particulars. In this instance it appears that people working with the situation on the ground were seeking to buy time for rebels to find the group before they were moved to a part of Syria under government control.

Double standard?

But as always is in these cases, expect a robust media ethics debate, and discussion of possible double standards from the press. Does the media do more to protect its own than other people? Consider how some US press carried pictures of a man they identified, wrongly, as the Sandy Hook Elementary School murderer on Dec. 14.

And while the safety of Engel and others today can be taken as evidence the blackout “worked,” that doesn’t prove they wouldn’t have been freed if more outlets had reported on events yesterday. When Jill Carroll, then a reporter for this paper, was kidnapped in Iraq in 2006, the Monitor tried to keep a lid on the news, though only managed to keep a hold on it for about 24 hours. With newspapers like The New York Times insisting that they couldn’t sit on a major international story for much longer, the Monitor was forced to go public more quickly than it would have liked.

But as that situation evolved, a high-profile strategy within the Iraqi press was adopted to present Ms. Carroll as a sympathetic, honest person who cared deeply about that country and its people. She was eventually released unharmed after three months of terrifying captivity in the hands of an Iraqi group close to that country’s offshoot of Al Qaeda. Did the media strategy help secure her eventual release? I’d like to think so. But it’s hard to prove. Likewise in the case of David Rohde, a New York Times reporter whose seven-month abduction in Afghanistan was kept mostly quiet by the world’s press because the Times was worried heavy attention would lead to higher ransom demands for Rohde. The Times said Rohde eventually escaped his captivity, and expressed satisfaction with the blackout.

Not so blacked out

In this case, some of the blackout efforts had the feeling of closing the barn doors after the horses had bolted.

For instance, The Atlantic website had a story up for hours yesterday afternoon titled “If Richard Engel is missing in Syria, nobody kept it a secret” but pulled it down upon request in the early evening. Reporting on war often brings up ethical conflicts between protecting lives and informing the public, but is vanishing a story down a memory hole after it has probably been viewed tens of thousands of times (it was on the top of The Atlantic’s most viewed list at the time it was deleted) the right thing? (For what it’s worth, the headline was wrong. Literally dozens of people had kept a lid on this story for days, astonishing in a community whose jobs and personal compulsions are to share information).

In online forums, reporters who cover conflict have been debating the ethics of all this for days, with the majority of opinion coming down on the side of suppressing information if there’s any hope it can save lives. But some, including me, have misgivings. Do such practices erode already low public trust in journalists? Are they sometimes potentially counterproductive, if captors are desperate for publicity and enraged when they don’t get it?

Austin Tice remains missing

For now, this story has a happy ending for Kooistra, Balkiz, and Engel. But it’s a partial one. Austin Tice, an American freelancer, has been missing and presumed captive in Syria since August. There are others who are missing whose cases have been kept more quiet. And the bloody Syrian civil war, with tens of thousands of civilian Syrians dead already, has also been rough on journalists. In a report out today, the Committee to Protect Journalists says 23 journalists were killed in combat situations this year, the highest number since 1992. Syria, and the proliferation of citizen journalists there, were responsible for that number.

“NBC was fantastic in informing our families and keeping everyone up to date, keeping the story quiet. Obviously there are many people who are still not at liberty to do this kind of thing. There are still hostages, there are still people who don’t have their freedom inside Syria and we wish them well,” Engel said.

His colleague Balkiz summed up: “When we first got captured for me at least it was a moment of disbelief … there were fumes of despair, at least for me, thinking of my family, my brother, my parents, my wife and I was feeling bad about what I’ve been putting them through … and I must say that when we were freed yesterday by the rebels it was one of the happiest moments of my life.”

Keystone XL: Montana Approves Easements Allowing Pipeline To Cross State Land

18 Dec

By Richard Best

Montana on Monday approved easements to let the Keystone XL pipeline cross state-owned land, including the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers.

The Land Board chaired by Gov. Brian Schweitzer, running his last meeting before leaving office, sold the package of 50-year easements to TransCanada Corp. for $741,000. The board also finalized approval for land leases for the completion of the Montana-Alberta Tie Line.

But it was the lease for the oil pipeline that brought out some critics, who argued the board isn’t doing enough to make sure the pipeline will be safe for the environment. They pointed to last year’s oil spill on the Yellowstone, caused when a pipeline ruptured, of the danger posed when rivers are crossed. Opponents also argued it shouldn’t be built at all due to global warming concerns from oil production.

The Northern Plains Resource Council, representing some eastern Montana ranchers and landowners affected by the pipeline, wrote a letter to the board advising it that the river crossing points are particularly dangerous.

Jim Jensen, executive of the Montana Environmental Information Center, said the board should at least postpone a decision on the portions of the lease package that cross the major rivers. He said there should be no rush since it is conditioned on receiving presidential approval, a process that has been bogged down in Washington, D.C., politics.

Jensen said the tar sands product is very different from normal crude oil, and its potential impact on aquatic environments is untested. He said the Land board also has an obligation to review the global warming impacts of developing the Canadian oil fields.

“I don’t believe it is responsible for the Land board to make this decision before it has all the information in front of it,” he said.

TransCanada told the board that it has agreed during regulatory permit proceedings to bury the pipeline 40 feet under the major rivers, a depth much greater than the older pipeline that ruptured last year.

Schweitzer told the critics that they need to take their concerns to state or federal agencies that offer the environmental permits.

The governor, shepherding his final land board meeting, said the same groups made similar requests of the board when it was making decisions on coal development in eastern Montana. He argued, again, that the land board makes the decisions regarding the state’s financial interest in such cases, while regulatory agencies make sure environmental laws are followed.

“I don’t know why MEIC and Northern Plains went well back to this well again,” Schweitzer said. “We handle the money. The environmental permits are handled elsewhere. That’s why we have a Department of Environmental Quality that does these things.”

The 36-inch oil pipeline still faces several much larger hurdles than the Montana Land Board, including court battles elsewhere and the pending request for the presidential approval needed for such a cross-border project. The pipeline, which will have an on-ramp for Montana oil developers, would eventually carry crude oil to refineries in southern Texas.

The board also gave the backers of the Montana-Alberta Tie Line some final easements needed across state land in north-central Montana to complete its project. The company told the board that it could be done in the first half of next year.

Schweitzer lauded the project as a key component to the state’s development of wind energy.