Thursday, December 13, 2007

Victoria Wyndham was one of the most seasoned and accomplished actresses in daytime soap opera television. She played Rachel Cory, the maven of Another World‘s fictional town, Bay City, from 1972 to 1999 when the show went off the air. Wyndham talks about how she was seen as the anchor of a show, and the political infighting to keep it on the air as NBC wanted to wrest control of the long-running soap from Procter & Gamble. Wyndham fought to keep it on the air, but eventually succumbed to the inevitable. She discusses life on the soap opera, and the seven years she spent wandering “in the woods” of Los Angeles seeking direction, now divorced from a character who had come to define her professional career. Happy, healthy and with a family she is proud of, Wyndham has found life after the death of Another World in painting and animals. Below is David Shankbone’s interview with the soap diva.

Wednesday, April 5, 2006

Glen Stollery is a New Zealand website developer who created the site ScienTOMogy.info in mid 2005. The site, which is a parody of Tom Cruise and his involvement with the Church of Scientology, became the centre of controversy when it was served with a number of cease and desist orders initiated by the Church. On March 19, 2006, Glen issued a media release stating that his web hosting provider, YouTube, had removed videos of Tom Cruise which formed part of the site. The release suggested that YouTube had taken this action under external pressure from Cruise or Viacom.

Responding to a query by Wikinews reporters, YouTube stated “We have not received a DMCA notification letter from Viacom.” The Church of Scientology was offered the opportunity to respond to the claims made by Stollery during the interview. No reply was received.

This exclusive interview deals with these issues and others relating to the website. It was conducted with Glen via email between March 21 and April 3, 2006.

Monday, November 28, 2005

U.S. Representative Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R–CA) pled guilty today to conspiring to take bribes in exchange for using his influence as a member of the House Appropriations Committee to help a defense contractor get business. In total he pled guilty to one count of income tax evasion and four counts of conspiracy, namely mail fraud, wire fraud, bribery of public official and accepting bribes. U.S. District judge Larry A. Burns scheduled Cunnigham to be sentenced on February 27. He is facing up to 10 years in prison and nearly $500,000 in fines, as well as forfeiture of unspecified amounts of cash and property.

In the court hearing, Cunningham admitted to accepting “bribes in exchange for performance of official duties” between “the year 2000 and June of 2005”, taking “both cash payments and payments in kind” and following up by “trying to influence the Defense Department”.

The federal investigation against Cunningham was triggered by his sale of his California residence to defense contractor Mitchell Wade in late 2003. However, Wade never moved in and sold the house at a $700,000 loss three quarters of a year later. At the same time Wade’s company MZM won tens of millions of dollars in defense contracts. Subsequent investigations discovered more questionable business transactions, including interactions with the defense contractor ADCS. In his plea agreement he testified that, among other charges, he “demanded, sought and received at least $2.4 million in illicit payments and benefits from his co-conspirators in various forms, including cash, checks, meals, travel, lodging, furnishings, antiques, rugs, yacht club fees, boat repairs and improvements, moving expenses, cars and boats.”

Cunningham announced his resignation after the hearing. In a written statement released by his law firm O’Melveny & Myers LLP he declared “The truth is — I broke the law, concealed my conduct, and disgraced my high office. I know that I will forfeit my freedom, my reputation, my worldly possessions, and most importantly, the trust of my friends and family.”

Friday, January 12, 2007

The iPhone only made its appearance as a prototype and there have been controversies aroused.

The dispute has come up between the manufacturer of the iPhone (which was resented on Wednesday for the first time) – Apple Inc. – and a leader in network and communication systems, based in San Jose – Cisco. The company claims to possess the trademark for iPhone, and moreover, that it sells devices under the same brand through one of its divisions.

This became the reason for Cisco to file a lawsuit against Apple Inc. so that the latter would stop selling the device.

Cisco states that it has received the trademark in 2000, when the company overtook Infogear Technology Corp., which took place in 1996.

The Vice President and general counsel of the company, Mark Chandler, explained that there was no doubt about the excitement of the new device from Apple, but they should not use a trademark, which belongs to Cisco.

The iPhone developed by Cisco is a device which allows users to make phone calls over the voice over Internet protocol (VoIP).

Thursday, November 23, 2006

Today an injunction that was filed in the High Court yesterday to stop the Auckland City Council and Auckland Regional Council from telling the Government which stadium they prefer has failed. The decision is over a new stadium located on the waterfront of Auckland, New Zealand or an upgrade of the already existing, Eden Park, Auckland. The stadium is for the final of the Rugby World Cup 2011, which New Zealand is hosting.

The injunction was filed by a group of five Aucklanders who believe that the decision is being rushed. The injunction was filed in the name of a private citizen to represent a group of five Aucklanders. Rodney Hide, leader of the ACT party and Member of Parliament (MP) and MP for the Green party, Keith Locke, are helping the fight for the injunction as they believe the Aucklanders have a strong case.

Justice John Priestley said that the group did not need this injunction because they could fight the stadium decision in the future by different means. A second injunction has already been filed for two days, starting December 11.

Mayor of Auckland, Dick Hubbard, said: “The council’s advisors have informed that processes have been proper and appropriate.”

Rodney Harrison, Queens Counsel (QC), said: “The group that lodged the injunction were Auckland ratepayers, residents and concerned citizens but none of whom could be called high profile. I have no idea what those decisions might be. Exactly how the defendants (local government) react to central Government requests or pressure is a matter for them.”

ARC chairman, Mike Lee attacked his own counsel Brian Latimore for failing to follow instructions at today’s High Court injunction hearing. The instruction were “not to oppose any injunction, merely to assist the court by explaining what was going on and leave the argument to the judge and the other parties.”

Mr Lee said: “We were there as peacekeepers not combatants and it seems this guy has gone in and opened fire.”

Patrick McGuire, one of the five Aucklanders who had sought the injunction, said that Mr Hide had introduced all of them to each other after they each wrote a letter to him with their concerns. Mr McGuire said it requires “public input”.

Mr Hide said that he “had acted as a middle-man, arranging for the members of the group to meet with lawyers.” Mr Locke and Mr Hide are working together because they are concerned the legal processes of the decision over which stadium will be chosen and how the decision will be made. Mr Hide said he did not like the waterfront stadium, “I’m not a lawyer but the legal advice we have had is that the injunction has a high chance of succeeding.”

The two councils, Auckland City and Auckland Regional, have been consulting the affected groups to see which decision they should go with. The Auckland City Council is currently in a meeting discussing the stadium decision and the Regional Council will do it tomorrow.

If the waterfront stadium was chosen then the stadium will be located on Ports of Auckland land and they want a guarantee that their running of the ports will not be affected. Denis Carlisle, president of the local Maritime union, said: “The Ports of Auckland are asking for guarantees that they will not suffer any financial loss from the stadium project, and likewise the Maritime Union will be seeking compensation for our members for any loss of work. The issue was about safeguarding Port of Auckland’s role as a major working port.”

“[The Ports of Auckland] is one of the key gateways between New Zealand and the global economy.”

Friday, July 7, 2006

A 36-year-old man, who is yet to be named, is undergoing surgery after an attacker lodged a knife through one cheek and out the other. The handle broke off, leaving the 15-cm (about 6 inches) blade inside him. The man was rushed to hospital today, July 7, at about 2 a.m. NZST. The attack occurred last night after a domestic row in Albany on Auckland‘s North Shore.

New Zealand Police report that the knife just missed his optic nerve and his condition is stable and not life threatening.

John Chaplin, head and neck surgeon said, “the man could be treated relatively simply. The major blood vessels of the head were further back in the neck and the knife could be relatively easily removed in an operating theatre where bleeding could be controlled.”

The police have issued an arrest warrant for Vance Paraki Tuheke, 31-year-old, in relation to the attack.

The victim may suffer from some facial numbness.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Dramatic developments today have revealed new information about last Thursday’s bomb attacks on London. One person has been arrested after a series of raids in Leeds.

The four men alleged to be responsible for the bombings travelled by train from Leeds to King’s Cross on Thursday morning, where they were seen on CCTV at 8.30am. Three of them, likely British citizens of Pakistani origin, came from Leeds while another joined them en route. One of the three from Yorkshire was reported missing by his family at 10pm that evening.

Three of them then boarded underground trains. The fourth alleged bomber – the man reported missing from Leeds – died onboard the bus, but there are no clear reasons for why he did not follow the same pattern as the others. It has been confirmed that at least three of the four bombers died in the blasts. Forensic evidence and items belonging to all of the men were found in the debris of the target vehicles.

Police also found a car at Luton train station, which is on the route from Leeds to King’s Cross. A series of controlled explosions was carried out on the car. It is understood that one of the bombers drove equipment in the car to Luton, while the others travelled by train.

Materials used to make explosives were also found at one of the houses in Leeds.

A second car was found on the property of a recovery company in Leighton Buzzard; it had been ‘routinely recovered’ from Luton train station on the evening of Tuesday, July 12. Bedfordshire Police, working in conjunction with the Metropolitan Police and the British Transport Police, sealed off the area within a 50 metre radius of the vehicle. The area was re-opened at 9.30pm BST, although a police presence remained until the next day. It has not yet been revealed why the car was towed away or what was contained inside it.