Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan testifies before a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on his nomination to be the Director of the CIA, on Capitol Hill in Washington, February 7, 2013.

WASHINGTON | Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:59pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's pick for CIA director, John Brennan, promised senators who will vote on his nomination more openness about U.S. counter-terrorism programs, saying the closely guarded number of civilian casualties from drone strikes should be made public, according to his written responses to questions released on Friday.

Brennan was questioned sharply by Democrats and Republicans alike during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on his nomination last week.

Along with harsh interrogation techniques, Brennan was questioned about drone strikes against terrorism suspects in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere. These strikes have increased under Obama and included the killing in Yemen of a U.S.-born cleric suspected of ties to al Qaeda and his U.S.-born son.

The U.S. government, without releasing numbers, has sought to portray civilian deaths from these strikes as minimal. But other organizations which collect data on these attacks put the number of civilians killed in the hundreds.

"I believe that, to the extent that U.S. national security interests can be protected, the U.S. government should make public the overall numbers of civilian deaths resulting from U.S. strikes targeting al Qaeda," Brennan wrote in response to a question from Senator Dianne Feinstein, the committee chairwoman.

"In those rare instances in which civilians have been killed" reviews are conducted and, if appropriate, condolence payments are provided to the families, he wrote.

Such casualties from drone strikes have created profound anger among civilian populations overseas and severe tension between the United States and Pakistan and Afghanistan.

During last week's hearing, Feinstein said she had been trying to speak publicly about the "very low number of civilian casualties" and to verify that number each year has "typically been in the single digits." However, she said she was told she could not divulge the actual numbers because they were classified.

The New America Foundation said the number of civilians killed by U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan was 261-305 from 2004 to 2013. (here).

A former intelligence official said the reason for the discrepancy between the U.S. government's apparently lower figures on civilian deaths and those collected by other organizations may be due to what is counted as a civilian death.

The government assumes "military-aged" males in the proximity of a drone strike are combatants unless it finds out otherwise, the former official said.

Asked whether the government could carry out drone strikes inside the United States, Brennan replied: "This administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so."

U.S. legal authorities have not limited the geographic scope to a war zone for using force against al Qaeda and its affiliates, he noted, adding: "This does not mean, however, that we use military force whenever or wherever we want."

YEMEN LEAK PROBE

On another topic, Brennan said he had been advised by the Justice Department that he is a witness in, and not a target of, a criminal investigation into media leaks last year about the disruption of an underwear bomb plot by al Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen. He said he had spoken to investigators, but been advised they have no plans to speak with him again.

Brennan said the Justice Department had provided his lawyer with a transcript of a conference call about the plot which he held last May 7 with former counter-terrorism officials who serve as TV news analysts.

At his confirmation hearing, Brennan confirmed the accuracy of a report by Reuters that during the conference call, he told the pundits that the alleged plot was never a real threat because the U.S. had "inside control" over it. But he vigorously disputed that he had leaked classified information.

Within hours, one of the analysts on the call appeared on TV saying that the U.S. government was implying that it had "somebody on the inside" of the alleged plot "who wasn't going to let it happen." News reports then proliferated saying the U.S. or its allies had succeeded in planting an informant inside al Qaeda's Yemen branch.

Brennan said in his written responses that he had given a transcript of his conference call with the pundits to the committee. Congressional officials said the Obama administration had requested that it be kept confidential, even though Brennan testified that nothing he told the pundits was classified.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for a copy of the transcript.

The committee's vote on Brennan's nomination has been delayed until after a congressional recess next week.

(Additional reporting by Mark Hosenball. Editing by Warren Strobel and Christopher Wilson)

View the original article here

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) (front, in green tie) walks with Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI) (R) after a meeting with House Republicans about a ''fiscal cliff'' deal on Capitol Hill in Washington January 1, 2013.

NEW YORK | Wed Jan 2, 2013 12:16am EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks are poised for gains to begin the year after the late passage of a bill to avoid harsh tax hikes that would have hit most Americans and crimped economic growth.

However, harsh reality awaits any euphoria that comes from avoiding the "fiscal cliff". In two months, battles over further spending cuts and, in particular, the U.S. federal debt limit will come to a head.

The House of Representatives voted for a bill passed on Monday by the Senate that will raise taxes on wealthy individuals and families and preserve certain other benefits that will, together, soften some of the blow that would have been sustained without an agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff.

That puts Wall Street in prime position to begin 2013 with a rally, even if thorny issues remain to be addressed in the coming months in Washington.

Asian markets extended gains modestly, with the MSCI Asia Pacific ex-Japan index of stocks up 1.7 percent. U.S. markets will not have a chance to react until 6 a.m. ET, when futures trading begins after the New Year's Day holiday.

"When you separate the fundamentals of the economy from the headlines, the fundamentals really suggest we can support higher prices in the new year," said Bill Vaughn, equity portfolio manager at Evercore Wealth Management in San Francisco.

The Standard & Poor's 500 stock index ended the year up 13 percent, its best gain since 2009, mostly shrugging off the debt-related worries that dominated headlines during the year.

Equity markets held up in the last two months of the year as well, expecting a resolution to head off $600 billion in spending cuts and tax hikes that could push the economy into recession if they stay in effect for long. While the deadline to avert the cliff was December 31, legislation can be formulated to retroactively prevent going over.

The back-and-forth in recent weeks has primarily been of concern to businesses, where confidence has eroded. Some slowing in economic growth due to the impasse is expected, but that may play into the hands of value investors if the market corrects in coming months.

"It appears as though politics will dominate for some time," said Richard Bernstein, chief executive of Richard Bernstein Advisors in New York. "That being said, equity market valuations already reflect this ... the stock market is attractive from my perspective."

Stock markets around the world were closed Tuesday because of New Year's Day. Some Republicans in the House had expressed concern on Tuesday afternoon that a bill would not be finished before U.S. markets open.

Many traders will still be away from their desks because of the holiday, indicating trading volume will stay near its recent low levels. The anemic action, coupled with uncertainty over the cliff, resulted in a spike of volatility in December, with the CBOE Volatility index jumping 13.5 percent in the month.

DEBT CEILING BATTLE REMAINS

The bill that passed does not contain the kind of spending cuts that many conservative Republicans favor in order to bring down the high U.S. federal debt.

Even as this battle recedes, markets will look ahead to another fight in the next few months, this time over whether Congress will approve an increase in the U.S. debt ceiling.

The White House has said it will not negotiate the debt ceiling as in 2011, when the fight over what was once a procedural matter preceded the first-ever downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. But it may be forced into such a battle again. A repeat of that war is most worrisome for markets.

"The spending side fight looms and it will be tougher," said David Kotok, chairman and chief investment officer at Cumberland Advisors in Sarasota, Florida. "The Republican caucus is tighter on that side."

Markets posted several days of sharp losses in the period surrounding the fight in 2011. Even after a bill to increase the ceiling passed, stocks plunged in what was seen as a vote of "no confidence" in Washington's ability to function, considering how close lawmakers came to a default.

Economists at Goldman Sachs, in a note Tuesday, said the coming fight to raise the debt ceiling -- where Republicans are likely to demand spending cuts while President Obama pushes for more taxes -- "is likely to be at least as politically difficult as the last increase was in the summer of 2011."

During this fight, the markets have been less volatile, largely because the effects of the spending cuts and tax hikes will be gradual, and there was an ongoing expectation that a retroactive fix was in the offing.

(Additional reporting by David Gaffen, David Randall, Chuck Mikolajczak and Richard Leong; Editing by Neil Fullick and Paul Tait)

View the original article here

NEW YORK | Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:01am EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Does an office perk count as a benefit if you pay for it yourself? Apparently so, because an increasing number of companies are using so-called voluntary benefits to bulk up workplace offerings.

More companies now offer extra coverage or benefits that workers pay for themselves. They run the gamut from life and disability insurance to vision and dental care, all the way to legal services, shopping discounts and pet care coverage.

About 85 percent of mid-sized companies offer at least one voluntary option, with nearly half offering three or more, according to a 2011 survey by industry-backed research group LIMRA International. Almost half of all companies planned to add more options in the future, according to a similar study by insurer Colonial Life.

That may sound nice, but these offerings are usually made in the context of companies trying to save money, and they put the onus on workers to decide whether they want to buy in.

So far, workers are unconvinced. Participation in life and long-term disability plans remained nearly the same from 2006 to 2010, at 34 percent of workers for life insurance and 24 percent for disability, according to LIMRA.

Employer-offered group plans can be cheaper and more convenient than plans individuals buy on their own. Group plans often carry discounts of 5 percent to 10 percent, as well as the convenience of having your payment automatically deducted from your paycheck.

But they are not necessarily better. Just because a policy is employer-sponsored does not automatically make it the best deal available, says Tom Billet of the human resources consultancy Towers Watson. "Do a little research first."

Smaller benefits like vision coverage or pet insurance aren't very significant; workers can opt in if they can afford the premiums and think it will save them some money around the edges.

But deciding about more expensive benefits -- disability, long-term care and life insurance -- is trickier. Here are some pointers.

LONG-TERM DISABILITY

Group disability coverage usually replaces 50 percent to 70 percent of your salary if an illness or accident leaves you unable to work for three months or longer. Group premiums typically top out at 1.5 percent of your salary, estimates Barry Lundquist of the Council for Disability Awareness. Individual policies can cost three times that.

Even so, private coverage is generally worth the extra money, says New York disability attorney Evan Schwartz. "With an individual policy, premiums are locked in and your policy can't be changed or canceled as long as you are paying premiums," Schwartz says. On group plans, "terms can change on annual basis."

If you change jobs, you can take your privately purchased plan with you; that's rarely the case with workplace group plans.

Furthermore, workplace policies may pay benefits for only two years, and may cut them off even more quickly for mental health or stress-related conditions, says Schwartz.

Group coverage policies also can include offsets, cautions Alan Olson, an employment lawyer in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. That means that before you ever receive your benefits, you must run through other income sources, such as workers compensation or state disability. Buying a private policy without offsets, "can definitely offer a greater return if you actually use the benefits," Olson says.

Finally, if your disability claims are denied, private coverage provides more remedies. Under group coverage - due to the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which covers a wide range of employee benefit plans - claimants must go through a lengthy appeals process before they can sue. ERISA also prohibits claimants from receiving jury trials. "That is one of the most powerful tools you have against an insurance company, and you're giving it up," Schwartz says.

Several online tools can help employees compare their company's disability offering, including MassMutual's Disability Benefits Benchmarking Survey (here).

LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE

If you think you want long-term care insurance, you may not have many choices beyond buying it at work - many carriers have stopped offering it privately, and some are not offering group plans anymore, either.

"You absolutely need to be sure, even with group coverage, that you're buying from an insurer you know and trust," says Frank Darras, a California-based disability lawyer. "What good is cheap insurance if there's no one to file a claim with when the time comes?"

Major carriers that are no longer selling new policies have said they would honor existing coverage but several smaller outfits have gone out of business. States have stepped in to aid existing claimants but not future ones.

Policies can provide financial lifelines for the 70 percent of Americans over 65 who the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says will require long-term care like assisted living at some point in their lives.

Employees who are already dealing with chronic medical conditions will sometimes find it easier to qualify for group coverage than an individual policy.

Fine print to consider: What is the daily benefit? Do I get to select where and when nursing home care is covered? Does the policy include home healthcare or coverage if a family member is providing the care?

Unlike life or long-term disability insurance, long-term care insurance stays in place after you've retired or have left a job, but there's no guarantee that the premiums will stay affordable once you've left your group. For that matter, there's no guarantee they will stay the same even while you're at your job.

Healthy employees, on the other hand, are likely to find buying on their own more affordable. Spousal discounts, for instance, are common on private policies but not workplace ones.

Another downside: Group long-term care policies also are subject to the same federal laws as long-term disability in terms of appealing claim denials detailed above.

TERM LIFE INSURANCE

Life insurance is one benefit that many employers still pay for - 44 percent of employers did in 2010, according to LIMRA - and if that is the case, there is almost no downside to signing up. These policies, usually equal to about one year's salary, are essentially free money. And they don't require medical examinations to qualify - especially important to anyone with a pre-existing condition.

If you want more coverage than your company is providing for free - or if you worry that you'll need coverage after you leave your job - shop around, says former Vermont insurance commissioner and Consumer Federation of America expert James Hunt. "You can often find better deals on the outside," Hunt says.

(This is part of a five-story package on employee benefits and open enrollment season. The author is a Reuters contributor and the opinions expressed are her own.)

(Editing by Linda Stern, Jilian Mincer and Steve Orlofsky)

View the original article here

On the night of July 9, a group of about 20 men groped and stripped a teenaged girl attending a birthday party at a pub in Guwahati.

A local news channel, News Live, whose studio is nearby, recorded the incident and broadcast it. The video went viral on the Internet after the channel posted it on YouTube, shocking the nation. (The original video has been removed from You Tube)

The mob molested the girl for more than 30 minutes until passersby and police rescued her. One of them was a journalist, Mukul Kalita, editor of Assamese-language daily Ajir Asom.

According to the police, 11 of the offenders have been identified and four arrested. Police have been unable to find the prime accused, Amar Jyoti Kalita. An employee of state run IT-agency AMTRON, Kalita has been suspended, according to media reports. One of the accused works as a sweeper at Guwahati Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) while another works for a water tanker service agency.

The story has prompted plenty of outrage about the behaviour of the men, but it also has raised an age-old question about the press. When, if ever, should a journalist abandon the observer’s role and become part of the story? Many people said News Live’s crew failed to live up to its human obligations and was only interested in ratings.

The episode was captured by a News Live employee who was on the spot.  In a television interview, meanwhile, the victim appealed to the government and police to arrest the culprits and punish them.

News Live’s reporter, Dipya Bordoloi, while speaking to other media, said that the mob was not listening to anyone, and “it was like a gang rape.” He says he called the police immediately on reaching the spot, but they took about 20 minutes to reach.

Guwahati City Senior Superintendent of Police Apurba Jiban Barua  said it was the proprietor of the Gateway Grandeur hotel who called the police, and that he received no media calls.

“The police received a call at 10.10 p.m. from a nearby hotel owner and reached the spot within five minutes,” he said. “[Officer] Dibash Chandan Nath was on the spot even before the call was made, and along with Mukul Kalita, rescued the girl,” he added. Barua also said police were trying to identify and arrest the other perpetrators.

People vented their anger on Twitter, criticising the channel for not concealing the victim’s face. People are also angry that the reporter and the cameraman continued to shoot footage but did not try to stop the mob. Many users have shared Amar Jyoti Kalita’s and the other molesters’ photos on Facebook.

News Live’s managing editor Syed Zarir Hussain defended his channel’s actions in an interview to a news channel, saying had the video not been shot, police would not have been able to identify the molesters. Reuters tried to reach the editor-in-chief of the channel, Atanu Bhuyan, who did not respond to email messages.

According to police superintendent Barua, the victim and a few of her friends went to the pub Club Mint to celebrate one of their birthdays. At the pub, they got into a scuffle with the bartenders over payment. When they left, one of the girls attacked a boy, following which a mob gathered. The victim’s friends fled, but the mob caught one of the other girls and assaulted her.

This incident comes on the heels of a pregnant Congress MLA (member of legislative assembly, for readers unfamiliar with India’s legislative system) Rumi Nath and her second husband being thrashed by a mob in the Assamese town of Karimganj. The mob was allegedly angry with Nath for marrying a second person without divorcing her first husband.

In November 2007, a woman was stripped and thrashed by a local businessman in Guwahati. This was followed by a Mizo girl being beaten in Guwahati in December 2010 while she was asking for directions. The mob in this case, mainly women, accused the girl of being drunk.

A report by the National Crime Records Bureau ranks Assam second in the category of crime committed against women in 2011 in India. The report indicates that there were 1,700 cases of rape, 3,192 cases of kidnapping and abduction of women and more than 5,000 cases of domestic violence in the state (PDF link).

“Such incidents are shameful. It only shows the degrading morality of our society,” Mridula Saharia, former chairwoman of the Assam State Commission for Women, told Reuters.

Whether she was drinking at a bar is irrelevant, she said. “Drinking may be harmful and bad, but that does not give anyone the right to outrage the modesty of a woman. And why can’t women party? These offenders must be arrested and brought to justice.”

India has seen a rise in crime against women, with New Delhi being unofficially tagged as the rape capital of India. Domestic violence, dowry deaths, honour killings are widely reported. A recent U.N. report ranked India as the worst G20 country to be a woman.

However, women in northeast India have traditionally enjoyed respect and equality in a predominantly patriarchal society. Bollywood superstar Aamir Khan in his recent avatar as a television anchor praised the people of the Northeast for their treatment of women in his popular show “Satyamev Jayate“.

With the July 9 incident in Guwahati, the question grows ever more urgent: what is the burden that rests on the people to treat their fellow citizens better — and at which point do journalists begin to share that burden through intervention?

View the original article here