Kia conceptualizes hot hatch for Geneva



Kia concept

Kia released this picture of a new concept car ahead of its unveiling at the Geneva auto show.



(Credit:
Kia)



Following Rolls-Royce's announcement of its new Wraith model for the upcoming Geneva Motor Show, Kia offered up relatively clear pictures, but few details, of a concept car it will put on display.


The body style of the concept looks like a three door hatchback, similar to the European market Pro Cee'd. In a press release, Kia refers to it as a 'provocative and racy new urban concept
car'. Among concept cars, 'Urban' often refers to a compact SUV. However, Kia's new concept, despite some resemblance to Nissan's Juke, appears to sit at hatchback height, one telltale being the low height between the tops of the front wheels and the hood.



Kia points out the modified Tiger Nose grille, the signature design cue on its production cars. The expression of this detail on the concept could point the way to future Kia design. The concept sports a very narrow grille which still accommodates the tabs of the Tiger Nose, and seems to rely on a lower air intake for aspiration. The headlights in the picture suggest LEDs, a common feature on current concept cars.


Kia offered no details on a drivetrain or which future model this concept might represent.


The car will be unveiled during the press preview at Geneva on March 5 and 6. The Geneva Motor Show will be open to the public from March 7 to 17.


Kia concept

Kia's new concept looks like a three door hatchback.



(Credit:
Kia)



Read More..

Women now equal men in lung cancer deaths

U.S. women who smoke today have a much greater risk of dying from lung cancer than they did decades ago, partly because they are starting younger and smoking more - that is, they are lighting up like men, new research shows.

Men who smoke have long had higher lung cancer death rates, but now women have caught up in their risk of dying from smoking-related illnesses. Lung cancer risk leveled off in the 1980s for men but is still rising for women, the study found.




Play Video


New cancer screening guides for heavy smokers



"It's a massive failure in prevention," said one study leader, Dr. Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society. And it's likely to repeat itself in places like China and Indonesia where smoking is growing, he said. About 1.3 billion people worldwide smoke.

The research is in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine. It is one of the most comprehensive looks ever at long-term trends in the effects of smoking and includes the first generation of U.S. women who started early in life and continued for decades, long enough for health effects to show up.

The U.S. has more than 35 million smokers - about 20 percent of men and 18 percent of women. The percentage of people who smoke is far lower than it used to be; rates peaked around 1960 in men and two decades later in women.

In 2009, 205,974 people in the United States were diagnosed with lung cancer, including 110,190 men and 95,784 women, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That same year, 87,694 men and 70,387 women passed away from the disease.

Researchers wanted to know if smoking is still as deadly as it was in the 1980s, given that cigarettes have changed (less tar), many smokers have quit, and treatments for many smoking-related diseases have improved.

They also wanted to know more about smoking and women. The famous surgeon general's report in 1964 said smoking could cause lung cancer in men, but evidence was lacking in women at the time since relatively few of them had smoked long enough.

One study, led by Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto, looked at about 217,000 Americans in federal health surveys between 1997 and 2004.

A second study, led by Thun, tracked smoking-related deaths through three periods - 1959-65, 1982-88 and 2000-10 - using seven large population health surveys covering more than 2.2 million people.

Among the findings:

- The risk of dying of lung cancer was more than 25 times higher for female smokers in recent years than for women who never smoked. In the 1960s, it was only three times higher. One reason: After World War II, women started taking up the habit at a younger age and began smoking more.

-A person who never smoked was about twice as likely as a current smoker to live to age 80. For women, the chances of surviving that long were 70 percent for those who never smoked and 38 percent for smokers. In men, the numbers were 61 percent and 26 percent.

-Smokers in the U.S. are three times more likely to die between ages 25 and 79 than non-smokers are. About 60 percent of those deaths are attributable to smoking.

-Women are far less likely to quit smoking than men are. Among people 65 to 69, the ratio of former to current smokers is 4-to-1 for men and 2-to-1 for women.

-Smoking shaves more than 10 years off the average life span, but quitting at any age buys time. Quitting by age 40 avoids nearly all the excess risk of death from smoking. Men and women who quit when they were 25 to 34 years old gained 10 years; stopping at ages 35 to 44 gained 9 years; at ages 45 to 54, six years; at ages 55 to 64, four years.

-The risk of dying from other lung diseases such as emphysema and chronic bronchitis is rising in men and women, and the rise in men is a surprise because their lung cancer risk leveled off in 1980s.




5 Photos


Shocking ads: Tips from smokers



Changes in cigarettes since the 1960s are a "plausible explanation" for the rise in non-cancer lung deaths, researchers write. Most smokers switched to cigarettes that were lower in tar and nicotine as measured by tests with machines, "but smokers inhaled more deeply to get the nicotine they were used to," Thun said. Deeper inhalation is consistent with the kind of lung damage seen in the illnesses that are rising, he said.

Scientists have made scant progress against lung cancer compared with other forms of the disease, and it remains the leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. More than 160,000 people die of it in the U.S. each year.

The federal government, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the cancer society and several universities paid for the new studies. Thun testified against tobacco companies in class-action lawsuits challenging the supposed benefits of cigarettes with reduced tar and nicotine, but he donated his payment to the cancer society.

Smoking needs more attention as a health hazard, Dr. Steven A. Schroeder of the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in a commentary in the journal.

"More women die of lung cancer than of breast cancer. But there is no `race for the cure' for lung cancer, no brown ribbon" or high-profile advocacy groups for lung cancer, he wrote.

Kathy DeJoseph, 62, of suburban Atlanta, finally quit smoking after 40 years - to qualify for lung cancer surgery last year.

"I tried everything that came along, I just never could do it," even while having chemotherapy, she said.

It's a powerful addiction, she said: "I still every day have to resist wanting to go buy a pack."

Read More..

Clinton on Benghazi: Afghanistan Diverted Resources













House Republicans slammed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today for her lack of awareness of State Department cables warning of security threats in Benghazi, Libya, prior to the Sept. 11 attack that killed four Americans, including Amb. Chris Stevens.


In the second congressional hearing of the day reviewing a report by the Accountability Review Board on the State Department's security failures, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, asked Clinton this afternoon why her office had not responded to a notification from Stevens about potential dangers in Libya.


"Congressman, that cable did not come to my attention," Clinton calmly told the House Foreign Affairs Committee hours after her Senate testimony this morning. "I'm not aware of anyone within my office, within the secretary's office having seen that cable."


She added that "1.43 million cables come to my office. They're all addressed to me."


Hillary Clinton's Fiery Moment at Benghazi Hearing


Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., asked Clinton whether she thought that signaled the need for a shifting of priorities to make sure she is notified about these kinds of threats in the future.


"That's exactly what I'm intent on doing," Clinton said. "We have work to do. We have work to do inside the department. We have work to do with our partners in DOD and the intelligence community."


Such answers failed to appease members like Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., who accused Clinton of letting "the consulate become a death trap."


Clinton also told the House committee that an emphasis on security in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past decade diverted resources from other outposts around the world.


She told Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., that legislation he championed reorganizing the State Department in the 19990s had "been very important in protecting our people around the world," but that the need for funding was ongoing and unmet.


Clinton reprised her role as defender of the State Department this afternoon in the second half of congressional testimony on the security failures that led to the deaths of Stevens and the other Americans.


Stevens understood the significance of the mission, she told the committee several hours after a morning Senate appearance.


"That's why Chris Stevens went to Benghazi in the first place," she said. "Nobody knew the dangers better than Chris, first during the revolution and then during the transition. A weak Libyan government, marauding militias, even terrorist groups … a bomb exploded in the parking lot of his hotel. He never wavered. He never asked to come home. He never said let's shut it down, quit, go somewhere else."


Representatives repeatedly asked about U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's assertion on Sunday morning talk shows in September that the attack was fueled by outrage over a video attacking Islam.






Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images











Hillary Clinton Cites Lack of Funding in Global Outposts Watch Video









Clinton: Security Request Not Brought to My Attention Watch Video









Hillary Clinton Gets Choked Up at Benghazi Hearing Watch Video





Clinton's response was to refer to the ARB report, which said the motivations behind the attack were complicated and still not all known. She maintained that Rice was speaking based upon talking points given to her by the intelligence community.


Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., asked why the secretary of state herself did not appear in Rice's place to give those televised explanations to the country.


"Well, I have to confess here in public [that] going on the Sunday shows is not my favorite thing to do. There are other things that I prefer to do on Sunday mornings," Clinton replied. "And I did feel strongly that we had a lot that we had to manage, that I had to respond to. And I thought that should be my priority."


The afternoon appearance followed morning testimony from an energized Clinton, who stood her ground and told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she has overseen plans to secure diplomatic outposts around the world while cuts in State Department funding undermine those efforts.


Citing a report by the department's Accountability Review Board on the security failures that led to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, during an attack last year, Clinton said the board is pushing for an increase in funding to facilities of more than $2 billion per year.


"Consistent shortfalls have required the department to prioritize available funding out of security accounts," Clinton told the Senate this morning, while again taking responsibility for the Benghazi attack. "And I will be the first to say that the prioritization process was at times imperfect, but as the ARB said, the funds provided were inadequate. So we need to work together to overcome that."


Clinton, showing little effect from her recent illnesses, choked up earlier in discussing the Benghazi attack.


"I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews," Clinton said this morning, her voice growing hoarse with emotion. "I put my arms around the mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters."


The outgoing secretary of state was the only witness to giving long-awaited testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee this morning, and appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee at 2 p.m.


The secretary, who postponed her testimony in December, started today by giving context to the terrorist attack.


"Any clear-eyed examination of this matter must begin with this sobering fact," Clinton began. "Since 1988, there have been 19 Accountability Review Boards investigating attacks on American diplomats and their facilities."


But the secretary did not deny her role in the failures, saying that as secretary of state, she has "no higher priority and no greater responsibility" than protecting American diplomats abroad like those killed in Benghazi.


"As I have said many times, I take responsibility, and nobody is more committed to getting this right," Clinton said. "I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger and more secure."


Among the steps Clinton has taken, she said, is to "elevate the discussion and the decision-making to make sure there's not any" suggestions that get missed, as there were in this case.


Clinton testified that the United States needs to be able to "chew gum and walk at the same time," working to shore up its fiscal situation while also strengthening security, and she refuted the idea that across-the-board cuts slated to take place in March, commonly referred to as sequestration, were the way to do that.


"Now sequestration will be very damaging to the State Department and USAID if it does come to pass, because it throws the baby out with the bath," Clinton said, referring to the United States Agency for International Development, which administers civilian foreign aid.


While the State Department does need to make cuts in certain areas, "there are also a lot of very essential programs … that we can't afford to cut more of," she added.


More than four months have passed since the attack killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Libya. These meetings, during which Clinton discussed the report on State Department security failures by the Accountability Review Board, were postponed because of her recent illness.


Clinton told the Senate that the State Department is on track to have 85 percent of action items based on the recommendations in the ARB report accomplished by March, with some already implemented.






Read More..

Cameron promises Britons vote on EU exit


LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron promised Britons a vote on quitting the European Union, rattling London's biggest allies and some investors by raising the prospect of uncertainty and upheaval.


Cameron announced on Wednesday that the referendum would be held by the end of 2017 - provided he wins a second term - and said that while Britain did not want to retreat from the world, public disillusionment with the bloc was at "an all-time high".


"It is time for the British people to have their say. It is time for us to settle this question about Britain and Europe," Cameron said in a speech, adding that his Conservative party would campaign for the 2015 parliamentary election on a promise to renegotiate the terms of Britain's EU membership.


"When we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice to stay in the European Union on these new terms; or come out altogether. It will be an in-out referendum."


A referendum would mark the second time British voters have had a direct say on the issue. In 1975, they decided by a wide margin to stay in, two years after the country had joined.


Most recent opinion polls have shown a slim majority would vote to leave amid bitter disenchantment, fanned by a hostile press, about the EU's perceived influence on the British way of life. However, a poll this week showed a majority for staying.


Cameron's position is fraught with uncertainty. He must come from behind to win the next election, secure support from the EU's 26 other states for a new British role, and hope those countries can persuade their voters to back the changes.


He also avoided saying exactly what he would do if he failed to win concessions in Europe, as many believe is likely.


Critics, notably among business leaders worried about the effect on investment, say that for years before a vote, Britain may slip into a dangerous and damaging limbo that could leave it adrift or effectively pushed out of the EU.


The United States, a close ally, is also uneasy about the plan, believing it will dilute Britain's international clout. President Barack Obama told Cameron last week that Washington valued "a strong UK in a strong European Union" and the White House said on Wednesday it believed Britain's membership of the EU was mutually beneficial.


Some of Britain's European partners were also anxious and told Cameron on Wednesday his strategy reflected a selfish and ignorant attitude. However, Angela Merkel, the leader of EU paymaster Germany, was quick to say she was ready to discuss Cameron's ideas.


FRENCH "NON"


French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius was less diplomatic: "If Britain wants to leave Europe, we will roll out the red carpet," he quipped, echoing words Cameron used recently to urge France's rich to escape high taxes and move to Britain.


French President Francois Hollande repeated his refusal of special deals: "What I will say, speaking for France, and as a European, is that it isn't possible to bargain over Europe to hold this referendum," he said. "Europe must be taken as it is.


"One can have it modified in future but one cannot propose reducing or diminishing it as a condition of staying in."


Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti was more positive. He said he agreed with Cameron on the need to make the EU more innovative and welcomed the idea of a British referendum, saying he thought Britons would ultimately vote to stay in the bloc.


Billed by commentators as the most important speech of Cameron's career, his referendum promise ties him firmly to an issue that has bedeviled a generation of Conservative leaders.


In the past, he has been careful to avoid bruising partisan fights over Europe, an issue that undid the last two Conservative prime ministers, John Major and Margaret Thatcher.


His speech appeared to pacify a powerful Euroskeptic wing inside his own party, but deepen rifts with the Liberal Democrats, the junior partners in his coalition. Their leader, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, said the plan would undermine a fragile economic recovery.


Sterling fell to its lowest in nearly five months against the dollar on Wednesday as Cameron was speaking.


"BREXIT"?


Cameron said he would take back powers from Brussels, saying later in parliament that, when it came to employment, social and environmental legislation, "Europe has gone far too far".


But such a clawback - still the subject of an internal audit to identify which specific powers he should target for repatriation to London - is likely to be easier said than done.


If Cameron wins re-election but then fails to renegotiate Britain's membership of the EU, a 'Brexit' could loom.


Business leaders have warned that years of doubt over Britain's EU membership would damage the $2.5 trillion economy and cool the investment climate.


"Having a referendum creates more uncertainty and we don't need that," Martin Sorrell, chief executive of advertising giant WPP, told the World Economic Forum in Davos. "This is a political decision. This is not an economic decision.


"This isn't good news. You added another reason why people will postpone investment decisions."


Cameron has been pushed into taking such a strong position partly by the rise of the UK Independence Party, which favors complete withdrawal from the EU and has climbed to third in the opinion polls, mainly at the expense of the Conservatives.


"All he's trying to do is to kick the can down the road and to try and get UKIP off his back," said UKIP leader Nigel Farage.


Euroskeptics in Cameron's party, who have threatened to stir up trouble for the premier, were thrilled by the speech.


Conservative lawmaker Peter Bone called it "a terrific victory" that would unify 98 percent of the party. "He's the first prime minister to say he wants to bring back powers from Brussels," Bone told Reuters. "It's pretty powerful stuff".


Whether Cameron holds the referendum remains as uncertain as the Conservatives' chances of winning the election. They trail the opposition Labour party in opinion polls, and the coalition is grappling with a stagnating economy as it pushes through unpopular public spending cuts to reduce a large budget deficit.


Labour leader Ed Miliband said on Wednesday his party did not want an in-or-out referendum.


EU REFORM


Cameron said he would campaign for Britain to stay in the EU "with all my heart and soul", provided he secured the reforms he wants. He made clear the Union must become less bureaucratic and focus more on free trade.


It was riskier to maintain the status quo than to change, he said: "The biggest danger to the European Union comes not from those who advocate change, but from those who denounce new thinking as heresy," he said.


Asked whether, if he did not succeed in his renegotiation strategy, would recommend a vote to take Britain out, he said only: "I want to see a strong Britain in a reformed Europe.


"We have a very clear plan. We want to reset the relationship. We will hold that referendum. We will recommend that resettlement to the British people."


Cameron said the euro zone debt crisis was forcing the bloc to change and that Britain would fight to make sure new rules were fair to the 10 countries that do not use the common currency, of which Britain is the largest.


Democratic consent for the EU in Britain was now "wafer thin", he said:


"Some people say that to point this out is irresponsible, creates uncertainty for business and puts a question mark over Britain's place in the European Union. But the question mark is already there: ignoring it won't make it go away."


A YouGov opinion poll on Monday showed that more people wanted to stay in the EU than leave it, the first such result in many months. But it was unclear whether that result was a blip.


Paul Chipperfield, a 53-year-old management consultant, said he liked the strategy: "Cameron's making the right move because I don't think we've had enough debate in this country," he said.


"We should be part of the EU but the EU needs to recognize that not everybody's going to jump on the same bandwagon."


Asked after the speech whether other EU countries would agree to renegotiate Britain's membership, Cameron said he was an optimist and that there was "every chance of success".


"I don't want Britain to leave the EU," he told parliament later. "I want Britain to reform the EU."


In the 1975 referendum, just over 67 percent voted to stay inside with nearly 33 percent against.


(Additional reporting by Paul Taylor in Davos, Alexandra Hudson in Berlin, Brenda Goh in London, Jeff Mason in Washington and James Mackenzie in Rome; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge, David Stamp and Alastair Macdonald)



Read More..

Assange hits out at WikiLeaks movie






LONDON: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange hit out on Wednesday at a Hollywood film about his secret-spilling website, calling the movie "a massive propaganda attack".

Speaking to students at Britain's prestigious Oxford University by videolink from the Ecuadoran embassy in London, Assange revealed that he had acquired a copy of the script for "The Fifth Estate", due to be released in November.

"It is a lie upon lie. The movie is a massive propaganda attack on WikiLeaks and the character of my staff," the Australian Internet activist told the audience at the university's Oxford Union debating club.

Assange, 41, also blasted the movie for "fanning the flames" of war against Iran by implying that the Islamic republic was working on a nuclear bomb.

Reading from the script, he said the opening scene was set inside a military complex in Iran with documents containing nuclear symbols.

"How does this have anything to do with us?" Assange said from the embassy, where he has been holed up since June after claiming asylum in a bid to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faces allegations of sex crimes.

DreamWorks Studios announced on Tuesday that it had begun shooting the WikiLeaks movie, which stars British actor Benedict Cumberbatch as Assange.

A photo released by the company showed Cumberbatch with lank hair dyed the same platinum shade as the WikiLeaks founder's, with German actor Daniel Bruehl standing beside him as former WikiLeaks spokesman Daniel Domscheit-Berg.

"'The Fifth Estate' traces the heady, early days of WikiLeaks, culminating in the release of a series of controversial and history changing information leaks," DreamWorks said, adding that the movie would open in the United States on November 15.

Director Bill Condon, who directed the final two instalments in the "Twilight" vampire saga, said the movie "won't claim any long view authority on its subject, or attempt any final judgement".

"We want to explore the complexities and challenges of transparency in the information age and, we hope, enliven and enrich the conversations WikiLeaks has already provoked," he said.

Ecuador granted asylum to Assange in August but Britain refuses to grant him safe passage out of the country, leaving the former computer hacker stuck inside the embassy.

Britain says it is obliged to see Assange extradited to Sweden. Assange denies the sex crime allegations, which he says are a politically-motivated attempt to see him sent to the United States and prosecuted.

WikiLeaks enraged the United States in 2010 by publishing hundreds of thousands of classified documents on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a huge cache of US diplomatic cables that embarrassed governments worldwide.

- AFP/jc



Read More..

How Korea's other phonemaker sells good, cheap phones



Pantech Discover, AT&T's higher-end 'budget' Android




One of my favorite smartphones on today's market also happens to be one of the least expensive around. It costs just $50, runs
Android, boasts a rapid-fire processor and 12.6-megapixel camera, and offers up some ergonomic design elements you won't see anywhere else.


Who makes this humble wonder device? I'll give you a hint: the Korean phone-maker isn't Samsung, or even Sammy's compatriot rival, LG. Instead, credit for the Discover goes to Pantech, the country's third-largest handset-maker.



Although less well-known in the U.S., Pantech has managed to achieve some important milestones that other second-tier smartphone brands have not. First, Pantech primary sells phones through Verizon and AT&T, the country's largest two wireless networks.


Second, Pantech manages to price its smartphones below $100, often charging just $50 with AT&T for models that wrap up a lot of features for not very much dough.


Cheap, but good

By Pantech's own admission, the Discover is its most premium smartphone to date.

Even before the Discover, smartphones like the Burst and Flex represented high-value, high-quality components for even half the up-front price of comparable smartphones.


Pantech's Verizon devices tend to cost more, but still hover in the hundred-dollar range.


This kind of pricing is a noteworthy feat for a subsidized phone. Typically, the manufacturer and carrier negotiate a subsidized price for consumers that comes in hundreds of dollars lower than the phone's full retail price. That's how iPhones and Samsung Galaxy S3s sell for roughly $400 less through a U.S. carrier than they would on their own.


Generally, the more powerful, in-demand brands can negotiate better deals to lure in customers. Otherwise, these brands foot more of the bill to reduce the carrier's sticker price and advertise the phone.


Despite its minimal corporate influence and relative obscurity, Pantech has still kept costs low and value high across the board. How?



Pantech's quad-core Vega R3 superphone

In Korea, Pantech's quad-core Vega R3 superphone challenges Samsung head-on.



(Credit:
Screenshot by CNET,Pantech)


"It has a lot to do with our manufacturing process," said Chandra Thompson, a marketing manager for Pantech USA, when I posed this very question.


Pantech spends a lot of money on in-house research, development, and design, Thompson said, which helps keep the price point down. "There are cost efficiencies that can be achieved by developing technologies in house instead of outsourcing them."


That may be, but plenty of other companies like Samsung, HTC, and Apple do exactly the same. Yet the majority of Samsung's feature-comparable smartphones, to draw one parallel, come in higher.


It's Thompson's second half of the answer that strikes truer: steering clear of multi-billion dollar campaigns keeps their phones' total price lower. In other words, since Pantech doesn't have to offset expensive print and TV ads, it can afford to sell its smartphones for less.



"We look for quality materials, none of our stuff is cheap at all," Thompson adds.


Not every Pantech smartphone or messaging phone comes out as big a winner as the Discover, though few recent models are truly bad (the cute Swift might be one exception,) and all look stylish.


Pantech phones also earn consistently high manufacturer ratings from AT&T for the fewest number of dropped calls. On the Verizon side, Pantech goes through a company called PCD, which helps bring clients' smartphones to market (Verizon's HTC Thunderbolt was a well-known PCD win.)


Humble beginnings



Helio Hero

The Pantech-made Hero debuted in May 2006 for Helio.



(Credit:
CNET)

Pantech has traveled a long road to reach this point. The company been selling phones in the U.S. as white label devices that lacked Pantech branding. Take, for instance, the Helio Hero of May 2006. This was Pantech's first "high-end" cell phone for the U.S., and by today's standards, it doesn't look like much.

Throughout the years, Pantech has sold messaging cell phones for AT&T and then Verizon, like the Pantech Laser touch phone and swivel-y Razzle.


It wasn't until 2011 that the company struck forth with its first smartphone, the durable but entry-level "http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/pantech-crossover-at-t/4505-6452_7-34813352.html">Pantech Crossover for AT&T.


Since then, the company has released six more smartphones in the U.S., in addition to releasing messaging handsets.


Super in Seoul

In the U.S., even the best Pantech smartphone so far sells as very good, but not premium. In its South Korean homeland, though, Pantech can tell a different story.

There, the Vega 3 smartphone can directly challenge front-runners like Samsung's Galaxy Note 2, with its 5.3-inch LCD screen, 1.5GHz quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro processor, 13-megapixel camera, and 2,600mAh battery.


Despite a respectable list of of Vega sub-branded phones, Pantech doesn't sell to Samsung's volume. The company launched four new smartphones in Korea in 2012, and three smartphones in the U.S. (plus some feature phones and the Pantech Element tablet.)





Click to enlarge.



(Credit:
Pantech)


In addition to the U.S., Pantech also has a presence in Japan. Combined, the country's overseas sales for 2011 -- 8.8 million units -- dwarf domestic sales of 3.5 million units. Likewise, Pantech's US and Japanese sales ($1,540,000 million) doubled the company's at-home revenue of $1,260,000.





Click to enlarge.



(Credit:
Pantech)


To put the numbers into perspective, Pantech is still small potatoes compared to Samsung, which pulls revenues in the billions and sells millions of units of just its flagship phone.


What's next for Pantech

Although Pantech remains a smaller-size brand compared to the heavy-hitters, expansion is most definitely in its future. In the U.S., Pantech aspires to become more consumer-focused, perhaps holding events at fashion and music shows in the future.

2013 will also see the company generate some grassroots exposure around the Pantech Discover, which they'll position as a Mass market device skewed toward Millennials.


In addition, Pantech's Web site points to establishing corporate offices in Europe and China.


"We're not a consumer brand," Pantech USA marketer Chandra Thompson said. "We'd certainly like to become one."


So long as the handset-maker can continue releasing top-performing smartphones like the Discover for a low ticket price, it'll have a shot.


Read More..

Evidence shows bold L.A. priest abuse cover-up

(CBS News) LOS ANGELES - There is new evidence that leaders of the Catholic Church in Los Angeles maneuvered secretly to shield priests accused of sexually abusing children.

Documents just released indicate they never told parishioners -- or the police -- what they knew.

"What we're seeing in these files is but a glimpse into a very, very dark, and endless tunnel of secrecy, of abuse, of silence," said Raymond Boucher, a former altar boy and current lead attorney, representing some 500 victims of sex abuse by priests in the archdiocese of Los Angeles.

Files show L.A. archdiocese manipulation in abuse cases

Judge to church: Keep names in Los Angeles priest abuse files
Ten years after revelations of massive sex abuse cover-ups, many victims never get their day in court

Raymond Boucher

Raymond Boucher


/

CBS News

The documents offer the strongest evidence yet of a cover-up that reached to the very top of Los Angeles clergy: Then-archbishop, now-retired Cardinal Roger Mahony.

"That has always been paramount for the church for decades: Protect itself from scandal," Boucher said.

Many of the documents are correspondence between Mahony and Monsignor Thomas Curry, his chief adviser on sex abuse. One concerns whether to allow Monsignor Peter Garcia to return to his duties in L.A. He had secretly been sent away for treatment in New Mexico for sexually abusing as many as 17 youngsters.

No one in the church hierarchy alerted authorities.

Mahony wrote on July 22, 1986: "I believe if Monsignor Garcia were to reappear here within the archdiocese we might very well have some type of legal action filed in both the criminal and civil sectors. Signed, sincerely yours in Christ, most reverend Roger Mahony."

Monsignor Curry concurred: "There are numerous - maybe 20 - adolescents or young adults that Peter Garcia was involved with in a first degree felony manner. The possibility of one of these seeing him is simply too great."

Cardinal Mahony issued this statement Tuesday to the victims: "I pray for them every single day."

It ends simply: "I'm sorry."

Victims held a press conference Tuesday. Manny Vega says was abused from age 10 to 15.

"Conscious, clear decisions were made to hide these priests and move them around and never, never did they consider the well-being of the children that they destroyed and left behind," Vega said.

Monsignor Garcia has passed away, and Monsignor Curry did not respond to requests for comment from CBS News.


As many as 30,000 more documents from the archdiocese sex abuse settlement are to be released in the coming weeks.

Read More..

Left Turn? Obama Speech Invigorates Progressives













A presidential campaign that was largely about jobs and the economy gave way during Monday's inaugural ceremonies to a sweeping affirmation of progressivism and call for "collective action."


Now, liberal allies of President Obama say they're closely watching to see whether the second-term president follows through on issues with which he has struggled before.


Obama's groundbreaking references to climate change and gay rights in his second inaugural address particularly surprised many progressive interest groups, which said their first-term frustrations have been replaced by a new sense of optimism.


"We are hopeful that the president's progressive speech signals a major strategy shift for the Obama administration," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.


Green's group and other liberal Democrats have openly expressed disappointment in Obama since 2009, saying his agenda has fallen short. Many have cited his failure to advance an assault-weapons ban, as promised, enact climate change legislation or overhaul the nation's immigration system.






J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo











The Inaugural Fashion of Michelle, Sasha and Malia Obama Watch Video









Jason Wu Inaugural Ball Gown: Michelle Obama Stunning Watch Video









Inauguration 2013: Obama's Speech a Call to Action Watch Video





Get more pure politics at ABCNews.com/Politics.


Other progressives have chafed at Obama's extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy in 2010 and move last month to make some of the cuts permanent, while putting changes to Social Security and Medicare on the table as part of a deficit-reduction deal.


During the election campaign, Obama ran no paid TV advertising that mentioned gays or gay rights, or the term "climate change," for example. Only four of his ads mentioned environmental issues, and two explicitly portrayed Obama as a defender of the coal industry, something anathema to many environmentalists.


"If the president's inaugural words and action on guns are the template for his governing strategy in a second term, that will allow the president to win big victories and secure a legacy of bold progressive change," Green said, responding to Obama's inaugural address.


In interviews with ABC News, advocates stressed that success on many liberal priorities remains a big "if," with a politically divided Congress and a record of failure by the White House to bridge the divide.


On the environment, activists say they are most closely watching the president's upcoming decision on the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline project, which would carry oil from the tar sands of Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast.


Obama delayed a decision on the project in January 2012, ordering a new environmental-impact study. But with that study nearing completion, he will be forced to weigh in on an issue that has pitted a need for jobs and cheaper energy with environmental and health concerns.


"The decision on the Keystone XL pipeline will be the first indicator about how seriously he's taking climate change over the next four years," said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, an environmental advocacy group opposed to the pipeline. "We'll know in the next month and a half to two months whether he does."


Bill McKibben, an author and leading environmentalist, said in a blog post that he is not holding his breath. "With words like that, it's easy to let ourselves dream that something major might be about to happen to fix the biggest problem the world has ever faced," he wrote.
"And given the record of the last four years, we know that too often rhetoric has yielded little in the way of results."


McKibben is organizing a major environmental rally in Washington on Feb. 17.






Read More..

Netanyahu turns to Iran after narrow election win


JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Hawkish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed victory in Israel's parliamentary election, shrugging off surprise losses to center-left challengers and vowing to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.


Exit polls showed the Israeli leader's right-wing Likud and the ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beitenu would remain the biggest bloc in the 120-member assembly, but with only 31 seats, 11 fewer than the 42 the two parties held in the last parliament.


If the exit polls compiled by three local broadcasters prove correct - and they normally do in Israel - Netanyahu would be on course for a third term in office, perhaps leading a hardline coalition that would promote Jewish settlement on occupied land.


But his weakened showing in Tuesday's election, which he had called nine months early in the hope of a strong new mandate for his confrontation with Iran, could complicate his struggle to forge an alliance with a stable majority in parliament.


"I am proud to be your prime minister, and I thank you for giving me the opportunity, for the third time, to lead the state of Israel," the 63-year-old leader told a cheering crowd in the early hours of Wednesday at his campaign headquarters.


Netanyahu said he planned to form as broad a governing coalition as possible, suggesting he would seek partners beyond his traditional ultra-nationalist and religious allies. His first call may be to Yair Lapid, a former television anchorman whose centrist, secular party came from nowhere to second place.


"The first challenge was and remains preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said.


Iran denies it is planning to build an atomic bomb, and says Israel, widely believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, is the biggest threat to the region.


Netanyahu views Tehran's nuclear program as a threat to Israel's existence and has stoked international concern by hinting at possible Israeli military action to thwart it.


He has shunted Palestinian peacemaking well down the agenda despite Western concern to keep the quest for a solution alive.


The projections showed right-wing parties with a combined strength of 61-62 seats against 58-59 for the center-left.


Lapid's Yesh Atid (There is a Future) party should have 18 or 19 seats, exit polls showed - a stunning result for a newcomer to politics in a field of 32 contending parties.


Lapid won support amongst middle-class, secular voters by promising to resolve a growing housing shortage, abolish military draft exemptions for Jewish seminary students and seek an overhaul of the failing education system.


He urged Netanyahu "to build as broad a government as possible so that we can bring about real change in Israel".


The once dominant Labour party led by Shelly Yachimovich was projected to take third place with 17 seats. She described Likud victory claims as "ridiculous" before final results were in.


"There is a very good chance, a very good chance, that tomorrow morning Benjamin Netanyahu will not be able to form a government," she declared at her party headquarters.


"YESH ATID SWEEP"


Some in Netanyahu's party acknowledged that the election had gone somewhat awry. "We anticipated we would lose some votes to Lapid, but not to this extent. This was a Yesh Atid sweep," Likud campaign adviser Ronen Moshe told Reuters.


Lapid said before the election he would consider joining a Netanyahu-led government. If that happens, the ultra-Orthodox religious parties which often hold the balance of power in parliament might lose some of their leverage.


After a lackluster campaign, Israelis voted in droves on a sunny winter day, registering a turnout of 66.6 percent, the highest since 2003. That buoyed center-left parties which had pinned their hopes on energizing an army of undecided voters against Netanyahu and his nationalist-religious allies.


Opinion polls before the election had predicted an easy win for Netanyahu, although the last ones suggested he would lose some votes to the Jewish Home party, which opposes a Palestinian state and advocates annexing chunks of the occupied West Bank.


The exit polls projected 12 seats for Jewish Home.


The biggest casualty was the centrist Kadima party, which was projected to win no seats at all. It had gained the highest number in the previous election in 2009, although its then leader Tzipi Livni failed to put together a governing coalition.


Full election results are due by Wednesday morning and official ones will be announced on January 30. After that, President Shimon Peres is likely to ask Netanyahu, as leader of the biggest bloc in parliament, to try to form a government.


WESTERN ANXIETY


Whatever permutation finally emerges, a Netanyahu-led government is likely to resist any push for a peace deal with the Palestinians that would come anywhere near satisfying the moderates who seek a viable independent state alongside Israel.


Britain warned Israel on Tuesday it was losing international support, saying Jewish settlement expansion had almost killed off prospects for a two-state solution.


U.S.-brokered peace talks broke down in 2010 amid mutual acrimony. Since then Israel has accelerated construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem - land the Palestinians want for their future state - much to the anger of Western partners.


Netanyahu's relations with U.S. President Barack Obama have been notably tense and Martin Indyk, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, told the BBC the election was unlikely to change that.


"President Obama doesn't have high expectations that there's going to be a government in Israel committed to making peace and is capable of the kind of very difficult and painful concessions that would be needed to achieve a two-state solution," he said.


Tuesday's vote was the first in Israel since Arab uprisings swept the region two years ago, reshaping the Middle East.


Netanyahu has said the turbulence, which has brought Islamist governments to power in several countries long ruled by secularist autocrats, including neighboring Egypt, shows the importance of strengthening national security.


Foreign policy issues barely registered during the election campaign, with a poll in Haaretz newspaper on Friday saying 47 percent of Israelis thought social and economic issues were the most pressing concern, against just 10 percent who cited Iran.


A major problem for the next government, which is unlikely to take power before mid-March, is the stuttering economy.


Data last week showed the budget deficit rose to 4.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2012, double the original estimate, meaning spending cuts and tax hikes look certain.


(Reporting by Jerusalem bureau; Editing by Alastair Macdonald)



Read More..

Marines beat a retreat in Beyonce lip-sync flap






WASHINGTON: The US Marine Corps beat a hasty retreat Tuesday from a furore over whether Beyonce lip-synched "The Star-Spangled Banner" at President Barack Obama's public inauguration ceremony.

First, the New York Times quoted a US Marine Band spokeswoman as saying that, just before Beyonce took the stage Monday, the musicians learned a version of the national anthem it had pre-recorded with her would be used.

"We don't know why," said the spokeswoman, Master Sergeant Kristin duBois. "But that is what we were instructed to do... It's not because Beyonce can't sing. We all know Beyonce can sing. We all know the Marine Band can play."

But later, the Marine Corps said only that a pre-recorded version of the band's musical track was played to the crowd outside the Capitol after Obama was sworn into office for a second term.

Since the band did not have a chance to rehearse with Beyonce beforehand, "it was determined that a live performance by the band was ill-advised for such a high-profile event," it said.

But as for Beyonce's vocal performance, it added: "No one in the Marine Band is in a position to assess whether it was live or pre-recorded."

Beyonce's publicist did not respond to emails Tuesday, leaving it unclear as to whether or not the R&B diva had pulled off the biggest karaoke number in the history of US presidential inaugurations, or somehow just mimed the words.

Also unexplained was a black-and-white Instagram photo, supposedly taken Sunday, of Beyonce in a wool beret and cardigan in a recording studio with three soldiers behind her. She appeared to be listening intently to something.

Equally mysterious was why Beyonce removed the ear monitor mid-way through the song. Singers performing over an instrumental track might do so if the playback is clashing with what's coming out of the loudspeakers.

One way or another, fans of Beyonce -- who sang "The Star-Spangled Banner" live at last year's Super Bowl and returns to the American football classic in February as its half-time act -- rallied behind her on Twitter.

"Who cares that Beyonce Lip #Sync the National Anthem, it was recorded live an hour before. You try singing in that cold," tweeted one fan, referring to Monday's near-freezing temperatures in Washington.

"Beyonce certainly acted like a diva ... but I don't see how that can be compared to Lance Armstrong cheating for 7 straight years at the least," said another Twitter user, referring to the disgraced cyclist.

"Beyonce is the best lip-syncer I've seen," added a third fan. "Because she surely fooled me."

The US Marine Band is the premier musical ensemble of the US Marine Corps. It's also known as the President's Own for its longstanding connection with the White House and important national events.

It played live for most of Monday's inauguration on the Capitol steps, but prior to any major event, it routinely goes into the studio to record its repertoire as a precautionary measure.

"Each piece of music scheduled for performance in the Inauguration is pre-recorded for use in case of freezing temperatures, equipment failure or extenuating circumstances," the Marine Corps statement said.

Pop star Kelly Clarkson and folk singer James Taylor also performed at the inauguration.

- AFP/jc



Read More..