European Parliament Approves Plan to Bolster Carbon Trading

LONDON — In a move to bolster the floundering European market for carbon offsets, the environmental committee of the European Parliament voted Tuesday to allow the European Commission to reduce the numbers of carbon permits that it auctions in the next three years.

Prices of carbon allowances, which permit companies to emit greenhouse gases, plunged below €3, or about $4, per ton last month, compared to around €30 per ton in 2008 and about €9 per ton a year ago.

Many analysts think that setting a hefty price on carbon will prove the most efficient way to reduce emissions. The European system is the world’s flagship program and its struggles could have negative implications for other countries that are considering similar efforts, including the United States.

The vote Tuesday, by an unexpectedly decisive 38 to 25 with two abstentions, is “a lifeline for the carbon market and for emissions trading as a policy tool for curbing emissions,” said Stig Schjoelset, head of carbon analysis at Reuters Point Carbon, a market research firm in Oslo. Mr. Schoelset added that if the vote had gone the other way, the system would have been “more or less dead.”

Although this vote is only a first step, politicians and analysts said it might allow the European Union program to begin recovering credibility with markets as a means to curb emissions.

“It is important that we get this right, and the sooner we get it right the better,” the E.U. climate action commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, said during an interview Monday.

Prices for carbon allowances on the Emissions Trading System, the world’s premier cap and trade program, fell to as low as €2.8 per metric ton last month. After the vote Tuesday prices were about €4.5 per ton, after closing at €5.13 per ton on Monday.

The proposal approved Tuesday would take 900 million carbon credits that were scheduled to be auctioned over 2013 to 2015 and “backload” them to 2019 and 2020 in order to put a floor under prices. It is estimated that there is now a surplus of 2 billion credits, so this move will not soak up all of the carbon allowance glut.

The changes will need to be approved later by the full Parliament and member states.

“It is really the first step in a long, long process,” said Kass Burchett, an analyst at IHS, an energy research firm.

The European Trading System was set up by the European Union to provide a signal to polluters like utilities and heavy manufacturers that they needed to reduce carbon emissions. Companies are either allocated or required to buy at auction enough credits to offset their annual emissions. The trouble is that with Europe’s dismal economy dampening industrial activity and energy use, there is now a huge surplus of allowances, or credits, depressing their price.

Industrialists and analysts say that single-digit prices do not provide the intended incentive for companies to switch to cleaner fuels and energy-efficient technology. Mr. Schoelset said that to encourage switching from coal to natural gas, a price of €30 to €40 per ton is needed, while an even higher level of perhaps €60 to €150 per ton is required for utilities to invest in expensive carbon–reducing technologies like carbon capture and storage.

“The vote signals the intention of the European Parliament to begin the process of restoring the most cost-effective approach to meeting Europe’s energy needs and reducing emissions over time,” David Hone, chief climate change adviser to the oil giant Royal Dutch Shell, said in a statement. “It will not immediately restore the system to good health, but it is a start.”

Read More..

National Briefing | South: Abortion Curbs Clear Senate in Arkansas

The State Senate voted 25 to 7 on Monday to ban most abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy. The measure goes back to the House to consider an amendment that added exceptions for rape and incest. The legislation is based on the belief that fetuses can feel pain 20 weeks into a pregnancy, and is similar to bans in several other states. Opponents say it would require mothers to deliver babies with fatal conditions. Gov. Mike Beebe has said he has constitutional concerns about the proposal but has not said whether he will veto it.

Read More..

National Briefing | South: Abortion Curbs Clear Senate in Arkansas

The State Senate voted 25 to 7 on Monday to ban most abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy. The measure goes back to the House to consider an amendment that added exceptions for rape and incest. The legislation is based on the belief that fetuses can feel pain 20 weeks into a pregnancy, and is similar to bans in several other states. Opponents say it would require mothers to deliver babies with fatal conditions. Gov. Mike Beebe has said he has constitutional concerns about the proposal but has not said whether he will veto it.

Read More..

Gadgetwise Blog: Q&A: Controlling Access to a Kindle Fire HD

Is there any way to keep my kid from roaming around through the videos on my Kindle Fire HD tablet?

Amazon’s Kindle Fire tablets include built-in parental controls for restricting access to specific apps, functions and content on the device. On the Kindle Fire HD, swipe your finger down on the screen to get to the settings area and tap More. Tap Parental Controls and then tap the On button. Select a password (one that will be needed to unlock the restrictions), and tap the Finish button. Select the apps and actions you want to block, like the Web browser, e-mail, video playback or the power to make purchases. Amazon has more information on parental controls here.

The newer Kindle Fire HD models also include Kindle FreeTime, an app that lets you select videos, apps and other specific content the child can view on the tablet. Instructions for setting up a child’s FreeTime profile are on Amazon’s site as well.

Read More..

Pistorius Denies Murder in Killing of Girlfriend

PRETORIA, South Africa — Facing a charge of premeditated murder following the killing of his girlfriend, Oscar Pistorius, the double amputee track star and one of the world’s best-known athletes, flatly denied on Tuesday that he intended to take her life when he opened fire at a closed bathroom door at his home last week.

“I fail to understand how I could be charged with murder, let alone premeditated, ” he said in an affidavit read to a packed courtroom, “I had no intention to kill my girlfriend.”

His assertion contradicted an earlier accusation from prosecutor Gerrie Nel that Mr. Pistorius committed premeditated murder when he rose from his bed, pulled on prosthetic legs, walked more than 20 feet from a bedroom and pumped four bullets into the door, three of which struck Reeva Steenkamp, Mr. Pistorius’s girlfriend, on the other side.

It was the first time that either the prosecution or Mr. Pistorius, appearing at a bail hearing, had publicly provided details of their version of events. The case — one of the most sensational in recent times — stunned South Africa last Thursday when the police arrived at Mr. Pistorius’s house in a gated community in Pretoria to find Ms. Steenkamp dead from gunshot wounds.

“We were deeply in love and I could not be happier. I know she felt the same way,” Mr. Pistorius’s affidavit said. As it was read out, the athlete wept uncontrollably so that magistrate Desmond Nair ordered a brief recess to permit him to regain his composure.

Mr. Pistorius said he heard a noise from the bathroom and put on stumps, not prosthetic legs. He was nervous, he said, because the toilet window did not have burglar bars and contractors who had been working there had left ladders.

The room was dark, he said, and he did not realize that Ms. Steenkamp was not in bed. He felt vulnerable and fearful without his prosthetics and opened fire at the door, he said, then broke it down with a cricket back to discover Ms. Steenkamp.

He carried her downstairs, he said, and “she died in my arms.”

Earlier, Mr. Nair, the magistrate, had said he could not exclude premeditation in the killing so Mr. Pistorius’s bail application would be much more difficult. But he said he would consider downgrading the charges depending on evidence at subsequent hearings.

Prosecutor Nel said Ms. Steenkamp, a model and law graduate who had just made her debut in a reality television show, had been in a tiny room measuring less than 20 square feet when the shots rang out. “She could not go anywhere,” he said. “It must have been horrific.”

“She locked the door for a purpose. We will get to that purpose,” he said. She was struck by three of the four rounds, he said.

But a lawyer acting for Mr. Pistorius, Barry Roux, said the defense would “submit that this is not a murder.” He said there was no evidence that Mr. Pistorius, 26, and Ms. Steenkamp, 29, had fought and there was no evidence of a motive. He also challenged the prosecution to produce a witness to corroborate its version of Mr. Pistorius’s actions.

“Scratch the veneer” of the prosecution case, he said, and there was no evidence to support it.

“All we really know is she locked herself behind the toilet door and she was shot,” Mr. Roux said.

Mr. Nel, the prosecutor, however, declared: “If I arm myself, walk a distance and murder a person, that is premeditated,” he said. “The door is closed. There is no doubt. I walk seven meters and I kill.”

He added “The motive is ‘I want to kill.’ That’s it.”

If convicted of premeditated murder, Mr. Pistorius would face a mandatory life sentence, though under South African law he would be eligible for parole in 25 years at the latest. South Africa abolished the death penalty in 1995.

Mr. Pistorius was appearing for the second time since Friday. He arrived in court looking grim-faced, his jaw set. But, as during his earlier appearance, he broke down in tears when the prosecutor said that he had “killed an innocent woman.”

As the court went into a midday recess, Ms. Steenkamp’s private funeral service began in the southern coastal city of Port Elizabeth, her hometown, with six pallbearers carrying a coffin swathed in a white cloth and white flowers as mourners expressed emotions from dismay to rage. More than 100 relatives and friends attended the funeral at the Victoria Park crematorium.

"Why? Why my little girl? Why did this happen? Why did he do this?" June Steenkamp, the victim’s mother, said in a published interview in The Times of Johannesburg.

Gavin Venter, a former jockey who worked for the victim’s father, a horse trainer, said on Tuesday, “She was an angel. She was so soft, so innocent. Such a lovely person. It’s just sad that this could happen to somebody so good.”

“I’m disgusted with what he did. He must be dealt with harshly,” he added, according to news reports.

The affair has stunned a nation that had elevated Mr. Pistorius as an emblem of the ability to overcome acute adversity and a symbol of South Africa’s ability to project its achievements onto the world stage.

During his first court appearance on Friday, Mr. Pistorius did not enter a formal plea. But a statement released by his agent said that he disputed the charge of premeditated murder “in the strongest terms” and that “our thoughts and prayers today should be” for Ms. Steenkamp, and her family, “regardless of the circumstances of this terrible, terrible tragedy.”

Mr. Pistorius was born without fibula bones and both of his legs were amputated below the knee as an infant. But he became a Paralympic champion and became the first Paralympic sprinter to compete against able-bodied athletes at the 2012 London Olympics.

His triumphs made him a global track star. Several companies have withdrawn lucrative sponsorships and his case has played into an emotional debate in South Africa about violence against women.

Members of the Women’s League of the ruling African National Congress protested outside the building, waving placards saying: “No Bail for Pistorius,” Reuters reported.

Lydia Polgreen reported from Pretoria, South Africa, and Alan Cowell from London.

Read More..

Today's Economist: Nancy Folbre: Preschool Economics

Nancy Folbre is an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. She recently edited and contributed to “For Love and Money: Care Provision in the United States.“

Even a 4-year-old can understand the case for early-childhood education. It’s fun, you learn things, you make it easier for Mom and Dad to earn a decent living, and when you grow up you will be better able to earn a decent living yourself. At that point, you will start paying taxes that return the favor, helping finance the retirement and health care of the generation that invested in your education.

President Obama’s proposal to help states develop and expand high-quality early-education programs has won verbal support from across the political spectrum, including David Brooks. More tangible evidence of political viability comes from Oklahoma and Georgia, two traditionally red states that now provide universal voluntary preschool for 4-year-olds.

Still, conservative opposition remains fierce. The loudest complaint is that public programs have not been shown to be cost-effective. But a wealth of research by highly respected economists shows that well-designed, high-quality early-childhood education programs offer a positive payback. At National Public Radio you can listen to the University of Chicago economist James Heckman reiterate this point – as he has been doing for many years.

Timothy Bartik of the Upjohn Institute offers great running commentary on debates over technical issues (such as whether small, demonstrably successful programs can be effectively scaled up) at his Investing in Kids blog.

Academics aren’t the only ones on board. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce published a report last year explaining “Why Business Should Support Early-Childhood Education.”

But the case for a public commitment to early-childhood education extends well beyond any cost-benefit analysis of child outcomes. It would help parents meet their child-care needs and reconcile the conflicting demands of wage employment and family care.

As a report published by the Center for American Progress emphasizes, preschool enrollment rates are already high among 4-year-olds in particular. But high costs mean that participation is highest among the poor, who qualify for Head Start, and the affluent, who can afford to pay out of pocket.

Even parents who currently rely on informal child-care arrangements would benefit from more dependable public provision. Many are just one family member, friend or neighbor away from a child-care crisis that could endanger their jobs. At Forbes, Bryce Covert makes a case for emphasizing the positive employment impact of the proposed policy.

Women’s labor-force participation rates in the United States were once relatively high by international standards. In 1990, we ranked sixth among 22 countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. By 2010, our rank had fallen to 17th. Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn of Cornell University estimate that about 29 percent of the decrease in women’s labor-force participation relative to other countries is attributable to those countries’ adoption of more “family friendly” public policies than those in the United States.

Improvements in children’s future productivity and greater opportunities for productive employment for everyone will shape the future of the United States economy. Conservatives enjoy their strongest support among older white voters, many of whom have already raised their children.

Both young parents and young children are far more ethnically diverse than the population over age 65.

But as the journalist Ronald Brownstein points out in an article memorably titled “The Gray and the Brown,” the very structure of our social programs makes the generations dependent on one another:

Today’s minority students will represent an increasing share of tomorrow’s workforce and thus pay more of the payroll taxes that will be required to fund Social Security and Medicare benefits for the mostly white Baby Boomers. Many analysts warn that if the U.S. doesn’t improve educational performance among African-American and Hispanic children, who now lag badly behind whites in both high school and college graduation rates, the nation will have difficulty producing enough high-paying jobs to generate the tax revenue to maintain a robust retirement safety net.

These are linkages that voters sorely need to understand. In coming months both Social Security and Medicare are likely to withstand the budgetary pressures imposed by the threat of sequestration. On the other hand, programs directed at children – including support for early-childhood education – are likely to come under the deficit-cutting knife.

In the long run, that knife will cut both ways, bleeding our system of intergenerational transfers.

Which is one more reason why it’s important for President Obama and his supporters to wrestle it out of conservative hands.

Read More..

Well: Health Effects of Smoking for Women

The title of a recent report on smoking and health might well have paraphrased the popular ad campaign for Virginia Slims, introduced in 1968 by Philip Morris and aimed at young professional women: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”

Today that slogan should include: “…toward a shorter life.” Ten years shorter, in fact.

The new report is one of two rather shocking analyses of the hazards of smoking and the benefits of quitting published last month in The New England Journal of Medicine. The data show that “women who smoke like men die like men who smoke,” Dr. Steven A. Schroeder, a professor of health and health care at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

That was not always the case. Half a century ago, the risk of death from lung cancer among men who smoked was five times higher than that among women smokers. But by the first decade of this century, that risk had equalized: for both men and women who smoked, the risk of death from lung cancer was 25 times greater than for nonsmokers, Dr. Michael J. Thun of the American Cancer Society and his colleagues reported.

Today, women who smoke are even more likely than men who smoke to die of lung cancer. According to a second study in the same journal, women smokers face a 17.8 times greater risk of dying of lung cancer than women who do not smoke; men who smoke are at 14.6 times greater risk to die of lung cancer than men who don’t. Women who smoke now face a risk of death from lung cancer that is 50 percent higher than the estimates reported in the 1980s, according to Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto and his colleagues.

After controlling for age, body weight, education level and alcohol use, the new analysis found something else: men and women who continue to smoke die on average 10 years sooner than those who never smoked.

Dramatic progress has been made in reducing the prevalence of smoking, which has fallen from 42 percent of adults in 1965 (the year after the first surgeon general’s report on smoking and health) to 19 percent in 2010. Yet smoking still results in nearly 200,000 deaths a year among people 35 to 69 years old in the United States. A quarter of all deaths in this age group would not occur if smokers had the same risk of death as nonsmokers.

The risks are even greater among men 55 to 74 and women 60 to 74. More than two-thirds of all deaths among current smokers in these age groups are related to smoking. Over all, the death rate from all causes combined in these age groups “is now at least three times as high among current smokers as among those who have never smoked,” Dr. Thun’s team found.

While lung cancer is the most infamous hazard linked to smoking, the habit also raises the risk of death from heart disease, stroke, pulmonary disease and other cancers, including breast cancer.

Furthermore, changes in how cigarettes are manufactured may have increased the dangers of smoking. The use of perforated filters, tobacco blends that are less irritating, and paper that is more porous made it easier to inhale smoke and encouraged deeper inhalation to achieve satisfying blood levels of nicotine.

The result of deeper inhalation, Dr. Thun’s report suggests, has been an increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or C.O.P.D., and a shift in the kind of lung cancer linked to smoking. Among nonsmokers, the risk of death from C.O.P.D. has declined by 45 percent in men and has remained stable in women, but the death rate has more than doubled among smokers.

But there is good news, too: it’s never too late to reap the benefits of quitting. The younger you are when you stop smoking, the greater your chances of living a long and healthy life, according to the findings of Dr. Jha’s international team.

The team analyzed smoking and smoking-cessation histories of 113,752 women and 88,496 men 25 and older and linked them to causes of deaths in these groups through 2006.

Those who quit smoking by age 34 lived 10 years longer on average than those who continued to smoke, giving them a life expectancy comparable to people who never smoked. Smokers who quit between ages 35 and 44 lived nine years longer, and those who quit between 45 and 54 lived six years longer. Even quitting smoking between ages 55 and 64 resulted in a four-year gain in life expectancy.

The researchers emphasized, however, that the numbers do not mean it is safe to smoke until age 40 and then stop. Former smokers who quit by 40 still experienced a 20 percent greater risk of death than nonsmokers. About one in six former smokers who died before the age of 80 would not have died if he or she had never smoked, they reported.

Dr. Schroeder believes we can do a lot better to reduce the prevalence of smoking with the tools currently in hand if government agencies, medical insurers and the public cooperate.

Unlike the races, ribbons and fund-raisers for breast cancer, “there’s no public face for lung cancer, even though it kills more women than breast cancer does,” Dr. Schroeder said in an interview. Lung cancer is stigmatized as a disease people bring on themselves, even though many older victims were hooked on nicotine in the 1940s and 1950s, when little was known about the hazards of smoking and doctors appeared in ads assuring the public it was safe to smoke.

Raising taxes on cigarettes can help. The states with the highest prevalence of smoking have the lowest tax rates on cigarettes, Dr. Schroeder said. Also helpful would be prohibiting smoking in more public places like parks and beaches. Some states have criminalized smoking in cars when children are present.

More “countermarketing” of cigarettes is needed, he said, including antismoking public service ads on television and dramatic health warnings on cigarette packs, as is now done in Australia. But two American courts have ruled that the proposed label warnings infringed on the tobacco industry’s right to free speech.

Health insurers, both private and government, could broaden their coverage of stop-smoking aids and better publicize telephone quit lines, and doctors “should do more to stimulate quit attempts,” Dr. Schroeder said.

As Nicola Roxon, a former Australian health minister, put it, “We are killing people by not acting.”

Read More..

Well: Health Effects of Smoking for Women

The title of a recent report on smoking and health might well have paraphrased the popular ad campaign for Virginia Slims, introduced in 1968 by Philip Morris and aimed at young professional women: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”

Today that slogan should include: “…toward a shorter life.” Ten years shorter, in fact.

The new report is one of two rather shocking analyses of the hazards of smoking and the benefits of quitting published last month in The New England Journal of Medicine. The data show that “women who smoke like men die like men who smoke,” Dr. Steven A. Schroeder, a professor of health and health care at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

That was not always the case. Half a century ago, the risk of death from lung cancer among men who smoked was five times higher than that among women smokers. But by the first decade of this century, that risk had equalized: for both men and women who smoked, the risk of death from lung cancer was 25 times greater than for nonsmokers, Dr. Michael J. Thun of the American Cancer Society and his colleagues reported.

Today, women who smoke are even more likely than men who smoke to die of lung cancer. According to a second study in the same journal, women smokers face a 17.8 times greater risk of dying of lung cancer than women who do not smoke; men who smoke are at 14.6 times greater risk to die of lung cancer than men who don’t. Women who smoke now face a risk of death from lung cancer that is 50 percent higher than the estimates reported in the 1980s, according to Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto and his colleagues.

After controlling for age, body weight, education level and alcohol use, the new analysis found something else: men and women who continue to smoke die on average 10 years sooner than those who never smoked.

Dramatic progress has been made in reducing the prevalence of smoking, which has fallen from 42 percent of adults in 1965 (the year after the first surgeon general’s report on smoking and health) to 19 percent in 2010. Yet smoking still results in nearly 200,000 deaths a year among people 35 to 69 years old in the United States. A quarter of all deaths in this age group would not occur if smokers had the same risk of death as nonsmokers.

The risks are even greater among men 55 to 74 and women 60 to 74. More than two-thirds of all deaths among current smokers in these age groups are related to smoking. Over all, the death rate from all causes combined in these age groups “is now at least three times as high among current smokers as among those who have never smoked,” Dr. Thun’s team found.

While lung cancer is the most infamous hazard linked to smoking, the habit also raises the risk of death from heart disease, stroke, pulmonary disease and other cancers, including breast cancer.

Furthermore, changes in how cigarettes are manufactured may have increased the dangers of smoking. The use of perforated filters, tobacco blends that are less irritating, and paper that is more porous made it easier to inhale smoke and encouraged deeper inhalation to achieve satisfying blood levels of nicotine.

The result of deeper inhalation, Dr. Thun’s report suggests, has been an increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or C.O.P.D., and a shift in the kind of lung cancer linked to smoking. Among nonsmokers, the risk of death from C.O.P.D. has declined by 45 percent in men and has remained stable in women, but the death rate has more than doubled among smokers.

But there is good news, too: it’s never too late to reap the benefits of quitting. The younger you are when you stop smoking, the greater your chances of living a long and healthy life, according to the findings of Dr. Jha’s international team.

The team analyzed smoking and smoking-cessation histories of 113,752 women and 88,496 men 25 and older and linked them to causes of deaths in these groups through 2006.

Those who quit smoking by age 34 lived 10 years longer on average than those who continued to smoke, giving them a life expectancy comparable to people who never smoked. Smokers who quit between ages 35 and 44 lived nine years longer, and those who quit between 45 and 54 lived six years longer. Even quitting smoking between ages 55 and 64 resulted in a four-year gain in life expectancy.

The researchers emphasized, however, that the numbers do not mean it is safe to smoke until age 40 and then stop. Former smokers who quit by 40 still experienced a 20 percent greater risk of death than nonsmokers. About one in six former smokers who died before the age of 80 would not have died if he or she had never smoked, they reported.

Dr. Schroeder believes we can do a lot better to reduce the prevalence of smoking with the tools currently in hand if government agencies, medical insurers and the public cooperate.

Unlike the races, ribbons and fund-raisers for breast cancer, “there’s no public face for lung cancer, even though it kills more women than breast cancer does,” Dr. Schroeder said in an interview. Lung cancer is stigmatized as a disease people bring on themselves, even though many older victims were hooked on nicotine in the 1940s and 1950s, when little was known about the hazards of smoking and doctors appeared in ads assuring the public it was safe to smoke.

Raising taxes on cigarettes can help. The states with the highest prevalence of smoking have the lowest tax rates on cigarettes, Dr. Schroeder said. Also helpful would be prohibiting smoking in more public places like parks and beaches. Some states have criminalized smoking in cars when children are present.

More “countermarketing” of cigarettes is needed, he said, including antismoking public service ads on television and dramatic health warnings on cigarette packs, as is now done in Australia. But two American courts have ruled that the proposed label warnings infringed on the tobacco industry’s right to free speech.

Health insurers, both private and government, could broaden their coverage of stop-smoking aids and better publicize telephone quit lines, and doctors “should do more to stimulate quit attempts,” Dr. Schroeder said.

As Nicola Roxon, a former Australian health minister, put it, “We are killing people by not acting.”

Read More..

Gadgetwise Blog: Q&A: Deleting Photos From the iPad

How do I delete photos from the iPad? Some images have a trash can icon I can use to remove them, but others don’t.

The iPad’s Photos app stores both the images you have added directly to the tablet (like pictures saved from e-mail, downloaded from the Web or taken with the iPad’s camera) and those you have copied over from the computer through iTunes. The steps for deleting the photos depend on how the pictures got there in the first place.

The photos you have added directly to the iPad can be deleted directly by tapping that trash can icon for individual pictures on the screen. You can delete multiple photos at once by tapping the Edit button on the album-view screen (typically the Camera Roll album, where saved and shot pictures are stored by default), selecting the pictures you want to remove and then tapping the red Delete button in the top-left corner of the screen.

Photos that you have added to the iPad by using iTunes to sync them from your computer’s pictures library or photo-editing program (like iPhoto or Adobe Photoshop Elements) must be removed through iTunes as well. To do so, connect the iPad to the computer (either with its USB cable or through your Wi-Fi Syncing setup) and click its icon in the iTunes window.

When the screen of iPad settings appears, click the Photos tab so the window shows the albums you have synced to the tablet. Turn off the checkboxes next to the albums you want to delete. The click the Apply button in iTunes and then the Sync button to remove those collections from the iPad. (If you just want to remove certain photos, remove them from the album on the computer and then sync the edited album to the iPad again.)

If you use Apple’s iCloud and its Photo Stream feature, you can find instructions for deleting selected photos from the Photo Stream album here.

Read More..

South African Leader Launches New Political Party

JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Respected anti-apartheid activist Mamphela Ramphele launched a new political party on Monday to challenge South Africa's ruling ANC, saying self-interested and corrupt leaders were threatening the continent's biggest economy.

Invoking the spirit of Nelson Mandela and the optimism that prevailed at South Africa's first all-race elections in 1994, Ramphele said the dream of the "Rainbow Nation" was dying under the African National Congress (ANC).

"Our society's greatness is being undermined by a massive failure of governance," she said, urging South Africans to "build our nation into the country of our dreams".

Ramphele, 65, faces a formidable challenge. Although political support for the ANC is weakening 19 years after the end of white-minority rule, it remains an unrivalled political machine and commands a nearly two-thirds majority in parliament.

But the medical doctor and former World Bank managing director has the respect of much of the country's black majority as a partner of Black Consciousness leader Steve Biko, who died in 1977 in apartheid police custody.

She was also placed under house arrest for seven years by the apartheid government because of her political work. She has regularly challenged authority and the ANC on its failings.

The new party, which will contest elections due early next year, will be called 'Agang', the Sesotho word for "Let us build".

The ANC "noted" her announcement but said Ramphela's launch speech, outside the Constitutional Court in central Johannesburg, offered nothing new.

The 101-year-old liberation movement also dismissed Ramphele's accusation that it was to blame for income inequality, social violence, failing education and other problems.

"The criticism of the ANC is a failure to acknowledge that many of the challenges were not created by the ANC. It is historical," party spokesman Keith Khoza said.

"Any party that won elections would have faced the same societal issues in education, health, housing and so on."

A group of ANC heavyweights split off in 2008 to form the Congress of the People (COPE) but the party fared poorly in elections the following year and has since all-but imploded amid infighting and wrangling.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Writing by Ed Cropley; Editing by David Dolan and Andrew Heavens)

Read More..