Veena Malik Romance With Ashmit bash

Case Against Veena Malik's 'Immoral Acts' on Bigg Boss

A case has been filed in a Lahore court against Pakistani actress Veena Malik for committing "immoral and un-Islamic acts" during her appearance on the Indian reality TV show Big Boss.

Mian Muhammad Iqbal, a resident of Baghbanpura in Lahore, filed the case in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge Mehr Muhammad Yousaf.

Iqbal contended that Malik's "immoral" acts on the television show were reported in the Pakistani press and police should register a case against her.

After hearing initial arguments, the court today sought a response from the chief of Shalimar police station by January 24.

Iqbal had named the Lahore DIG, the chief of the Shalimar police station and Malik as respondents in his petition.

Malik was one of two Pakistani participants in the latest season of Big Boss. Full Pics

News From: movies.ndtv.com

Danielle Chiesi admits in Galleon case

Danielle Chiesi admits "crossing the line" in Galleon case

(Reuters) - A key defendant in the Galleon hedge fund insider trading case pleaded guilty to criminal charges on Wednesday, tearfully admitting to "crossing the line" by leaking information on stocks including IBM and Advanced Micro Devices.

Danielle Chiesi, a former hedge fund trader, was arrested along with Galleon hedge fund founder Raj Rajaratnam in October 2009 in what officials call the biggest probe of insider trading at hedge funds in the United States.

Chiesi is accused of providing Rajaratnam with some of the confidential information that the government accuses him of trading on -- evidence gathered in secretly recorded telephone conversations between them and others in a long-running probe of the industry. Her guilty plea comes a month before Rajaratnam goes on trial.

"I am deeply ashamed by what I did," Chiesi, 45, said during a 30-minute plea proceeding in U.S. District Court in New York. "By crossing the line on those occasions, I ruined a 20-year career in my field and brought disrepute to what was an honorable profession."

"I apologize to the court and I take full responsibility," she said, adding that "this guilty plea causes me great pain."

Chiesi wore a dark pant suit and white blouse, and cried as her mother, sister and two nieces watched from the public benches.

She admitted to three counts of conspiracy to commit securities fraud before U.S. District Judge Richard Holwell. The same judge is presiding over the criminal trial of Rajaratnam starting on February 28.

Chiesi, who used to work for New Castle Funds LLC, could serve up to four years in prison under the terms of a plea agreement. Her lawyer, Alan Kaufman, said outside the courtroom that Chiesi had not agreed to cooperate with the government in the Galleon probe and that prosecutors had not asked her to.

Sri Lankan-born Rajaratnam has pleaded not guilty in a case that federal prosecutors in New York describe as the biggest probe of insider trading at hedge funds in the United States.

The probe also marked the most extensive use of wiretaps in a white-collar criminal case, authorities said.

Chiesi told the judge that in 2008 and early 2009 she had nonpublic material information on IBM Corp, Advanced Micro Devices and Sun Microsystems that she shared with her boss at New Castle, Mark Kurland, and other people in the hedge fund industry.

PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT

Duke University law professor Samuel Buell, a former lead prosecutor in the U.S. Justice Department's Enron task force, said Chiesi's plea was unlikely to have a major impact on the trial strategies of remaining defendants.

"It might have a mild psychological effect on the defendants themselves," said Buell. "They may think Chiesi had thought she was able to beat this case, and now changed her mind, so that might cause other defendants to second-guess themselves."

The judge said Chiesi signed a plea agreement that includes prison sentence guidelines of 37 months to 46 months.

News From: www.reuters.com

The Front Office’s Case Against Sean McDermott

On the last day of the season when the Green Bay Packers were beating the Eagles, I had heard that the Birds front office had their doubts about defensive coordinator Sean McDermott. Two charges were made against McDermott and that’s what ultimately cost him his job.

The complaints centered around him making his schemes “Too Complex”.

They didn’t like the way he had made the defensive coverages so complicated that some of the rookies couldn’t get on the field. Rookie cornerback Trevard Lindley was a key to the argument. He had been kept on the bench because of the complexity of the coverages, as veteran corners Ellis Hobbs, Joselio Hanson and Dimitri Patterson were roasted at the right cornerback position.

Although most of us look at the Eagles secondary and say they didn’t have enough talent, the front office thought McDermott didn’t get that talent, in this case, Lindley, on the field. Would Lindley have been the answer at right cornerback? I don’t know but we’ll probably find out next season.

You can read between the lines, that obviously the front office felt that the young defensive talent is better than it looked and will improve under somebody other than McDermott. Could it be that some of the people in the front office who voted to get rid of McDermott and believe the defensive talent is better than it looked, had a hand in drafting that defensive talent?

The second charge the front office made against McDermott was his habit of dropping defensive ends and other pass rushers into pass coverage. They thought he was trying to do too much with his defensive schemes. Again they thought he was making the schemes too complex. Pro Bowl defensive end Trent Cole did express a problem with the way he was being used and that surely didn’t help McDermott’s case during the meetings to decide his fate.

As I see it, McDermott was constructing all of these blitzes to put pressure on the passer and coverages to confuse them because his front four couldn’t get there on its own. Brandon Graham, Daniel Te’o Nesheim and Ricky Sapp may one day put pressure on quarterbacks, but they weren’t ready to do it yet. The front office felt these youngsters were ready to get the job done, but they weren’t utilized properly, so they held McDermott responsible for the lack of a pass rush.

I don’t think those are strong arguments against McDermott, but there are reasons you could give him his walking papers.

I think the biggest problem McDermott had and the reason nobody could save him was the 370 points that his defense allowed and the nearly 80% of successful touchdown drives which his defense surrendered when teams got into the Eagles red zone. I didn’t think they were attacking enough in the red zone.

Too many times the defenders were playing passively. You must attack in the red zone and give the offense only a split second to make a play. I would agree with the “Too Complex” argument against McDermott in the red zone. Clearly this charge sticks in this case.

The Eagles defensive players were thinking and reacting far too much with their backs to goalline, as opposed to attacking and forcing the offense to make quick decisions.

Nobody can deny that the defense struggled in the red zone when they allowed offenses to get into the end zone at a pace not seen in the NFL in three decades. Anytime you start setting records for futility, somebody has to walk.

My question is, how could veteran coaches like Reid and Dick Jauron fail to make the corrections in the red zone.

This is the second season in a row that the front office had a problem with one of Reid’s players or coaches. Last year it was Donovan McNabb who was sent packing. This year it’s McDermott. Next year if the Birds make the playoffs and lose their first game, somebody else will take the fall and he’ll probably weigh a lot more than Sean McDermott.

It seems that in the past the front office believed everything that Reid told them, that’s not the case anymore and Reid’s decision-making authority is decreasing year by year. Next year he might not even get a vote.

On a side note: McDermott’s defense doesn’t look too bad when you compare the job the Eagles defense did against the Packers and the 31 for 36 for 366 yards and 3 touchdowns, which Aaron Rodgers and his receivers put on Atlanta. 21-16 looks a lot better 48-21.

What do you guys think about the firing? Make sure to join me on 610-WIP tonight Sunday 7pm-11pm. I’ll be talking about the firing of McDermott and the NFL playoffs.

Ravens vs. Steelers

Ravens vs. Steelers could be test case for new NFL OT rules

PITTSBURGH — The NFL's new overtime rule for the playoffs is in force. It has yet to be used. Given the history of tight finishes between the Baltimore Ravens and the Pittsburgh Steelers, might OT enter the equation here Saturday?

"Hey, if I had to bet which two teams are going to be the first ones to go do it, it would be Baltimore and Pittsburgh," says Steelers linebacker Larry Foote.

"I mean every game is decided by three points. It seems like every game is going to go down to it. So I'd like to see it. As long as we're the last team standing, I'm cool."

PLAYOFF PICKS: Our analysts choose this weekend's winners
WHO HAS THE EDGE? Breaking down Ravens vs. Steelers

Pittsburgh and Baltimore play at least twice a year in the AFC North. In five of their last six regular season meetings, the margin of victory has been three points (with the teams entering overtime twice in the past three seasons). The lone exception was a four-point Pittsburgh win, 13-9 in Baltimore in 2008.

The last playoff meeting between the two wasn't quite that close at the finish, but it was tight. Pittsburgh won the AFC title game 23-14 here in the 2008 season with the help of a late interception return touchdown by Troy Polamalu.

In 2010, the Ravens won 17-14 in October in Pittsburgh. The Steelers won 13-10 in Baltimore in December.

PLAYOFFS: Results, schedule on Road to Super Bowl

"To me, it's definitely the best rivalry in sports. … It's the most physical game of the year.," says Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs.

"So, that's just what it is. It's going to be a physical gang fight, just like the first two games were."

Except maybe longer.

Under the new overtime rule:

• If the team that gets the ball first in overtime scores a touchdown on its first drive, the game is over.

• If the team that gets the ball first scores a field goal on its first drive, the other team gets a chance with the ball. If it scores a touchdown, it wins. If it gets a matching field goal, play continues until the next score.

Both teams must get the opportunity to possess the ball in overtime — as long as the opening drive doesn't end in a touchdown.

The first case could happen here.

"Yeah it could. That's a new rule that none of us have ever had to deal with, really. It's not so much emphasis on the coin toss as there used to be," says Steelers defensive end Brett Keisel.

"But hopefully it doesn't get to that point. Hopefully, we can just take care of business in the four quarters we're allotted."

If neither team manages that, it could come down to the placekickers: Shaun Suisham of Pittsburgh and Billy Cundiff of Baltimore.

While Suisham says invocation of the new rule "would be interesting," he would prefer to see Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger taking a knee at the end of the game to wrap up a victory.

"I'd rather see the guys in victory formation, but if I'm asked to do it I certainly will be ready," says Suisham.

He says the new rule won't make his job any different.

"No, absolutely. I don't ever want to over-complicate what I do. I go on the field and kick the ball through the uprights," says Suisham.

This time, Suisham or Cundiff might have to kick more than one field goal in overtime to win.

"You never know what's going to happen during the game," says Suisham. "I'll be prepared for whatever I'm asked to do."

Berlusconi investigated in teen dancer case

Premier Silvio Berlusconi is under investigation in a prostitution case involving a then 17-year-old Moroccan girl, a case his lawyers on Friday called "absurd and groundless."

Italy's leading newspaper, Corriere della Sera, reported that the 74-year-old premier is suspected of having sex with the minor and then abusing his power in trying to cover up the encounters with the girl, nicknamed Ruby by the news media.

Berlusconi's attorneys, Nicolo Ghedini and Piero Longo, later confirmed the investigation, saying the probe represented a "very serious interference in the prime minister's private life that has no precedent in the country's judicial history."

They called the case media-driven and said the allegations "have already been refuted by all witnesses and people directly involved."

According to the BBC and Italian newspapers, the teen is a nightclub dancer named Karima El Mahroug. She denies having sex with Berlusconi but says she was paid 7,000 euros, or roughly $9,230 Cdn, to attend a party he was at last year.

The investigation escalates a long history of accusations of sexual and financial improprieties aimed at Berlusconi, a billionaire businessman who has shaken off the crises and maintained his hold on power.

It comes, however, at a moment of particular vulnerability. The premier has been politically weakened in recent months and a law shielding him from two, unrelated trials in Milan was significantly watered down Thursday by a ruling of Italy's Constitutional Court.
Berlusconi intervened

The Ruby case became public months ago when it emerged that Berlusconi had intervened to secure the release from police custody of the girl, who had been held for theft.

Berlusconi said at the time that he had done nothing wrong and that he had only intervened to help someone in need. The girl said in newspaper interviews that she had been at the premier's villa and that she lied about being over 18.

The girl has in the meantime turned 18.

Berlusconi's office said it had no immediate comment. Many of his political allies said the latest probe was the latest attempt to hurt the premier by what they say are left-leaning magistrates. The office of Milan prosecutor Antonio Sangermano said he was not available for comment.

According to Corriere, the prosecutors allege that Berlusconi abused his power when he called Milan police on the night of May 27-28 to secure the release of the girl. The prosecutors believe he did so because he wanted to hide the fact he had been her client, according to the report, which did not cite sources.

The ANSA news agency said Milan prosecutors on Friday summoned Berlusconi. Reports also said police searched the offices of two of his aides on Friday.

Daniele Capezzone, a spokesman for Berlusconi's party, said the case was politically motivated.

"If someone … still believes that Silvio Berlusconi can be defeated through judicial means, once again they will be sorely disappointed," he said.

Camp Lejeune Becoming Famous News Reports

Camp Lejeune Becoming Famous for Worst Case of Public Water System Contamination

by Duane Craig

Up to a million people may have been affected by contaminated water at Camp Lejeune Marine Base in Jacksonville, NC. The base water was apparently contaminated with cancer-causing chemicals from 1957 to 1987 and some affected Marines are now claiming the USMC knew about the chemicals, failed to do anything about them, and is now subverting information and blocking investigations.

Scientists testifying before Congress claimed the contamination is the worst case ever discovered in a public water system in the U.S. The Marine Corps says it followed all rules of the times and that federal agencies have exonerated the leadership of wrongdoing.

In some cases there are entire families that stayed at the base, for even short periods of time, that have serious medical issues, and others claim family members died from the exposure to contaminants at the base. One former male marine, who has had breast cancer, claims he has found 66 other men who were stationed at the camp who have also been diagnosed with the disease. According to a breast cancer specialist, Dr. John Kiluk, about one in 1,000 men in the general population are at risk of getting breast cancer.