The template for this display is not available. Please contact a Site administrator.
“Better than even chance” of DADT repeal?
Created: Tuesday, 14 December 2010 20:23
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
Things may be looking up for “Don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal efforts.
Today a repeal bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, mirroring a companion bill that was dropped in the Senate hopper late last week. The stand alone legislation would bypass the procedural issues that played out when repeal language was attached to a much larger defense spending measure. The Senate refused to even bring that bill up for discussion in a closely-watched vote last week.
Today Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., told Metro Weekly introduction of the House bill means “there’s a better than even chance” it will pass in the Senate. ”There would be no point doing this if there wasn’t a real chance to get this done in the Senate,” Frank said.
President Barack Obama this morning met with members of his new White House Council for Community Solutions, including Michael Fleming, the executive director of the David Bohnett Foundation.
“It was a tremendous honor to join the president in the Oval Office this morning and to hear his continued passion for and commitment to public service. I’m proud to serve with this diverse and talented group of leaders and change-makers to advise the president as he looks for new solutions to America’s toughest challenges,” Fleming told Gay Politics.
Among the other 25 Council members are: the musician Jon Bon Jovi; Patty Stonesifer, who chairs the Board of Regents for the Smithsonian Institution; Scott Cowen, the president of Tulane University; and John Donahoe, the president and CEO of eBay, Inc.
Fleming was on hand today when the president signed an executive order creating the panel, which is charged with advising the White House in enlisting support for creative solutions to key challenges in numerous ways including:
• Enlisting leaders in the non-profit, philanthropic and private sectors to make progress on key national policy goals.
• Providing strategic input and recommendations to help the federal government promote greater innovation and cross-sector collaboration to realize solutions to our nation’s toughest challenges.
• Honoring and highlighting those making a significant impact in their own communities.
“The president has made an outstanding choice in naming Michael Fleming to serve on the White House Council for Community Solutions. Few people are as adept at tapping diverse networks to bring together the minds, energy and resources necessary to solve tough problems. That skill will be crucial as the president looks for fresh solutions to America’s challenges, so I congratulate both President Obama and Michael on this exciting appointment,” said Chuck Wolfe, President and CEO, Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and Leadership Institute.
Fleming has been the executive director of the Los Angeles-based David Bohnett Foundation since 2000, and also serves as Mr. Bohnett’s political director. He works hand in hand with Mr. Bohnett to promote the Foundation’s goal of improving society through social justice and civic activism. The Foundation funds forward-thinking programs, organizations and institutions in areas including public policy, education, the LGBT community, the arts, gun violence and animal language research.
A federal appeals court on Monday heard arguments on the constitutionality of Prop. 8, California's ban on same-sex marriage.
Courtney G. Joslin, acting professor of law at the UC Davis School of Law, says judges on the three-member panel of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals appeared to take different approaches on some issues. Here’s the analysis she provided The Times:
At different points in the hearing, Judge N. Randy Smith suggested that he thought that the particular circumstances of the case make the proponents' task of defending Prop. 8 a particularly difficult one. Specifically, Judge Smith pointed out that even after Prop. 8 was approved by the voters, California law still extended to lesbian and gay couples all of the state-conferred rights and obligations of marriage, including all of the parentage and child-related protections. That being the case, he suggested, it is difficult to see how Prop. 8 rationally furthers any interests related to the protection and well-being of children. Later in the hearing, Judge Smith suggested that same-sex marriage bans in states that, unlike the state of California, do not encourage and facilitate same-sex parent families might be more likely to survive constitutional review.
Judge Michael Hawkins went down a different path. Judge Hawkins pressed Charles Cooper, counsel for the Prop. 8 proponents, on the applicability of Romer vs. Evans, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion striking down a Colorado voter initiative provision under rational basis review. The initiative at issue in Romer prevented the state or any governmental entity from prohibiting discrimination against lesbian, gay or bisexual people. The Colorado initiative “withdr[e]w] from homosexuals, but no others, specific legal protection from the injuries caused by discrimination, and it forb[ade] reinstatement of these laws and policies.” This, the court said, was impermissible. Amendment 2, the court explained, “impos[ed] a broad and undifferentiated disability on a single named group” and “its sheer breadth [wa]s so discontinuous with the reasons offered for it that the amendment seem[ed] inexplicable by anything but animus towards the class that it affect[ed],” and thus failed rational basis review. Why, Hawkins asked, aren’t the merits of this case controlled by Romer?
9th Circuit Perry v. Schwarzenegger hearing: analysis and discussion
(a) Cooper’s constitutional argument turned almost entirely on the word itself- marriage- and as Brian noted in our live-blog thread, that this word is simply special.
(b) Very interesting and promising that Judge Hawkins seemed to ridicule Cooper’s discussion of theRomer v. Evans case when Cooper said that case was far-reaching and different, interjecting, if you take away a bunch of rights, it’s not okay, but if it’s one right [marriage], then it’s ok? Cooper could not square the circle that, to him, Amendment 2 was a noxious and over-the-top move by the voters of Colorado, but taking away the fundamental freedom to marry from same-sex couples is fine by him, and Hawkins seemed to note that.
(c) Tyler was terrible. Couldn’t explain why the clerk herself wasn’t there, made numerous factual mistakes, unprepared to respond to challenges from the judges.
(d) Ted Olson hammered home repeatedly, and without interruption that the US Supreme Court has never said marriage is just between man and woman when ruling in the context of prisoners, contraception, divorce, other cases that marriage is (a) liberty (b) privacy (c) association (d) identity. He noted the Supreme Court said this 14 different times. That, along with Olson’s discussion points that (a) even if raising children in same-sex households were a problem, the remedy is not to deny the freedom to marry to same-sex couples, and (b) as Brian put it, you can’t wall off a right because children shouldn’t be exposed to sexuality… it just doesn’t stand up to even the lowest level of rational basis- seemed to be the most poignant in the entire day.
I will be posting further reactions from others throughout the afternoon, as well as the scene from outside the courtroom.
Over the next few months, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will take up an appeal that is being brought by the sponsors of Proposition 8 (the California initiative banning same-sex marriage) to undo U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling, made after a long trial, that the initiative violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. When the Ninth Circuit begins its work, the first question the appellate judges will consider is whether the folks trying to preserve Proposition 8 are appropriate parties in the case -- that is, whether anyone who favors Proposition 8 has "standing" under the Constitution and relevant laws to defend the initiative measure in federal court.
If the Ninth Circuit determines that no defendant (other than the Attorney General and Governor, who have both declined to defend the initiative in either the trial or appellate court) has standing, then the appeal will be dismissed. If that happens, the findings and opinion resulting from the trial conducted by Judge Walker will also likely be erased. This is so because if the only defendants who had constitutional standing in the trial court (the elected executive officials) chose not to defend the measure, then the trial that took place was not a product of a live "case or controversy" under the Constitution; it was, instead, a trial between appropriate plaintiffs on one side and invalid parties -- the Proposition's sponsors -- on the other side. And the results of such a contest where only one side is properly represented cannot be afforded legal respect or significance.
Under this reasoning, the Ninth Circuit would send the case back to Judge Walker to return to square one, and to process the litigation simply on the basis that the plaintiffs should win by default, because the appropriate defendants -- the Attorney General and the Governor -- have conceded the matter. Under such a scenario, unless something new develops, Proposition 8 would be invalidated, but the invalidation would come in a ruling that could never be taken up to the higher courts to set any precedent that might be applicable outside California or that might induce (or even allow) the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in.
In the space below, we begin to analyze some of the arguments supporting the idea that Proposition 8 sponsors should be recognized as having standing in federal court. In Part Two of this series, we will develop other arguments -- beyond even those yet identified by the parties -- that may call into question such standing. And in a later column, we will discuss the attempts by Imperial County (a California county whose electorate voted overwhelmingly in favor of Proposition 8) to intervene in the federal lawsuit (that is, to become a party when no one has named the county as a defendant) in order to defend the gay-marriage ban.
This Monday, December 6, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will hear oral arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the legal challenge toCalifornia's Proposition 8. The panel of judges includes Judge Stephen Reinhardt, Judge Michael Hawkins, and Judge Randy Smith.
NOM's live coverage of the two-hour arguments will begin shortly before 10a.m. PT/1 p.m. ET. Check back Monday for all of NOM's live coverage from the courtroom and video reaction from Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of NOM's Ruth Institute.
SAN FRANCISCO — The defenders of California's gay marriage ban took a pummeling during the first federal trial to explore the civil rights implications of outlawing same-sex marriages. They summoned only two witnesses, one of whom left the stand looking thrashed. Even the lead attorney was left groping for words when pressed to explain how allowing gays and lesbians to wed would undermine traditional unions.
If the courtroom had been a boxing ring, the referee would have called a knockout.
Yet lawyers for the ban's sponsors say their side was on the ropes for a reason: They disputed that live testimony and reams of evidence were relevant to a lawsuit against the voter-approved Proposition 8, so they did not provide it. In their view, the proceedings were a "a show trial," and they were willing to invite the unfavorable verdict they eventually got while betting they would win in a later round where the ground rules would be different.
"Something that has been lost sight of is who has the burden of proof in this case," Andrew Pugno, a lawyer for Proposition 8's sponsors, said at the 13-day-long trial's close. "The burden is not on the defendants and the people who voted for Prop 8."
A new social media campaign known as Childhood Cartoon Faces hopes to raise awareness of violence against children by encouraging Facebook users to ditch traditional pictures in favor of the cartoon images.
"Change your Facebook profile picture to a cartoon from your childhood and invite your friends to do the same," said the Campaign to End Violence Against Children, a Facebook page.
"Until Monday [Dec. 6], there should be no human faces on Facebook but an invasion of memories," the group also writes, meaning your friends' pages should go back to normal by the start of the workweek.
It is not clear if the group has official ties. However searches revealed that the Childhood Cartoon Faces campaign is the only major event for the cause in December.
Response on Facebook has not been entirely positive. A page critical of the campaign's functionality challenges its motives, writing, "Aside from changing your profile pictures...[w]hat else can you do to support the campaign after December 6?"
After strong appeal from Pentagon, opponents of ‘Don’t ask’ repeal ponder next move
Created: Tuesday, 30 November 2010 15:51
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates appealed strongly to the Senate to repeal the military's ban on openly gay service members within the next month, telling reporters Tuesday that the Pentagon's most comprehensive study of troop opinion found there would be little risk to repealing "Don't ask, don't tell."
Gates mentioned by name the most passionate defender of the military's gay ban, Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, who has said this study -- which takes into account the survey responses of 115,000 troops and 44,000 military spouses -- is not comprehensive enough to authorize a repeal. McCain has strongly opposed repeal of the ban, and had heretofore insisted that Congress refrain from acting on the question before consulting the results of the Pentagon study. Now that those results seem to favor supporters of repeal, McCain and other backers of "Don't ask, don't tell" face a dilemma: how to keep making their case when not merely influential military leaders, but rank-and-file soldiers appear to have no serious problem with gays openly serving in the military.
McCain's approach has been to suggest the study itself is inadequate.
"In this respect I think he's mistaken," Gates said. "This does provide a sound basis for drawing conclusions on this law...It's hard for me to imagine that you could come up with a more comprehensive approach."
McCain's spokeswoman, Brooke Buchanan, told The Lookout in an email that the senator is "currently in the process of carefully reviewing the Pentagon's report." She did not comment on whether the recommendations will sway the senator to support repeal.
In a seismic shift on one of the most profound — and profoundly contentious — Roman Catholic teachings, the Vatican said Tuesday that condoms are the lesser of two evils when used to curb the spread of AIDS, even if their use prevents a pregnancy.
The position was an acknowledgment that the church's long-held anti-birth control stance against condoms doesn't justify putting lives at risk.
"This is a game-changer," declared the Rev. James Martin, a prominent Jesuit writer and editor.
The new stance was staked out as the Vatican explained Pope Benedict XVI's comments on condoms and HIV in a book that came out Tuesday based on his interview with a German journalist.
The Vatican still holds that condom use is immoral and that church doctrine forbidding artificial birth control remains unchanged. Still, the reassessment on condom use to help prevent disease carries profound significance, particularly in Africa where AIDS is rampant.
"By acknowledging that condoms help prevent the spread of HIV between people in sexual relationships, the pope has completely changed the Catholic discussion on condoms," said Martin, a liberal-leaning author of several books about spirituality and Catholic teaching.
The development came on a day when U.N. AIDS officials announced that the number of new HIV cases has fallen significantly — thanks to condom use — and a U.S. medical journal published a study showing that a daily pill could help prevent spread of the virus among gay men.
"This is a great day in the fight against AIDS ... a major milestone," said Mitchell Warren, head of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition.
Theologians have debated for years whether it could be morally acceptable for HIV-infected people to use condoms to avoid infecting their partners. The Vatican years ago was reportedly preparing a document on the subject, but it never came out.
The groundbreaking shift, coming as it does from the deeply conservative pontiff, would appear likely to restrain any public criticism from Catholic conservatives, who insisted Tuesday that the pope was merely reaffirming the church's moral teaching.
Conservatives have feared that a comment like this would give support to Catholics who want to challenge the church's ban on artificial contraception in an environment where they feel they are under siege from a secular, anti-Catholic culture.
George Weigel, a conservative Catholic writer, said the Vatican was by no means endorsing condom use as a method of contraception or a means of AIDS prevention.
"This is admittedly a difficult distinction to grasp," he told The Associated Press in an e-mail. What the pontiff is saying is "that someone determined to do something wrong may be showing a glimmer of moral common sense by not doing that wrong thing in the worst possible way — which is not an endorsement of anything."
Earlier this week, The Huffington Post wroteabout the app, which critics have called "anti-gay" for "[boiling] LGBT people down to little more than deviant cretins." Several days later, the app was no longer available in the App Store, and it seems Apple has quietly removed the app. (We've contacted the creators of the app for a comment.)
The app's disappearance from the App Store comes after thousands signed an online petitionasking Apple to remove the app. "Supporters of equal rights and the right of women to control their own bodies must stand together and say to Apple: 'Applications that support hate and division have no place in the iTunes Store,'" the petition's authors wrote.
The Manhattan Declaration invited users to add their signatures to a nearly 5,000-word long "declaration" authored by Christian clergy, among others, that "speaks in defense of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty." The app described itself as a "call of Christian conscience."
In 2008, Apple donated $100,000 to oppose the ban on gay marriage.
Do you think Apple should have removed the app? Weigh in below.
Afrojack ft. Eva Simons - Take Over Control (Official Video HD)
Created: Sunday, 28 November 2010 13:51
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
Afrojack, aka Nick van de Wall is a Dutch DJ from Spijkenisse. He has gone from strength to strength since starting his own label Wall Recordings back in 2007 which soon accelerated a collection of quality releases from “Don’t Be” to “Proper Introduction” and “Thief”. In his field, Afrojack soon became considered as a genius producer and embarked on a series of collaborations with international artists such as David Guetta, Diplo, Kid Cudi, Laidback Luke and Steve Angelo to name but a few.
It wasn’t long until he returned to the clubs in 2008 with “Math” and “Do My Dance” and as predicted both tracks were quickly picked up by every big name on the scene. The remix, “Drop Down (do my dance)” was soon born.
“Take Over Control” the newest member to the ever growing brood of hits looks set to follow in similar footsteps. Afrojack has teamed up with hot Dutch vocal talent Eva Simons. With huge interest and support from major labels stateside and with a tour already completed in the US and in Australia, Afrojack looks set to replicate other breakthrough artists such as Sidney Samson and Fedde Le Grand.
American Express boosts Small Business Saturday
Created: Saturday, 27 November 2010 14:35
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
A new national campaign is urging consumers to take a break between the big-box madness of Black Friday and the bargain-hunting of Cyber Monday and spend today patronizing neighborhood merchants in a new event dubbed Small Business Saturday.
Backed by American Express OPEN, the division of the credit card giant that serves small businesses, the campaign supports the locally owned businesses that help give neighborhoods their character.
"We're really focused on the little guys that don't have the national or regional brand names hanging over their doors," said Cinda Baxter, the small business advocate in Minneapolis whose activities helped spawn today's event.
Baxter said that about 18 months ago she floated an idea in a blog posting. She called it the 3/50 Project: Find three local merchants you love and spend $50 at each per month.
She described 3/50 as a less confrontational variant of the broader buy-local movement because her approach acknowledged that everybody shops at big boxes and online - while also reminding consumers that local merchants deliver not just personal service but millions of jobs.
Baxter said AmEx, which liked the tone of the 3/50 Project, brainstormed with her about how to spotlight neighborhood retailers during the holiday season - and Small Business Saturday was born.
At y&I clothing store on Chestnut Street in San Francisco, co-owner Robyn Sribhen White said small shops like hers need the assist.
Sribhen White, who worked for the Gap and other national brands before opening her shop four years ago, said local merchants have a tough time competing for gift purchases, in part because items from small stores can be harder to exchange, especially if the gift is sent out of town.
For that reason, she said, most of her clientele are women - or their significant others - buying fashion statements like one of this season's favorites: thigh-high leather boots.
In addition to the national advertising campaign to christen what AmEx hopes to make a recurring event, the credit card giant has urged its cardholders to register in advance for a special promotion - if they shop in a local store on Saturday and charge at least $25 on their AmEx card, they'll get a $25 credit on their next statement.
Andrew Mastorakis, president of Fremont Bank, a local institution that also caters to small businesses, praised AmEx for a brilliant campaign to bolster the little guys - while also helping the credit card giant improve its reach among small retailers, many of whom only take competing credit cards.
Meanwhile, at Big Swingin' Cycles in San Francisco's Russian Hill neighborhood, proprietor Brian Bruckner said he sent an alert about today's special to the hundreds of customers who have joined his mailing list in the 10 years since he began selling bikes and service.
An American Express customer - as is Sribhen White - Bruckner has the inside track on making the most of the event.
"Black Friday is not usually a big day for us," said Bruckner, who is hoping that Small Business Saturday may convince a few more shoppers to come in and kick the tires.
HOUSEWIVES. WITH CHRISTMAS BALLS! GET INTO THE HOLIDAYS WITH “THE A-LIST: NEW YORK”
Created: Saturday, 27 November 2010 14:26
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
Since Thanksgiving is practically here y’all… I think we can safely say the holiday season has arrived. And since the boys from Logo’s A-List: New York have been roasting everybody’s chestnuts all this fall (Is this show an amusing bit of dishy fun and catty misbehavior, or is it the worst thing to happen to the Gay Rights movement like evaaahhhhhhh!!!???) we thought we’d pay a little holiday visit with Reichen, Derek, Austin and the lads to see what they’ve got cooking for the yuletide season.
Watch below as we find out what the A-gays are thankful for, what’s on their Christmas lists, and what 2011 resolutions they’ve got schemed up. Plus, who doesn’t love a little round of “Secret Santa!”
JOY TO THE WORLD! Goddess, rest ye merry gentleman! (Or “Mary” gentlemen?) Or as Rodiney would say “Feliz Natal!”
AND… Next Monday, November 29 brings the final regular episode of The A-List: New York, and then on Monday, December 6th it’s the big fat Reunion Special hosted by Wendy Williams!!! Mark your calendars!
US judge says lesbians can be ‘cured’ by male soldiers
Created: Friday, 26 November 2010 17:16
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
An American judge has been accused of advocating corrective rape for lesbians.
Joe Rehyansky, a part-time magistrate and Vietnam veteran, wrote on conservative news site The Daily Caller that lesbians should be allowed to serve in the military because straight male soldiers could “convert” them.
Mr Rehyansky, of Hamilton County, Tennessee, argued that men were naturally more promiscuous than women and “it fell to men to swing through the trees and scour the caves in search of as many women as possible to subdue and impregnate – a tough job but someone had to do it”.
Then, he claimed that the “promiscuity” of gay men, coupled with HIV, would have “the potential for disastrous health consequences” if gay men were allowed to serve openly in the military.
“Gays spread disease at a rate out of all proportion to their numbers in our population and should be excluded from the military,” he argued.
He continued: “Shouldn’t the overwhelmingly straight warriors who answer their county’s call be spared the indignity of showering with other men who achieve lascivious enjoyment from the sight of those lithe naked bodies, and who may be tempted to seek more than the view?”
Lesbian military personnel, who Mr Rehyansky praised for their “medical and administrative specialties”, should be allowed to serve because they apparently have low sex drives.
His final argument, which has now been removed by The Daily Caller, was as follows: “My solution would get the distaff part of our homosexual population off our collective ‘Broke Back,’ thus giving straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream.”
Mr Rehyansky was accused of advocating corrective rape for lesbians by some commentators.
Blogger Amanda Hess sardonically noted: “Once all the lesbians are easily accessible in one place, an army of straight dudes will turn them all straight, presumably through that time-tested tactic of subduing and impregnating women against their will.”
U.S. Government Seizes and Shutters Torrent-Finder.com
Created: Friday, 26 November 2010 17:09
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
[for those of you who use Torrent-Finder.com, thanks ^joe sosa]
Torrent-Finder.com is down today; the site was apparently seized by government agencies for reasons unknown. In all likelihood, the site was taken down due to intellectual property concerns including copyright infringement and trafficking in counterfeit goods.
The agencies named in the notice include the Department of Justice, the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm of Homeland Security Investigations.
While torrenting in general is one of the seedier parts of the underbelly of the Internet, Torrent-Finder itself did not host or link to any torrents. Instead, it simply acted as a sort of torrent search engine, returning iframes with other sites that do contain torrent links.
If you’d like to see how the site works for yourself, you can check out Torrent-Finder.info, which hasn’t apparently popped up on the government’s radar yet.
This technicality was apparently not enough to keep the hounds at bay, however. Currently, the site’s homepage looks like this:
Most troubling of all, however, are statements made by the owner of Torrent-Finder.com. He told the bloggers atTorrentFreak that his site was seized “without any previous complaint or notice from any court… While I was contacting GoDaddy I noticed the DNS had changed. Godaddy had no idea what was going on and until now they do not understand the situation, and they say it was totally from ICANN.”
What do you make of this site’s seizure by the U.S. government? In the struggle to protect copyrighted works, should the powers that be still have to notify site owners that their websites are in violation? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.
Big surprise that Fox News adds another example of how unfair and unbalanced they are. Media Matters reports:
Once again proving that Fox News has a love/hate (perhaps more hate/hate) relationship with the LGBT community, the right-wing network has rejected an advertisement from the Palm Center featuring openly gay troops discussing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), according to a press release obtained by Media Matters.
Palm Center's communications consultant Cathy Renna told Media Matters that Fox News' ad department wrote in an email explaining their rejection of the ad, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell is still on hold, so claiming the military is planning repeal is incorrect."
Renna countered, saying "the ad is a demonstration by Palm that the experience of allied militaries has been that having openly gay service members by their side does not undermine combat effectiveness. The important thing is that these are our allies talking about their experience."
The Palm Center was trying to get a diverse audience to view the ad, hence their approaching Fox News. Fox News isn't having any of that kind of thing.
Leaked "Glee" Sectionals Video: Darren Criss Scores Another Hit
Created: Friday, 26 November 2010 16:48
Written by Joe L. Sosa, Jr
Posted by Dennis Ayers, Managing Editor on November 24, 2010
Actor/singer Darren Criss pretty much became a star when that "Teenage Dream" performance was leaked to the web a few weeks ago. Seeing him actually perform it on Glee and share a few minutes of screentime with Kurt was pretty much an afterthought. The kid was already a star.
If you have any doubt of that, the following video will confirm it. It's another Dalton Academy Warblersperformance leaked in advance by Glee to stir up excitement for next week's sectionals episode. Mission accomplished. Just like "Teenage Dream," Criss knocks it out of the park.
iPhone 5 (or the iPhone 5G, as some are calling it) rumours are flying thick and fast already. Will there be a rush release to erase memories of the iPhone 4's antenna problems? Will the 5th generation iPhone deliver ultra-fast mobile internet? Will it ever end up on Verizon in the US?
Let's discover what the rumour mill has to say, and which iPhone 5 rumours are the most convincing.
…or maybe the iPhone 5 release date will be earlier
iLounge says its source reckons Apple will push the iPhone 5 released date forwards - possibly to January 2011 - because of the iPhone 4 antenna problems, although iLounge itself says the claim is "hard to believe". It's unclear whether such a rush release would be an iPhone 4 with a different antenna or something more substantial.
However, as Techeye.net notes, "Apple has looked into NFC before" so this might not be imminent.
PAY PHONE: Apple patents show how a near field communication-equipped iPhone 5 could act as a kind of credit card
The iPhone 5 might be on Verizon
The Verizon iPhone rumour has been around forever, and one day it'll come true. Will that day be the iPhone 5 release date? Apple may be using Qualcomm chipsets in the iPhone 5, and Qualcomm created the CDMA network that's used by Verizon and Sprint in the US.
That doesn't mean a Verizon phone is imminent, but as Slashgear says, dual-mode chipsets make a Verizon-friendly iPhone 5 a bit more likely.
The iPhone 5 specs will be similar to the iPhone 4
According to the Chinese Economic Daily News (via AppleInsider), with the exception of Qualcomm chipsets - which would replace the current Infineon chipsets in the iPhone 4 - Apple's sticking with the same suppliers for the 2011 iPhone 5 components.
The iPhone 5 specs will be evolutionary, not revolutionary
The specs? A new antenna, 1.2GHz processor and a larger screen: 3.7" instead of 3.5". The iPhone 5 may also be made from a new kind of alloy, or maybe meat.
BETTER SIGNAL:After "antennagate" we're sure Apple's tinkering with the iPhone antenna for the iPhone 5
The iPhone 5 specs may include LTE support
At least one analyst thinks the iPhone 5 will support LTE, super-fast mobile broadband, in the US. That would make the iPhone 5 a 4G phone, which won't be confusing at all. LTE is certainly coming - AT&T plans to roll out its LTE service in 2011 - but an LTE iPhone has been rumoured for a while. USA Today floated the idea of an LTE iPhone on Verizon last year.
FASTER PHONE:HTC's Evo takes advantage of 4G mobile broadband in the US. Could the fifth iPhone do the same?
The iPhone 5 price won't change
If the iPhone 5 is an evolutionary step like the move from the iPhone 3 to the iPhone 3GS - and we think it will be - then we'd expect the price to stay more or less the same, although in the UK it might increase slightly due to January's VAT rise.