Ms Jones is suing Mr Clinton for sexual harassment alleging that he made an unwelcome

Ms Jones is suing Mr Clinton for sexual harassment, alleging that he made an unwelcome sexual advance in an Arkansas hotel room in 1991. Ms Jones’s lawyers say that they want to introduce testimony from half a dozen or more women to show a “pattern of behaviour” by Mr Clinton over many years.Mr Clinton’s lawyers have petitioned the judge to apply sanctions against Ms Jones’s team for contempt, saying the release at the weekend of details of a 20-year-old “unsubstantiated third-party rape accusation” against Mr Clinton breached a confidentiality order imposed last year.. Ms Gracen told the Daily News the encounter with Mr Clinton was “a very bad error in judgement” on her part, but it had been consensual. She was responding to a claim by a former friend of hers, given in sworn evidence to the Paula Jones sexual harassment investigation, that she had confided tearfully about a forced sexual encounter with Mr Clinton.
Despite being summoned to testify in the Paula Jones case, Ms Gracen stayed abroad during the pre-trial hearing and denied any involvement with Mr Clinton. The only extra- marital sexual relationship he has admitted to under oath was with the former Arkansas nightclub singer, Gennifer Flowers. MORE trouble loomed for President Bill Clinton yesterday after a former Miss America, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, told a New York tabloid that she had had sex with him in 1982 when they were both married and he was governor of Arkansas.

While she absolved Mr Clinton of behaving improperly towards her in any way, her admission added to the impression that the whole truth about his conduct has not been told. If they choose to tamper with the filter there is nothing we can do about it.”. ALASTAIR Campbell, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman, last night accused the media of staging a “self-indulgent orgy” after William Hague, the Tory leader, had suggested he was a liar, writes Anthony Bevins. The row centred on a recent telephone call to Tony Blair made by Romano Prodi, the Italian Prime Minister, during which Mr Blair asked Mr Prodi what he thought about a bid from Rupert Murdoch for a controlling interest in three Italian television networks.
Mr Campbell spent last week saying the call had been made by Mr Prodi, and that as Mr Blair had only asked in passing about the attitude towards the Murdoch bid, he had hardly “intervened” on his behalf.But the BBC carried a series of reports on the affair yesterday, with Francis Maude, a Tory frontbench spokesman, calling Mr Campbell a liar, and BBC political reporters complaining about Mr Campbell’s “frightening” and “intimidating” conduct – a charge later dismissed as “jocular” by Nick Clarke, presenter of The World at One.Three charges were laid by the Tories against No 10 – that Mr Campbell’s briefing on the Prodi-Blair call had been “at best misleading and at worst deliberately false”; that Mr Campbell had attempted to gag Harriet Harman, and Frank Field, the social security ministers; and that Labour had tried to cover up a plan to set up a “cash-for-access” deal with Mr Blair’s office.At his evening briefing with political reporters, Mr Campbell drew a distinction between the legitimate journalistic interest in Mr Blair’s relationship with Mr Murdoch and the question of whether he had lied. Brands described as mild, light and low should not even be on the market.”He said he had written to Tessa Jowell, minister for public health, seeking the immediate removal of the tar and nicotine numbers, a new pack warning about nicotine addiction, an end to branding that implied a health benefit and regulations to control the harmful components of tobacco.John Carlisle, spokesman for the Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association, said: “Low-tar cigarettes have been produced in response to consumer demand but the way they are smoked is up to the consumer. A British American Tobacco memo in 1977 asked: “Are smokers entitled to expect that cigarettes shown as lower delivery in league tables will in fact deliver less to their lungs than cigarettes shown higher?” It answered its own question in a 1984 memo: “Irrespective of the ethics involved, we should develop alternative designs (that do not invite obvious criticism) which will allow the smoker to obtain significant enhanced deliveries should he so wish.”Clive Bates, director of Ash, said: “So-called low-tar cigarettes are a grotesque confidence trick that has been running for 20 years.

It is worrying that people may be switching to these products rather than quitting.”We hope that smokers will recognise that low-tar cigarettes are at best a fool’s paradise and at worst a con-trick and begin the process of giving up.”Tobacco industry documents dating from the late 1970s and early 1980s show that executives recognised the compensation effect. Because of compensation for nicotine, smokers can and do get as much nicotine from these low-yielding cigarettes as from standard ones. Tests had shown that blocking the ventilation holes raised the tar level to 12mg.Silk Cut Ultra was featured in an advertising campaign at the turn of the year which used the slogan “JAN ONE”, to suggest that switching to the brand would be a good New Year’s resolution, instead of giving up.Dr Jarvis said: “The numbers on the cigarette packs are worse than useless and may be dangerous and misleading. But smokers do not smoke like machines and tend to inhale more deeply or suck more often when nicotine levels are low.Dr Martin Jarvis, of the ICRF Health Behaviour Unit, said: “It is scandalous that the tobacco companies have known this for so long, but continued to develop products designed to make compensation easy, while at the same time marketing them with a healthy …

To satisfy their craving for nicotine, smokers may subconsciouslyblock the holes in the filter with fingers or saliva.Silk Cut Ultra is rated at 1mg of tar, against 12mg for a conventional Benson and Hedges cigarette, but that did not mean that it carried one twelfth of the risk, Dr Jarvis said. image.”Low-tar cigarettes do not contain low-tar tobacco, but have ventilation holes around the filter so that more air is drawn in. Tar and nicotine levels are measured by a smoking machine that takes standard puffs through its steel “mouth”. TOBACCO manufacturers have fooled smokers into believing that low-tar cigarettes are safer than the conventional kind despite knowing for over 20 years that they are not, two charities say today. In the latest damaging disclosure for the tobacco industry, researchers from Ash, the anti-smoking group, and the Imperial Cancer Research Fund have found documents showing that the industry has known since the late 1970s that smokers compensate for the lower dose of nicotine and tar in cigarettes such as Silk Cut Ultra or Marlboro Lights by taking more or deeper puffs.
The charities claim that the manufacturers have cynically designed cigarettes to give low tar readings but deliver high tar and nicotine to the smoker. But banner ads are likely to remain attractive, especially when experimentation is common.The advertising industry itself is beginning to throw up research to support the use of Internet. The Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB), a new body to promote the medium, has published the results of a study with big claims for banner ads, including the all-important positive impact on intent to purchase.