What Adam Curry is reading

Former Newark Airport TSA screener says the job does little to keep fliers safe
  Link to Article
  Source: Stuff Ain't Right » Uncategorized
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:17
  It is perhaps America's most unsafe airport. Despite being the launching point for one of the planes hijacked on 9/11 '-- Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania '-- Newark Airport has had numerous security violations since. The latest: a fake bomb that made it past Transportation Security Administration officers. Here, a Newark TSA screener who recently left the agency tells how silly policies and lazy workers do little to stop real threats:A LOT of what we do is make-believe.I've had to screen small children and explain to their parents I had no choice but to ''check'' them. I would only place my hands on their arms and bottom half of their legs, and the entire ''pat-down'' lasted 10 seconds. This goes completely against TSA procedure.Because the cameras are recording our every move, we have to do something. If someone isn't checked or even screened properly, the entire terminal would shut down, as this constitutes a security breach.But since most TSA supervisors are too daft to actually supervise, bending the rules is easy to do.Did you know you don't need a high-school diploma or GED to work as a security screener? These are the same screeners that TSA chief John Pistole and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refer to as a first-class first line of defense in the war on terror.These are the employees who could never keep a job in the private sector. I wouldn't trust them to walk my dog.An agent got through Newark last week with an improvised explosive device? That's not even news to anyone who works there. It happens all the time. The failure rate is pretty high, especially with federal investigators, and the pat-down itself is ridiculous. As invasive as it is, you still can't find anything using the back of your hand on certain areas.When there are internal tests, conducted by the Newark training department, it's easy to cheat because they use our co-workers. You could be working with someone all morning, and then they're gone. Word gets around the checkpoint. Someone will come over to you and say, ''Hey, it's Joe. He's got a blue duffel bag.''What are the chances of you being on a flight where something happens? We always said it's not a question of if terrorists get through '-- it's a question of when. Our feeling is nothing's happened because they haven't wanted it to happen. We're not any big deterrent. It's all for show.A real pat-down is when a police officer pulls you over, uses his hands to search, actually goes into your clothes. We have to use the back of our hands around certain areas. It just doesn't work. It's a really bad way to pat somebody down.If I had to guess, I'm sure lots of things get through. One screener told me about something he did going through security when he went on vacation. Let's just say the screeners did not catch something that was really obvious to anyone who was paying attention.Most TSA screeners know their job is a complete joke. Their goal is to use this as a stepping stone to another government agency.We work in a culture where common sense has no place. All but a very few TSA personnel know they're employed by a bottom-of-the-barrel agency.Our first question to anyone in a wheelchair is to ask if they're able to stand for a pat-down. If someone is in a wheelchair, he likely can't stand. Even when they're sitting, we're required to ask them to move so we can check under their buttocks.All I needed was for a passenger to fall over because I asked them to stand. And if that did happen, the screener would be vilified and the official p.r. spin would be that he needed ''additional training.''Every time you read about a TSA horror story, it's usually about a screener doing what he or she is instructed to do.Supervisors play absolutely no role in day-to-day functions except to tell you not to chew gum. Gum chewing is a huge issue with management. I once saw a supervisor make an officer open his mouth to prove he had a mint and not a piece of gum.Goofing off and half-hour-long bathroom breaks are the only way to break up the monotony. There is also a lot of ogling of female passengers by the male screeners. So, ladies, cover up when you get to the airport. These guys are checking you out constantly.A small number of screeners are delusional zealots who believe they're keeping America safe by taking your snow globe, your 2-inch pocket knife, your 4-ounce bottle of shampoo and performing invasive pat-downs on your kids.(Incidentally, the flap over the new rule allowing small pocketknives is overblown. Most of the public doesn't realize it, but you are already allowed to bring scissors, screwdrivers, tweezers, knitting needles and any number of sharp instruments on board.)The rest are only there for the paycheck and generous benefits. Screeners start at $15 per hour, and there is tons of overtime '-- mainly because they are filling in for the many screeners who don't bother coming to work. For every 40 hours you work, you receive four hours of vacation and four hours of sick time.One screener didn't come to work for four weeks. When he finally reappeared, he asked for another week off. The answer was no. So what did this brainiac decide to do? He took another week off '-- and didn't get terminated.People have been caught falling asleep on the job. They get written up, it's put in their file, and that's it.New hires see how bad it is working there, and, believe it or not, TSA does manage to hire some pretty decent people. They just don't last because they can get a normal job.It's the people who've been there a good number of years who could never find employment elsewhere. When you have a real job, it usually means you have to actually work and think, which a lot of them have a hard time doing.Anyone boarding an aircraft should feel maybe only a teeny tiny bit safer than if there were no TSA at all. http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/confessions_of_tsa_agent_we_re_bunch_OhxHeGd0RR9UVGzfypjnLO/0
  Like this:LikeLoading...
Fed Injects Record $100 Billion Cash Into Foreign Banks Operating In The US In Past Week | Zero Hedge
  Link to Article
  Source: Grand Chessboard
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:17
  Those who have been following our exclusive series of the Fed's direct bailout of European banks (here, here, here and here), and, indirectly of Europe, will not be surprised at all to learn that in the week ended February 27, or the week in which Europe went into a however brief tailspin following the shocking defeat of Bersani in the Italian elections, and an even more shocking victory by Berlusconi and Grillo, leading to a political vacuum and a hung parliament, the Fed injected a record $99 billion of excess reserves into foreign banks. As the most recent H.8 statement makes very clear, soared from $836 billion to a near-record $936 billion, or a $99.3 billion reserve ''reallocation'' in the form of cash '' very, very fungible cash '' into foreign (read European) banks in one week.
  Fed Injects Record $100 Billion Cash Into Foreign Banks Operating In The US In Past Week | Zero Hedge.
Agenten krijgen kopstoten
  Link to Article
  Source: VK: Home
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:43
  10/03/13, 14:16 '' bron: ANP
  Op twee plekken in Nederland hebben agenten zaterdagavond een kopstoot gekregen. In het Brabantse dorpje Ledeacker ging het mis toen de politie twee mannen (23, 25) wilde aanhouden.
  Het duo werd een bar uitgezet nadat het klanten en personeel lastig had gevallen. Een van de mannen verzette zich, waarna de agenten zich ermee bemoeiden.
  Een van de mannen gaf, toen ze al waren aangehouden en onderweg waren naar het politiebureau, een agent een kopstoot. De andere verdachte had eerder al een agent op het gezicht geslagen. Beiden bedreigden de agenten ook nog met de dood.
  In Rijswijk (Zuid-Holland) kreeg een agent een kopstoot nadat hij een man had aangehouden. De politie moest ingrijpen omdat er een vechtpartij was. In totaal drie Hagenaars werden aangehouden.
Startups at SXSW in search of some better mousetraps
  Link to Article
  Source: Phys.org - latest science and technology news stories
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:07
  Not long after her husband left her "to live in a van down by the river" in Idaho, as she puts it, Elissa Shevinsky thought it was high time for a better mouse trap. Or rather, a better dating website.
  The thirty-something app developer who divides her time between New York and California is the driving force behind MakeOut Labs and its "fun, free Jewish dating site" called JSpot.
  She says she's engineering it to be more female friendly than the current big players in online dating'--sites like Match.com and OKCupid.com'--by creating "the first spam filter in online dating."
  "We've built a site where women get fewer messages that are lower quality so that the great messages stand out and the great guys stand out," she told AFP at the Startup Village corner of the ongoing South by Southwest (SXSW) festival.
  Shevinsky's project is starting out small, but her dreams are big, especially given that online dating has grown into $4 billion industry as lonely hearts turn to the Internet in their quest for love'--or at least a movie and dinner.
  Like many other apps being pitched at SXSW, springboard in past years for such global household names as Foursquare and Twitter, JSpot grew out of Shevinsky's personal experience.
  When her husband left her'--she insists they're still friends'--"I found myself single... I took a look around and I saw that we needed a better Jewish dating site," she said.
  "You need to be a technologist and also really well-connected Jewishly, and I thought I was the person to do that."
  Besides putting a lid on excessive proposals from dubious suitors, Shevinsky said her project will include the novel ability for users to, in effect, create their own dating websites reflecting their individual interests.
  "For many users, they might have an interest in dating vegans or dating people who love SXSW, and those demographics are too small to support for a company like Match.com," which was founded 17 years ago, styles itself as the original dating website and operates in 25 countries.
  "We're part of this movement towards an open web, where users can create and lead their own communities," Shevinsky said.
  Improving upon existing online products, especially mobile apps, was a notable theme during a SXSW Startup Village workshop Saturday attended by dozens of youthful startup entrepreneurs, many in T-shirts with their venture's logos.
  They were invited to make 30-second pitches to a trio of hard-nosed technology journalists, who in turn critiqued their ability to get media attention. (One common reaction: How will these bright ideas make money?)
  Michael Bergman, founder of Repp, wearing a T-shirt that read "Online, I'm a horny supermodel," said his website enables users to carry out background checks on anyone from potential dates to prospective house sitters.
  He explained how the idea came about after a woman he met at a speed-dating event spent hours surfing social media websites to predetermine his credibility. The two now are married.
  Tappr is a smartphone app that enables users to order drinks anywhere in a crowded bar without actually going to the bar and angling for the busy bartenders' attention. Its developers are targeted it at craft beer lovers.
  Dealflix does one better than established online box offices like Fandango by offering cut-price movie tickets in cinemas with too many empty seats to fill, and Junkio rides the wave of social responsibility by providing a virtual space for unwanted merchandise to be sold for charity.
  (c) 2013 AFP
Syrian National Coalition postpones meeting to form government
  Link to Article
  Source: Reuters: World News
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:05
  TweetShare thisEmailPrint1 of 2. Syrian National Coalition leader Moaz Alkhatib speaks to the media after meeting with Arab League head Nabil al-Arabi in Cairo February 11, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Asmaa Waguih
  AMMAN | Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:39am EDT
  AMMAN (Reuters) - Syria's opposition as postponed a meeting to form a provisional government, in the latest setback to opposition efforts to create an administration to take over if President Bashar al-Assad is ousted, coalition sources said on Sunday.
  The Syrian National Coalition meeting to elect a provisional prime minister, which was due to be held on March 12 after being postponed once already, has been rescheduled for March 20, but it was uncertain it would be held even then, the sources said.
  "We cannot afford a split over this issue any more. The revolution was not born chaotic," said coalition member Kamal al-Labwani, a veteran opposition figure who spent nine years as a political prisoner after Assad took over from his father in 2000.
  Labwani said the coalition was split in two over the merits of forming government, with some preferring to wait to see if U.N. mediator Lakhdar Brahimi's efforts to form a transitional government as part of a political compromise succeed.
  Other wanted to form a government immediately to pre-empt any deal that could see Assad remaining in power, Labwani said.
  A second coalition source said that the meeting could go ahead on March 20 and that even if only a small number of members attended they could approve a government with a simple majority.
  Osama al-Qadi, an economist who leads an opposition taskforce drawing up plans for post-conflict economic recovery, has emerged as front-runner for the post of prime minister after former Prime Minister Riad Hijab, the highest-ranking civilian defector from Assad's government, withdrew his candidacy.
  Hijab had run into opposition from Islamists and liberals in the coalition over his former ties with Syria's ruling elite.
  (Reporting by Khaled Yacoub Oweis; Editing by Louise Ireland)
  Tweet thisLink thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprintsComments (0)
  Be the first to comment on reuters.com.
  Add yours using the box above.
Britain's Drone Secrets
  Link to Article
  Source: Global Research
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:02
  The lack of transparency surrounding the US use of drones has come under the spotlight over the past few weeks during the hearings to confirm John Brennan as head of the CIA. US politicians, journalists and campaigners have rightly criticised the secrecy that surrounds the US use of drones and called for greater openness from the Obama administration and more engagement with the public on the issue.
  However it is not just the US that is keeping it use of drones under wraps. The UK's use of armed drones is swathed in secrecy too and there is much that we are not allowed to know. What we do know is that the UK launched 120 drone strikes in Afghanistan in 2012, bringing the total number of UK drone strikes to 363 since British forces began launching weapons from its Reaper drones in May 2008. Beyond this basic figure however we know precious little.
  We have been asking the MoD for more details about its use of armed drones since 2009 but to little avail. Freedom of Information requests about drones are often refused on the grounds that to share such information with the public would ''prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces'' or ''prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and another State.''
  This week we launched an appeal to the Information Tribunal challenging the refusal of the Information Commissioner to overturn the MoD's refusal to provide details of the date and province within Afghanistan of each UK drone strikes (we still don't know if UK drones operate throughout Afghanistan or just in Helmand province where British forces are located) as well as their refusal to tell us the number of weapons released from drones under daily tasking orders (i.e. pre-planned) and those released under dynamic targeting procedures (i.e. on the go). Details of the refusals can be found here and here.
  The information we are seeking is extremely important. We know that drones operate in a different way from how manned aircraft traditionally operate. loitering for example over towns, villages and compounds looking for 'targets of opportunity'. Information about where and how weapons are being released by UK drones would be able to greatly inform the debate about whether drones are lowering the threshold when it comes to using lethal force.
  Another key issue in the argument surrounding the use of drones is accuracy. Military spokespeople repeatedly describe drone strikes as being 'pin-point' or 'precise'. But questions about the whether such systems are really so accurate are also being refused. This week Tom Watson MP was again rebuffed when he asked in the House of Commons for details about the Hellfire missile fired from British reaper drones. This followed a refusal in January to answer a similar question about the accuracy of weapons fired by drones. The MoD has also refused in the past to confirm whether it is launching the thromobaric version of the Hellfire missile '' which we know the UK has in its arsenal '' from drones.
  But perhaps the biggest secret surrounding the UK use of drones is the impact they are having on the ground. In May 2012 it was revealed following a NATO investigation that four Afghan civilians had been killed in a UK drone strike. The MoD insist that these are the only Afghan civilians that have been killed in UK drone strikes although they also insist at the very same time that they cannot know how many people have been killed in drone strikes. However the MoD have confirmed to me that they carry out a battle damage assessment after every single weapon release from Reaper drone and, of course, the video footage of the drone strike is recorded and available for review.
  Across the border in Pakistan, according to figures compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, there have been 364 drone strikes, (a remarkably similar number to the UK's 363 strikes in Afghanistan although US strikes often involve multiple weapon launches). According to BIJ between 2,500 and 3,500 have been killed in the 364 US strikes with between 400 and 800 being reliably identified as civilians of whom between 150 '' 200 being children. Given this, information the MoD's insistence that only four civilians have been killed in UK drone strikes is very hard to believe.
  Over the past few years we have seen disastrous consequences when institutions claim the privilege of exemption from public scrutiny and accountability '' MPs expenses and bankers manipulating the Libor rate being just two recent examples. While it may be necessary to keep some information secret, it is simply not legitimate or appropriate for the MoD to refuse to disclose virtually all information about the use of British Reaper drones over the past five years. There is, at the very least, the sense that public discussion about drones is being manipulated and curtailed.
  This week we have written to the Defence Select Committee urging that the remit for their forthcoming inquiry into the use of drones is as wide as possible. With the use of armed drones only set to increase, we need a serious, public, and fully informed debate on all these issues and that must include greater information about the day-to-day use of armed Reaper drones by British forces.
Two killed in US drone strike in NWA
  Link to Article
  Source: Dave says...
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:01
  At least two militants were killed and several others reported injured when an unmanned US spy plane targeted a house with missiles here on early Sunday morning.According to details, the US drone fired missiles at a residential compound in Muhammad Khel village of Tehsil Boya in North Waziristan Agency (NWA) near Afghan border.The house was completely destroyed resulting in death of two militant suspects and leaving several others injured.The locals on self help basis dug out the bodies and injured from the rubble but the rescue work started with delay as people avoided taking part in relief work as the drones continued to hover over the area for a long time for more targets.It should be mentioned that Pakistan government and masses publicly denounce the US drone strikes in tribal belt and term them violation of its sovereignty. But Obama led US administration considers drone strikes vital to deal with terrorism, extremists and call them mandatory in US war against terrorism.
Grote betoging in Tokio tegen kernenergie
  Link to Article
  Source: VK: Home
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:00
  10/03/13, 13:19 '' bron: ANP
  (C) ap. Een van de demonstranten.
  Duizenden betogers hebben zondag in Tokio de sluiting van alle kerncentrales in Japan geist. De betoging is in het kader van de herdenking van de ramp die zich 11 maart 2011 in Japan voltrok. Een aardbeving voor de oostkust onder de bodem van de Stille Oceaan met een kracht van 9 op de schaal van Richter en vervolgens een tsunami kostten aan zeker 19.000 mensen het leven.
  De aan de kust gelegen kerncentrale van Fukushma Daiichi, ten noordoosten van Tokio, werd verwoest door de ramp. Het is de grootste kernramp sinds die van het Russische Tsjernobyl in 1986. Japan worstelt nog steeds met de 'stralende' ru¯nes van de centrale.
  Het land heeft eigenlijk al afscheid genomen van kernenergie. Van de ruim 50 reactoren in het land werken er nog slechts twee.
YOU'RE MY BEST FRIEND
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:00
"I Think What Rand Paul Did Was Great! POTUS Can't Be An Emperor And Put Thumbs Down To Kill People
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:00
WALMART SENDS FAMILY INTO HELL
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:59
UN Peacekeepers Released by Syrian Rebels
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:36
Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. Citize
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 05:42
  WASHINGTON - One morning in late September 2011, a group of American drones took off from an airstrip the C.I.A. had built in the remote southern expanse of Saudi Arabia. The drones crossed the border into Yemen, and were soon hovering over a group of trucks clustered in a desert patch of Jawf Province, a region of the impoverished country once renowned for breeding Arabian horses.
  A group of men who had just finished breakfast scrambled to get to their trucks. One was Anwar al-Awlaki, the firebrand preacher, born in New Mexico, who had evolved from a peddler of Internet hatred to a senior operative in Al Qaeda's branch in Yemen. Another was Samir Khan, another American citizen who had moved to Yemen from North Carolina and was the creative force behind Inspire, the militant group's English-language Internet magazine.
  Two of the Predator drones pointed lasers on the trucks to pinpoint the targets, while the larger Reapers took aim. The Reaper pilots, operating their planes from thousands of miles away, readied for the missile shots, and fired.
  It was the culmination of years of painstaking intelligence work, intense deliberation by lawyers working for President Obama and turf fights between the Pentagon and the C.I.A., whose parallel drone wars converged on the killing grounds of Yemen. For what was apparently the first time since the Civil War, the United States government had carried out the deliberate killing of an American citizen as a wartime enemy and without a trial.
  Eighteen months later, despite the Obama administration's effort to keep it cloaked in secrecy, the decision to hunt and kill Mr. Awlaki has become the subject of new public scrutiny and debate, touched off by the nomination of John O. Brennan, Mr. Obama's counterterrorism adviser, to be head of the C.I.A.
The new scramble for Africa | Feature Article 2013-02-20
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:42
  Feature Article of Wednesday, 20 February 2013
  Columnist:Arthur Kobina Kennedy
  There appears to be a third scramble for Africa underway. This follows the first which occurred during the Berlin Conference of 1884 and the second during the Cold War.
  Let me state at the outset that relationships with external powers are not innately good or bad. Some have been good while others have been bad.
  While we recall things the slave trade, the conduct of the Belgians in Congo, colonialism, apartheid and other such unspeakable evils, there have been good things coming from our relationships with outsiders.
  When we use roads like the Bush Highway in Accra or the Chinese railways in East Africa or see millions of HIV patients get free medication or see French forces liberate Mali, we see the good side of the world powers in Africa.
  The alarm for this current scramble was sounded by none other than then US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton in June 2009, during a tour of Africa. Warning of a ''new colonialism'', Mrs Clinton stated, ''We saw that during colonial times, it is easy to come in, take our natural resources, pay off leaders and leave.''
  While she was referring to China, did she have a point and was this really a question of the kettle calling the teapot black?
  This new scramble appears to be mainly between the United States and China with France playing a very significant role as well.
  In addition to these, Brazil, India and Turkey are all trying to increase their influence in Africa.
  While these are external, African countries like Libya, Nigeria and South Africa have always been influential in Africa.
  Foreign influence and interventions raise important issues of sovereignty and independence.
  China has been very active in Africa over the last few years. In 2009, China became Africa's largest trading partner, surpassing the United States.
  Chinese Direct Foreign Investments in Africa was 100 million USD in 2003. By 2011, it had jumped to 12 billion USD. All over Africa, China is building roads, railways and other infrastructure.
  Indeed, the new African Union Headquarters in Addis Ababa is a gift from China. Last year, many African leaders, including South Africa's Jacob Zuma gathered in China for the China-Africa Co-operation forum.
  In an interview on the sidelines of the forum to the magazine Jeune Afrique, the Director General of the Department of Africa in the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Lu Shaye, defended China on the accusation that Chinese are being sent to do work that can be done by Africans.
  He said Chinese workers work in three shifts a day and work all day and all night to speed up projects schedules.
  Continuing, the Chinese official stated, ''Take government assistance projects for example. China spends 95 per cent of the money on the project and on recipient countries, while the West may spend 80 per cent on their own staff.''
  Was Lu Shaye suggesting that Africans could not work three shifts and complete projects on time?
  In contrast to the Chinese effort, the US aid to Africa in 2009 was 8.2 billion USD. Furthermore, in the Bush era, the US committed about 16 billion USD to the fight against HIV and Malaria.
  Furthermore, the US has established the US Africa Command which became operational in 2008 and is headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany.
  Furthermore, earlier this year, the US, which, in the words of administration officials, ''led in Libya and the Ivory Coast from behind'', signed an agreement to station drones in Niger as part of on-going operations in Mali. As the US and China strive for influence in Africa, it becomes increasingly likely that one of these days, they will clash militarily in Africa.
  While the Americans and the Chinese have been active, the French role has been open and forceful, no pun intended.
  They led the military interventions in the Ivory Coast, Libya and now Mali. Just a few days ago, French President Francoise Hollande was welcomed to Mali as a liberator.
  The welcome for the French leader was not surprising. While nearly 4000 Frenchmen and women were pushing towards Gao to liberate Malians from the clutches of Al Qaeda and all manner of thugs, hundreds of African soldiers were still getting ready to leave for Mali.
  It was obvious that if left to Africa and her leaders, the Malian invaders would be in Mali for a long, long time.
  It can be argued that the repeated failures of leadership in Africa, has led to foreign interventions in the Ivory Coast, Libya and now Mali.
  All these are very reminiscent of the role of the powers during the Cold War and since then. Even in the case of China, even if we grant their good intentions, leadership has been glaringly lacking.
  Why are Chinese doing illegal mining in Ghana and other places while officials look on?
  Why did our leaders sit down for outsiders to come in and resolve problems in the Ivory Coast , Libya and Mali?
  The frightening thing is that there are many Africans who will happily welcome foreigners due to the inability, by and large, of our leaders to perform.
  How can Nigeria help in fighting Al Qaeda in Mali when it is impotent in the face of Boko Haram at home?
  What are the motives of the Americans and the Chinese and the French, to mention just a few, in the new scramble for Africa?
  Is it the need for raw materials like oil and minerals which exist in Libya and Mali and Niger?
  Is it the need to control Al-Qaida and Boko Haram and emerging drug lords?
  Is it African development?
  Is Western imperialism better than Chinese or Indian or Brazilian imperialism?
  The hard question is this'--if we do not welcome them, can we solve our problems on our own? How can we deal with terrorists and drug dealers and pirates on our own?
  Are we getting bad deals, as Mrs Clinton implied because many of our leaders are corrupt?
  Regardless of their motives, Africa cannot trust its future to foreigners in the mistaken belief that they mean well. While we must trust others, we must verify that they mean well.
  Africa's leaders must sign agreements that protect our interests. We cannot permit people to do business in Africa without protections for our environment or local resources.
  We cannot permit exploitation of our natural resources without benefit to our people. It is unconscionable that a place like Obuasi in Ghana can produce so much gold for so long without any tangible benefits to the local population.
  The same applies to Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea and others with regard to oil.
  Our leaders must start addressing our problems effectively.
  We should re-examine Nkrumah's idea of an African High Command that is effective and can get to places like Libya and Mali before the West does.
  We should draft investment laws that protect our environment and invest in our future.
  We should empower ordinary people so that they can hold our leaders accountable at all levels.
  We should increase transparency in our politics so that it is clear how our politicians are influenced by money and other factors.
  We should ensure that the most powerful court regarding Africa are courts in our countries, not the International Criminal Court.
  If we fail to address these challenges, we may wake up one day and realise that ordinary Africans, frustrated by the ineffectiveness of our leaders, are not only welcoming outsiders who come to solve our problems but demanding that they come.
  Let our leaders start working to make Africa, the independent continent Nkrumah, Nasser, Nyerere and Senghor meant her to be. May African leaders grow to make us proud and to earn our confidence.
  Read Article
Large Size Sugary Drink Ban Begins Tuesday In New York City
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:38
Brennan takes oath on draft Constitution'--without Bill of Rights | The Ticket - Yahoo! News
  Link to Article
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 03:46
  Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan at the White House, March 8, 2013. (David Lienemann/Official '...
  Oh, dear. This is probably not the symbolism the White House wanted.
  Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office'--behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy'--the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.
  ''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''
  Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.
  "Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.
  The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)
  That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on ''unreasonable searches and seizures,'' and no right to a jury trial.
  How ... symbolic?
Brennan Sworn In On Draft Copy Of Constitution Without Bill of Rights
  Link to Article
  Source: Crooks and Liars
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:25
  According to the White House, John Brennan was sworn in as CIA Director on a first draft of the Constitution including notations from George Washington, dating to 1787.
  Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, March 8, 2013. Members of Brennan's family stand with him. Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution, dating from 1787, which has George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it.
  That means, when Brennan vowed to protect and defend the Constitution, he was swearing on one that did not include the First, Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments '-- or any of the other Amendments now included in our Constitution. The Bill of Rights did not become part of our Constitution until 1791, 4 years after the Constitution that Brennan took his oath on.
  I really don't mean to be an asshole about this. But these vows always carry a great deal of symbolism. And whether he meant to invoke this symbolism or not, the moment at which Brennan took over the CIA happened to exclude (in symbolic form, though presumably not legally) the key limits on governmental power that protect American citizens.
  Update: Olivier Knox describes how the White House pushed the symbolism of this.
  Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office '' behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy '' the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.
  ''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters gathered for their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''
  Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.
  ''Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.
GOOD AND BAD NEWS ON THE ECONOMY
  Link to Article
  Source: aangirfan
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:22
  www.mirror.co.uk1. "'There's a lot of little kids going hungry round here,' explained one friend, who works in a local community centre."Indeed, just the other day she had spoken to a family where the child had been chewing wallpaper at night.
  "'He didn't want to tell his mum because he knew she didn't have the money for supper,' she explained. 'We hear more and more stories like this.'"
  Life in the UK - Where austerity really hits homeGerald Cavendish Grosvenor, Duke of westminster
  The UK's Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor and family are worth $11.4 Billion.
  Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster "has a history of frequenting prostitutes, reportedly 'hiring four hookers over a six-week stretch in late 2006 and early last year.'
  "His appointment with Emperor's Club VIP escort "Astrid" on January 12, 2008 was caught on tape. For his one hour appointment, he paid 500 pounds ($1000)."
  An escort reportedly said: "I thought his conversation was quite boring. He talked about the Army, going to Afghanistan..."www.digitalalchemy.tv
  Aangirfan sees lots of malnourished kids in the UK these days.2. The UK's John Lewis Partnership, which operates supermarkets and department stores, is owned by its workers.The business is thriving - sales up 9.1 per cent to £8.47bn in the year to 26 January 2013.
  "The company is owned by a trust on behalf of all its employees - known as Partners - who have a say in the running of the business and receive a share of annual profits, which is usually a significant addition to their salary."
  The John Lewis Partnership has defied the devastation on the high street to increase its staff bonus.
  March 7, 2013 - John Lewis staff share £211m bonus potThe Partnership, seen as a model of responsible capitalism, said it had put £125m into its defined benefit pension scheme, which is non-contributory after three years of service.
  3. Merryn Somerset Webb, editor-in-chief of MoneyWeek, writes:
  http://www.ft.com/"Wealth inequality may be ... falling across the globe, but in the west it is rising to uncomfortable levels.
  "In the US the top 1 per cent of the population own more than 35 per cent of the nation's wealth while the top 20 per cent own not far off 90 per cent.
  "The bottom 80 per cent, between all of them own a mere 7 per cent.
  "The UK looks pretty rubbish when it comes to wealth distribution as well. The top 1 per cent have something in the region of 20 per cent of the wealth...
  "If progress even partly depends on a good distribution of wealth, this shift doesn't bode particularly well for us."
  Li Ka-shing from Hong Kong in China is worth $31 Billion
  4. China has a growing list of billionaire politicians / The Chinese parliament holds 83 billionaires Last year, the richest 70 members of China's parliament added many billions to their wealth.
  "That increase is more, on its own, than the total net worth of all 535 members of the U.S. Congress, the President, his cabinet and all nine Supreme Court justices combined." Mexico's Carlos Slim Helu and family are worth $73 Billion. They have a 'monopoly' in telecoms.
  In China, the richest six dozen lawmakers are worth nearly $90 billion. Mitt Romney is worth about $200 million. Zong Qinghou, Cina's richest lawmaker, is estimated to be worth $5.6 billion.
  Swiss voters have overwhelmingly backed curbs on corporate wages that take the power away from company boards.The referendum approved rules that include:
  A. Giving shareholders a binding say on executive payB. Banning golden hellos and goodbyesC. Requiring annual re-elections for directorsD. Threatening criminal sanctions for non-compliance.
  Switzerland's Ernesto Bertarelli and family are worth $11 Billion.
  "The Netherlands, which has been involved in multiple bank rescues, imposed a bonus cap in 2010 and is considering tightening the limit to 20 per cent of salary...
  "The Swiss government has a year to convert the initiative's proposals into law."
Comet Pan-STARRS Visible TONIGHT With The Naked Eye
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:19
Asteroid 2013 ET Safely Passes Earth
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:19
Saturday Night Funny Video: Obama's Decision to Pardon the Sequester and Send It to Portugal
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:15
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  ABC's Jimmy Kimmel sent a producer out to Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles to ask passing pedestrians a nonsensical question: ''What do you think about Obama's decision to pardon the sequester and send it to Portugal?''
  Hilarity ensued in the very sure answers given by the very ill-informed low information potential voters in the ''Confusing Question of the Day'' segment aired on this past Monday's (March 4) Jimmy Kimmel Live on ABC.
  Cross-posted on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.
Japan Foreign Policy Observatory: East Asia's race for energy resources intensifies
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:58
  In Asia's quest to secure energy resources and the rising tensions that ensue, China is seems to be playing the role of the eight hundred pound gorilla. The plot is not unfamiliar to the historian, as a growing consumption pattern presses the demand for primary resources that can sustain the major thrust upward of millions of previously impoverished citizens into the welfare of an industrious and vibrant middle-class.As the international profile of China expanded in the last couple of decades of the 20th century, the 21st century is seeing the Communist Party increasingly concerned about securing the great achievements thus far obtained, which inevitably leads to growing concerns about the continuous and unscathed flow of fossil fuel from oil-rich regions. The securitisation of otherwise mainly socio-economic issues is a common pattern of countries with great-power ambitions (see China, Imperial Japan, unified Germany, post-WWII United States, Brazil), or those somehow threatened with a real or perceived decline in relative power or the demise of the ruling regime (Venezuela, North Korea).Brandishing its newly found power whilst seeking to guarantee access to resources, China's Communist Party has undertaken a set of programs that will revamp its ability to influence the future of the country with greater freedom from entanglements. From population control to economic liberalisation, the modernisation of its armed forces to the strengthening of diplomatic ties in the near-abroad and outside regions, Beijing sees itself able to shape international events according to a new definition of self-interest, one matching its status.In the maritime dimension, this reality could not be more obvious. The repertoire of incidents is vast and more cases are being added almost monthly, and today it made the headlines again.Japan protested against China possibly drilling for natural gas in a field in the East China Sea, arguing that the move violates their agreement to jointly develop gas resources in the disputed area, Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said Wednesday. Tokyo also called for bilateral talks to resume soon on signing a treaty to jointly develop gas in the sea, since the talks have been stalled due in part to a spat over maritime collisions in 2010 near the disputed Senkaku Islands, government officials said. Fujimura said at a press conference that a flare was seen in the gas field known as Kashi, and Japan protested against China on Tuesday over the suspicious move to develop natural gas there.Some analysts have been arguing for more strategic common sense when dealing with China. Drawing on the same historical precedents, an immediate dismissal of Beijing's regional aspirations might indeed provoke the same incidents that once led to inter-state conflict. A pure balance of power view on this issue, therefore, might contribute to disrupt the very foundations of a dynamic balance of powers system in East Asia. Notwithstanding the theoretical reasoning behind these claims, the United States and regional partners, including South Korea, Japan and Taiwan are not responding with enthusiasm to China's growing sphere of influence.The latest spat regarding territorial claims, now around the Senkaku (Diaoyutai) Islands, which many believe to be the leitmotiv to a greater access to important energy and food resources - namely in South China Sea, but also in East China Sea to some extent -, will surely test the diplomatic progress and traditions of regional actors matured since the Cold War. Judging from recent evidence, however, the prospects are grim. The gentlemen's agreement that existed between Beijing and Tokyo, dating back to the 1990s,¼Š to contain the political discourse and security escalation of the territorial disputes over the Senkaku (Diaoyutai) Islands in bilateral relations is threatened to be thrown overboard with events like this. And if international law is no guarantor of peace and stability, there are fears that East Asia will continue representing a focal point for inter-state tensions.Japan's moderately restrained conservatives and nationalists may also feel tempted to read the international conjuncture as one increasingly detrimental to Japan's interests and further entrench their stance on key issues of national security. Should that happen, the room for manoeuvre will be significantly reduced and a tougher posture can in theory be adopted to follow a policy focused on containing China. One should thus attentively follow what will follow suit.¼Š Michael Green (2001), Japan's Reluctant Realism
Coupons.com Brothers Commercial - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:44
VIDEO-Manchester police officer shot by fellow officer during college - WFSB 3 Connecticut
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:28
  MANCHESTER, CT (WFSB) -About 24 hours after the lockdown was lifted at Manchester Community College, the campus seemed back to normal.
  A lockdown was issued after a student reported seeing a man with a "handgun protruding out from his waistband" Wednesday afternoon.
  About 4,000 people were "under a shelter-in-place emergency," while police searched each classroom.
  During the lockdown, a Manchester police officer was shot in the foot. However, he did not shoot himself. It was an accidental discharge by another officer.
  After about six hours, the lockdown was lifted after no one with a firearm was located on the campus.
  "I wasn't really apprehensive," said student Jonathan Taylor. "I think they got everything under control now."
  Some students told Eyewitness News that it was hard to come to Manchester Community College Thursday morning.
  "My parents actually had to convince me to come back to school today," said student Diana Dunn.
  State police told Eyewitness News even though the possible suspect was never found, it believes the call the agency received on the suspect was believable.
  However, students and faculty alike give the college high marks for how it handled the situation.
  "I feel as though they handled it well. From the updates they gave me, they gave me like a million updates," said Manchester Community College Instructor Crystal Wiggins. "I got like ten updates during the time they were locking down the classrooms."
  Students at Manchester Community College were alerted of the situation via text message, the school website and media outlets.
  Manchester Community College President Gena Glickman spoke at a campus safety at the State Capitol in Hartford Thursday morning.
  Manchester Community College has their own sworn officers and they called Manchester Police Department for help.
  On Thursday, Glickman discussed her proposal to get weapons for her five unarmed, but state certified police officers.
  "They can't be part of the response team," she said. "They can be part of the logistics team, which they certainly were. They were invaluable yesterday, but they had to turn over their keys."
  Glickman said she believes arming the Manchester Community College police could be done at little, if any, cost. It must be approved by the Connecticut Board of Regents.
  Police told Eyewitness News the suspect is believed to be a heavyset Hispanic man, who is possibly 5'8" to 5"10" and wearing a red short-sleeved shirt.
  No arrests have been made at this time and no evidence was located.
  The incident remains under investigation by state police.
  Copyright 2013 WFSB (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.
Hackers steal over $12,000 of Bitcoins from transaction broker Bitinstant | The Verge
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:24
  Online institutions of all types are vulnerable to hacking, and Bitcoin is no exception: last week, hackers stole over $12,000 worth of Bitcoin currency from Bitinstant, one of the bigger Bitcoin transaction sites. As with many recent hacks, the Bitcoin theft was executed thanks to a bit of social engineering. According to the Bitinstant blog, the attacker went to the company's domain registrar posing as a Bitinstant employee '-- the attacker had a similar enough email address and knowledge of the employee's date of birth and mother's maiden name. From there, the attacker convinced the domain registrar to make the fake email address the default and to reset the account's password.
  Once the attacker had access to the Bitinstant domain, he redirected the DNS to servers in Germany and then to the Ukraine, locking out the Bitinstant employees and gaining access to their email accounts. With control over the email accounts, they reset the login for a Bitcoin exchange and stole the $12,800 in three separate transactions. Getting access to the Bitcoin exchange proved simple because of a lack of two-factor authentication '-- all the thieves needed was a username and password.
  Fortunately for Bitinstant and the company's customers, no personal information was obtained by the hacker '-- the company says it keeps all personal and transactional data offline to protect user privacy. Sadly, it wasn't as vigilant with other forms of security. Wired reports that Virwox, the Bitcoin exchange hackers raided, has supported multi-factor authentication since September of 2012. "Bitinstant was not using it (they learned and do now)," a Virwox representative told Wired.
Build Your Own NACD | No Agenda CD.com
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:23
  We've sliced and diced February's shows so you don't have to! Download your favorite segments and build your own No Agenda CD or link to the MP3s to hit your friends in the mouth.
  Agenda 21 / Climate Change484 Al Gore Climate Change Bullshit '' MP3 | WAV
  America, Fuck Yeah!484 Simulated Military Attacks on USA '' MP3 | WAV485 DOJ Drone Whitepaper '' MP3 | WAV485 Obama the Cyber Warrior '' MP3 | WAV
  DHS / TSA484 Superbowl Travel Tips From Blogger Bob '' MP3 | WAV
  Evil Elites484 Chuck Hagel Confirmation '' MP3 | WAV484 Hillary 2016 '' MP3 | WAV484 Hillary at CFR '' MP3 | WAV484 Oval Office Part Deux '' MP3 | WAV485 Farage on WWIII '' MP3 | WAV485 Napolitano 2016 '' MP3 | WAV485 Upcoming Confirmation Hearings '' MP3 | WAV
  Errata484 Dreamliner Outsourcing Woes '' MP3 | WAV484 Great Lead In Sore Mouth '' MP3 | WAV484 Moonlight Towers '' MP3 | WAV484 Teen Dating Violence Month '' MP3 | WAV484 Valentines Day Anniversary '' MP3 | WAV485 Economics 101 '' MP3 | WAV485 Fixies in Austin '' MP3 | WAV485 Liquor and Perfume '' MP3 | WAV485 Superbowl Wrap Up '' MP3 | WAV
  Healthcare484 Healthcare Scam '' MP3 | WAV484 Healthcare Providers '' MP3 | WAV485 NHS Sucks '' MP3 | WAV
  Mainstream Media484 Texas Teacher Hit and Run '' MP3 | WAV484 Timbuktu Un-Vasion '' MP3 | WAV484 Violent Video Games Not Dangerous '' MP3 | WAV484 Wikimedia CEO '' MP3 | WAV485 Don Lemon Subtle Propaganda '' MP3 | WAV485 Hezbolla on the Bulgarian Penninsula '' MP3 | WAV485 Piers Moron Appeals the Second Amendment '' MP3 | WAV485 Sandy Hook Exploitation '' MP3 | WAV485 Sharpton is an Athiest '' MP3 | WAV
  Shut up, Slave484 Shut Up Amtrak Passenger '' MP3 | WAV485 Muslim Patrols '' MP3 | WAV
  War on Ammo484 Obama Shotgun Fun '' MP3 | WAV484 Reuters on Second Amendment '' MP3 | WAV485 Dual Nationals and Jews VS Guns '' MP3 | WAV485 Gun Insurance '' MP3 | WAV
  What a Scam!485 Anti Doping Agency '' MP3 | WAV485 Just Blame S and P '' MP3 | WAV485 Slave Gets Dispended '' MP3 | WAV
UK judges back Lindsay Lohan-style 'booze bracelets' for parents who abuse alcohol to determine whether they can keep their children | Mail Online
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:10
  Family Drug and Alcohol Court given bracelets to more than a dozen parentsDevices detect traces of alcohol through the skin and are used in the U.SUK trial began in November in cases where children were taken into careCourt warned parents that they must change drinking habits or lose childrenLohan had one fitted after failing to turn up for a drink-driving court dateBy Jo Macfarlane
  PUBLISHED: 18:17 EST, 9 March 2013 | UPDATED: 18:47 EST, 9 March 2013
  Monitored: Troubled star Lindsay Lohan wearing the tag on her ankle. The device has been fitted to 274,000 people in America since 2003
  Parents with a history of alcohol abuse are being fitted with US-style 'booze bracelets' to determine whether they can keep custody of their children.
  In the first UK trial of its kind, the highly controversial ankle tags have been given to more than a dozen problem parents by the Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC) so a check can be kept on their promises to stay sober.
  The devices detect traces of alcohol released through the skin and are commonly used in the States to monitor alcohol-dependent criminals and tackle anti-social behaviour.
  Troubled Hollywood actress Lindsay Lohan was ordered to wear one for a year after failing to turn up for a drink-driving court date.
  The UK trial, which began last November, has involved 13 individual parents referred to the FDAC in Central London after their drinking became so bad their children were taken into foster care.
  The court, set up in 2008 by District Judge Nicholas Crichton, warns parents that they must change their behaviour or lose their children for good. It has so far presided over more than 200 cases.
  If parents commit to change, the court has a multi-disciplinary team run by The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, a mental health unit, and Coram children's charity to provide immediate intensive support.
  The bracelets, known as SCRAMx, are being used as an alternative to other forms of testing the FDAC routinely carries out, for example blood and urine samples and hair strand analysis.
  They clip on to the ankle and every 30 minutes, 24 hours a day, test for the presence of alcohol fumes emitted by the skin.
  These readings are then transmitted to a base station usually installed at the individual's home. The base station uploads the data automatically to a central database in Denver, Colorado, where it is processed and sent back to the FDAC.
  This allows the FDAC to identify if any of the parents have consumed alcohol and, if so, how much and how often. It can also determine whether the bracelet has been tampered with. On average, FDAC parents have worn them for 42 days, but the longest time was 98 days.
  The FDAC says the system has proved highly successful and in a couple of cases parents have been allowed to return home with their children.
  Regularly tested: Lindsay Lohan flaunts her SCRAMx bracelet, which tests for alcohol every half an hour
  Judge Crichton said: 'We are dealing with troubled families who have child after child in the hope that one day the courts will let them keep one.
  'In one London borough alone, 203 children have come into the care system from just 49 mothers.
  'It seems crazy to go on in that way when there may well be another way of tackling their problems. It's expensive to keep removing children and adopting them '' far better to tackle the heart of the issue, which is drug or alcohol problems.
  'The bracelet is no more expensive than having a hair strand test, which is historical and not current. If alcohol is detected it sends out an alert.
  Punishment: Lohan was ordered to wear one for a year after failing to turn up for a drink-driving court date
  'If this happens, we are notified immediately. It provides local authorities with a greater degree of confidence in allowing parents to have contact with children who are in care, and in one or two cases it has allowed children to go home to their parents on the basis that the local authority will know very quickly if the parent chooses to drink.'
  Versions of the bracelet have been used in the US since 2003 and have been fitted to more than 274,000 people.
  Dr Claire George, laboratory director at Concateno, the worldwide drug, alcohol and healthcare testing organisation which manufactures the devices, said: 'It's about helping an individual succeed.
  'They can see on record that they've been successful.'
Scripting News: A business model for movie theaters.
  Link to Article
  Source: Dave Winer
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 01:52
  I'd like to have a film festival for my friends.
  So I'll give you a list of 20 movies, Mr Movie Theater Owner, and one night every other week, you'll play one of them, and I'll guarantee a certain number of tickets sold. Above that, we'll split the revenue.
  That way we get to watch old movies in a theater setting, with popcorn and restrooms, and then we can all go out to dinner after and talk about the movies and why we like them so much. Maybe we could even get one of the actors or the director to join us.
  Movie theaters should be hubs for social activity. Watching a movie at home or on a laptop or a tablet isn't the same as watching it in a theater. And most of the great movies aren't showing in theaters now.
The View From Falling Downs: 1157 Johnson Street and the Cirque du Soleil
  Link to Article
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 01:49
  When I lived out in Victoria there were these Quebec dudes who used to entertain the tourist crowd in front of the Empress with their flaming bowling pin juggling act.I had no idea that these bowling pin jugglers were destined for stardom.
  Cirque du Soleil grew out of that juggling act out in Victoria.
  Smoked up with those embryonic billionaires more than a few times.
  Had not the slightest idea that they would eventually remake Las Vegas.
  And remake the genre of circus entertainment.
  But they did.
  Hell, if I could have juggled a Stihl then the way I do now, everything might have been different.
Archbishop condemns benefit changes
  Link to Article
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Sun, 10 Mar 2013 01:33
  9 March 2013Last updated at18:40 ETThe Archbishop of Canterbury has backed a group of bishops who have written an open letter criticising government plans to change the benefits system.
  They said it would have a "deeply disproportionate" effect on children.
  The Most Reverend Justin Welby's move came after 43 bishops wrote the letter to the Sunday Telegraph.
  The Department for Work and Pensions said tough decisions were necessary in order to keep the costs of welfare sustainable in the long term.
  Civilised societyThe letter from the Church of England bishops called on politicians to protect children and families whom they said were being hit hard by cuts.
  Continue reading the main storyPoliticians have a clear choice. By protecting children from the effects of this bill, they can help fulfil their commitment to end child poverty.''
  End QuoteThe Most Reverend Justin WelbyArchbishop of CanterburyIt has been supported by Dr Welby and the Archbishop of York, the Most Reverend John Sentamu.
  In a statement from Lambeth Palace, Dr Welby said a civilised society had a duty to support the vulnerable, especially when times were hard.
  He added that planned changes to the benefits system, which would cap rises in welfare payments to 1% for the next three years, would exact a large price on families who were already battling to make ends meet.
  Dr Welby said: "Politicians have a clear choice. By protecting children from the effects of this bill, they can help fulfil their commitment to end child poverty."
  The statement is Dr Welby's first major intervention in political life since he was named in his new role in November. He is due to be formally enthroned at Canterbury Cathedral on 21 March.
  'Hardship penalty'The Welfare Benefits Up-rating Bill will be debated in the House of Lords next week.
  This prompted the bishops to write to the Sunday Telegraph, saying they were concerned that 200,000 children could be pushed into poverty.
  The bishops said: "Children and families are already being hit hard by cuts to support, including those to tax credits, maternity benefits and help with housing costs.
  "They cannot afford this further hardship penalty. We are calling on the House of Lords to take action to protect children from the impact of this bill."
  Face-to-face meetingThe newspaper said his intervention would come as a blow to Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith who is attempting to guide the reforms through Parliament.
  BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said Dr Welby and Mr Duncan Smith met face-to-face within the past week and a government source said the issue did not come up.
  Our correspondent said it was quite clear that Church and State would have plenty more to say to each other on this.
  A Department for Work and Pensions spokeswomen said: "In difficult economic times we've protected the incomes of pensioners and disabled people, and most working age benefits will continue to increase 1%.
  "This was a tough decision but it's one that will help keep the welfare bill sustainable in the longer term.
  "By raising the personal allowance threshold we've lifted two million people out of tax altogether, clearly benefiting people on a low income."
Does it take one to know one? Endorsement of conspiracy theories is influenced by personal willingness to conspire - Douglas - 2011 - British Journal of Social Psychology
  Link to Article
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:58
  Brief report
  Karen M. Douglas*,Robbie M. SuttonArticle first published online: 12 APR 2011
  DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02018.x
  (C)2011 The British Psychological Society
  Additional Information
  How to CiteDouglas, K. M. and Sutton, R. M. (2011), Does it take one to know one? Endorsement of conspiracy theories is influenced by personal willingness to conspire. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50: 544''552. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02018.x
  Author InformationUniversity of Kent, Canterbury, UK
  *Karen Douglas, School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NP, United Kingdom (e'mail: k.douglas@kent.ac.uk).
  Publication HistoryIssue published online: 2 SEP 2011Article first published online: 12 APR 2011Received 12 May 2010; revised version received 15 December 2010We advance a new account of why people endorse conspiracy theories, arguing that individuals use the social''cognitive tool of projection when making social judgements about others. In two studies, we found that individuals were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories if they thought they would be willing, personally, to participate in the alleged conspiracies. Study 1 established an association between conspiracy beliefs and personal willingness to conspire, which fully mediated a relationship between Machiavellianism and conspiracy beliefs. In Study 2, participants primed with their own morality were less inclined than controls to endorse conspiracy theories '' a finding fully mediated by personal willingness to conspire. These results suggest that some people think 'they conspired' because they think 'I would conspire'.
  More content like this
  Find more content:Find more content written by:
Did Dennis Rodman have an Obama mission?
  Link to Article
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:57
  With the murder of Hugo Chavez by an Obama deployed bio cancer weapon, that the rest of the world has caught up to, there is a reality in the Obama machination machine of diverse protocols enlisted against those who are enemies of the feudalcrats.
  John McCain and Gay Ear Graham sit down to a feast with Obama and condemn Jeb Bush VP nominee Rand Paul for being out of control in filibuster state theater.
  Andrew Breitbart having information on Obama is puffy pink murdered utilizing toxins.
  Aaron Swartz part of the diaspora is psychologically assisted out of this world with a minder.
  Six Latin Americans are induced with cancer for questioning Obama. Fidel Castro warns Chavez of his doom and Chavez succumbs.
  Hugo Chavez himself once speculated that the United States had a cancer weapon after being diagnosed with the disease in 2011. ''Would it be so strange that they've invented the technology to spread cancer and we won't know about it for 50 years?'' he stated.''Fidel [Castro] always told me, 'Chvez take care. These people have developed technology. You are very careless. Take care what you eat, what they give you to eat '... a little needle and they inject you with I don't know what,' Chavez added.The reality is as Obama blackmailed Oz man, Rupert Murdoch's Sun now goes after Kim Jong Un for being furious over Obama blowing up a Kim missile test humiliating him, just what was the real mission of Dennis Rodman, a black Obama voter.You can note the Sun lying for Obama in this, in first they hype things up that the nuke test was massive, and then it was smaller than previous tests.For the record the previous tests were a dud, and one which barely registered. This last test was large.
  Last month the world was put on high alert when North Korea carried out its biggest nuclear blast yet.The giant underground explosion caused an earthquake with a magnitude of 4.9.
  The actual device was thought to be smaller than those in two earlier tests '-- raising fears that the crackpot Communist state is close to its aim of perfecting a missile capable of hitting its number one enemy the US.
  All of this Obama propaganda after Rodman stated Kim wanted peace and only to talk with Obama, makes one question in all the "love" Rodman was showering just what else might have tagged along on the North Korean junket.In effect, was the Obama posturing on Rodman a cover for another operation as Obama does not allow others like Chavez or Kim on his stage. There is only room for one Designer Negro from Peking.Even Obama's Filipino Cardinal is getting press as Obama is pushing Asian for the next pope.
  The reality in this is simple. Did Rodman unknowingly carry a contagion on his person, placed there by one of the minders he had with him in this entourage? Who accompanied Rodman to North Korea, and just what was the special mission involved?
  Rodman, who raised many eyebrows when he visited the Communist leader with members of the Harlem Globetrotters, recently went on news programs to encourage more relations between the two countries
  Was Rodman and the black trotters a form of Typhoid Mary's all meant to get Kim?Did Rodman and the Harlem trotters knowingly know they were on a mission from Obama?
  I will make this blunt. It is not that difficult in the bug labs to update travel vaccines nor to inoculate any ones person with genetic specific viral agents. It has been done with cancer for a generation in testing in America through various means.Rodman or the black trotters might be absolutely immune to this viral strain as it is geared to only Korean DNA, and specifically Kim DNA, as it can be tailored that specifically as Hugo Chavez example was recently put on display.
  Breathed in or human contact, from the host, the victim can be innoculated and not even realize they are dead men walking.
  There was a time that it was good looking women, seducing men with these viral agents on their fingernails, and during sex scratching would occur. The best of these programmes can come in any form, and host contact in the Typhoid Mary protocol is one of the methods of transfer.
  It is possible to create a Kim Cancer, and it possible to make a Kim Un specific cancer, as well as heart viral agents attacking that muscle rendering him in need of a new heart or any other organ shut down. Cancer though does seem to be the protocol of choice in Latin American caste as Obama thins them out. Commonality points to not sex acts, but an advanced agent breathed or ingested as in human host contact or dinner parties.
  I would not at all be surprised if Kim Jong Un develops some type of "disease" within the next two years.
  Kim has the bigger missile in his pants, but Obama has the bigger germ in the Worm.
  Mrs. Kim Jong Un will make such a lovely widow. Obama will probably go over and feel her up too as he likes Indochinese at least.
  Yes my children, another Lame Cherry matter anti matter exclusive waiting for the world to catch up.
  agtG 248Y
Federal Register | Trade Mission to Egypt and Kuwait
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:49
  In June 2012 the Department of Commerce initiated recruitment for participation in the U.S. Trade Mission to Egypt and Kuwait March 10-14, 2013, published at 77 FR 33439, June 6, 2012. In 77 FR 71777, December 4, 2012, the Department of Commerce announced that the application deadline for the mission was extended until January 18, 2013. Since then, due to unforeseen circumstances, the Kuwait portion of the mission has been cancelled, and Trade Mission to Egypt will be April 14 to 16 and the application deadline March 14. Interested firms that have not already submitted an application are encouraged to apply. Applications will be accepted after the deadline only to the extent that space remains and scheduling constraints permit.
  The Trade Mission to Egypt and Kuwait is replaced to read as follows:
  Mission DescriptionThe U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service is organizing a Trade Mission to Cairo, Egypt to explore opportunities in all industries.
  Led by a senior executive of the Department of Commerce or other U.S. Government agency, the trade mission will include one-on-one business appointments with pre-screened potential buyers, agents, distributors and joint venture partners; meetings with national and regional government officials, chambers of commerce, and business groups; and networking receptions for companies and trade associations representing companies interested in expansion into the North African and Middle Eastern markets. Meetings will be offered with government authorities that can address questions about policies, tariff rates, incentives, grid interconnection, regulation, etc.
  The mission will help participating firms and trade associations gain market insights, make industry contacts, solidify business strategies, and advance specific projects, with the goal of increasing U.S. exports to Egypt. Participating in an official U.S. industry delegation, rather than traveling to Egypt on their own, will enhance the companies' ability to secure meetings in Egypt.
  Commercial SettingEgypt is strategically located at the gateway of trade for Africa and the Middle East. It is a prime location for the transit of goods, as well as a key destination for American companies seeking to do business in the region.
  Egypt has experienced profound political changes over the past year. On February 11, 2011, President Hosni Mubarak's 30-year rule came to an end. In January 2012, Egypt seated its first freely and fairly elected parliament, and has held a Presidential election. In the meantime, the United States remains committed to a strong partnership with Egypt.
  As the largest Arab country with a population of 90 million, Egypt is the fourth largest export market for U.S. products and services in the Middle East. The United States is Egypt's largest bilateral trading partner, and the second largest investor. In 2011, bilateral trade reached $8.2 billion. The gross domestic product (GDP) grew over five percent from 2009 to 2010. According to Business Monitor International's forecasts, Egypt's real GDP is expanding 2.1% in FY2011/12 and projected to grow 4.9% in FY2012/13 (Egypt's fiscal year is July through June). Egyptian law requires that foreign companies retain Egyptian commercial agents for public tenders, but they may work directly with private companies. Most foreign companies have found it beneficial, however, to engage a local agent for private sector transactions as well because of their familiarity of the language, law and general business practices. Based on geographical location or product basis, a firm can appoint multiple agents in Egypt to further enhance its success.
  Mission GoalsThe goal of the trade mission is to provide U.S. participants with first-hand market information, access to government decision makers as appropriate and one-on-one meetings with business contacts, including potential agents, distributors and partners, so they can position themselves to enter or expand their presence in the Egypt.
  Mission ScenarioCairo is the capital of Egypt and the largest city in Africa. The business week runs from Sunday through Thursday.
  Proposed TimetableSaturday13 AprilArrival in Cairo.Sunday14 AprilOrientation and market briefings, business luncheon with American Chamber of Commerce and U.S. Ambassador's networking reception.Monday15 AprilOne-on-one business appointments; business lunch'--General Authority For Investment and Free Zones presentation on major public-private partnership projects; group dinner.Tuesday16 AprilOne-on-one business appointments.Participation RequirementsAll parties interested in participating in the Trade Mission to Egypt must complete and submit an application package for consideration by the U.S. Department of Commerce. All applicants will be evaluated on their ability to meet certain conditions and best satisfy the selection criteria as outlined below. A minimum of 15 U.S. companies and/or trade associations and maximum of 20 companies and/or trade associations will be selected to participate in the mission from the applicant pool. U.S. companies or trade associations already doing business with Egypt, as well as U.S. companies or trade associations seeking to enter these countries for the first time may apply.
  Fees and ExpensesAfter a company has been selected to participate on the mission, a payment to the U.S. Department of Commerce in the form of a participation fee is required. The fee for one representative to participate in the mission is $1400 for an SME and $2100 for large firms or trade associations. The fee for each additional company or association representative (SME or large firm) is $400. Expenses for travel, lodging, most meals, interpreters, and incidentals are the responsibility of each mission participant. Participants may be able to take advantage of Embassy rates for hotel rooms.
  Conditions for ParticipationAn applicant must submit a completed and signed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on the company's products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation. If the U.S. Department of Commerce receives an incomplete application, the Department may reject the application, request additional information, or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the applications.Each applicant must also certify that the products and services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least 51 percent U.S. content. In the case of a trade association or trade organization, the applicant must certify that, for each company to be represented by the trade association or trade organization, the products and services the represented company seeks to export are either produced in the United States, or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least fifty-one percent U.S. content.Selection Criteria for ParticipationSelection will be based on the following criteria:
  Suitability of the company's (or, in the case of a trade association or trade organization, represented companies') products or services to the targeted marketsApplicant's (or, in the case of a trade association or trade organization, represented companies') potential for business in the target markets, including likelihood of exports resulting from the missionConsistency of the applicant's goals and objectives with the stated scope of the missionReferrals from political organizations and any documents containing references to partisan political activities (including political contributions) will be removed from an applicant's submission and not considered during the selection process.
  Timeframe for Recruitment and ApplicationsMission recruitment will be conducted in an open and public manner, including posting Export.gov'--and other Internet Web sites; publication in trade publications and association newsletters; direct outreach to the Department's clients; posting in the Federal Register; and announcements at industry meetings, symposia, conferences, and trade shows.
  Recruitment for the mission will begin January 28, 2013 and conclude no later than March 14, 2013. The U.S. Department of Commerce will review applications and make selection decisions on a rolling basis until the maximum of twenty participants is reached. We will inform all applicants of selection decisions as soon as possible after the applications are reviewed. Applications received after the March 14 deadline will be considered only if space and scheduling constraints permit.
  U.S. Commercial Service, Cairo, Egypt, Dennis Simmons, Deputy Senior Commercial Officer, U.S. Commercial Service, Embassy of the United States of America, Email: Dennis.Simmons@trade.gov., Tel: 2 (02) 2797-2610.
  U.S. Commercial Service, Washington, DC, Anne Novak, U.S. Commercial Service, Washington, DC, Tel: (202) 482-8178, Email: Anne.Novak@trade.gov.
Federal Register | 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:51
  Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as Amended(i) Prospective Purchaser: Commonwealth of Australia.
  (ii) Total Estimated Value:
  Major Defense Equipment*$2.6 billionOther$1.1 billionTOTAL$3.7 billion(iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or Services under Consideration for Purchase: up to 12 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft, 54 F414-GE-402 engines (48 installed and 6 spares), 2 engine inlet devices, 35 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems, 70 AN/USQ-140 Multifunctional Informational Distribution System Low Volume Terminals (MIDS-LVT) or RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V) Joint Tactical Radio Systems, 40 AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Countermeasures Systems, 24 AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets, 72 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers, 15 M61A2 Vulcan Cannons, 32 AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles or Night Vision Cueing Device Systems, 40 AN/APX-111 Combined Interrogator Transponders, 80 AN/ARC-210/RT-1990A(C) Communication Systems, 100 Digital Management Devices with KG-60's, 36 Accurate Navigation Systems, 30 AN/AYK-29(V) Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS), 4 AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Cases, 24 AN/ ASQ-228 Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pods, 40 AN/PYQ-10 Simple Key Loaders (SKL), 80 KIV-78 Mode4/5Modules, 48 COMSEC Management Workstations (CMWS), 24 AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems, 80 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS), and 400 AN/ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoys. Also included are system integration and testing, tools and test equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documents, personnel training and training equipment, aircraft ferry and refueling support, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support.
  (iv) Military Department: Navy (SCI).
  (v) Prior Related Cases, if any:
  FMS Case SAF'--$2.2B'--02May07
  FMS case GQY'--$358M'--6May11
  FMS case LEN'-- $992M'--13September12
  (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None.
  (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense Article or Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: None.
  (viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: 27 February 2013.
  [*] As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
  Australia'--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler Aircraft
  The Government of Australia has requested a possible sale of up to 12 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft, 54 F414-GE-402 engines (48 installed and 6 spares) 2 engine inlet devices, 35 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems, 70 AN/USQ-140 Multifunctional Informational Distribution System Low Volume Terminals (MIDS-LVT) or RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V) Joint Tactical Radio Systems, 40 AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Countermeasures Systems, 24 AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets, 72 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers, 15 M61A2 Vulcan Cannons, 32 AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles or Night Vision Cueing Device System, 40 AN/APX-111 Combined Interrogator Transponders, 80 AN/ARC-210/RT-1990A(C) Communication Systems, 100 Digital Management Devices with KG-60's, 36 Accurate Navigation Systems, 30 AN/AYK-29(V) Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS), 4 AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Cases, 24 AN/ASQ-228 Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pods, 40 AN/PYQ-10 Simple Key Loaders (SKL), 80 KIV-78 Mode4/5Module, 48 COMSEC Management Workstations (CMWS), 24 AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems, 80 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS), and 400 AN/ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoys. Also included are system integration and testing, tools and test equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documents, personnel training and training equipment, aircraft ferry and refueling support, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $3.7 billion.
  Australia is an important ally in the Western Pacific that contributes significantly to ensuring peace and economic stability in the region. Australia's efforts in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations have made a significant impact on regional political and economic stability and have served U.S. national security interests. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives and facilitates burden sharing with our allies.
  The proposed sale will improve Australia's capability in current and future coalition efforts. Australia will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these additional aircraft into its armed forces.
  The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
  The prime contractor will be The Boeing Corporation in St. Louis, Missouri; General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, Massachusetts; Data Link Solutions in Chesterfield, Missouri; BAE Systems in Rockville, Maryland; Northrop Grumman Corporation in Falls Church, VA; Raytheon Corporation in Waltham, MA; and Visions Systems International in San Jose, California. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
  Implementation of this proposed sale may require the assignment of additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Australia.
  There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
  Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control ActAnnex Item No. vii(vii) Sensitivity of Technology
  1. The F/A-18E/FSuper Hornet is a single- and two-seat, twin engine, multi-mission fighter/attack aircraft that can operate from either aircraft carriers or land bases. The F/A-18 fills a variety of roles: Air superiority, fighter escort, suppression of enemy air defenses, reconnaissance, forward air control, close and deep air support, and day and night strike missions. The F/A-18E/F Weapon System is considered Secret.
  2. The EA-18GGrowler is a two-seat, twin engine, multi-mission Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) aircraft that can operate from either aircraft carriers or land bases. It provides a capability to detect, identify, locate, and suppress hostile emitters. The EA-18G provides organic accurate emitter targeting for employment of onboard suppression weapons, such as High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM). The EA-18G Weapon System is considered Secret.
  3. The AN/APG-79Active Electronically Scanned Array Radar System is classified Secret. The radar provides the F/A-18 aircraft with all-weather, multimission capability for performing air-to-air and air-to-ground targeting and attack. Air-to-air modes provide the capability for all-aspect target detection, long-range search and track, automatic target acquisition, and tracking of multiple targets. Air-to-surface attack modes provide high-resolution ground mapping navigation, weapon delivery, and sensor cueing. The system component hardware (Antenna, Transmitter, Radar Data Processor, and Power Supply) is Unclassified. The Receiver-Exciter hardware is Confidential. The radar Operational Flight Program (OFP) is classified Secret. Documentation provided with the AN/APG-79 radar set is classified Secret.
  4. The AN/ALR-67(V)3Electric Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Set is classified Confidential. The AN/ALR-67(V)3 provides the F/A-18F aircrew with radar threat warnings by detecting and evaluating friendly and hostile radar frequency threat emitters and providing identification and status information about the emitters to on-board Electronic Warfare (EW) equipment and the aircrew. The OFP and User Data Files (UDF) used in the AN/ALR-67(V)3 are classified Secret. Those software programs contain threat parametric data used to identify and establish priority of detected radar emitters.
  5. The AN/ALE-47Countermeasures Dispensing Systems is classified Secret. The AN/ALE-47 is a threat-adaptive dispensing system that dispenses chaff, flares, and expendable jammers for self-protection against airborne and ground-based Radio Frequency and Infrared threats. The AN/ALE-47 Programmer is classified Confidential. The OFP and Mission Data Files used in the AN/ALE-47 are classified Secret. Those software programs contain algorithms used to calculate the best defense against specific threats.
  6. The APX-111Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT) with the Conformal Antenna System (CAS) is classified Secret. The CIT is a complete MARKXII identification system compatible with Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) Modes 1, 2, 3/A, C, 4, and 5 (secure). A single slide-in module that can be customized to the unique cryptographic functions for a specific country provides the systems secure mode capabilities. The Mode S Beacon System is a combined data link and Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) system that was standardized in 1985 by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Mode S provides air surveillance using a data link with a permanent unique aircraft address.
  7. The Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) is a modified HGU-55/P helmet that incorporates a visor-projected Heads-Up Display (HUD) to cue weapons and aircraft sensors to air and ground targets. In close combat, a pilot must currently align the aircraft to shoot at a target. JHMCS allows the pilot to simply look at a target to shoot. This system projects visual targeting and aircraft performance information on the back of the helmet's visor, enabling the pilot to monitor this information without interrupting his field of view through the cockpit canopy, the system uses a magnetic transmitter unit fixed to the pilot's seat and a magnetic field probe mounted on the helmet to define helmet pointing positioning. A Helmet Vehicle Interface (HVI) interacts with the aircraft system bus to provide signal generation for the helmet display. This provides significant improvement for close combat targeting and engagement. Hardware is Unclassified; technical data and documents are classified up to Secret.
  8. The AN/AVS-9Night Vision Goggles provide imagery sufficient for an aviator to complete night time missions down to starlight and extreme low light conditions. The AN/AVS-9 is designed to satisfy the F/A-18 mission requirements for covert night combat, engagement, and support. The third generation light amplification tubes provide a high-performance, image-intensification system for optimized F/A-18 night flying at terrain-masking altitudes. The AN/AVS-9 night vision goggles are classified as Unclassified but with restrictions on release of technologies.
  9. The AN/USQ-140Multifunctional Informational Distribution System (MIDS) Low Volume Terminal (LVT) is classified Confidential. The MIDS LVT is a secure data and voice communication network using the Link-16 architecture. The systems provides enhanced situational awareness, positive identification of participants within the network, secure fighter-to-fighter connectivity, and secure voice capability and ARN-118 TACAN functionality. It provides three major functions: Air Control, Wide Area Surveillance, and Fighter-to-Fighter. The MIDS LVT can be used to transfer data in Air to-Air, Air-to-Surface, and Air-to-Ground scenarios. The MIDS enhanced Interference Blanking Unit (EIBU) provides validation and verification of equipment and concept. EIBU enhances input/output signal capacity of the MIDS LVT and addresses parts obsolescence.
  10. The RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V)Multifunctional Informational Distribution System (MIDS) Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) is classified Confidential. It is a 4-channel radio designed to run the complex Link 16 waveform and up to three additional communication protocols, including Airborne Networking Waveform (ANW). The terminal can host and provide the necessary computer processing to run routing and platform specific applications.
  11. The ALE-55Fiber Optic Towed Decoys is radio frequency countermeasure designed to protect an aircraft from radar guided missiles. It consists of an aircraft-towed decoy and onboard electronics. It works together with the aircraft's electronic warfare system to provide radar jamming. In addition, it can also be used in a backup mode as a signal repeater, which allows it to lure incoming missiles away from their actual target.
  12. The AN/ARC-210, RT-1990A(C) Communication System has been designed to better meet software defined radio tenets, and architectures, provides superior performance in the transfer of networked and point to point data and voice imagery.
  13. The Accurate Navigation Systems (ANAV) with country specific Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SASSM) including Advance Digital Antenna Production/Antenna Electronics (ADAP/AE) and Conformal-Controlled Reception Patterned Antenna (C-CRPA) provide full accuracy and P/Y-Code GPS. The ANAV can accommodate many interfaces to various sensors through a number of available options including Selective Availability and Anti-spoofing Module (SASSM), and can be integrated with existing Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Doppler systems. The system also incorporates Air Navigation Warfare (NAVWAR) protection designed to counter GPS Electronic Warfare threats due to intentional and unintentional interference by providing the warfighter continued access to GPS through the use of Anti-jam (AJ) Antenna Systems consisting of the Conformal'--Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna, (C-CRPA), and the Advanced Digital Antenna Production/Antenna Electronics, (ADAP/AE).
  14. The AN/AYK-29(V)Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS) and AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Case uses onboard hardware and software processing to produce precise targeting solutions for Super Hornet aircrews. The system compares synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) maps from the aircraft's active-array radar with stored geo-registered SAR maps and generates precise target coordinates for GPS-guided weapons. DTS enhances Super Hornet aircrews' situational awareness when engaging air-to-ground targets.
  15. The AN/ALQ-214(V)4Jammer is the next generation integrated countermeasures system that blends sensitive receivers and active countermeasures to form an electronic shield for the F/A-18 fighter aircraft. The RF countermeasure system responds to threats autonomously with a specific series of measures designed to protect the aircraft from detection and engages any fired threats to the aircraft, to ensure mission success.
  16. The AN/ASQ-228Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pod is a multi-sensor, electro-optical targeting pod incorporating infrared, low-light television camera, laser rangefinder/target designator, and laser spot tracker developed and manufactured by Raytheon. It is used to provide navigation and targeting for military aircraft in adverse weather and using precision-guided weapons.
  17. The LAU-127Guided Missile Launchers is a rail launcher designed to carry and launch AMRAAM. It provides the electrical and mechanical interface between the missile and launch aircraft as well as the two-way data transfer between missile and cockpit controls and displays to support preflight orientation and control circuits to prepare and launch the missile. The launcher will also be capable of carrying and launching the AIM-9L/M SIDEWINDER missile.
  18. If a technologically advanced adversary were to obtain knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
Federal Register | 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:03
  Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.
  The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 12-60 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.
  Dated: March 4, 2013.
  Aaron Siegel,
  Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
  BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
  BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
  Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as Amended(i) Prospective Purchaser: Iraq.
  (ii) Total Estimated Value:
  * As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.Major Defense Equipment*$0 millionOther$600 millionTOTAL$600 million(iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or Services under Consideration for Purchase: 90 M45 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 40 M60 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 70 American Science and Engineering brand Z Backscatter Vans, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, Quality Assurance Team, tools and test equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related logistical support.
  (iv) Military Department: Army (WAN).
  (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: None.
  (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None.
  (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense Article or Defense
  Services Proposed to be Sold: None.
  (viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: 27 February 2013.
  Iraq'--RAPISCAN System VehiclesThe Government of Iraq has requested a possible sale of 90 M45 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 40 M60 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 70 American Science and Engineering brand Z Backscatter Vans, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, Quality Assurance Teams, tools and test equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related logistical support. The estimated cost is $600 million.
  This proposed sale directly supports the Iraqi government and serves the interests of the Iraqi people and the United States.
  This proposed sale of RAPISCAN systems and vehicles will contribute to a stable, sovereign, and democratic Iraq. The purchase and use of these systems will facilitate progress toward this goal by increasing the Government of Iraq's ability to defend critical infrastructure and reduce terror and insurgent activities. The Z Backscatter vans will be used to scan vehicle interiors and will provide the Government of Iraq a tool to restrict the ability of insurgent and terrorist groups to operate by detecting contraband movement through borders and checkpoints. Iraq will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment.
  The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
  The prime contractors will be Rapiscan Systems in Torrance, California; and American Science and Engineering in Billerica, Massachusetts. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
  Implementation of this proposed sale will require contractor representatives (30 from Rapiscan and 15 from American Science and Engineering) to travel to Iraq for a period of three years to provide management, and operation and maintenance training.
  There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
  [FR Doc. 2013-05401 Filed 3-7-13; 8:45 am]
  BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
Is that an IED in your pants?
  Link to Article
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:34
  An undercover TSA inspector with an improvised explosive device stuffed in his pants got past two security screenings at Newark Airport '-- including a pat-down '-- and was cleared to get on board a commercial flight, sources told The Post yesterday.
  The breach took place Feb. 25, when the Transportation Security Administration's special operations team '-- the agency's version of internal affairs '-- staged a mock intrusion at the airport.
  ''This episode once again demonstrates how Newark Airport is the Ground Zero of TSA failures,'' a source said.
  The ''bomber'' was part of the four-person ''Red Team'' that posed as ticketed passengers and filed through the B1 checkpoint of Terminal B '-- home of American Airlines, JetBlue and Delta, sources said.
  With the inert ''bomb'' stashed somewhere in his pants, he got through the magnetometer undetected at around 11 a.m. He was then pulled aside for a physical screening, and a TSA agent failed to discover the IED and allowed the ''bomber'' to go to his gate.
  ''He did have a simulated IED in his pants,'' the source said. ''They did not find it.''
  The exact makeup of the mock IED was not available, but even devices small enough to be stashed in a passenger's pants could blow a hole through a plane's fuselage.
  TSA inspectors have previously used mock bombs modeled after devices used by 2009 ''underwear bomber'' Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and 2001 ''shoe bomber'' Richard Reid.
  Only one member of the TSA's terror team was stopped at the checkpoint '-- a female agent ''carrying a simulated IED inside her carry-on that was inside a child's doll,'' the source said.
  It had ''wires sticking out'' and was obviously suspicious and she was pulled aside, sources say.
  The Red Team also targeted Terminal C the same day, although results from that test were unclear.
  The TSA said in a statement that it would not provide details of any of its undercover operations.
  ''TSA regularly conducts covert testing of security layers. Regardless of the tests' outcome, TSA officers are provided with immediate on-the-spot feedback so they receive the maximum training value that the drills offer,'' the statement said.
  ''Due to the security-sensitive nature of the tests, TSA does not publicly share details about how they are conducted, what specifically is tested or the outcomes.''
  Newark Airport, which has 1,400 screeners and supervisors, has long struggled with security.
  Last year, 52 baggage and traveler screeners were fired and another 19 disciplined for major security lapses and thefts.
  Newark Airport was where a screener left a note saying, ''Get your freak on, girl,'' after finding a vibrator in the bag of a Manhattan attorney in 2011.
  And it was where, in 2010, an airport ''Romeo'' was able to walk unticketed and unscreened into a secure area so he could kiss his girlfriend goodbye.
  Despite the security woes, the TSA this week declared it would soon allow travelers to carry non-locking knives up to 2.36 inches in length and a half-inch width onto airplanes.
  philip.messing@nypost.com
Federal Register | Food Ingredients and Sources of Radiation Listed and Approved for Use in the Production of Meat and Poultry Products
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:06
  Charles Williams, Director, Policy Issuances Division, Office of Policy and Program Development, FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700, (202) 720-5627.
  On May 7, 2012, FSIS issued a proposed rule entitled ''Food Ingredients and Sources of Radiation Listed and Approved for Use in the Production of Meat and Poultry Products'' and requested comments on the document (77 FR 26706). FSIS proposed to remove sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances that the regulations prohibit for use in meat or poultry products.
  As explained in the proposal, under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA)(21 U.S.C. 301et seq.), FDA is responsible for determining the safety of ingredients and sources of irradiation used in the production of meat and poultry products, as well as prescribing safe conditions of use. Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601, et seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451et seq.), FSIS is responsible for determining the suitability of FDA-approved substances in meat and poultry products. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that was implemented in January 2000, FDA and FSIS work together to evaluate petitions requesting the approval of new substances, or new uses of previously approved substances, for use in or on meat and poultry products. The MOU is available for viewing by the public in the FSIS docket room and on the FSIS Web site at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_Policies/Labeling_FDA_MOU/index.asp. Under this MOU, if FDA and FSIS approve an ingredient for use in meat or poultry products, FDA establishes the parameters of the approved use under its regulatory system. FSIS also lists the substance in FSIS Directive 7120.1, ''Safe and Suitable Ingredients Used in the Production of Meat, Poultry, and Egg Products,'' as part of a comprehensive listing of the substances that have been reviewed and that have been accepted as safe and suitable. (The Directive is available at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISDirectives/7120.1.pdf.)
  The proposed rule also explained that, under FSIS's regulations, certain antimicrobial substances are prohibited for use in meat or poultry products because these substances have the potential to conceal damage or inferiority when used at certain levels (9 CFR 424.23(a)(3)). Among these substances are potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl phydroxybenzoate), calcium propionate, sodium propionate, benzoic acid, and sodium benzoate.
  In 2006, Kraft Foods Global, Inc. petitioned FSIS to amend the Federal meat and poultry products inspection regulations to permit the use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate as acceptable antimicrobial agents that may be used in combination with other approved ingredients to inhibit the growth of Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) in ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry products. On July 26, 2010, Kemin Food Technologies petitioned FSIS to amend the regulations to permit the use of liquid sodium propionate and liquid sodium benzoate as acceptable antimicrobial agents in meat and poultry products.
  After receiving each petition, FSIS conducted an initial evaluation of the requested action to confirm that FDA had no objections to the safety of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, or benzoic acid at the proposed levels of use. FSIS also considered each petitioner's supporting data on the suitability of these substances for use in meat and poultry products. FSIS concluded that the petitioners had established the safety of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid at the proposed levels of use but that the Agency needed additional data to make a final suitability determination. Therefore, in July 2007, FSIS issued a waiver of provisions under 9 CFR 303.1(h) and 381.3(b) to enable Kraft to conduct various experimental trials involving the use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate, in combination with other ingredients, to control the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. Additionally, from September 2010 through March 2011, FSIS issued waivers to Kemin and to various meat and poultry product processing establishments to conduct trials on the use of antimicrobial agents containing liquid sodium propionate and propionic acid supplied by Kemin for Lm control in RTE meat an poultry products.
  While operating under the waivers, the Kemin and Kraft companies gathered sufficient data to support the use of sodium propionate, sodium benzoate, and benzoic acid as antimicrobial agents in RTE meat and poultry products. Kraft submitted data collected from its in-plant-trials and from scientific studies that show that these substances do not conceal damage or inferiority or make products appear better or of greater value than they are under the proposed conditions of use. Kraft submitted research findings to demonstrate that its proposed use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate is effective in controlling the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. Kemin also submitted findings supporting the use of its sodium propionate and propionic acid formulations.
  The Kemin petition and supporting materials are available for viewing by the public on the FSIS Web site at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Petition_Kemin.pdf. The Kraft petition is available at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Petition_Kraft.pdf.
  After considering the comments received and discussed below, FSIS has determined that sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid, under the conditions proposed in the petitions, are both safe and suitable for use as antimicrobial agents in certain RTE meat and poultry products. Therefore, FSIS is amending 9 CFR 424.23(a)(3) to remove these substances from the list of prohibited substances that may be used ''* * * in or on any product, only as provided in 9 CFR Chapter III.''
  Under this final rule, use of these substances in or on meat or poultry products will continue to be approved by FDA for safety and by FSIS for suitability. FDA will continue to establish the parameters of the approved use under its regulatory system, and FSIS will list approved uses of these substances in the table of approved substances in Directive 7120.1. In that directive, FSIS will specify that sodium propionate (generally recognized as safe under 21 CFR 184.1784) can be used as an antimicrobial in various meat and poultry products in an amount not to exceed 0.5 percent (by weight of total formulation) when used alone. Sodium propionate is a direct food ingredient that must be labeled by its common or usual name in the ingredients statement of a product (21 CFR 101.4, 9 CFR 317.2(f), 381.118(a)).
  The directive also will state that, when used as an antimicrobial, sodium benzoate can be used in various meat and poultry products at up to 0.1 percent when used alone (21 CFR 184.1733). Sodium benzoate is a direct food additive that must be labeled by its common or usual name in the ingredients statement of a product. Similarly, benzoic acid is a generally recognized as safe (GRAS) direct food ingredient that can be used in various meat and poultry products at up to 0.1 percent (21 184.1021 and similarly must be labeled (21 CFR 101.4, 9 CFR 317.2(f) and 381.118(a)).
  The uses of these substances are consistent with FDA regulations and reflect the levels that the petitioners requested to use in meat and poultry products and that they provided supporting data. Also, the use of these substances enhances food safety by controlling Lm in RTE products.
  The Kraft petition also addressed sodium diacetate (GRAS under 21 CFR 184.1754 when used as an antimicrobial agent under cGMP). The company intends to use this substance in combination with sodium benzoate and sodium propionate. Sodium diacetate is not one of the substances considered in this rulemaking because is not prohibited by FSIS regulations. When sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, or sodium diacetate are used in combination with each other, the overall maximum level for the combination cannot exceed 0.1 percent (in accordance with 21 CFR 184.1(d)). FSIS will include this information in the directive.
  As a result of amending 9 CFR 424.23(a)(3), the procedures for listing approved uses of sodium propionate, benzoic acid, and sodium benzoate in the FSIS directive will be consistent with the procedures for listing approved uses in meat and poultry products of other safe and suitable substances. Approved new uses of potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl p-hydroxybenzoate), and calcium propionate will continue to be listed through rulemaking because the regulations (9 CFR 424.23(a)(3)) prohibit their use in meat and poultry products.
  FSIS carefully considered all the comments received and developed the following responses.
  FSIS received 20 comments in response to the proposed rule. Members of the public submitted twelve, organizations related to the food industry five, and a food safety consulting firm, a non-profit association, and a trade association each submitted one. Several commenters supported the proposal to remove sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances that the regulations prohibit for use in meat or poultry products. They stated that the additives are effective as anti-Listerial agents and are suitable for specified uses in meat and poultry products.
  FSIS agrees that adding sodium propionate to the list of approved ingredients also provides meat and poultry processors greater flexibility in formulating new products while protecting the food supply against Listeria. Moreover, sodium propionate and propionic acid, which are GRAS (21 CFR 170.30, 21 CFR 184.1784) for use as antimicrobials under current good manufacturing practices, have been confirmed as safe and effective at inhibiting Lm. Sodium propionate does not mask spoilage or negatively affect sensory attributes. This ingredient provides the benefit of lowering sodium contribution in meat and poultry products, while extending shelf-life.
  The following is a discussion of the relevant issues raised in the comments.
  Comment: A commenter asked why there were no tests involving the human body after eating the substances. Another commenter expressed concern about the cumulative effects of combined dosages of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid on children.
  Response: FSIS and FDA do not conduct tests of the effects of food ingredients directly on humans. For a GRAS substance, such as the substances discussed in this rule, generally available data and information about the use of the substance are known and widely accepted and FDA has a basis for concluding that there is consensus among qualified experts that the data and information establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use (21 CFR 170.36(c)(4)(i)(C)). For a food additive, privately held data and information about the use of the substance are sent by the sponsor to FDA. FDA then evaluates the data and information to determine whether they establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use (21 CFR 171.1).
  FSIS and FDA have evaluated all the data and determined that the uses of these substances considered in this rule are safe for individual consumers, including children.
  Comment: A few commenters disapproved removing sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances prohibited from use in meat and poultry products because they stated that these ingredients would have harmful effects on human health. One commenter explained that, as a potential consumer of harmful additives, she found the evidence submitted by Kraft Foods and Kemin Food Technologies insufficient to prove that all three agents are safe for use in meat and poultry products. Specifically, the commenter stated that Kemin had relied on old research (a 1973 study conducted by the Select Committee on Generally Recognized as Safe Substances) to prove the safe use of sodium benzoate and benzoic acid and that new research must be performed to ensure the safety of benzoic acid for public use.
  Another commenter expressed concern because Kraft stated that it used Lem-O-Fos in its meat and poultry products to ''enhance antimicrobial activity.'' The commenter stated that studies have shown that when benzoic acid is mixed with citric acid it forms benzene, which is a carcinogen. In the commenter's opinion, the substances should be kept separate from one another or concrete evidence must prove that the mixture does not constitute a hazard to consumers.
  Another commenter stated that, in the early 1990s, the FDA urged companies not to use benzoate in products that also contain ascorbic acid. The commenter noted that a lawsuit filed in 2006 by private attorneys ultimately forced Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and other soft-drink makers in the United States to reformulate affected beverages'--typically fruit-flavored products. According to this commenter, soft-drink makers are now eliminating the use of benzoate in combination with vitamin C worldwide. This commenter stated that these developments should cause FDA and FSIS to reconsider whether benzoate should continue to be classified as GRAS. Another stated that the GRAS status of the sodium benzoate should be reviewed to take into account changes in consumer diets and advances in science and technology. The commenter also stated that FSIS should not expand its use until a safety assessment is done and noted that the European Union is in the process of reviewing its safety now.
  Response: FDA and FSIS have considered the points made by the commenters and have determined that there are no human health hazards arising from the approved uses that will be listed in FSIS Directive 7120.1.
  The conditions under which benzene is produced in soft drinks are different from the conditions under which benzene could be produced in ready-to-eat (RTE) meats. RTE meats have a pH close to neutral, are continuously refrigerated or stored at room temperature (canned RTE meats), and are protected from excessive exposure to light. Therefore, the use of sodium benzoate in RTE meats does not present a safety concern even if combined with Vitamin C or similar compounds.
  Regarding the concern that the GRAS status of sodium benzoate should be reviewed, FDA has confirmed that the petitioner's intended use of sodium benzoate is covered under the GRAS regulations (at 21 CFR 184.1733) and that there are no safety issues with the intended use. FSIS accepts the conclusion of FDA. Further, FSIS is aware that the Codex Committee on Food Additives (1995) [1] has also approved the use of benzoates in cured (including salted) and dried non-heat treated processed (including comminuted) meat and poultry products, at a maximum level of 0.1 percent.
  Regarding the European Union's evaluation, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a data call June 1, 2012, on the occurrence in foods and beverages of certain food additives (sorbates, benzoates, and gallates) that were already permitted in the EU before January 20, 2009. Benzoic acid and sodium benzoate are among the ingredients on the list. The data are to be used to re-evaluate the ingredients. We understand from EFSA that the report on this re-evaluation will be available in late Spring 2013. When the re-evaluation is completed, experts in this Agency, and particularly in FDA, will consider the results and their possible implications. At this time, however, the available evidence supports the safety of the use of these ingredients.
  Comment: One commenter supported the proposed rule but suggested that more studies be conducted on the effects of these three preservatives in higher dosages (higher than the use levels currently permitted under the FDA GRAS regulations), possible allergic reactions through contact or ingestion and the extent of those reactions, and potential alternatives to these preservatives that produce the same outcome without the use of preservatives.
  Response: The levels that FSIS would allow to be used under this rule have not been shown to cause allergic reactions. Data on uses at higher levels would be evaluated under the joint FDA and FSIS ingredient approval system.
  Data in the scientific literature on the amounts of these substances that are necessary to trigger or give rise to allergic reactions are not available. Food additives, such as benzoic acid and benzoates, have been known to cause hypersensitivity reactions. Such reactions are known to be very unusual in healthy individuals. However, in some cases, doses as low as 50 mg of benzoates have been shown to cause allergic reactions in individuals already suffering from allergic reactions. Information on the effects of these doses on healthy individuals is not currently available. Therefore, it is important that food additives or ingredients that may cause severe allergic or hypersensitivity reactions be appropriately declared in the ingredient statement on the product label.
  Industry is likely to pursue research on the preservatives that are the subject of this rulemaking and on others. FSIS and FDA will continue to review new substances for safety and suitability under the MOU.
  Comment: A commenter recommended not specifying a pH range of 4.8 to 5.2 percent for the use of sodium propionate as indicated in the Kemin petition, increasing the permissible use level of propionate when used in combination with other antimicrobial ingredients, and specifying that the substances are to be used in meat and poultry, including RTE products. The commenter explained that a higher pH provides several benefits including greater stability of the antimicrobial solution, better handling and shipping classifications, and improved sensory characteristics in finished meat products.
  The commenter further stated that not including a pH specification in the approved ingredient listing in the FSIS Directive will provide room for innovation and fair competition in the market. Moreover, a permitted use level of sodium propionate in RTE meat and poultry products is necessary because the firm's testing results indicate that propionate, when combined with commonly used existing antimicrobials for meat and poultry (e.g., lactate, acetate, and diacetate), is required at higher levels to ensure safety of uncured high-moisture items.
  Response: As noted above, sodium propionate that meets food grade standards as outlined in the Food Chemicals Codex, when used in accordance with 21 CFR 184.1784, is GRAS for use as an antimicrobial agent in meat products with no other limitations than cGMP. Therefore, FSIS will not specify a pH level in its Directive 7120.1. Also, since 21 CFR 184.1784 does not prescribe a maximum use level for sodium propionate, when the substance is used in combination with another antimicrobial agent, the maximum level for the combination is governed by the maximum use level of the other antimicrobial. For example, when sodium propionate is used in combination with sodium benzoate, the maximum level for the mixture is not to exceed 0.1 percent. When sodium propionate is used in combination with sodium diacetate, the maximum use level for the mixture is not to exceed 0.25 percent.
  The directive will specify the uses of benzoic acid, sodium benzoate, and sodium propionate in meat and poultry products, including RTE meat and poultry products.
  Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This final rule has been determined not to be significant and therefore has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866.
  The rule will benefit companies that want to use these substances in the production of meat and poultry products by expediting the approval process. It will also benefit consumers by expediting the approved use of substances that enhance food safety by controlling the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. The rule also will make the approval process for new uses of sodium propionate, sodium benzoate, and benzoic acid in meat and poultry products consistent with the process for obtaining approval for other safe and suitable substances.
  There are no expected costs associated with this final rule. All substances intended for use in the production of meat and poultry products will continue to be subject to FDA evaluation for safety and FSIS evaluation for suitability. Company costs and the agencies' costs associated with these evaluations will not be affected by this final rule.
  Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FSIS Administrator has determined that this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This determination is based primarily on the fact that the final rule will not affect the process for approving new uses of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid in meat or poultry products. This final rule will make the process of listing approved uses of these substances more efficient by eliminating the need for FSIS to conduct rulemaking each time a new use is approved.
  This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) has no retroactive effect; and (2) does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. However, the administrative procedures specified in 9 CFR 306.5, 381.35, and 590.300 through 590.370, respectively, must be exhausted before any judicial challenge may be made of the application of the provisions of the final rule, if the challenge involves any decision of an FSIS employee relating to inspection services provided under the FMIA, PPIA, or EPIA.
  This rule does not contain any new information collection or record keeping requirements that are subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.
  FSIS and USDA are committed to achieving the purposes of the E-Government Act (44 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.) by, among other things, promoting the use of the Internet and other information technologies and providing increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.
  FSIS will announce the availability of this final rule on-line through the FSIS Web page located at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/Interim_&_Final_Rules/index.asp.
  FSIS also will make copies of this Federal Register publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal Register notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that could affect or would be of interest to our constituents and stakeholders. The Update is communicated via Listserv, a free email subscription service for industry, trade, and farm groups, consumer interest groups, allied health professionals, scientific professionals, and other individuals who have requested to be included. The Update also is available on the FSIS Web page. Through Listserv and the Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader, more diverse audience.
  In addition, FSIS offers an email subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food safety news and information. This service is available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/email_subscription/. Options range from recalls to export information to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password-protect their accounts.
  For the reasons set forth in the preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR part 424 as follows:
  begin regulatory text
  1.The authority citation for part 424 continues to read as follows:
  Authority:7 U.S.C. 450, 1901-1906; 21 U.S.C. 451-470, 601-695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53.
  2.In § 424.23, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
  (a) * * *
  (3) Sorbic acid, calcium sorbate, sodium sorbate, and other salts of sorbic acid shall not be used in cooked sausages or any other meat; sulfurous acid and salts of sulfurous acid shall not be used in or on any meat; and niacin or nicotinamide shall not be used in or on fresh meat product; except that potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl p-hydroxybenzoate), and calcium propionate, may be used in or on any product, only as provided in 9 CFR Chapter III.
  * * * * *
  end regulatory text
  Done at Washington, DC on: February 28, 2013.
  Alfred V. Almanza,
  Administrator.
  [FR Doc. 2013-05341 Filed 3-6-13; 8:45 am]
  BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P
Will the Austin startup ecosystem ever live up to its promise?
  Link to Article
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:26
  By Hamish McKenzieOn March 8, 2013
  On paper, it seems obvious that Austin should be included in the ''best startup cities in America'' list. For starters, the city hogs the tech industry's attention for a week every year during South By Southwest, now hyped and mocked in equal measure. Then there are the heavy-hitter tech residents. Some of the biggest and most important tech companies have a presence here: Google, Apple, Facebook, Evernote, Cisco, IBM, Dell, AMD, National Instruments, and Texas Instruments, just to name a few. The local economy is booming, the state is business-friendly, and the cost of living is relatively low, compared to the coasts.
  But the key words in the graph above are ''on paper,'' ''for a week'' and ''a presence.'' The reality is despite the best intentions and endless buzz, Austin has never lived up to its much talked about potential as a startup hub.
  The optimist's case is one of a small community that is only beginning to stand on its own two feet. While the city has had a few stand-out tech exits '' SolarWinds ($4.45 billion market cap), Home Away ($2.52 billion), and BazaarVoice ($480 million) '' insiders refer to it as a ''blue-collar tech town'' characterized by tech workers who favor good lifestyles over grand dreams of changing the world. And for as much as it holds the allure of a burgeoning economy, a business-friendly climate, and some of the best barbecue in America, it also suffers from some small-town problems.
  While the tech giants loom on Austin's periphery '' most are based outside the city, or even in suburban Round Rock '' they rarely have anything to do with the startups that are typically based in the middle of the city, and they're mostly aging companies laden with legacy baggage of ''old tech.'' In fact, they exist in an almost entirely separate universe.
  Even as Dell, the longtime giant of Austin, faces its post-PC blues and sheds staff, those high-tech workers are more likely to join GM's new technology center than filter into the startup community. And while some ''Dellionaires'' have in the past started investment groups in the state '' Daylight Partners, Eyes of Texas Partners, Sentient Ventures, and Coursa Ventures among them '' the company's overall impact on the startup ecosystem is widely considered as almost negligible.
  A common refrain here is that Dell is more of a supply chain company than a tech company. A former Dell executive who now works in a startup told me that his former colleagues just don't have the mindset for startup life.
  On the flip side of the equation, the startup community is attempting to capitalize on last year's IPO of BazaarVoice, a social commerce company that figures in any local discussion of Austin's ecosystem. BazaarVoice, backed by the one dominant venture firm in town, Austin Ventures, has had some spin-off effect, most prominently with its former CMO going on to head up Mass Relevance, one of the city's hottest startups. Meanwhile, Capital Factory has set up an accelerator in the middle of the city and is behind a SXSW competition to move a startup to Austin, which comes with $100,000 worth of benefits for the winner. The City of Austin, the Austin Chamber of Commerce, and other incubators such as the University of Texas-affiliated Austin Technology Incubator are also well coordinated and eager to support the startup community.
  The city also boasts a handful of other promising startups, including Spredfast, SpareFoot, Bloomfire, Subtle Data, and Jutera Labs, which have all raised more than $1 million. (Disclosure: PandoDaily is working out of Jutera Labs during SXSW, and it is co-hosting a SXSW happy hour with the startup.) Coupons giant WhaleShark, meanwhile, has raised $300 million in venture backing, and is expected to go public in the not-too-distant future.
  Most of those companies have an enterprise bent. That's no coincidence. The seeds of Austin's startup ecosystem were planted in the 1980s, with the advent of MCC, a computing research consortium, and Sematech, a semiconductor consortium. They led to first-generation tech startups Tivoli, Trilogy, Motiv, and Vignette in the 1990s, all of which bore strong enterprise tech chops. Then there was Dell and AMD, which added to the area's enterprise cachet.
  However, Austin '-- like most aspirational tech hubs in America '-- has proven to be difficult territory for consumer-focused companies. Gowalla, a Foursquare competitor, was once its greatest hope, and startup people here still speak fondly of it. But Gowalla ultimately failed, sold to Facebook as part of an acqui-hire, reportedly for less than it even raised in venture capital.
  The city's startup ecosystem faces several other challenges, the most important of which is a lack of options for capital. Austin Ventures is the big dog in town, and for the most part it focuses on growth equity, in many cases favoring a ''roll up'' strategy in which it helps companies grow big by embarking on acquiring sprees. HomeAway, for instance, is a conglomeration of several vacation rental sites, just as WhaleShark is a mish-mash of online discounts operations. Meanwhile, startups that have their pleas for funding turned down by Austin Ventures can find it difficult to raise from elsewhere in the city. One of the first questions from investors for such companies is, ''Why did Austin Ventures say no?''
  Entrepreneurs often claim it can be difficult to get buzz in Austin, too, because it is so far removed from the Silicon Valley echo chamber and doesn't have the prestige of New York City. And finding high-level executives for top roles as the companies scale can also be a tough ask.
  But Austin has a trump card that is likely largely responsible for keeping it on the tech map, even if it finds it difficult to live up to the media hype and the associated buzz from SXSW. And that is that Austin is a great place to live. That not only helps attract talent to the city, but it also makes it hard for them to leave.
  Compared to San Francisco, it's affordable '' rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the middle of the city clocks in at around $1,700 a month, houses a mile from the city center go for as low as $200,000, and a pint of beer at a good bar is infrequently more than $4. It has a big lake running right through the middle of the city, around which a hike-and-bike trail wends its way. The famous Barton Springs swimming spot provides the perfect chill-out zone, and it is close to the enormous Zilker Park, one of many excellent parks in the city. There's the live music of course (Austin bills itself as ''live music capital of the world'') and dozens of festivals running throughout the year (including a hot-sauce festival in the middle of summer; approach with caution). And thanks the University of Texas and the State government, there's plenty of intellectual capital around. So, the population is young, energized, and often out and about.
  That line about Austin being a ''blue-collar tech town,'' then, is no insult. In fact, the guy who came up with that line explained it to me as a point of pride. ''We work for wages, we have great lifestyles,'' Dave Rupert, an Austin-based Web designer and tech-show podcast host, said. ''We just want to work, make cool shit, and then go home to our families, to our lives, to our dogs, to our backyards.'' There are many people in Austin who are interested in ''building the Internet'' who don't care about the fame and glory that comes with being part of a startup scene, Rupert said.
  That attitude represents both boon and bane. It means you are unlikely to find in Austin the world's most ambitious entrepreneurs bent on building the next killer tech company. But you are going to find a city of content people who can see life beyond the Internet's fences.
  Sometimes what's great for building a balanced life can be bad for building the next Facebook.
VIDEO-Bitcoin for libertarians: Roger Ver at NH Liberty Forum 2013 - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:58
NBC Touts 'Controversial Theories' About Pope's Resignation That Claim Scandal 'As Big As Watergate'
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:17
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  On Friday's NBC Today, fill-in co-host Lester Holt hyped unfounded speculation surrounding the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI: "More than a week after his resignation became official, there are still a lot of controversial theories about why Pope Benedict XVI stepped down. NBC's chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel is looking into them at the Vatican."
  Previewing a report for Rock Center, Engel proclaimed: "What we still don't know, not definitively anyway, is why Pope Benedict decided to retire....[Italian journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi] exposed some of the Vatican's most guarded secrets. A scoop seen in Italy as big as Watergate."
  More in the cross-post on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.
Hey Ed Schultz: Your Employer MAKES Those Drones!
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:17
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  [Caller rips Ed Schultz to shreds on drone issue]
  CALLER (07 March 2013): Hey, regarding drones, you suddenly sound like a neo-conservative, so I googled 'unmanned aerial systems,' otherwise known as drones and the words 'General Electric' and I see your parent company is knee-deep in profiteering off drone manufacturing. Also ...
  SCHULTZ: And you think that that, and you think that that drives my opinion?
  CALLER: I don't know, it's just weird ...
  SCHULTZ: Oh give me a break! Terry! (crosstalk) Listen to what the hell you're saying! (argument ensues, each talking over the other). Do you, I am with the president! Exclu, excuse me, I am with the president! I'm with the president on this!
  CALLER: You're an idiot! You're an idiot, war-profiteering, you should be speaking about GE paying some taxes too instead of gutting Social Security or the sequester ...
  SCHULTZ: Wow, psycho talk (crosstalk), psych-, keep going, keep going, this is good. So sick in Los -, Terry, sick in Los Angeles.
  CALLER: Google 'unmanned aerial systems' and GE and you'll see, they are profiteering off drones and now all of a sudden ...
  SCHULTZ: You just found that out?! You just found that out?! (starts imitating Cheney) Terry, it is a fact that you have lost your mind, uh, it is a fact, Terry, that you better watch out, you might be taken out by a drone yourself, Terry, you just never know. (laughs, turning into guffaw). Folks, let me tell you something -- if I get to the boardroom of General Electric, to that pay grade, I'll do something about it, OK? But for her to call in and say that that affects where I stand on issues, that's a stretch. (sarcastically) Hysterical, she's just absolutely hysterical.
NAZIS IN THE FBI; J EDGAR HOOVER; MIND CONTROL
  Link to Article
  Source: aangirfan
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:16
  Recently declassified documents reveal that the FBI protected Nazi war criminals in America.J. Edgar Hoover recruited many hundreds of Nazis.
  The FBI's recruitment of Nazi war criminalsReuters Blogs (blog). By Richard Rashke. Adapted from Useful Enemies: America's Open-Door Policy for Nazi War Criminals, published by Delphinium Books.
  Hoover did not report alleged Nazis to the authorities.
  Among the Nazi collaborators that the FBI used and protected were John Avdzej, Laszlo Agh, and Vladimir Sokolov.
  Nazis at work.
  During the war, Belorussian John Avdzej had been installed as the Nazi's puppet mayor in a town in Belorussia, once part of Poland.
  He executed journalists, professors, priests, and former military officers.
  SS unit executing anti-Nazi partisans in Belarus.The United States was responsible for bringing Avdzej to America.
  Hoover recruited him and protected him.
  Nazis love to murder innocent women and children.
  Laszlo Agh was a Hungarian fascists responsible for the murder of 10,000 to 15,000 Hungarians.
  According to 12 eyewitnesses, Agh had personally tortured, and killed hundreds of Hungarians.
  What the Nazis did to children in Hungary.
  Hoover recruited and protected Agh.
  Reportedly, George Soros collaborated with the Nazis in Hungary.
  Russian Vladimir Sokolov (aka Vladimir Samarin) was another Nazi who worked for the FBI.
  Hoover had many things in common with certain top Nazis, for example: Dr Harold Lief, professor emeritus of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, concluded that Hoover suffered from "a personality disorder, a narcissistic disorder with mixed obsessive features'... paranoid elements, undue suspiciousness and some sadism. "A combination of narcissism and paranoia produces what is known as an authoritarian personality. 4. Possible Jewish ancestry.James DeanAccording to Darwin Porter:Hoover assembled the largest collection of porn in history.
  Hoover's collection included sex films made by Hollywood stars, such as Frank Sinatra, before they were famous.
  Hoover had nude photos of Tony Curtis, teenage Warren Beatty, Burt Lancaster, Elvis Presley, Charlton Heston and James Dean.
  Did Hoover (right) and his partner Tolson (left) have blazing hot sex together?J. Edgar Hoover was the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 1924 until his death in 1972.In Hoover's garden, there were statues of nude males.
  Hoover liked to train certain FBI agents to dress as women.
  Reportedly, FBI agent Bert Horgson spent much of his FBI career wearing dresses and high-heeled shoes, acting as Hoover's "special agent."
  (THE SECRET LIFE OF J. EDGAR HOOVER)
  Reportedly, Hoover gave orders that after Hoover died, Horgson was to be confined to a high-security nursing home as a national security risk.
  In 1993, Anthony Summers, in his book Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover, wrote that Hoover did not pursue the Mafia. According to Summers, this was because the Mafia had blackmail material on Hoover.Summers quotes Susan L. Rosenstiel as saying that, in 1958, she was at a party at the Plaza Hotel where Hoover was dressed as a woman.
  Hoover, calling himself "Mary", was reportedly wearing a dress and high heels.
  Nixon and Cardinal Spellman - both allegedly part of the gay fascist mafia. (BOYS TOWN AND THE POPE). Cardinal Spellman reportedly shared boys with J Edgar Hoover.According to Rosentiel:Hoover "was wearing a fluffy black dress, very fluffy, with flounces and lace stockings and high heels, and a black curly wig. He had makeup on and false eyelashes."
  Rosentiel said she saw Hoover, boss of the FBI, go into a bedroom and take off his skirt.
  There, "young blond boys" worked on him in bed.
  We should perhaps remember that it is the FBI that has been entrusted with investigating such matters as the Kennedy assassination and the Lockerbie bombing.
  A year later Rosenstiel was at a party at the same hotel.
  This time Hoover wore a red dress and a black feather boa.
  Hoover got a boy to read to him from a Bible while another boy "played" with him.
  Hoover then grabbed the Bible, tossed it to the ground, and told the first boy to join in.
  Reportedly, Hoover had a bungalow at Texas oilman Cliff Murchison's Del Charro Hotel in La Jolla.
  Summers quotes Charles Krebs as saying: "On three occasions that I knew about, maybe four, boys were driven down to La Jolla at Hoover's request."
  Reportedly, on one occasion, Hoover and "the boys, the fifteen-year-old and another youngster", went in two cars to a tryst by a reservoir in the San Diego hills.
  Summers verified the existence of the restaurant and the reservoir.
  The following is an extract from :''SOMEWHERE OVER THE RAINBOW''- mindcontrolblackassassins.com/
  "The Nazi Lebensborn and the Ahnenerbe (Occult Bureau) were some of the most secret, terrifying and diabolical programs ever developed by a State...
  "The Nazi Reich ... was a State whose national policy was based on global racial mass murder. "It was a nation committed to the secret art, science and technology of mass population control for a Master-Slave New World Order (NWO)...
  "Lebensborn (Spring of Life) was set up by Himler...
  "Thousands of children were 'drafted' into Lebensborn. "They were kidnapped and sent to secret remote hospitals, academies, and children's concentration camps for mind control programming and reprogramming.[1]..."Himmler ordered that all Polish children be examined racially.
  "Those under the age of six years who proved racially valuable were to be brought to Lebensborn homes for further evaluation and the process of Eindeutschung (brainwashing)... "Many children were rounded up at orphanages, at school, or at playgrounds; others were kidnapped off the street or even out of their mothers.''[2]"In 1946, it was estimated, it is only an estimate, that more than 250,000 children were kidnapped for Lebensborn and sent by force to Germany for programming.[3]...
  "Dr. Mengele had been one of Lebensborn's most important and secretive technicians... "Dr. Mengele used his human guinea pig victims which numbered into the hundreds of thousands to primarily provide scientific improvement to pre-existing methods of Illuminati trauma based mind control programming of children."Dr. Mengele's advanced mind control and reprogramming programs, methodologies and techniques were secretly instituted in Lebensborn facilities.[6]"Lebensborn and the Ahnenerbe (Occult Bureau) didn't disappear with the Fall of Nazi Germany....
  "One of the 'hidden hands' and 'research beneficiaries' behind the veil of Dr. Mengele on the other side of the globe was the Rockefeller Foundation.[7]"Today, children found and designated 'Valuable to the State' are tested, evaluated then kidnapped.
  "They go through an advanced process of Eindeutschung (trauma based mind control-multiple personality programming) developed and perfected primarily by Hauptsfuhrer (Captain) SS Josef Mengele.
  "John David 'Johnny' Gosch (born November 12, 1969) was a 12-year-old paperboy in West Des Moines, Iowa, when he disappeared on September 5, 1982, presumably kidnapped.[8]"
Bonesman Kerry Hits Snags in Effort to Boost Support for Syria's Death Squad Rebels
  Link to Article
  Source: TARPLEY.net
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:16
  Archives
  Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.PressTVMarch 8, 2013
  Publications
  Select a book to review and purchase on Amazon.com Most are also available at:
PBS's Judy Woodruff Helps Pelosi Blame Republicans for Sequester
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:16
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
Readout of the President's Meeting on Commonsense Immigration Reform
  Link to Article
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:15
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  March 08, 2013
  This morning, the President, joined by members of his senior staff, met with leaders from the faith community to discuss the need to fix the broken immigration system so that everyone plays by the same rules. The President thanked the leaders for their support and reiterated his strong commitment to working with Congress in a bipartisan manner so that they can swiftly pass and send a commonsense immigration reform bill to his desk. The leaders expressed their concerns over the impact the broken immigration system is having on families throughout their congregations. The President and the leaders discussed the pillars the President has put forward for reform, including that any bill must include a pathway to earned citizenship, as well as measures to crack down on employers who game the system and exploit both American and immigrant workers, continuing to strengthen our border security, and strengthening the legal immigration system for families, employers, and workers. The President noted that there is good progress being made by a bipartisan group in the Senate, but urged the leaders to continue to make this important issue a priority. The President and the leaders agreed that the diversity of faith communities represented around the table was indicative of the growing consensus across America in support of fixing the broken immigration system. The leaders thanked the President for his leadership, offered a prayer, and agreed to continue working together to move the immigration debate forward in Congress.
  Participants in the meeting included:
  Leith Anderson, National Association of EvangelicalsStephan Bauman, President and CEO, World ReliefBishop Minerva Carca±o, United Methodist ChurchRev. Luis Cort(C)s, President, EsperanzaBarrett Duke, Southern Baptist ConventionBishop Orlando Findlayter, Senior Pastor, New Hope Christian FellowshipArchbishop Jos(C) Horacio Gomez, Archdiocese of Los AngelesMark Hetfield, President and CEO, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society Rev. Kathryn Lohre, National Council of ChurchesImam Mohamed Magid, President, Islamic Society of North AmericaRev. Samuel Rodriguez, President, National Hispanic Christian Leadership ConferenceRev. Gabriel Salguero, President, National Latino Evangelical CoalitionDieter Uchtdorf, Second Counselor, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day SaintsJim Wallis, President and CEO, Sojourners
Fact Sheet: Implementation of Export Control Reform
  Link to Article
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:14
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  March 08, 2013
  Today, the Administration announced two key steps to further the goals of President Obama's Export Control Reform Initiative, which is a common sense approach to overhauling the nation's export control system. President Obama signed an Executive Order today to update delegated presidential authorities over the administration of certain export and import controls under the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, and yesterday the Administration notified Congress of the first in a series of changes to the U.S. Munitions List.
  Executive Order
  Executive Order 11958 delegated authority to control exports of defense articles and services to the Secretary of State and delegated the comparable authority to control imports to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Department of State controls the export of defense articles and services on its U.S. Munitions List (USML); the Department of Justice controls their import pursuant to the U.S. Munitions Import List (USMIL) administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The USMIL was previously a subset of State's USML. The most recent comprehensive delegation of these authorities was in Executive Order 11958 of January 18, 1977. The President's new Executive Order updates delegated authorities consistent with the upcoming changes to our export control lists. It supersedes and replaces Executive Order 11958 and amends Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, that pertains to the Department of Commerce-administered controls. The new Executive Order makes the following changes:
  Consolidation of All Brokering Responsibilities with the Department of State: The Arms Export Control Act requires the registration and licensing of brokering activities for defense articles and services for both exports and imports. A broker is a person who acts as an agent for others in negotiating or arranging contracts, purchases, sales or transfers of defense articles or services. The Executive Order consolidates and delegates to the Secretary of State all statutory responsibility for maintaining registration and licensing requirements for brokering of defense articles and services on either the State or ATF lists which both control defense articles and services under the Arms Export Control Act. This one-stop approach provides better clarity for the defense trade community and makes it easier for industry to comply and for the U.S. Government to enforce.
  Elimination of Possible ''Double Licensing'' Requirements: Today the Department of State licenses entire systems, including any accompanying spare parts, accessories, and attachments, yet many of these items will be moved to the Commerce list which may mean that an exporter would need two licenses instead of one. The President's delegation, via an amendment to Executive Order 13222, will allow the Department of State to authorize those accompanying items that may have moved to the Commerce list and prevent any potential double-licensing requirement. This ensures that the prioritization of our controls, in which we facilitate secure trade with Allies and partners, does not add new red tape. Items licensed or otherwise approved by the Secretary of State under this delegation remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, including for enforcement purposes.
  Congressional Notification Process: The President has directed that the Department of Commerce establish procedures for notifying Congress of approved export licenses for a certain subset of items that are moved or that may move from the State list to the Commerce list. A key feature of the President's reform initiative is to enhance transparency with Congress and the public in the administration of our export control system. This Executive Order ensures that, going forward, the Executive Branch will continue this transparency and notify Congress about export licenses for those certain items that, while no longer subject to the statutory notification requirements of the Arms Export Control Act, warrant continued transparency and notification to Congress.
  Other Administrative Updates: The Executive Order delegates to the Attorney General the functions previously assigned by Executive Order 11958 to the Secretary of the Treasury, reflecting the 2003 move of ATF to the Department of Justice from the Treasury (accommodated by Executive Order 13284). It also makes a number of other necessary updates to ensure that the authorities to administer our export control system are current.
  Changes to the U.S. Munitions List
  The cornerstone of the President's Export Control Reform Initiative is the rebuilding of the two primary export controls lists, State's USML and the Department of Commerce's Commerce Control List (CCL) which primarily controls dual-use items, i.e., commercial items with possible military applications, and some military items of lesser sensitivity. By law, everything on the USML is controlled equally, whether an F-18 fighter or a bolt that has been modified for use on that F-18, and each of these items requires an individual license. This system has created significant obstacles and delays in providing equipment to Allies and partners for interoperability with U.S. forces in places like Afghanistan, and harms the health and competitiveness of the U.S. industrial base. Rebuilding our export control lists and moving less sensitive items from the State to the Commerce list will provide us the flexibility to more efficiently equip and maintain our partner's capabilities while allowing us to focus on preventing potential adversaries from acquiring military items that they could use against us.
  The Administration notified Congress yesterday of the first in a series of changes to the USML, as required by Section 38(f) of the Arms Export Control Act. Once the Congressional notification period concludes, these changes -- to current Department of State- administered controls on Aircraft and Gas Turbine Engines -- will be published, with an effective date of 180 days after publication. The revised USML will enable the United States to better focus its resources on items that deserve the highest levels of export protection and on destinations of concern, while providing American companies with a streamlined export authorization process for thousands of parts and components. The remaining USML changes will be published on a rolling basis throughout 2013, and ultimately will update every category of defense articles to better meet current national security and economic challenges. These actions will improve our national security by better utilizing our export licensing and enforcement resources to focus on those items, destinations, and end-uses of greatest concern, improve interoperability with Allies and partners, and bolster the U.S. defense industrial base. To follow developments in the President's Export Control Reform Initiative, visit www.export.gov/ecr/.
Guess the rules!
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:13
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
Bill Clinton Says Defense Of Marriage Act Which He Signed Into Law Should Be Overturned
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:07
NATIONWIDE CANNED TUNA RECALL
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:07
"After WE Killed al-Awlaki A Drone Killed His Son We're Now Told That Was An Accident"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:07
McCain Justifies Killing Totally Innocent Americans On US Soil
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:05
FOX News Pimp James O'Keefe Pays Out $100000 Dollar Settlement To ACORN Employee He Secretly Taped
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:05
"I'll Keep Fighting To Solve The Real Challenges Facing Middle-Class Families" Pres Obama Weekly
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:04
Osama Bin Laden's Son-In-Law Pleads NOT Guilty To Terrorism Charges In New York Court
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:04
Executive Order -- Export Control Reform
  Link to Article
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:10
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  March 08, 2013
  EXECUTIVE ORDER
  - - - - - - -
  ADMINISTRATION OF REFORMED EXPORT CONTROLS
  By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Arms Export Control Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.) (the "Act"), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:
  Section1. Delegation of Functions. The following functions conferred upon the President by the Act, and related laws, are delegated as follows:
  (a) Those under section 3 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753), with the exception of subsections (a)(1), (b), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (f) (22 U.S.C. 2753(a)(1), (b), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (f)), to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, in the implementation of the delegated functions under sections 3(a) and (d) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753(a) and (d)), is authorized to find, in the case of a proposed transfer of a defense article or related training or other defense service by a foreign country or international organization not otherwise eligible under section 3(a)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753(a)(1)), whether the proposed transfer will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace.
  (b) Those under section 5 (22 U.S.C. 2755) to the Secretary of State.
  (c) Those under section 21 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2761), with the exception of the last sentence of subsection (d) and all of subsection (i) (22 U.S.C. 2761(d) and (i)), to the Secretary of Defense.
  (d) Those under sections 22(a), 29, 30, and 30A of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2762(a), 2769, 2770, and 2770a) to the Secretary of Defense.
  (e) Those under section 23 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2763), and under section 7069 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74, Division I) and any subsequently enacted provision of law that is the same or substantially the same, to the Secretary of Defense to be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of State and, other than the last sentence of section 23(a) (22 U.S.C. 2763(a)), in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, except that the President shall determine any rate of interest to be charged that is less than the market rate of interest.
  (f) Those under sections 24 and 27 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2764 and 2767) to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury in implementing the delegated functions under section 24 (22 U.S.C. 2764) and with the Secretary of State in implementing the delegated functions under section 27 (22 U.S.C. 2767).
  (g) Those under section 25 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2765) to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of Defense shall assist the Secretary of State in the preparation of materials for presentation to the Congress under that section.(h) Those under section 34 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2774) to the Secretary of State. To the extent the standards and criteria for credit and guaranty transactions are based upon national security or financial policies, the Secretary of State shall obtain the prior concurrence of the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury, respectively.
  (i) Those under section 35(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2775(a)) to the Secretary of State.
  (j) Those under sections 36(a) and 36(b)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(a) and (b)(1)), except with respect to the certification of an emergency as provided by subsection (b)(1) (22 U.S.C. 2776(b)(1)), to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense, in the implementation of the delegated functions under sections 36(a) and (b)(1) (22 U.S.C. 2776(a) and (b)(1)), shall consult with the Secretary of State. With respect to those functions under sections 36(a)(5) and (6) (22 U.S.C. 2776(a)(5) and (6)), the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
  (k) Those under section 36(b)(1) with respect to the certification of an emergency as provided by subsection (b)(1) and under sections 36(c) and (d) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(b)(1), (c), and (d)) to the Secretary of State.
  (l) Those under section 36(f)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(f)(1)) to the Secretary of Defense.
  (m) Those under sections 36(f)(2) and (f)(3) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(f)(2) and (f)(3)) to the Secretary of State.
  (n) Those under section 38 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) to:
  (i) the Secretary of State, except as otherwise provided in this subsection. Designations, including changes in designations, by the Secretary of State of items or categories of items that shall be considered as defense articles and defense services subject to export control under section 38 (22 U.S.C. 2778) shall have the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense. The authority to undertake activities to ensure compliance with established export conditions may be redelegated to the Secretary of Defense, or to the head of another executive department or agency as appropriate, who shall exercise such functions in consultation with the Secretary of State;
  (ii) the Attorney General, to the extent they relate to the control of the permanent import of defense articles and defense services. In carrying out such functions, the Attorney General shall be guided by the views of the Secretary of State on matters affecting world peace, and the external security and foreign policy of the United States. Designations, including changes in designations, by the Attorney General of items or categories of items that shall be considered as defense articles and defense services subject to permanent import control under section 38 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) shall be made with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense and with notice to the Secretary of Commerce; and
  (iii) the Department of State for the registration and licensing of those persons who engage in the business of brokering activities with respect to defense articles or defense services controlled either for purposes of export by the Department of State or for purposes of permanent import by the Department of Justice.
  (o) Those under section 39(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2779(b)) to the Secretary of State. In carrying out such functions, the Secretary of State shall consult with the Secretary of Defense as may be necessary to avoid interference in the application of Department of Defense regulations to sales made under section 22 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2762).
  (p) Those under the portion of section 40A of the Act added by Public Law 104-164 (22 U.S.C. 2785), to the Secretary of State insofar as they relate to commercial exports licensed under the Act, and to the Secretary of Defense insofar as they relate to defense articles and defense services sold, leased, or transferred under the Foreign Military Sales Program.
  (q) Those under the portion of section 40A of the Act added by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-132) (22 U.S.C. 2781), to the Secretary of State.
  (r) Those under sections 42(c) and (f) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2791(c) and (f)) to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall obtain the concurrence of the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce on any determination considered under the authority of section 42(c) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2791(c)).
  (s) Those under section 52(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2795a(b)) to the Secretary of Defense.
  (t) Those under sections 61 and 62(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2796 and 2796a(a)) to the Secretary of Defense.
  (u) Those under section 2(b)(6) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended (12 U.S.C. 635(b)(6)) to the Secretary of State.
  Sec. 2. Coordination. (a) In addition to the specific provisions of section 1 of this order, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, in carrying out the functions delegated to them under this order, shall consult with each other and with the heads of other executive departments and agencies on matters pertaining to their responsibilities.
  (b) Under the direction of the President and in accordance with section 2(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2752(b)), the Secretary of State, taking into account other United States activities abroad, shall be responsible for the continuous supervision and general direction of sales and exports under the Act, including the negotiation, conclusion, and termination of international agreements, and determining whether there shall be a sale to a country and the amount thereof, and whether there shall be delivery or other performance under such sale or export, to the end that sales and exports are integrated with other United States activities and the foreign policy of the United States is best served thereby.
  Sec. 3. Allocation of Funds. Funds appropriated to the President for carrying out the Act shall be deemed to be allocated to the Secretary of Defense without any further action of the President.
  Sec. 4. Revocation. Executive Order 11958 of January 18, 1977, as amended, is revoked; except that, to the extent consistent with this order, all determinations, authorizations, regulations, rulings, certificates, orders, directives, contracts, agreements, and other actions made, issued, taken, or entered into under the provisions of Executive Order 11958, as amended, and not revoked, superseded, or otherwise made inapplicable, shall continue in full force and effect until amended, modified, or terminated by appropriate authority.
  Sec. 5. Delegation of Functions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, is amended as follows:
  (a) Redesignate section 4 as section 6.
  (b) Insert the following new sections 4 and 5 after section 3:
  "Sec. 4. The Secretary of Commerce shall, to the extent required as a matter of statute or regulation, establish appropriate procedures for when Congress is to be notified of the export of firearms that are subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce under the Export Administration Regulations and that are controlled for purposes of permanent import by the Attorney General under section 38(a) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778(a)) and appropriate procedures for when Congress is to be notified of the export of Major Defense Equipment controlled for purposes of permanent export under the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce.
  Sec. 5. (a) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to take such actions and to employ those powers granted to the President by the Act as may be necessary to license or otherwise approve the export, reexport, or transfer of items subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce as agreed to by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce.
  (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, items licensed or otherwise approved by the Secretary of State pursuant to this section remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce."
  Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
  (i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof; or
  (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
  (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
  (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
  BARACK OBAMA
Authentication System from Microchip Technology Would Use the Body to Secure Guns and Gadgets
  Link to Article
  Source: BadChad's ThoughtPile
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:09
  With Microchip's BodyCom technology, the human body is the medium for short-range authentication.
  Leave a gun lying around, and anyone who picks it up could fire it. That could change, though, with newly announced technology from Microchip Technology, which uses the body as part of a secure authentication process.
  BodyCom, which the company announced last week, is a short-range communication system that uses the body as a wire between two points. In the example above, those points would be a little fob in your pocket and a touch pad on the firearm.
  The chip maker, which is based in Chandler, Arizona, believes its authentication method is cheaper, simpler, and usually less power-hungry than others'--all factors it's hoping will encourage device makers to add it to products.
  Edward Dias, Microchip's security business development manager, says the company envisions a slew of potential security applications for BodyCom. With the technology in place, you could unlock your front door just by touching the doorknob; power tools and guns could be secured so that only a user with the right fob could get them to work. (The idea is similar to the RFID- or biometric-equipped ''smart gun'' that some lawmakers are mulling.) BodyCom could be used for pets, too: a collar-mounted fob could let a pet open the doggy door with its nose or paw, but unwanted animals wouldn't be able to get in.
  Already, Dias says, a company in Italy is using BodyCom to ensure that motorcyclists cannot zoom off bare-headed. The key fobs are incorporated into helmets, while the handlebars of the motorcycle act as the base station.
  As Dias acknowledges, the idea isn't entirely new'-- ''personal area networks'' that use the body to enable the exchange of data between electronics were described by Thomas Zimmerman in his 1980 thesis at MIT, for example. But it hasn't yet been popularized.
  BodyCom uses capacitive coupling to transmit a signal between a pocket-sized fob and a base station, with your body in the middle. If you're wearing or carrying the fob and you touch a base station embedded in, say, a doorknob, the base sends a 125-kilohertz signal via your body to the fob to wake it up. The fob then sends an eight-megahertz authentication signal back to the base to approve your access.
  Dias says those two frequencies are used because they couple well with the human body. While the current BodyCom setup requires a user to touch the panel, it is possible to set it up so the user can be authenticated from a few inches away, he says.
  The technology, which would cost $3 to $4 to add to a device, can't currently determine whether the person with the key fob is the person who should be granted authorization. But Dias says Microchip could add that capability in the future.
  Beyond home door locks, power tools, and firearms, BodyCom could show up in passive keyless entry systems like the ones on some cars, Dias hopes. He also envisions a body-area network in which a medical patient covered in various sensors could wirelessly communicate data back to a main unit.
  Chris Harrison, a PhD candidate at Carnegie Mellon University's Human-Computer Interaction Institute and cofoundere of a startup whose touch-screen technology can distinguish knuckle from fingertip taps, is thinking in the same vein. As we wear more and more electronic devices'--like a smart watch or Google Glass'--he can imagine BodyCom allowing these gadgets to communicate with each other using the body as a medium.
  This could be more intelligent and more energy efficient than Bluetooth, he says, since taking the fob out of your pocket effectively disconnects you from the network.
Texans fight to protect the privacy of cell phone users '-- RT USA
  Link to Article
  Source: BadChad's ThoughtPile
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:08
  Published time: March 08, 2013 19:09
  Lawmakers in the state of Texas are trying to pass legislation that would limit the federal government's ability to spy on American's cell phone data without a warrant.
  Currently law enforcement officers across the United States don't need a warrant to obtain sensitive information sent over cellular networks, and a recent analysis concluded that service providers receive over one million requests annually for this kind of information. Wiretapping text messages and phone calls are another story, but under current law it's all too easy for police agencies to request and obtain certain cell information, including real time location data that can let officers nearly pin-point the exact spot a person is located.
  ''Cell phones communicate location information constantly,'' says Greg Foster of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Austin, Texas office. ''Now the details of your life '' your employer, your hobbies, your relationships, your religion, political meetings you attend '' can all be gleaned from customer data held by your phone company. And police don't need a warrant to get it.''
  Lawmakers in Texas don't like that notion, and are asking officials in both the state House and Senate to approve separate bills that will bar law enforcement from obtaining cell tower location data without good reason.
  If passed, the law enforcement will only be able to obtain information ''if there is probable cause to believe the records disclosing location information will provide evidence in a criminal investigation."
  ''When the Bill of Rights was written, the framers kept all their personal information in their homes, and no one had invented location tracking. This bill will apply our constitutional rights to the new ways we collect and store personal information,'' explains Heather Fazio of Texans for Accountable Government.
  Scott Henson, the writer of the criminal justice blog Grits for Breakfast, adds, ''This bill ensures that government can't track your daily movements without a good reason.'' The EFF's Foster says it ''creates reasonable privacy protections for all Texans.''
  One of the acts, House Bill 1608, was filed last month by State Rep. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola). State Senator Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa (D-McAllen) has introduced a companion bill in the other chamber that has since attracted support from both sides of the aisle. The Texas Electronic Privacy Coalition and the state's American Civil Liberties Union branch both endorse the legislation as well, although it will need approval in both the House and Senate before it can land on the desk of Governor Rick Perry, who unsuccessfully sought the Republican Party's nomination for president during last year's election.
  Should Gov. Perry sign-on, Gregory Nojeim of the Center for Democracy and Technology says it could set the stage for federal lawmakers to follow suite.
  ''What the states do on this issue will certainly influence what Congress does,'' Nojeim, a senior counsel at the CDT, tells Ars Technica. ''It's clear to me that because the location of a cell phone is mobile and because phones cross state lines routinely it's probably that if the states start acting then Congress would need to enact a uniform rule.''
  A Supreme Court decision last year in the case of United States v. Jones ruled that law enforcement cannot track a suspect using a GPS signal without a warrant. Police agencies can still easily access other location data sent from cell towers, however, which gives near-perfect estimations of where a person is located at a specific time.
  Should the Texas bills be approved, cell service providers will also need to provide to the public and government an annual transparency report on how law enforcement applies for sensitive information.
Another Large Asteroid Passing Earth Tomorrow "There's A Move A Foot For Some Asteroid Detection"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:07
CBS Fawns Over Caroline Kennedy; Rose Wonders If She Will Run For President
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:07
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  Charlie Rose, Norah O'Donnell, and Gayle King gushed over Caroline Kennedy on the 8 March 2013 edition of CBS This Morning. O'Donnell asked Kennedy is she supported a potential Hillary Clinton presidential run in 2016, which prompted Rose to wonder if the daughter of JFK might run herself for the highest elected office in the U.S.
  King hyped the potential nomination of Kennedy to be an ambassador to Japan: "Madame Ambassador '' does that have a ring to it for you?" O'Donnell tossed the softest of softballs as a follow-up: "Do you like Japan or Canada better?"
'Clinton News Network': CNN Promotes Clinton's 'Surprising' Pro-Gay Marriage Op-Ed
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:06
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  CNN couldn't stop talking about former President Clinton's pro-gay marriage op-ed on Friday, reporting it every hour between 5 a.m. and 3 p.m. ET and giving it over a half hour of coverage.
  Clinton had asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act that he signed as president.
Dianne Feinstein: "It's legal to hunt humans" with high capacity magazines
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:06
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
North Korean Atomic Bomb Subs Cause Global Panic
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:33
  World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
  "The News You Need Today'...For The World You'll Live In Tomorrow."
  What You Aren't Being Told About The World You Live In
  IronMountainApocalypse: The True Story Of 2013
  A ''must have'' book for those seeking to understand the true events surrounding the most troubled years of our modern times. (Continued)
  Picking up the Pieces: Practical Guide for Surviving Economic Crashes, Internal Unrest and Military SuppressionBy: Sorcha Faal ''In the span of less than 3 months gasoline prices will rise 500%. The prices of both food and shelter rise over 300%. (Continued)
  Partisans Handbook:By: Sorcha Faal ''Essential Survival Guide For Resisting Foreign Military Occupation, Escape And Evasion Techniques, Surviving Interrogation, Facing Execution, Wilderness Survival (Continued)
  March 8, 2013
  North Korean Atomic Bomb Subs Cause Global Panic
  By:Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
  A grim Ministry of Defense (MOD) ''URGENT ACTION'' bulletin to all Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) is warning these nuclear units to prepare for ''Dead Hand'' operations over growing fears that at least 5 atomic-bomb equipped North Korean submarines have ''successfully evaded'' US Naval Forces and are preparing to strike targets in South Korea, Japan and North America.
  According to this MOD bulletin, North Korea conducted its third underground nuclear test in seven years on 12 February after which Russian defense analysts noted a series of ''highly suspicious'' transfers of ''unknown materials'' from the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Facility to the Mayang Do Naval Base where shortly thereafter at least 10 Yono-class miniature submarines[photo 2nd left] departed and are feared to have aboard them atomic bombs.
  A Yono-class submarine is thought to have fired the torpedo attack which sank a South Korean Pohang-class corvette, the ROKS Cheonan on 26 March 2010 in South Korean waters that killed 46 and injured 56.
  According to some investigators, the weapon used in the attack was a North Korean-manufactured CHT-02D torpedo, from which substantial parts were recovered. The device allegedly exploded not by contact, but by proximity, creating a powerful pillar of water, called the bubble jet effect.
  Critical to note about North Korea's CHT-02D torpedo, this MOD bulletin warns, is that it is capable of being armed with a small nuclear device similar to that of the United States M-28 or M-29 Davy Crockett Weapon System developed in the 1950's and having a yield equivalent to somewhere between 10 or 20 tons of TNT.
  So concerned were Russian military leaders about the potential danger these atomic bomb equipped North Korean submarines could pose to world peace, this MOD bulletin says, UN envoy Vitaly Churkin, on 5 March, called for an extraordinary meeting of the UN Security Council, and which yesterday punished the Hermit Kingdomwith tough, new sanctions targeting its economy and leadership.
  Within hours of these new UN sanctions being announced, this bulletin continues, the state-run Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea announced that ''[North Korea] abrogates all agreements on non-aggression reached between the North and the South,''severed its hotline with South Korea, and its leader, Kim Jong-Un, called for ''all-out war'' as he visited a frontline military unit involved in the shelling of a South Korean island in 2010.
  South Korean President Park Geun-hye, who had previously ordered her nations military forces to their highest alert status, called the current security situation ''very grave,'' and warned that North Korean forces were preparing for a ''massive military exercise.''
  Most worrisome however, this MOD bulletin says, was North Korea's state news agency warning yesterday: ''Now that the US is set to light a fuse for a nuclear war, (our) revolutionary armed forces... will exercise the right to a preemptive nuclear attack to destroy the strongholds of the aggressors.'' The North Korean official reading this ominous statement further stated that a second Korean war is ''unavoidable.''
  To North Korea's war strategy in employing these atomic bomb equipped submarines, this MOD bulletin warns, is to attack their enemies vital shipping ports which, if successful, could destroy the entire global economy.
  Russian military analysts contributing to this MOD bulletin note that the most likely targets for these atomic bomb equipped North Korean submarines include South Korea's Port of Busan, Japan's Port of Yokohama, and the United States ports of Seattle (Washington) and Oakland (California).
  Unbeknownst to the American, South Korean and Japanese peoples about these North Korean mini submarines, and perhaps best stated by the US National Defense magazine, is that the US Navy has already admitted that it has ''no silver bullets'' able to defeat them.
  To how vulnerable the Western coastal areas of the United States currently are was noted by Russian military intelligence experts on 8 November 2010 after a Chinese submarine successfully penetrated American waters and launched a missile in full view of Los Angeles, and as we can read, in part, as reported by the Infowar News Service:
  ''China flexed its military muscle Monday evening in the skies west of Los Angeles when a Chinese Navy Jin class ballistic missile nuclear submarine, deployed secretly from its underground home base on the south coast of Hainan island, launched an intercontinental ballistic missile from international waters off the southern California coast.
  WMR's intelligence sources in Asia, including Japan, say the belief by the military commands in Asia and the intelligence services is that the Chinese decided to demonstrate to the United States its capabilities on the eve of the G-20 Summit in Seoul and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Tokyo, where President Obama is scheduled to attend during his ten-day trip to Asia.''
  This MOD bulletin further notes that China's 2010 submarine incursion into US waters utilized the ''concealment and camouflage'' of large container ships entering the Port of Los Angeles, and which these ''missing'' North Korean mini subs are ''without doubt'' planning to do too as they approach their strike targets.
  As White House spokesman Jay Carney told the American people today, ''I can tell you that the United States is fully capable of defending against any North Korean ballistic missile attack,'' this MOD bulletin notes that the Obama regime is failing to tell their citizens the true state of this war and the danger it poses to the whole world.
  The same cannot be said of Russia, as within 5 days of the 12 February North Korean nuclear test, and their subsequent moving of atomic materials to their submarine base, President Putin ordered the largest nuclear army drill in two decades in preparation for what in all terms can only be called World War III.
  To if North Korea will be successful in carrying out its nuclear strikes it remains unknown, as does also the intentions of the United States should they begin to bargain with the Hermit Kingdom.
  March 8, 2012 (C) EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.
  [Ed. Note: Western governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagrees with in believing that it is every human beings right to know the truth. Due to our missions conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their 'agents' against us has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit and which is addressed in the report ''Who Is Sorcha Faal?''.]
  You May Already Be To Late'...But It Has Begun!
  They Are Going To Come For You'...Why Are You Helping Them?
  Return To Main Page
How do you convert 12V to 5V?
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 16:40
  I need to power a Bluetooth wireless music receiver that is to be attached to a 12V car stereo on my boat. The purpose is to wireless stream audio from my iPad 2 to the boat stereo hardwired speakers.The Bluetooth receiver comes equipped with an AC charger. The charger specs areInput: 100 - 240V ~ 50 - 60Hz 65mA 6.5VAOutput: 5V = 350mA
  As I don't have a handy AC power source, I'm obliged to use the boat's 12V power. I require a converter to go from 12V input to 5V output to power the Bluetooth receiver.
  I'm a dummy with electricity so all help/advice is greatly appreciated.
  Any ideas where I can buy one?
DICK CHENEY!!! Libs Shift Drone Blame Away From Obama
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:08
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  BILL PRESS (07 March 2013): I hate to pop your bubble, but here's something we have to remember, President Obama is not going to be in the White House forever, okay there's going to be someone else sitting there, and some day it's going to be a Republican and would you really trust a George Bush or a Dick Cheney or a Newt Gingrich or a Herman Cain or a Michelle Bachmann or you name it, or a Rand Paul to use this kind of authority and to have that kind of authority that killing authority here in the United States? No freaking way!
  --- MIKE IN CHICAGO (STEPHANIE MILLER SHOW - 07 MARCH 2013) (30:47): Imagine another Dick Cheney in office
  STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah.
  MIKE IN CHICAGO: and this becomes law.
  STEPHANIE MILLER: Did you ah read the Maureen Dowd piece about Dick Cheney.
  MIKE IN CHICAGO: No.
  STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah yeah it really is terrifying. There's a new documentary The World According to Dick Cheney. Have you heard about it?
  MIKE IN CHICAGO: Yeah I saw the preview of it yesterday. STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah but now that's
  MIKE IN CHICAGO: It's really scary he has no remorse either. That's the most unbelievable part.
  STEPHANIE MILLER: That's what I mean.
  JIM WARD: He's a sociopath, incapable of remorse.
  STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 3/7/2013
  Link to Article
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:06
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  March 07, 2013
  James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
  1:00 P.M. EST
  MR. CARNEY: Hello, everyone. Sorry that I'm running a little late here. A lot of activity in the White House today. Before I take your questions, I just wanted to note that in an important bipartisan step towards implementing the President's plan to reduce gun violence in this country, the Senate Judiciary Committee just voted to send to the full Senate legislation to address the very serious problem of gun trafficking.
  The administration and the law enforcement community have long identified the need for legislation imposing tough penalties on gun traffickers and straw purchasers who funnel guns to dangerous criminals. And the President is pleased that Congress is taking steps to act. We look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this and on the other important pieces of legislation that are part of the President's comprehensive plan.
  With that, I will take your questions.
  Q Thanks, Jay. Can you respond to North Korea's threat of a nuclear strike on the United States?
  MR. CARNEY: First of all, I think it's important to note, as you probably saw at the United Nations earlier today, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2094 condemning North Korea's highly provocative February 12 nuclear test, and imposing strong sanctions under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter.
  The strength, breadth, and severity of these sanctions show that the P5 and the rest of the Security Council take seriously the North Korean threat. North Korea will follow -- will now face, rather, new barriers to developing its ban to nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Resolution 2094 increases North Korea's isolation and demonstrates to North Korea's leaders the increasing costs they pay for defying the international community. The international community stands united in its commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and in its demand that North Korea comply with its international obligations. The Security Council also committed to take additional measures in the event of another nuclear test or launch.
  Now, as I stated earlier this week, DPRK will achieve nothing by threats or provocations, which will only further isolate North Korea and undermine international efforts to ensure peace and stability in Southeast Asia.
  Q Does the United States believe that North Korea is capable of carrying out this threat? Officials there are claiming that they now have the missiles on standby that can ''leave Washington engulfed in a sea of fire.'' What can you tell Americans who might be concerned when they see that about whether they have the capability to carry that out?
  MR. CARNEY: I can tell you that the United States is fully capable of defending against any North Korean ballistic missile attack. And our recent success in returning to testing of the upgraded version of the so-called GBI, or the CE2 missile, will keep us on a good trajectory to improve our defense capability against limited ballistic missile threats such as those from North Korea. But let's be clear, we are fully capable of dealing with that threat.
  Q On the dinner last night, it's getting some positive reviews from the Republicans that were there. But Senator Corker talked about how there was a discussion of whether they could have these frank discussions over dinner and then turn around and have the President attacking them in a partisan manner. And I wonder if the President plans to change his tone at all in his public comments now that he's initiated this outreach.
  MR. CARNEY: Well, let me say a couple of things. First, I spoke with the President about this a little while ago, and he said that he found the dinner very constructive and very pleasant. He said that there seemed to be sincere interest in avoiding constant crisis, sincere interest expressed by the participants in the dinner.
  Beyond that, we're not going to get into details about these conversations, in part because we're trying to help foster an environment where these conversations are productive, and they help the cause of finding common ground for bipartisan solutions to the challenges we face -- whether they're the challenge of reducing our deficit in a way that allows our economy to grow from the middle out, for the middle class to expand and become more secure, or whether it's bipartisan efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, or to pass measures like the one that passed out of committee today dealing with the problem of gun violence in America.
  So the President, again, was very pleased with the dinner. He thought that it was constructive and pleasant, as I said. As you know, he's having lunch today with Chairman Paul Ryan and ranking member Chris Van Hollen. They're having lunch as we speak. And he's going to continue to speak to lawmakers of both parties about what he said in the inaugural address, which is we don't have to agree on everything, we don't have to resolve all of our differences in order to move forward on finding solutions to the challenges that we face, and recognizing that there is a bipartisan consensus in the country on so many of these issues. And there is, in fact, a bipartisan consensus, at least of opinion, even in Washington about how to move forward on many of these issues. And he's encouraged by some of the progress that we've seen -- on gun violence, on immigration reform -- on Capitol Hill, and he hopes to build on that moving forward.
  Q But will we see a change in his tone publicly?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that the President has made clear since the election, since the inaugural, that he's interested in working cooperatively and together with members of both parties to achieve these goals. I mean, when you -- reducing our deficit -- and I'll go back to the State of the Union. The first major section of the State of the Union address was dedicated to deficit reduction. So that's hardly a partisan -- Democratic, partisan issue. He also talked about immigration reform, an issue that has traditionally had bipartisan support, that seems to have again bipartisan support. Measures to reduce gun violence -- that's not a partisan issue at all. The victims of gun violence, especially when we talk about our children, like the children of Newtown, are not Democrats or Republicans. And that's why we need to take common-sense measures that protect our Second Amendment rights but move forward in the cause of reducing gun violence in America.
  So he will continue to engage with Republicans as well as Democrats. He'll continue to speak clearly about what his priorities are. He will make clear that, for example, we're disappointed that the choice was made by Republicans to allow the so-called sequester to take effect, with all of the negative consequences that result. But he also believes we can move forward and try to address these other challenges, and that's part of what's happening.
  Jeff.
  Q Jay, Eric Holder said --
  MR. CARNEY: I couldn't tell if you were just -- oh, let me say also, I understand we're running late and I understand that some of you who may be in the pool might have to jump up and load up for the motorcade, and I apologize for that, but feel free to disrupt the briefing. I will not take offense.
  Jeff.
  Q Thank you. Eric Holder said yesterday that the President would be speaking soon about his policies with regard to drone use in the United States. Can you give us any sense as to when that would be and what sort of action is going on to develop that policy?
  MR. CARNEY: The Attorney General, I assume, was referring to what the President has said publicly, which is that he thinks these are important issues. He believes very much in the need to be as transparent as possible on these matters with Congress as well as with the public. He has spoken about it. Senior administration officials have spoken often about it, and he looks forward to addressing those issues as well in the coming months -- I think that's the phrase the President used. I don't have any timetable to provide to you or an event to announce, but I would just point you to what the President himself has said.
  Q And then a follow-up on the dinner from last night. Speaker Boehner said today that the President has done a 180. Is there any retrospective, looking in the White House, that maybe this is something that could have been done earlier? Why now? Why not before?
  MR. CARNEY: Look, I think two -- I'll make two points. One -- and I'll try to do this briefly -- in the President's first term, he engaged consistently with Congress, especially in the first two years, and consistently with Congress, including leaders of the Republican Party after the midterm elections through the summer of 2011. I think there is ample data to prove that point. And he did it in numerous ways -- in small groups, telephone conversations, meetings in the Oval Office, meetings in the residence. In the calendar year of 2011, especially leading up to and through the fiscal cliff -- I mean, rather the debt ceiling negotiations, he spent an enormous amount of time with Republican leaders, face-to-face time, probably more than either of his immediate predecessors did in such a sustained, short period of time.
  I mean, it is a fact that after the grand bargain talks ended the way they did, that a different approach was taken. And I think if you look at the recent comments, or recent published comments by Eric Cantor, where he said he talked the Speaker out of the -- going along with the grand bargain and convinced him that they should take these issues to the electorate in the 2012 campaign, that explains some of the dynamic that existed after those grand bargain negotiations resulted in -- not in a grand bargain, but in the Budget Control Act and the sequester.
  The President also acknowledged in the campaign year, last year, that some of these issues that divide us, especially on matters of the budget and fiscal challenges, would continue to be debated during the campaign, and the American people would give their views on that debate in the election, and I think they did. And I think the American people have made it clear both in the election and in the aftermath that they want Washington to pursue common-sense, balanced solutions to these challenges. And that's certainly the President's position.
  After the election, when we faced anew deadlines regarding our fiscal challenges, the fiscal cliff, what did the President do? He negotiated with and engaged with Republican leaders and he put forward proposals that represented by any measure serious compromise -- meeting the Republicans halfway; reducing his target for revenue; putting on the table and leaving on the table proposals for entitlement reforms that are without question difficult choices for Democrats to make. And as I said, he continues to make clear that that proposal remains on the table.
  And now we have a period where, because of the choice to let the sequester take effect, we are not now in a countdown clock situation -- the cable nets don't have the clock. And there is an opportunity here to do what some members of Congress and leaders have said they would like to do, and we agree, and that is return to some sense of normalcy here, regular order, engage in a budget process and negotiation and debate that hopefully produces a bipartisan compromise. And that is what informed the President's interest in having the dinner that he had last night and the conversations they had on those issues. And it more broadly informs the approach he's taking when he's speaking with lawmakers of both parties, moving forward on all the issues that are important. Because it's not just sequester and deficit reduction. It's the whole panoply of issues that are confronting the country and that the President believes should be priorities.
  Q Even if it's not a 180, Jay, isn't this strategy of going out for dinner and having the lunches that he's having now, I mean, doesn't that reflect at least somewhat of a change in tack?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I would say that he is certainly engaging with lawmakers, with Republicans, as well as Democrats. And that is --
  Q Differently.
  MR. CARNEY: Differently or more in different manners, in part because of changed circumstances. As I said, if you look at what the cycles we've been through of these manufactured crises and these deadlines that have been set arbitrarily, not because of regular order but newly imposed deadlines -- fiscal cliffs, debt ceiling drop-dead dates and sequester deadlines -- that they have forced a situation that required direct, highly charged negotiations with the leaders to try to reach a resolution before the deadline was hit. And that was true in the fiscal cliff, true in the debt ceiling negotiations in 2011, true in the sequester.
  And again, because of the circumstances that exist now where we don't have to produce a deal by Friday, but we are now engaged in a process that will allow the Congress -- both houses -- to move forward with budget proposals, the President will submit his budget, that he is trying to have a conversation with lawmakers who have expressed either specific or general interest in compromise, and hope that that results in a positive outcome.
  And we're not na¯ve about the challenges that we still face; they exist and there are differences. But it is useful to remember that back in December -- because the President came very far in his proposal -- in his negotiations with the Speaker, there wasn't that much difference between them until the Speaker walked away and pursued the so-called plan B.
  The President made some very serious proposals, and I think, gradually, people are recognizing that and accepting that the President has had a plan and does have a plan. It exists on paper. It exists on the Web. And to state otherwise is simply at odds with reality.
  Jim.
  Q I wanted to ask you -- Senator Rand Paul said earlier today on CNN that the White House is talking with his office about a way to resolve some of his concerns over use of drones on American soil. Are those conversations taking place? And does the President have an opinion on whether or not he has the constitutional authority to use drones against American citizens on U.S. soil, and under which circumstances?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I would say that of course, the White House is in touch with Senator Paul's staff and that's true what Senator Paul said. But let's back up a little bit. First of all, this debate has nothing to do with the qualifications of John Brennan. Senator Paul himself said as much yesterday. And as you know, Mr. Brennan was voted out of the Intelligence Committee by a wide, bipartisan margin, and he should be promptly confirmed. The country needs a CIA director and there is wide agreement that John Brennan is eminently qualified to lead the CIA. As I said, he should be confirmed immediately.
  Now, Senator Paul has raised questions about the President's authority to use lethal force within the United States, which John Brennan and the Attorney General have both answered. Today, Senator Paul raised an additional question and the Attorney General has answered it. And to be crystal clear, I want to -- to be crystal clear about what Senator Paul is now asking, I'm going to read directly from the Attorney General's letter today. He has sent a letter responding to this question. It was transmitted to Senator Paul within the last half hour or so.
  And this is from the letter: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer is no." The answer to that question is no. And that is a letter that is signed by the Attorney General and was submitted to Senator Paul and his office.
  Q As to the circumstances as to when those drones could be used, would that be a 9/11 or Pearl Harbor-style attack that might be --
  MR. CARNEY: I think it's important to step back and say the issue of technology has nothing to do with the legal matters that we're discussing. The President has not and would not use drone strikes against American citizens on American soil. On the broader question, the legal authorities that exist to use lethal force are bound by and constrained by the law and the Constitution. The issue here isn't the technology. The method does not change the law. The President swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and he is bound by the law.
  Whether the lethal force in question is a drone strike or a gun shot, the law and the Constitution apply in the same way. And, again, that's why I think there's been a great deal of confusion about the technology here, when the technology is irrelevant to what the law and the Constitution say. And the President is bound by the Constitution, bound by the laws, and has sworn to uphold them.
  Q So when you say he would never, you're saying that there are no circumstances? Because I thought there were circumstances outlined by the Attorney General when he talked about a 9/11 or a Pearl Harbor-style attack that --
  MR. CARNEY: Look, you can make sort of wild hypotheticals, but that doesn't -- they don't change the law. It is certainly the case that the President, as part of his oath to the Constitution, to uphold the Constitution, is sworn to protect the United States. And in an event like an attack like Pearl Harbor or an attack like 9/11, obviously the President has the constitutional authority to take action to prevent those kinds of attacks. But that has nothing to do with the technology used to prevent those attacks. There is no distinction in the law or the Constitution with regards to -- in terms of the authorities invested in the President -- or the Congress, for that matter -- when it comes to the methods used to enforce the law.
  Q Did Holder's letter contribute to the confusion of this, the original one to Senator Paul?
  MR. CARNEY: You would have to ask Senator Paul. I mean, I think that the --
  Q But do you think this original language -- I suppose this is what Holder said directly -- to imagine -- ''it's possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance for which it would be necessary and appropriate for the President to authorize the military use of legal force within the territory of the United States'' -- did that muddy the water? Did that confuse things?
  MR. CARNEY: But how is -- again, it has nothing to do with the methodology here. If there were -- if the United States were under attack or there were imminent threat, all the same laws that applied to the President's authority apply now, whether it has to do with drones or other modes that you would use to prevent a terrorist attack or an attack like Pearl Harbor, or any other hypothetical that you can imagine. The law is the law, and the Constitution is the Constitution. And I think that's what the Attorney General was saying.
  In response to the question that Senator Paul has asked the Attorney General today, I think the answer I gave you is quite categorical and clear. The question that Senator Paul asked: Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer to that question is no.
  Q Can I ask you about reports, numerous reports this morning that Sulaiman Abu Ghaith has been captured in Jordan? And if you have any information about that?
  MR. CARNEY: I've seen some media reports, but I don't have anything on that for you.
  Q There's no confirmation on that?
  MR. CARNEY: I have nothing for you on that.
  Q Jay, can you come back to the grand bargain and the talks? So you were saying the President did put a plan on the table in December -- true. John Boehner walked away -- true. But also true is that the President was not having dinner at the Jefferson Hotel with Bob Corker and Lindsey Graham in December --
  MR. CARNEY: That you know of.
  Q I'm not aware of it. So the question I think is, does he have any regret that the week after the election -- two weeks after the election, when he was saying on Election Night, I'm going to have lunch with Mitt Romney and I want to bring people together -- he eventually had that lunch with Romney but he was not having dinner with the Lindsey Grahams of the world and reaching out to them. He was just having these one-on-one talks with John Boehner. Is there any regret here that more of this kind of work, back right after the election could have borne more fruit?
  MR. CARNEY: Ed, I would simply say that we were facing a deadline that would have, if not dealt with, would have had significantly negative effects on our economy -- not just the imposition of the sequester, which would have taken effect on January 1st, if there weren't a resolution, a temporary resolution, but the automatic raising of taxes -- tax rates on every American. Middle-class Americans would have had been dealt a blow through an automatic tax hike.
  And in order to avoid that eventuality, in keeping with the stated goals of the Republican leaders as well as the President, the President engaged in negotiations with Republican leaders that ultimately led to the result that we had, which was making the law of the land permanently tax cuts for every American making less than $400,000 and raising that rate for the wealthiest Americans -- millionaires and billionaires, and those making over $450,000, families making over $450,000 -- back to the levels under the Clinton administration.
  So, again, we can --
  Q That was an extraordinary last-minute McConnell-Biden deal.
  MR. CARNEY: The result was. But the negotiations --
  Q At the very end.
  MR. CARNEY: But, Ed, but you conceded at the top of your question that we were engaged in negotiations with the leadership that we hoped, and the President sincerely hoped -- and backed up his sincere hope with concrete, compromise proposals -- would result in a big deal that resolved not just the sequester but met and exceeded the goal of deficit reduction of more than $4 trillion over 10 years.
  Again and again, this President has moved towards Republicans in trying to find common grounds in these negotiations. And I think, as you have seen him say and is evidenced by the meetings he's been having, he remains interested in that. And he believes that when he hears top Republicans say that they're interested in finding that common ground, that they believe it's possible to marry entitlement reforms that produce savings with tax reforms that produce savings and achieve that deficit reduction. He wants to have that conversation, and that's what he's doing.
  Q Last question on Brennan -- you dealt with the specific legal question. I guess two parts on Brennan. Is it now the White House's hope that with the filibuster over, this letter from Holder, that now the Brennan nomination will be voted upon on the Senate floor and will pass? And what do you say to Republicans who have been asking for even more documents -- have been saying that they want even more documents about the Osama bin Laden raid, that there were documents at his compound that have not been released? I assume some of those are still classified, perhaps.
  MR. CARNEY: Ed, I think that you saw the committee of jurisdiction vote on John Brennan's nomination in substantial bipartisan fashion. We believe that -- we know that John Brennan has a substantial majority of support within the Senate, and we believe that the Senate ought to vote to confirm him, because all of the questions that you raised either go to policy debates or historical debates or political debates. They have nothing to do with the qualifications of the nominee. And we need to separate the nomination process from those debates.
  Is John Brennan qualified to be Director of the CIA? Unequivocally, the answer is yes. And that question we believe can and will be answered in the affirmative by the full Senate.
  Q Jay, can you set some expectations for us? All these meetings with Republicans. What are the chances of actually coming to a big agreement with the Republicans? Give me some odds.
  MR. CARNEY: Well, thank you for the question, because I think it's important to note, as I tried to earlier, that we are not unrealistic in our expectations. We are not na¯ve about the fact that there are real disagreements between the two parties on these issues and disagreements that exist even between Democrats and Republicans who might qualify for members in the ''caucus of common sense,'' if you will. And I think these are real sincere points of debate and discussion and negotiation, and we hope compromise.
  But what we do know is that the President has made clear in real terms, with a real offer, that he is prepared to take steps to reform our entitlements in a way that produces savings and reduces the burden that our health care entitlements place on our deficits and debt, coupled with taking steps to reform our tax code that closes -- steps that close loopholes and cap deductions, and that by doing so produce proceeds that also cap, coupled with the savings from entitlement reform, can go towards deficit reduction -- a very conservative objective.
  Again, if the Speaker of the House had -- on the tax reform side, the Speaker of the House had a proposition late last year in those negotiations that we were talking about that he could produce a trillion dollars over 10 years in deficit reduction from tax reform, capping deductions and closing loopholes. The President's proposal to -- or offer to the Speaker actually asks for substantially less than that. And it seems to me that if this is the case, that both sides say they want entitlement reform, both sides say they want tax reform, and there is overlap in the substance, that there should be an opportunity to find common ground.
  But we are not predicting that. We are simply saying that it is the right thing to do and the American people expect their leaders to do it, to engage and have a conversation about these issues.
  Q So you know Paul Ryan's views well on Medicare and taxes and budgets. I mean, you've talked about it from the podium. Is Paul Ryan the kind of person the President thinks he can get a deal with?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I had a nice conversation with Chairman Ryan just before coming out and before he headed into lunch with the President, and as you know, the President believes that Chairman Ryan is a thought leader in the party, the Republican Party, on these matters. He, I know, was looking forward to the lunch that he was going to have with Chairman Ryan and Congressman Van Hollen.
  And there's no question that there are going to be disagreements, that the ideal proposal that Chairman Ryan or others might have about how to move forward is not going to be -- is not going to converge with the President's proposal. But there are also likely to be areas of agreement. And we'll see where these conversations lead. What the President hopes is that there is a spirit of compromise, that there's not a proposition at the outset that ''we're not doing this, absolutely no way'' --that compromise can't be, you compromise only with us but the reverse is not true.
  And going back to where we've been on this issue, the President has compromised on propositions about entitlement reforms. He's put forward proposals that represent, I think by any measure, tough choices by Democrats, and he has modified his proposals on revenue to try to account for Republican opposition. Again, his proposal for revenue through tax reform is substantially lower than what Speaker Boehner said was possible just in December. So we're only asking that we have that conversation about the things that we should be able to agree on.
  Q But just to be clear on the terms here, because we heard from the Speaker again today -- no more taxes. If Republicans stick to the ''no more taxes'' mantra, is there any deal possible?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, if you're saying if there's no deal possible -- is there no deal possible, I suppose the answer to that could only be no. But the President doesn't believe that Washington leaders ought to throw up their hands and say, you know what, we give up on this. Because there is -- and we have heard and we have seen, and he has had discussions with members who have expressed an opinion that there is possibility for compromise, that there is some convergence of opinion about how to move forward with combined entitlement reform and tax reform in a way that reduces our deficit, that eliminates the sequester, that helps the economy grow.
  Economists after economists I think have been noting that the economy is poised right now to do well if -- and this is a big caveat -- if Washington doesn't get in the way, and will do even better if Washington makes smart, compromised decisions about how to move forward with deficit reduction -- decisions that protect seniors, that don't ask middle-class Americans to foot the bill all by themselves for continued deficit reduction, but that move the country forward and help the economy grow from the middle out and not just the top down.
  Q So the President thinks he can talk Republicans into raising taxes in these dinners?
  MR. CARNEY: I think the President has had conversations with and has seen conversations reported with members of the Republican Party who agree with the proposition that we can have balance in deficit reduction, balance that includes revenues as well as entitlement reforms.
  Q That's occurred during these conversations he's recently had?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I'm not going to read out conversations specifically, but I would point you to public statements by some members of Congress, Republicans, who have suggested that they are open to that proposition, and open to the general principle that there ought to be room for compromise on these issues.
  It is despite all of our differences that we have achieved $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction thus far, four to one in spending cuts to revenues, but still there has been balance. And it is entirely reasonable, given where the President is, given where Republicans either are or have been, that we should be able to come together and find a solution. It's going to be hard. I do not want to in any way suggest that this is a sure thing. It is far from that. But the President believes it's important and that the American people expect that he and other leaders in Washington come together and have these discussions.
  Q Jay, just a quick question on the White House tours. I wanted to ask you -- a group of kids from 6th-graders at the St. Paul's Lutheran School in Waverly, Iowa -- these 6th-graders have put a video message on Facebook urging Washington, ''The White House is our house. Please let us visit.'' They were supposed to be visiting here next week. What is your answer, or the President's answer to the 6th-graders at the St. Paul's Lutheran School?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, my answer is that the President and the First Lady have throughout the time that they've been here made extraordinary efforts to make this the people's house, and it is extremely unfortunate that we have a situation like the sequester that compels the kinds of tradeoffs and decisions that this represents.
  The fact is the Secret Service, like other agencies of government, is affected by the sequester. And the Secret Service presented options that ranged from canceling tours to potential furloughs and cuts in overtime. And in order to allow the Secret Service to best fulfill its core mission, the White House made the decision that we would, unfortunately, have to temporarily suspend these tours.
  I think the point we've made broadly about the sequester when there have been questions raised about what kind of flexibility exists is that the tradeoffs here are never good because of the nature of the cuts and the way that the law is written. And whether it's in the education budget, where if you're given flexibility, your option is to give less money to disabled kids so you can give more money to poor kids, more support to poor kids -- this is a similar kind of tradeoff, and it's very unfortunate.
  And we are obviously disappointed about that kind of decision, but it would have been far better, in our view, if Congress had taken action to delay the sequester in the very same way they took action two months ago -- two and a half months ago, to delay the sequester to avoid just this kind of outcome.
  Q But absent of that, they shouldn't count on coming to the White House?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, again, the suspension is temporary. Hopefully, we can move forward and resolve these issues.
  Q Temporary pending a resolution of the sequestration.
  MR. CARNEY: Well, exactly.
  Q You're not reevaluating.
  MR. CARNEY: No. And I think that, again --
  Q Can we move to the back rows?
  MR. CARNEY: We're going to do that.
  The issue here is a choice between potential furloughs -- and that's not just an issue that goes to the Secret Service mission, but also the individuals affected. We're talking about pay cuts and overtime cuts or a choice to suspend tours. And I'm not suggesting it's a happy choice, but it is one that we had to make.
  Yes, Jackie.
  Q Could you tell us why the President went to the Hotel Jefferson instead of just having them in at the White House? And more broadly, how this engagement came about? Was it planned long before the sequestration actually went through that you would do this?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I'll answer the first part. The President thought that having dinner outside of the White House would be -- help create a positive environment, neutral ground, if you will. And I won't go into details on the second part in terms of how it came about, because I think Senator Graham has spoken publicly about this, and I can confirm that in a conversation he had with Senator Graham, the President suggested that Senator Graham put together a group of his colleagues to have dinner with the President at an outside location and Senator Graham very graciously did that.
  So more broadly, in terms of the engagement itself, the engagement did pre-date -- and the kind of engagement that we've been talking about here -- did pre-date the imposition of the sequester. As you know, the President has been reaching out, having phone conversations and other kinds of encounters with lawmakers of both parties. And we don't read all of them out and we won't read most of them out, because as the President said to me earlier with regards to the dinner, part of the effort here is to foster an environment where these conversations can be held in a way that allows for a free exchange of ideas. And there was resistance to the temptation in Washington to turn these things into political talking points, but allow them instead to be more organic and focused on the substance -- and not just on fiscal issues, as I said, but immigration reform, gun violence, energy independence, education -- the whole range of issues that are the President's priorities and they also happen to be the American people's priorities.
  Q So do you think that -- I mean, most of these calls and the plans for the President's visit to the caucuses next week on Capitol Hill, the dinner, all came about since sequestration took effect. But you're saying that this was actually underway to an extent we don't know before sequestration?
  MR. CARNEY: I'm saying that the President -- I'm not trying to overstate. But I'm saying that the President -- I think that it has been noted in part that the President had been having some conversations with some Republican lawmakers prior to sequestration. And that represents -- it's also true that he was having some conversations with some Republican lawmakers last year and the year before. This is a fact that we don't always read out. And I think it goes to the point that not every example of presidential engagement with Congress fits the mold of the President meeting with the Speaker and the Minority Leader in the Roosevelt Room or the Oval Office.
  But I do acknowledge that we -- because of changed circumstances with the imposition of the sequester, there is an increased focus on engagement because of the opportunity the circumstances provide. He is trying to make something good out of a bad situation. We don't have a looming deadline. Republican leaders have made clear they're not revisiting, at least not anytime soon, the idea of postponing the sequester in a balanced way. So the sequester is here. The budget process, regular order, is moving forward.
  And there is an opportunity on that issue to use that process hopefully towards a positive end, as well as have conversations about things that continue to move forward, even as there's a focus on sequester and budget issues: immigration reform -- positive progress, bipartisan progress on immigration reform; measures to reduce gun violence -- positive bipartisan progress on those issues and a number of others.
  The President today, as you know, is signing, probably momentarily, the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. That's very important. And it represents positive progress for the country, and we're going to continue to press on all these fronts to try to move things forward.
  Peter, then April.
  Q Jay, after having the dinner with an all-Republican guest list last night, why did the President decide to go the bipartisan route with Van Hollen and Ryan and have it here today not on neutral --
  MR. CARNEY: Again, there's not -- there are different ways you can have conversations. The President is meeting with and talking with lawmakers from both parties. Given the focus of expertise and responsibility that the committee in question has here, it seemed like a good idea to have both of these members today for lunch. But next week he's going to go talk to everybody in both the Republican conferences and in the Democratic caucuses.
  Q And what will the message be then?
  MR. CARNEY: I think the message will be broad. It won't be focused on fiscal issues. It will also deal with moving forward on immigration reform, moving forward on gun violence, moving forward on increasing our energy independence, and moving forward on investments in education and research and innovation that allow us to be competitive and grow in the 21st century.
  April.
  Q Following up on Jonathan and Jackie, and a question that Jonathan asked about a week and a half ago, how is the White House --
  MR. CARNEY: I can't remember a week and a half ago.
  Q Well, you were supposed to get back to us. (Laughter.)
  MR. CARNEY: Okay, what was the question?
  Q How is the White House impacted beyond the Secret Service as it relates to sequester? What other offices are impacted? How is staff impacted? Have they been told they will be furloughed? Will they lose pay? Will there be cuts here? What can you tell us?
  MR. CARNEY: The answer is that the White House office -- the Executive Office of the President and the White House office within that are all affected in similar ways as the rest of the executive branch and the government. And notifications have -- there's various notifications about potential furloughs and the like. I don't have details for you because -- and like with a lot of these agencies, this is a gradual process as notifications are made. But we can get more information for you on that.
  I mean, the reason why -- if decisions haven't been made yet or notifications haven't resulted yet in furloughs, I don't have -- I'm not going to say that this person is going to have to be furloughed today if that hasn't happened yet, and we don't know when that will happen specifically.
  Q So last night's meeting at the Jefferson had nothing to do with the fact that staff might have been limited, cut back on?
  MR. CARNEY: No, no. The decision to have dinner off-campus, if you will, was made by the President or suggested by the President because he thought it would help foster a positive atmosphere.
  Q And the traditional Easter Egg Roll is just a couple of days away -- a couple of weeks away; tradition, 135 years. You were talking about Secret Service staffing -- that is a major event that the Secret Service has to staff. When will there be a decision made if the Easter Egg Roll will go through? Or is it determined that it will totally go through?
  MR. CARNEY: I would refer you both to the East Wing and the Secret Service. But it's my understanding that as of now, the decision has been made that the Easter Egg Roll will go forward.
  Q As of now. So there is a question that it could be --
  MR. CARNEY: Again, that is my understanding. But I would refer you to the Service and to the East Wing on whether or not there are possibilities or contingencies. But my understanding is it's going forward.
  I'm sorry?
  Q Why is it going forward when the tours are canceled?
  MR. CARNEY: Again, I would -- we can take this question. I think there are obviously a lot of people --
  Q This is in line with the tours being cut.
  MR. CARNEY: But your question is like -- there are choices you make all the time. This is about tradeoffs. Because when you have the kind of severe cuts that the sequester represents, you have to reduce your budget accordingly, and then you have to make choices about what you do and what you don't. And I would refer you to the offices in question.
  Kathleen.
  Q Just to be a little more specific about what you'd like to see, is the President trying to encourage another gang, like a ''Gang of Twelve'' or whatever, on deficit reduction?
  MR. CARNEY: He simply wants to hear from and speak with members of Congress who are open to the idea of compromise on a range of issues, both fiscal and others. What form progress takes will be determined by the members. And this is not limited to rank-and-file members; it includes chairmen and it includes leaders as appropriate and as interest is expressed in moving forward in a spirit of compromise.
  So, again, I don't want to overstate our expectations, but the President feels it's very important to have these, conversations because he knows that while there are differences that always exist, and they're sincere, there is a fundamental fact here that the President has put forward a proposal when it comes, again, to our fiscal issues that includes entitlement reforms and tax reforms. Republicans say that top of the list of priorities that they have are entitlement reforms and tax reform. So that seems like a pretty good starting point towards moving towards further deficit reduction in a balanced way.
  Scott.
  Q Has the President's thinking about entitlement reform changed as far as Congressman Ryan's proposal for Medicare?
  MR. CARNEY: I don't believe we've digested or reviewed Chairman Ryan's new budget proposal, if that's what you're talking about. But the President --
  Q Well -- his old budget proposal that the President campaigned pretty strongly against --
  MR. CARNEY: Well, if you're saying do we support voucherization of Medicare, the answer is no. It's unfair cost-shifting onto seniors, and it is not good policy as far as -- or necessary policy as far as the President is concerned. One of the issues that -- points we made in the previous iterations was that one of the reasons why such drastic and dramatic cost-shifting and cuts were imposed upon seniors was in order to funnel money for tax cuts to wealthy Americans, which we thought was not a fair tradeoff.
  But again, I'm not trying to prejudge proposals that have either just arrived or will come forward. The President has put forward entitlement reform proposals that represent tough choices for Democrats and that produce real savings in the 10-year window that we're talking about. And gradually, I think, outside observers as well as some lawmakers on the Republican Party side have acknowledged that those are serious, concrete, and legitimate and cost-saving proposals.
  He has also put forward a very reasonable proposal when it comes to tax reform and generating revenues from tax reform by closing loopholes and ending special exceptions and exemptions for the well-off and well-connected that would also contribute to deficit reduction in a balanced approach. And that's what last night's conversation was largely about, and it will be part of the conversations that the President has moving forward.
  Kristen and then Lisa. Yes.
  Q Jay, just to clarify, you talked about the fact that the President is going to discuss immigration, gun control in some of these future meetings. Was that discussed as well during last night's dinner?
  MR. CARNEY: I don't have a readout to give you beyond what I've just said from my conversation with the President for the reasons I just said. It is fair to say that the focus of the discussion last night was mostly on fiscal and budgetary issues.
  Q But not only?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I'm not going to read out specifics and I can't account for everything that was said. I would just give that broad description.
  Q Past discussions with leadership -- Minority Leader McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner -- haven't been as successful as all parties would have liked. But doesn't the President need them ultimately to be brought back into the fold to turn these conversations into actual legislative action? How does he do that, and when does he bring them back into the fold?
  MR. CARNEY: Well, I think rather than focus on the -- it's kind of a negative approach to what we're hoping to achieve here, which is to build some positive discussion about areas of common ground. There is no question that we have and will continue to work with the leadership of both parties in both houses to move legislation forward on all of these issues. So those conversations must and will continue.
  I think it's important also to note that part of what the President is doing here reflects the advice of leadership, which is to engage in a process that returns the dynamic in Washington back to something more like normal, back to what's called often regular order, where these debates and decisions and compromises are made within the context of the budget process, rather than outside the context, through these deadlines that are often manufactured and created and cause a kind of crisis environment. So we're hoping to take advantage of that and see where this leads.
  Again, we're not trying to set expectations very high here. We're just saying that this is an important process, there is common ground that we believe can be found, and the President enjoyed his dinner last night and will continue to have these conversations.
  Q Jay, can you also comment on the reports that David O'Connor is the President's top pick to be the Director of the Secret Service?
  MR. CARNEY: Kristen, as you know, I just -- I don't comment on speculation about personnel announcements. I prefer to let the President make decisions about personnel and announce them himself.
  Q Is an announcement forthcoming?
  MR. CARNEY: I have no information to provide on that.
  Yes.
  Q There has been a number of positive economic indicators recently: home prices are up, jobless claims are down, the market is at record highs. Does the generally improving economy make it harder to strike a deal by removing some of the urgency?
  MR. CARNEY: I would say no. I would say that the data that you referred to I think demonstrates that the economy has a great deal of potential that we believe, as outside economists do, that there is an opportunity here for positive growth and positive job creation, and stepped up growth and stepped up job creation.
  The big caveat here is whether or not Washington will continue to engage in a process that unnecessarily inflicts wounds on the economy. And we have to get beyond the dynamic where we're governing from crisis to crisis, and where these crises are manufactured and highly politicized, and move towards a process where we can come together and focus on the substance of the issues and debates, make rational and reasonable decisions about how to move forward and compromise, and thereby contribute to the positive growth we're seeing and the positive data that we're seeing in the economy.
  If we do that, the President believes and his economic team believes that the economy will continue to heal and continue to strengthen, and continue to create jobs for middle-class Americans, which is, after all, the objective -- the primary objective.
  Q Thanks, Jay.
  MR. CARNEY: Okay. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it.
  END1:50 P.M. EST
Statement from the President on the Confirmation of John Brennan as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
  Link to Article
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:06
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  March 07, 2013
  With the bipartisan confirmation of John Brennan as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Senate has recognized in John the qualities I value so much'--his determination to keep America safe, his commitment to working with Congress, his ability to build relationships with foreign partners, and his fidelity to the values that define us as a nation.
  With John's 25 years of experience at the Agency, our extraordinary men and women of the CIA will be led by one of their own. I am especially appreciative to Michael Morell for being such an outstanding Acting Director and for agreeing to continue his service as Deputy Director.
  Timely, accurate intelligence is absolutely critical to disrupting terrorist attacks, dismantling al Qaeda and its affiliates, and meeting the broad array of security challenges that we face as a nation. John's leadership, and our dedicated intelligence professionals, will be essential in these efforts. I am deeply grateful to John and his family for their continued service to our nation.
"THEY Could Take A Toyota Pickup Put A Nuke In The Back And Park It In Any American City!"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:55
"I'm Offended By Lindsey Graham These People Have Played Politics With The 9/11 Trials!"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:55
Senators McCain & Graham Slam Rand Paul For His "Drone Rant"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:52
Snoop Dogg Explains His Transformation Into Snoop Lion
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:49
Analysis of How Bitcoin Is Actually Used
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 13:22
  A blog covering security and security technology.
  Genetic Privacy | Main | Stoking Cyber Fears >>
  Analysis of How Bitcoin Is Actually Used"Quantitative Analysis of the Full Bitcoin Transaction Graph," by Dorit Ron and Adi Shamir:
  Abstract. The Bitcoin scheme is a rare example of a large scale global payment system in which all the transactions are publicly accessible (but in an anonymous way). We downloaded the full history of this scheme, and analyzed many statistical properties of its associated transaction graph. In this paper we answer for the rst time a variety of interesting questions about the typical behavior of account owners, how they acquire and how they spend their Bitcoins, the balance of Bitcoins they keep in their accounts, and how they move Bitcoins between their various accounts in order to better protect their privacy. In addition, we isolated all the large transactions in the system, and discovered that almost all of them are closely related to a single large transaction that took place in November 2010, even though the associated users apparently tried to hide this fact with many strange looking long chains and fork-merge structures in the transaction graph.
  The paper has been submitted to the 2013 Financial Cryptography conference.
  EDITED TO ADD (10/30): Somecommentary.
  Posted on October 18, 2012 at 6:11 AM ' 58 Comments
  To receive these entries once a month by e-mail, sign up for the Crypto-Gram Newsletter.
  Bitcoin is doomed, in at least two different ways...
  First, because it is based on ECDSA, if and when someone invents a sufficiently powerful quantum computer, Shor's algorithm will enable someone with such a computer to steal bitcoins at will.
  Second, if no one ever does create a sufficiently powerful quantum computer, there is a fixed upper limit on the total number of Bitcoins (21 million), and no one has the authority to make more. So if you lose your private key/wallet (and don't have a quantum computer) then the bitcoins in that wallet are lost forever.
  In other words, the bitcoin system can be thought of as an absorbing Markov chain. Bitcoins leap from wallet to wallet (the non-absorbing states), but there is always a chance they will leap to the absorbing state of being lost. As an absorbing Markov chain, it is inevitable that eventually most and then all the bitcoins will become lost, and the bitcoin system will break down.
  Together with the deflationary aspect of the bitcoin system, I sometimes wonder if it was carefully designed as a Pyramid scheme to extract wealth over the next decade or so from conspiracy theorists, paranoids, currency speculators, gold-bugs, and Ayn-Randian fanatics. Perhaps that is the reason why the creator used a pseudonym and is still anonymous...
  J.D., perhaps you should research the subject a little more before stating your reasons why it is (or is not) doomed?
  J.D: I've lost more paper money from washing my clothes with money in the pockets than I ever have / will Bitcoins.
  P.J., while I am sure you personally have immaculate back-up habits, and will never ever lose your bitcoin data to failed hard-drives, fire, or someone stealing your computer, not everyone involved in the bitcoin system will be so lucky or so careful.
  F.Y, maybe you should use your brain a little more?Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed because it is a deflationary system, period.
  (I do not expect a meaningful answer, I have yet to meet a bitcoin fan with a basic grasp of what is deflation. To paraphrase your derogatory non-reply, "you should research the subject a little more".)
  Together with the deflationary aspect of the bitcoin system, I sometimes wonder if it was carefully designed as a Pyramid scheme to extract wealth over the next decade or so from conspiracy theorists, paranoids, currency speculators, gold-bugs, and Ayn-Randian fanatics. Perhaps that is the reason why the creator used a pseudonym and is still anonymous...
  Yeah, that was obvious from the start. A very well made scheme, still very interesting from a pure engineering point of view. This is so funny to see the gold-standard armchair economists fall hook and sinker for it.
  Don't believe me ? The choice of an algorithm with an hard upper limit (there will never be more than ~21 million bitcoins) is the obvious proof.
  This research shows that there are users (certainly early adopters, including the creator) hoarding a ton of bitcoins and trying very hard to hide it.
  J.D. > Man, you should check your pockets a bit more often. Or move to Australia, the land of waterproof (and, I suppose, moldproof, bulldogantproof, saltwatercrocodileproof, greatwhitesharkproof, funnelwebspiderproof, boxjellyfishproof, blueringedoctopusproof) polymer banknotes.
  Sorry, the last remark was for PJ, not J.D.
  @edw: So what? The same applies to the gold standard and that worked well for a long time.... A deflationary system is not necessarily bad.
  After all, money is just some measure to price goods and services and to facilitate exchange of services and goods.
  And because it is fixed, it isn't an inflationary system which is very good and it is outisde of governments control (which is also good; just look at the Euro mess).
  Sorry for Offtopic....
  Edw, I'm not sure that "lost" bitcoins are going to be a significant source of deflation compared to the potential of demand vastly outstripping a gradual decrease in additional supply.
  To expand a bit on Edw's point, a little inflation is a good thing for (useful) currencies. It discourages hoarding and therefore increases money velocity; the more money changes hands for goods or services, the better off everyone is. If you know the price of a good is going to be cheaper tomorrow, you might delay your purchase.
  That doesn't mean that bitcoins won't be a good investment, just that good investment vehicles don't necessarily make good currencies (why don't we barter in AAPL stock?).
  The tension is that, in order for bitcoins to be a good investment, current owners have to convince non-owners that it makes a good currency. The more they convince, the faster the deflationary effects occur, hence the worse bitcoins are as a currency.
  @EdwBitcoin was designed to "keep money out of the hands of the government and politicians". Inflation was the enemy.
  However, the Bitcoin gang have been so brainwashed by the libertarians and gold nuts, that they think deflation as the opposite of inflation must be a good thing (TM).
  Terry Pratchett made fun of the Gold Standard in "Making Money". The same holds for Bitcoins.
  The gold standard worked well?
  I, for one, welcome our visitors from another dimension.
  (or, more likely, somebody who got "F" in Economics as well as History 101.)
  And because it is fixed, it isn't an inflationary system which is very good and it is outisde of governments control (which is also good; just look at the Euro mess).How much inflation is there in Europe, smartie?None.How much governmental control is there on the European Central Bank?None. It has only one mandate, to keep inflation as low as possible.
  And, yes, look at the mess that results from a hard-fixed, non-manipulated currency.
  Hey,
  They note that people tried to hide their transactions. Using what is referred to as mixers - these operations combining a large amount of bitcoins to a master account and based on information submitted to the person who controls the account, getting it paid back out again to a different account the user controls.
  Obviously they did it in an incompetent way that was completely ineffective. Does anyone have any analysis on how to do it properly such that the statistics are suitably arranged?
  I doubt bitcoins could really get lost.
  If it ever became a problem I am sure you can move those BitCoins out of the wallets all you need is more than 50% of the computing power. i..e you add a rule that all agree on: if some wallet is not used for a certain time the bitcoins of the wallet will be distributed equally sth like that.
  ChristianO,
  So who do you propose would have the power to take bitcoins from 'unused' wallets? And how are you going to get every single one of the paranoiacs who bought into bitcoin precisely because there was no central authority who could 'steal' their money (via inflation) to agree to this rule of yours?
  Tho u can follow bitcoins going from address to address u still can't prove what it was used for unless u have the private keys and can match up txn to identities. This seems like they found a mining pool such as deep bit which is sending out the bulk of coins to users who then trade them. As for the crypto its designed to improve with whatever breakthroughs in quantum research happen, if you read the updated whitepaper. There definitely is a problem of forever lost coins tho bitcoin can be forked into a new branch and more coins created if needed. Its up to the community to adopt the new fork... either they pay for them or not hence the future proofing of the system
  Interesting paper. It seems like many Bitcoin users are using Bitcoin as an investment instead of as a currency.
  agreed hoarding for the purposes of speculation are another problem with bitcoin if you want to use it for commerce
  @S: "So what? The same applies to the gold standard and that worked well for a long time..."
  In high finance just as in cryptography, attacks never get worse. Bitcoin apparently[1] has a number of weaknesses as a financial system, that could easily be exploited. The main reason nobody seems to be running those exploits is that there isn't enough money in it (yet). Interestingly, this article shows that, with so many of the bitcoins held in savings accounts, the amount of money that could be siphoned by manipulating the market for bitcoins is even smaller than previously assumed.
  [1] I once read a forum post[2] that literally stated "Bitcoin takes the monetary system back essentially a hundred years. We know how to beat that system. In fact, we know how to nuke it for profit." I don't know enough of the "quant prop derivatives trader" jargon to evaluate the analysis that preceded that statement or recognize the examples of predatory algorithms following it, but it rings true.[2] I don't know of a good way to link to that forum post, but searching that exact phrase works well enough. Some of the follow-up posts are also relevant.
  @ Busy Bee
  I think this is the article you were referring to.
  http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3787375
  Proposed techniques to use against Bitcoin in that comment:
  "Bitcoin is volatile, inherently deflationary and has no lender of last resort. Cornering and squeezing would work well - they use mass in a finite trading space. Modern predatory algos like bandsaw (testing markets by raising and suddenly dropping prices), sharktooth (electronically front-running orders), and band-burst (creating self-perpetuating volatile equilibria in a leverage-sensitive trading space, e.g. an inherently deflationary one), would rapidly wreak havoc. There is also a part of me that figures regulators will turn a blind eye to Bitcoin shenanigans."
  @ Nick P:
  See Mencius Moldbug's brilliant reply to that same comment:
  "BS.
  How do you "corner and squeeze" a market that can't be shorted? You can manipulate GLD down by issuing naked shorts (essentially counterfeited against collateral). But you can't counterfeit Bitcoin. If you want to drop the market price of Bitcoin, you have to sell actual BC that you had before and don't have now.
  Then, to actually profit, you have to find a way to buy those BC back for less than you sold for. This isn't going to happen unless your smart algo finds an equal and opposite stupid algo that it can rape. Who gets raped and why?
  (If you ask me, it's BC that's a well-designed market and Wall Street that's a funky, broken anachronism. A lot of stupid pointless volatility would go away if we eliminated synthetic securities and lenders of last resort, and replaced the ancient order-matching system with a central limit-order book. Then, you'd have to actually add information to the system in order to profit - rather than profiting by raping other algos, and more plausibly retail traders, with "sharktooth and band-burst.")"
  1) First of all, the Ron/Shamir paper includes one clearly false assumption. That may not invalidate all their results, but it is provably false and a key assumption of their paper: https://gist.github.com/3901921
  2) On deflation: critics inevitably cite unrelated economic conditions -- an entire nation on a gold standard[-like] currency -- as somehow indicative of bitcoin's guaranteed failure.
  Bitcoin is a private, virtual currency where the users are entire self-selected. These conditions are entirely different from those studied and widely cited.
  A world where people may freely choose between nation-state currencies and private currencies at any moment, easily switching between the two, has economic signals and behaviors wholly different from a single, gold-backed nation-state currency.
  3) Yes, there is a fixed upper limit on bitcoins -- 21 million -- however, bitcoins are divisible up to 8 places.
  4) Lost bitcoins are lost in the noise. Ignoring the clear economic incentive to not lose bitcoins, we can see that bitcoin divisibility implies the system easily adapts.
  5) ChristianO: you cannot steal bitcoins with >50% network power. Giving yourself someone else's bitcoins requires breaking ECDSA.
  Transaction verification (mining) may prevent transactions from being published, but it cannot modify or steal transactions.
  6) Anyone with very deep pockets may "nuke" bitcoin, just like they may "nuke" a penny stock. This is true of any small issue. It has nothing to do with inflation.
  Hello All, thanks for good blog!
  Interesting paper but authors jump to conclusions when missing the use patterns in action, particularly pooled accounts, change transactions, and cold storage. I still believe some of the conclusions may hold but lets encourage more papers!
  @Edw, J.D - Why do you occupy your thoughts with deflation vs inflation in terms of bitcoins. Your armchair macroeconomic theory applies (in the best case) to national currencies and bitcoins is a tiny nano part in a diverse family of new valuble things to send of the internet. Bitcoins is not macro economy!
  In fact the gold standard of old times have nothing to do with bitcoins. As gold standard was a thing upheld or abandoned by the state or king, and bitcoin is a peer to peer thing you can freely choose to use or not use, in parallel to any national currencies, or other things. Deflation in bitcoins will not have any macro effects.
  To elaborate on Jeff Garzik's post above, point 3)
  The maximum number of bitcoins is about 21 million. Each one is divisable to 8 decimal places - the lowest atomic value for a tranaction is 1 100 millionth of a bitcoin
  21 million * 100 million = 2.1 quadrillion units of currency
  Per this randomly selected google result (http://money.howstuffworks.com/how-much-money-is-in-the-world.htm) there are approximately 10 trillion US dollars in existence - or 1 quadrillion cents.
  The theoretical capacity of the bitcoin system, then, is enough to individually account for every half of a currently existing US cent. Does that sound granular enough to stave off the inevitable collapse of the system by deflation?
  As I see it, whenever anyone is talking about "deflation" they are really referring to a lack of inflation. The deflation experienced by gold, for instance, is certainly not the logical opposite of the inflation experienced by the U.S. dollar. Unless gold is being launched into space or drowned in the ocean, never to be found again (I will admit that this happens at a certain rate, but I suspect that mining extracts gold from the Earth's crust at a far greater rate.)
  "Deflation" just means that your money is worth more as time goes by because the economy grows in productivity. This only happens if the growth is actually taking place - and growth does not happen forever in a finite universe, and certainly not on a finite planet.
  Anyone arguing against deflation is simply arguing for the State's right to reach into every pocket at the same time by printing money. This is a great deal if your pockets are empty and the some portion of the proceeds from the theft might land in them. Otherwise it plain old sucks.
  Proponents of government-issued fiat currency: be honest and call inflation a tax. But don't lie and paint non-rotting money as some kind of Medieval torment which the Enlightenment graciously set us free from.
  Economics is an open field and an ongoing debate. You go to a school and they only teach you to use microsoft tools or whatever tech companies have been financially supporting them with their generous 'free' licenses. So guess what type of economics the state run schools are going to teach you..
  Deflation - good for you, bad for the state.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6E1k2YO9qU
  Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc
  @ osmosis:
  What is presently taught under the name of "economics" is a pseudoscience, not unlike astrology.
  But the underlying science, to the extent there is any, is the science of theft - on a planetary scale. And a very special kind of theft, in which not only does the thief go unpunished, but he is able to brainwash his victims into feeling good about being relieved of their wealth.
  Stanislav Datskovskiy:"Deflation" just means that your money is worth more as time goes by because the economy grows in productivity. This only happens if the growth is actually taking place"
  That is incorrect. To pick a recent example, Hong Kong went through years of severe deflation in the late 90's, and simultaneously went through an economic slump.
  I wonder if Bitcoins are fungible?
  From my limited understanding, they aren't, but fungibility is an important quality of present currency that should not be given up.
  @ JohnT:
  Right now, bitcoins are fungible. But there have been suggestions to make them less so (here's mine.)
  I'm not sure why fungibility is so important in a currency. Paper dollars which have been stolen in a bank heist and stained by an exploding dye bomb are not freely-exchangeable for ordinary dollars, for instance.
  @Stanislav Datskovskiy
  Inflation means that holding onto your money for a period of time devalues that money. This gives you an incentive to spend it instead of keeping it.
  Deflation (in the formal sense) means that holding onto your money for a period of time increases the value of that money. This gives you an incentive to keep that money instead of spending it.
  Typically, for a currency in a macroeconomy, you want the former behavior (an incentive to spend) instead of the later behavior (an incentive to keep). This increases the liquidity of the currency. However, you don't want particularly high inflation, because that causes the desire to hold onto currency to approach 0.
  That said, Bitcoin isn't used by any macroeconomy. It's features are well-known, and as far as I'm aware, no one is forced into the use of Bitcoin. I'm not certain that this means much other than that Bitcoin is relatively illiquid compared to most currencies (as this study demonstrates).
  @ Fred P:
  > Inflation means that holding onto your money for a period of time devalues that money. This gives you an incentive to spend it instead of keeping it.
  People should save, not spend.
  > Deflation (in the formal sense) means that holding onto your money for a period of time increases the value of that money. This gives you an incentive to keep that money instead of spending it.
  Exactly. Even if people want to save instead of spend, they still need to buy milk and eggs. Few people will starve themselves because of deflation.
  > Typically, for a currency in a macroeconomy, you want the former behavior (an incentive to spend) instead of the later behavior (an incentive to keep). This increases the liquidity of the currency. However, you don't want particularly high inflation, because that causes the desire to hold onto currency to approach 0.
  Only in economies which are dominated by those interested in bleeding people as long as possible.
  @..."Exactly. Even if people want to save instead of spend, they still need to buy milk and eggs. Few people will starve themselves because of deflation."
  You have obviously not looked at what happened in economies with consistent deflation?
  Spoiler alert: Disaster
  Saving only makes sense if the money is invested and generates ROI. However, with deflation, you get an interest without investment taking the incentives away from investing at all. Furthermore, reduced consumption will drag down ROI. So deflation will decrease the amount of money invested and hence economic growth.
  ...For those who doubted the BC fans have no clue about basic economic definitions, just look at Jeff Garzik and especially dragonfrog. They have absolutely no clue about what is deflation.
  Stanislav Datskovskiy > No, saying "inflation is acceptable" is not "arguing for the State's right to reach into every pocket at the same time. It is arguing against money hoarding. If you do not like it, please, do convert all your savings to gold, or anything which is not fiat money. If really it was about reaching into people's pockets, you'd think this loophole would have been closed and nobody would be allowed to invest in anything, wouldn't you?
  Fred P gets it right. Which makes all those who get it right depressing, because it is not rocket science.
  Winter > The "bitcoin is out of reach of the claws of the gov'ment" is bullshit anyway. How many bitcoins do you think the NSA could mine with their brand new datacenter? Most of the supercomputers are state-sponsored efforts, and bitcoins only rewards computational power. The US government - or any other first-world gov - can kick bitcoin in the balls anytime.
  That's Schneier's analysis of the effect of the internet on power balances, by the way: to paraphrase, the internet is an enabler, which initially gave power to people because big organizations are slower to adapt, but once they do, they too will see their power augmented... And come back to the top (maybe even more powerful).
  Deflation is all around us. Just because it would concern money, does not make it something bad. The balance would be different but deflation used by economist is usually thought of as a deflating credit bubble, not a stable balance between savers and spenders.
  Anyone who argues that involuntary and stealth theft of one's money is positive, is an enemy of liberty. I guess there are a lot of enemies then.
  Exactly. Even if people want to save instead of spend, they still need to buy milk and eggs. Few people will starve themselves because of deflation.
  So, tell me, Mr. "...", I hope you are a few cows or hen? Because if not, you will have nothing to save, because you will earn nothing. If everybody saves, you will starve like everybody else (save a few farmers), sucker.
  Deflationista really want to bring us back a few centuries ago!
  Democraatus > Deflation is all around us? Pray tell, where is this wonderful land were a stale loaf of bread left three days on a table is worth more than a fresh loaf, where my five-year-old car is worth more than a brand new one? (Just a though: you are not, by any chance, suggesting that the fact I pay less for a used car than for a new one is "deflation" because I can buy "a car" with less money, are you?)
  There are no 'investors' in BitCoins, only speculators... (Well and miners but they are a bit rare now that the get-rich-quick economics of mining have fallen apart...)
  And speculators may get rich or they may lose it all... If you're holding more than $100 worth consider yourself a speculator...
  For everyone else, just make sure you buy/ sell BitCoins less than a day apart and in small quantities...
  Hmm the joys of economics home spun or otherwise.
  One problem you bump into all the time is people basing their ideas on "monetary value" not actual or real value, mainly because it is mentaly easier.
  It's a problem because if you assume that they are equall then stockpilling natural resources is a deflationary activity. Only it is not, as a tonne of coal cannot be more than a tonne of coal, it can only decrease by the well known principles of entropy.
  An increase in real wealth as opposed to monetary wealth comes about by applying energy (work) to resources (natural resources etc) to produce goods or services that are perceived as having sufficient extra utility to create a differential that exceeds the input values. We often call it "value added" activities.
  Real wealth is thus based on the value of the resources and the perceived extra value of the utility of a finished good. The resources are finite, in current human terms, that is we only have so much of any natural resource on the planet at any one time, most of which is not usable because there is insufficient utility in aquiring it. Energy however is not finite in the human sense we have around 1.5KW of energy for every square meter of earths surface provided free gratis by the Sun. However energy from the Sun is problematic in that it is unreliable at the earths surface and difficult to store. It is also in most forms very inefficient to transport, the exception being where it's stored in chemical bonds but currently the conversion process other than by nature is grossly inefficient (mind you a UK company has just anounced it can turn "thin air" into fuel sufficiently efficiently to be economicaly viable). Money on the other hand has due to inflation no upper limit to the number of right hand zeros and is thus infinite in human terms, every so often we revalue it simply because your average human has trouble remembering numbers of more than five digits and usually lose count of the zeros when they get above seven or eight (hence using comas every three decimal places, but even that gets out of hand after four or five of them, hence we write one above another when evaluating numbers as opposed to side by side as we do words).
  The important thing to remember about money is it has no "real" value and was created in usable form to assist in trade and as a method of storing perceived value. Initialy it was by the use of various semi precious metals, later as promisory notes and now as bits of information speeding around computers and networks. At each step it has become furtheer divorced from "real" value, which is why some people hanker after Gold Standards etc.
  Inflation is in reality the difference in exchange value with time, only it is sometimes difficult to see due to other factors due to the vageries of such things as 'supply and demand' which makes planning difficult (hence futures markets). In effect it represents the loss of value you might other wise obtain by increasing the utility of natural resources. In investment terms it is the loss of interest to you the person holding the money in your pocket (under the matress etc), but the interest is not actualy lost it in effect goes to the person who prints the money (seniorage) and other intermediaries. The main advantages of money are you know what you are going to get for it at any point in time you enter a market which makes transactions easier than bartering, and it's transportation and storage costs are generaly minimal compared to most natural resources.
  Unfortunatly converting real value into perceived value in a market allows those with more knowledge to gain advantage and further advantage by manipulation or controling supply (look at value of diamonds). Worse then divorcing the monetary value from real value alows others to further manipulate monetary value to their short term advantage over others. The main reason that Governments got rid of Gold Standards was so that they could mess around with the supply of money to their own advantage, not as usually indicated to free up markets.
  Another way of looking at inflation is the "value added" product for investors in the Banking industry. In theory (only) the Banking industry increases the utility of money by providing an easy interface between investors and borrowers. In return the banks supposadly take a "fair" percentage for the cost of running the interface and for the risk involved. As we have seen for quite some time this is not the case and banks have been creating valuless faux markets in order to take a considerably larger percentage and have in the process kept Government appointed regulators off of their backs by the simple process of back handers in various forms to senior individuals and by giving preferential rates to Governments so that they can borrow money to bribe the electors with, and you the poor blighted tax pay have to pay the piper when the music stops even though you did not call the tune.
  Lots of defensiveness about bitcoin here. Simple observation of where it stands and where it has travelled these last few years should tell people all they need to know. It's fuelled several massive speculative bubbles and collapses and it's still no closer to being a stable viable currency now than it was then.
  From a security standpoint it's also suffered from some serious hacks and many of these were quite obvious vulnerabilities even back then - unencrypted wallets, insecure exchanges etc.
  Economic aspects of bitcoin aside, the analysis these authors have performed fills me with dread for the future of Bitcoin. When I see that most of the big transactions don't seem to have been anonymised buys of various goods but more an attempt to covertly shift a huge amount of currency around, closely followed by obfuscatory tactics (that didn't work), then I am forced to but one conclusion:
  SCAM.
  The original creator of bitcoin was setting up a scam to diddle a wide variety of potential marks out of actual wealth. What I'd wager occurred is that someone started out with a huge lump sum of bitcoins, and then sold this lot on to some half-smart financial wizards.
  Said wizards then tried the very same obfuscatory tactics that work out in the real world with non-traceable money on their load of bitcoins, not realising that this was useless (hence half-smart). After this, the lump was then flogged off to legions of conspiracy theorists, loons, anarchists and dozy libertarians in a collection of very small parcels.
  In the early days, bitcoin suffered a series of rollercoaster peaks and slumps; this was because most of the capital was being controlled by whizzkids. These days it'll be stable because most of the capital will be sitting as nest-eggs in the wallets of the aforementioned legions of loons; there won't be any movement save a slow deflation simply because there isn't enough liquidity in the system to actually support much movement.
  All in all, a very, very effective scam. I take my hat off to the man who invented bitcoins; almost as effective a way of fleecing idiots as a religion, and hitting a completely different market of suckers that was hitherto the sole preserve of gold-dealers. Nicely done, very nicely done indeed!
  Damn... an interesting article made obscure by the internet inflation/deflation/gold fanatics.
  More important from the article (yes I did read it) was the November 2010 transaction... perhaps a scam (Dan H.) but I'm not so sure. I'd like to think it is a nascent AI who is probing the concepts of markets. ;)
  Bitcoins are infinitely divisible. They are currently divisible to 8 decimal places because the value in the protocol is a 32-bit integer. Change to 64-bit and so on for more decimal places. An entire economy could exist off of 0.000001 bitcoins.
  This paper's analysis is flawed because it is impossible to know if these large transactions are single users or part of a company (eg Mt.Gox, Silk Road, BitInstant, etc). It is also impossible to know if the coins that have not moved in a while have been lost (user deleted private key and can no longer access wallet), or are actually being stored.
  Breaking ECDSA would only allow one to steal bitcoins that have been sent to an address which has sent coins already. This is because the public key of an address is revealed when it spends coins. Use a new address for every transaction and ECDSA flaws will not be a threat to your coins (eg it is astronomically harder to brute force BOTH the public key and private key).
  The only way the original creator of bitcoin (Satoshi) could make any money is if he redeemed the coins sent to the first bitcoin address (presumably his). There is a large number of coins in that address but there is no way to know if the private key to that address has been lost, or if Satoshi is holding on to it. Worst case: he sells the coins all at once and crashes the market for a bit.
  Before diving into the matter of inflation and deflation, one must define them. I haven't defined mine when speaking about 'deflation is everywhere' so let's do this first.
  I normally use the following definitions:
  1. Inflation: a net increase in money supply and credit, with credit marked-to-market.
  2. Deflation: a net decrease in money supply and credit, with credit marked-to-market.
  The first two definitions have nothing to do with prices per se. However, many if not most economists, especially Keynesians, think of inflation in terms of prices. That's the reason why I referred to deflation as such when stating 'deflation is everywhere'.
  'Economist' are so busy claiming that an increase of purchasing power of money is so bad because the economy would come to a crippling halt, that they fail to notice something else. Even if $499 remains $499 1 year later in nominal terms, I may be able to get 'more' for the same money.
  2 March 2011: Ipad 2 is launched.7 March 2012: Ipad 3 is launched.
  Both were priced similarly when launched. Someone with $499 who waited one mere year could have bought a tablet that is much more powerful than the one he could purchase one year before. Realistically, he was able to buy much more a year later with the same money, than a year before. However, the iPad 2 was not a failure nor was the first iPad. Noboby cared about the next year when buying the iPad 2 at that time.
  'Economist' tend to be very sensitive about money not appreciating over time. There is extensive material on defining whether there is 'official' inflation or not. In essence, a lot of bureaucrats comparing iPad 2's with iPad's 3, apples with pears, figuring out arbitrarily whether there is (Keneysian price) inflation or not. All because appreciating currency is so, so, soooo incredibly bad. The simple notion that people may - at times - just prefer to hold money instead of immediately spending it, is deemed bad. A true display that those kind of 'economist' do not understand the real world.
  I have never ever ever ever never never ever never ever ever ever NEVER EVER postponed a purchase or brought a purchase forward for considerations of assumed increase or decrease of purchasing power. There is a simple truth that this argument used by 'economist' is just that: an argument. It has no meaning in real life because ordinary people do not take this into account. It's simply the choice whether one wants NOW or in the FUTURE.
  But that won't stop 'economist' proclaiming that 'deflation' is bad and a little 'inflation' is good. Please do not mind that people are simply robbed of value if someone, be it banks or government, prints new money. Its nothing more than theft, taxation without representation. Something that once started a whole rebellion of the 'best country in the world' against the Brits. But humanity has to learn over and over again.
  So, yes, I thinkered a bit with the definition of 'deflation' for argument sake. But the fact remains that deflation (if not too extreme) does not lead to a crippled economy. Otherwise, I would still be holding my $499 for that iPad 7 that will blow the rest out of the water, starved to death because deflation urges me not to spend any money.
  Einstein already defined insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. Keynesian economist with their inflation fallacy were and are dead wrong. Their policies are part of the reason why we are in such a hard place. Entirely foreseeable for those willing to use real logic. And yes, I love to keep learning from the other side of the story.
  That does not take away the particulars of the Bitcoin study. I would be interested to learn the numbers in respect of 'official money'. No one is hoarding that other digital money?
  One thing that marks Bitcoin rather strongly as a scam is the mind-set of its proponents. These arguments given (also given here) are the typical ones used by participants in pyramid schemes. It is a mixture of naive believe, and secret hopes that by recruiting enough others to the scam they can be high enough in the pyramid to profit themselves. (Which they never do. All profitable layers and a few extra ones are with the instigators of the scam.)
  The Bitcoin creators did two things really well:
  a) Create that mind-set (the "idea" part of the scam). As is well known, there are about 5% of the population that cannot identify a scam even if it is glaringly obvious, if the "idea" is good. With an "idea" this good, the number may be significantly higher.
  b) Make the crypto strong enough that nobody has broken it so far. Not that the crypto is any good (see below), it is just not easily broken.
  There are glaring flaws as well:
  1. The deflatory nature screams "pyramid scheme" so loud nobody halfway awake can ignore it. Due to defects in perception of the participants, it works nonetheless (as any good scam does).
  2. Bitcoin handling is very hard to implement securely, as numerous plundered individuals and Bitcoin exchanges have shown. I would go so far as to say that at this time secure Bitcoin handling is unsolved, unless you keep them completely offline. No doubt the people at the top of the pyramid are doing that until they decide to cash in. This flaw makes Bitcoin fundamentally unsuitable for its stated purpose.
  Bottom line: Just another scam for the gullible, advertised with the usual "world changing" type of "idea" that cannot hold water on close scrutiny, but seems plausible to non-experts. I expect that is also why nobody really tries to outlaw it: Any good economist sees what it is.
  It does have some interesting properties though, and can certainly be classified as an advanced scam.
  @...
  - In that case, I'd advise that you create models of two economies: one with fiat currency with inflation and one with fiat currency with deflation, both at fixed rates (for simplicity). Include (very simple) debt, loans, investments, work, actors, etc. Then compare the two.
  If you can find a realistic model where currency with deflation performs better than one with inflation, I'd encourage you to publish. I'm certain that I wouldn't be the only person interested in this result; while I am hardly an economist, I've tried this and failed.
  @Democraatus - you appear to realize that your definitions for inflation and deflation are non-standard. Are you aware that your definition for money is non-standard? Indeed, it's pretty easy to construct an example http://www.slate.com/articles/business/... where an increase in money supply does little to affect the value of money.
  Addresses which have never spent coins: the only reason to reuse an address is if you need to publish it. So concluding that these coins are being hoarded is unwarrented.
  Quantum computers: never reuse a bitcoin address. Public key is disclosed only when coins are spent or moved. How is this worse than our e-commerce system which fails on publication of root PKI keys? Actually it is much better.
  Bitcoin creators cash in: same as founders after a successful IPO.
  Currency issues: bitcoin is a payment system and bitcoins are a commodity that cannot be manufactured. Bitcoins are useful because they can be used to make payments especially international payments.
  Professional traders on currency exchanges: never try to beat the pros in short term trading.
  Retail bitcoin exchanges allow payments with simultaneous rapid international transfer and currency conversion.
  Hoarding is just commodity speculation.
  Government takeover or suppression: definitely possible. Suppression simply requires many government miners whose goal is to slow down transaction processing enough to make bitcoin useless.
  But there are ever more legitimate businesses in bitcoin and the system is useful. So I expect takeover by a group of nations (no nation will want to allow another to take over bitcoin). The majority of miners can change the rules. This offers an opportunity for a transaction tax, and for 3% inflation.
  I meant to include these points.
  Wallet security: support for the "brainwallet" is maturing. A suitable (globuniq) passphrase is hashed to seed private key production. Neither the private nor public keys are disclosed; only the bitcoin addresses are placed online. Bitcoins are received at those addresses. To spend the coins in a specific address, the passphrase is entered into an offline device which generates the signed transaction and sends it over a write-only channel to the bitcoin network.
  Real world adoption: Argentina has high inflation and is trying to enforce currency controls. People are buying bitcoins for Pesos and dollars for bitcoins. Google for Argentina blue market bitcoin. http://thebluemarket.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/...
  Sorry, the last remark was for PJ, not J.D.
  Sure a lot of BC fans have a bit of the flavor of the true believer about them. They really do think BC is a valuable innovation, and they're not ashamed to tell you that.
  But for pure intellectually bankrupt desperation, the competing legions of jaded naysayers take the cake. If Bitcoin really were as weak and vulnerable as they say it is, well, they wouldn't be saying a thing. Instead, they'd have their fancy trading algorithms and quantum crypto key-finders churning day and night, stealing all that money that the poor deranged libertarians have left lying around for the taking.
  Since that clearly isn't happening, I'm not going to worry too much about the hand-wavy pseudo-economics. Here's a clue for the befuddled: don't think of BC as a fiat currency, but as a commodity. No modern economy requires consumers to keep pork bellies in their wallets, and that's OK!
  The main problem with a gold standard is that it does not allow your exchange rate to float independently against multiple trading partners. This was not a large problem in the past (prior to about WWII), because at that time almost all countries were either exporters of raw materials or of finished goods, not both, and nobody exported services (except very locally, between immediate neighbors).
  In the modern world, however, a gold standard would generate harmful currency arbitrage, draining the currency backer's coffers, which is why the US Dollar had to be taken off the gold standard. There wasn't really any choice, except in the timing of exactly how soon to do it. Ultimately, we had to go to a fiat currency (unless we wanted to return to the practice of enacting high tariffs on all imports, causing all of our trading partners to erect tariffs on our exports in turn, a practice that economically isolates you and allows the rest of the world to pass you by).
  Bitcoin, for slightly different technical reasons, would have an effectively very similar problem, if it were ever adopted as a primary currency in any given geographic area. So it won't be.
  I suppose, if enough of the right people embraced it, it could potentially compete with services like PayPal. I see no evidence that that is happening in practice, though. For example, I am not aware of a single major retailer that accepts it as payment.
  Even the bitcoin enthusiasts know that these long strings of numbers aren't worth anything. But I suspect that they are hyping it up so that the price of a bitcoin will rise and then they sell out before the coin crashes.
  And the idea that this is the currency of choice for underground drug trafficking on the internet is laughable. Was that is a Cracked article or something?
  I wonder about those dormant accounts. It seems to me they could be used as a reserve currency, passing the private key around as the actual, untraceable medium of exchange. I suspect this would require some enforcement mechanism, such as the violent response available to drug and weapons dealers.
  The BIG problem with all this macro thinking by some, no doubt, "very clever people", is that it oftentimes ignores the micro ~ almost all the complaints they level at the door of Bitcoins, in the macro, are equally applicable to flat currencies in the micro.
  But please don't let me interrupt your high-level discussion. Very interesting. Stupid, but very interesting.
  So, why is it bad if it's a deflationary system?
  Study economics 101:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6a10UuQFOM
  If you lose some, the value of all other bitcoins go up. Consider it a donation to all others using the currency.
  Seriously, nobody knows what's next.
  Historically, all fiat currencies all disappeared.. and gold is totally unusable as a currency..
  Yet.. Bitcoin is no fiat and no gold.. It is (take a deep breath) something else.
  And since nothing like that exists in our past history, nobody can say what is going to happen.
  Bitcoin future would be a dead end if Bitcoin wouldn't have anything to offer.. The reality is that Bitcoin *has* something unique to offer.
  - Worldwide immediate and interoperable payments- Free (or extremely low fee) transactions- Total zero payback fraud- Total zero counterfeiting- Total zero spoofing- Impossible to freeze or control by any organisation
  I would say that is pretty huge.. No fiat ever got to obtain such properties. And it is for real.
  Yet, the real question is now to know if the market will want these properties.
  And as for the deflation or legality, these are indeed valid concerns. Everyone is wondering how things will evolve. And negative reactions on this forums leaves a good demonstration that deflation might in fact be a factor that will stabilize Bitcoin adoption (and deflation) with a simple market resistance. Or maybe not!
  My bet is that Bitcoin will not die that easily. The protocol is terribly resistant and resilient to anything that comes to imagination. And even when speaking about human reaction, Bitcoin confidence has shown is ability to survive to apocalypse when MT.Gox was hacked. The dollar would never survive to anything close to what happened to Bitcoin in its first years of existence. However, I still have no clue if Bitcoin has the potential to become mainstream. But the probability that it might disappears is very unlikely.
  Even if it was initially set up as a scam,which I don't believe, the bottom line is, we now have a system for sending money around the Globe, anonymously, quickly and relatively cheaply.That's a useful technology, which I think will make it very popular, and as it becomes more popular, it's price will soar.
  Subscribe to comments on this entry
  Schneier.com is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of BT.
  Crypto-Gram NewsletterIf you prefer to receive Bruce Schneier's comments on security as a monthly e-mail digest, subscribe to Schneier on Security's sister publication, Crypto-Gram.read more
DoDEA - Budgetary Uncertainty
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 12:39
  In the coming days and weeks, all DoD entities including DoDEA will confront significant uncertainty regarding the amount of budgetary resources available for the remainder of the fiscal year as well as the potential for furloughs of civilian employees. This website will help DoDEA stakeholders stay informed about planning efforts to address this critical situation.
  The Defense Education Activity (DODEA) is thoughtfully developing its plan to minimize the impact civilian furloughs may have on students, parents and faculty. Throughout this process, our goal is to preserve the accreditation of our schools and ensure a quality education for all our children. "We understand the anxiety these uncertainties bring to our school communities. While there will be impacts to our students, parents and faculty if furloughs are implemented, the principle guiding DODEA's planning efforts is to lessen the impacts of sequestration wherever we can."
  Two sources of budget uncertainties:
  The Continuing Resolution (CR)The Continuing Resolution (CR), which will remain in effect until at least March 27, 2013. The CR holds us to Fiscal Year (FY) 12 spending levels and permits no new program starts this year. Since we were expecting our budget to increase in FY 13, funds will run short at the current rate of expenditure if the CR continues through the end of the FY 13.
  Potential SequestrationSequestration refers to the mandatory reduction in federal budgetary resources of all budget accounts that have not been exempted by statute. Under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, across-the-board reductions are scheduled to take place Mar. 1, 2013, unless legislation is enacted that avoids such reductions. This creates significant additional uncertainties for managing our operations due to the short time frame in which to execute any reductions or furloughs.
  DoDEA Demographics and Stakeholders AffectedPotential Impact on DoDEAThere will be a significant impact on DoDEA operations due to budget reductions.We are unclear at this time how a furlough would affect DoDEA.DoD has directed DoDEA to prepare for reduced spending with careful and thoughtful decisions.The Department intends to implement sequestration in a manner that preserves the ability to provide students a full school year of academic credit, including completion of final exams, and to maintain school accreditation standards.Our first priority is to mitigate the negative impacts that sequestration will have on our ability to provide quality educational services. No decisions have been made at this point. DoD leaders are continuing deliberations and planning.Immediate steps we are taking to slow down spendingCeased all non-mission critical travel.Suspended the Department of Defense Dependents Schools (DoDDS) Transfer Program for School Year 2013-2014, except as may be necessary to place excess employees. We will make every effort to place excess educators, as we do every year.Suspended the Administrator Rotation Program for School Year 2013-2014. All efforts will be made to ensure all excess employees are placed.Ceased all training and conferences, unless they are mission-essential.Spring sports are fully funded and will proceed subject to any changes driven by potential furloughs.Planning underwayAll DoD entities are now developing plans outlining how we might handle a budget shortfall in FY 13 because of CR and potential sequestration budget uncertainties.DoDEA has submitted a plan to DoD for approval. We expect a decision by 15 March.It is important to note that planning does not assume that any of these unfortunate events will occur, only that we must be ready.There are limited areas in our budget from which to generate any savings in the last six months of a budget cycle. Nonetheless, we have to be prepared to accomplish our mission to the best of our ability given the constraints that may affect our school system.We must operate in a strict culture of savings now.In all of our planning, we will offer steps that are reversible in the event that a budget resolution is reached in Congress.We understand the anxiety these uncertainties bring to our school communities. DoDEA is reviewing all areas of its budget for potential savings. We will keep our employees, parents, and communities informed at each and every step along the way
Washington: Hizballah has got hold of chemical weapons
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 12:03
  For the first time in many years, voices in the US administration were criticizing the Israeli defense forces for under-reacting and, in this case, also underestimating the chemical weapons threat emanating from Syria and neglecting to pursue counter-measures. This is what visiting Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak heard when he met US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel at the Pentagon Tuesday, March 5, as the new defense secretary's first foreign visitor.debkafile's military and Washington sources disclose that Barak was berated for ''inadequate and cursory'' military preparations which failed to take into account that a chemical attack on Israel would make it necessary for the IDF to enter Syria '' most likely for an offensive operation coordinated against the common threat with the Turkish and Jordanian armies.
  Present at the meeting between Hagel and Barak were also Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff and Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren. Our sources add that the conversation ranged over the Syrian crisis with no reference to a nuclear Iran.From the defense secretary, Barak heard intelligence estimates confirmed for the first time by an American official that Hizballah has been able to procure a quantity of chemical weapons from Syria '' a development which Israel's leaders have vowed to prevent.
  The proliferation of chemical weapons to HIzballah and other armed bands on Israel's borders was apparently in the mind of Russia's UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin, UN Security Council president for March, when he cautioned Monday that trouble was building up between Israel and Syria.Read debkafile's earlier report:
  At UN Center in New York, Israeli and Russian delegates separately warned Monday, March 4, of a dangerous situation developing in the area of separation on the Golan captured by Israel in the 1967 war. Syrian troops were forbidden to enter this area under a ceasefire formalized in 1974 between Syria and Israel.
  Israeli UN Ambassador Ron Prosor complained to the Security Council about five shells fired from this very area which landed in Israel Saturday, March 2. "Israel cannot be expected to stand idle as the lives of its citizens are being put at risk by the Syrian government's reckless actions," Proser wrote in a Note to the council. "Israel has shown maximum restraint thus far."
  Russia's UN Ambasador Vitaly Churkin then spoke of ''a very new and dangerous phenomenon'' of armed groups operating in the Golan area of separation. ''It's something which potentially can undermine security between Syria and Israel,'' said Churkin, who is acting Security Council president for March. He pointed out that the UN peacekeeping force is unarmed and unable to cope with this new situation. Israel and Syria are technically in a state of war.
  debkafile's military and intelligence sources note that the exchange of warnings between Israel and Russia touched two sensitive nerves:
  1. It occurred the day before definitive talks open in Moscow between the Syrian government and opposition. The Russians fear Israel might embark on military action in response to the round of shells fired from the Syrian Golan Saturday, and force a delay in the talks. The last time this happened, in late January, Israel reacted with a cross-border attack on Syrian military installations.2. Saturday, too, debkafile exposed the no-man's lands unfolding along Syria's borderlands with Israel and Jordan following the withdrawal of the bulk of Syrian forces from these areas. Moscow fears additionally that Israel's armed forces will seize strategic points in the abandoned territory to clear out armed bands of the pro-al Qaeda Jabhat al Nusra, which are believed responsible for the latest round of shelling into the Israeli Golan.Churkin's warning referred to ''armed groups'' as the potential troublemakers, but he was also cautioning Israel to desist from fighting back so as not to upset Moscow's diplomatic initiative for resolving the Syrian civil war.
Damascus - Syria Says Uncovers Israeli Spy Equipment Near Coast -
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 12:00
  Damascus - Syria said on Thursday it had uncovered an Israeli spy camera monitoring a ''sensitive site'' on its Mediterranean coast.
  State television showed pictures of what it said was a camera, six large batteries and transmission gear along with fake rocks used to camouflage the equipment.
  It quoted an official source as saying the equipment was found in the last few days at a coastal location not specified, and that the discovery highlighted the role Israel had played in the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad.
  It said the camera had relayed pictures in real time and had been used in the service of both Israel and ''armed terrorist groups'' - the label Syrian officials give to insurgents fighting to topple Assad.
  An Israeli military spokeswoman said she was checking the report and made no further comment.
  Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor would not comment on the report of the spy equipment, saying: ''We will not be dragged into the Syrian civil war. Not on the verbal or propaganda battlefield, nor on the real one.''
  The equipment shown on Syrian television - and the artificial rocks used to disguise it - closely resembled items seized in Lebanon in recent years that Lebanese authorities said were also used by Israel to monitor movements inside Lebanon.
  Syria is engulfed in a civil war which the United Nations says has killed 70,000 people and erupted nearly two years ago with initially peaceful protests against Assad.
MSNBC's David Corn: Holder Letter To Paul 'Had a Very Silent FU In It'
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:51
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
ABC's Jon Karl Hits Obama for Closing of White House Tours
  Link to Article
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:51
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
Osama Bin Laden's Son-In-Law Being Interrogated In NEW YORK CITY!
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:44
North Korea Threatens "First Strike Nuclear Attack That Will Leave Washington DC In A Sea Of Flame"
  Link to Article
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:44
A First Draft of the Third War - By Micah Zenko | Foreign Policy
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 04:58
  Since 11:47 on Wednesday morning, the beginning of a Senate filibuster to delay a vote on John Brennan's nomination to head the CIA, "Rand Paul," "drones," and "John Brennan" have intermittently been trending on Twitter. This attention-grabbing focus on targeted killings -- which will last only until Paul runs out of steam -- is representative of the sporadic attention that the controversial tactic has received from policymakers and the public.
  With each supposed revelation -- the "kill list," "signature strikes," "disposition matrix," and the leaking of a Department of Justice white paper providing the legal justification for killing American citizens -- there is a frenzy of interest in drone strikes. Analysts (myself included) are repeatedly asked, "Where is this all heading in five or ten years?" In other words: What additional lethal missions will U.S. armed drones execute, and where will they occur? What other states will seek to develop this military capability?
  But, in general, there is relative indifference to the history of America's Third War -- the 10-year campaign of over 400 targeted killings in non-battlefield settings that have killed an estimated 3,500 to 4,700 people. And that is puzzling, particularly since they have become a defining feature of post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy.
  Over the past few months, many stakeholders in and out of government have offered recommendations about how the Obama administration should change, limit, end, or enhance its targeted killing policies. However, there have been no calls for an official government study into the history and evolution of non-battlefield targeted killings. This is essential, since reforms must first be informed by an accurate accounting of how the policies were originally conceived, how they were implemented and altered based on updated information, whether they succeeded or failed at achieving their objectives, and what their intended and unintended effects have been.
  If President Obama believes what he said in his State of the Union address -- "It is not sufficient for citizens to just take my word for it that we are doing the right thing" -- then he should authorize a comprehensive historical review into targeted killings, ideally by an independent commission. This review would later be declassified -- with input from the original classification authorities -- to the greatest extent possible without revealing classified information regarding the sources and methods of such operations. This would include protecting those foreign liaison relationships that facilitate U.S. military or intelligence access to denied areas.
  The president and his senior officials have repeatedly asserted that drones are "surgical," "discriminate," and "precise," and that there is a very careful and deliberate interagency process ("not a bunch of folks in a room somewhere just making decisions"). If that is true, then the Obama administration must believe it has a positive targeted killings story to share with the public. This would be preferable to the surreptitious custom of rebutting criticisms of targeted killings via anonymous officials, or selectively disavowing attacks that were initially thought to be drone strikes, as the New York Timesreported on Monday.
  Such an action would not be unprecedented. In May 2009, President Obama declassified Office of Legal Counsel memoranda justifying torture "because the existence of that approach to interrogation was already widely known, the Bush administration had acknowledged its existence." Today, targeted killings via U.S. drone strikes are openly debated, and Obama himself explicitly acknowledged the practice of targeted killings in Pakistan over 13 months ago. The principle and excuse of deniability no longer applies and is an unacceptable defense for the limitless secrecy surrounding the targeted killings program.
  There are publicly available or partially declassified U.S. government reports on similarly controversial topics, including the CIA's 2004 report on detention and interrogation, the Pentagon's 2005 review of detention and interrogation, and the director of national intelligence's 2012 report on Guantanamo detainees. There have also been major reports, like the 9/11 Commission Report and the congressional joint inquiry into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, as well as the U.S. military's highly critical assessments of the Afghanistan and Iraqwars. Finally, there was the Senate Foreign Relations Committee report on Afghanistan's narco-war, which revealed that U.S. military forces "put drug traffickers with proven links to the insurgency on a kill list, called the joint integrated prioritized target list."
  If the White House is unable or unwilling to conduct a similar study on drones, then Congress should build upon its recent efforts at oversight by initiating a full and complete accounting of non-battlefield targeted killings. This could be done through a joint inquiry or within the committees on governmental affairs, foreign relations, armed services, or intelligence. It would include staff investigations, closed hearings with administration officials, and public hearings with outside experts and former officials. One recent example is the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's 6,000-page report on CIA torture, which may be released in whole or in part "after receiving executive branch comments," according to Senator Dianne Feinstein. Given that Congress (justifiably) investigated America's role in the torture of an estimated 136 victims, it is surely worth investigating the targeted killings program, which has killed over 3,000 suspected terrorists, militants, and civilians -- and counting.
  The first component of reform is drawing upon the experiences and lessons of the past. Without an official history of targeted killings, future U.S. government officials and employees will only be influenced by the immediate scope of their responsibilities, and citizens will absorb each new headline without a broader context or awareness. An executive or congressional historical report of targeted killings should receive bipartisan support, since the program has actually spanned three administrations -- even Bill Clinton maintained a kill list of "fewer than ten" suspected al Qaeda members. However, virtually all policymakers and citizens have forgotten that and are similarly unaware of the deep and opaque history of the Third War, because their focus is forever on the present and the future.
Analysis: Without Belmokhtar, jihadi networks would suffer | Reuters
  Link to Article
  Fri, 08 Mar 2013 02:47
  Veteran jihadist Mokhtar Belmokhtar speaks in this file undated still image taken from a video released by Sahara Media on January 21, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Sahara Media via Reuters TV /Files
  By Myra MacDonald
  LONDON | Sun Mar 3, 2013 3:02pm EST
  LONDON (Reuters) - Nearly two years after the killing of Osama bin Laden, the death in Mali of Algerian commander Mokhtar Belmokhtar, if confirmed, would be a serious blow to al Qaeda's efforts to recover its cohesion as a force for global jihad.
  Official sources question how far al Qaeda's leadership is able to influence its branches in far-flung North Africa, arguing that an intensive U.S. drone campaign on its presumed haven in Pakistan's tribal areas bordering Afghanistan has severely damaged its ability to exercise command and control.
  But Belmokhtar - whom Chad said its forces had killed in northern Mali on Saturday - nonetheless represented an important link to the jihadi organization's roots, having trained in Afghanistan in the early 1990s, where according to two former mujahideen commanders he was close to al Qaeda.
  The presumed mastermind behind a hostage-taking at an Algerian gas plant in January, he had also staked a claim to represent core al Qaeda causes when the hostage-takers demanded the release from U.S. prisons of Egyptian Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and Pakistani neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui.
  Abdel-Rahman, the blind cleric jailed for involvement in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and Siddiqui, whose uncle by marriage was Sept 11 mastermind Khaled Sheikh Mohammad, are highly sensitive cases in Egypt and Pakistan, used to win support for al Qaeda's cause and draw in recruits and funding.
  "If confirmed, his death would definitely be a blow for the jihadi networks in North Africa and the Sahel," said Camille Tawil, a journalist at al Hayat newspaper and a leading authority on North African jihadism. "He is for sure one of the oldest recognizable figures in the region with a wide and strong network of cells made up of locals as well as foreigners."
  A jihadist quoted by the SITE monitoring service rejected reports that Belmoktar had been killed, saying he was alive and would soon release a message. There has been no confirmation of his death outside of Chad.
  Chad's President Idriss Deby said on Friday his soldiers had also killed al Qaeda commander Abdelhamid Abou Zeid in an operation in the same area - Mali's Adrar des Ifoghas mountains near the Algerian border.
  An Algerian security source said it was "very likely" Belmokhtar had been killed. Others were more skeptical, noting his experience and knowledge of the desert terrain could have helped him escape after French-led military operations were launched against the Islamist militants in Mali this year.
  The killing of the two commanders, if confirmed, would also not be death blow for al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Before being driven out of towns in northern Mali, the militants had dug deep roots among the local population and won many new recruits who are expected to continue the fight.
  FRESH CHALLENGE FOR ZAWAHIRI
  Belmokhtar's death - far more so than that of Abu Zeid - would nonetheless break a chain linking those dedicated to al Qaeda's ideology from Mauritania in the west, eastwards through Mali to Libya, Egypt, Somalia, Nigeria, Yemen and Pakistan.
  It would also come at a time when bin Laden's successor, the Egyptian Ayman al Zawahiri, has to prove his credentials to keep the different parts of al Qaeda together.
  Zawahiri has neither the iconic stature nor the background as a former Saudi national that allowed bin Laden to act as a unifying force before he was killed by U.S. forces in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad in May 2011.
  "One of the major challenges which Zawahiri will have to face is to reassure members of al Qaeda that as its leader, he will not follow an Egypt-centric strategy'..." said Arslan Chikhaoui, a security analyst and chairman of a consultancy firm based in Algiers.
  "He will have to work particularly hard to keep al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula (AQAP) and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) on the side of the al Qaeda network and convince them of their interest in being inside the organization and not on the outside," he said in a report released last month.
  And while support for al Qaeda's ideology will be carried forward by younger recruits, Belmokhtar was, or is, the last in the Sahel connected to the early days of global jihad.
  According to two former mujahideen commanders who knew him, he was 19 years old when he reached Afghanistan in 1991. He spent 1-1/2 years there, losing an eye during a bomb-making class, before returning to Algeria to join its bloody civil war.
  A statement on his reported death, released by U.S. Representative Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, described him as "one of the most elusive and deadly terrorists in North Africa". Underscoring his importance, the statement added that, "Belmokhtar has been tracked by the Central Intelligence Agency since the early 1990s."
  Belmokhtar, along with many other Algerian Islamists who fought in the civil war, officially joined al Qaeda when his group became al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in 2007.
  Before the attack on the Algerian gas plant at In Amenas, in which more than 60 people were killed, some experts had suggested Belmokhtar had drifted away from jihad in favor of kidnapping and smuggling weapons and cigarettes in the Sahara, where he earned the nickname "Mr. Marlboro".
  Yet in a video released last year he had publicly pledged his loyalty to Zawahiri and Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad Omar. Rather than drifting away from jihad, he appeared to be combining it with smuggling and kidnapping to raise funds.
  Underscoring his geographical reach, he had support in Mauritania, an old base of operations for him. He had also been reported to have bought weapons from jihadis in Libya - part of the huge cache which also found its way into the hands of Islamist militants in the Sinai in Egypt after the overthrow in 2011 of Libyan dictator Muammar al Gaddafi.
  Little is known of how Zawahiri plans to leverage the fragmented parts of the al Qaeda franchise to retain its global cohesion and relevance after the "Arab spring" uprisings led to the overthrow of dictators it had opposed.
  But Algerian analyst Chikhaoui argued that Zawahiri had named among his closest circle in the central leadership men from North Africa with ties to AQIM in order to focus initially on Libya, Algeria and the Sahel.
  "Zawahiri sees Libya in particular as a potential rear base for Egypt, considered the key to the Arab world," he wrote. Having ensured that AQIM remained within the ambit of the core organization, he would seek to keep AQAP on board.
  Belmokhtar's death, if confirmed, would remove a key player in that scenario - a man who with the attack at In Amenas burnished his jihadi credentials and proved al Qaeda remained a potent threat to Western interests.
  (Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi in Kabul and Lamine Chikhi in Algiers; Editing by Stephen Powell)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprints
Move Over, NRA. Meet the Knife Lobby. | Mother Jones
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:13
  Doug Ritter was carrying two pocketknives and a Leatherman on his belt as he entered a suburban barbecue restaurant near his home in Gilbert, Arizona. "If we were in New York City right now, I could be arrested and sentenced to a year in prison for carrying these knives," he told me as we stood in line at the counter.
  Sitting down to carve into a big platter of pork and brisket, Ritter, the founder and chairman of Knife Rights Inc., laid out his arguments for restoring our right to carry switchblades, double-edged daggers, combat knives, bowie knives, stilettos, and cutlasses on any street in America. "Knives are essential tools used by millions of Americans every day, at work, at home, at play," he said. "And on rare occasions, they're also used as an arm in self-defense, or to defend one's family. When the Second Amendment talks about the right to bear arms, it doesn't specify firearms in particular."
  Ritter, a 59-year-old survival equipment expert, has carried a pocketknife since he was seven, and he feels naked without one. "It's part of getting dressed, like pulling on your pants in the morning," he said. He started Knife Rights in late 2006 after reading a Wall Street Journal article that portrayed military-style tactical knives as a deadly menace but offered no statistics linking them to any crimes.
  His group now has more than 2,200 members. Its legal arm receives most of its funding from the knife industry. Its chief lobbyist sits on the National Rifle Association's board of directors, and its website is strewn with overheated endorsements from the likes of Ted Nugent ("God Bless Knife Rights!") and NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre.
  But it might be a mistake to characterize the organization simply as a side project for gun nuts. Knife Rights' board also includes outdoorsman, knife designer, "kitchen despot," and Joy of Cooking heir Ethan Becker. "A significant minority of our members are hikers, backpackers, climbers, kayakers, environmentalists," Ritter said. "It's not a left-right, red-blue issue."
  Sure enough, in 2009, Congress updated the Federal Switchblade Act of 1958, which had outlawed the importation and interstate trade of spring-loaded "automatic" knives amid a panic about youthful hoodlums based on the fictional violence in West Side Story and movies such as Rebel Without a Cause and The Wild One. The bipartisan amendment, signed by President Obama, ensured that knives that can be pushed open with one hand'--just like the ones on Ritter's belt and an estimated 80 percent of the nonkitchen knives sold in America'--are not classified as switchblades.
  Still, knives remain regulated by a complicated, contradictory patchwork of state and local laws. That's how it used to be in Arizona: In Phoenix, you could carry a concealed pocketknife, but not a dagger or bowie knife. In neighboring Tempe, knives were banned only in bars and liquor stores. Down in Tucson, you could carry any kind of knife, openly or concealed, just about anywhere except libraries. After a lobbying campaign led by Knife Rights, the state Legislature overturned all these local restrictions in 2010, and Arizonans are now free to stroll down the sidewalk with anything from keychain pocketknives to samurai swords. The same year, the New Hampshire Legislature overturned the state's ban on switchblades, stilettos, dirks, and daggers. In 2011, it voided municipal knife restrictions. Utah and Georgia have done the same.
  "A significant minority of our members are hikers, backpackers, climbers, kayakers, environmentalists," Ritter said. "It's not a left-right, red-blue issue."
  But Knife Rights has run into sharp opposition in New York City. In 2010, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. held a press conference showcasing hundreds of "illegal knives" after his undercover investigators had bought dozens at stores like Home Depot and Eastern Mountain Sports. The stores agreed to pay nearly $1.9 million in penalties. An adviser to Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the DA for removing "a threat that was hiding in plain sight." Knife Rights is suing the city and Vance for allegedly misclassifying ordinary one-handed folding knives as illegal switchblades or gravity knives. (Gravity knives are not opened by a spring or by pushing the blade out, but rather by releasing a latch that lets the blade "drop" out.)
  It's hard to determine whether New York-style anti-knife laws actually make the streets safer. According to the FBI, knives were used in 13 percent of homicides in 2010. Jan Billeb, the executive director of the American Knife and Tool Institute ("Imagine Your Life Without a Knife"), claims that the overwhelming majority of knife crimes are committed with kitchen knives.
  Ritter worries that if "the demonization of knives" continues, we'll end up like Europe, where knives are often strictly regulated. He recalls a trip to England, where folding blades longer than three inches are illegal and you can't carry any knife in public "without good reason." (Self-defense doesn't count.) Ritter was testing life rafts on a sailboat when the ropes got tangled. "The only practical solution was to start cutting some lines loose," he recalled. "The rest of the folks were all connected with marine safety, but I was the only person that had a knife on board. Not even the captain of this boat. When I pulled it out and opened it up, it was like, 'Oh my God, he's got a knife. Look at that thing!' It was a little three-inch folder, just another tool I carry, and truly a critical piece of safety gear on a boat."
  Knife Rights' argument echoes a familiar tenet of the gun rights movement: Weapons don't kill people'--people kill people. "A screwdriver makes an excellent weapon if you want to use it that way. So does a baseball bat or a claw hammer," Ritter said, finishing his lunch and putting down his fork and knife. "It's irrational to believe that if you ban certain types of knives, criminals will somehow stop being criminals."
Vaccinating Babies: More Vaccines For Newborns? Set You Free News
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:08
  By Janelle Vaesa | Decoded Science
  A newborn's immune system is not very well developed and doesn't respond to vaccines very well. However, a new study may change the vaccine timetable for infants. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the only vaccine currently given at birth is the hepatitis B.
  This new study conducted by Ofer Levy MD, PhD of the Boston's Children's Hospital has found a compound that increases the immune system's response to vaccines.
  Toll-like Receptor 8Dr. Levy and his team of researchers found that in the white blood cells there is a receptor called the Toll-like receptor 8 (TLR 8) that responds strongly to stimulation. The researchers tested a panel of synthetic compound called, benzazepines that target the Toll-like receptor 8.
  Decoded Science asked Dr. Levy how this works to stimulate the immune system and he stated, ''benzazepines apparently bind to TLR8 and thereby activate white blood cells to induce an immune response.''
  Researchers discovered toll-like receptors about twenty years ago, and have currently found ten TLRs. The receptors are part of the innate immune response, which is the body's first defense against an infection. One TLR called monophosphoryl lipid A (MPLA) is used in the Cervarix vaccine for HPV, which protects against the human papillomavirus.
  Benzazepines '' VTX-294One of the benzazepines, called VTX-294 was tested in the white blood cells that were taken from cord blood and from whole blood of adults. VTX-294 resulted in a large production of cytokines (chemicals that ignite the immune response) and proved to be 10 times more potent then the TLR8.
  This benzazepine, VTX-294 was sometimes more effective in the newborns' cord blood than in the adult samples, but is benzazepine VTX-294 safe for newborns? Dr. Levy explains, ''We don't yet know for sure whether benzazepines are safe for newborns. Next steps will be animal studies to assess that. If the animal studies suggested safety and effectiveness in boosting vaccine responses, then yes the idea would be to include these compounds in vaccines.''
  Vaccines for NewbornsIf all the testing is successful, and VTX-294 is approved, other vaccines maybe given at birth in addition to the hepatitis B shot. Dr. Levy explains which vaccines maybe given and if it safe.
  ''Currently only hepatitis B virus vaccine (''HBV'') is given at birth in U.S., ultimately there may be more vaccines given at birth to induce protection earlier in life. In regions of the world where there is a lot of tuberculosis (''TB'') a vaccine called Bacille-Calmette Guerin (''BCG'') is also given soon after birth as is oral polio virus vaccine. Safety will be a major focus in this neonatal vaccine development.''
  Can a Newborn's Immune System Handle More Vaccines?If a newborn's immune system doesn't respond to most vaccines; then why do we give newborns the hepatitis B vaccine when the infant is just 12 hours old? I asked Dr. Levy and he explained, ''HBV should be given at birth per the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and prevention (CDC).
  HBV does have some effectiveness with a birth dose which is why it is given. We believe that research such as that we are doing will ultimately allow us to manufacture even more effective vaccines- perhaps ones that may not require multiple doses.''
  Vaccines at BirthOne of the benefits of giving more vaccines at birth is in other countries, where many times the only time a infant has access to a doctor is at birth. This would provide children swifter access to protection against illnesses such as whooping cough and rotavirus, when normally these immunizations aren't given until two months of age. The acceleration of an immunization schedule could potentially save many lives, especially in developing countries.
  Resources:American Academy of Pediatrics. Recommended vaccine schedule for persons ages 0-18 years '' 2013. Accessed March 7, 2013.
  David J. Dowling, Zhen Tan, Zofia M. Prokopowicz, Christine D. Palmer, Maura-Ann H. Matthews, Gregory N. Dietsch, Robert M. Hershberg, Ofer Levy. The Ultra-Potent and Selective TLR8 Agonist VTX-294 Activates Human Newborn and Adult Leukocytes. (2013). PLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (3): e58164 DOI. Accessed March 7, 2013.
  Boston Children's Hospital. A vaccine that works in newborns? (2013). Accessed March 7, 2013.
Video of Syrians With Seized U.N. Vehicle in Golan Heights
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:01
  Updated, Thursday, 9:07 a.m. As my colleagues Rick Gladstone and Alan Cowell report, 30 armed rebel fighters kidnapped a group of 20 United Nations peacekeepers in the Golan Heights on Wednesday and gave a 24-hour deadline before they would treat the peacekeepers ''as prisoners of war.''
  The abduction was announced in two video messages posted online by a group calling itself the Martyrs of Yarmouk Brigade that showed two young-looking rebels, one carrying a rifle, standing in front of captured United Nations vehicles. The videos did not clearly show any of the abducted United Nations personnel, although two figures seated in the cab of one of the captured vehicles may have been peacekeepers.
  One of the videos posted on YouTube does appear to show the abducted peacekeepers, although they are not the focus of the message. Several people in the signature light blue helmets and vests of the United Nations can be seen inside the captured vehicles while their kidnappers energetically talk about the treachery of both the United Nations and the Syrian government.
  Video posted on YouTube on Wednesday by a Syrian rebel group calling itself the Martyrs of Yarmouk Brigade, which claims to have abducted 20 United Nations peacekeepers in the Golan Heights.
  Speaking about the United Nations, one rebel shouts, ''They are agents of Israel, and the Syrian regime and the United Nations and all the European countries, and the Assad regime, they are all agents of Israel!''
  He also calls Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, ''an agent of Zionism and America'' before the sound of gunfire is heard. ''One of the tyrant's snipers is shooting at us,'' he said, before the video ended.
  In a second video clip, a young spokesman for the rebels listed their demands.
  A video messsage from a Syrian rebel group that said it had captured U.N. preacekeepers.
  The spokesman said:
  We are holding the forces of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force until the withdrawal of Bashar al-Assad's forces from the village of al-Jamla and its outskirts to their positions. We ask America, the United Nations and the Security Council that Assad's forces withdraw to obtain their release. We won't release them until after the withdrawal of the forces of the regime of Bashar al-Assad from the outskirts of the village of al-Jamla, which is on the border with Israel. We ask them for the complete withdrawal of the forces back to their positions. If the withdrawal does not take place within 24 hours, we will treat them as prisoners of war, and praise be to God almighty.
  The abduction poses perhaps the most serious threat to the safety of United Nations personnel since the start of the two-year-old Syrian conflict. The European media director of Human Rights Watch posted an update on Twitter that said his organization was investigating the rebel brigade for its role in the execution of prisoners.
  Rebels holding UN team are being investigated by @HRW for past executions http://t.co/TmTXY55gxr
  '-- Andrew Stroehlein (@astroehlein)6 Mar 13
  The United Nations has demanded the immediate return of its personnel. But an update posted to Twitter to that effect also exposed resentment bubbling among some Syrians who feel the outside world has done little but stand by and watch their country descend into violence and chaos.
  Security Council demands release of UN peacekeepers held in Golan Heights http://t.co/unCZ4Ag2L9 #Syria
  '-- UN News Centre (@UN_News_Centre)6 Mar 13
  @UN_News_Centre @UN Syrians demand that the UN and the Security Council respect their commitments in protecting the Syrian people. SHAME!
  '-- Jinan Assami Alaouf (@jinnyonly)6 Mar 13
  There is more than one place in Syria called Yarmouk, and it was not immediately clear whether the rebel group that claimed responsibility for the abduction was named in honor of those who died in Yarmouk Camp, a large Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus, or in Wadi Yarmouk, a valley on the border with Jordan in Daraa where refugees have fled in the past.
  There are Facebook pages dedicated to a rebel group from Yarmouk Valley as well as one memorializing those killed in Yarmouk Camp, but as of Wednesday evening neither page posted an update claiming an affiliation with the Martyrs of Yarmouk Brigade.
  In December, government jets attacked Yarmouk Camp for the first time, killing at least eight people and driving hundreds more to flee to Lebanon.
  Yarmouk has traditionally housed the most Palestinian refugees of any camp in Syria. It is a densely packed urban quarter housing more than 148,000 registered Palestinian refugees, according to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which is assigned to care for Palestinian refugees since they were displaced by the creation of Israel in 1948.
  In a video posted to YouTube in January, two Syrian activists, standing in a meadow full of bleating sheep ''just 10 meters from Jordan'' in Yarmouk Valley, discuss government harassment and attacks of refugees who were once there.
  Two Syrian activists discuss past government attacks on refugees in Yarmouk Valley in Daraa Province.
  Another video, posted to YouTube on Monday, shows a large number of refugees, primarily women and children, in the valley. Some are seeking shelter inside a large tunnel while others are climbing into the back of pickup trucks to travel elsewhere. The video is narrated by a fighter from the Ahfad Ibn al-Walid Brigade.
  Refugees in Yarmouk Valley sought shelter in a large tunnel and climbed into pickup trucks to travel elsewhere.
  The Golan Heights has long been a trip wire for regional conflict. Israel occupied the area during the Six-Day War in 1967 and effectively annexed it in 1981. That action was not internationally recognized, and Syria and Israel have technically been in a state of war for decades. United Nations peacekeepers have been stationed there since 1974.
  Syria and Israel have never resumed hostilities, but opposition to Israel has long been a pillar of the Assad government's self-styled image as an anti-imperial stalwart and ''the beating heart of Arabism.'' That is especially true when it comes to the Golan Heights.
  As Anthony Shadid pointed out in May 2011, critics of the Syrian government have long said that its anti-Israel and anti-imperialist rhetoric was meant to distract from the brutality it meted out to its own people as well as its meddling in neighboring Lebanon. A popular joke about the Assad regime has turned the surname, which means ''lion'' in Arabic, into a sarcastic barb: ''A lion in Lebanon but a rabbit in the Golan.''
What if you could mine the Moon?
  Link to Article
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:52
  7 March 2013Last updated at08:07 ETBy Regan MorrisBBC News, Los AngelesSpace exploration has long been about reaching far off destinations but now there's a race to exploit new frontiers by mining their minerals.
  When Neil Armstrong first stepped on the Moon in 1969, it was part of a "flags and footprints" strategy to beat the Soviets, a triumph of imagination and innovation, not an attempt to extract precious metals.
  No-one knew there was water on that dusty, celestial body. What a difference a generation makes.
  Mysterious and beautiful, the Moon has been a source of awe and inspiration to mankind for millennia. Now it is the centre of a space race to mine rare minerals to fuel our future - smart phones, space-age solar panels and possibly even a future colony of Earthlings.
  "We know that there's water on the Moon, which is a game-changer for the solar system. Water is rocket fuel. It also can support life and agriculture. So exploring the Moon commercially is a first step towards making the Moon part of our world, what humanity considers our world," says Bob Richards, CEO of Silicon Valley-based Moon Express, one of 25 companies racing to win the $30m in Google Lunar X Prizes.
  It is considered to be among the top-three teams in the running for the prize. The other two are Pittsburgh-based Astrobiotic and Barcelona Moon Team.
  Google's $20m first prize will be awarded to the first privately funded company to land a robot on the Moon that successfully explores the surface by moving at least 500m and sends high-definition video back to Earth.
  A second place team stands to win $5m for completing the same mission, with bonus prizes for teams that travel more than 5km or find water. The deadline is 2015.
  But $30m is a relatively small amount of money when it comes to funding a Moon mission. The companies competing have business models far beyond the Google prize, with the real prize being the potential treasure trove of valuable minerals.
  "The most important thing about the Moon is probably the stuff we haven't even discovered," says Mr Richards. "But what we do know is that there could be more platinum-group metals on the surface of the Moon than all of the reserves of Earth. The race is on."
  But can anyone own the Moon, and what happens if multiple companies and countries succeed in getting there?
  Continue reading the main storySo-called rare-earth minerals, which are used in a range of technologies. Currently, they are refined almost exclusively in ChinaWater frozen in the dark recesses of polar craters, which according to Nasa can be split into hydrogen for rocket fuel and oxygen for breathingHelium-3 (He-3), which apparently exists in abundance on the Moon. Some believe He-3 could be a future energy sourceValuable titanium depositsAccording to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty no nation can own the Moon, and most people believe that extends to individuals and companies. But would-be Moon miners can have something like property rights. And there is an advantage to getting there first and staking claims.
  "Appropriation and ownership is not allowed under the treaty, but free access exploitation is encouraged," says space lawyer James Dunstan. "You can't own it, but you can go there and use it, so how do we balance those two?"
  China has plans to land a probe on the Moon later this year and astronauts by 2020. Because China's lunar plans are more ambitious than most, some fear they may get too much control of the moon.
  Dunstan does not think China would flout international laws to gain an upper hand in space, but it will be difficult to police.
  "Trade sanctions would be very harsh if there were a rogue country or rogue corporation driving around ripping up other people's stuff."
  If Moon Express and others are right, it's conceivable that in the future the lunar surface could host a colony of mining robots and astronauts who could use the Moon as a base to explore further into the solar system.
  Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  Alastair Leithead gets a look at the prototype Lunar Express lander
  Richards believes humans will discover ways to live on the Moon permanently.
  "We're becoming a multi-world species. That will happen. The first footprints on Mars by human beings will happen in our lifetime in the next 10 to 20 years," he says.
  "People, themselves, will be transformed. They'll be merging with their technologies. And that which we call human will become redefined as we find how to reprogramme our bodies to live longer, how we find machines that are able to symbiotically work with us to cure disease.
  "So that which we consider human today will continue to evolve."
  Moon Express, which has its offices at Nasa Ames' research centre, is funded by entrepreneur Naveen Jain.
  Jain says that location is key because it's in Silicon Valley where he believes, which he believes will become the home to space pioneers.
  Continue reading the main storyWhat if we could stay young forever? What if everyone had a car? What If? is a season across BBC News looking at visions of the future.
  What If (special report)
  "We are those crazy people who think that every idea is a crazy idea until we make it happen and then people say, 'Of course'," he says.
  So, if we're going to live on the Moon one day, shouldn't we worry about polluting it? Won't armies of digging robots mess up our future real estate?
  Nasa planetary scientist Margarita Marinova thinks we won't make the same mistakes in space that we've made on Earth and that man can't afford to explore space without tapping the local resources to survive.
  "For me, it's a little hard because I do see these planets as very beautiful and very pristine in a way we don't really have on Earth anymore, and so the idea of mining is a little difficult," she says.
  The potential resources from the Moon are vast. M Darby Dyar, a professor of astronomy at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts, says the reservoirs of water ice in the dark, polar regions of the Moon probably come from comets that hit the moon over the past four billion years, and that future moon miners could strike it rich with precious metals in ancient lunar rocks.
  But even if no company makes the 2015 deadline to win the Google Prize, Dyar says the Google Lunar prize has already yielded returns on Earth.
  "I lived through the excitement of the Apollo era, my father helped design thrusters on the lunar landing modules and those remembered feelings of patriotism and wonder about the universe are what brought me into lunar science in the first place.
  "When I hand a child a meteorite and tell her that it's four billion years old, her entire frame of reference changes, and that's what science should do. Not everyone wants to be a scientist but everyone can get excited about and learn to respect and understand its breakthroughs.
  "Competitions like this bring science to the public's eyes. Where better than the Moon, which seems so close to us?"
  You can follow the Magazine onTwitterand onFacebook
The War Against Macaroni and Cheese: Petition Asks Kraft to Remove Artificial Dyes | Healthy Living - Yahoo! Shine
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:49
  Food bloggers Vani Hari (left) and Lisa Leake are asking Kraft to remove the artificial dyes from their iconic '...Like many people in the United States, Lisa Leake grew up eating Kraft Macaroni & Cheese. She even used to whip up a blue box of the iconic comfort food for her kids once a week or so. But when she took a closer look at the ingredient list she immediately decided to stop serving it to her family.
  Also on Shine: Mom Fights to Ban Toxins in School Supplies
  The problem: Yellow 5 and Yellow 6, two artificial food dyes that give the dish it's day-glo hue but also contain known carcinogens. In Europe, foods that contain Yellow 5 are required to carry a warning label, and the chemical has been banned outright in some countries, including Norway and Austria. In 2008, the Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the FDA to ban eight different food dyes found in nearly everything kids like to eat today (even plain white marshmallows have blue dye in them).
  Also on Shine: 20 Surprising Artificially Colored Foods
  "A lot of American companies use ingredients in the products they sell in the US that are no longer used, and are in some cases banned in other countries," Leake told Yahoo! Shine in an interview on Wednesday. "We were just appalled."
  In the United Kingdom, Kraft's "Cheesey Pasta" comes in a red-and-yellow box'--and doesn't contain artificial food dyes. Instead, the company uses natural colors from paprika extract and beta-carotene to create the dish's iconic color for British consumers.
  Leake and Vani Hari, who writes the blog Food Babe and guest posts once a month on Leake's blog, 100 Days of Real Food, decided to launch a petition at Change.org, calling on Kraft to give U.S. consumers the same chemical-free formulation that they currently sell in the U.K. They racked up more than 18,000 signatures in less than 24 hours.
  Kraft isn't the only company that markets different versions of their products. "McDonald's french fries has basic ingredients in the U.K.: potatoes, salt, and oil," Hari told Yahoo! Shine in an interview. "But here in the United States they use an ingredient that's an anti-foaming agent that's used in Silly Putty."
  Hari decided to do some investigating, and found plenty of other offenders: Betty Crocker cake mixes, Pringles potato chips, Rice Krispies, Starburst candies, and Diet Coke were among those that use artificial flavorings, colorings, and preservatives in the U.S. but leave them out of their European versions. Kellogg's strawberry Nutri-Grain cereal bars, for example, are colored with Red 40, Yellow 6, and Blue 1 in the United States but use beetroot, annatto, and paprika in their "soft bake bars" sold in the United Kingdom.
  "These companies already have better, safer versions of their products formulated and for sale in other countries overseas," Leake pointed out. "In some cases, that's because their consumers demanded it. But nobody has done anything over here yet."
  Food bloggers Vani Hari and Lisa Leake tested both the U.K. and the U.S. versions of Kraft's macaroni and cheese '...Still, the women, both of whom are based in North Carolina, decided to focus their petition on Kraft first.
  "There is a health component here with Kraft Macaroni & Cheese," Hari explained to Yahoo! Shine. "The one thing that really angers Lisa and I, and why we're so appalled at this, is that Kraft Macaroni & Cheese is specifically aimed at children."
  Yellow 5, also known as tartrazine, has been linked to long-term health problems including asthma, skin rashes, and migraines, as well as slightly decreased sperm counts in mice; it has also been known to affect behavior in children who have diagnosed hyperactivity issues. It's found in bright-yellow products like Mountain Dew and some candies as well.
  "Their brains are developing, they don't need to be exposed to these chemicals," Hari told Yahoo! Shine. "The fact that they have a safer version for kids overseas and not here is a travesty."
  "Our petition is honestly bigger than just Kraft Macaroni & Cheese," Leake told Yahoo! Shine. "We decided that if we could convince the largest food company to change its iconic food products to match the formula that its already created for other countries, that could hopefully allow Kraft to lead the way for other companies to follow suite."
  To make sure that the artificial food dyes weren't actually part of the pasta's flavor profile, Hari and Leake asked a friend in the U.K. to send them a box of Kraft's "Cheesey Pasta" so they could compare it with the U.S. version. (They included a video of the taste test with their petition.) The results? They taste'--and look'--virtually the same.
  "Artificial dyes provide no value to the food they're in," Leake pointed out. "They provide no nutritional value, they don't affect the taste or the flavor of the food they're in, yet they do pose risks. So there's really no benefit in having them there."
  A spokesperson for Kraft told Yahoo! Shine on Wednesday that the company had recently expanded its macaroni and cheese line. "We know some people prefer foods without certain ingredients," Lynne Galia of Kraft Foods Corporate Affairs told Yahoo! Shine in an email. "We now offer a multitude of products without added colors, as well as products with natural food colors," including their organic, "deluxe," and "homestyle" macaroni and cheese options.
  "The safety and quality of our products is our highest priority and we take consumer concerns very seriously," Galia wrote. "We carefully follow the laws and regulations in the countries where our products are sold. So in the U.S., we only use colors that are approved and deemed safe for food use by the Food and Drug Administration."
  But Hari and Leake -- as well as the thousands of people who have signed on to their petition -- feel that Kraft can do more.
  "Kraft is the largest U.S. based food company," Hari told Yahoo! Shine. "The government hasn't acted'--there have been multiple government petitions that have not produced the results that we were hoping to see with the FDA. But if we target a specific company and they make the change, this could snowball into finally eliminating artificial dyes and safeguarding our children."
  "American food companies have already formulated safer versions of these products for other countries overseas," Leake added. "We deserve the same here in the U.S. It's that simple."
  Also on Shine:
  8 Ways to Make Organic DIY Food ColoringThe Difference Between Natural and Artificial FoodsAlso on Shine: Food Dyes and Hyperactivity: Are M&Ms Really Like Crack for Kids?
John Tirman: Petraeus' Torture Teams
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:49
  One of Britain's leading newspapers, the Guardian, has just published an expos(C) of interrogation teams run by two U.S. operatives acting under the authority of General David Petraeus in Iraq in 2003-05. While no smoking gun -- or blood-stained billy club -- has Petraeus' fingerprints, it's clear from this extensive reporting that Petraeus not only knew of the "enhanced interrogation" of suspected insurgents, but likely hired the two thugs who were involved in it for two years.
  The Guardian article and video, and earlier reporting by Gareth Porter, reveal that two Americans, James Steele and Colonel James Coffman, created commando units and manned them with Shia militia members from the Badr Brigade. That particular militia -- which was "funded, trained, and equipped by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps," according to a reliable source -- was the arm of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. These militia-supplied commandos comprised the torture squads, say reports, that "interrogated" thousands of Sunni insurgents and very likely many who were not insurgents, and did so with the implicit, if not explicit, approval of the U.S. military and the Bush administration.
  Hundreds of victims were paraded in front of television cameras on a program dedicated to showing how tough the Shia were on the Sunni fighters. It was "an open secret," said one high-ranking U.S. official in Baghdad, that torture was going on in the detention centers and that the United States was complicit.
  Steele earned his stripes in Ronald Reagan's jihad in Central America in the 1980s, creating exactly the same kind of torture and death squads in El Salvador. The Guardian says that defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent Steele to Iraq to create the commando squads. Coffman, a retired colonel, reported directly to Petraeus. They worked together and were deeply involved in operations of the detention centers where torture took place.
  For those of us who followed the war closely, it was well known that the detention centers were Dickensian, violent places. I did an investigation for a lawsuit in the UK that involved the detention centers and other prisons in Iraq, and while I never saw one in person, the accounts of them were chilling. It was assumed that the U.S. military was aware of the sustained, brutal human rights violations in these places, but were not responsible for them.
  Now we know differently, thanks to Gareth Porter and the Guardian team, headed by Mona Mahmood. The detentions in Iraq were notorious for many reasons. Men, usually, could be detained for no particular reason. It wasn't just "insurgents" being tortured -- beaten, humiliated and harmed sexually, hung upside down, etc. -- but Iraqis who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Abu Ghraib scandal early in the war shocked many Americans and perhaps set off the downward spiral in public support for the war. What happened at Abu Ghraib is what was happening much more broadly, at the express wishes of the U.S. command and that reached into the civilian leadership at the Pentagon.
  More importantly for Iraq was the way these torture and death squads fueled the sectarian war that was just brewing in 2003-04. While the United States is responsible for the hundreds of thousands of deaths resulting from the war, the retort to that charge is that much or most of the killing was Iraqi-on-Iraqi. (That still does not absolve the U.S.: an occupying power is obligated by law to provide security.) But here we have one of the most incendiary causes of the oncoming civil war -- the hiring of sectarian militias, bent on revenge for Saddam's rule, brutalizing Sunnis and boastfully broadcasting it on television.
  This is the deeper significance of this story. Bad enough that torture was used -- an organized, sustained program of torture that affected many thousands of Iraqis, and apparently organized at the behest of General Petraeus and Secretary Rumsfeld. But anyone familiar with Iraq would know that stoking the flames of revenge in the volatile environment of Iraq would indeed set the country aflame.
  The Sunnis and Shia were in conflict, even as many communities got along fine and there was a high rate of intermarriage. But the tensions are just below the surface, and this can become violent in times of social and political stress. Given the longtime brutality of Saddam and the disruptions of the U.S. invasion and occupation, the competition for power, and the score-settling for how badly the Sunni Saddam treated the Shia, everyone knew Iraq was a sectarian tinderbox. Everyone knowledgeable, that is. The neocons were, as one would expect, downplaying any repercussions.
  From about the time these detention centers were operating with torture techniques (to say nothing of unwarranted detentions themselves), the sectarian strife mounted. By 2006-07, the level of killing, displacement, and immiseration was out of control. By then, it was a civil war. And Iraq continues to suffer this legacy. Political violence continues, albeit at a low level compared with six or seven years ago. Millions of displaced Iraqis have no means or interest to return to their homes, some because their neighborhoods were subject to sectarian "cleansing."
  Of course, no American official -- not Steele (now a motivational speaker in Texas), not Petraeus (now licking his wounds from his extramarital affair), not Rumsfeld (continuing to defend the indefensible) -- is going to be arrested and tried for their criminal behavior in organizing, condoning, or covering up a torture operation that lasted at least two years. And, anyway, federal prosecutors are busy these days with the likes of Bradley Manning for his release of documents to Wikileaks. That act, as it happens, is how we've come to learn of Petraeus' torture teams.
  Follow John Tirman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JohnTirman
Facebook To Unveil Changes To Its News Feed
  Link to Article
  Source: TPM News
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:48
  David Kurtz March 7, 2013, 9:18 AMBy BARBARA ORTUTAY, AP Technology Writer
  NEW YORK (AP) '-- Amid chatter of ''Facebook fatigue,'' real or imagined, the world's biggest social networking company is getting ready to unveil a new version of News Feed, the flow of status updates, photos and advertisements its users see on the site.
  Facebook Inc. is hosting an event at its Menlo Park, Calif., headquarters on Thursday to show off ''a new look for News Feed.'' The company offered no other details on what the changes will be in an invitation sent to journalists and bloggers. It will be Facebook's second staged event at its headquarters since the company's May initial public offering. The company unveiled a search feature at the first one in January.
  If past site changes are any indication, the News Feed tweaks may take some getting used to and will likely lead to user grumbles. Facebook users often complain about changes to the site, whether it's cosmetic tweaks or the overhaul of privacy settings.
  Gartner analyst Brian Blau says one change he'd like to see from Facebook as a user is the ability to control how much he's seeing from the businesses and other non-friend accounts he follows. Currently users can only tweak how much they see from their friends, not from businesses they follow.
  ''We have a 'like' but there is no degree of 'like,' it's binary,'' he says. ''I need a 'like plus' or even a 'like minus.'''
  The event comes a month after a Pew study reported that many Facebook users take a break from the site for weeks at a time. The report, from the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project, found that some 61 percent of Facebook users had taken a hiatus for reasons that range from boredom to too much irrelevant information to Lent.
  Overall, though, Facebook's user base is growing, especially on mobile devices. At last count it had 1.06 billion active monthly accounts. The number of people who access Facebook daily is also on the rise.
  That said, even the company has acknowledged that some of its users, especially the younger ones, are migrating to substitutes, but so far this has not meant an overall decline in user numbers.
  ''For example, we believe that some of our users have reduced their engagement with Facebook in favor of increased engagement with other products and services such as Instagram,'' the company said last month in the ''risk factors'' of its annual 10-K filing. ''In the event that our users increasingly engage with other products and services, we may experience a decline in user engagement and our business could be harmed.''
  Facebook owns Instagram, but so far it has not shown any ads on it.
  Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.
  Facebook, Social Media
Shut up, slave, and close your business!
  Link to Article
  Source: TheCandyman's news feed
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:39
  Growing numbers of small businesses are finding it impossible to pay their bills.Image: YleMany businesses, especially those employing four people or less, are having trouble making ends meet. One out of three entrepreneurs who calls the financial aid service of the Small and Medium Sized Enterprise Foundation is already in such deep trouble that the only sensible thing to do is to close down.
  The Foundation's development chief, Jari Leskinen, says that some businesses are even still paying off debts from the recession of the 1990s, and there are indications that small businesses today are heading in the same direction.
  The stage on which small businesses play their roles has changed. The number of self-employed has double in ten years. Some have become entrepreneurs against their will through jobs cuts and outsourcing programmes.
  According to official figures, there were 255,000 registered businesses in the country at the end of last year. There are no exact figures on how many of these represent people who are self-employed, but estimates run as high as 170,000.
  According to Heli Kyyr¶nen, a financial aid consultant at the Small and Medium Sized Enterprise Foundation, these are often people in services, the restaurant sector, transport, physical therapists, freelance journalists, people in the building trade and many more.
  She often finds that she has to warn people against taking on more loans to survive. Instead, she advises trying to negotiate new payment schedules for the debts and payments they may have in arrears.
  More generally, small businesses that are feeling the squeeze are advised to try to cut costs, boost income, take care of their own finances as carefully as possible, and to create a payment agenda based on precise calculations.
  Growing numbers are being told that the only reasonable course of action is to go out of business.
  Mi Mi Po Hti fled the Myanmar regime through the jungle to Thailand, arriving in bitterly-cold eastern Finland in December 2000. 14:55
  The game Starcrossed won this year's "Ones to Watch" prize for up-and-coming game creators. 13:41
  The Valio dairy products company says that it has been given mixed signals about pricing policy for its milk. 11:36
  The number of self-employed entrepreneurs in Finland has doubled over the past decade. However, with the present state of the economy, many are finding it increasingly hard to survive financially and are being advised to simply close up shop. 10:50
  High winds and heavy snowfall downed trees and cut power lines in many parts of North Savo and South Karelia leaving thousands of households without electricity on Wednesday night. Power outages also affected areas in Kymenlaakso. 6:59
  Cases of seasonal flu this year peaked in February and now are in decline. Unusually high numbers of people this year required hospitalization after being smitten by the virus. 6:40
  The teleoperator has concluded lay-off talks and will reduce its staff by around 125. Sonera hopes around 80 people will take voluntary pay-offs. 6.3.
  Finland's established church is now seeking to match a popular online resignation service by allowing new members to sign up online and even via Facebook. 6.3.
  Finns Party and Left group politicians have asked parliament's Constitutional Law Committee to look into a controversial research project linked to Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen. 6.3.
  Parliamentarians voted Wednesday to approve a proposal to reform electoral districts in southeast Finland. The reform was endorsed by a vote of 83 to 63. 6.3.
AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.
  Link to Article
  Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:37
  AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.
  General Assembly
  Proposed Bill No. 374
  January Session, 2013
  LCO No. 2001
  Referred to Committee on PUBLIC HEALTH
  Introduced by:
  SEN. HARP, 10th Dist.
  REP. WALKER, 93rd Dist.
  AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.
  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:
  That section 10-206 of the general statutes be amended to require (1) each pupil enrolled in public school at grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 and each home-schooled child at ages 12, 14 and 17 to have a confidential behavioral health assessment, the results of which shall be disclosed only to the child's parent or guardian, and (2) each health care provider performing a child's behavioral health assessment to complete the appropriate form supplied by the State Board of Education verifying that the child has received the assessment.
  Statement of Purpose:
  To provide behavioral health assessments to children.