What Adam Curry is reading

Winnend lied Denemarken gejat van Nederlandse band?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Telegraaf.nl - prive
  Sun, 19 May 2013 07:28
  Winnend lied Denemarken gejat van Nederlandse band? - Priv(C) | Het laatste Priv(C) nieuws leest u op Prive.nl van De Telegraaf [prive]Uw browser ondersteunt geen javascript of javascript staat uitgeschakeld. Hierdoor kunnen er cookies geplaatst worden waar u geen toestemming voor heeft gegeven.
RT: QUANTUM COMPUTING INTERNET IN OPERATION AMONG TECHNOCRATIC ELITE AT LOS ALAMOS FOR TWO YEARS
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Giza Death Star
  Sun, 19 May 2013 07:17
  TweetTweetThis one is a very interesting article for a number of reasons, most of them being the less obvious ones. Here's the article:
  The US government has been running a quantum Internet for over two years
  Now the obvious things here first: RT is correct, of course, in assuming the last thing the Western America-based oligarchs want is a quantum computing based internet, for the simple reason that the Internet is enough of a headache to them already. Add a virtually eavesdropping-proof factor to that and you have the ultimate in the Rockefailure migraine-inducer. So you won't be seeing it come online for the public any time soon, not, at least, until The Powers that Be find a way to eavesdrop and spy without being caught. That may be awhile. In the meantime, they will have their hands full in preventing the technology from making it into the open and becoming cheap and affordable. We already know how the oligarchs and technocrats unjustly exempt themselves and their gorillas from the laws they expect everyone else to live by. It's a felony, for example, in some states to video law enfarcement officials beating or otherwise exercising gestapo-like tactics'... and they wonder why their once respected profession is quickly spiraling to the bottom of people's ''trust list.''
  All that aside, I think there's something else going on here, and that something else is the determination of the BRICSA nations (that's my abbreviation for the inclusion of South Africa) to end the dollar reserve system and to have a greater and more equitable share in the determination of the world's financial system, which thus far has been exclusively a New York-London-Tokyo-Hong Kong-Frankfurt preserve. As I have attempted to argue in Covert Wars and Breakaway Civilizations and in some more recent talk show appearances, there was a vast hidden (and abyssally corrupt and fraudulent) system of finance put into place after World War Two, a system interfaced with postwar fascists, Nazis, drug lords, and criminal elements both within western intelligence agencies and outside of them. This system in turn was the secret political slush fund to sponsor numerous terrorist cells and events, and more importantly, the sheer size of it indicated a connection to the development of black technologies.
  In short, the whole vast Enterprise was the prop holding up what Eisenhower called the Military-Industrial complex. It is the underpinning of the American Empire, and whatever hidden technologies its corporations wield.
  By taking direct aim at that foundation, the BRICSA nations are hoping to undermine the empire it supports. Their potential reasoning is simple: that hidden system and the public dollar reserve system has been in place since the end of World War Two. Who knows what it has developed. To leave it in place and unmolested may allow it to pass the point of no return, able to respond to any potential coalition of challengers. That is a danger that the BRICSA nations have concluded they and the world cannot afford. And they have some justification for that view in the rampant unilateral and unipolar military adventurism that has come out of the USA and the West since 9/11.
  We can rest assured that those nations and in particular Russia will be investing '' if they haven't already '' in their own secretive quantum computing internets, and we can be equally sure that they won't want it to go public any more than their western counterparts. The story, really, is about the fact that they are alarmed that the West is pulling away technologically, and the engine driving it '' the dollar '' is what they are aiming at.
  It's going to get interesting folks.
  See you on the flip side.
Media Now Openly Admitting The Government Controls The News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Sat, 18 May 2013 22:37
  A trio of Obama scandals has forced the corporate media admit its own reports are nothing more than the government-controlled talking points and not the product of a free and open press.
  If you have been following the news lately you'll notice there are 3 government scandals that the media is focusing on 1) The DOJ spying on the AP reporters 2) Benghazi gate 3) IRS targeting of activist groups.
  While each of these are truly a damning indictment of the widespread corruption in our now gone rogue federal government, combing these three stories reveals an even bigger story which is recurring open admission by the media that the news they report is being controlled government.
  These three scandals have led the media to rebel against the Obama administration in a way that it has not done in the past while at the same time forcing the media to admit some damning facts about the way news is truly originated in America.
  The media's reporting on the scandals has provided the public insights into the operations of the incestuous relationship between the press and the government.
  Such revelations clearly suggest the corporate media is telegraphing to the public the American government has just gone way too far out of control.
  These three scandals forced the corporate media to admit openly what has long been dismissed as merely conspiracy theory '-- that the corporate media is now openly admitting that they are in fact controlled stenographers that do nothing more than echo pre-scripted narratives outlined in talking points created by the rulers of America's shadow government.
  To be absolutely clear, that is not hyperbole nor is it speculation. It's a fact that the corporate media is now openly admitting their reporting on the Benghazi scandal over the last 8 months has been merely the parroting of statements given by government officials who were merely echoing talking points issued by the CIA.
  By now just about every news organization has repeatedly reported the story about how those CIA issued talking points were edited 12 times by various people in the shadow government before they were given to figureheads to relay to the press who in turned echoed them to the masses.
  This is a direct admission that the false narrative about Benghazi that has been shoved down our throat as fact by the corporate media was nothing more than CIA issued talking points.
  Since subliminal manipulation the consciousness of the masses is now a science that the government has completely mastered, let make make sure you have been deprogrammed before continuing.
  Wake up '' Every news outlet in the country is admitting 8 months of news reports about Benghazi were nothing more than the parroting of CIA issued talking points.
  Stop.
  Let it sink in.
  This is not hyperbole and not sensationalism.
  The entire corporate media is now openly admitting what they presented to us as objective independent news reports was nothing more than echoing of list CIA talking points.
  Does that not at all disturb anyone?
  Most people that are disturbed are merely disturbed by the fact the talking points were lies.
  That is what the media is telling us the scandal is.
  But the real scandal here, and the one no one seems to have a problem with, is that the media is echoing an actual list government talking points to the public and manipulating the public into believing those talking points were the result of objective independently verified investigative journalism.
  Yes the real scandal is that the government is entirely controlling the news and the media is doing nothing more regurgitating an official narrative crafted by spooks in the shadow government.
  Those spooks operate in secret and disseminate their propaganda operation instructions to public figure heads behind the scenes who in turn relay that information to the media who then relays it to the public.
  Information Operations, Google it.
  But the media wants us to believe that the scandal is that CIA's talking points were lies and that's the only scandal the media wants you to see.
  The media not dare look in the mirror and point onto itself.
  Surely they represent themselves to the public as fact checkers who vet and verify all information in their reports.
  But nothing can be further from the truth because as we clearly see here even an amateur who made a measly attempt to independently verify the statements issued by the government would have easily outed the falsehoods in their claims.
  Instead, the only scandal the media sees here is the fact the CIA's talking points were deliberately falsified so Obama didn't catch heat sothat he could be reelected.
  Now look, I don't disagree that is in fact a scandal and the media by all rights should continue to investigate and expose the truth about that scandal.
  But for the well-being of this nation and the protection of its citizen's that media needs to be held just as accountable because if they didn't take the government at its word despite a continual track record of lies and deception America would be a much safer place today and the citizens of this nation and humanity as a whole would have a much brighter, safer and secure future.
  Instead the media's incestuous relationship with the government has lead to illegal overseas wars and ongoing bombings in several nations that have claimed the lives of an untold number of numerous people all being perpetuated by an ever-expanding police state that looks more and more like an Orwellian totalitarian nightmare with each day that passes.
  Of course the damage the media has allowed to occur will continue to reverberate destructive echoes of carnage upon the masses for generations to come.
  The IRS scandal illustrates this point even further. The media has ignored for years complaints from activist groups saying they were unfairly being shaken down by the IRS. Those complaints were ignored even while members of congress of provided evidence to back up the allegations. But what we saw was a corporate media controlled by the American Gestapo that dared not step off script and report anything beside the talking points the government gave them. The same goes with the destruction of the constitution through an escalating campaign of post 9/11 hogwash from the Patriot Act, the NDAA, and drones to draconian measure containing to be pushed by the propaganda machine to implement measures such as CISPA, real-time total surveillance, and the inevitable disarming of the public.
  The reason for this is clear but I fear if those in the media do not find the courage to be brave now it wil soon be too late.
  News organizations know if they step out of line they their access to their ''inside sources'' and be blacklisted by the government. For individuals in those organization committing such acts of bravery are career ending moves. When the media steps out of line and reports anything that contradicts official government narrative we see them get targeted by the government, both covertly and overtly. We saw it with the coalition of journalist that sued the government for being targeted through the NDAA and with WikiLeaks.
  This of course ties into the third scandal which is the Associated Press being spied on by the Gestapo for daring to report information that wasn't explicitly authorized in talking points issued by the shadow government.
  Yes, every now and then we see outlets such as the Associated Press, The New York Times, or the Washington Post do so-called investigative journalism that adds we are supposed to believe steps outside the boundaries and conflicts with the official narrative. But don't be fooled. Yes the media reports them as ''leaks'' coming from ''inside sources speaking on the condition of anonymity'' but nothing could be further from the truth. Those reports are nothing more than statements given by officials from the same Gestapo who are quoted on the condition of anonymity and those leaks are authorized.
  Just look at what is happening to the Associated Press right now. They dared contradict the talking points narrative. Instead they implicated the CIA as being involved in planning a Yemen based terror plot which Al Qaeda operatives were going to attack American airplanes and now they are being targeted by the Gestapo for leaking that information.
  Look at the reporting on Benghazi. I did several investigative reports which debunked the government's narrative soon after the attacks. Many of the details I uncovered in my reporting still to this day are not being discussed by the corporate media so even the reports we are now being given by corporate media about the scandal are still being controlled by talking points or we would hearing much different information about the scandal from the media.
  Of course this is typical of a media that simply echoes government talking points. Just look at the reporting on drone strikes, which in every case echoes government statements that militants were killed despite hundreds of foreign news reports on the bombings showing drone bombings repeatedly kill innocent woman and children. The examples are numerous. Iraq's WMDs, Libya, the BP oil spill, Fukushima and even now we see the same thing in Syria.
  Despite the corporate media's track record, be it unwittingly or knowingly or some combination thereof for various reasons, of acting as an obedient mouthpiece in the propaganda machine this all appears to be changing in the wake of the latest scandals rocking the Obama administration.
  This is all evidenced by the fact the media is admitting its reporting is based on government generated talking points which as stated before was never before admitted or discussed openly beyond what has long been labeled the fringe conspiracy theorist crowd.
  What is being signaled by this revelation to the public is the government has gone far too rogue and we ought to be wary that what we once accepted as credible news is nothing more than a well-orchestrated campaign of propaganda.
  Yet even in the wake of the media's rebellion we should not get to overzealous as government handlers will soon work to stamp out those who are working to resist the machine.
  Mass media news organizations will be forced in one way or another to get their reporting back on script.
  For those in the media who read this, the time to act is now. We cannot continue to allow the information that is communicated to the masses by the media, which is the public's tool to keep the government in check and prevent it from becoming overbearing on the people, to be controlled by a few rich and powerful figureheads working as icy manipulators of a well oiled propaganda machine that for a secret shadow government.
Why Obama Will Survive the Equivalent of Five ''Watergate Scandals''
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 18:52
  Mark Twain once talked about history not necessarily repeating, but he noted that history sure does rhyme.
  Richard Nixon was unable to survive one direct hit upon his administration, namely, the Watergate scandal. Conversely, Obama is facing five scandals which dwarfs Watergate in terms of criminality, abuse of power, malfeasance of office and outright treason. The damage inflicted upon the American people by the criminal syndicate occupying the White House, in American History, is unparalleled. Yet, Obama is going to survive and this article will describe how Obama is this century's version of the famous escape artist, Houdini.
  The Alternative Media Is Doing Its JobIn Part One of this series, I detailed how various researchers have determined that it only takes 10% of the population to passionately hold to an ideal for the ideal to reach critical mass and go viral. I also described how the knowledge that this country is being run by a criminal syndicate is taking hold and we have likely passed the 10% threshold as evidenced by the fact that America is outraged by (1) Benghazi-Gate; (2) IRS-Gate; (3) AP Spy-Gate; (4) Whistle-blower-Gate; and even (5) Fast and Furious is beginning to make a second pass. The alternative media is being so effective that it is forcing the MSM to jump off Obama's ship and claim they do not support him any longer (e.g. MSNBC Chris Mathews).
  The Calm Before the StormEven the great fence sitter, Glenn Beck, is beginning to throw words around like ''impeachment'' in reference to Obama. And this is coming from a man who cannot decide if he is in the MSM or the alternative media. Remember, according to Beck, 9/11 is exactly as the Bush administration claims it was, an al Qaeda venture. This is the same al-Qaeda that we are allegedly fighting in Afghanistan while supporting in Syria in our effort to oust Assad.
  Regardless of the pedigree of many reporters who are now hinting at the fact that we are witnessing the last days of the Obama administration, the President himself, seems unbelievably calm.
  Obama is calm because he knows that he is going to survive the largest onslaught of simultaneous scandal exposures in our country's history. There has never been a time in our history in which a sitting President has been besieged with this much exposed fodder aimed at his removal. If Watergate forced Nixon to resign, Obama should have been crushed by the comparative weight of his scandals and he should have already exited the White House. Why hasn't this happened?
  Sacrificial Lambs Buy TimeIt is not likely that the Mafioso inhabitant presently residing in the White House will ever leave office prematurely. In fact, I think it is likely that Obama may never leave the Oval Office in 2016 as well.
  If this were 1974, I would be advising Obama to pack his bags and I would also be advising him that he should be begging Joe Biden to grant him a pardon for his criminal acts including the facilitation of the murder of Ambassador Stevens. Make no mistake about it, Obama will survive these crises. However, Holder and possibly even DHS director, Janet Napolitano, may not.
  Undoubtedly, Obama will offer up the head of Eric Holder as a sacrificial lamb and he will be gone by Labor day, if not much sooner and this will buy Obama time to enact his endgame strategies which will negate the five Watergate wolves trying to break through his door.
  Holder's departure will bring celebrations in the alternative media and their followers as we will be dancing in the streets. We will also smell blood and want more removals. But the head of the President will never be touched despite the fact that all of us will soon be screaming for Obama's scalp. It will just never happen.
  What Will Save This President?There is one game changing event which will suddenly and irreversibly negate the momentum that the alternative media has achieved in terms of exposing and removing this criminal administration from power.
  In the last eight months, I have repeated the mantra that most of what drives this government today is the preservation of the Petrodollar on behalf of the Federal Reserve. I have also detailed how Iran is selling its oil to Russia, China and India for gold, thus threatening the preeminence of the Petrodollar in which the other countries of the world must first purchase dollars from the Federal Reserve for the ''privilege'' of purchasing oil. This process provides the only backing that our dollar possesses.
  Iran, China, Russia and India are destabilizing the dominance of our currency. Before you cheer the fact that the Federal Reserve is about ready to take a much deserved blood bath, please realize that you have a job to go to every Monday morning because of this one-sided arrangement and it is all about to end unless Iran can be toppled.
  Why Syria?Have you yet figured out why Obama will survive these crushing scandals and assume power in this country in a manner only reserved for such despots as Stalin? The road to Obama's immediate survival runs through Damascus.
  On the surface, Syria seems so very insignificant on the global chessboard. However, the key to invading Iran and seizing their oil fields is to first control Syria because the occupation of Syria is an insurmountable checkmate against Russian ground troops intervention.
  If the US takes over the Syrian revolution that we started through our al-Qaeda proxy forces, the US will gain a huge tactical advantage in the Middle East. The installation of short and medium range missile batteries in Syria will serve as a deterrent and a blocking mechanism for Russian ground troops ability to intervene in Iran.
  If Russia allows the US to control Syria, Russiawill lose any chance of preventing a US/NATO takeover of Iran. Russia and China have heavily vested themselves in gold. If Iran is stopped from selling its oil for gold, China, Russia and India will have wasted a enormous amount of the respective GNP's in acquiring gold. And the acquisition of gold will be for naught if the US is above to re-establish the dominance of the Petrodollar as the world's reserve currency through a successful invasion of Iran.
  For awhile, it appeared as if Russia did not have the stomach for WWIII and they were going to let us topple Assad with so much as a whimper. I have been shocked as I watched Russia apparently acquiesce to an impending takeover of Syria by US led forces. However, recent Russian events make it clear that WWIII is on the horizon.
  The Game Changing Piece Now on the ChessboardA now widely circulated report emanating by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has written about a meeting which just concluded between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry and the report is stating that President Putin has ordered Russian military forces to ''immediately move'' from Local War to Regional War military operational status and to be ''fully prepared'' to expand to Large-Scale Warshould either the United States or European Union enter into the Syria Civil War. I would also presume that this admonition also extends to US led NATO intervention as well.
  A definition of terms is critical. A Regional War is clearly speaking about the entire Middle East.
  According to the Mission and Objectives of the Russian Armed Forces, a Large-Scale War denotes:
  ''A war between coalitions of countries or larger world powers. It can be precipitated by escalation of an armed conflict, local or regional war by way of a significant number of countries from different world regions being effectively involved. In a large-scale war, the warring sides would pursue radical military and political goals. It would require that participating countries mobilize all of their available material resources and moral courage.''
  My military and intelligence sources were telling me last year that Alaska and Taiwan were at risk of a Russian invasion with regard to this conflict as is the North Pole if we intervened directly in either Syria or Iran. The North Pole? The North Pole's melting glaciers has exposed the world's greatest oil supply as well as untold amounts of gold and other precious metals. This is another story for another time except to illustrate that the Russians are talking world war if we topple Assad and invade Iran.
  This means WWIII is near and this reality is evidenced by the fact that the Russians are drawing a clear line in the sand and this is why Obama is not concerned about any thought of impeachment. The one thing that will distract the country from the five present ''Watergates'' will be the commencement of World War Three.
  If anyone doubts the veracity of these claims just ask yourself if the forces of darkness behind the Federal Reserve are going to give up their wealth and dominance without so much as a fight? Is it worth risking WWIII? If you are a Federal Reserve Board Governor and your safety has been assured under by your escape into nether regions of Denver International Airport, when the proverbial poop hits the fan, would you proceed forward? Of course you would. And if you were Obama and were facing impeachment as well as a lengthy prison term for your involvement in five Watergate type scandals, would you move forward with this agenda? Of course you would. Given the dramatic shift in the corporate controlled dinosaur media, Obama is clearly being blackmailed and his present options are narrowing with passing day.
  Why Is the MSM Vilifying Obama After Worshiping Him?Who owns the MSM? Who owns the Federal Reserve system? Who owns the controlling interest in the defense industry? Who owns oil? Who owns the dollar? When one realizes it is the same small cabal of people that Patrick Wood wrote about over three decades ago in his book he coauthored with Anthony Sutton, Trilaterals Over Washington, you have your answer. A war will benefit all of the above business interests as well as to preserve the status of the Petrodollar dominance. And Obama is being chastised by a former lap dog media because they are forcing his hand to act militarily in the Middle East. Obama does not want WWIII, but he is getting backed into a corner by the corporate controlled media and will act in accordance to his own selfish interests.
  It is not very far-fetched to believe that Obama will also be thrown a bone as a reward for his compliance to the NWO. The bone? How about getting promoted from President to Permanent Dictator when martial law is declared?
  ConclusionTime is running out for the Petrodollar and Obama must be made to act now. Impeachment and imprisonment or WWIII? That is Obama's choice. And of course how will Obama solidify his power just prior to commencing the next war to end all wars? He will mix in the mother of all false flag attacks and he will blame Syria and/or Iran, and then institute martial law. And what will America look like from that point on? The legislation, lying dormant for the moment, gives us an accurate accounting of what life will be like in a soon to be transformed America. Remember, Obama promised to fundamentally transform America. He is very close to accomplishing this goal and this is why he is not worried about the five Watergate type scandals which are now exposed in the MSM and the alternative media.
  Part three of this series will examine what life will soon be like in America given the scenario described in this article.
  Part One
Miley Cyrus SWATted '-- Again
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Patterico's Pontifications
  Sat, 18 May 2013 22:15
  Miley Cyrus SWATted '-- AgainThe Friday Night Celebrity SWATting has become so common as to be almost expected. Last night's was different, though, in that it involved a repeat victim:
  Miley Cyrus had already fallen victim to swatting but now the star has been unfortunate enough to have to go through the ordeal for a second time.
  According to TMZ, the 20-year-old singer and actress was swatted once again on Friday night when police received a 911 call from a female claiming to be calling from her closet and reporting shots fired in her home.
  Authorities arrived and quickly determined that the call was not real.
  I'll update with the roll call of the SWATted later.
Google insider exposes 'immoral' tax scam | The Sunday Times
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 22:13
  Former Google executive Barney Jones has a cache of 100,000 emails and documents (Paul Vicente)
  A FORMER Google executive has blown the whistle on a massive and ''immoral'' tax avoidance scheme that has ''cheated'' British taxpayers out of hundreds of millions of pounds over the past decade.
  Barney Jones, 34, who worked for the internet search giant between 2002 and 2006, has lifted the lid on an elaborate structure which diverts British profits through Ireland to the Bermuda tax haven.
  Although Google's London sales staff would negotiate and sign contracts with British customers, and cash was paid into a UK bank account, deals were technically booked through its Dublin office to minimise its liabilities here. Jones, a devout Christian and father of four, is ready to hand over a cache of more than 100,000 emails and documents to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), detailing the ''concocted scheme''.
  He has already provided testimony to the Commons public accounts committee (PAC) which led to the combative questioning
Tipping law enforcement to possible terrorist activity is purpose of 13-county program | jacksonville.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 14:05
  Sheriffs in 13 Northeast Florida counties announced an online system Thursday for residents to report suspicious activity they think may be terrorism-related.
  Individuals can make reports online to any one of the counties from Nassau to Alachua that are part of the iWATCH program.
  The site provides examples of red flags to watch for, such as people with an unusual interest in building plans or who are purchasing materials useful in bomb making. Important places to watch include hobby stores and dive shops.
  Those making reports must provide their name and contact information.
  ''This is not like Crime Stoppers, where people report crimes,'' Jacksonville Sheriff John Rutherford said, referencing a reward-based system for solving crimes that allows anonymity.
  For iWATCH, people are less likely to be targeted by rumors or malicious accusations. Also, it gives investigators the opportunity to further interview the person reporting the activity.
  ''It's always a concern that someone may be setting up a neighbor,'' Rutherford said.
  Reports entered in the iWATCH system are sent to the individual counties through a central clearing house. It is also passed to other counties, in case the information can be connected to something similar or related. The program was set up using a $150,000 state grant and piggybacks on an existing information-sharing system law enforcement uses now.
  The sites combine iWATCH with the county name, or in Jacksonville's case the city, to direct the report. The site for Jacksonville is www.iwatchjax.com.
  Other counties in the program are: Alachua, Baker, Bradford, Clay, Flagler, Gilchrist, Levy, Marion, Nassau, Putnam, St. Johns and Union.
  ''The majority of citizens want to do what's right,'' Alachua County Sheriff Sadie Darnell said at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement offices in Jacksonville where the program was announced.
  Dana Treen: (904) 359-4091
KX3 assembly part one - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 13:56
IDOL Platform
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 13:35
  "The integration we've done with Autonomy search, TeamSite and LiveSite has enabled us to harness the power of search, site data and content to accelerate our online success."Eric Soll,Sales and Marketing IT Manager
  "By using Autonomy Web Solutions to automate navigations and evolve legacy content, we reduced time-to-market by 50 percent and renewed our website quickly and efficiently. Moving forward, the new capabilities of Autonomy TeamSite and LiveSite will allow our marketers to create a more individualized online experience, without IT involvement, supporting even greater business agility and speed to market."Kozo Tsukada,Manager, Content Systems, Solution Division
  "Of all the software vendors we assessed, Autonomy provides the content infrastructure that will best allow our bank to develop multiple web initiatives simultaneously, collaborate across business teams, and deploy information quickly and easily."Chris Milner,Sales and Communications Manager
  "To address the increasingly complex content picture, global companies like TransUnion need to consistently provide more targeted content and deliver a relevant experience to increase lifetime customer value. Autonomy is addressing an important industry requirement by offering a solution that is designed to help companies adjust their strategy based on specific customer segments and preferences to improve the overall experience."Jerry Eichhorst,Director of Global eCommerce
  "With Autonomy, Arkema's business users can now manage and deliver their own web content in a timely and efficient manner without reliance on technical assistance. This important capability has freed up our data processing resources to handle other high-value work."Jean-Pierre Asun,Director of Data Processing
  "Autonomy's comprehensive suite of content management solutions have provided our company with a powerful alternative to manual processes that proved to be both costly and time-consuming. By enabling real-time web site updates, we are able to meet the time-sensitive demands of our highly dynamic industry."Jean-Pierre Asun,Director of Data Processing
  "Meeting user expectation is vital and, in keeping with that, our site is rapidly becoming not only a video-centric portal that builds on TV programmes, but also a platform for user interaction, where our audience can rate programmes and provide their own commentary. Autonomy has really helped us ensure our site content is current with news and editorial content that our viewers are really interested in."Sam McGregor,Manager of New Media Technology
  "Interactive areas on the Channel 4 site that encourage contributions from website visitors have become a vital part of enabling editors to understand the audience and appreciate their needs. Of course, that relies heavily on strong moderation capabilities in order that inappropriate content does not appear. That is something that TeamSite helps us control."Sam McGregor,Manager of New Media Technology
  "Meeting user expectation is vital and, in keeping with that, our site is rapidly becoming not only a video-centric portal that builds on TV programmes, but also a platform for user interaction, where our audience can rate programmes and provide their own commentary. Autonomy has really helped us ensure our site content is current with news and editorial content that our viewers are really interested in."Sam McGregor,Manager of New Media Technology
  "Autonomy has given us the tools to make business insight more actionable and align ourselves better with our customers' needs. We can anticipate what they really want through web analytics, then use Autonomy to deliver it proactively."Eric Soll,Sales and Marketing IT Manager
Winklevoss twins on Bitcoin: Time to work with the Feds
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: CNET News
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:33
  Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, who parlayed Facebook cash into a multi-million dollar Bitcoin stake, say making money means working with the Feds. Meanwhile, the Bitcoin Foundation is about to hire its first D.C. lobbyist.
  Cameron (left) and Tyler Winklevoss, the twin Harvard graduates who competed in the 2008 Olympics as rowers and became bitcoin investors and owners, say it's time to "work with regulators."
  (Credit: Declan McCullagh/CNET)SAN JOSE--The Winklevoss twins, who transformed a lucrative Facebook payout into a venture capital fund, say it's now time for bitcoin companies to work with governments rather than against them.
  Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twin Harvard graduates famously portrayed in the 2010 film The Social Network, showed up at the Bitcoin 2013 conference to talk up the future of the Internet's favorite alternative currency -- as long as it escapes a government crackdown.
  "I don't think anyone wants a fight -- I think everyone here wants to build bitcoin, to work with regulators," Cameron Winklevoss told over 1,000 conference attendees yesterday evening. "Cooperation is really the way forward."
  The Winklevii, who became enough of a cultural icon to be immortalized with Snooki and Kermit the Frog in pistachio commercials, have motives that are far from altruistic: they reportedly own 1 percent of all Bitcoins mined to date. They also led a seed funding round that yesterday raised $1.5 million for BitInstant, a New York startup that makes it easier to buy and sell bitcoins.
  "You can laugh all you want, but Bitcoin's real," Tyler Winklevoss said. "FinCEN acknowledges virtual currencies. They've given guidance, which is a big step." That's a reference to a March 2013 statement from FinCEN, an arm of the Treasury Department, which slapped Bitcoin exchanges with a hefty set of regulations borrowed from the banking world. Smaller U.S.-based exchanges promptly went out of businesses, prompting a Bitcoin Foundation board member to warn last month that the rules are "choking" entrepreneurs.
  Lack of government control is precisely why Bitcoin has grown so rapidly. Unlike what devotees refer to with disdain as government "fiat currency" -- more can be brought into existence with a printing press run -- the supply of bitcoins is sharply, algorithmically, limited. An all-digital currency allows people in places like Cyprus or Argentina to evade currency controls with ease. It also, in at least some ways, is far more anonymous than moving cash through the legacy banking system.
  But that period of benign neglect appears to be over. The Royal Bank of Canada pulled the plug three weeks ago on a Calgary startup that acted as a bitcoin marketplace. An internal FBI report predicts "malicious actors will exploit bitcoin to launder money."
  A Homeland Security police unit that investigates money laundering crimes obtained a court order this week cutting off Dwolla payments to Mt. Gox, a Japan-based company that operates the largest bitcoin exchange. The Feds allege that Mt. Gox lied about being a money transmitting business, a felony if true. (It also means that Mt. Gox employees, who are presumably aware of the legal troubles of Kim Dotcom and those gambling executives a few years ago, probably don't want to set foot on U.S. soil right now.)
  That may be why Peter Vessenes, the executive director of the Bitcoin Foundation who's also enmeshed in a messy lawsuit against Mt. Gox, also stressed the need for governmental cooperation.
  "We'll be hiring someone to work on [Capitol] Hill and interact with regulators," Vessenes said. "I'm someone who thinks we should have a civil conversation... It's time to engage with regulators and have a good, productive conversation."
  Then again, that didn't stop the E-Gold online payment system from being shut down after a federal indictment on charges of money laundering. Not only did E-Gold chairman Douglas Jackson interact with regulators, he even testified before the U.S. Congress a year before the indictment took place.
  One difference is that Bitcoin is, by design, far more distributed. That's one reason why alternative currency enthusiasts and Federal Reserve critics love it so much: the merry band of libertarian activists from New Hampshire who produce the Free Talk Live radio show not only showed up at the conference, but were broadcasting live for a few hours from the event floor. The anti-war and liberty activists at BitcoinNotBombs were happily selling T-shirts for $20, or a fractional payment in bitcoins, from their booth yesterday evening even after the conference had officially ended for the day.
  So far, the informal alliance of liberty-minded aficionados and technical savants who embraced bitcoin early on and the buttoned-down investors who merely want to get rich has held. But now cracks are showing.
  One bitcoin trader dismissed libertarian politics in a conversation with CNET yesterday, saying what's important is merely liquidity and a stable market and Panama-based companies like Coinapult don't help accomplish that in the eyes of regulators. At a booth a few feet away, conferencegoers were arguing about whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or the Securities and Exchange Commission would be the preferred regulatory agency for a fund that would let investors buy and sell bitcoins. And many venture capitalists actually prefer regulation, believing it's a sign of a mature market.
  "Will we win?" asks Cameron Winklevoss. "I think everyone in this room is pretty confident in saying bitcoin is a winner. We bet on the horse, not a donkey here."
Google CEO Is Tired of Rivals, Laws, Wants to Start His Own Country
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT news feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:32
  Larry Page wants to save the world, but things keep getting in the way.Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
  In a surprise appearance at Google's I/O conference today, CEO Larry Page took the stage to philosophize and take questions about the company's products, their role in the world, and how Google can solve world hunger. Along the way, he blew off some steam about politics, the media, and all those other pesky tech companies that keep treating Google as a rival instead of welcoming it as an overlord a collaborative partner.
  It started when a guy from Mozilla asked a question about the future of the Web and mobile platforms. Page dove right in. ''I've personally been quite sad at the industry's behavior around all these things," he said. "If you take something as simple as IM, we've had an open offer to interoperate forever. Just this week Microsoft took advantage of that by interoperating with us. You can't have people milking off of just one company.''
  He was referring to Microsoft's announcement that it would incorporate Google Talk into Outlook.com, even though it doesn't allow Google to incorporate Outlook functions into Gmail. But as AllThingsD's Mike Isaac noted, he left out the part where Google recently sent Microsoft a cease-and-desist letter demanding that it remove the YouTube app from its Windows Phones.
  Page wasn't finished. ''You can't focus on negativity and zero-sum games,'' he said. ''I don't know how to deal with all of those things, and I'm sad that the Web isn't advancing as fast as it should be. We struggle with people like Microsoft.'' A question about Oracle and Java got him going again. ''We've had a difficult relationship with Oracle, including having to appear in court,'' Page said. ''Money is obviously more important to them than any collaboration.''
  It turns out this is also the media's fault. ''Every story I read about Google is us vs. some other company, or some stupid thing. I just don't find that very interesting. We should be building great things that don't exist. Being negative isn't how we make progress.''
  To recap, Page criticized Microsoft for treating Google as a rival, blasted Oracle for caring too much about money, and then whined about everyone being so negative. Heck, if it weren't for those other companies standing in the way, Google would have probably already solved world hunger. Well, except for all the laws and bureaucrats and journalists who are also standing in the way.
  Fortunately, Page has an idea. What if Google could just build its own country with its own rules and do whatever it thought best for everyone?
  ''Maybe we can set aside part of the world,'' he mused. ''I like going to Burning Man. As a technologist maybe we need some safe places where we can try things and not have to deploy to the entire world.'' (As The Verge noted in its live blog, ''Larry wants a beta-test country, guys.'') He later lamented that people are reluctant to disclose their medical problems and speculated that the insurance industry was to blame. ''We should change it so they have to insure people,'' he said. ''Maybe we have a safe place where people can go live in a world like that and see if it works.'' Other tech companies could presumably come too, as long as they agreed to give Google free access to all their products and data and not to worry about making money themselves.
  Help Larry out here, readers: What should he call his new country? Googletopia? Glassachusetts? Canada?
IRS Official in Charge During Tea Party Targeting Now Runs Health Care Office
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT news feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:31
  May 16, 2013 6:15pm
  The Internal Revenue Service official in charge of the tax-exempt organizations at the time when the unit targeted tea party groups now runs the IRS office responsible for the health care legislation.
  Sarah Hall Ingram served as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. But Ingram has since left that part of the IRS and is now the director of the IRS' Affordable Care Act office, the IRS confirmed to ABC News today.
  Her successor, Joseph Grant, is taking the fall for misdeeds at the scandal-plagued unit between 2010 and 2012. During at least part of that time, Grant served as deputy commissioner of the tax-exempt unit.
  Grant announced today that he would retire June 3, despite being appointed as commissioner of the tax-exempt office May 8, a week ago.
  As the House voted to fully repeal the Affordable Care Act Thursday evening, House Speaker John Boehner expressed ''serious concerns'' that the IRS is empowered as the law's chief enforcer.
  ''Fully repealing ObamaCare will help us build a stronger, healthier economy, and will clear the way for patient-centered reforms that lower health care costs and protect jobs,'' Boehner, R-Ohio, said.
  ''Obamacare empowers the agency that just violated the public's trust by secretly targeting conservative groups,'' Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., added. ''Even by Washington's standards, that's unacceptable.''
  Sen. John Cornyn even introduced a bill, the ''Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013,'' which would prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury, or any delegate, including the IRS, from enforcing the Affordable Care Act.
  ''Now more than ever, we need to prevent the IRS from having any role in Americans' health care,'' Cornyn, R-Texas, stated. ''I do not support Obamacare, and after the events of last week, I cannot support giving the IRS any more responsibility or taxpayer dollars to implement a broken law.''
  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also reacted to the revelation late Thursday, stating the news was ''stunning, just stunning.''
  ABC News' Abby D. Phillip contributed to this report.
  (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
  SHOWS: NightlineThis WeekWorld News
Weekly Address: The President Talks About How to Build a Rising, Thriving Middle Class
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Blog Feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:23
  President Obama talks about his belief that a rising, thriving middle class is the true engine of economic growth, and that to reignite that engine and continue to build on the progress we've made over the last four years, we need to invest in three areas: jobs, skills and opportunity.
  Transcript | Download mp4 | Download mp3
IRS sued for seizing 60 million medical records
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT news feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:22
  A healthcare provider has sued the Internal Revenue Service and 15 of its agents, charging they wrongfully seized 60 million medical records from 10 million Americans.
  The name of the provider is not yet known, United Press International said. But Courthouse News Service said the suit claims the agency violated the Fourth Amendment in 2011, when agents executed a search warrant for financial data on one employee '' and that led to the seizure of information on 10 million, including state judges.
  The search warrant did not specify that the IRS could take medical information, UPI said. And information technology officials warned the IRS about the potential to violate medical privacy laws before agents executed the warrant, the complaint said, as reported by UPI.
  ''Despite knowing that these medical records were not within the scope of the warrant, defendants threatened to 'rip' the servers containing the medical data out of the building if IT personnel would not voluntarily hand them over,'' the complaint states, UPI reported.
  The suit also says IRS agents seized workers' phones and telephone data '' more violations of the warrant, UPI reported.
  The complaint alleges the IRS was ''invasive and unlawful'' and stole access to intimate medical records that included patients' treatment plans and therapies, UPI said.
  The suit seeks $25,000 in compensatory damages, per violation. The records' seizure could impact up to one in 25 Americans, UPI said.
  (C) Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Daily Press Briefing - May 17, 2013
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:07
  1:22 p.m. EDT
  MS. PSAKI: Pretty color, Jill. It's very bright.
  QUESTION: Thank you.
  MS. PSAKI: Yes. Well, Happy Friday, everyone. I hope everyone has some fun weekend plans. I don't have anything at the top, so let's get to what's on all of your minds.
  Can we ''
  QUESTION: Go ahead.
  MS. PSAKI: Brad. Or Jill.
  QUESTION: I was going to start with Syria.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: And more news about more arms shipments from Russia and sort of slight astonishment from Foreign Minister Lavrov that anybody would be upset about this. What would you have to say about that?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I know there were some new reports this morning, so can you specify a little bit more on which specific reports you're referring to?
  QUESTION: There were some reports of a new batch of upgraded Yakhont anti-ship missile systems that are going to be shipped to Syria, which will make it obviously quite difficult for any shipping embargo to be enforced, if there were to be one, for example.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, let me take those specific '' those specific reports '' let me say. So the transfers of such weapon systems from Russia to Syria have been reported in the media several times before. I would point to the fact that the Secretary also referred to his concerns that we '' he has expressed publicly and privately to the Russians about their continuing to aid the Syrian regime.
  These specific anti '' these specific missiles, the Yakhont anti-ship missile, was reported in December of 2011, and I believe in the same report there was a reference to SA-17s, which was previously reported in April 2012. We've consistently raised concerns, as I mentioned, but it seems that these cases that were reported this morning have been previously reported.
  QUESTION: So the recent deliveries would refer to December of '' I mean, you have no indications that there's been any recent deliveries or there are any deliveries imminent?
  MS. PSAKI: We're not aware of new shipments of these specific missiles.
  QUESTION: But that's different from whether there have been recent deliveries.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we're not aware of new shipments, so --
  QUESTION: No, but that's not the point. I mean, a shipment could have been made '' it could have been announced two years ago and made two weeks ago. That would not be a new shipment, but it would be a recent shipment. So are you aware of any recent shipments of these, regardless of when the agreements to ship them may have been reached?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think '' to totally clarify what I was saying, or to be clear here, what I was saying is that the reports of these specific missiles '' so the Yakhont missile and the SA-17s '' have been previously reported. It was previously reported that they have been transferred. In terms of whether new versions '' there's not new '' we're not aware of new shipments of these particular missiles.
  QUESTION: And one other '' sorry, one other thing, just if I may, on this. Today's reports referred, I think, to the '' one, I think, they '' at least the Times, I think, referred to recent shipments. And then secondly, I believe it referred to advanced guidance systems. The reference that you made to December 20th of 2011, was that a reference to these missiles with the advanced guidance systems that the Times referred to?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, those were the Yakhont anti-ship missiles. I know there have been a number of missiles that have been reported out there. We've seen those same reports, the S-300s. I don't have anything specific for you on those reports. I was just referring to the fact that the new reports this morning were '' have been previously reported.
  QUESTION: But --
  QUESTION: But you mean (inaudible)?
  MS. PSAKI: I was just saying that they have been previously reported, so an indication that they are new or referring to something new does not jive with our knowledge.
  QUESTION: But Jen, that doesn't answer the question of whether the United States is concerned about any type of transfer because '' let's say that there were transfers before. Now Lavrov is justifying the contracts, and he could '' in the future, a day from now, they could deliver the remainder of that contract. So is the U.S. concerned about any transfers on any contract, whether it's an old one or a new one?
  MS. PSAKI: Absolutely, and I appreciate your question. And the Secretary himself said this just two weeks ago. We remain concerned about any aid that is being provided to help the Syrian regime by the Russians or anyone else, including any form of missiles. That's a concern we've expressed publicly and the Secretary and others have expressed privately as well.
  QUESTION: Wasn't the --
  QUESTION: So you don't take his point that this is just a contract, we have to fulfill old contracts, and that's just the way it is?
  MS. PSAKI: Look, I don't want to get into that level of specificity in the contracts. I'm not familiar with the specifics of a contract. But let me just convey, to be fully clear: We are always concerned, we remain concerned, about any transfer of weapons or assistance to the Syrian regime.
  On a larger picture, though, and the Secretary has spoken to this as well, we continue to work with the Russians in planning the international conference and in working to get both sides back to the table to work toward a political transition at the same time we're doing that.
  QUESTION: I'm sorry, and maybe I'm being obtuse, but I '' are you aware of any recent shipments of Yakhont missiles by Russia to Syria?
  MS. PSAKI: We're not aware of new shipments.
  QUESTION: But you keep saying ''new,'' and I worry that you are deliberately choosing a word that does not address my specific question, because ''new'' could be interpreted as something that was previously announced, and therefore it is not new; in other words, it's not an additional thing. But I'm interested not in whether it was previously announced, but rather whether it was recently delivered. So can you address the question of recency?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, the point I was raising, Arshad, is that previously it was reported that the transfers were made. We're not aware of new '' any new information or new --
  QUESTION: So you're not aware of any transfers since December 20th, 2011?
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I don't have any new information beyond what I just laid out for you.
  QUESTION: But it's sort of odd that you're not able to address '' I mean, you're saying you're not aware of any new transfers. That either means that there's nothing since '11, or it doesn't.
  MS. PSAKI: What I'm conveying to you here is that the transfers of these weapons have been previously announced. In terms of the timing of that, I don't have anything more specific for you.
  QUESTION: So you (inaudible) --
  MS. PSAKI: But the notion that this is new information '' it has been previously reported. Beyond that, I just don't have anything more for you.
  QUESTION: So it's possible that there were, indeed, recent deliveries of these; you just don't know?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't want to speculate on that.
  QUESTION: You don't know?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't want to speculate on that.
  QUESTION: So do you know the answer to that?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any more information for you.
  QUESTION: But do you know the answer to whether there were any recent deliveries?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything additional for you, Arshad. I don't --
  QUESTION: I can see that.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay, great. Any more on Syria?
  QUESTION: What has been the response from the Russians when Secretary Kerry has publicly and privately expressed these concerns about continued aid? Has there been what you would characterize as any kind of satisfactory response? And within the weeks leading up to a peace summit, would any continued fulfillment of existing contracts still be seen as a Russian commitment to a peace summit? Would it disrupt the plans for this June summit?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, let me take the first one first. The Secretary '' I'm not going to speak on behalf of the Russians, and obviously, you can call them and reach out to them about their take on that. Clearly, and obviously, the Secretary and Foreign Minister Lavrov standing next to each other just a few days ago and stating their joint commitment to moving towards the conference, moving towards a political transition, is evidence that we're both committed on both sides to doing that.
  Of course, there are concerns at the same time simultaneously about any aid being provided to the regime, and that remains the case. But we can still move forward on the track towards the conference because we share a commitment to moving toward a political transition, and that has been the case.
  QUESTION: Would it be fair to say, then, that the response has not been satisfactory from the Russians so far specifically on these expressions of concern regarding aid, including weapons?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't want to parse that. We are pleased that the Russians have shown an openness to work with the Secretary, work with us, work with allies around the world, to move toward planning a conference and bringing both sides back to the table. That's a very important step. At the same time, we're also working on a multilateral approach to continue to help the opposition and continue to aid them with what they need. And that is going on, of course, on the other side as well.
  QUESTION: So there was no request for an embargo on arms deliveries leading up to the peace conference?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not going to get into any specifics of internal conversations.
  Is it on Syria?
  QUESTION: Yes, please.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: My name is Joseph Howly --
  MS. PSAKI: Hi, Joseph.
  QUESTION: -- from Sky News Arabia. Regarding the international peace conference on Syria, the idea suggested by Russia and the United States, would you mind, would you agree, if Iran participated?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we've talked about this. Welcome to the briefing room this week. Good to see you. We've talked about this quite a bit this week. I don't have anything new for you on the conference today. The planning is underway. I mentioned yesterday that the P-3 political representatives were here yesterday, so that would be the U.S., UK, and France. They had a meeting. There's going to be a meeting next week that the Secretary will be participating in in Jordan. But in terms of the participants and the agenda for the conference, that's being worked out with our partners and with the UN, and we'll continue to work on that every day.
  QUESTION: And what about the meeting of Friends of Syria that's going to happen in Jordan? Secretary Kerry is going to participate --
  MS. PSAKI: Yes, he will be participating.
  QUESTION: -- but the opposition, the Syrian opposition, said it's not going to participate. So how this would help the Syrian opposition, and would you be there if still this would be the opinion for this opposition?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, the purpose of the meeting in Jordan next week is to work with our partners, work with the London 11 that we've worked with in the past to help the opposition in planning for the conference. The Syrian opposition, as you may know, also has their own conference next week that will take place in Istanbul that has a broad agenda, including their plans to expand their membership and leadership. And they'll be deciding there whether they'll be participating moving forward. We certainly hope they will. We've been in close contact with them '' Ambassador Ford and others have been. But I would send you to them for any further comment.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Do you have a date and venue for the peace conference yet?
  MS. PSAKI: The Geneva '' the next Geneva 1, follow-up to Geneva 1 --
  QUESTION: Yes.
  MS. PSAKI: -- I should call it? We need a good name for it. I don't have a date yet. We're still in discussions with the UN and other partners about the timing of that, and we continue to shoot for early June.
  QUESTION: Geneva, right? It will take place in Geneva?
  MS. PSAKI: We don't have any specifics on the location. Any announcement would come from the UN.
  QUESTION: Really? The President --
  QUESTION: On Google --
  QUESTION: The President said Geneva yesterday. Did he screw up magnificently?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, it's a follow-up to Geneva 1.
  QUESTION: He said talks in Geneva.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay. Well, when we have a formal announcement to make, it will come from the UN, so I'll let you all wait for that.
  QUESTION: So you're saying he was incorrect or what?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not saying that, Brad. I'm just telling --
  QUESTION: I just don't understand why you hide information --
  MS. PSAKI: I'm just --
  QUESTION: -- when the President of the United States has given the name of the city.
  MS. PSAKI: I'm just suggesting you wait for a formal announcement for all the details.
  QUESTION: Okay. So the President, when he says something, it's not formal enough for you? (Laughter.)
  MS. PSAKI: Brad, thank you.
  QUESTION: The Secretary said last Friday that it's going to be in Geneva when he did the Google chat. I have a question: Do you have a reaction to the Syrian activist Mazen Darwish? It's reported that he's being scheduled to appear before the Syrian anti-terrorist court on May 19.
  MS. PSAKI: We do, and thank you for your question. We're deeply concerned about the well-being of Syrian activist Mazen Darwish, Director for the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression, and several of his colleagues who were detained by Syrian air force intelligence over a year ago for the center's work to promote and protect human rights in Syria.
  Just to give folks a little bit of background in case you haven't heard of this particular case, Mazen and two of his colleagues are scheduled to appear before the anti-terrorism court in Damascus on Sunday, May 19th. We feel this is clearly part of the regime's continued attempts to repress freedom of expression and silence those who peacefully advocate for democracy and human rights. And finally, I would also note that the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression, of which he is the Director, is the only Syrian NGO to be granted consultative status by the United Nation Economic and Social Council.
  QUESTION: Thank you.
  QUESTION: One more thing on Syria --
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: The Secretary himself in Rome referred to it as Geneva 2, so the exchange you had with Brad I think makes all of us think it's not going to be in Geneva. Would you steer us away from that?
  MS. PSAKI: I will stop being too cute about this. There will be a formal announcement. The obvious location for it is Geneva. It has been said by many people that it will be in Geneva. Because it is not our announcement to make, it is the UN's announcement, I just wanted to refer to the official announcement.
  QUESTION: Okay, okay. Thank you.
  QUESTION: When is the announcement (inaudible)?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any timing for you on that. Obviously, there are a number of pieces, including the date and particulars like that that would need to be decided before any announcement would be made.
  QUESTION: Jen, I wanted to ask a follow-up on yesterday's designation of Syrian Air by the Treasury. It was made because you believe that it has been used to ferry weapons into Syria, and I understand that grounds; but on the other hand, it's also quite a vital service within Syria itself for helping people within Syria to move around now that the roads have become very dangerous. I wondered if perhaps in this case such a designation could be seen as a little harsh when it might actually have a reverse effect and hit the people that you're actually trying to help.
  MS. PSAKI: Sure. And I appreciate your question. Because it's a Treasury designation, I would point you to them for the specifics of the reasoning and the pieces weighed there.
  QUESTION: But there's nothing you can add from the State side of it?
  MS. PSAKI: I just am not going to weigh in on a Treasury designation.
  QUESTION: Can you weigh in on the State designation --
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: -- of the leader of al-Nusrah Front? Because al-Nusrah was already designated by State some time ago, but specifically the leader being designated as a global terrorist, there's a note about having recently pledged loyalty to the leader of al-Qaida. Was that the prompt for the designation, or was there something else?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, just so everybody's aware '' and we sent out an extensive Media Note on this yesterday, so if anybody didn't receive it, we're happy to provide it. But the Department of State did '' has designated al-Nusrah Front leader Mohammad Al-Jawlani as a specially-designated global terrorist. The consequences of this designation includes a general prohibition against engaging in transactions involving Jawlani and the freezing of all property and interests '' in his property, and that that is in the United States or comes within the United States.
  As you mentioned, Margaret, but let me just repeat, he's considered the leader of al-Nusrah Front and has stated in videos that his ultimate goal is the overflow of the Syrian regime and the institution of Sharia law throughout the country. These public validations '' declarations validate what we've long felt, known, that al-Nusrah Front is the Syrian arm of the AQI franchise, and this designation is something that confirms that further. I'm not going to get into the specifics of how those are decided, but clearly he's somebody who there is great concern about, which warranted this specific step.
  QUESTION: And has there been a change in the nature of the violence or anything that is related to this?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I don't have anything specific for you on the reasons why now. I'm happy to connect you with someone who can speak to that more in depth. Obviously, as somebody who is the leader of al-Nusrah Front, as somebody who has '' we've long expressed concerns about the actions of that group. This was a step that seemed like a natural next step.
  QUESTION: Can I ask about that? Does the U.S. Government have any reason to believe that this individual has any assets in the United States or under U.S. jurisdiction that could be frozen?
  MS. PSAKI: That's a good question, Arshad. I'm happy '' I'm going to have to take the question and look further into it. I don't know off the top of my head what his assets are in the United States.
  QUESTION: (Inaudible) follow on terrorism. May 2nd was the second anniversary of the death of Usama bin Ladin, and my question is now here. A number of offices have been opened by the Taliban, like in Qatar and other places. Where do we stand now as far as terrorism is concerned around the globe after this Usama bin Ladin's death? (Inaudible.)
  MS. PSAKI: That's a quite a broad question. I will tell you that we remain committed to fighting it. The Secretary is doing everything he can on that part. The President speaks about this frequently, and I'd point you to his strong remarks in the past month.
  QUESTION: When does the Global Terrorism report come out? It might be something to point to as well in the future. (Laughter.)
  MS. PSAKI: Thank you, Brad. I'm happy to do that.
  Go ahead, in the back.
  QUESTION: About terrorism, but it's another spot. I mean, Egypt. I asked this question yesterday about --
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: A few days ago it was reported that a terror plot or plan was there to target different embassies, and they specifically mentioned the American Embassy and then French Embassy. I don't know if you have something to say about it.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we work closely with our partners around the world on security issues, and of course keeping our people safe. We don't speak on specifics of those, for obvious reasons. And so I would refer you to the Government of Egypt for any other specifics.
  QUESTION: So my other question is related to somehow something happened last weekend. An American citizen was stabbed next to the American Embassy, as a matter of fact. Do you have anything going on and any involvement from FBI or anybody is involved to the investigation what's going on in that part of the world?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything more specific for you on that. I think we may have spoken to it at the time, which our plan was to get you yesterday. And if we haven't, I'm happy to do that following the briefing.
  Go ahead, Jill.
  QUESTION: Jen, I know you don't like to, obviously, comment about CIA affairs. However, we know that for the past week there's been a big spy scandal brewing in Moscow. And just wanted to know '' it's been very, very public, and obviously deliberately so, on the part of the Russians to splash it all over the Russian media. Is this '' is the State Department commenting to the Russians? Is the Ambassador talking about this? Is there a concern that this is turning into some type of almost public vendetta?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Jill, no surprise, and you prefaced at the beginning, I don't have anything further to add to what Patrick has said from the podium here about the specific case. I will say broadly that over the years we have worked closely with Russia on a number of issues, including combating terrorism, including on economic issues. You're very familiar with what we did to implement the New START Treaty, to work on North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan. You've seen the Secretary meet with Foreign Minister Lavrov '' I think actually it's more than any other foreign minister at this point, they've worked together. So we still feel that we have a very positive relationship and one that we can continue to work together on areas where we agree.
  There are still areas, of course, where we disagree, but I'm not going to weigh in further on the impact here. I would just tell you that we continue to work with Russia on a number of broad global cooperative issues across the board.
  QUESTION: Same subject. Has the alleged spy left Russia yet?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything for you on that.
  QUESTION: I think you said earlier in the week that you abide by your Vienna Convention obligations. Seventy-two hours would be up now, so have you abided by those obligations and pulled him out of the country, or is he still there?
  MS. PSAKI: I just don't have an update for you on that.
  QUESTION: And then there was a report today that the FSB spokesman outed a CIA station chief in Moscow.
  MS. PSAKI: I have not seen that report, but I don't expect I would have anything for you. I would point you to our friends at the CIA.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: So, this week a senior adviser to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made a sudden visit to North Korea, and this trip has just ended on Friday. So the U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Policy Glyn Davies didn't receive advance notice of this trip, and also said we need to make efforts in future to ensure good communications. Does it mean there's no good enough communications between Japan and the U.S.? How '' any comments on that?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, let me say broadly that we have a very close and cooperative relationship with the Government of Japan. We work with them closely on a number of issues. The Secretary was just there just a couple of weeks ago.
  On this particular issue, I don't think I can add much more to what Ambassador Davies said about not having prior knowledge. He is in Japan right now. I expect he will speak to his meetings and his visit as he's departing tomorrow, and so I would point you to that.
  QUESTION: So he's going to mention more things in this meeting.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I would '' he will give a summary of his visit to Japan, and he expected that he would receive a little bit more information on this. I don't know if he has or hasn't, but I would point you to whatever he says on that when he's leaving.
  QUESTION: Because there's a '' I mean, some U.S. meetings say that Japan's secret trip to North Korea disrupt united stance against North Korea. So how do you '' any comments --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, it's hard for me to speak to a trip that I don't know the purpose of or the details of, so I'd point you to the Government of Japan for an answer to that question. Our approach to North Korea has been the same. We remain committed to working with our partners to put necessary pressure on. That's why the Secretary was there just a couple of weeks ago and why one of the reasons the ambassador is in the region now.
  QUESTION: Do you mean --
  QUESTION: Can I ask on trips that I think you may know something about the details and purpose of?
  MS. PSAKI: Yes.
  QUESTION: Certain parts of the Secretary's trip have already been announced. He, in Rome, told us that he would be in Jerusalem and Ramallah the '' I think he said the 20th and the 21st, and you've confirmed that he will attend the meeting in Jordan, although you didn't know when.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Are you now in a position to do a trip announcement? It becomes very hard to write about the trip if one doesn't know sort of where all he's going.
  MS. PSAKI: Understandably so. Those are two major components of the trip. As you know, he'll also be going to Ethiopia to participate in the AU celebration there a week from Saturday. We will have a trip announcement with all the final details out later this afternoon, so I would point you to that. And of course, happy to address questions once that's out.
  QUESTION: I have a question. The Prime Minister Abe this morning '' we saw the interview with Foreign Affair magazine. He compared Yasakuni Shrine to U.S. Arlington Cemetery. He said U.S. should understand the purpose for his visit to Yasakuni Shrine because Obama '' President '' U.S. President did the same thing. I wonder, do you have any comment? Do you agree this kind of comparison?
  MS. PSAKI: I haven't seen those comments and maybe because we were kind of getting ready to come down here. I'm happy to take a look at them. I know we've spoken to his visit several weeks ago from the podium in the past, but I'll have to get back to you on that.
  QUESTION: (Inaudible) Japan's mayor's sex slaves remarks, and you said they were outrageous and offensive yesterday. How do you see the recent Japanese right-wing activities, because some South Korea media say that Japan's far-right politicians have lost their minds? Any comments --
  MS. PSAKI: I spoke to this pretty extensively yesterday, so I would point you to my remarks yesterday when I called the comments offensive and outrageous. And we still feel the same way, but beyond that I don't know that I have much more analysis for you. I'd refer you to the Government of Japan.
  QUESTION: (Inaudible) Egypt?
  MS. PSAKI: Yes.
  QUESTION: Today, actually right now, thousands of Egyptians are protesting again President Mohamed Morsy and the Muslim Brotherhood in Tahrir Square. I would like to know if you have any comment about that.
  MS. PSAKI: I haven't seen those reports, so I'd have to look closer at the details. Of course, we always support the freedom of and the rights of people to peacefully protest. We encourage them to do that peacefully. So let me take a closer look at that.
  QUESTION: And on Taiwan today, I know my colleague and I have been asking this for a week, and State Department are reluctant to make any comment before the investigation coming out. But both sides from Taiwan and Philippine just released their investigation unilaterally. So far, what U.S. has learned? And seems like there is very two different version of the story.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I haven't had an opportunity to review the reports that have come out. This continues to be an issue, and we have actually spoken to it pretty extensively from the podium and called it a tragic death. We've encouraged, of course, the Philippine Government to continue with their investigation and to pursue all avenues for that. This is an issue that we encourage both sides to work through together. That remains our position, and we're happy to take a closer look at the reports that have come out.
  QUESTION: And yesterday you mentioned you didn't know that Philippine refused to cooperate with Taiwan to have a joint investigation. Do you have any follow-up?
  MS. PSAKI: I think I said I would take a closer look at it. This is an issue where, again, it's up to the Government of the Philippines, to the Taiwan authorities, to work through together. Obviously, we regret the tragic death of this fishing boat master. We've said that a couple times from here. That, of course, remains the case. I'd also point you to the fact that, Joe Yun, our Acting Assistant Secretary, expressed his condolences to the family for this unfortunate loss of life when he was on Capitol Hill. So we've repeatedly expressed that. Unfortunately, I don't think I have anything new for you on this today.
  QUESTION: He said that he didn't know what really happened. But so far, there is so many information already provided. So U.S. doesn't still --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we didn't want to weigh in on an investigation that the Philippine Government was going to take underway. I haven't seen their report on the investigation, but again, we'll take a closer look at that.
  Go ahead in the back.
  QUESTION: A follow-up. If the two sides they don't want to work together, will the U.S. get involved? And if the U.S. doesn't want to get involved, what will your reaction be if China propose to be the mediator?
  MS. PSAKI: There's a lot of hypotheticals there, which I'm not going to weight into. But we encourage '' continue to encourage both sides to work together. We've been in touch with both the Government of the Philippines as well as the Taiwan authorities. We hope they will work together. We continue to encourage that. And beyond that I'm not going to get ahead of where things are.
  Jo, go ahead.
  QUESTION: Jen, can I change the subject? It would seem that in Iran the Guardians Council, which is vetting the candidates for the upcoming elections next month, have decided and have ruled that women cannot contest, they cannot stand as candidates. I wondered what the United States reaction is to that, considering that 50 person of the population in Iran is women '' are women.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we don't take positions on any candidates, as you know, and we hope that the upcoming elections will be free, fair, and transparent and will represent the will of the Iranian people. So we wouldn't weight into decisions made by the government. Of course, broadly, we hope that women around the world participate in politics and elected office, but beyond that I don't think I have anything specific for you.
  QUESTION: Taking the word ''fair'' '' if you're being fair, it would seem to exclude 50 percent of the population from an election, would already mean that it is not a fair election.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we don't weigh in on to the candidates and the candidates that are chosen through the process in Iran. Of course, of course, broadly speaking we do want women to participate in elections around the world and rise up in elected office.
  QUESTION: Just not in Iran?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not suggesting that, Arshad. I'm just suggesting that we leave it to the process that happens in Iran for them to pick their candidates.
  QUESTION: But I mean why '' it seems astounding that this Department '' I mean, what if they decided to exclude, as this country once did, not merely women but black people? Would that be acceptable to you? That's just their choice; they do it any way they want and you're not going to stand up for democratic rights?
  MS. PSAKI: I think we pretty broadly stand up for democratic rights from this building.
  QUESTION: Just not for Iranian women, apparently.
  MS. PSAKI: That's not at all what I was conveying. I think there are two separate issues here. Of course, we want women to participate in processes around the world, whether that is participating in voting or being elected to office. Of course. More specifically, in terms of how candidates are selected, we don't weigh in on specific candidates, of course, as the Government of Iran is picking them. But broadly, yes, we would like women to be participating at every level.
  QUESTION: Including in Iran?
  MS. PSAKI: Including around the world.
  QUESTION: But '' no but --
  QUESTION: This is not a process. This is a clear case of gender discrimination, no? Isn't that a difference between a vetting procedure and just saying, ''All women no''? I mean, you've got to take a stand on something like that.
  MS. PSAKI: Again, Brad, I think I made pretty clear '' I don't know that I have much more to add '' that of course we have long supported women being elected to office in the United States and around the world and participating in the process. We want this to be free and fair. There's a lot of ways to, of course, define that. But again, we don't select or play a role in selecting who the candidates are. We can take a look through the process, and happy to comment once it's completed.
  Go ahead, Goyal.
  QUESTION: India? Can you confirm that Home Minister of India Mr. Sushil Kumar Shinde should be here on Monday for the next two days to have talks on terrorism and cooperation between India and U.S.? And also, he may be asking the U.S. again access to Mr. Rana, who was involved in the Mumbai attacks.
  MS. PSAKI: I haven't seen reports of him visiting. I would '' and he was an official from India?
  QUESTION: May 20th through 22nd. And Indian televisions, Indian reports are there.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay. I have not seen that. I don't know that he has meetings here. We're happy to check on that for you and for others if you all are interested.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Just back to Japan and DPRK. Just let me reconfirm one things. I read the Ambassador Davies remark in Japan. The United States has not been informed about Japan's Prime Minister senior advisor trip to North Korea --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Ambassador Davies spoke to this just a couple of days ago. Obviously we're well aware now. I would point you to his comments. I don't have anything further to add to that. As I mentioned a little bit yesterday, since Ambassador Davies is there in Japan and having several meetings, it's possible that he will get more of a briefing on this visit. I don't want to predict what he will know by tomorrow, but I would expect that he'll make some comments as he's leaving the country.
  QUESTION: Does the United States know this thing before or after that? Do you --
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I think Ambassador Davies comments made clear on that point.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: You tell me not only that Ambassador Davies but everybody in this building, including Secretary Kerry and the White House, nobody knows about this trip beforehand, right?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't think I have any further details on the trip, other than what I've already said in terms of what we knew and didn't know.
  Walitz, do you have something?
  QUESTION: Afghanistan.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: President Karzai's office issued a brief statement today that he spoke to Secretary Kerry. Do you have any details on the readout, what were the issues they discussed?
  MS. PSAKI: I do, I do.
  QUESTION: Thank you.
  MS. PSAKI: So Secretary Kerry spoke this morning with President Karzai. They discussed our joint progress on the bilateral security agreement, border issues, and the status of the ongoing peace process. Secretary Kerry also affirmed that he and President Karzai remain committed to the same strategy and the same goal of a stable, sovereign Afghanistan, responsible for its own security and able to ensure that it can never again be a safe haven for terrorists.
  QUESTION: Do you know when this BSA will be signed? What's the status on that?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any specific update on that. Again, it's obviously something that we continue to work on, work very closely on at many levels with the Government of Afghanistan.
  QUESTION: Syria?
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: A little bit on Pakistan.
  MS. PSAKI: Oh.
  QUESTION: There were bomb blasts outside two mosques inside Pakistan. Fifteen people were killed and more than 100 injured. Do you have anything to say?
  MS. PSAKI: I do. And thank you. I appreciate your question. We offer the families of all those killed in today's attacks our deepest '' or attack, I should say, I apologize '' our deepest condolences and wish those injured a speedy recovery. We remain concerned about extremist violence of all kinds. Violence against innocent civilians is an assault on the values of the people of Pakistan and a threat to a prosperous future of all citizens.
  Go ahead. Burma?
  QUESTION: Yeah. So as I'm sure you've seen, there are reports that the Myanmar authorities have released 23 political prisoners. This is on the eve of the departure of the President for his visit to Washington. Three questions: One, what's your reaction to the release? Two, would you not prefer that all of the political prisoners, which activist groups say number in the hundreds, be released immediately? And three, activist groups say that '' and I think they're right '' that there is a pattern of the Myanmar authorities releasing prisoners at sort of strategic times before sanctions decisions come up, before important visits. Wouldn't you rather not have this piecemealed process and just see them all freed?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, thank you, Arshad. We do welcome the reports that approximately 20 political prisoners were released today. We talked about this a little bit yesterday, so that leads the number to, I believe, over 850 now. So we continue to urge the government to work through the political prisoner review committee, which was specially put in place to address remaining cases. And of course, we encourage them to release all political prisoners unconditionally.
  And I spoke to this a little yesterday, but let me just add there's, of course, been great progress made and a number of positive reforms in Burma, including the release of these prisoners, including the easing of restrictions. But part of the discussion next week I'm sure will be about continued progress that needs to be made.
  QUESTION: And the 850 number refers to the number that have been released so far?
  MS. PSAKI: Yes.
  QUESTION: And do you have an estimate of the number that remain imprisoned?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't. I don't have one here. I'm happy to look further into that for you.
  QUESTION: And what about the argument that rights activists make, that this is a very kind of cynical process and that people get let out before there are sort of diplomatic visits, things that are '' it's good for the optics? Do you see it that way?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't want to speak to that specifically, but I can say that of course we want all prisoners to be released unconditionally, and that would be a wonderful step. We can't underestimate the fact that Burma has made great progress in the last couple of years. Yes, there's still more work to do, but the progress they've made has been significant and they've put in place an ambitious reform agenda, and we encourage them to keep doing more.
  QUESTION: Thanks.
  QUESTION: Oh, I got one more. I'm sorry. Yesterday, I think I had asked if you '' I think you had said that you would be happy to check whether the Secretary or anybody from the building had spoken to the Israeli Government about the four outposts that are apparently going to be legalized. Have they?
  MS. PSAKI: We have addressed it through many channels here and it's raised regularly. I don't have anything specific on the Secretary specifically.
  QUESTION: But on this specific issue?
  MS. PSAKI: Yes. On this specific case of the recent reports we discussed yesterday.
  QUESTION: Okay.
  MS. PSAKI: And I did check on that for you.
  QUESTION: And was it done at the Embassy or high level or was it the acting assistant secretary or --
  MS. PSAKI: I don't want to get into that level of detail. It was just --
  QUESTION: Why not?
  MS. PSAKI: It was just raised at a high level here.
  QUESTION: At a high level?
  MS. PSAKI: At a high level, yes.
  QUESTION: Okay. And high level means like an ambassador or up or --
  MS. PSAKI: I'm just not going to be specific. But this is something the Secretary has raised repeatedly in public and private. But I did follow up on your specific question.
  QUESTION: No, no. Thank you. There is a reason why it's interesting though. I mean, my specific question was actually about Secretary Kerry. So he did not raise it then?
  MS. PSAKI: I'll have to just double-check on that for you.
  QUESTION: Okay. Please do. The reason we ask, and it's not to be pesky --
  MS. PSAKI: Oh, no. Not at all.
  QUESTION: -- but it's because the level at which something gets raised conveys something. So when the President raises an issue, it means one thing. When the Secretary raises it, it means something. When the assistant secretary or the acting assistant secretary raises it, it means something. When a third secretary makes a phone call about it, it means something else.
  MS. PSAKI: Sure. I certainly understand.
  QUESTION: So if you could tell us where --
  MS. PSAKI: And it is '' and our position on these issues has been no secret, either, so --
  QUESTION: Yeah.
  MS. PSAKI: Great. One thing I would just like to add, many of you know Jonathan Lalley, who's standing over there with blond hair and hiding behind the post. But today is his last day. He's going over to the White House. They've stolen him. But he has been just an incredible asset. I've only been here two and a half months, but he has helped me navigate through this entire building, every aspect of getting ready to talk to all of you. And I am just so grateful for him. And I've only been here two and a half months, so there are many people who appreciate him many more. He will be '' the White House will be well served by him, and I just wanted to thank him. And we'll embarrass him and just give him a little '' (applause).
  Okay. Thank you, everyone.
  QUESTION: We appreciate him too, and congratulations, Jonathan.
  (The briefing was concluded at 2:03 p.m.)
Federal Register | Monsanto Co.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Herbicide Resistant Soybeans and Cotton, and Notice of Virtual Public Meeting
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 17 May 2013 16:05
  We are announcing to the public that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on environmental impacts that may result from the potential approval of two petitions from the Monsanto Company (Monsanto) seeking a determination of nonregulated status of herbicide resistant soybeans and cotton. Issues to be addressed in the EIS include the potential environmental impacts associated with the increased use of certain herbicides and possible selection for and spread of weeds resistant to the herbicide dicamba combined with resistance to other herbicides (multiple resistance). We are also requesting public comments to further delineate the scope of the alternatives and environmental impacts and issues to be included in this EIS. We are also announcing that APHIS will be hosting a virtual public meeting during the scoping period. The purpose of the scoping meeting will be to allow the public an opportunity to comment on the range of alternatives and environmental impacts and issues discussed in the EIS.
  We will consider all comments that we receive on or before June 17, 2013. We will also consider comments made at a virtual public meeting that will be held during the comment period.
  You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
  Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2013-0043 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.
  Other Information: Details regarding the virtual scoping meeting, including times, dates, and how to participate, will be available at http://www.aphisvirtualmeetings.com.
  Dr. Rebecca Stankiewicz Gabel, Branch Chief, Biotechnology Environmental Analysis Branch, Environmental Risk Analysis Programs, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238; (301) 851-3954. To obtain copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy Eck at (301) 851-3882, email: cynthia.a.eck@aphis.usda.gov.
  Under the authority of the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act (PPA), as amended (7 U.S.C. 7701et seq.), the regulations in 7 CFR part 340, ''Introduction of Organisms and Products Altered or Produced Through Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Pests or Which There Is Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests,'' regulate, among other things, the introduction (importation, interstate movement, or release into the environment) of organisms and products altered or produced through genetic engineering that are plant pests or that there is reason to believe are plant pests. Such genetically engineered organisms and products are considered ''regulated articles.''
  The regulations in § 340.6(a) provide that any person may submit a petition to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) seeking a determination that an article should not be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 340.6 describe the form that a petition for a determination of nonregulated status must take and the information that must be included in the petition.
  APHIS has received two petitions (referred to below as ''the petitions'') from the Monsanto Company (Monsanto) seeking a determination of nonregulated status for soybean and cotton cultivars genetically engineered to be resistant to herbicides. The first petition, APHIS Petition Number 10-188-01p, seeks a determination of nonregulated status of soybean (Glycine max) designated as event MON 87708, which has been genetically engineered for tolerance to the herbicide dicamba. The second petition, APHIS Petition Number 12-185-01p, seeks a determination of nonregulated status of cotton (Gossypium spp.) designated as event MON 88701, which has been genetically engineered for tolerance to the herbicides dicamba and glufosinate. The petitions state that these articles are unlikely to pose a plant pest risk and, therefore, should not be regulated articles under APHIS' regulations in 7 CFR part 340. These part 340 regulations are authorized by the PPA to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests, and the decision on whether or not to approve the petitions will be based on this standard.
  Notices were published [1] in the Federal Register for each petition advising the public that APHIS had received the petition and was seeking public comments on the petitions. The notices also announced that APHIS would prepare either an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321et seq.) (NEPA) to provide the Agency with a review and analysis of any potential environmental impacts associated with the petition request.
  Under the provisions of NEPA, Federal agencies must examine the potential environmental impacts of proposed major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment before those actions can be taken. In accordance with NEPA, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372), APHIS has considered how to properly examine the potential environmental impacts of decisions for petitions for determinations of nonregulated status. For each petition for a determination of nonregulated status under consideration in the past, APHIS prepared an EA to provide the APHIS decisionmaker with a review and analysis of any potential environmental impacts. In two cases, [2] APHIS prepared an EIS.
  In reviewing petitions for determinations of nonregulated status of crop cultivars genetically engineered to be resistant to various herbicides, APHIS has identified the potential selection of herbicide resistant weeds as a potential environmental impact. We have concluded that for the two Monsanto petitions it is appropriate to complete an EIS for the potential determinations of nonregulated status requested by the petitions in order to perform a comprehensive environmental analysis of the potential selection of dicamba resistant weeds and other potential environmental impacts that may occur as a result of making determinations of nonregulated status of these events. An EIS can examine the broad and cumulative environmental impacts of making determinations of nonregulated status of the two requested soybean and cotton cultivars, including potential impacts of the proposed action on the human environment, alternative courses of action, and possible mitigation measures for reducing potential impacts.
  The Federal action being considered is whether to approve the two petitions for nonregulated status. This notice identifies reasonable alternatives and potential issues that may be studied in the EIS. We are requesting public comments to further delineate the range of alternatives and environmental impacts and issues to be evaluated in the EIS for the two petitions. We will be hosting a virtual meeting during the scoping period to discuss the scope of the EIS (see ADDRESSES above). We are particularly interested in receiving comments regarding biological, cultural, or ecological issues, and we encourage the submission of scientific data, studies, or research to support your comments.
  The EIS will consider a range of reasonable alternatives. APHIS is currently considering four alternatives: (1) Take no action, i.e., APHIS would not change the regulatory status of the soybean and cotton events and they would continue to be regulated articles, (2) approve both the petitions for determinations of nonregulated status of the soybean event and the cotton event, (3) approve the petition for determination of nonregulated status of the soybean event and deny the petition for determination of nonregulated status of the cotton event, or (4) approve the petition for determination of nonregulated status of the cotton event and deny the petition for determination of nonregulated status of the soybean event.
  We have also identified the following potential environmental issues for consideration in the EIS. We are requesting that the public provide information on the following questions during the comment period on this Notice of Intent (NOI):
  What are the impacts of weeds, herbicide-resistant weeds, weed management practices, and unmet weed management needs for crop cultivation, and how may these change with the approval of these petitions for nonregulated status of these herbicide-resistant crops?In which weeds would the approval of the two petitions likely contribute to controlling the spread of biotypes that are resistant to more than one herbicide mode of action and how will that control influence weed management strategies in cropland or managed non-cropland?What weeds are currently resistant to dicamba herbicide and what is their natural frequency and occurrence in soy and cotton crops, other crops, and in non-crop ecosystems?Would the increased use of dicamba associated with the approval of these two petitions cause an acceleration of the selection and spread of dicamba-resistant biotypes? Are there weeds that are more likely to be difficult to control if they become resistant to dicamba?In which crops or non-cropland weeds would the selection and spread of dicamba-resistant biotypes be most problematic in terms of available alternate weed management strategies and agronomic production?In which weeds would the approval of the two petitions likely contribute to the selection and spread of biotypes that are resistant to more the one herbicide mode of action and which would be most problematic for weed management strategies in cropland or managed non-cropland?What are the potential changes in agronomic practices, including crop rotation and weed management practices (e.g., herbicide use, tillage), for control of weeds in rotational crops that may occur with the use of these herbicide-resistant crops? What are the current and potentially effective strategies for management of herbicide-resistant weeds in crops? What are the costs associated with these practices and strategies?Comments that identify other issues or alternatives that could be considered for examination in the EIS would be especially helpful. All comments received during the scoping period will be carefully considered in developing the final scope of the EIS. Upon completion of the draft EIS, a notice announcing its availability and an opportunity to comment on it will be published in the Federal Register.
  7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
  Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of May 2013.
  Michael Gregoire,
  Deputy Administrator, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
  [FR Doc. 2013-11580 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
  BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
Letter -- Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Amendments
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 08:00
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  May 17, 2013
  TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENTTO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
  May 17, 2013
  Dear Mr. Speaker:
  I ask the Congress to consider the enclosed Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 Budget amendments for the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Justice, State, and Transportation, as well as Other International Programs, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Federal Trade Commission. These amendments do not affect the proposed FY 2014 Budget totals. These amendments are necessary to reflect correctly policies assumed in the FY 2014 Budget.
  Also included is a new Department of Defense (DOD) General Provision that would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to receive and retain payment in-kind for the settlement of the longstanding A-12 aircraft contract litigation. This litigation has been ongoing for over two decades.
  The final decision about the pace of the drawdown in Afghanistan was not made at the time the FY 2014 Budget request was developed. As a result, the Budget included a placeholder for DOD FY 2014 Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding, equivalent to the amount provided in the President's FY 2013 Budget. The Administration noted in the FY 2014 Budget that after determining the required force levels in Afghanistan, a Budget amendment updating the OCO request would be submitted to the Congress. The enclosed DOD amendments also include the necessary updates to the OCO request, which funds military operations in Afghanistan and other activities that primarily support Operation Enduring Freedom.
  In addition, this transmittal contains FY 2014 amendments for the Legislative Branch. As a matter of comity and tradition, these appropriations requests for the Legislative Branch are transmitted without change.
  The details of these amendments are set forth in the enclosed letter from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
  I again urge the Congress to consider my FY 2014 Budget, which takes a balanced approach to further deficit reduction and replaces sequestration.
  Sincerely,
  BARACK OBAMA
Obama's media shield law makes prosecuting journalists even easier '-- RT USA
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BadChad's ThoughtPile
  Sat, 18 May 2013 07:55
  United States President Barack Obama is encouraging Congress to take up a media shield law that was abandoned at the start of his administration, but critics of the bill say it might make it even easier for journalists to be subpoenaed by the government.
  After the Associated Press revealed on Monday that they are the target of a US Department of Justice probe, Obama asked lawmakers to consider a would-be media shield law that fell apart in Washington after the start of his first presidency in 2009.
  The AP wrote this week that the Justice Department subpoenaed two months of phone records likely in an attempt to try and find out with whom the news agency spoke with before publishing a May 2012 article that exposed a Yemeni terror plot foiled by the Central Intelligence Agency. Attorney General Eric Holder called the disclosure of classified information to the AP one of the biggest leaks ever suffered by the US and said publically that it put the American people at risk. On Thursday, Pres. Obama commented that "leaks related to national security can put people at risk," but suggested that reviving a media shield law that died in Congress could perhaps strike the balance between the public's right to know and the safety of the nation.
  "So the whole goal of this media shield law that was worked on, and largely endorsed by folks like the Washington Post editorial page and prosecutors, was finding a way to strike that balance appropriately," said the president. "And to the extent this case '... has prompted renewed interest about how do we strike that balance properly, I think now is the time for us to go ahead and revisit that legislation. I think that's a worthy conversation to have and I think that's important."
  Now as the White House shifts focus from one scandal to another, free speech advocates are concerned that the shield law, as written, wouldn't do much more than current legislation in terms of thwarting future subpoenas sent to journalists. Trevor Timm, an activist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation and a board member of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, wrote in a blog post this week that the media shield law touted by Pres. Obama during his days as a senator in Illinois failed to take shape after he secured his spot in the Oval Office.
  ''As a Senator, Obama was a vocal supporter of a robust shield law; he co-sponsored a bill in 2007 and campaigned on the issue in 2008,'' Timm wrote. ''But when the Senate moved to pass the bill as soon as Obama came into office, his administration abruptly changed course and opposed the bill, unless the Senate carved out an exception for all national security reporters.''
  When Obama entered the White House in early 2009, he walked away from a Senate where a shield law he advocated for had just started to take shape. Before long, though, his own administration asked for Congress to make adjustments before it ended up on the president's desk. That original law would, in theory, put in place safeguards that would help prevent journalists from being compelled to testify who their sources are. Once in the White House, though, Obama did an about face.
  In September 2009, Charlie Savage wrote for the New York Times that those safeguards ''would not apply to leaks of a matter deemed to cause 'significant' harm to national security.''
  ''Moreover, judges would be instructed to be deferential to executive branch assertions about whether a leak caused or was likely to cause such harm, according to officials familiar with the proposal,'' Savage wrote.
  One of the bill's authors, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York), had sharp words for the president at the time. ''The White House's opposition to the fundamental essence of this bill is an unexpected and significant setback. It will make it hard to pass this legislation,'' the senator said. Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pennsylvania), a co-sponsor, called the changes ''totally unacceptable.''
  ''If the president wants to veto it, let him veto it,'' Sen. Specter told the Times in 2009. ''I think it is different for the president to veto a bill than simply to pass the word from his subordinates to my subordinates that he doesn't like the bill.''
  Ultimately, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the shield law after some minor tweaking in December 2009, but as Savage explained in the Times this week, ''a furor over leaking arose after WikiLeaks began publishing archives of secret government documents, and the bill never received a vote.''
  Speaking to the Washington Post about what the passing of that version would have done in regards to the AP probe, Sen. Schumer said, ''at minimum, our bill would have ensured a fairer, more deliberate process in this case.''
  "While it is unclear whether the bill would change the outcome in the AP phone records case since a national security exception may have applied, the bill would have set up a legal process for approving the subpoenas that would guarantee consideration of the public's interest in protecting the freedom of the press," Schumer weighed in. "Prosecutors would have to convince a judge that the information at issue would ''prevent or mitigate an act of terrorism or harm to national security.''
  For the Freedom of the Press Foundation, Timm wrote this week that the latest version of the shield law wouldn't do much more. Under the Sept. 2009 request sent from the White House, the shield law once supported by Pres. Obama would include an exception where journalists could be subpoenaed if it means national security is at risk.
  ''Now, it's important to remember: virtually the only time the government subpoenas reporters, it involves leak investigations into stories by national security reporters. So it's hard to see how this bill will significantly help improve press freedom,'' wrote Timm. ''Worse, there's a strong argument that passing the bill as it ended in 2010 will weaken rights reporters already have and make it easier for the government to get sources from reporters.''
  ''The difference is that instead of DOJ unilaterally making that determination,'' the Justice Department would ''have to convince a judge that this was the case,'' University of Minnesota Law Professor Jane Kirtley explained to the Post.
  On Thursday, Sen. Schumer and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) announced they would co-sponsor a media shield bill '-- but that the national security exemption ordered by Obama in 2009 was once again present.
  ''The government has a legitimate interest in preventing and investigating leaks of classified information," Graham and Schumer wrote. "At the same time, the public has a legitimate interest in a robust free press.''
  ''This bill strikes a fair and reasonable balance between those interests, and we urge you to join us in advancing it,'' they wrote
Weekly Address: The President Talks About How to Build a Rising, Thriving Middle Class
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 18 May 2013 07:43
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  May 18, 2013
  WASHINGTON, DC'--In this week's address, President Obama talked about his belief that a rising, thriving middle class is the true engine of economic growth, and that to reignite that engine and continue to build on the progress we've made over the last four years, we need to invest in three areas: jobs, skills and opportunity.
  The audio of the address and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, May 18, 2013
  Remarks of President Barack ObamaAs Prepared for DeliveryWeekly AddressThe White HouseMay 17, 2013
  Hi, everybody. Over the past few months, I've laid out a series of commonsense ideas to reignite the true engine of our economic growth: a rising, thriving middle class.
  The way I see it, there are three areas where we need to focus. One: making America a magnet for good jobs. Two: making sure our workers have the education and skills they need to do those jobs. And three: making sure your hard work leads to a decent living.
  I've also been visiting cities across the country that are doing some interesting and creative things along these lines.
  On Friday, I stopped by a factory in Baltimore that's creating good jobs here at home by exporting digging equipment abroad.
  I read with young kids in a pre-K program, where kids are getting a head start learning the skills they'll need to succeed in life.
  And I stopped by a program that's helping folks in tough circumstances '' especially low-income dads '' get the training and guidance they need to find work and support their families.
  That's why I like getting out of the Washington echo chamber whenever I can '' because too often, our politics aren't focused on the same things you are. Working hard. Supporting your family and your community. Making sure your kids have every chance in life.
  More than anything, the American people make me optimistic about where we're headed as a nation. Especially after all we've been through the past several years. And that should encourage us to work even harder on the issues that matter to you.
  In a little over three years, our businesses have created more than 6.5 million new jobs. And while our unemployment rate is still too high, it's the lowest it's been since 2008. But now we need to create even more good, middle-class jobs, and we need to do it faster.
  Corporate profits have skyrocketed to all-time highs. But now we need to get middle-class wages and incomes rising too.
  Our housing market is healing. But we still need to help a lot more families stay in their homes, or refinance to take advantage of historically low rates.
  And our deficits are shrinking at the fastest rate in decades. But now we need to budget in a smarter way that doesn't hurt middle-class families or harm critical investments in our future.
  So in a lot of sectors, things are looking up. The American auto industry is thriving. American energy is booming. And American ingenuity in our tech sector has the potential to change the way we do almost everything.
  In the coming weeks, I'm going to visit more cities like Baltimore, and Austin, Texas '' where I was two weeks ago; places where Americans are coming together to strengthen their own communities and economies '' and in the process, making this country better for all of us.
  And I'm going to keep trying to work with both parties in Washington to make progress on your priorities. Because I know that if we come together around creating more jobs, educating more of our kids, and building new ladders of opportunity for everyone who's willing to climb them '' we'll all prosper, together.
  Thanks. And have a great weekend.
Bob Woodward: You know, this Benghazi scandal is a lot like Watergate
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: TheBlaze.com - Blog
  Fri, 17 May 2013 15:04
  President Obama may be dismissing ongoing congressional investigations into the 9/11 Benghazi terror attacks as a political ''sideshow,'' but veteran journalist Bob Woodward hints that today's scandal is very reminiscent of Richard Nixon's Watergate scandal.
  ''You're talking about government not working, but who's in charge of the executive branch,'' Woodward said Friday. ''You go to the Constitution, and the president has sole responsibility for the executive branch. This rests on him.''
  Comparing the release of emails from the administration to Nixon's edited transcripts, he concluded: ''I would not dismiss Benghazi. It's a very serious issue.''
  WATCH:
Cell phone users 'have no legitimate expectation of privacy' '' judge '-- RT USA
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BadChad's ThoughtPile
  Fri, 17 May 2013 14:47
  A federal judge recently ruled that if someone has their cell phone turned on, their location data does not deserve protection under the Fourth Amendment, meaning law enforcement can track individuals without a search warrant.
  New York magistrate judge Gary Brown decided in favor of Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents who were seeking his approval over a warrant on a doctor who they suspected was being paid for issuing thousands of prescriptions. The warrant would have compelled the physician's phone company to provide real-time tracking data from his cell.
  Brown, certainly to the delight of police, issued a 30-page brief outlining his opinion that, by carrying a cell phone, someone is essentially waiving their Fourth Amendment right to due process.
  ''Given the ubiquity and celebrity of geolocation technologies, an individual has no legitimate expectation of privacy in the prospective of a cellular telephone where that individual has failed to protect his privacy by taking the simple expedient of powering it off,'' Brown wrote.
  ''As to control by the user, all of the known tracking technologies may be defeated by merely turning off the phone. Indeed '' excluding apathy or inattention '' the only reason that users leave cell phones turned on is so that the device can be located to receive calls. Conversely, individuals who do not want to be disturbed by unwanted telephone calls at a particular time or place simply turn their phones off, knowing that they cannot be located.''
  He goes on to suggest that because there are smartphone applications available that allow users to locate people in their area with similar interests, cell phone customers should not expect their inherent right to privacy to be observed.
  ''Given the notoriety surrounding the disclosure of geolocation data to retailers purveying soap powder and blue jeans to mall shoppers, the police searching for David Pogue's iPhone and, most alarmingly, the creators and users of the Girls Around You app, cell phone users cannot realistically entertain the notion that such information would (or should) be withheld from federal law enforcement agents searching for a fugitive.''
  The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has long been a voice for the American people against governmental overreach and technological surveillance. Chris Soghoian, a principal technologist and senior policy analyst at the ACLU, wrote that Brown's opinion was ''ridiculous.''
  ''There is a big difference between location information you knowingly share with a select group of friends (or, in fact, the world) and information collected about you without your knowledge or consent,'' he wrote.
  Exactly how common this practice is throughout the law enforcement community is unclear but it has widely been reported that a Michigan police force tried to gain information about every single cell phone within the proximity of a labor protest.
  Congressional leaders are currently considering two laws that would address how freely police are able to bug citizens. During an April hearing on Capitol Hill one detective told Senators that warrantless geolocation tracking is ''essential to obtain in the early stages of investigations when probable cause has not yet been established.''
  That attitude, and the wide potential for abuse this kind of law creates, has the ACLU alarmed.
  ''Someone might be happy to share their location with a few friends by 'checking in' using Foursquare while at a music festival, but not want law enforcement to access that same information,'' Soghoian continued. ''And, they would still reasonably expect that their location a week later at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting or abortion clinic should remain private. Sharing location data isn't and shouldn't be all or nothing.''
President and First Lady to Host Concert Honoring Carole King in the East Room
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Fri, 17 May 2013 11:51
  The White House
  Office of the First Lady
  For Immediate Release
  May 17, 2013
  Wednesday, May 22 * White House '' As part of their ''In Performance at the White House'' series, the President and First Lady will host a concert in the East Room honoring singer-songwriter Carole King, who will be awarded the 2013 Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song. President Obama will present the award as he did when the Library of Congress honored Stevie Wonder (2009), Sir Paul McCartney (2010), and the songwriting team of Burt Bacharach and Hal David (2012). The program will include performances by King, as well as Gloria Estefan, Billy Joel, Jesse McCartney, Emeli Sand(C), James Taylor and Trisha Yearwood.
  The President's remarks will be pooled press and the entire event will be streamed live on www.whitehouse.gov/live starting at 7:00 PM ET. ''Carole King: The Library of Congress Gershwin Prize In Performance at the White House'' will be broadcast Tuesday, May 28 at 8:00 PM ET on PBS stations nationwide (check local listings). The program will also be broadcast at a later date via the American Forces Network to American service men and women and civilians at U.S. Department of Defense locations around the world.
  This will be the first time the Gershwin Prize honor has been awarded to a woman. The Gershwin Prize commemorates George and Ira Gershwin, the legendary American songwriting team whose extensive manuscript collections reside in the Library of Congress. The prize is awarded to musicians whose lifetime contributions in the field of popular song exemplify the standard of excellence associated with the Gershwins.
  The White House concert caps off two days of events celebrating the recipient of the Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song. On Tuesday, May 21st at 7:00 PM ET, the Library of Congress will host an invitation-only concert at their Coolidge Auditorium in honor of Carole King. The all-star tribute will include performances by Patti Austin, Colbie Caillat, Michael Feinstein, Siedah Garrett, Louise Goffin, Shelby Lynne, Gian Marco, Arturo Sandoval and a special performance by honoree Carole King. This event will be open to press, but space is limited. Members of the media who wish to cover this event must contact Sheryl Cannady at 202-707-6456 or scannady@loc.gov.
  ''Carole King: The Library of Congress Gershwin Prize In Performance at the White House'' will be the eleventh ''In Performance at the White House'' program hosted by the President and Mrs. Obama. Starting in February 2009, these events have honored the musical genius of Stevie Wonder, Sir Paul McCartney, Burt Bacharach and Hal David; celebrated Hispanic musical heritage during Hispanic Heritage Month; marked Black History Month with events featuring music from the Civil Rights Movement, Motown, Memphis Soul and the Blues; spotlighted Broadway and the unique spirit of the American musical; and explored the rich roots and resiliency of Country Music.
Angelina Jolie's Secret Test Results
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 17 May 2013 07:56
  A few weeks ago we talked to Dr. Robert Nussbaum, a geneticist at the University of California San Francisco. Nussbaum was frustrated by the monopoly that one company, Myriad, had over the interpretations of abnormalities in two genes - BRCA1 and BRCA2 '' those abnormalities are predictors of breast and ovarian cancer. Those two genes are also patented by Myriad and the legality of that patenting is currently before the Supreme Court. But Nussbaum's issue, as a geneticist and a genetic counselor, wasn't the ownership of genes, it's the ownership of years and years of test results that Myriad has privatized. Keeping that information from the public means that his patients, usually women, are denied second-opinions and alternative interpretations of genetic information that for many of them has enormous stakes.
  Well today one of those women came forward to tell what she'd done when confronted with her BRCA1 and 2 test results '' Angelina Jolie wrote in the New York Times that she's gotten a preventive double mastectomy because her BRCA1 and 2 tests indicate that she has a high likelihood of developing breast cancer. Nussbaum told us that this was a stark, but not uncommon decision made by his patients who confront few other choices when they get back alarming Myriad test results. Unfortunately it was a part of the story that got edited out of the interview we broadcast. Since Jolie has put it back in the news it might be worth re-listening to our interview with Nussbaum about the consequences of locking away public health information.
More on the accused child pornographer arrested after US sought help from online public
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 17 May 2013 07:50
  Child pornography suspect arrested May 16, 2013 by Homeland Security officers in Salinas, CA. Photo: HSI/ICE.
  A Salinas, California man believed to be the "John Doe" child predator sought in a nationwide manhunt this week appeared in federal court today following his capture Wednesday, about 24 hours after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) team issued a public appeal online for help tracking him down.
  "David J. Stevens, 58, was taken into custody in Salinas by HSI special agents and investigators with the Salinas Police Department," according to an ICE bulletin. "Authorities also rescued a child victim identified in the case."
  The videos Stevens is accused of having recorded, which document the sexual abuse of a 7-9 year old girl, were intercepted online by authorities in Denmark. The Danish authorities observed indicators that the perpetrator was based in the US; they reached out to US authorities for help tracking him down.
  Here's the criminal complaint (PDF).
  An odd detail that may interest some Boing Boing readers: Mr. Stevens is a licensed enthusiast of amateur radio.
  More below, from the ICE bulletin:
  The arrest and rescue came after a member of the public called in a lead to ICE's tip line. Stevens appeared before a federal magistrate in San Jose, where the case will be prosecuted.
  The criminal complaint and arrest warrant for John Doe were signed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. At that time, HSI had no information about the identity or whereabouts of John Doe, but he was believed to be located somewhere in the United States. The victim he recorded being sexually abused was believed to be 7 to 9 years old.
  "When the HSI special agents investigating this case ran out of leads, we turned to the media and the general public for help," said ICE Director John Morton. "A day later, a tip from the public has led to the capture of an alleged predator and more importantly, the rescue of a child. I applaud our investigators, the media and the brave individual who provided critical information. Without the public's help we would not have solved this case."
  "This predator was arrested very quickly after the member of the public came forward to identify him," said Salinas Police Chief Kelly McMillin. "Thanks to a longstanding relationship between the Salinas Police Department and HSI, strengthened by HSI's presence at the Law Enforcement Operations Center in Salinas, both agencies worked together closely to ensure the suspect was captured quickly and vital evidence of his crimes was recovered. The Salinas Police Department is grateful to HSI and all our federal partners for their ongoing commitment to the safety and security of the people of Salinas and Monterey County."
  According to the criminal complaint filed by HSI in Washington, D.C., four videos of child pornography with date stamps of April 14 and 27 were first discovered by the Danish National Police on May 3 and referred to U.S. law enforcement for further investigation.
  Following Stevens' arrest, investigators obtained a search warrant for the defendant's Salinas residence where they seized additional evidence related to the case. Based upon interviews with witnesses, HSI special agents believe there may be additional unidentified child victims and are asking anyone with further information regarding the person in the photographs below, who has now been identified as David John Stevens, of Salinas, to call ICE's tip line - 1-866-347-2423 or the Salinas Police Department's Investigations Division at 1-831-758-7226. The public may also contact the Salinas Police Department anonymously by calling 1-831-775-4222 or by contacting the We-Tip line at 1-800-78-CRIME.
  HSI's Victim Identification Program seeks to rescue child victims of sexual abuse and exploitation and bring the perpetrators to justice.
  This investigation is part of Operation Predator, a nationwide HSI initiative to protect children from sexual predators, including those who travel overseas for sex with minors, Internet child pornographers, criminal alien sex offenders and child sex traffickers. HSI encourages the public to report suspected child predators and any suspicious activity through its toll-free hotline or by completing its online tip form. Both are staffed around the clock by investigators.
  Photos in this post provided by ICE.
TEN-TEC Introduces the Model 506 Rebel: an open-source QRP transceiver
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 17 May 2013 00:20
  The TEN-TEC Model 506 Rebel 20/40 meter QRP Transceiver (Photo: TEN-TEC''click to enlarge)
  Today, at the QRP ARCI convention''Four Days In May''TEN-TEC will announce a new QRP transceiver based upon acompletely differentplatform than any others rigs they have in production: a QRP radio, buit on the chipKIT' Uno32' (Arduino-based software) to be known as the Model 506 Rebel.
  And, folks, I've been lucky enough to get my mitts on a prototype'...!
  The Model 506 Rebel
  The TEN-TEC Model 506 Rebel is an open-source (meaning, anybody can program it), factory-built QRP transceiver based on a Chip Kit Uno 32 Arduino-compatible prototyping platform, which serves as the main processing unit that holds the Rebel's program. (For those of you not familiar with the Arduino series, check out this article.)
  And I have to admit, I love the concept: TEN-TEC delivers a factory-built, uber-simple transceiver, with just enough programming to reliably get you on the air with a basic radio (see details below). Users then have full access to develop and program the Rebel via an open-source platform, themselves. No need to wait on firmware revisions; firmware, in a sense, will be crowd-sourced! That's to say, it uses online collaboration''a great idea.
  According to TEN-TEC, the programming environment is very safe. Users can tinker with code without fear that they might harm their Rebel 506. The original base program can be re-flashed to the radio at any time. So if you can't get past an error, you can always revert to a safe default copy.
  In addition, even if you don't have any idea how to program, someone has already created a web-based email group where users can upload and share code packages, and you can select someone else's programming to test drive. Click here to join the group.
  The Rebel is a CW-only transceiver that operates on 40 or 20 meters. The user changes bands by moving jumpers inside the chassis, mounted on the PC board.
  The basic Rebel comes with no frequency display. When you turn on the radio, it comes up on the QRP calling frequency of 7.030 MHz or 14.060 MHz, depending on which band is selected. There is no VFO, but a DDS chip that is highly stable and that allows the Chip Kit Uno 32 to select a frequency upon which to operate. Of course, since the Chip Kit controls the DDS chip, you can re-program how the Rebel manages frequencies.
  (Click to enlarge)
  Initial impressions
  Last week, TEN-TEC sent me a prototype of the Rebel to Beta test. I've had it on the air several times''I've also popped the cover and given it a thorough inspection and workout. I'll share my initial impressions below. I'm not commenting, however, on some specs like filtering, as they have not been finalized for production and are still subject to change. The unit I tested, keep in mind, was a prototype; production units will be still more polished and incorporate changes Beta testers have provided.
  (Click to enlarge)
  Front Panel Layout
  The front faceplate of the Rebel 506 is reminiscent of TEN-TEC QRP Kits, gloriously clean and simple. There is a large tuning knob in the middle with a SELECT button on the left and FUNCTION button on the right. Both buttons are large enough that you could comfortably use them even if wearing winter gloves. Above each button is a vertical row of just three LEDs: green, yellow and red. These colored LEDs simply indicate the position of the function/selection buttons.
  (Click to enlarge)
  Function button controls
  Band WidthStep SizeUser-programmed functionsSelect button selects
  Bandwidth: Wide, Medium and NarrowTuning steps: 100 hz, 1 kHz or 10kHzUser, U1, U2 or U3There are only two knobs: one for volume (AF gain) and one for RIT (+/- 500 Hz). There is also an ON/OFF simple toggle switch, and a rather classy touch from TEN-TEC''namely, a small LED light in the TEN-TEC logo itself. And that's all, folks''bare-bones design.
  No frequency display
  The Rebel 506 does not come with a frequency display. However, there are features to help you understand where you are on the band as you turn the encoder:
  As you tune within the selected tuning steps, the LED in the TEN-TEC logo flashes as you pass each step; for example, if you've selected 100 Hz steps, then when you pass each 100 Hz step, the LED in the logo will flash once. When you reach either band edge, the LED stays lit. Again, a nice touch.When you turn on the (factory default) Rebel, the frequency starts on QRP calling frequencies 7.030 MHz (40M) or 14.060 MHz (20M)''of course, you could change these with programming.There are (already) third-party frequency displays that plug into the Rebel's board, an easy addition.Since I had neither frequency display nor frequency counter, I simply used my SDR's waterfall display to locate where I was on the band. It's also fairly easy to count the steps with the logo's red LED.
  Rear view (Click to enlarge)
  Connections
  On the rear panel, you'll find a standard BNC antenna connection, a key/paddle port (1/8'"), a speaker/headphone port (1/8'") and a standard DC port (10-15V reverse polarity protected) that equates to 4-5 watts output depending on supply voltage.
  Key/Paddle input from the factory is only for straight key, but you can modify the code to make it a paddle input. Also, the headphone/speaker port defaults to headphone use from the factory, but there is a small jumper on the PCB that can me moved to drive a non-amplified speaker.
  On production units (not on my prototype, however, nor on those at FDIM) there will be a CW side tone volume control pot via a small hole in the side of the Rebel's enclosure. Also, production units will have a hole on the rear panel to allow for access to the ChipKit's USB port.
  The PCB has hooks, test pins, and inputs for the following:
  Battery read pin: reads 0.20 of the supply voltage.Power-out read pin: reads 0.50 of the RF pickupCode read pin: ties to low level audio line, can be used to build a CW code readerCW-speed read pin: DC voltage used to determine approximate speed of CW routineAll connections of the Chip Kit Uno32 are available on the top of the PCB.The unit accepts Arduino-compatible Shields for such things as:
  PrototypingDisplaysAudio DSPEvidently, the Rebel has a lot of memory space for writing CW memory-keyer functions or whatever the user desires/dreams up. Even a voice synthesizer could be installed in the Rebel; indeed, I believe there are many mods and possibilities for the Rebel. The greatest limitation might simply be'...the imagination of the user.
  TEN-TEC was clear with me about the goal of the Rebel 506: ''To provide a platform for users to experiment and to learn to program using Arduino-Compatible Code.''
  The Rebel has a small form factor (Click to enlarge)
  I like it!
  I have thoroughly enjoyed putting this little radio on the air. Let's be clear, though: this is no Argonaut VI or Eagle, nor should it be expected to be. Receiver performance is on par with other QRP kits and rigs of its class. The Rebel is fairly sensitive and the noise floor is fairly low. Selectivity is adequate for most conditions, although I imagine crowded conditions could overwhelm this modest receiver.
  When I had the Rebel on the air, I engaged in a bit of a rag-chew and found the audio quite pleasant from my GoalZero portable amplified speaker. And other than needing to adjust the side tone volume, the Rebel was ready to go, straight out of the box.
  Criticisms? Well, it's just too early to have many. I've passed along all my frank observations to TEN-TEC and they're actually addressing them now (yet again, one of the many benefits of an American-based radio producer). If this were a $900 rig, performance-wise, I would complain about selectivity. But I'm willing to bet it's at least as good as the Index Labs QRP ++ I once owned. In fact, though it's not a full-featured general-coverage rig, it has that same sort of bare-boned fun factor the Index Labs radio provided me, along with many other QRP kits.
  Field? I would totally take the Rebel into the field or backpacking. I have a hunch it uses less than 200 milliamps on receive. It's modestly-sized and built like a little tank.
  The Rebel lives up to open-source philosophy
  The Arduino chipKIT Uno32' Prototyping Platform
  Here is the amazing part about the Rebel: TEN-TEC only shipped me the radio''no connectors, no adapters, no power cord. At first, I thought I'd have to find an appropriate plug and solder my own power cord, not to mention figure out what other adapters I would need for my key/speaker'...but I didn't. The power port is very standard; the same one my LDG ATU, Elecraft K2 and KX1 use, with standard positive tip polarity. The Rebel's antenna connector is a BNC, speaker and key ports are standard 1/8'" and the ChipKit board has a mini USB connection. The top cover is easy to remove''even the toggle switch, LEDs and selection buttons are all standard and easy to access for servicing. Everything is standard!
  But it doesn't stop there. The Rebel is truly an experimenter's radio, and is meant to be. The programming is completely open-source and TEN-TEC is encouraging and facilitating users to tinker with the code and make hardware modifications at will.
  Open-source technology is all about alteration and collaboration, the kind of environment we hams have always embraced. In the open-source world, nothing is proprietary; rather, everything is transparent, standard, accessible; supporting changes and modifications of every stripe. And in my humble opinion, it's about fun. On these points, the Rebel delivers.
  I have done some scripting in my past, but I am no professional programmer. Though many of my Maker friends had been urging me to give it a go, I hadn't jumped on the Arduino band wagon until, well, now. The Rebel will serve both as a great intro to Arduino Compatible Code and a truly fun QRP rig. If TEN-TEC is lucky, this little rig may actually nudge some of my Maker friends to get their ham radio tickets.
  (Click to enlarge)
  Price
  TEN-TEC will be announcing the price of the Rebel 506 in Dayton, literally in just a few hours. I have no idea what it will be, but I'm fairly sure it'll be competitive with other dual band QRP transceivers and kits on the market. I'll post an update here when the price has been published. Stay tuned'...
  By the way, if you're at FDIM or the Hamvention this year, drop by booth 601 in the East Hall (here's a map.): I'd be happy to talk with you about the Rebel further (and my radio-based non-profit, Ears To Our World).
  Disclaimer:Just to be clear, although I own TEN-TEC (also Elecraft and Yaesu) products, and although I Beta test for TEN-TEC on occasion, I have no formal relationship with TEN-TEC. Nor am I compensated by the company in any way. The opinions in this article and others on this site are frank and my own; they are not those of TEN-TEC.
Mystery Sponsor Of Weapons And Money To Syrian Mercenary "Rebels" Revealed | Zero Hedge
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 16 May 2013 23:39
  Previously, when looking at the real underlying national interests responsible for the deteriorating situation in Syria, which eventually may and/or will devolve into all out war with hundreds of thousands killed, we made it very clear that it was always and only about the gas, or gas pipelines to be exact, and specifically those involving the tiny but uber-wealthy state of Qatar.
  Needless to say, the official spin on events has no mention of this ulterior motive, and the popular, propaganda machine, especially from those powers supporting the Syrian "rebels" which include Israel, the US and the Arabian states tries to generate public and democratic support by portraying Assad as a brutal, chemical weapons-using dictator, in line with the tried and true script used once already in Iraq.
  On the other hand, there is Russia (and to a lesser extent China: for China's strategic interests in mid-east pipelines, read here), which has been portrayed as the main supporter of the "evil" Assad regime, and thus eager to preserve the status quo without a military intervention. Such attempts may be for naught especially with the earlier noted arrival of US marines in Israel, and the imminent arrival of the Russian Pacific fleet in Cyprus (which is a stone throw away from Syria) which may catalyze a military outcome sooner than we had expected.
  However, one question that has so far remained unanswered, and a very sensitive one now that the US is on the verge of voting to arm the Syrian rebels, is who was arming said group of Al-Qaeda supported militants up until now. Now, finally, courtesy of the FT we have the (less than surprising) answer, which goes back to our original thesis, and proves that, as so often happens in the middle east, it is once again all about the natural resources.
  From the FT:
  The tiny gas-rich state of Qatar has spent as much as $3bn over the past two years supporting the rebellion in Syria, far exceeding any other government, but is now being nudged aside by Saudi Arabia as the prime source of arms to rebels.
  The cost of Qatar's intervention, its latest push to back an Arab revolt, amounts to a fraction of its international investment portfolio. But its financial support for the revolution that has turned into a vicious civil war dramatically overshadows western backing for the opposition.
  In dozens of interviews with the FT conducted in recent weeks, rebel leaders both abroad and within Syria as well as regional and western officials detailed Qatar's role in the Syrian conflict, a source of mounting controversy.
  Just as Egypt and Libya had their CIA Western-funded mercenaries fighting the regime, so Qatar is paying for its own mercenary force.
  The small state with a gargantuan appetite is the biggest donor to the political opposition, providing generous refugee packages to defectors (one estimate puts it at $50,000 a year for a defector and his family) and has provided vast amounts of humanitarian support.
  In September, many rebels in Syria's Aleppo province received a one off monthly salary of $150 courtesy of Qatar. Sources close to the Qatari government say total spending has reached as much as $3bn, while rebel and diplomatic sources put the figure at $1bn at most.
  For Qatar, owner of the world's third-largest gas reserves, its intervention in Syria is part of an aggressive quest for global recognition and is merely the latest chapter in its attempt to establish itself as a major player in the region, following its backing of Libya's rebels who overthrew Muammer Gaddafi in 2011.
  That, sadly, is not even close to half the story. Recall from Qatar: Oil Rich and Dangerous, posted nearly a year ago, which predicted all of this:
  Why would Qatar want to become involved in Syria where they have little invested? A map reveals that the kingdom is a geographic prisoner in a small enclave on the Persian Gulf coast.
  It relies upon the export of LNG, because it is restricted by Saudi Arabia from building pipelines to distant markets. In 2009, the proposal of a pipeline to Europe through Saudi Arabia and Turkey to the Nabucco pipeline was considered, but Saudi Arabia that is angered by its smaller and much louder brother has blocked any overland expansion.
  Already the largest LNG producer, Qatar will not increase the production of LNG. The market is becoming glutted with eight new facilities in Australia coming online between 2014 and 2020.
  A saturated North American gas market and a far more competitive Asian market leaves only Europe. The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income. Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way.
  Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Moslem Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia's efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir's broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus.
  A control centre has been established in the Turkish city of Adana near the Syrian border to direct the rebels against Al-Assad. Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Saud asked to have the Turks establish a joint Turkish, Saudi, Qatari operations center. ''The Turks liked the idea of having the base in Adana so that they could supervise its operations'' a source in the Gulf told Reuters.
  The fighting is likely to continue for many more months, but Qatar is in for the long term. At the end, there will be contracts for the massive reconstruction and there will be the development of the gas fields. In any case, Al-Assad must go. There is nothing personal; it is strictly business to preserve the future tranquility and well-being of Qatar.
  Some more on the strategic importance of this key feeder component to the Nabucco pipeline, and why Syria is so problematic to so many powers. From 2009:
  Qatar has proposed a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Turkey in a sign the emirate is considering a further expansion of exports from the world's biggest gasfield after it finishes an ambitious programme to more than double its capacity to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG).
  "We are eager to have a gas pipeline from Qatar to Turkey," Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the ruler of Qatar, said last week, following talks with the Turkish president Abdullah Gul and the prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the western Turkish resort town of Bodrum. "We discussed this matter in the framework of co-operation in the field of energy. In this regard, a working group will be set up that will come up with concrete results in the shortest possible time," he said, according to Turkey's Anatolia news agency.
  Other reports in the Turkish press said the two states were exploring the possibility of Qatar supplying gas to the strategic Nabucco pipeline project, which would transport Central Asian and Middle Eastern gas to Europe, bypassing Russia. A Qatar-to-Turkey pipeline might hook up with Nabucco at its proposed starting point in eastern Turkey. Last month, Mr Erdogan and the prime ministers of four European countries signed a transit agreement for Nabucco, clearing the way for a final investment decision next year on the EU-backed project to reduce European dependence on Russian gas.
  "For this aim, I think a gas pipeline between Turkey and Qatar would solve the issue once and for all," Mr Erdogan added, according to reports in several newspapers. The reports said two different routes for such a pipeline were possible. One would lead from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq to Turkey. The other would go through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey. It was not clear whether the second option would be connected to the Pan-Arab pipeline, carrying Egyptian gas through Jordan to Syria. That pipeline, which is due to be extended to Turkey, has also been proposed as a source of gas for Nabucco.
  Based on production from the massive North Field in the Gulf, Qatar has established a commanding position as the world's leading LNG exporter. It is consolidating that through a construction programme aimed at increasing its annual LNG production capacity to 77 million tonnes by the end of next year, from 31 million tonnes last year. However, in 2005, the emirate placed a moratorium on plans for further development of the North Field in order to conduct a reservoir study. It recently extended the ban for two years to 2013.
  Specifically, the issue at hand is the green part of the proposed pipeline: as explained above, it simply can't happen as long as Russia is alligned with Assad.
  So there you have it: Qatar doing everything it can to promote bloodshed, death and destruction by using not Syrian rebels, but mercenaries: professional citizens who are paid handsomely to fight and kill members of the elected regime (unpopular as it may be), for what? So that the unimaginably rich emirs of Qatar can get even richer. Although it is not as if Russia is blameless: all it wants is to preserve its own strategic leverage over Europe by being the biggest external provider of natgas to the continent through its own pipelines. Should Nabucco come into existence, Gazpromia would be very, very angry and make far less money!
  As for the Syrian "rebels", who else is helping them? Why the US and Israel of course. And with the Muslim Brotherhood "takeover" paradigm already tested out in Egypt, it is only a matter of time.
  According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which tracks arms transfers, Qatar has sent the most weapons deliveries to Syria, with more than 70 military cargo flights into neighbouring Turkey between April 2012 and March this year.
  Perhaps it is Putin's turn to tell John Kerry he prefer if Qatar was not "supplying assistance to Syrian mercenaries"?
  What is worse, and what is already known is that implicitly the US - that ever-vigilant crusader against Al Qaeda - is effectively also supporting the terrorist organization:
  The relegation of Qatar to second place in providing weapons follows increasing concern in the West and among other Arab states that weapons it supplies could fall into the hands of an al-Qaeda-linked group, Jabhat al-Nusrah.
  Yet Qatar may have bitten off more than it can chew, even with the explicit military Israeli support, and implicit from the US. Because the closer Qatar gets to establishing its own puppet state in Syria, the closer Saudi Arabia is to getting marginalized:
  But though its approach is driven more by pragmatism and opportunism, than ideology, Qatar has become entangled in the polarised politics of the region, setting off a wave of scathing criticism. ''You can't buy a revolution,'' says an opposition businessman.
  Qatar's support for Islamist groups in the Arab world, which puts it at odds with its peers in the Gulf states, has fuelled rivalry with Saudi Arabia. Qatar's ruling emir, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, ''wants to be the Arab world's Islamist (Gamal) Abdelnasser,'' said an Arab politician, referring to Egypt's fiery late president and devoted pan-Arab leader.
  Qatar's intervention is coming under mounting scrutiny. Regional rivals contend it is using its financial firepower simply to buy future influence and that it has ended up splintering Syria's opposition. Against this backdrop Saudi Arabia, which until now has been a more deliberate backer of Syria's rebels, has stepped up its involvement.
  Recent tensions over the opposition's election of an interim prime minister who won the support of Syria's Muslim Brotherhood has also driven Saudi Arabia to tighten its relationship to the political opposition, a job it had largely left in the hands of Qatar.
  What Saudi Arabia wants is not to leave the Syrian people alone, but to install its own puppet regime so it has full liberty to dictate LNG terms to Qatar, and subsequently to Europe.
  Khalid al-Attiyah, Qatar's state minister for foreign affairs, who handles its Syrian policy, dismissed talk of rivalry with the Saudis and denied allegations that Qatar's support for the rebels has splintered Syria's opposition and weakened nascent institutions.
  In an interview with the Financial Times, he said every move Qatar has made, has been in conjunction with the Friends of Syria group of Arab and western nations, not alone. ''Our problem in Qatar is that we don't have a hidden agenda so people start fixing you one,'' he says.
  Sadly, when it comes to the US (and of course Israel), it does have a very hidden agenda: one that involves lying to its people about what any future intervention is all about, and the fabrication of narrative about chemical weapons and a bloody regime hell bent on massacring every man, woman and child from the "brave resistance." What they all fail to mention is that all such "rebels" are merely paid for mercenaries of the Qatari emir, whose sole interest is to accrue even more wealth even if it means the deaths of thousands of Syrians in the process.
  A bigger read through of the events in Syria reveals an even more complicated web: one that has Qatar facing off against Syria, with both using Syria as a pawn in a great natural resource chess game, and with Israel and the US both on the side of the petrodollars, while Russia and to a lesser extent China, form the counterbalancing axis and refuse to permit a wholesale overthrow of the local government which would unlock even more geopolitical leverage for the gulf states.
  Up until today, we would have thought that when push comes to shove, Russia would relent. However, with the arrival of a whole lot of submarines in Cyprus, the games just got very serious. After all the vital interests of Gazprom - perhaps the most important "company" in the world - are suddenly at stake.
  Finally, one wonders just what President Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan were really talking about behind the scenes.
  Average:Your rating: NoneAverage: 4(21 votes)
CIA approved AP report that triggered investigation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: End the Lie - Independent News
  Thu, 16 May 2013 17:42
  Reuters / Adrees Latif
  The Associated Press and the administration of United States President Barack Obama are at odds over whether or not the AP's publishing of a May 2012 article on a foiled al-Qaeda bomb threat put the US in danger.
  The AP announced on Monday that the US Department of Justice seized two months' worth of phone records belonging to journalists, an act the news agency's CEO condemned as a ''massive and unprecedented intrusion.'' On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder defended his office's decision to subpoena the phone history of AP reporters and editors by citing a crucial investigation into an intelligence leak. Now as the debate heats up, the AP insists that they were told by the Central Intelligence Agency that publishing the article wouldn't put national security at risk.
  Holder admitted Tuesday that he was interviewed in June 2012 by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to find out if the attorney general, in his capacity as head of the Justice Department, was aware of a possible leak of classified information.
  According to the AP, the investigation into the news agency's phone history is likely the result of a May 7, 2012 article that revealed the CIA thwarted a bomb plot planned to originate out of Yemen to avenge the death of former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who was killed by US Navy SEALs one year earlier to the week. Days before the AP published the bombshell, the US Department of Homeland Security said there was ''no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the US tied to the one-year anniversary of Bin Laden's death.''
  This week, Holder said that the leaking of intelligence out of the CIA and to the AP was a major blow to the US and put the nation's security at risk.
  ''I have been a prosecutor since 1976 and I have to say that this is among, if not the most serious, it is within the top two or three most serious leaks that I have ever seen,'' Holder said.
  ''It put the American people at risk, and that is not hyperbole. It put the American people at risk. And trying to determine who was responsible for that I think required very aggressive action.''
  But as the Justice Department insists that the probe was necessary to try and plug any leak to journalists, the AP is standing by their decision to publish the article '-- a decision, says the AP, which was made after consulting the CIA and the White House.
  The Washington Post wrote on Thursday that the AP only published their article on the foiled bomb plot after a last-minute meeting with the CIA that came five days after they asked if they could go to print.
  ''The CIA officials, who had initially cited national security concerns in an attempt to delay publication, no longer had those worries'' the Post reported. ''Instead, the Obama administration was planning to announce the successful counterterrorism operation that Tuesday.''
  According to individuals familiar with these exchanges that occurred last May, the AP refused efforts to negotiate the publishing of the article after they were assured that it would not raise any national security concerns. CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell told former White House national security spokesman Tommy Vietor that the AP was offered some additional background details to persuade them to hold off, the Post reported, but the agency refused to wait any longer when they were told national security concerns were ''no longer an issue'' early Monday.
  Among the proposals the AP was presented with, Vietor told the post, was waiting one day before publishing, then going live with their story one hour before an official announcement. The White House shut that suggestion down and instead offered the AP five minutes of exclusivity, after which the Obama administration would go public with their thwarting of the terror plot. Moments later, the AP decided to publish it on their terms.
  ''We did not publish anything until we were assured by high-ranking officials with direct knowledge of the situation, in more than one part of the government, that the national security risk was over and no one was in danger. The only deal was to hold the story until any security risk was resolved,'' AP spokeswoman Erin Madigan White told the Post.
  But even if AP was essentially given the go ahead to do their report, it does not mean the CIA operative who exposed the details was permitted to go to the press. The subsequent probe into the AP's phone records target the agency's sources, not necessarily their story, and could bring the government face-to-face with the agent who explained a foiled terror plot before the president could make the announcement himself.
  From a Thursday afternoon press conference in Washington, Pres. Obama stood by Holder and agreed with his interpretation of the severity of the leaks.
  ''Leaks related to national security can put people at risk. They can put men and women in uniform that I've sent into the battlefield at risk. They can put some of our intelligence officers who are in various dangerous situations that are easily compromised at risk,'' said Obama. ''US national security is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs, so they're not just left out there high and dry and potentially put in any more danger.''
  ''It's important to recognize that when we express concern about leaks at a time when I've still got 60,000-plus troops in Afghanistan and I still got a whole bunch of intelligence officers around the world who are in risky situations,'' added the president.
  Current CIA Director John Brennan was also questioned by the FBI over the leak and denied claims in February that he was the source of AP's intelligence. In January, CIA vet John Kiriakou was sentenced to over two years in jail for leaking the identity of a covert agent to journalists. Kiriakou is one of seven people prosecuted by the Obama administration for leaking intelligence under the Espionage Act of 1917.
  Source: RT
Federal Register | Announcement of Requirements and Registration for ''Propose New Ideas For Prescription Drugs Oral Overdose Protection''
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 16 May 2013 10:54
  (1) Submission Period begins May 13, 2013, 12:01 a.m., EDT.
  (2) Submission Period ends June 14, 2013, 11:59 p.m., EDT.
  (3) Judging will take place between June 17-June 30, 2013.
  (4) Winners will be notified and prizes awarded July 8, 2013.
  Dr. Elena Koustova, Director, Office of Translational Initiatives and Program Innovations, Office of Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse; NIDA Challenge Manager; NIDA SBIR/STTR Coordinator; Phone: 301-496-8768; email: koustovae@nida.nih.gov; elena.koustova@nih.gov.
  Prescription drugs are the second-most abused category of drugs in the United States, following marijuana. The most commonly misused prescription drugs fall into three classes:
  Opioids (pain relievers, analgesics) which include oxycodone (OxyContin, Roxicodone), hydrocodone (Vicodin, Lortab), and methadone (Dolophine);Central nervous system (CNS) depressants which include butalbital (Fiorinal, Fioricet, Axocet), diazepam (Valium), and alprazolam (Xanax);Stimulants which include methylphenidate (Ritalin) and amphetamine/dextroamphetamine (Adderall)Because prescription drugs are legal, they are easily accessible, often from a home medicine cabinet. The latest report from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health indicates that 70% of people who abuse prescription pain relievers got them from friends or relatives. Surprisingly, the individuals who abuse prescription drugs, particularly teenagers, believe that these substances are safer than illicit drugs because they are prescribed by a healthcare professional. However, they are just as dangerous and deadly as illegal drugs when used improperly and for non-medical reasons.
  The possibility that patients will abuse, become addicted to, or unlawfully channel their prescribed pharmaceuticals to the illicit marketplace is one of the greatest risks associated with prescribing opioid medications in pain management practice. Meanwhile, overdoses from opiate drugs which were once almost always directly linked to illegal heroin use, are now increasingly due to abuse of prescription painkillers.
  Prescription pain medication containing opioids can be abused in several ways, crushing the pills to facilitate nasal entry into the body, dissolving the powder in water to create an injectable substance, or taking the pills orally intact (the focus of this Challenge), just to name a few. Pharmaceutical industry and academic researchers are focusing on drug formulations that limit the availability of drugs that can be abused by pill ''crushing,'' injecting and snorting. Abuse of prescription drugs by the means of injection and inhalation can be limited or prevented when those abuse-deterrent formulation technologies are successfully deployed. Unfortunately, the oral (as intended) administration, when the drug delivery system is not altered by the user, can still lead to addiction and accidental overdose. The misuse of prescription drugs by persons who over-consume prescribed medications remains less of a research focus.
  NIDA is seeking ideas on how to reduce or eliminate the risk of harm from accidentally or intentionally swallowing too many pills at the same time. NIDA is particularly interested in approaches that deter overdosing on an intact product. This Challenge is a broad question formulated to obtain access to new ideas, similar to a global brainstorm for producing a breakthrough. This Challenge is not looking for ideas to reformulate medication so that an individual would not be able (abuse resistance) or would not want (abuse deterrence) to manipulate the prescription drug.
  Submitted ideas should take into consideration that the proposed approach should also maintain the original drug efficacy, be devoid of new safety issues for the intended population, avoid harming a potential abuser, and be economically viable.
  This Challenge is in accordance with NIDA's statutory authority, described in 42 U.S.C. 285o. The general purpose of the National Institute on Drug Abuse is the conduct and support of biomedical and behavioral research, health services research, research training and health information dissemination with respect to the prevention of drug abuse and the treatment of drug abusers. This Challenge is also in accordance with NIDA's strategic goals to prevent the initiation of prescription drug abuse and the escalation to addiction in those who have already initiated use. Furthermore, this Challenge will serve as a vehicle to promote cross-cutting priorities identified in a NIDA's current strategic plan to attract new and diverse expertise and experiences in various non-traditional areas to drug abuse research area, including chemistry, physics, bioengineering, and mathematics. Through this Challenge, NIDA hopes that global brainstorming about the stoppage of inappropriate use of prescription medications, which is a major public health challenge for our nation, will produce breakthrough ideas and reinvigorate the addiction research.
  All Entry Materials, including items a. through d., must be submitted to Challenge.gov which is an online challenge platform administered by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) that empowers the U.S. Government and the public to bring the best ideas and top talent to bear on our nation's most pressing challenges. Access the www.challenge.gov Web site and search for ''Propose New Ideas For Prescription Drugs Oral Overdose Protection.''
  Other than providing your contact information as described below, please do not submit any other confidential information. Entry Materials should include a technological summary as follows of not more than 5 pages:
  a. TITLE PAGE (1 page). Include a title and abstract (
Federal Register | Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of Three Synthetic Cannabinoids Into Schedule I
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 16 May 2013 10:53
  Effective Date: This Final Order is effective on May 16, 2013.
  John W. Partridge, Executive Assistant, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; telephone (202) 307-7165.
  Section 201 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811) provides the Attorney General with the authority to temporarily place a substance into Schedule I of the CSA for two years without regard to the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he finds that such action is necessary to avoid imminent hazard to the public safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h). In addition, if proceedings to control a substance are initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the Attorney General may extend the temporary scheduling up to one year.
  Where the necessary findings are made, a substance may be temporarily scheduled if it is not listed in any other schedule under section 202 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 812) or if there is no exemption or approval in effect under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD Act) (21 U.S.C. 355) for the substance (21 U.S.C. 811 (h)(1)). The Attorney General has delegated his authority under 21 U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of DEA, who in turn has delegated her authority to the Deputy Administrator of DEA. 28 CFR 0.100, Appendix to Subpart R.
  Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4)) requires the Deputy Administrator to notify the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of his intention to temporarily place a substance into Schedule I of the CSA. [1] The Deputy Administrator has transmitted notice of his intent to place UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 in Schedule I on a temporary basis to the Assistant Secretary by letter dated February 14, 2013. The Assistant Secretary responded to this notice by letter dated March 14, 2013 (received by DEA on March 21, 2013), and advised that based on review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there are currently no investigational new drug applications or approved new drug applications for UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48. The Assistant Secretary also stated that HHS has no objection to the temporary placement of UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 into Schedule I of the CSA. DEA has taken into consideration the Assistant Secretary's comments (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4)). As UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 are not currently listed in any schedule under the CSA, and as no exemptions or approvals are in effect for UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 under Section 505 of the FD Act (21 U.S.C. 355), DEA believes that the conditions of 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1) have been satisfied. On April 12, 2013, a Notice of Intent to temporarily schedule these three synthetic cannabinoids was published in the Federal Register (78 FR 21858).
  To make a finding that placing a substance temporarily into Schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the Deputy Administrator is required to consider three of the eight factors set forth in section 201(c) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3)). These factors are as follows: the substance's history and current pattern of abuse; the scope, duration and significance of abuse, and what, if any, risk there is to the public health. 21 U.S.C. 811(c)(4)-(6). Consideration of these factors includes actual abuse, diversion from legitimate channels and clandestine importation, manufacture or distribution. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3).
  A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling (21 U.S.C. 811(h)) may only be placed in Schedule I. Substances in Schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States (U.S.), and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1). Available data and information for UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 indicate that these three synthetic cannabinoids have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S., and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision.
  While synthetic cannabinoids have been developed over the last 30 years for research purposes to investigate the cannabinoid system, no scientific literature referring to UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 was available prior to these drugs' identification in the illicit market. In addition, no legitimate non-research uses have been identified for these synthetic cannabinoids nor have they been approved by FDA for human consumption. Synthetic cannabinoids, of which (1-pentyl-1 H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone (UR-144), [1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-1 H-indol-3-yl](2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone (5-fluoro-UR-144, XLR11), and N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1 H-indazole-3-carboxamide (APINACA, AKB48) are representative, are so-termed for their Î--9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-like pharmacological properties. Numerous herbal products have been analyzed, and UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 have been identified, in varying mixture profiles and amounts, spiked on plant material.
  As of April 3, 2013, according to the System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) data, there are 1,510 reports involving 179 total cases for UR-144, 1,194 reports involving 186 total cases for XLR11 and 112 reports involving 40 total cases for AKB48. From January 2010 to March 2013, the National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS) registered 14,831 reports containing these synthetic cannabinoids (UR-144'--5,465 reports; XLR11'--8,837 reports; AKB48'--529 reports) from at least 32 states. No instances regarding UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 were reported in NFLIS prior to March of 2010. For the period January 2010 through March 2013, NFLIS and STRIDE reports [2] for the three synthetic cannabinoids UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 (16,014 total reports) exceeded the number of reports for the five synthetic cannabinoids JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497 and CP-47,497 C8 (7,555 total reports). JWH-018, JWH-200, JWH-073, CP-47,497 and CP-47,497 C8 homologue were temporarily scheduled on March 1, 2011, and later placed in Schedule I by Section 1152 of Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), Pub. L. 112-144, on July 9, 2012. Section 1152 of the FDASIA [3] amended the CSA by placing cannabimimetic agents and 26 specific substances (including 15 synthetic cannabinoids, 2 synthetic cathinones, and 9 phenethylamines of the 2C-series) in Schedule I. UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 were not included among the 15 specific named synthetic cannabinoids, and do not fall under the definition of cannabimimetic agents, under FDASIA.
  Factor 4. History and Current Pattern of Abuse Back to TopSynthetic cannabinoids (JWH-018) laced on plant material were first reported in the U.S. in December 2008, when a shipment of ''Spice'' was seized and analyzed by U.S. Customs and Border Patrol in Dayton, Ohio. Also in December 2008, JWH-018 and cannabicyclohexanol were identified by German forensic laboratories.
  Since the initial identification of JWH-018 (December 2008), many additional synthetic cannabinoids with purported psychotropic effects have been found laced on plant material or related products. The popularity of these synthetic cannabinoids and their associated products appears to have increased since January 2010 in the U.S. based on seizure exhibits and media reports. This trend appears to mirror that experienced in Europe since 2008. Synthetic cannabinoids are being encountered in several regions of the U.S. with the substances primarily found as adulterants on plant material products as self-reported on internet discussion boards. Since then, numerous other synthetic cannabinoids including UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 have been identified as product adulterants.
  Data gathered from published studies, supplemented by discussions on Internet Web sites and personal communications with toxicological testing laboratories, demonstrate that products laced with UR-144, XLR11 and/or AKB48 are being abused mainly by smoking for their psychoactive properties. The adulterated products are marketed as `legal' alternatives to marijuana. This characterization, along with their reputation as potent herbal intoxicants, has increased their popularity. Several synthetic cannabinoids, including UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48, have been shown to display higher potency in scientific studies when compared to THC. Smoking mixtures of these substances for the purpose of achieving intoxication has been identified as a reason for numerous emergency room visits and calls to poison control centers. Abuse of these synthetic cannabinoids and their products has been characterized with both acute and long term public health and safety issues. In addition, numerous states, local jurisdictions, and the international community have controlled these substances.
  Factor 5. Scope, Duration and Significance of Abuse Back to TopAccording to forensic laboratory reports, the first appearance of synthetic cannabinoids in the U.S. occurred in December 2008, when U.S. Customs and Border Protection analyzed ''Spice'' products. NFLIS has reported 14,831 exhibits (January 2010 to March 2013) related to UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 from various states including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. STRIDE has reported 2,816 records involving UR-144, XLR11 and/or AKB48 from January 2010 through April 3, 2013. From January 1 through December 31, 2012, the American Association of Poison Control Centers [4] has reported receiving in excess of 5,200 calls relating to products purportedly laced with synthetic cannabinoids. Although the center does not identify specific cannabinoid substances, the data does indicate the magnitude of adverse exposure to synthetic cannabinoids.
  Factor 6. What, If Any, Risk There Is to the Public Health Back to TopUR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 are pharmacologically similar to Schedule I substances THC and JWH-018, as well as other synthetic cannabinoids. By sharing pharmacological similarities with the Schedule I substances (THC and JWH-018), synthetic cannabinoids pose a risk to the abuser. In addition, the chronic abuse of products laced with synthetic cannabinoids has also been linked to addiction and withdrawal. Law enforcement, military and public health officials have reported exposure incidents that demonstrate the dangers associated with abuse of synthetic cannabinoids to both the individual abusers and other affected individuals since these substances were never intended for human use. Warnings regarding the dangers associated with abuse of synthetic cannabinoids and their products have been issued by numerous state public health departments, poison control centers and private organizations. In a 2012 report, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) reported 11,406 emergency department visits involving a synthetic cannabinoid product during 2010. In a 2013 report, SAMHSA reported the number of emergency department visits in 2011 involving a synthetic cannabinoid product had increased 2.5 times to 28,531.
  Detailed product analyses have detected variations in the amount and type of synthetic cannabinoid laced on plant material even within samplings of the same product. Since abusers obtain these drugs through unknown sources, purity of these drugs is uncertain, thus posing significant adverse health risk to these users. Submissions to DEA laboratories from January 2012 through February 11, 2013, have documented over 142 distinct packaging examples containing a mixture of UR-144, XLR11 and/or AKB48. These unknown factors present a significant risk of danger to the abuser. Some of the adverse health effects reported in response to the abuse of synthetic cannabinoids include vomiting, anxiety, agitation, irritability, seizures, hallucinations, tachycardia, elevated blood pressure, and loss of consciousness. As mentioned above, there are reported instances of emergency department admissions in association with the abuse of these THC-like substances. There are no recognized therapeutic uses of these substances in the U.S.
  In February 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a report by Murphy et al. describing unexplained cases of acute kidney injury in 16 patients, all of whom had reported recent smoking of synthetic cannabinoids. Upon further investigation, it was determined that of the 16 patients, 7 of the subjects had smoked substances that were positive for XLR11 or its metabolite. Cases were reported from Wyoming (4 cases), Rhode Island (1 case), New York (2 cases), Oregon (6 cases), Kansas (1 case) and Oklahoma (2 cases).
  Finding of Necessity of Schedule I Scheduling To Avoid Imminent Hazard to Public Safety Back to TopBased on the available data and information, the continued uncontrolled manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation and abuse of UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 pose an imminent hazard to the public safety. DEA is not aware of any currently accepted medical uses for these synthetic cannabinoids in the U.S. A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling (21 U.S.C. 811(h)) may only be placed in Schedule I. Substances in Schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S., and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. Available data and information for UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 indicate that these three synthetic cannabinoids have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S., and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision.
  In accordance with the provisions of section 201(h) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)), the Deputy Administrator has considered available data and information and has set forth herein the grounds for his determination that it is necessary to temporarily schedule three synthetic cannabinoids, (1-pentyl-1 H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone (UR-144), [1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-1 H-indol-3-yl](2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone (5-fluoro-UR-144, XLR11) and N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1 H-indazole-3-carboxamide (APINACA, AKB48) in Schedule I of the CSA and finds that placement of these synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I of the CSA is warranted in order to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.
  Because the Deputy Administrator hereby finds that it is necessary to temporarily place these synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the final order temporarily scheduling these substances will be effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register, and will be in effect for a period of up to three years pending completion of the permanent or regular scheduling process.
  Regular scheduling actions in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a) are subject to formal rulemaking procedures done ''on the record after opportunity for a hearing'' conducted pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. The CSA sets forth specific criteria for scheduling a drug or other substance. While temporary scheduling orders are not subject to judicial review (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(6)), the regular scheduling process of formal rulemaking affords interested parties with appropriate process and the government with any additional relevant information needed to make a permanent scheduling determination. Final decisions which conclude the regular scheduling process of formal rulemaking are subject to judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 877.
  With the issuance of this final order, UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 become subject to the regulatory controls and administrative, civil and criminal sanctions applicable to the manufacture, distribution, possession, importation and exportation of a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA and the CSIEA.
  1. Registration. Any person who manufactures, distributes, imports, exports, or possesses UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48, or who engages in research or conducts instructional activities with respect to UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48, or who proposes to engage in such activities, must be registered to conduct such activities in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 822 and 957. Any person who is currently engaged in any of the above activities and is not registered with DEA must submit an application for registration and may not continue their activities until DEA has approved that application. Retail sales of Schedule I controlled substances to the general public are not allowed under the CSA. Possession of any of these substances in a manner not authorized by the CSA on or after May 16, 2013 is unlawful and may subject those in possession of any of these substances to prosecution pursuant to the Controlled Substances Act.
  2. Security. UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 are subject to Schedule I security requirements. Accordingly, appropriately registered DEA registrants must manufacture, distribute and store these substances in accordance with 1301.71; 1301.72(a), (c) and (d); 1301.73; 1301.74; 1301.75(a) and (c); and 1301.76 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations as of May 16, 2013.
  3. Labeling and packaging. All labeling and packaging requirements for controlled substances set forth in Part 1302 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations shall apply to commercial containers of UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48. Current DEA registrants authorized to handle UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 shall comply with Part 1302 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations within thirty (30) calendar days of May 16, 2013.
  4. Quotas. Every manufacturer authorized to manufacture UR-144, XLR11 and AKB48 must apply for and be granted a quota to manufacture such substance(s) pursuant to Part 1303 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. No authorized manufacturer may manufacture UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 in excess of a quota assigned to him as of May 16, 2013.
  5. Inventory. Every DEA registrant authorized to possess any quantity of UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 is required to keep inventory of all stocks of these substances on hand pursuant to 1304.03, 1304.04 and 1304.11 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Every authorized DEA registrant shall comply with all inventory requirements within thirty (30) calendar days of May 16, 2013.
  6. Records. All registrants who are authorized to handle UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 are required to keep records pursuant to 1304.03, 1304.04, 1304.21, 1304.22 and 1304.23 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Current DEA registrants authorized to handle UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 shall comply with all recordkeeping requirements within thirty (30) calendar days of May 16, 2013.
  7. Reports. All registrants are required to submit reports in accordance with 1304.33 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Registrants who manufacture or distribute UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 are required to comply with these reporting requirements and shall do so as of May 16, 2013.
  8. Order Forms. All registrants involved in the distribution of UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 must comply with order form requirements of Part 1305 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations as of May 16, 2013.
  9. Importation and Exportation. All importation and exportation of UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 must be conducted by appropriately registered DEA registrants in compliance with Part 1312 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations on or after May 16, 2013.
  10. Criminal Liability. The manufacture, distribution or possession with the intent to conduct these activities; as well as possession, importation or exportation of UR-144, XLR11 or AKB48 not authorized by, or in violation of the CSA or the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act occurring as of May 16, 2013 is unlawful.
  Section 201(h) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)) provides for an expedited temporary scheduling action where such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. As provided in this subsection, the Attorney General may, by order, schedule a substance in Schedule I on a temporary basis. Such an order may not be issued before the expiration of 30 days from (1) the publication of a notice in the Federal Register of the intention to issue such order and the grounds upon which such order is to be issued, and (2) the date that notice of a proposed temporary scheduling order is transmitted to the Secretary of HHS. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1).
  In as much as section 201(h) of the CSA directs that temporary scheduling actions be issued by order and sets forth the procedures by which such orders are to be issued, DEA believes that the notice and comment requirements of section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) do not apply to this final order. In the alternative, even assuming that this final order might be deemed to be subject to section 553 of the APA, the Deputy Administrator finds that there is good cause to forgo the notice and comment requirements of section 553, as any further delays in the process for issuance of temporary scheduling orders would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest in view of the manifest urgency of the temporary scheduling action to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.
  Further, DEA believes that this temporary scheduling action Final Order is not a ''rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), and, accordingly, not subject to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The requirements for the preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. 603(a) are not applicable where (as here) the agency is not required by section 553 of the APA or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking.
  Additionally, this action is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 ''Regulatory Planning and Review,'' section 3(f), and, accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
  This action will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132 ''Federalism'' it is determined that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
  Pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act) (5 U.S.C. 801-808), DEA has submitted a copy of this Final Order to both Houses of Congress and to the Comptroller General.
  Under the authority vested in the Attorney General by section 201(h) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)), and delegated to the Deputy Administrator of the DEA by Department of Justice regulations (28 CFR 0.100, Appendix to Subpart R), the Deputy Administrator hereby orders that 21 CFR part 1308 be amended as follows:
  begin regulatory text
  1.The authority citation for Part 1308 continues to read as follows:
  Authority:21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted.
  2.Section 1308.11 is amended by adding new paragraphs (h)(9), (10), and (11) to read as follows:
  § 1308.11 Schedule I.* * * * *
  (h) * * *
  (9) (1-pentyl-1 H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers'--7144 (Other names: UR-144, 1-pentyl-3-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropoyl)indole)
  (10) [1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-1 H-indol-3-yl](2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers'--7011 (Other names: 5-fluoro-UR-144, 5-F-UR-144, XLR11, 1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-3-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropoyl)indole)
  (11) N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1 H-indazole-3-carboxamide, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers'--7048 (Other names: APINACA, AKB48)
  end regulatory text
  Dated: May 10, 2013.
  Thomas M. Harrigan,
  Deputy Administrator.
  [FR Doc. 2013-11593 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
  BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
Op-Ed by President Obama: A Partnership That Delivers
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Thu, 16 May 2013 17:19
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  May 16, 2013
  The piece was published today in Turkish by Turkish Daily ''Sabah'' and can be foundhere. The full English text of the op-ed by President Obama is printed below.
  A Partnership That DeliversBy President Barack Obama
  Turkey and the United States have been partners since shortly after the birth of the modern Turkish Republic. As NATO allies, we have defended our common security for more than six decades. And in the United States we are grateful for the many Turkish-Americans who enrich our national life every day.
  Today, when I welcome my friend Prime Minister Erdogan back to the White House, we'll chart the next steps in our alliance'--a partnership that delivers security, prosperity and progress for both our peoples.
  On a personal level, the prime minister's visit will be another opportunity for me to reciprocate the hospitality that he and the Turkish people showed me when I visited Ankara and Istanbul during my first year in office. I came to Turkey during my first overseas trip as president because I am committed to an even deeper relationship with our Turkish friends. Four years later, U.S.-Turkish relations are as strong as ever, and Prime Minister Erdogan's visit will allow us to expand our cooperation in several important areas.
  First, we will reaffirm our solemn obligation to our shared security. As allies, our commitment to our collective defense is unwavering, as demonstrated by NATO's deployment of Patriot missile defenses to help protect the Turkish people. And I applaud the prime minister's courageous efforts to seek a lasting peace in Turkey after the PKK violence that has taken so many innocent lives. The United States strongly supports Turkey's efforts to defend itself from terrorism, even as we support efforts to uphold rule of law, good governance and human rights.
  Just as our nations stood together after the attack this year on our embassy compound in Ankara, we condemn last week's outrageous bombings in Reyhanli, which killed innocent Turkish civilians. To our Turkish friends, we say basiniz sag olsun. In Washington, we'll have the opportunity to deepen our security cooperation, including against the threat from terrorist groups like al-Qaeda.
  Second, we can continue increasing U.S.-Turkish trade and create more jobs for our people. Our aerospace companies are moving ahead with $3.5 billion deal to jointly build our most advanced helicopter. American and Turkish pharmaceutical and research firms can partner to realize state-of-the art Turkish health care. We can collaborate on clean energy and energy efficiency to meet Turkey's growing energy needs. And our technology companies can help put the most advanced educational tools in the hands of Turkish children and help turn Turkey into a regional hub of educational software and innovation.
  Meanwhile, we can expand educational exchanges so we bring more American students to Turkey and more Turkish students to the United States. Like the extraordinary students I met in Turkey four years ago, these young people can help drive Turkish innovation and help Turkey reach its goal of becoming one of the world's ten largest economies.
  Third, Prime Minister Erdogan and I will address regional challenges, including our shared interest in a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians, and the need to support democratic transitions in Egypt and Libya. And even as we recognize that sanctions on Iran bring costs for countries like Turkey, we need to keep standing together to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, which would threaten the entire region, including Turkey.
  Most urgently, we need to keep working together to end the Assad regime's horrific slaughter of the Syrian people. Prime Minister Erdogan and I will discuss how we can keep increasing the pressure on the Assad regime, strengthening the moderate opposition, and preparing for a transition to a democratic Syria without Bashar Assad. At the same time, the United States will continue to provide critical humanitarian relief to Syrian refugees, including those in Turkey who owe so much to the tremendous generosity of the Turkish people.
  Finally, given Turkey's growing role on the world stage, I look forward to consulting with Prime Minister Erdogan on global challenges. Our forces continue to serve bravely together in Afghanistan, where Afghans will soon take the lead for their own security. We're partners in promoting security and stability in Africa. And as members of the G-20, we can help sustain the global economic recovery with a focus on creating jobs and opportunity for our people.
  This is an ambitious agenda, but it reflects the many interests our nations share as well as Turkey's unique place in the world. As I told the Turkish parliament four years ago, ''Turkey's greatness lies in your ability to be at the center of things. This is not where East and West divide '' this is where they come together.''
  I look forward to welcoming Prime Minister Erdogan back to Washington. And I'm confident that if our two great nations continue to work closely together, our alliance will continue to deliver the security, prosperity and progress that our citizens deserve.
  ###
President Obama Appoints Daniel Werfel as Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Thu, 16 May 2013 17:15
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  May 16, 2013
  WASHINGTON '' President Obama today announced the appointment of Daniel Werfel as Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue, effective Wednesday, May 22. As Acting Commissioner, Mr. Werfel will lead efforts to ensure the IRS implements new safeguards to restore public trust and administers the tax code with fairness and integrity. Mr. Werfel has agreed to serve through the end of the fiscal year.
  President Obama said, ''Throughout his career working in both Democratic and Republican administrations, Danny has proven an effective leader who serves with professionalism, integrity and skill. The American people deserve to have the utmost confidence and trust in their government, and as we work to get to the bottom of what happened and restore confidence in the IRS, Danny has the experience and management ability necessary to lead the agency at this important time.''
  Mr. Werfel, 42, currently serves as Controller of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), where he has led efforts across the federal government to improve Federal program integrity, including all areas of financial management, financial reporting, accounting standards, improper payments, and financial systems, among others. Prior to his current role, Mr. Werfel served in multiple career civil service capacities at OMB, including as Deputy Controller, Chief of the Financial Integrity and Analysis Branch, Budget Examiner in the Education Branch, and Policy Analyst in the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Mr. Werfel has also served as a Trial Attorney in the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.
  Mr. Werfel is a recipient of both national and local awards from the Association of Government Accountants for his contributions to Federal financial management. During the Bush Administration, he was the recipient of the Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Service. Mr. Werfel also served as a member of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board from 2006 to 2009.
  Mr. Werfel holds a Masters Degree in Public Policy from Duke University, a Juris Doctor from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a Bachelors Degree in Industrial and Labor Relations from Cornell University.
Republicans Gin Up Benghazi Incident, Hope to Impeach Obama '' But Real Story is Early October Surprise as Part of Attempted Coup D'‰tat
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: TARPLEY.net
  Thu, 16 May 2013 17:15
  Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.PressTVMay 16, 2013
  Zealously seeking issues to use against the Obama White House, the reactionary Republicans of the US House of Representatives last week once again dredged up the Benghazi incident of September 11, 2012 in the form of a full-blown media circus centering on hearings by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Congressman Darrell Issa.
  Long deprived of foreign policy issues to exploit for political gain, and fearing the political backlash from their usual expedient of trying to start a new war, the Republican reactionaries are doing everything possible to create popular hysteria reminiscent of the final phases of the Watergate scandal four decades ago.
  GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, desperately seeking to stave off a political challenge by Tea Party fanatics, says that a new Watergate is in the air. The troglodyte Senator Imhofe of Oklahoma is busily invoking the specter of Obama's impeachment, a project in which he is joined by failed Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. House Speaker John Boehner wants to open a fishing expedition among the e-mails of the White House. The pseudo-libertarian Rand Paul has already announced that the Benghazi incident shows that Hillary Clinton, still the most likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, should never hold high public office again. Few indeed are the Republican congressmen who have not found a way to pop off about Benghazi.
  These farnetications by themselves would be of limited interest, were it not for a recent change in the attitude of the controlled corporate media, reflecting in turn a shift in the attitude of the US ruling class towards the Obama regime. Up until now, harping on the Benghazi incident has tended to be limited to Fox News, controlled by the British Empire's right-wing billionaire Rupert Murdoch, and a gaggle of extremist radio talk show hosts. But now, other propaganda channels have joined in: Cheryl Atkisson of CBS news is now working on the story full-time, and Jonathan Karl at ABC news is attempting to catch up. National Public Radio, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press have developed new interest in a story they have long dismissed. For virtually the first time, Jay Carney's daily White House press briefing is turning into a hostile confrontation, rather than a liturgy of adoration for Obama.