What Adam Curry is reading

VIDEO-Marathon suspect's hearing frustrates some - Boston News, New England News, WHDH-TV 7NEWS WHDH.COM
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:54
  BOSTON (AP) -- Survivors of the Boston Marathon bombings got little satisfaction from suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's first public appearance since the deadly attacks. "Not guilty" was all he said, over and over.
  The blase-looking 19-year-old, his arm in a cast and his face swollen, entered his pleas Wednesday during a seven-minute arraignment in federal court.
  Bombing victims showed little reaction in the courtroom after a federal marshal warned them against any outbursts, but some made their views known afterward -- as did a group of chanting Tsaraev supporters.
  "I thought that maybe he would come with a different attitude or maybe look a little different, maybe look like he cared a little bit. But he didn't show me that," said Peter Brown, whose two nephews each lost their right legs in the explosions.
  Tsarnaev gave a small, lopsided smile to his two sisters upon arriving in the courtroom. He appeared to have a jaw injury and there was swelling around his left eye and cheek.
  Leaning into the microphone, he told a federal judge, "Not guilty" in his Russian accent. Then he was led away in handcuffs, making a kissing gesture toward his family with his lips. One of his sisters sobbed loudly, resting her head on a woman seated next to her.
  Tsarnaev, who has been hospitalized since his capture with wounds suffered in a shootout and getaway attempt, faces 30 federal charges, including using a weapon of mass destruction to kill, in connection with the April 15 twin explosions that left three people dead and more than 260 wounded. Tsarnaev also is charged in the killing of a Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer and the carjacking of a motorist during a getaway attempt. He could get the death penalty if prosecutors choose to pursue it.
  The proceedings took place in a heavily guarded courtroom packed not only with victims and their families but with police officers, the public and the media.
  The Russian immigrant and former college student looked much as he did in a photo widely circulated after his arrest, his hair curly and unkempt. Wearing an orange prison jumpsuit, he appeared nonchalant, almost bored, during the hearing. The cast covered his left forearm, hand and fingers.
  MIT Police Chief John DiFava, who was in the courtroom, said Tsarnaev looked "smug."
  "I didn't see a lot of remorse. I didn't see a lot of regret," he said. "It just seemed to me that if I was in that position, I would have been a lot more nervous, certainly scared."
  DiFava added: "I just wanted to see him. I wanted to see the person that so coldly and callously killed four people, one of whom being an officer of mine."
  Authorities say Tsarnaev orchestrated the bombing along with his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died following a gun battle with police several days after the attack. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was arrested on April 19, hiding in a bloodstained boat in a suburban backyard after a manhunt that paralyzed much of the Boston area.
  Tsarnaev's lawyer, Judy Clarke, an expert in death penalty cases, asked that the judge enter not-guilty pleas for him, but U.S. Magistrate Judge Marianne Bowler said: "I would ask him to answer."
  On the same day as the arraignment, Boston's police commissioner appeared on Capitol Hill and complained to a Senate panel that the Justice Department failed to share information on terrorism threats with local officials before the bombing.
  "There is a gap with information sharing at a higher level while there are still opportunities to intervene in the planning of these terrorist events," Commissioner Edward F. Davis III said.
  Reporters and spectators began lining up for seats in the Boston courtroom at 7:30 a.m. as a dozen Federal Protective Service officers and bomb-sniffing dogs surrounded the courthouse. Four hours before the 3:30 p.m. hearing, the defendant arrived at the courthouse in a four-vehicle motorcade.
  About a dozen Tsarnaev supporters cheered as the motorcade arrived. The demonstrators yelled, "Justice for Jahar!" as Tsarnaev is known.
  Lacey Buckley, 23, said she traveled from her home in Wenatchee, Wash., to attend the arraignment. She said she believes he is innocent. "I just think so many of his rights were violated. They almost murdered an unarmed kid in a boat," she said.
  A group of friends who were on the high school wrestling team with Tsarnaev at Cambridge Rindge and Latin waited in line for hours, hoping to get a seat.
  One of them, Hank Alvarez, said Tsarnaev was calm, peaceful and apolitical in high school.
  "Just knowing him, it's hard for me to face the fact that he did it," said Alvarez, 19, of Cambridge.
  Prosecutors say Tsarnaev, a Muslim, wrote about his motivations for the bombing on the inside walls and beams of the boat. He scrawled that the U.S. government was "killing our innocent civilians," and also wrote: "We Muslims are one body, you hurt one you hurt us all."
  Martin Richard, 8, Krystle Marie Campbell, 29, and Lingzi Lu, 23, were killed by the two bombs, which were fashioned out of pressure cookers, gunpowder, nails and other shrapnel. Numerous victims lost legs.
  (Copyright (c) 2013 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Ex-NYU professor arrested for stalking Citigroup's chief economist - Daily News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:22
  Mark Kohn/Hollandse Hoogte/ReduxDutch economist Heleen Mees was apparently obsessed with chief Citigroup economist Willem Buiter, sending him thousands of emails over a two-year period and even continuing to contact him after he filed a cease-and-desist.
  A SEXY DUTCH economist's obsession with another number cruncher added up to a whole lot of trouble.
  Heleen Mees, 44, was busted for stalking and harassing chief Citigroup economist Willem Buiter '-- sending him photos of herself masturbating and images of other naked women, the Daily News has learned.
  A one-time NYU professor, Mees sent Buiter more than 1,000 emails over a two-year period, authorities said.
  RELATED: MARION COTILLARD STALKER GETS PROBATION
  Some of them were laced with threats, while at least one was a hyper-sexual come-on. ''What can I do to make it right? Shall I lick your b---s?'' Mees allegedly wrote in one email.
  ''Shall we adopt a child?'' she wrote in another.
  At least one message was far darker. ''Hope your plane falls out of the sky,'' Mees wrote to Buiter, court papers say.
  RELATED: 'CHARLIE BROWN' VOICE ACTOR SENTENCED TO ONE YEAR IN JAIL
  The pair were once lovers '-- but at some point, the romance apparently soured and Mees unleashed her wrath on her fellow Dutchman. A noted researcher and columnist who speaks five languages, Mees barraged Buiter with an avalanche of emails between July 1, 2011, and Monday.
  In addition to sending him X-rated images of herself, she sent him a photo of dead birds on May 3.
  Mees also targeted Buiter's economist wife, Anne, and children, sending them unwanted messages as well, court papers say. Buiter demanded she stop, and still the loony stalker kept harassing him.
  RELATED: HUGH JACKMAN'S STALKER ORDERED TO TAKE PSYCH EXAM
  Even after Buiter sent Mees a cease-and-desist letter Feb. 27, she allegedly wouldn't stop, sending the object of her twisted desire several hundred more emails. ''Defendant's actions have caused him severe annoyance and alarm, and fear for his physical safety of his wife and children,'' the criminal complaint says.
  Mees '-- who once founded a female-empowerment organization called Women on Top '-- was arrested at 11:45 p.m. Monday.
  She was arraigned Tuesday on stalking, harassment and aggravated harassment charges. She was ordered held on $5,000 bail.
  RELATED: WOMAN HARASSED HERSELF ON FACEBOOK: COPS
  Mees' Legal Aid lawyer, Vaneshka Hyacinthe, said her client ''had a longstanding relationship'' with Buiter and ''the emails go in both directions.''
  Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Robert Mandelbaum issued Mees an order of protection and demanded she stay away from Buiter and his family.
  ''Do not call them, do not go to their home, school, businesses, place of employment . . . no email, no text messages, instant messages, no phone calls, letters, fax or voice messages,'' the judge said.
  Buiter, who previously served as chief economist of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, declined comment at his posh apartment building on the upper West Side.
  A spokesman for the NYU Wagner Graduate School of Public Service said Mees taught a course there last fall.
  A doorman at her building in DUMBO, Brooklyn, described her as a generous tipper and frequent traveler who is always seen with her bike and laptop.
  With Edgar Sandoval and Nicholas Wells
Report Suggests Malaria Drug May Have Played Role In U.S. Soldier's Deadly Rampage - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:00
  Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New PostsMost PopularWatch Out Wal-Mart?ListsMost Powerful CelebritiesVideoCountry Cash KingsFREE Report: 12 Stocks to Sell NowHelp|Connect
  |Sign up|Log in
VIDEO-Video: Spray-On Antenna Material Turns Just About Anything into a Signal Array | Popular Science
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:19
  Chamtech's Spray-On Antenna Material, Magnified
  Presenting at Google's ''Solve for X'' gathering, a Utah startup has unveiled a spray-on antenna that improves signals by anything, just about anywhere, into a signal array. Using a novel nanoparticle spray, Chamtech Enterprises demonstrated how their product can be used on all kinds of materials--trees, walls, fabrics--and in all kinds of environments, even underwater.
  The material relies on a proprietary formula that uses thousands upon thousands of nano-capacitors that automatically align themselves properly when sprayed onto a surface. They charge and discharge quickly, and notably don't generate much heat--a major selling point for a product that might be sprayed onto anything from wood structures to cell phone cases to vehicle exteriors.
  The explanation of exactly how this works is better demonstrated than written, and Chamtech's CEO, Anthony Sutera, does so in detail in the video below. The company is currently riding high on the results of successful tests that showed that the spray works well underwater, and is currently looking for customers in both the public and private sectors.
  [PhysOrg]
VIDEORCMP makes arrests in plot to bomb B.C. legislature
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:17
  RCMP makes arrests in plot to bomb B.C. legislature
  By Kim Bolan
  A Surrey man and woman have been charged after a foiled domestic terrorist plot targeting the B.C. legislature on Canada Day.
  RCMP say investigators outside the legislature on Monday recovered explosive devices inside pressure cookers similar to the type of bombs used in the Boston Marathon bombings.
  John Stewart Nuttall, 38 and Amanda Marie Korody, 29 are charged with knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity, possession of an explosive substance and conspiring to commit and indictable offence.
  Both were arrested on Monday at 2 p.m. without incident in Abbotsford and are in custody in Surrey.
  ''We detected this threat early and disrupted it,'' said RCMP Assistant Commissioner James Malizia. He said although the police believe the threat was real ''at no time was the security of the public at risk.''
  The investigation began in February when the Canadian Security Intelligence Service tipped the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team about a possible terror plot, leading to the four-month investigation dubbed Project Souvenir.
  Both Nuttall and Korody are Canadian born, but were inspired by al-Qaida ideology, Malizia said.
  He said RCMP believe the suspects had planned to build and place explosive devices in Victoria for the purpose of causing death on Canada Day.
  There is no indication of a link to the Boston bombings, say the RCMP.
  RCMP Asst. Com. Wayne Rideout said that Nuttall and Korody's ''self-radicalized behaviour was intended to create maximum impact and harm to Canadian citizens at the B.C. Legislature on a National holiday.''
  ''They took steps to educate themselves and produced explosive devices designed to cause injury and death,'' he said.
  Rideout said the RCMP used a variety of techniques to ''monitor and control'' the accused throughout their conspiracy, though he said he couldn't provide specifics now that the case is before the courts.
  ''The suspects were committed to acts of violence and discussed a wide variety of targets and techniques.
  In order to ensure public safety, we employed a variety of complex investigative and covert techniques to control any opportunity the suspects had to commit harm,'' Rideout said.
  However, like the suspects in that case, police are alleging the suspects are self-radicalized.
  Nuttall, born in 1974, has a criminal record including a 2010 conviction for possessing weapon for dangerous purpose. He also has convictions for robbery, mischief and breaching probation conditions.
  Victoria lawyer Tom Morino said he has represented John Nuttall in the past, and was contacted by him on Monday evening.
  ''He and I spoke for quite some time last night about the allegations,'' said Morino, adding he also spoke with Korody, who he said is in a relationship with Nuttall.
  Standing in the shadow of the B.C. Legislature Tuesday morning, Premier Christy Clark said the province should remain strong in the face of an attempted terror attack.
  ''Let me say this about those who would resort to terror: You will not succeed,'' Clark told reporters.
  ''You will not succeed in damaging our democratic institutions. But just as importantly, you will not succeed in tearing down the values that make this country strong,'' she said.
  Clark said she was alerted about the plot on Monday, not long before the two suspects were arrested.
  In her comments, Clark urged people to remain vigilant, but not to let Monday's unsuccessful attack change how we live our lives.
  ''We will be vigilant, but instead of letting fear grip us we will go to work here in this legislature,'' she said, speaking not long before the Legislature was set to reconvene Tuesday afternoon.
  ''We will not let suspicion darken our hearts. Instead we will remain open hearted, depending on one another, trusting in one another and we will not be seized by anger,'' she added.
  Federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews applauded the work of the law enforcement agencies involved in the investigation.
  ''Yesterday's arrests demonstrate that terrorism continues to be a real threat to Canada,'' Toews said in a statement.
  ''The RCMP has assured me that at no time during the course of this investigation was there an imminent risk to the safety of Canadians.''
  Terrorism in Canada at a glance:
  Canadians have been the targets '-- and sometimes the perpetrators '-- of terrorist attacks in the modern era. Here's a brief look at some major events:
  1985
  June: Air India flight 182 is blown up off the coast of Ireland, killing 331 people, mostly Canadians. One person, Inderjit Singh Reyat, a militant Sikh nationalist, is convicted for manslaughter related to the attack.
  2001
  September: 24 Canadians are killed in the 9/11 attacks against the World Trade Center in New York and the hijacked airliner that crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.
  2004
  March: Ottawa software engineer Momin Khawaja is arrested and charged with participating in an international plot to bomb locations in London, England on behalf of Islamic extremists. He is convicted in 2008 and given a life sentence.
  2006
  August: Eighteen men from the Toronto area are arrested and charged with various terrorist offences including attempting to assassinate the prime minister, blow up the Peace Tower and bomb the Toronto Stock Exchange. The group is linked to al-Qaida. Eleven are eventually convicted of a number of crimes with sentences ranging from two-and-a-half years to life.
  2009
  October: Pakistani-Canadian Tahawwur Rana is arrested in Chicago by the FBI and charged with providing material support to the Pakistan militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba. He is convicted in 2011 and in January, 2103, sentenced to 14 years in prison.
  2010
  August: Two Ottawa men, Hiva Mohammad Alizadeh and Misbhuddin Ahmed, and one man from London, Ont., Dr. Khurram Sher, are arrested and charged with participating in a terrorist group and conspiring to participate in acts of terror. The attacks were supposedly planned for Canada, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
  2013
  April: Ali Medlej and Xristos Katsiroubas, from the same high school in London, Ont., are identified as two insurgents who were killed in January during a terror attack on a gas plan in Algeria. A third friend, Aaron Yoon, is in jail in Mauritania serving a two-year sentence for terror-related offences. A fourth man from London, Mujahid Enderi, is also sought by police.
  April 22: Police say they have arrested Chiheb Esseghaier, from Montreal, and Raed Jaser, from Toronto, in a terrorism plot targeting a Via Rail passenger train route. They are charged with conspiring to carry out an attack and commit murder at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group.
  '-- With files from Kirsten Smith and Jonathan Fowlie, Postmedia News and The Canadian Press
Wall Street beats the City in bidding war to run Libor - Business News - Business - The Independent
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 05:20
  The New York Stock Exchange yesterday beat off the London Stock Exchange in the bidding to run the disgraced Libor benchmark, triggering howls of protest in the UK at yet another "capitulation" to the might of Wall Street.
  As US financial news networks ran wall-to-wall headlines declaring "London loses Libor", MPs responded with shock that such a key indicator for the global financial markets was now to be run by New York.
  The decision was made by a committee led by City grandee Baroness Hogg, whose daughter Charlotte has just taken up office as Mark Carney's chief operating officer at the Bank of England. She said the award to NYSE Euronext would "play a vital role in restoring the international credibility of Libor".
  John Mann, a Labour MP on the Treasury Select Committee, said: "This is a wholesale surrender. Because the Government did not get on top of this scandal and the regulator messed around, we let America take the lead on investigating Libor fixing and they are now getting the prize."
  The Serious Fraud Office originally declined to investigate the Libor scandal, while the Financial Services Authority was seen as having been sluggish to act, giving the impression that Wall Street's watchdogs were making all the running.
  In one concession to the UK, the rate will be physically based in NYSE's London headquarters and regulated by the Bank of England's Financial Conduct Authority. There are no current plans to change the name. At present, Libor, whose very name '' the London Interbank Offered Rate '' denotes its British heritage, is issued by the British Bankers Association after being collated by Thomson Reuters. It will be replaced by a new company, NYSE Euronext Rate Administration, early next year.
  As well as the London Stock Exchange, data companies Thomson Reuters and Markit are also thought to have bid. In addition to collating and distributing the Libor data, NYSE will also issue new guidelines to banks about how they should calculate the rates they submit.
  In the scandal, it emerged that banks were colluding with each other to fix their Libor submissions up or down in order to hit certain targets.
  The contract award follows growing concern in the UK that the US regulators have been using the financial scandal as a way of securing more power for Wall Street.
  NYSE paid a nominal £1 for the contract and will now license its use to customers, as it does with other benchmarks it operates, such as the French shares index, the CAC-40.
  A comparison of the charges from the US and the UK laid against Tom Hayes, currently on trial in London over the Libor scandal, show how the US action makes no mention of the Wall Street banks he worked for. The UK charges cite his work at Citigroup and his alleged conspiring with JPMorgan.
Britten verliezen 'hun' Libor
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FTM - Follow The Money
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 05:18
  Kamerleden in het Verenigd Koninkrijk zijn teleurgesteld dat de Londense interbancaire rente in handen is gekomen van een Amerikaans bedrijf.
  The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) heeft gisteren de strijd van de London Stock Exchange (LSE) gewonnen om het beheer van de Libor. Dat is een klap in het gezicht voor de Britten want de benchmark is voorheen altijd in hun handen geweest.
  'London loses Libor', verklaren Amerikaanse televisiestations. Kamerleden uit het Verenigd Koninkrijk zijn boos dat zo'n belangrijke financile indicator in handen is gekomen van de Amerikanen. Sinds 1 juli wordt bovendien ook de Bank of England bestuurd door een buitenstaander: de Canadees Mark Carney.
  John Mann, een kamerlid namens de Labour Partij die zich bezighoudt met financin, zegt. 'This is a wholesale surrender. Because the Government did not get on top of this scandal and the regulator messed around, we let America take the lead on investigating Libor fixing and they are now getting the prize.'
  De Britse waakhond Serious Fraud Office heeft inderdaad nagelaten om het Libor-schandaal, dat vorige zomer aan het licht kwam, te onderzoeken. Ook heeft de Britse toezichthouder Financial Services Authority niet daadkrachtig opgetreden.
  Banken hebben tot dusver in totaal miljarden dollars aan boetes moeten betalen vanwege het gesjoemel met de interbancaire rente. Barclays moest 450 miljoen dollar aftikken, UBS kon 1,5 miljard dollar inleveren en Royal Bank of Scotland betaalde 615 miljoen dollar aan boetes.
  Momenteel bepaalt de British Bankers' Association nog de benchmark door middel van een rondgang bij grootbanken. Vanaf begin 2014 neemt het Amerikaanse beursbedrijf NYSE deze taak over. De bedoeling is dat NYSE de Libor meer gaat baseren op daadwerkelijke financile transacties in plaats van de losse schattingen die de Britse bankenlobby gebruikte.
  Als concessie heeft NYSE in ieder geval beloofd om de Libor-beheertaak uit te voeren in zijn Londense kantoor, en dus niet in New York, waar de hoofdzetel is gevestigd.
Deja vu all over again: Canadian pressure cooker bombers were poor and mentally feeble
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dr. Jones reports
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 05:18
  The lawyer for one of two Surrey, B.C., residents accused of planning to bomb the province's legislature on Canada Day says the case has elements of entrapment.
  John Stewart Nuttall and Amanda Korody were charged earlier this month with knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity, making or possessing an explosive device and conspiracy to place an explosive device with the intent to cause death or injury. Court documents show Korody and Nuttall are each facing an additional charge of conspiracy to murder persons unknown.
  Nuttall and Korody briefly appeared in court in B.C. provincial court in Surrey Tuesday morning as provincial court charges against the pair were stayed so the case can move to B.C. Supreme Court for a direct indictment.
  Speaking outside the courtroom, Nuttall's lawyer Tom Morino alluded to U.S. police forces being involved in the investigation, but said it could be tough to prove whether police set a trap for the pair.
  "Entrapment is a very high hurdle to clear," he said. "I think it's safe to assume there were certain elements of that. Whether or not that officially constitutes the legal definition of entrapment, that remains to be seen."
  Morino says he'll ask for a four-week to six-week adjournment after the pair is indicted in B.C. Supreme Court on Wednesday.
  Nuttall and Korody smiled at each other in court, and Nuttall appeared to be clutching a Qur'an.
  Friends question allegationsNuttall, 38, and Korody, who is 28 or 29, are alleged to have turned ordinary pressure cookers into improvised explosive devices filled with rusted nails, nuts, bolts and washers.
  Police have claimed the two were inspired by ''al-Qaeda ideology,'' but say there's no evidence the two were acting ''at the direction of a terror group.''
  Police released this image of 'inert' explosive devices seized in the thwarted bomb plot.(RCMP)The couple's friends have said they find it hard to believe the pair could have organized such a plot.
  Korody has been described as a bright and creative but impressionable young woman who could have been led astray.
  Nuttall, meanwhile, is described as a talented musician with the mentality of a 16-year-old.
  The couple's landlord described them as having limited means and questioned how they could have financed such a plot.
  CBC News reporter Steve Lus, who was allowed inside the couple's basement suite, said the couple lived in squalor, and described a living space strewn with discarded methadone bottles, video games and DVDs.
  'Too much' into religionHowever, one friend said the couple's behaviour changed once they found Islam and became increasingly religious.
  Ashley Volpatti told CBC News the couple started exhibiting odd behaviour about six months ago '-- becoming distant, declining to socialize and selling off Nuttall's guitars '-- before they were kicked out of a Surrey mosque.
  Volpatti said she wasn't sure why they were kicked out, but described the pair as being ''way too much into their religion.''
  A neighbour told CBC News she overheard Nuttall having a loud telephone conversation in which he mentioned jihad.
  The couple had also been active in the local paintball community, but stopped attending last August.
Buckmaster OCF Dipole Antenna
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 04:41
  HamCall.netGoogle Translate:Shopping CartProductsAuctionsHamCall DVD Owner Benefits Software Features Subscriptions HamCall FAQ Third-party support User Opinions Order HamCallHamCall Member BenefitsHamCall Gold PasswordsHCLogOCF Dipole Antennas 7-Band OCF 4-Band OCF 8-Band OCF Features Installation Ordering Reviews FAQPL259 ConnectorsAntenna Support RopeStainless PulleysLine-GripWire WindersRF ChokesGreat Circle MapsName BadgesCQ Magazine ArchivesCryptography BookClub DiscountsDealer DiscountsReturn Address LabelsServicesDXSpotsNew Callsign NotificationVEC Renewals/ModsMailing ListsReturn Address Labels73 Archive SearchCallsign DatabaseAdvertising BannersBrowser Search BlankCallsign ServerField SearchMailing ListsNew Callsign NotificationTop CallsignsMost Wanted CallsignsAdd/Update CallsignHamCall DX SpotsBest Station PhotosBrowse QSLsHamCall FAQHTML Lookup CodeAbout/ContactFacebookTwitterAdvertising BannersAbout HamCallContact UsSearch site(Not a callsign search)4-Band: 40, 20, 10, & 6 meters. 68 feet (23+45) long.7-Band: 75/80, 40, 20, 17, 12, 10, & 6 meters. 135 feet (45+90) long.8-Band: 160, 75/80, 40, 20, 17, 12, 10, & 6 meters. 270 feet (90+180) long.The magic is in the mathematical relationship between amateur bands. The charts below speak for themselves!4-Band OCF Antennas Our 4-Band antennas cover 40, 20, 10, and 6 meters, with no tuner required! 12 meters may also work on the 4-Band 300 watt model. The 4-Band antennas are OCF (off-center-fed), with a 23 foot leg and a 45 foot leg, totaling 68 feet.
  7-Band OCF Antennas Our 7-Band antennas cover 80, 40, 20, 17, 12, 10, and 6 meters, with no tuner required! Wire antennas are a great simple way to work 40M and 80M rather than a noisy vertical antenna that requires horizontal radials. Our 7-Band antennas are OCF (off-center-fed), with a 45 foot leg and a 90 foot leg, totaling 135 feet.8-Band OCF Antennas Most of the information for 7-Band antennas applies to our 8-Band antennas. Balun construction is the same, the antenna just has more wire. A tuner may be needed for 160 meters.Click here for 8-Band OCF information, SWR chart and Frequency/SWR table.
  Some comments from our users:
  Chosen by the 3YX DXpedition to Peter I Island in Antarctica.Used aboard the 'DAP Mares' transport ship. Photo of Peter I DXPedition Members Photo of Bob K4UEE pointing to the Buckmaster OCF Antenna"...its amazing that just two carefully selected lengths of wire can work that well on five [really 7] bands." - Kent, WA5VJB (CQ, January, 2006, p70)"...works great, I'm impressed, tunes 160m with tuner [not recommended], worked stations on all bands, outstanding quality construction." - WC4NChosen by KC4AUF leader of the 2004 Tangier Island DXpedition. "Superb design (no tuner), quality manufacture and booming all band signals." - KC4AUF"It sure is great to have a relatively flat SWR with no tuner all across those six bands! Thanks for a good-quality product! I speak well of it to my friends." - K3TED"Purchased OCF 3KW antenna. Works fantastic, best dipole I've ever used! Not only am I able to hear DX from around the world, I'm able to work anything I hear." - John, K6LLK"Great signal on both ends of QSO. It is good to get products and service that deliver as, or better than, advertised." - KA4AQN"These things are built like a tank! ... This is the finest wire antenna I've ever used. Just cannot recommend it enough." - KB0QMF (at eham.net)"Liked it so much I bought a second one. The Buckmaster's are definitely worth the money." - K3VV (at eham.net)"Absolutely the best dipole I have owned or tried. Superior to the Windom. Would buy another product from them again without questions." - KC4QH (at eham.net)"Fine construction and resonant on all advertised bands. I am very pleased with it compared to several previous Radio Works Carolina Windom ANTs." - N9VV (at eham.net)"After playing around with numerous wire antennas for the last 40 years in amateur radio, I am impressed with the construction and simplicity of installation. The real bonus is that the performance is as advertised." - Gene, K4COH"I installed the OCF Dipole that I bought last week. I just wanted to tell you that I am very pleased!! It was an easy installation, and the SWR is great on all bands. The signal reports I have gotten are excellent, and the receive is even better. Thanks for a great antenna. I will recommend it any time." Cordially, Jim Davis N0DNY"As proof of the efficiency of the Buckmaster antenna, I worked the VP6DX Ducie DXpedition on 80meteres with only 2.5watts with my FT-817 QRP rig. The VP6DX is 5248 miles away so that equates to 2099.2 miles per watt." - Tony KC4AUFSee the eHam.net user reviews for the 7-Band 3,000eHam.net user reviews for the 7-Band 300eHam.net user reviews for the 4-Band 300About the Buckmaster OCF Dipole
  In production since early 2004No tuner or counterpoise required, uses just one wire!Quickly switch bands and eliminate a tuner as one more thing to adjust or transport. Eliminate send/receive tuner loss.Due to the fact that one wire leg of the antenna is shorter than the other, the OCF is more convenient to erect than a regular center fed dipole. Less coax is required.We have used an antenna electrically equivalent to this for over 7 years with outstanding results.Short wave listeners will love this antenna because of its low noise reception.Check the SWR always BEFORE using with any antenna tuner (we don't recommend an antenna tuner). It only takes overheating the Ferrite in the balun one time to change its characteristics. The dipole is constructed using top quality, flexible, tinned, 12 gauge, 65 strand, PVC coated copper wire pictured below. **The 7-band 100 Watt antenna uses 14 gauge 38 strand wire of similar quality.No trimming - fully assembled, complete and ready to go with end insulators and crimped center and end connections. Add your 50 Ohm coaxial feed line, suspension rope (see our OCF Antenna Support Rope) and go.No external hardware to loosen or corrode.Bands, power, height and other identification are clearly and permanently engraved on the exterior of the center insulator. Operation outside those bands are at your own risk and can likely overheat the balun! We inscribe the antenna with the bands and maximum wattage (in any mode) it can handle.Problems of RF on the exterior (common-mode feed line currents) of the coaxial feed line have not been experienced and seldom reported with this antenna. RF problems are generally due to coupling to house wiring, guy wires, downspouts, etc. Any resonant length of metal can rob signal from any antenna, so study your environment and keep the antenna away from metal.Integral PVC moisture drip ring shields and protects coaxial connection (not present on 100 Watt version due to space considerations.)The 300 to 50 Ohm (6:1) balun (also sometimes called an auto-transformer), is sealed in permanent black epoxy potting compound for moisture and corrosion free operation and is internally crimped and hard soldered to a beryllium copper silvered pin, Teflon barrel, SO-239 coaxial connector. Your PL-259 and coax go here (see photo below).Heavy duty stainless 1/4 inch center threaded, cemented with lock nut eyebolt supports the off center insulator for years of trouble free service. The off center insulator has a special drip collar to protect the SO-239 coaxial connector, yet lets moisture evaporate.Complete with permanently sealed white PVC off center weatherproof insulator containing the potted balun and crimped on gray end insulators. Suspension rope and coaxial feed line not included, see our OCF Antenna Support Rope, Stainless Steel Pulleys, and Line Grips.Installation Information
  Installation Instruction Sheet: Word DOC Adobe PDF. These are the instructions that ship with the antennas.Usually works best as an "inverted-V." Erecting at least 30 feet above ground is recommended. Each end can droop up to 30 degrees from horizontal, 180-(2*30)=120 degrees total is ideal, but anything from 120 to 180 degrees should work well. Ends should be 8 feet or more from the ground for safety reasons.Higher is not always better. If the center is mounted too high off a tower it is very hard to get a 120 degree angle, so mount it lower.If you don't have anything to hang the center from, consider using a 'messenger line' between two supports (trees, etc.) consisting of a run of good quality, UV protected rope with a pulley at one support. Tie the OCF balun along this line in a spot that works for you (and will allow the balun to be reached from the ground) and run the coax away at a ninety degree angle (as possible). This takes tension off of the antenna legs and the pulley at one support makes it easy to take things down for service or inspection (be sure the rope is long enough). Also be sure to make allowances for support trees swaying in the wind by using a weighted gallon milk jug or two and a pulley to handle the movement of the tree supports.We recommend using rope and a pulley to hang the center balun, so the antenna can be easily lowered for access to connectors etc.Coupling to nearby metallic objects and the mineralization of the underlying soil can impact performance and impedance of an OCF antenna system. The impedance can also vary as antenna orientation is changed in relationship to earth. The OCF is generally very forgiving.The balun will test as a short when testing using a DC Ohm meter and will test correctly at RF frequencies when erected and using an antenna analyzer. So use an analyzer or your transceiver's SWR meter at reduced power.Route coaxial feed line to the shack by running it down to the ground (not tied to a metallic structure or tower) and away from the antenna at a 90 degree angle as possible. The length of the feed line is not critical as the coax is NOT part of the radiating antenna. Shorter is usually better.Use good quality 50 Ohm coaxial cable with appropriate power rating such as: RG58, RG8X, RG8, RG213, Belden 9913F7, Davis RF Bury-Flex. A coax with a dense (or double) braid is worth the money. Don't lose that weak signal in the coax!Verify your coax and connectors (switches, etc) by temporarily installing a 50 Ohm dummy load instead of the OCF and checking SWR from the transceiver end.ALWAYS physically disconnect the OCF coax from equipment and securely ground both conductors when you are finished operating. Better to lose an antenna to lightning rather than a transceiver!Warranty and Returns
  One (1) year unconditional warranty against defects. We will repair or exchange your antenna within the first year of ownership. Warranty not offered if antenna is stretched, over-powered, operated with high SWR, or operated on non-supported bands. Our OCF antennas support the bands inscribed on the balun case.
  30 Day return privlege. You may return your antenna within 30 days in "as new" condition for a full refund of the antenna purchase price (less shipping.)
  Before returning any antenna, please talk to us at the phone number below. It is extremely rare we get a defective antenna back, problems are usually due to a bad coax connector or a resonant length of metal in the vicinity. We also ask you include this RMA form with your antenna so we know who sent it and why.
  Ordering Information
  Shipping weight is estimated at 6 pounds for the 300 Watt, 8 pounds for the 3,000 Watt, and 10 pounds for the 5,000 Watt. 8-Band antennas have a lot more wire, and weigh about 11 pounds. We ship via UPS Ground to continental US addresses, the UPS cost is usually around $17.00-$22.00. If you can ship to a business address that saves several dollars.For antennas shipped outside the USA, we ship USPS Priority Mail International, the cost starts around $67.00. These shipments can take a long time and we insure each shipment for the full value of the antenna. Please check this page to see if full insurance is offered on shipments to your country (click on your country name, look for the section that mentions "Insurance.") If insurance for the full cost of the antenna is not offered, we will not be able to ship an antenna to you! If possible, ship the antenna to a country where insurance is offered.To order an antenna, click one of the following links:Our 4-Band antennas are 68 feet (20 meters) long and work on 40, 20, 10, & 6 meters.Order 4-Band 300 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $267Special Price: $203! (6 or more = $160 ea.)Order 4-Band 3,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $387Special Price: $294 (6 or more = $232 ea.)Order 4-Band 5,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $598Special Price: $455 (6 or more = $359 ea.)
  Our 7-Band antennas are 135 feet (41 meters) long and work on 80, 40, 20, 17, 12, 10, and 6 meters.Order 7-Band 100 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $262Special Price: $199 (6 or more = $157 ea.)Order 7-Band 300 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $273Special Price: $207 (6 or more = $163 ea.)Order 7-Band 3,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $394Special Price: $299 (6 or more = $236 ea.)Order 7-Band 5,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $605Special Price: $460 (6 or more = $362 ea.)
  Our 8-Band antennas are 270 feet (82 meters) long and work on 160 (tuner may be required), 80, 40, 20, 17, 12, 10, & 6 meters.Order 8-Band 300 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $357Special Price: $272 (6 or more = $214 ea.)Order 8-Band 3,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $476Special Price: $362 (6 or more = $285 ea.)Order 8-Band 5,000 Watt OCF Dipole Antenna: $682Special Price: $518 (6 or more = $409 ea.)
  View Shopping cart or go to Checkout
  For help in erecting your OCF antenna, see our Antenna Support Rope, Line Grips, PL-259 connectors, and Stainless Steel Pulleys.
  Buckmaster Antennas6196 Jefferson HighwayMineral, Virginia 23117 USA540:894-5777800:282-5628 (Orders)540:894-9141 (Fax)Email: info@buck.com
  182509 hits since
FBI Director Nomination Hearing - C-SPAN Video Library
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 04:15
  Follow Similar Programs1
  Senate Committee JudiciaryFollow Sponsors
  James Comey testified about his nomination to become the director of the FBI.*Among the issues he addressed were the use of water-boarding in interrogations, National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, and the force .. Read MoreJames Comey testified about his nomination to become the director of the FBI.*Among the issues he addressed were the use of water-boarding in interrogations, National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, and the force feedings of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay detention facility.'‚He also said that the secret surveillance court that approved wiretapping requests, known as the FISA court, was ''anything but a rubber stamp.''
  2 hours, 42 minutes | 492 Views
$1.1 Million of Soros Money Tied To Magazine That Released McConnell Tape | CNS News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 04:02
  George Soros isn't behind everything the left does, but it sure seems like he helps fund it all. The lefty magazine Mother Jones released a tape, reportedly obtained from a Democratic Super PAC in Kentucky, in an effort to hurt Mitch McConnell's bid for reelection in the U.S. Senate. But, Mother Jones has funding baggage of its own.
  Mother Jones is the news outlet of The Foundation for National Progress, the left-wing "umbrella organization that exists to publish and support Mother Jones." It also founded the Media Consortium. The FNP received $485,000 in Soros funding in 2008. The Media Consortium, also still under the umbrella of the FNP, has received $675,000 since 2000, adding up to $1,160,000. Those figures come from 990 forms from Soros' Open Society Foundations.
  The Media Consortium is designed to be a progressive "echo chamber," where left-wing media outlets can network and share ideas. Other members of the Consortium include such liberal outlets as The Nation, Alternet and The American Prospect.
  The McConnell tape, released by Mother Jones and promoted by other media outlets, including all three major networks, was recorded by the liberal Democratic Super PAC Progress Kentucky, which has raised nearly $5 million in a campaign to replace McConnell in the U.S. Senate. The FBI is currently investigating the legality of the recording. Mother Jones was also the news outlet that released the "47%" video of Mitt Romney back in September of 2012.
  Soros's donations go to fund an extensive network of liberal media outlets, which have received more than $52 million. Those operations include a wide range of liberal news operations as well as the infrastructure of news - journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations. Since 2000, Soros has given away more than $550 million to liberal organizations in the United States through his Open Society Foundations.
  Progress Kentucky also made the news back in February, when the group tweeted out a racially-charged comment about McConnell's wife, former Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, suggesting that she was working to outsource jobs to China. The tweets have since been deleted, and Progress Kentucky issued a statement apologizing for the incident.
  See more "Right Views, Right Now."
Donation Information | Freedom of the Press Foundation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:59
  Tax-Deductible
  The Foundation for National Progress, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, is the Freedom of the Press Foundation's fiscal sponsor and provides users a way to give tax-deductible donations. Our tax ID number is 94-2282759. Your gift is tax-deductible to the full extent provided by law.
  Checks and Money Orders
  We are pleased to receive anonymous donations in the mail. Please make checks and money orders payable to "Foundation for National Progress," and make sure to write "Freedom of the Press Foundation" in the memo field. Please mail checks and money orders to:
  Foundation for National Progressc/o Freedom of the Press Foundation222 Sutter Street, Suite 600San Francisco, CA 94108
  If you'd like to designate your donation to particular transparency journalism organization, please specify how you'd like your money allocated in an attached note. Otherwise, your money will be donated directly to the Freedom of the Press Foundation's general fund.
Samsung pays Apple $1 Billion sending 30 trucks full of 5 cent coins
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:49
  Thirty trucks filled with 5-cent coins pulled up to the Apple headquarters in Cupertino, California. Initially, the security team at Apple, who protects the tech giants facility, told the trucks that they were in the wrong place. But, just minutes later, Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, received a phone call from the Samsung CEO explaining how the billion fine was being paid in the form of coins.
  The funny part is that the signed document does not specify a single payment method, so Samsung is entitled to send the creators of the iPhone their billion dollars in the way they deem best.
  This dirty but genius geek troll play is a new headache to Apple executives as they will need to put in long hours counting all that money, to check if it is all there and to try to deposit it crossing fingers to hope a bank will accept all the coins.
  Lee Kun-hee, Chairman of Samsung Electronics, told the media that his company is not going to be intimidated by a group of ''geeks with style'' and that if they want to play dirty, they also know how to do it.
  You can use your coins to buy refreshments at the little machine for life or melt the coins to make computers, that's not my problem, I already paid them and fulfilled the law.
  A total of 20 billion coins, delivery hope to finish this week.
  Let's see how Apple will respond to this.
  Commentscomments
Board of Directors | Mother Jones
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:30
  ChairPhil is a photographer. He straddles the digital/analog border with a 4X5 camera and film, scanning, Photoshop, and toned silver prints. For dozens of thousand-word equivalents answering the question, "What does he photograph?" see his website, at www.strausphoto.com.
  Phil is on the board of directors of the Center for Defense Information where he's underwritten the launch of the Straus Military Reform Project. He is supporting a MotherJones.com project on militarism.
  He's recently begun playing the piano and composing music and returned to running after a ten-year lapse due to now-eliminated arthritis. He's looking forward to a return to the study of mathematics. Phil has been a devoted go player for over 35 years.
  He lives in Philadelphia with his wife, Margaret Harris. They've recently become empty-nesters. Phil has degrees in psychology and engineering. For other details of his past life, ask his cousin, Jane Butcher.
  PresidentBuckingham became president and CEO in February 2010. Prior to this she held the position of COO/CFO; she joined Mother Jones in 2002. She has spent more than 20 years in senior finance and management positions in the publishing and high-tech industries working for a range of publishing companies and Internet startups, including Sony Corp.'s Internet incubator and at International Data Group.
  Vice PresidentMonika Bauerlein is co-editor of Mother Jones, where, together with Clara Jeffery, she spearheaded an era of editorial growth and innovation, marked by two National Magazine Awards for general excellence, the addition of a seven-person Washington Bureau, and an overhaul of the organization's digital strategy that tripled MotherJones.com's traffic. Previously she was Mother Jones' investigative editor, focusing on long-form projects marrying in-depth reportage, document sleuthing, and narrative appeal. She has also worked as an alternative-weekly editor (at Minneapolis/St. Paul's City Pages), a correspondent for US and European publications in Washington, D.C. and at the United Nations, an AP stringer, corporate trainer, translator, and pastry chef (a very short stint). She lives in Oakland with her husband and their three children.
  Vice PresidentClara Jeffery is co-editor of Mother Jones, where, together with Monika Bauerlein, she has spearheaded an era of editorial growth and innovation, marked by the addition of an eight-person Washington bureau, an overhaul of the organization's digital strategy and a corresponding tripling of traffic, and the winning of two National Magazine Awards for general excellence. Before joining the staff of Mother Jones, she was a senior editor of Harper's magazine. Eight pieces that she personally edited have been finalists for National Magazine Awards, in the categories of essay, profile, reporting, public interest, and fiction. Works she edited have also been selected to appear in various editions of Best American Essays, Best American Travel Writing, Best American Sports Writing, and Best American Science Writing. Clara cut her journalistic teeth at Washington City Paper, where she wrote and edited political, investigative, and narrative features, and was a columnist. Jeffery is a graduate of Carleton College and Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism. Born in Baltimore and raised in Arlington, Virginia, she now resides in the Mission District of San Francisco with her partner Chris Baum and their two-year-old son Milo. Their burrito joint of choice is El Metate.
  Vice PresidentSteven Katz is Publisher for Mother Jones and its non-profit publisher, the Foundation for National Progress. He joined MoJo in 2003 after several years as Vice President of Development for Earthjustice, the nation's leading non-profit environmental law firm. While at Mother Jones, Steve helped found and was the first Project Director for The Media Consortium, a network of more than 40 independent, progressive media organizations around the United States.
  Steve has thirty years' experience working in the fields of the environment advocacy, the arts, social justice, and neighborhood-based housing development. Prior to joining Earthjustice in 1995, he was Managing Director for the California urban environmental advocacy organization, Communities for a Better Environment, from 1989 to 1994. During the mid and late 1980s, Steve worked in the non-profit arts world, including three years as Managing Director for the San Francisco-based touring ensemble, A Traveling Jewish Theatre. He also was Associate Director for Housing and Planning at Brooklyn's Flatbush Development Corporation for two years in the early 1980s, and Development Coordinator for the Bronx-based sweat equity urban homesteading group, People's Development Corporation, from 1976 to 1978.
  Steve has been on a number of non-profit boards, among them Earthshare of California, the As You Sow Foundation, the Marin Center for Peace and Justice, and Turtle Island Restoration Network. Steve received his PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Santa Cruz in 1987, and his B.A. from Oberlin College in 1974. He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area with his wife Rachelle, and his son, Noah.
  SecretarySara Frankel has worked in media companies since starting her first job as a Mother Jones intern in 1986. She subsequently worked as an editor and feature writer for both weekly magazines and a daily newspaper. Since receiving her MBA in 1994, she has held a range of business positions in electronic media companies, most recently running an Internet company she founded in 1999. She is currently working as a business consultant in New York.
  For 25+ years Harriett was a partner at New York based Frankfurt Balkind, an award -winning brand strategy and communications agency with offices in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Known for its innovative integrated approach, the agency was purchased by Interpublic/Hill Holliday during 2002. At Frankfurt Balkind, Harriett was responsible for business development and led client liaison and brand strategy teams for companies whose needs required multi-disciplinary marketing '' identity, print, video, digital, web. Clients ranged from AT&T, Avon, Saks Fifth Avenue, Pitney Bowes, Hearst, Goldman Sachs, HBO, and Sony to the MTA (Grand Central Station) and New Visions for Public Schools.
  Today Harriett is co-founder of Strat B in New York, providing brand strategy, messaging and marketing communications for established companies such as Time Warner Cable Media and start-ups like Cindy Levine Group. She is a partner of Bemis Balkind, a premier Los Angeles based entertainment marketing agency.
  Harriett's career began in San Francisco where she lived for 13 years and worked in retail and banking prior to joining Landor Associates, a brand and creative design consultancy. Moving to New York, she headed advertising and public relations for Reeves Communications, who later became one of her first clients when she started Levin Associates; the other was Gips+Balkind design firm, subsequently, Frankfurt Balkind. Harriett has been published in industry publications such as Communication Arts, Graphic Design: USA, and Direct Marketing News. She has a monthly blog-azine, "Secrets no one ever told you," www.snoety.com, directed primarily to 45+ women who are interested in new ideas and thoughts on living, and she serves on the Industry Council of Eurica Media Lab. She has one son, Devin, who is 25 and lives in Brooklyn.
  Harriet is the director of the HKH Foundation, which makes grants in areas relating to the environment, the arms race, and civil liberties, and is also director of the Blue Mountain Center, an upstate New York workplace for artists, writers and activists. Ms. Barlow has also founded and co-founded 12 public interest organizations and has been a member of the board of directors of over 50 non-profits.
  Jane is co-Chair of the Conference on World Affairs, Chair of the Dean's Advisory Committee for Arts and Sciences at the University of Colorado, is on the Advisory Board of the Autry National Center and also on the Biotech Advisory Board at the University of Colorado. She is the founder of the consulting firm Conventional Wisdom, Ltd.
  Andre CarothersAndre Carothers has more than 25 years experience in non-profit management, philanthropy, program development, and organizational and leadership development. He is currently an independent consultant. He is the co-founder, former Executive Director, and now a Senior Fellow at the Rockwood Leadership Institute, a national non-profit training and consulting organization. He serves as Chairman of the Board of the Rainforest Action Network and is a Board Member of International Rivers. He is also senior adviser to the Weinmann Charitable Trust, and Executive Director of the Furthur Foundation and the New Place Fund. From 1984 to 1997 he worked at Greenpeace USA as editor of their national newsmagazine, campaign manager and member of the Board of Directors. He was a regular columnist for ''E'' Magazine and has written extensively on environment and civic issues for many publications. He has authored numerous reports, articles and conference presentations on topics ranging from the economics of timber extraction in Papua New Guinea to the integration of spiritual practice into social activism. He received an MA in environmental science from the Energy and Resources Group at the University of California, Berkeley.
  Diane FilippiDiane Filippi is the Director of the SPUR Urban Center in San Francisco. Prior to joining SPUR, Ms. Filippi was a founder and Managing Principal of SMWM, an architectural and urban design firm in San Francisco.
  As the Director of the SPUR Urban Center, Diane has been a guest speaker on Urban Centers to national and international audiences.
  A few of Diane's other activities include:Chair, Rail-volution, Washington DC and Portland, Oregon - currentBoard Member, Association of Architectural Organizations, Chicago - currentBoard Member, ULI District Council - currentChair, Urban Land Institute, San Francisco District CouncilBoard Member, San Francisco Chamber of CommerceChair, San Francisco Friends of the LibraryChair, Keep Libraries Alive Political CampaignChair, State of California Friends of the LibraryChair, Libraries for the Future, New York
  For the past 8 years, Diane has been named one of San Francisco's 100 Most Influential Women. In 2010, she was honored as a permanent member of San Francisco Most Influential Women Hall of Fame.
  In 1996, Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. in recognition of service to the people of San Francisco and the San Francisco Public Library, declared February 20 to be Diane Filippi Day in San Francisco.
  Dave GlasscoDave is a self-described "father, geek, and musician who lives in Austin, Texas." He is a Texas native, and true to the Austin ethos, he's creative, passionate, and active in his community.
  Dave graduated from the University of Texas with a degree in government. He later attended the Berklee College of Music, but returned to Austin to open Satellite Studio. Currently he is the President of the board of The Participatory Culture Foundation, which supports open video on the web. Dave is also very active in Texas and national politics and sits on the board of Be One Texas.
  Erik is a co-founder and president of the Seattle-based Quixote Foundation. The Quixote Foundation was founded in 1997 by Erik's father, Arthur, to advance progressive causes through the action, education & policy work of dynamic nonprofit groups. Erik's wife, Lenore is the Executive Director of the Quixote Foundation.
  Adam is a writer and was one of the co-founders of Mother Jones. He is the author of seven books: Half the Way Home: a Memoir of Father and Son; The Mirror at Midnight: a South African Journey; The Unquiet Ghost: Russians Remember Stalin; Finding the Trapdoor: Essays, Portraits, Travels; King Leopold's Ghost: a Story of Greed, Terror and Heroism in Colonial Africa; Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's Slaves; and To End All Wars: A Story of Loyalty and Rebellion, 1914-1918. In 1997-98, he spent five months as a Fulbright Lecturer in India, and he teaches a writing class at the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California at Berkeley.
  Kim Keller is the Executive Director of the David & Anita Keller Family Foundation, a Bay Area-based family foundation committed to human rights as the cornerstone to peace and justice. She is deeply engaged and passionate about international human rights and strategic philanthropy. In addition to serving on the boards of the Foundation for National Progress (Mother Jones) and Accountability Counsel, Kim is an active member of The Philanthropy Workshop West, Global Philanthropy Forum, and the International Human Rights Funders Group. In 2011, she volunteered with the Carter Center as an election observer during the Liberian presidential election.
  Prior to directing her family's foundation, Kim worked in social science research and policy analysis for Bay Area non-profits including the Prevention Research Center and the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, and for the Department for Veterans' Affairs.
  Kim holds degrees from Wellesley College and the London School of Economics and Political Science.
  Rick is a founding principal of Melcher & Tucker Consultants, a Chicago-based strategic marketing and communications firm advising small and midsize companies and not-for-profit organizations. Since he co-founded the business in 2000, Rick has helped clients with strategic planning, media and capital campaigns, and in building alliances. Prior to his current endeavors, Rick worked at two leading public policy web sites, and spent two decades at Business Week magazine, managing bureaus in Chicago and London, and where he received the Citation for Excellence from the Overseas Press Club for reporting on Europe and the Center for Education Reform's award for Excellence in Journalism.
  Rick is a board member of the Foundation for National Progress, and serves on the national board of trustees and the Chicago advisory board of Facing History and Ourselves. He is also on the executive committee of the board of directors of Chicago Commons and is a member of the Economic Club of Chicago and the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. A graduate of Duke University, Rick and his wife, Barbara, are the parents of three children.
  Carolyn Mugar is and has been for twenty years the Executive Director of Farm Aid. Previous to that, she was an organizer with the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union and the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers International Union. Both unions have since merged several times. She also founded the Armenia Tree Project based in Watertown Massachusetts and Yerevan, Armenia and is very active on Armenian issues, going back and forth to Armenia several times a year. She likes to bike a lot. She walked the whole Camino in Spain over four years ago. She went to college and received a higher education.
  Staff Representative
  Maddie is the research editor at Mother Jones, managing a team of editorial fellows who fact-check the magazine's website and print issues and help make its explosive stories bulletproof. She also writes about culture, food politics, and environment for MoJo, and enjoys interviewing writers and comedians for its media section. Before Mother Jones, she worked at several educational nonprofits in the Bay Area and wrote for The Rumpus. She studied literature at Middlebury College and originally hails from Boulder. When not enjoying the victual paradise of San Francisco, you can find her skiing and hiking in the mountains.
  Jon Pageler has been a Vice President of Diageo, the world's leading premium drinks company, since 2003 and is currently responsible for Marketing Communications. At Diageo, Mr. Pageler's responsibilities include overseeing the marketing communications efforts in North America, as well as coordinating these efforts with the other Diageo markets worldwide. Prior to becoming the Head of Marketing Communications for North America, Mr. Pageler served as the Brand Communications Strategist in Diageo's world Headquarters in London.
  Mr. Pageler began his tenure with Diageo in Napa, as the Diageo Chateau & Estate Wine Company's executive in charge of Corporate Relations in the role of Vice President Corporate Relations, Diageo Chateau & Estate Wines.
  From 2000 to 2003, prior to joining Diageo, Mr. Pageler worked for the Crisis Management and Strategic Communications firm, Westhill Partners, where, among other responsibilities, he managed the firm's largest client, Diageo. Mr. Pageler came to Westhill from his role as Scheduler and, ultimately, Trip Director on the Bill Bradley for President Campaign, where he served for two years. From 1995 through 1998, Mr. Pageler held positions on several political campaigns including as the Scheduler for Charles Schumer's successful bid to unseat US Senator Al Damato and as Campaign Manager for Charlie King's unsuccessful bid for New York State Lieutenant Governor.
  Prior to that Mr. Pageler worked for the American Red Cross as a communications specialist and as an Investigator for the Neighborhood Defender Service of Harlem, a non-profit criminal defense firm based on 125th Street in Manhattan.
  Mr. Pageler graduated with honors and a BA in Philosophy from Carleton College in Northfield Minnesota in 1990.
  Ken is a technologist, designer, musician and amateur chef.
  Working at the intersection of design and technology, Ken has led several software and design projects over a 30-year career, most recently as CTO at Groupon.com He is currently an investor and advisor to several early stage start-ups, including DesktimeApp.com, TheNounProject.com and Kitchensurfing.com
  Ken serves on the board of The Old Town School of Folk Music and The Awesome Foundation of Chicago, and is partner and board member at City Winery Chicago.
  Ken has had a lifelong interest in cooking and the politics of food. He recently completed the 'La Technique' program at The French Culinary Institute, NYC and is a founding member of The Kitchen Community Chicago, a non-profit based in Boulder, CO that is building 'learning gardens' in Chicago schools.
  Ken is a 20-year transplant from the Boston area to Chicago where he lives with his wife, Amanda Lao and their 2 year old rooftop garden.
  Susan has been active in the arts, education, civil rights and women's issues for most of her life. She has been a on the board of Pitzer College since 1990 and the chair since 2001. She also serves on the board of directors of Chicago-based Urban Gateways: Center for the Arts in Education, the largest arts-in-education organization in Cook County, Ill. Urban Gateways reinforces the arts curriculum in Chicago public and parochial schools by sponsoring artists to teach visual arts, dance, theater and music. Susan is also chair of the board of directors of the Chicago Foundation for Women, whose goal is to increase philanthropic giving by women for a variety of causes, including shelters for abused women and girls and programs on domestic violence and sexual assault. Susan is married to Nick Pritzker, whose family are owners of the Hyatt Hotel chain.
  Dr. Nan Schaffer is a conservationist and internationally recognized expert on the rhinoceros and reproduction. Although her research programs focused on reproductive issues in a variety of mammals, Dr. Schaffer's greatest contributions to science and conservation center on the five species of rhinoceros. In 1998, concerned with the continued decline of these critically endangered species, Dr. Schaffer refocused her efforts and founded SOS Rhino, an international non-profit organization focused on saving rhinoceroses in their natural habitats. SOS Rhino's community-based conservation programs built on the capacity of all stakeholders to conserve by raising local awareness and promoting protection of habitats and animals.
  In addition to her contributions to science and conservation, Dr. Schaffer is also a philanthropist and activist in the LGBT community. She was the first woman invited to join the Board of IMPACT, the predecessor to Equality Illinois, the state's oldest and largest LGBT political action committee. In 1985 she co-founded Outlines, one of the first lesbian newspapers in the Midwest, which became The Windy City Times, the oldest and only surviving LGBT newspaper in Chicago. In addition to her political and publishing efforts, Dr. Schaffer supported numerous LGBT organizations with her time, wisdom and financial resources, and in 2004, she was inducted into the Chicago Gay & Lesbian Hall of Fame.
  In her retirement, Dr. Schaffer has continued her philanthropy, activism and conservation efforts. She serves as a governing member of the Chicago Zoological Society's Board of Trustees and continues to consult with Malaysian government officials and leaders of rhinoceros conservation programs.
  Staff RepresentativeKate Sheppard covers energy and environmental politics in Mother Jones' Washington bureau. She was previously the political reporter for Grist and a writing fellow at The American Prospect. She can be reached by email at ksheppard (at) motherjones (dot) com. Her work has also been featured in the New York Times Room for Debate blog, The Guardian's Comment is Free, High Country News, The Center for Public Integrity, The Washington Independent, ForeignPolicy.com, Washington Spectator, Who Runs Gov, In These Times, and Bitch. She was raised on a vegetable farm in southern New Jersey (yes, they do exist), but has adapted well to life in the nation's capitol. She misses trees and having a Congressional representative with voting power, but thinks D.C. is pretty great anyway.
  Kevin Simmons is the founder and co-director of two nonprofit art spaces: High Concept Laboratories (HCL), and Los Del Patio. HCL collaborates with Chicago-area artists and performers to foster the creation and development of new works, and also curates classes, screenings, lectures, and other events for the community. Los Del Patio, located in Panama City, Panama, entails a gallery, cafe/bar, center for studios and workshops, as well as professionally-oriented programming pertaining to the production and presentation of contemporary art. He is the president of Opera Cabal, a Chicago-based avant-garde contemporary opera company, and in addition to serving on the board of the Foundation for National Progress / Mother Jones Magazine, he is a board member of Molly Shanahan / Mad Shak Dance Company, The Canary Project, and the Azuero Earth Project. A former AmeriCorps*VISTA Site DIrector with LIFT, he studied political science and public policy at Princeton University and has worked in development and programming for a variety of environmental projects in Panama, including the Panama Rainforest Discovery Center and the Frank Gehry-designed BioMuseo / Museum of Biodiversity in collaboration with the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute.
How we broke the NSA story - Salon.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:18
  Shortly after Salon's biographical sketch on Laura Poitras went live, the award-winning documentary filmmaker agreed to a phone interview, her first since she helped reveal the scope of the National Security Agency's digital surveillance. ''I feel a certain need to be cautious about not wanting to do the work for the government,'' she told Salon, but agreed to clarify some parts of her role in the story.
  Poitras is still in Hong Kong, where she is filming the story behind the story '-- including her co-author on the Guardian story and former Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald '-- for her forthcoming documentary on whistle-blowers and leaks. In a wide-ranging interview, she explained how she first made contact with Snowden, her reaction to the possible future investigation into his leaks, and why Snowden didn't go to the New York Times. What follows is a lightly edited transcript.
  So how did this all begin?
  I was originally contacted in January, anonymously.
  By Edward Snowden?
  Well, I didn't know who it was.
  What was the format?
  Via email. It said, I want to get your encryption key and let's get on a secure channel.
  And he didn't say what it was about?
  He just said '-- that was the first, and the second was, I have some information in the intelligence community, and it won't be a waste of your time.
  Do you get a lot of those kinds of requests?
  No, I don't.
  Did you immediately know what was the best, most secure protocol to go about it?
  I actually did. I have a lot of experience because I've been working with '-- as you note in your thing, I've done filming with WikiLeaks, I know Jacob Appelbaum. I already had encryption keys but what he was asking for was beyond what I was using in terms of security and anonymity.
  How did it proceed from there?
  So that's where I'm not going into a lot of details, but sort of ongoing correspondence. I didn't know, I didn't have any biographical details or where he worked, had no idea. He made claims and said he had documentation. At that point it was all completely theoretical, but I had a feeling it was legit.
  Why do you think he contacted you? Were you the first person he contacted?
  I can't speak for him. Glenn and I just touched base about, what was your story, because we connected later in the spring. He, I think, got an email in February. But I didn't know he'd gotten an email.
  He told me he'd contacted me because my border harassment meant that I'd been a person who had been selected. To be selected ''and he went through a whole litany of things '-- means that everything you do, every friend you have, every purchase you make, every street you cross means you're being watched. ''You probably don't like how this system works, I think you can tell the story.'' '... Of course I was suspicious, I worried that it was entrapment, it's crazy, all the normal responses you have to someone reaching out making, claims. He said he'd seen a piece that I'd done on Bill Binney in the Times.
  I can say from conversations I had with him after that, I think he had a suspicion of mainstream media. And particularly what happened with the New York Times and the warrantless wiretapping story, which as we know was shelved for a year. So he expressed that to me but I think also in his choices of who he contacted. I didn't know he was reaching out to Glenn at that point.
  And you and Glenn were already colleagues, right, you sit on a board together?
  At that point the foundation had just opened. So we knew each other and we were colleagues and friends.
  How did it get to the point where you knew it was going to be a story, and how did you decide where it was going to be published?
  Those are the details I'm not going to go into. What I can say is that once I had a few pieces of correspondence, I said, let me ask a couple of people about this, people who have experience, and I sat down with a couple of people, one of whom was Bart Gellman '... and he said, it looks like this person could be legit. And that was probably February.
  These disputes that have been played out on the internet about who got in touch with whom and who needed assurances ''
  In a situation like this, this is a confidential source and has been until very, very recently, actually has been a person whose identity I did not know. To actually go on the record and talk about '-- it seems to be a violation of a lot of relationships with someone who's trusted you. There's partly that, so I've been hesitant. I've asked, you know, like, Bart, don't go try and tell my story. I'll tell my story, you know, about my reporting. I don't need reporters reporting on my reporting. So maybe that stuff contributed to different timelines. But that seems now '-- I'm not quite sure, what makes the most sense. Because I don't want to tell the whole story now, I don't think it's the right time. And I want to tell it in my own words. I'm a storyteller. I'll tell it when I'm ready to tell it, in detail.
  But it makes sense to go on the record to explain why I was attached to both of those stories.
  So you ended up getting in touch with Bart and Glenn because you wanted their help to vet the claims in documents?
  There weren't documents yet '... I wanted to know if this correspondent '-- it was possible something else would be entrapment or just crazy, that's always an option. I had an instinct that it was legit. I wanted to talk to people who knew.
  So then they said, my paper would be happy to publish it?
  No, it was just colleagues saying, this was happening, what do you think. There was nothing to '-- it was just somebody wanting to start a conversation and claiming to have information '... There was no material at that point.
  So how did it then become two separate stories in the Washington Post and the Guardian?
  The source also has a relationship with Glenn. Which I can't speak to.
  I know that Glenn said he had more stories to come. Do you have more footage you're planning on using in your documentary?
  Of course. I'm here working.
  Are you still in touch with him?
  I'm not going to comment on that.
  Do you know where he is?
  Not going to comment.
  Are you going to be working on more stories in print before your documentary comes out?
  I really can't predict.
  Are you going to be sticking around Hong Kong for awhile or do you think you'll come to the U.S.?
  I haven't decided. I'm trying to figure that out right now. But I'm actually based right now outside the U.S.
  Are you worried about retaliation in any investigation that goes forward?
  You know what? I'm not. I've been harassed for a long time, I wouldn't be surprised if that continues. Being here and seeing the kind of '-- actually, Glenn was really inspiring. Really incredible courage in journalism and just saying, we need to talk to him about these things. It's not OK that we have a secret court that has secret interpretations of secret laws; what kind of democracy is that? I felt like, this is a fight worth having. If there's fallout, if there's blowback, I would absolutely do it again, because I think this information should be public. Whatever part I had in helping to do that I think is a service.
  People take risks. And I'm not the one who's taking the most in this case.
  And you feel like the person who is taking the most risk '-- meaning Snowden '-- is aware of all the possible ramifications of it?
  You can see it in the video, right? I think he is. I think he wanted to reveal his identity because he didn't want to create a situation where he was anonymous and everyone would have been investigated. In these investigation cases, there are repercussions for many, many people. I think he wanted to take responsibility.
  Did he always plan to reveal his identity?
  I don't know. At some point I became aware of that but I don't know what his intention was.
  It's this complicated situation because we have a source who decided to reveal himself. I still feel like I have journalistic obligations to the source even though they've made that choice '... There's something that Glenn said that I actually want to contradict. He said we began ''working with'' him. There was no working with. We were contacted. It was totally cold contact.
  Since he contacted you before he started working at Booz Allen, the implication people were drawing was that he went to Booz Allen with the express intention of leaking this.
  That's completely absurd. I had no dialogue about what the information was '-- there were claims, that's all I received.
  So the implication that you sent him into Booz Allen to spy was incorrect.
  Are you kidding? I didn't know where he worked, I didn't know he was NSA, I didn't know how '-- nothing. There was no like, Oh do you think you '..., no nudging. It's like the crazy correlations that the NSA does. There's no connection here. We were contacted, we didn't know what he was up to, and at some point he came forward with documents.
GuideStar Exchange Reports for Foundation for National Progress
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 03:03
  Basic Organization InformationFoundation for National Progress
  Also Known As:FNP, MoJo, MJ, Mother JonesPhysical Address:San Francisco, CA 94108 EIN:94-2282759Web URL:www.motherjones.com NTEE Category:A Arts, Culture, and Humanities A30 Media, Communications Organizations A Arts, Culture, and Humanities A33 Printing, Publishing A Arts, Culture, and Humanities A99 Other Art, Culture, Humanities Organizations/Services N.E.C. Year Founded:1976 Ruling Year:1975 Sign in or create an account to see this organization's full address, contact information, and more!
  Mission StatementFor over thirty years, the mission of the Foundation for National Progress has been to produce revelatory journalism that in its power and reach seeks to inform and inspire a more just and democratic world. We measure the effectiveness of our public-interest reporting in three ways: 1. The size and nature of audience; 2. The influence of our stories on the larger commercial media industry; and 3. The impact of our reporting when used by people working for progressive change).
  Expert AssessmentThere are no Expert Reviews for this organization. Learn more about TakeAction@GuideStar.Impact Summary from the NonprofitThis organization has not provided an impact summary.
  Personal Reviews
  Financial Health Dashboard: Highlights key financial trends and ratios for a selected nonprofit organization over a period of up to five years.Peer Comparison Dashboard: Compares the organization's financials with up to five peer nonprofits that you select.Graphical Analysis: Provides multi-year graphs and an interpretive guide in a format ready to present to your clients.Printable PDF Report: Provides a complete analysis of the organization for your records. The full report tells you what to look for and why it matters.Advanced Search: Allows you to search by EIN (Employer Identification Number), organization name, city, state, revenue, expenses, and assets.LeadershipMs. Madeleine Buckingham
  Term:
  Since Feb 2002
  Profile:
  Buckingham became president and CEO in February 2010. Prior to this she held the position of COO/CFO; she joined Mother Jones in 2002. She has spent more than 20 years in senior finance and management positions in the publishing and high-tech industries working for a range of publishing companies and Internet startups, including Sony Corp.'s Internet incubator and at International Data Group.
  Highest Paid Employees & Their CompensationHighest Paid Employee Data for 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 are included in the GuideStar Premium Report. Upgrade NowReport Added To Cart
  Program: Program OverviewBudget:$8,384,399Category:Population Served:General Public/UnspecifiedProgram Description:
  The Foundation for National Progress supports the following four programs: Mother Jones magazine: Published six times per year, Mother Jones magazine offers in-depth investigative reports, news analysis, essays, and images on the most important social and political issues of our time. The print magazine currently has a paid circulation of approximately 225,000 readers and subscribers. With a long history of independent, uncompromising journalism, people have come to trust and rely on the information they garner from the pages of Mother Jones magazine. MotherJones.com: In 1993, Mother Jones became the first general interest magazine on the internet. From its inception, MotherJones.com has broadened the reach and impact of Mother Jones magazine through its blend of original content and ability to provide readers with information beyond the scope of a print publication, including timely news analysis, interactive multi-media projects, enhanced in-print investigative pieces, and in-depth reports. Over the past year, traffic to MotherJones.com has more than doubled too nearly 875,000 unique visitors each month. in addition, weekly newsletters are sent out to over 50,000 subscribers informing a broad spectrum of people about the most important issues of the day, and the ways in which they can get involved and create change. The Ben Bagdikian Fellowship Program: Named after a long-time investigative reporter and journalism educator, The Ben Bagdikian Fellowship Program is one of the few independent programs in the nation through which aspiring journalists can get in-the-field experience in critical investigative reporting skills, and nurture the social and professional networks that will enable them to break into reporting. Each year, three cycles of four interns join the staff. Since the program's inception in 1980, more than 800 interns have passed through Mother Jones. More than six out of ten of our former interns are currently working as journalists or in another media related profession. In addition, the program provides invaluable experience to young people seeking to gain hands-on experience in nonprofit administration, with intern and fellowships in departments throughout the Foundation, including summer placements for high school students. The Media Consortium: The Foundation for National Progress is the sponsor for The Media Consortium, a network of more than 40 leading progressive independent journalism organizations. The Consortium?s goals are to create smart, powerful, and passionate journalism that changes the terms of the American political and cultural debate, to redefine ?independent progressive media? so that it reaches and serves the audience of the 21st century, to create a cooperative infrastructure that supports a sustainable future for progressive journalism, and to help get the message out to millions of Americans looking for honest, fair, and accurate journalism.
  Program Long-Term Success:
  In 2007, Mother Jones bucked the trend of dramatic newsroom cutbacks by opening the first major Washington news bureau set up by a U.S. media organization in years. The eight person bureau, headed by veteran Washington journalist David Corn, is made up of experienced full-time staff reporters and editors. The bureau is also paired with dedicated staff reporters in our San Francisco office, to create the Mother Jones Investigative Team. With these top-notch staff reporters, and an extensive network of some of the best freelance journalists in the world, the I-Team gives Mother Jones the flexibility, concentration of resources, and fast response capacity that simply would not be otherwise possible.
  Program Short-Term Success:
  Program Success Monitored by:
  Program Success Examples:
  Contractor data is available for this organization!
  Independent Contractor information for 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 is available for this organization with a subscription to GuideStar Premium Pro.
  GuideStar Premium Pro also includes:
  Comprehensive financial data, including functional expense detail, for every digitized fiscal year in GuideStar's databaseAbility to download up to 55 fields of data for up to 1,000 organizations at a time and up to five years' worth of Income Statement and Balance Sheet data for individual organizationsComprehensive advanced search capabilities, including criteria for functional expenses, investible assets, investment income and audit & 990T filing requirementsAbility to save organizations and searches for quick referencePeople search with salary range dataAccess to all available Forms 990More information
  Upgrade Now!
  Evidence of ImpactExpert Comments
  There are no comments available for this organization.
  Organizational StrengthsExpert Comments
  There are no comments available for this organization.
  Areas for ImprovementExpert Comments
  There are no comments available for this organization.
Freedom of the Press Foundation takes 8% from each donation for operational costs.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:59
  ''A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know.''
  '--Judge Murray Gurfein, Pentagon Papers case, June 17, 1971
  Our MissionThe Freedom of the Press Foundation is dedicated to helping defend and support aggressive, public-interest journalism focused on exposing mismanagement, corruption, and law-breaking in government. We accept tax-deductible donations to a variety of journalism organizations that push for government transparency and accountability.
  The Freedom of the Press Foundation is built on the recognition that this kind of transparency journalism '-- from publishing the Pentagon Papers and exposing Watergate, to uncovering the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program and CIA secret prisons '-- doesn't just happen. It requires dogged work by journalists, and often, the courage of whistleblowers and others who work to ensure that the public actually learns what it has a right to know.
  But in a changing economic and technological age, media organizations are increasingly susceptible to corporate or government pressure. This can lead to watered-down or compromised coverage, or worse: censorship.
  Increasingly, non-profit media and transparency organizations are emerging as a critical component of the journalism landscape. Leveraging the power of the Internet, these organizations are helping to reinvent and reimagine independent watchdog reporting.
  Right now, too many of those organizations are struggling for funding, relying on a few large foundations or competing for donors. Our goal is to broaden the financial base of these types of institutions'--both start-ups and established non-profit organizations '-- by crowd-sourcing funding and making it easy for people to support the best journalism from an array of organizations all in one place.
  Using the same networked, collaborative approach, the Freedom of the Press Foundation will also provide support for organizations and individuals that have been unjustly censored or cut off from funding for doing their job as journalists. Given the variety of corporate and government pressures on journalism outlets around the world, the need has never been greater.
  How It Works:The process is simple. On our website, you can donate to as many as four journalism and transparency organizations at once. We'll feature a ''bundle'' of four organizations and provide a bit of background on each. Every two months we will release a new bundle of deserving organizations or individuals. Once you enter the total amount you wish to donate, you can use the sliders to determine the percentage you want each entity to get.
  You can also donate directly to the Freedom of the Press Foundation to help further our mission. Twice a year, we will distribute a grant to projects our Board of Directors has vetted and selected.
  Freedom of the Press Foundation takes 8% from each donation for operational costs.
  Criteria for choosing organizations:Record of engaging in transparency journalism or supporting it in a material way, including support for whistleblowers.Public interest agenda.Organizations or individuals under attack for engaging in transparency journalism.Need for support. The foundation's goal is to prioritize support for organizations and individuals who are in need of funding or who face obstacles to gaining support on their own.You can go here to see a description of the organizations we are currently crowd-funding donations for.
Board of Directors & Staff | Freedom of the Press Foundation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:58
  Daniel Ellsberg
  Daniel Ellsberg is a co-founder of the Freedom of the Press Foundation. He is best known as the whistleblower who gave the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times in 1971. Ellsberg is also the author of three books: Papers on the War (1971), Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers (2002), and Risk, Ambiguity and Decision (2001). In December 2006, he won the Right Livelihood Award, known as the ''Alternative Nobel Prize,'' in Stockholm, Sweden, ''for putting peace and truth first, at considerable personal risk, and dedicating his life to inspiring others to follow his example.''
  Glenn Greenwald
  Glenn Greenwald is a lawyer, journalist, blogger, and author. He worked as a constitutional and civil rights litigator before becoming a contributor to Salon, and now writes for The Guardian about civil liberties issues. He is the author of three New York Times bestselling books, including his latest, With Liberty and Justice for Some. Greenwald was named by The Atlantic as one of the 25 most influential political commentators in the nation. He was the recipient of the first annual I.F. Stone Award for Independent Journalism, and won the 2010 Online Journalism Association Award for his investigative work on the arrest and oppressive detention of Bradley Manning.
  John Cusack
  John Cusack is an actor, director, producer, and screenwriter who has appeared in over 60 films. He's also a political activist and regularly speaks out and writes on issues of human rights, government transparency, and accountability'--amongst other things.
  John Perry Barlow
  John Perry Barlow is co-founder of the Freedom of the Press Foundation. He is also a retired Wyoming rancher (and native), a former lyricist for the Grateful Dead, and the co-founder and board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties organization which has been protecting the free flow of information on the Internet since 1990. He was a founding Fellow at Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. He has been writing about Cyberspace since 1988 and was first to apply that name to the global social space it presently describes. Barlow's piece on the future of copyright, ''The Economy of Ideas,'' is taught in many law schools, and his ''Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace'' is posted on thousands of websites. Recently, The Guardian named him one of the twenty most influential champions of the Open Internet. He is presently engaged in starting a company, Algae Systems, that aspires to turn sewage into carbon negative jet fuel. He is the father of three daughters and his primary aspiration is to be a good ancestor. He dreams of a world where all general useful knowledge can be available to anyone, of any station, merely for the price of curiosity.
  Josh Stearns
  Josh Stearns is a journalist and organizer working for press freedom and the future of news through media and tech policy. As the Journalism and Public Media Campaign Director at Free Press, Stearns runs national advocacy campaigns to amplify the voice of local people in the policy debates that shape our media. Since 2011 he has been tracking journalist arrests and press suppression across the US, an effort the earned him ''Storify of the Year'' and the Lew Hill Media Ally Award for his use of cutting-edge technology and First Amendment advocacy. His articles have appeared in Mother Jones, Orion Magazine, Yes Magazine and the Columbia Journalism Review.
  Laura Poitras
  Laura Poitras is a documentary filmmaker. Her 2003 film Flag Wars won a Peabody Award. Her 2006 film My Country, My Country was nominated for an Academy Award. Her 2010 film The Oath was nominated for an Emmy Award for outstanding investigative journalism. She is currently working on a documentary about state surveillance, WikiLeaks, Internet freedom, and whistleblowers. She is the recipient of a 2012 MacArthur Fellowship. Her work was included in the 2012 Whitney Biennial.
  She has been detained and interrogated about her work at the U.S. border over 40 times.
  Rainey Reitman
  Rainey Reitman is a co-founder and chief operating officer of Freedom of the Press Foundation. She's also a founder and steering committee member for the Bradley Manning Support Network, a network of individuals and organizations advocating for the release of accused WikiLeaks whistleblower Pfc. Bradley Manning. She serves on the board of the directors for the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, a nonprofit whose mission is to organize and support an effective, national grassroots movement to restore civil liberties, and on the steering committee for the Internet Defense League, which organizes Internet users to combat imminent threats to online rights. Reitman is also Activism Director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
  Trevor Timm
  Trevor Timm is a co-founder and the executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation. He is a writer, activist, and lawyer who specializes in free speech and government transparency issues. He has contributed to The Atlantic, Al Jazeera, Foreign Policy, The Guardian, Harvard Law and Policy Review and PBS MediaShift. He currently works as an activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Previously, Timm helped the longtime General Counsel of The New York Times, James Goodale, write a book on the First Amendment.
  Xeni Jardin
  Xeni Jardin is a founding partner and co-editor of award winning blog Boing Boing. Executive Producer and host of Webby-honored "Boing Boing Video," online and in-flight on Virgin America. Has contributed to such diverse venues as NPR, Wired, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, and a frequently-sought tech expert in broadcast news.
Freedom of the Press Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:54
  The Freedom of the Press Foundation is a non-profit organization founded in 2012 to fund and support free speech and freedom of the press. The organization is headed by both mainstream and alternative journalists such as Daniel Ellsberg and Xeni Jardin as well as activists, celebrities, and filmmakers.
  The mission is to help "promote and fund aggressive, public-interest journalism focused on exposing mismanagement, corruption, and law-breaking in government",[2] and it offers a way to crowd-source funding for WikiLeaks and independent journalistic organizations.[3] Supported organizations includes WikiLeaks, MuckRock News, the National Security Archive, The UpTake, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the Center for Public Integrity and Truthout.[4]
  The Freedom of the Press Foundations selects organizations and individuals to support based on four criteria: 1. Record of engaging in transparency journalism or supporting it in a material way, including support for whistleblowers; 2. Public interest agenda; 3. Organizations or individuals under attack for engaging in transparency journalism; and 4. Need for support. The foundation's goal is to prioritize support for organizations and individuals who are in need of funding or who face obstacles to gaining support on their own.
  In May 2013, The Freedom of the Press Foundation began crowd-funding donations to hire a professional court stenographer to take transcripts during the trial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, after the government refused to make its transcripts available to the public.
  See also[edit]References[edit]External links[edit]
He Was Taller Than I Expected And Spoke With A Heavy Russian Accent Which He NEVER Had Before
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:32
Tired of helping the CIA? Quit Facebook, Venezuela minister urges | Reuters
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:32
  TweetShare thisEmailPrintA man uses an iPad with a Facebook app in this photo illustration in Sofia January 30, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Stoyan Nenov
  CARACAS | Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:30pm EDT
  CARACAS (Reuters) - A Venezuelan government minister on Wednesday urged citizens to shut Facebook accounts to avoid being unwitting informants for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, referring to recent revelations about U.S. surveillance programs.
  Edward Snowden, a former U.S. National Security Agency contractor who is stuck in a Moscow airport while seeking to avoid capture by the United States, last month leaked details about American intelligence agencies obtaining information from popular websites including Facebook.
  "Comrades: cancel your Facebook accounts, you've been working for free as CIA informants. Review the Snowden case!" wrote Prisons Minister Iris Varela on her Twitter account.
  Venezuela has offered to provide asylum for Snowden, but he has not responded and appears unable to leave the transit zone of Sheremetyevo International Airport.
  He exposed a program known as Prism that relied on customer data supplied by major technology companies.
  "Countries and people that have fallen victim to gringo spying should sue the United States to ensure fair compensation. We're going to bankrupt the U.S. economy!" wrote Varela, known for radical rhetoric and ardent support of the late socialist leader Hugo Chavez.
  (Reporting by Diego Ore; Editing by Will Dunham)
  Tweet thisLink thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprintsComments (1)
  What a jerkwad. South America needs leaders that are at least somewhat mature.
U.S. arms showing up in hands of pro-Assad militias
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:29
  M-16 rifles have been spotted with Shiite militias fighting in Syria.(Photo: Garrett Hubbard for USA TODAY)
  Story HighlightsEasy flow of weapons is a reason why some U.S. officials oppose sending arms to SyriaIran likes to show it has obtained weapons, analysts sayWeapons include rifles, carbines and grenade launchersU.S. and Western weapons have been reaching Iranian-backed Shiite militias fighting to keep Bashar Assad's forces in power in Syria.
  Analysts say it's unclear if the weapons were captured, stolen or bought on the black market in Syria, Turkey, Iraq or Libya. Propaganda photographs from Shiite militias posted on dozens of websites and Facebook pages show the weapons were acquired in new condition, said Phillip Smyth, an analyst for Jihadology.net, a site affiliated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
  Many of the weapons are things the militias "shouldn't really have their hands on," Smyth said. Iranians love to show "they have weapons and systems that are very close to the Americans."
  The ability of Assad's allies to obtain U.S. weapons is one of many reasons the United States should not supply Syrian rebels with weapons, which President Obama said he would start to do last month, said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., former chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
  Syria is "already overflowing" with weapons being supplied to the Assad regime and to the rebels "that could one day be turned against the U.S.," Ros-Lehtinen said.
  It's "extremely difficult" to distinguish between friend and foe in Syria, she said, and "no amount of safeguards can guarantee that weapons will not fall into the wrong hands."
  State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the administration has taken steps "to do everything possible to ensure that any aid is making its way into the right hands" in Syria. That is why the United States and its partners have agreed to direct military aid through the secular-leaning, anti-Assad Free Syrian Army's Supreme Military Council and its chief, Gen. Salim Idris.
  Many of the U.S. weapons in the hands of pro-Assad militia could have reached the black market after a major U.S. sales to Iraq in 2009, said Christopher Harmer, a senior analyst at the Institute for the Study of War. Almost 10 years of fighting there left thousands of loose weapons floating around Iraq and available for sale on the black market.
  The U.S. sale included 80,000 M-16s, 25,000 M-4s and 2,550 M-203 grenade launchers, according to an announcement Dec. 9, 2009, by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
  U.S. arms are transferred to foreign militaries only under strict controls that prohibit transfers to third parties without State Department approval, said Neil Hedlund, a spokesman for the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which administers U.S. assistance to foreign militaries.
  Nevertheless, U.S. weapons have often been diverted to militant groups across the Middle East, said Nic Jenzen-Jones, an independent arms specialist based in Perth, Australia. He noticed U.S. weapons in images from the Syrian battlefield since last year, primarily in the hands of Syrian rebel forces.
  "The most likely source is Lebanon," where the United States has supplied the Lebanese military and Israeli soldiers armed with American rifles fought as recently as 2006, he said. "Weapons are not fragile, they last for quite some time and will keep on killing as long as there's ammunition and people to fire them."
  Smyth points to photos on social media sites linked to the Iranian military showing "martyred" Shiite fighters toting U.S.-made M-16s and M-4s fitted with laser and holographic sights and M-203 grenade launchers.
  Based on more than 30 online forums and 100 Facebook pages, Smyth has found images of U.S. and Belgian weapons in the hands of members of various Iran-backed militias. Liwa'a abu Fadl al-Abbas uses Iraqi, Lebanese and Afghan fighters. Liwa'a Zulfiqar uses Iraqi fighters who prefer working with Iraqi and Shiite commanders, under the leadership of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps rather than Syrian leadership, Smyth said.
  Similar weapons appear in the hands of rebel fighters, including fighters with al-Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate the State Department has designated a terrorist group, in videos and photos from the civil war. This year, Eliot Higgins, a British military analyst, discovered video footage and photos posted to jihadi social media sites showing that al-Nusra had weapons purchased with Saudi money in Croatia and transferred to Syrian rebels through Jordan.
  "This operation was run with full U.S. knowledge, and the arms were only meant to go to the FSA," Higgins said, referring to the secular-leaning Free Syrian Army that U.S. officials prefer to deal with. "After a couple of months, they began to appear in the hands of groups like Ahrar al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra, showing they had spread beyond the FSA."
  Harmer said there's a propaganda aspect to everything Iran does, and the images probably have a dual purpose, for both domestic and Western consumption.
  "They're heavily involved through state-owned media and attempting to influence Shiite groups throughout the Middle East," Harmer said. "It's absolutely plausible Iran is purposely highlighting U.S. weapons in their hands."
  Their goal is to show the world that Iranian-backed Shiite militiamen have a much higher degree of training and professionalism, and they're using Western tools to keep Assad in power, Smyth said.
  Many of the most recent martyrdom photos resulted from fighting in Qusair, a strategic town on the border with Lebanon that regime forces retook after a three-week battle joined by fighters from Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese Shiite militia.
  One of the photos shows Jusoor Muhammed Isma'il, a Lebanese Hezbollah fighter, whose death was announced May 24. In the photo, Isma'il stands in a clearing in the woods by a rudimentary camp stove. Slung from his shoulders is an M-4 fitted with what looks like an EOTech targeting sight and an M-203 grenade launcher.
  EOTech is an American company that sells holographic accessories to the military and civilians that help shooters aim in a hurry. Pentagon contract documents show the company sold $25 million worth of its sites to the U.S. Special Operations Command in May 2010.
  In other images, Shiite militia fighters wear camouflage fatigues and tactical gear, including body armor, kneepads, gloves and elbow pads, much like U.S. troops wore to battle in Iraq. In one post, Hezbollah fighters gloated about using netting on their helmets to aid in camouflage, like Israeli forces do. "We're fighting the Zionists with their own tools," the author wrote.
Jacob Applebaum-Interview with Whistleblower Edward Snowden on Global Spying - SPIEGEL ONLINE
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:12
  Shortly before he became a household name around the world as a whistleblower, Edward Snowden answered a comprehensive list of questions. They originated from Jacob Appelbaum, 30, a developer of encryption and security software. Appelbaum provides training to international human rights groups and journalists on how to use the Internet anonymously.
  Appelbaum first became more broadly known to the public after he spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at a hacker conference in New York in 2010. Together with Assange and other co-authors, Appelbaum recently released a compilation of interviews in book form under the title "Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet."
  Appelbaum wound up on the radar of American authorities in the course of their investigation into the WikiLeaks revelations. They have since served legal orders to Twitter, Google and Sonic to hand over information about his accounts. But Appelbaum describes his relationship with WikiLeaks as being "ambiguous," and explains here how he was able to pose questions to Snowden.
  "In mid-May, documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras contacted me," Appelbaum said. "She told me she was in contact with a possible anonymous National Security Agency (NSA) source who had agreed to be interviewed by her."
  "She was in the process of putting questions together and thought that asking some specific technical questions was an important part of the source verification process. One of the goals was to determine whether we were really dealing with an NSA whistleblower. I had deep concerns of COINTELPRO-style entrapment. We sent our securely encrypted questions to our source. I had no knowledge of Edward Snowden's identity before he was revealed to the world in Hong Kong. He also didn't know who I was. I expected that when the anonymity was removed, we would find a man in his sixties."
  "The following questions are excerpted from a larger interview that covered numerous topics, many of which are highly technical in nature. Some of the questions have been reordered to provide the required context. The questions focus almost entirely on the NSA's capabilities and activities. It is critical to understand that these questions were not asked in a context that is reactive to this week's or even this month's events. They were asked in a relatively quiet period, when Snowden was likely enjoying his last moments in a Hawaiian paradise -- a paradise he abandoned so that every person on the planet might come to understand the current situation as he does.""At a later point, I also had direct contact with Edward Snowden in which I revealed my own identity. At that time, he expressed his willingness to have his feelings and observations on these topics published when I thought the time was right."
  Editor's note: The following excerpts are taken from the original English-language version of the interview. Potential differences in language between the German and English versions can be explained by the fact that we have largely preserved the technical terms used by Snowden in this transcript. Explanations for some of the terminology used by Snowden as well as editor's notes are provided in the form of footnotes.Interviewer: What is the mission of America's National Security Agency (NSA) -- and how is the job it does compatible with the rule of law?
  Snowden: They're tasked to know everything of importance that happens outside of the United States. That's a significant challenge. When it is made to appear as though not knowing everything about everyone is an existential crisis, then you feel that bending the rules is okay. Once people hate you for bending those rules, breaking them becomes a matter of survival.
  Interviewer: Are German authorities or German politicians involved in the NSA surveillance system?
  Snowden: Yes, of course. We're1 in bed together with the Germans the same as with most other Western countries. For example, we2 tip them off when someone we want is flying through their airports (that we for example, have learned from the cell phone of a suspected hacker's girlfriend in a totally unrelated third country -- and they hand them over to us. They3 don't ask to justify how we know something, and vice versa, to insulate their political leaders from the backlash of knowing how grievously they're violating global privacy.
  Interviewer: But if details about this system are now exposed, who will be charged?
  Snowden: In front of US courts? I'm not sure if you're serious. An investigation found the specific people who authorized the warrantless wiretapping of millions and millions of communications, which per count would have resulted in the longest sentences in world history, and our highest official simply demanded the investigation be halted. Who "can" be brought up on charges is immaterial when the rule of law is not respected. Laws are meant for you, not for them.
  Interviewer: Does the NSA partner with other nations, like Israel?
  Snowden: Yes. All the time. The NSA has a massive body responsible for this: FAD, the Foreign Affairs Directorate.
  Interviewer: Did the NSA help to create Stuxnet? (Stuxnet is the computer worm that was deployed against the Iranian nuclear program.)
  Snowden: NSA and Israel co-wrote it.
  Interviewer: What are some of the big surveillance programs that are active today and how do international partners aid the NSA?
  Snowden: In some cases, the so-called Five Eye Partners4 go beyond what NSA itself does. For instance, the UK's General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) has a system called TEMPORA. TEMPORA is the signals intelligence community's first "full-take" Internet buffer that doesn't care about content type and pays only marginal attention to the Human Rights Act. It snarfs everything, in a rolling buffer to allow retroactive investigation without missing a single bit. Right now the buffer can hold three days of traffic, but that's being improved. Three days may not sound like much, but remember that that's not metadata. "Full-take" means it doesn't miss anything, and ingests the entirety of each circuit's capacity. If you send a single ICMP packet5 and it routes through the UK, we get it. If you download something and the CDN (Content Delivery Network) happens to serve from the UK, we get it. If your sick daughter's medical records get processed at a London call center '... well, you get the idea.
  Interviewer: Is there a way of circumventing that?
  Snowden: As a general rule, so long as you have any choice at all, you should never route through or peer with the UK under any circumstances. Their fibers are radioactive, and even the Queen's selfies to the pool boy get logged.
  Interviewer: Do the NSA and its partners across the globe do full dragnet data collection for telephone calls, text and data?
  Snowden: Yes, but how much they get depends on the capabilities of the individual collection sites -- i.e., some circuits have fat pipes but tiny collection systems, so they have to be selective. This is more of a problem for overseas collection sites than domestic6 ones, which is what makes domestic collection so terrifying. NSA isn't limited by power, space and cooling PSC constraints.
  (C) SPIEGEL ONLINE 2013All Rights ReservedReproduction only allowed with the permission of SPIEGELnet GmbH
Jacob Applebaum-Snowden confirms NSA created Stuxnet with Israeli aid '-- RT News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:09
  The Stuxnet virus that decimated Iranian nuclear facilities was created by the NSA and co-written by Israel, Edward Snowden has confirmed. The whistleblower added the NSA has a web of foreign partners who pay ''marginal attention to human rights.''
  In an interview with Jacob Applebaum published in German daily Der Spiegel on Monday, Snowden stated that the US and Israel were behind the computer worm. Stuxnet infiltrated Iranian nuclear facility networks in 2009-2010 and was used to change the speed of thousands of gas-spinning centrifuges, sabotaging nuclear research.
  Washington and Tel Aviv were thought to have been behind the cyber-attack, however, this was never confirmed by either government.
  ''The NSA and Israel wrote Stuxnet together,'' Snowden told Applebaum in the interview that was carried out in May.
  Snowden stressed that the National Security Agency (NSA) often cooperates with foreign partners through a special body known as the Foreign Affairs Directorate (FAD). Referring to Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, also known as the 'Five Eye Partners,' he said their practices often go further than those of the NSA.
  In particular he flagged the system used by the UK's General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), TEMPORA as one of the worst offenders.
  ''TEMPORA is the signals intelligence community's first 'full-take' internet buffer that doesn't care about content type and pays only marginal attention to the Human Rights Act,'' said Snowden.
  The UK buffer is able to hold a vast quantity of internet data for up to three days, said the whistleblower.
  ''You should never send information over British lines or British servers. Even the Queen's 'selfies' with her lifeguards would be recorded, if they existed.''
  While Snowden conceded that monitoring abroad had its limits and the NSA has to prioritize the information it collects, he stressed that monitoring on its own territory was ''practically limitless.''
  Private enterprise is also involved in the NSA's mass collating of internet data, but proving their complicity is very difficult.
  ''The names of the cooperating telecom companies are the crown jewels of the NSA... Generally you can say that multinationals with headquarters in the USA should not be trusted until they prove otherwise,'' Snowden pointed out.
  When asked about how one could avoid falling into the traps of NSA surveillance, Snowden said anyone who had been targeted ''was just owned.'' The analyst charged with following an individual receives a report every day, meaning the ''target's machine doesn't belong to them anymore, it belongs to the US government.''
  Snowden's interviewer, 30-year-old Jacob Applebaum, has also fallen foul of US law enforcement in the past. Applebaum co-wrote a book with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange detailing tips on how to evade cyber-surveillance while surfing the web.
  The book called 'Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet', was also co-written by Jeremie Zimmermann and Andy Muller-Maguhn. Assange invited his co-authors on to the Julian Assange show, which aired on RT last year in March, to discuss cyber resistance.
  ''Two of them, besides myself, have been targeted by law enforcement agencies as a result of their work to safeguard privacy and to keep governments accountable. Their words, and their stories, need to be heard,'' Assange told the New York Times.
  The members of the Cypherpunks movement shared their stories with Julian Assange whilst sitting down to discuss the problems of privacy, online communication and freedom on the internet.
  US citizen Edward Snowden is believed to be eluding an extradition order to the US on charges of espionage in the transit zone of Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport. Snowden has sent a number of applications for political asylum. Thus far Venezuela and Nicaragua have confirmed receipt of the applications, but are yet to grant asylum. However, Snowden is still unable to travel as his passport has been voided by the US authorities.
Why Did The Obama Administration ''Organize And Manage'' Protests Against George Zimmerman? | InvestmentWatch
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:08
  July 10th, 2013
  by Michael Snyder
  Is the Obama administration at least partially responsible for turning the George Zimmerman trial into such a huge national spectacle? Judicial Watch has obtained documents which prove that the Community Relations Service, a division of the Department of Justice, was sent to Sanford, Florida in late March 2012 ''to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman''. This included spending quite a bit of money, arranging meetings between the NAACP and local leaders, and providing police escorts for protesters. Someone needs to ask Obama why the federal government was doing this. A story that should have never made national headlines now threatens to unleash a firestorm of racial fury unlike anything we have seen since the Rodney King verdict. One young man, a neighborhood watch captain, shot and killed another young man. This kind of thing happens in American cities every single night. George Zimmerman says that he did it in self-defense. He should be allowed to have his day in court and that should be the end of the matter. But instead, this thing has been hyped into a massive national spectacle and it is being used to divide us along racial lines. And it appears that we have clear evidence that the Obama administration was involved in doing the hyping.
  The documents that Judicial Watch was able to obtain contain some absolutely startling information. Apparently the role of the Obama administration in these protests was quite substantial'...
  *****
  JW filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the DOJ on April 24, 2012; 125 pages were received on May 30, 2012. JW administratively appealed the request on June 5, 2012, and received 222 pages more on March 6, 2013. According to the documents:
  March 25 '' 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being ''deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.''March 25 '' 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 ''in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.March 30 '' April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL ''to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.''March 30 '' April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL ''to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.''April 3 '' 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL ''to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.''April 11 '' 12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL ''to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.''*****
  But the involvement of the Department of Justice went far beyond just spending money and helping to organize and manage the protests.
  Apparently, the Department of Justice was involved in setting up meetings between the NAACP and local officials, and the Department of Justice even arranged police escorts for protesters'...
  On April 15, 2012, during the height of the protests, the Orlando Sentinel reported, ''They [the CRS] helped set up a meeting between the local NAACP and elected officials that led to the temporary resignation of police Chief Bill Lee according to Turner Clayton, Seminole County chapter president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.'' The paper quoted the Rev. Valarie Houston, pastor of Allen Chapel AME Church, a focal point for protestors, as saying ''They were there for us,'' after a March 20 meeting with CRS agents.
  Separately, in response to a Florida Sunshine Law request to the City of Sanford, Judicial Watch also obtained an audio recording of a ''community meeting'' held at Second Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford on April 19, 2012. The meeting, which led to the ouster of Sanford's Police Chief Bill Lee, was scheduled after a group of college students calling themselves the ''Dream Defenders'' barricaded the entrance to the police department demanding Lee be fired. According to the Orlando Sentinel, DOJ employees with the CRS had arranged a 40-mile police escort for the students from Daytona Beach to Sanford.
  Under what conditions is it ever acceptable for the federal government to arrange police escorts for protesters?
  And why did the Obama administration want to help them?
  What was the goal?
  As a result of all of the hype that this case has been given, we now have more racial tension in the United States than we have had in a very, very long time.
  And it is becoming apparent to everyone what could potentially happen if George Zimmerman is acquitted. In fact, law enforcement officials are so concerned about violence in the aftermath of the verdict that they have released a video encouraging young people not to commit violent acts'...
  On Monday, the Broward County Sheriff's Office released a video calling on the public not to riot in the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict, expected this week or next in Florida. The Sheriff's Office released a statement explaining that it was ''working closely with the Sanford Police Department and other local law enforcement agencies'' to coordinate ''a response plan in anticipation of the verdict.''
  The video, titled ''Raise Your Voice, Not Your Hands,'' focuses on attempting to channel reaction into non-violent response. It depicts two youngsters, one black teenage boy, one Hispanic teenage girl. ''Raise your voice!'' says the girl. ''And not your hands!'' says the boy. ''We need to stand together as one, no cuffs, no guns,'' says the girl. ''Let's give violence a rest, because we can easily end up arrested,'' says the boy. ''I know your patience will be tested,'' says the girl, and then both conclude, ''but law enforcement has your back!''
  This never should have happened.
  This case should never have been hyped like this.
  Instead of being encouraged to look at each other as individuals and fellow American citizens, our politicians and the media continue to hype racial division and strife.
  Are we ever going to learn how to love one another?
  Did you already share this? No? Share it now:
  It only takes a few moments to share an article, but the person on the other end that reads it might have their life changed forever
  Contact Information:Submit: articles [ at ] investmentwatchblog.com Advertising: ads [ at ] investmentwatchblog.com General: admin [ at ] investmentwatchblog.comSUBMIT YOUR NEWS TIPS OR ARTICLE
There's Alien Gas Flowing Through New York City's Subways.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT news feed
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:04
  No need to fear, though: it's an experiment to see exactly how gases are dispersed through the hundreds of miles of New York City subway tunnels.
  2nd Avenue Subway Station, Sans GasDan Nosowitz
  Starting today, New York City authorities will be releasing perfluorocarbon gas into several subway stops, some above and some below ground. Sounds scary, but isn't: perfluorocarbon is a harmless gas, odorless and colorless, and it's being used in the largest airflow experiment ever undertaken.
  Perfluorocarbon tracers, or PFTs, are used because they're artificial and do not occur in nature, so a very small amount can be detected fairly easily. The work of detection will be done by a large team from three national labs: the Brookhaven, Argonne, and Los Alamos National Laboratories. About 100 interns in addition to professionals from the labs will be constructing and monitoring small black-and-grey boxes in dozens of locations all around the city, all dedicated to checking the air for these tracers.
  Those locations aren't merely in the subway; the thing about New York's extensive, massively complex subway system is that it's the quickest way for airborne contaminants to race through (nearly) all portions of the five boroughs. So these testing boxes will be installed on subway platforms, sure, but also on telephone poles above ground.
  The experiment is only the latest in a series of airflow experiments in the New York City subways. The New York Times claimed that a clandestine test was carried out in the 1960s by smashing a "bulb" of similar tracer gas in the subways to see if the city was prepared for such an attack. (It wasn't. An engineer involved in that test said a rush hour attack of that sort would "put New York out of commission.")
  But this time, the test is anything but clandestine. The city released details of the experiment to the press, and each box has a phone number and a website that will provide information to anyone who is (reasonably, to be fair) a little alarmed about strange boxes that have something to do with strange gases flowing through the subway tunnels.
  The study is funded, at a cost of $3.4 million, by a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, and today's is the first of three non-consecutive tests that will be done between now and July 28th.
  [via NYTimes]
Data Brokers Are Now Selling Your Car's Location For $10 Online - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 02:03
  Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New PostsMost PopularWatch Out Wal-Mart?ListsMost Powerful CelebritiesVideoCountry Cash KingsFREE Report: 12 Stocks to Sell NowHelp|Connect
  |Sign up|Log in
VIDEO-Boston Marathon Bombing SUSPECT Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Pleads NOT GUILT ON ALL COUNTS - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:58
Boston Marathon Bombing SUSPECT Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Pleads NOT GUILT ON ALL COUNTS
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:40
Poll shows ''Massive Swing'' In Public View Of Terror/Liberty Trade Off
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dprogram.net
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:36
  Majority of Americans see Snowden as hero, despite relentless government and media attacks
  (SteveWatson) '' A new scientific poll out this week finds that former NSA leaker Edward Snowden is viewed by the majority of Americans in a positive light as a whistleblower, and not a ''traitor'', as the mainstream media and government officials would have it.
  The poll from Quinnipiac, also reveals that a plurality of registered voters believe that government anti-terrorism programs have gone too far in stripping away liberties.
  When given the two options, 55% of poll respondents said that they believed Snowden to be a ''whistleblower'', while only 34% see him as a ''traitor.''
  The terms were used as an acknowledgement of the media talking point that has been repeated again and again since Snowden fled the US to Moscow, from where he is still seeking political asylum.
  The poll found that the description of Snowden as a whistle-blower and not a traitor was the majority opinion in practically every demographic of voter, regardless of party, gender, income, education or age.
  Only amongst black voters did more people say they thought Snowden to be a traitor, with the margin at 43% to 42%.
  ''The verdict that Snowden is not a traitor goes against almost the unified view of the nation's political establishment,'' commented Peter Brown, assistant director of Quinnipiac's polling institute.
  Several elected officials, including House Speaker John Boehner, have referred to Snowden as a traitor, and have called for him to be given the harshest possible punishment.
  The findings have bolstered the results of similarpolls undertaken when the news first broke last month in early June, and underscore the fact that people no longer believe the idea that exposing government surveillance of Americans makes the country less safe.
  Perhaps the more telling revelation from the poll is the fact that by a 45-40% margin, voters now believe that the government goes too far in restricting civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism efforts.
  Those figures represent a monumental reversal from just over three years ago when the public told Quinnipiac by a 63-25 margin that the government didn't go far enough.
  ''The massive swing in public opinion about civil liberties and governmental anti-terrorism efforts, and the public view that Edward Snowden is more whistle-blower than traitor are the public reaction and apparent shock at the extent to which the government has gone in trying to prevent future terrorist incidents,'' said Peter Brown.
  Put simply, Americans are no longer buying the idea that the threat of terrorism warrants their own government spying on them en mass. Neither do they believe that it is right to punish and demonize anyone who speaks out about it, just as an authoritarian regime would.
  The poll also revealed that both Democrats and Republicans were evenly divided on whether government counter-terrorism measures have become excessive. By a margin of 49 percent to 36 percent, independent voters said the government has taken things too far.
  ''The fact that there is little difference now along party lines about the overall anti-terrorism effort and civil liberties and about Snowden is in itself unusual in a country sharply divided along political lines about almost everything,'' Brown said.
  ''It would be naive to see these numbers as anything but evidence of a rethinking by the public about the tradeoffs between security and freedom,'' Brown added.
  In related news, Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who broke the Snowden leaks has revealed that Snowden has this week ''vehemently denied media claims that he gave classified information to the governments of China or Russia.''
  '' He also denied assertions that one or both governments had succeeded in 'draining the contents of his laptops'. 'I never gave any information to either government, and they never took anything from my laptops,' he said.''
  Greenwald explains how the claim was generated in the media without a shred of evidence, and subsequently spread everywhere as ''truth'', being repeatedly cited in an effort to demonize Snowden.
  Source: Infowars
Linchpin for Obama's plan to predict future leakers unproven, isn't likely to work, experts say | McClatchy
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:35
  WASHINGTON '-- In an initiative aimed at rooting out future leakers and other security violators, President Barack Obama has ordered federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues based on behavioral profiling techniques that are not scientifically proven to work, according to experts and government documents.
  The techniques are a key pillar of the Insider Threat Program, an unprecedented government-wide crackdown under which millions of federal bureaucrats and contractors must watch out for ''high-risk persons or behaviors'' among co-workers. Those who fail to report them could face penalties, including criminal charges.
  Obama mandated the program in an October 2011 executive order after Army Pfc. Bradley Manning downloaded hundreds of thousands of documents from a classified computer network and gave them to WikiLeaks, the anti-government secrecy group. The order covers virtually every federal department and agency, including the Peace Corps, the Department of Education and others not directly involved in national security.
  Under the program, which is being implemented with little public attention, security investigations can be launched when government employees showing ''indicators of insider threat behavior'' are reported by co-workers, according to previously undisclosed administration documents obtained by McClatchy. Investigations also can be triggered when ''suspicious user behavior'' is detected by computer network monitoring and reported to ''insider threat personnel.''
  Federal employees and contractors are asked to pay particular attention to the lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors '' like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel '' of co-workers as a way to predict whether they might do ''harm to the United States.'' Managers of special insider threat offices will have ''regular, timely, and, if possible, electronic, access'' to employees' personnel, payroll, disciplinary and ''personal contact'' files, as well as records of their use of classified and unclassified computer networks, polygraph results, travel reports and financial disclosure forms.
  Over the years, numerous studies of public and private workers who've been caught spying, leaking classified information, stealing corporate secrets or engaging in sabotage have identified psychological profiles that could offer clues to possible threats. Administration officials want government workers trained to look for such indicators and report them so the next violation can be stopped before it happens.
  TSA officers watch for suspicious behavior at airports (Carey Wagner/Sun Sentinel/MCT)''In past espionage cases, we find people saw things that may have helped identify a spy, but never reported it,'' said Gene Barlow, a spokesman for the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive, which oversees government efforts to detect threats like spies and computer hackers and is helping implement the Insider Threat Program. ''That is why the awareness effort of the program is to teach people not only what types of activity to report, but how to report it and why it is so important to report it.''
  But even the government's top scientific advisers have questioned these techniques. Those experts say that trying to predict future acts through behavioral monitoring is unproven and could result in illegal ethnic and racial profiling and privacy violations.
  ''There is no consensus in the relevant scientific community nor on the committee regarding whether any behavioral surveillance or physiological monitoring techniques are ready for use at all,'' concluded a 2008 National Research Council report on detecting terrorists.
  ''Doing something similar about predicting future leakers seems even more speculative,'' Stephen Fienberg, a professor of statistics and social science at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and a member of the committee that wrote the report, told McClatchy.
  The emphasis on individual lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors comes at a time when growing numbers of Americans must submit to extensive background checks, polygraph tests and security investigations to be hired or to keep government or federal contracting jobs. The U.S. government is one of the world's largest employers, overseeing an ever-expanding ocean of information.
  While the Insider Threat Program mandates that the nearly 5 million federal workers and contractors with clearances undergo training in recognizing suspicious behavior indicators, it allows individual departments and agencies to extend the requirement to their entire workforces, something the Army already has done.
  Training should address ''current and potential threats in the work and personal environment'' and focus on ''the importance of detecting potential insider threats by cleared employees and reporting suspected activity to insider threat personnel and other designated officials,'' says one of the documents obtained by McClatchy.
  The White House, the Justice Department, the Peace Corps and the departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and Education refused to answer questions about the program's implementation. Instead, they issued virtually identical email statements directing inquiries to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, declined to comment or didn't respond.
  Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said in her statement that the Insider Threat Program includes extra safeguards for ''civil rights, civil liberties and privacy,'' but she didn't elaborate. Manning's leaks to WikiLeaks, she added, showed that at the time protections of classified materials were ''inadequate and put our nation's security at risk.''
  Reply from the National Security Council
  Even so, the new effort failed to prevent former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden from taking top-secret documents detailing the agency's domestic and international communications monitoring programs and leaking them to The Guardian and The Washington Post newspapers.
  The initiative goes beyond classified information leaks. It includes as insider threats ''damage to the United States through espionage, terrorism, unauthorized disclosure of national security information or through the loss or degradation of departmental resources or capabilities,'' according to a document setting ''Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs.''
  McClatchy obtained a copy of the document, which was produced by an Insider Threat Task Force that was set up under Obama's order and is headed by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Attorney General Eric Holder. McClatchy also obtained the group's final policy guidance. The White House, the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined requests for both documents, neither of which is classified.
  Although agencies and departments are still setting up their programs, some employees already are being urged to watch co-workers for ''indicators'' that include stress, divorce and financial problems.
  When asked about the ineffectiveness of behavior profiling, Barlow said the policy ''does not mandate'' that employees report behavior indicators.
  ''It simply educates employees about basic activities or behavior that might suggest a person is up to improper activity,'' he said.
  ''These do not require special talents. If you see someone reading classified documents they should not be reading, especially if this happens multiple times and the person appears nervous that you saw him, that is activity that is suspicious and should be reported,'' Barlow said. ''The insider threat team then looks at the surrounding facts and draws the conclusions about the activity.''
  Departments and agencies, however, are given leeway to go beyond the White House's basic requirements, prompting the Defense Department in its strategy to mandate that workers with clearances ''must recognize the potential harm caused by unauthorized disclosures and be aware of the penalties they could face.'' It equates unauthorized disclosures of classified information to ''aiding the enemies of the United States.''
  All departments and agencies involved in the program must closely track their employees' online activities. The information gathered by monitoring, the administration documents say, ''could be used against them in criminal, security, or administrative proceedings.'' Experts who research such efforts say suspicious behaviors include accessing information that someone doesn't need or isn't authorized to see or downloading materials onto removable storage devices like thumb drives when such devices are restricted or prohibited.
  ''If you normally print 20 documents a week, well, what happens if the next week or the following week you have to print 50 documents or 100 documents? That could be at variance from your normal activity that could be identified and might be investigated,'' said Randy Trzeciak, acting manager of the Computer Emergency Response Team Insider Threat Center at Carnegie Mellon University's Software Engineering Institute.
  ''We've come up with patterns that we believe organizations might be able to consider when determining when someone might be progressing down the path to harm the organization,'' said Trzeciak, whose organization has analyzed more than 800 cases and works with the government and private sector on cyber security.
  But research and other programs that rely on profiling show it remains unproven, could make employees more resistant to reporting violations and might lead to spurious allegations.
  The Pentagon, U.S. intelligence agencies and the Department of Homeland Security have spent tens of millions of dollars on an array of research projects. Yet after several decades, they still haven't developed a list of behaviors they can use to definitively identify the tiny fraction of workers who might some day violate national security laws.
  ''We are back to the needle-in-a-haystack problem,'' said Fienberg, the Carnegie Mellon professor.
  ''We have not found any silver bullets,'' said Deanna Caputo, principal behavioral psychologist at MITRE Corp., a nonprofit company working on insider threat efforts for U.S. defense, intelligence and law enforcement agencies. ''We don't have actually any really good profiles or pictures of a bad guy, a good guy gone bad or even the bad guy walking in to do bad things from the very beginning.''
  Different agencies and departments have different lists of behavior indicators. Most have adopted the traditional red flags for espionage. They include financial stress, disregard for security practices, unexplained foreign travel, unusual work hours and unexplained or sudden wealth.
  But agencies and their consultants have added their own indicators.
  For instance, an FBI insider threat detection guide warns private security personnel and managers to watch for ''a desire to help the 'underdog' or a particular cause,'' a ''James Bond Wannabe'' and a ''divided loyalty: allegiance to another person or company or to a country besides the United States.''
  A report by the Deloitte consulting firm identifies ''several key trends that are making all organizations particularly susceptible to insider threat today.'' These trends include an increasingly disgruntled, post-Great Recession workforce and the entry of younger, ''Gen Y'' employees who were ''raised on the Internet'' and are ''highly involved in social networking.''
  Report from Deloitte
  Some government programs that have embraced behavioral indicators have been condemned as failures. Perhaps the most heavily criticized is the Transportation Security Administration's Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT, program.
  The program, which has cost $878 million and employs 2,800 people, uses ''behavior detection officers'' to identify potential terrorists by scrutinizing airline passengers for signs of ''stress, fear or deception.''
  DHS' inspector general excoriated the program, saying in a May 2013 report, ''TSA cannot ensure that passengers at United States airports are screened objectively, show that the program is cost-effective or reasonably justify the program's expansion.''
  Interviews and internal complaints obtained by The New York Times quoted TSA officers as saying SPOT has led to ethnic and racial profiling by emphasizing certain profiles. They include Middle Easterners, Hispanics traveling to Miami and African-Americans wearing baseball caps backward.
  Another problem with having employees report co-workers' suspicious behaviors: They aren't sure which ones represent security threats.
  ''Employees in the field are not averse to reporting genuine security infractions. In fact, under appropriate conditions they are quite willing to act as eyes and ears for the government,'' said a 2005 study by the Pentagon's Defense Personnel Security Research Center. ''They are simply confused about precisely what is important enough to report. Many government workers anguish over reporting gray-area behaviors.''
  Even so, the Pentagon is forging ahead with training Defense Department and contractor managers and security officials to set up insider threat offices, with one company emphasizing how its course is designed for novices.
  ''The Establishing an Insider Threat Program for Your Organization Course will take no more than 90 minutes to complete,'' says the proposal.
  Officials with the Army, the only government department contacted by McClatchy that agreed to discuss the issue, acknowledged that identifying potential insider threats is more complicated than relying on a list of behaviors.
  Response from the Army
  ''What we really point out is if you're in doubt, report, because that's what the investigative personnel are there to do, is to get the bottom of 'is this just noise or is this something that is really going on?''' said Larry Gillis, a senior Army counterintelligence and security official.
  The Army implemented a tough program a year before Obama's executive order after Maj. Nidal Hasan, a U.S.-born Muslim, allegedly killed 13 people in a 2009 rampage at Fort Hood, Texas. Hasan, who has not gone on trial, has said he was defending the Afghan Taliban.
  Gillis said the Army didn't want a program that would ''get people to snitch on each other,'' nor did it want to encourage stereotyping.
  ''We don't have the luxury to make up reasons to throw soldiers out,'' Gillis said. ''It's a big deal to remove a soldier from service over some minor issue. We don't want to ruin a career over some false accusation.''
  But some current and former U.S. officials and experts worry that Obama's Insider Threat Program could lead to false or retaliatory accusations across the entire government, in part because security officials are granted access to information outside their usual purview.
  These current and former U.S. officials and experts also ridiculed as overly zealous and simplistic the idea of using reports of suspicious behavior to predict potential insider threats. It takes years for professional spy-hunters to learn their craft, and relying on the observations of inexperienced people could lead to baseless and discriminatory investigations, they said.
  ''Anyone is an amateur looking at behavior here,'' said Thomas Fingar, a former State Department intelligence chief who chaired the National Intelligence Council, which prepares top-secret intelligence analyses for the president, from 2005 to 2008.
  Co-workers, Fingar said, should ''be attentive'' to colleagues' personal problems in order to refer them to counseling, not to report them as potential security violators. ''It's simply because they are colleagues, fellow human beings,'' he said.
  Eric Feldman, a former inspector general of the National Reconnaissance Office, the super-secret agency that oversees U.S. spy satellites, expressed concern that relying on workers to report colleagues' suspicious behaviors to security officials could create ''a repressive kind of culture.''
  ''The answer to it is not to have a Stasi-like response,'' said Feldman, referring to the feared secret police of communist East Germany. ''You've removed that firewall between employees seeking help and the threat that any employee who seeks help could be immediately retaliated against by this insider threat office.''
  CORRECTION: A story about the Obama administration's Insider Threat Program gave the wrong name and title for Deanna Caputo, the principal behavioral psychologist at MITRE Corp.
Obama's Insider Threat Program Resembles Nazi Gestapo | Dprogram.net
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:35
  SS propaganda poster of the Day of the German police (1941). Wikimedia Commons
  (KurtNimmo) '' The techniques employed by Obama's Insider Threat Program are reminiscent of those used by the Gestapo in Nazi Germany. Unlike the Nazis, however, Obama's effort '' the result of an unconstitutional executive order issued in October, 2011 '' is limited, for now, to federal government employees.
  From McClatchy:
  The techniques are a key pillar of the Insider Threat Program, an unprecedented government-wide crackdown under which millions of federal bureaucrats and contractors must watch out for ''high-risk persons or behaviors'' among co-workers. Those who fail to report them could face penalties, including criminal charges.
  ('...)
  Under the program, which is being implemented with little public attention, security investigations can be launched when government employees showing ''indicators of insider threat behavior'' are reported by co-workers, according to previously undisclosed administration documents obtained by McClatchy. Investigations also can be triggered when ''suspicious user behavior'' is detected by computer network monitoring and reported to ''insider threat personnel.''
  Federal employees and contractors are asked to pay particular attention to the lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors '' like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel '' of co-workers as a way to predict whether they might do ''harm to the United States.'' Managers of special insider threat offices will have ''regular, timely, and, if possible, electronic, access'' to employees' personnel, payroll, disciplinary and ''personal contact'' files, as well as records of their use of classified and unclassified computer networks, polygraph results, travel reports and financial disclosure forms.
  The effort is not limited to preventing whistleblowers like Edward Snowden. ''The initiative goes beyond classified information leaks,'' McClatchy explains. ''It includes as insider threats 'damage to the United States through espionage, terrorism, unauthorized disclosure of national security information or through the loss or degradation of departmental resources or capabilities,' according to a document setting 'Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs.'''
  In his book, The Third Reich in Power, Richard J. Evans describes a similar pattern in Nazi Germany. The Gestapo, the official secret police of Germany in the 1930s and all of occupied Europe during the Second World War, relied on a large network of informers comprised largely of average citizens. The end result of the Gestapo's panopticism '' as described by Canadian historian Robert Gellately '' was the creation of widespread fear and the belief that the state was all-seeing, an attribute fictionalized by George Orwell in his seminal novel, Nineteen Eighty Four.
  Critics will argue that Obama's effort is limited to the federal workforce and it does not threaten society at large. Developments since September 11, 2001, however, reveal that a Gestapo-like panopticism '' a social theory originally developed by French philosopher Michel Foucault in his book, Discipline and Punish '' is already at work in American society.
  Because of the Department of Homeland Security's ''see something, say something'' program and the TSA's intrusive and humiliating search techniques and revelations of the NSA's overarching electronic surveillance grid '' a high-tech electronic panopticon '-- it can be categorically stated that America is now a Stasi police state.
  Mission creep under the rubric of the so-called war on terror is now commonplace. The Department of Homeland security was established in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks to address the supposed threat Americans face from foreign terrorists.
  ''Over the last decade, the feds have established a number of efforts to nationalize law enforcement and create a number of organizations designed to supposedly 'protect the homeland' from not only terrorists '' most handled by the FBI and the CIA '' but all sorts of domestic criminals, including those who engage in victimless crimes such as drug use and prostitution,'' we reported last March.
  There are now dozens of organizations feeding off tax dollars dispensed by the feds '' from FEMA's Citizen Corps to Volunteers in Police Service and Infragard and beyond. In many ways, these federally-funded and organized groups rival the police state apparatus active in Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union.
  For example, the DHS now ''protects victims'' from ''domestic violence and other violent crimes'' that have nothing to do with the late CIA asset Osama bin Laden or the would-be nineteen hijackers who trained on U.S. military bases. The mega-bureaucracy now doles out money to everything from ''Juvenile Accountability'' to anti-counterfeiting, border security, and computer incident response.
  But it really shines when it comes to acting as a political surveillance tool for the establishment. It has successfully exploited the global jihad terror myth to spy on antiwar and patriot groups and recently the Occupy movement. So-called fusion centers '' centralized high-tech Orwellian snoop hubs '' now dot the landscape and feed data into the DHS leviathan.
  Obama's Insider Threat Program sets a precedent for similar action outside government. In fact, Infragard '' a public-private partnership between business and government (the very essence of fascism) '' serves as an apparatus that shares data with the government's intelligence network.
  The ACLU put it mildly when it said there ''is evidence that InfraGard may be closer to a corporate TIPS program, turning private-sector corporations '-- some of which may be in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual customers '-- into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI.''
  Source: Infowars
Apple Rigged Book Prices, Judge Rules
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:29
  Apple Rigged Book Prices, Judge RulesPosted on Jul 10, 2013When Apple decided to get into the e-book business, it joined a conspiracy with major publishers to raise book prices as much as 50 percent, a judge determined Wednesday.
  Apple says it will appeal and argues that, on the contrary, its entry into digital book-selling helped offer consumers greater choice in a market dominated by Amazon.
  Amazon, however, kept prices low, at $9.99 a book (ironically mirroring Apple's business model in the music business). Amazon could force publishers to keep prices low as long as it was the only viable market for their wares. When Apple launched the iBooks store, publishers simultaneously raised their prices.
  ''Apple is confronted with the fact that the conspiracy succeeded. It not only succeeded, it did so in record-setting time and at the precise moment that Apple entered the e-book market,'' said U.S. District Judge Denise Cote.
  Cote said comments from Apple's late CEO Steve Jobs, who said one day all book prices would be the same, helped lose the company the case.
  '--Posted by Peter Z. Scheer
  More Below the Ad
  New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
US to pay Spain 200 million to host missile shield
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: StratRisks
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:26
  Source: ElPais
  Spain and the US are expected to formalize an agreement in the coming weeks over the stationing of four destroyers at the naval base in Rota, Cdiz, for an initial period of over four years. The deal is worth 200 million euros to Spanish public company Navantia, which will be responsible for the maintenance of the four Arleigh Burke class vessels. The destroyers form part of the NATO missile defense shield and are equipped with Aegis combat systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.
  The first two ships, the Ross and the Donald Cook, are scheduled to arrive at the Rota base in 2014, with the Porter and the Carney to follow in 2015. The destroyers will come with 1,100 military personnel and their families, which represents a shot in the arm for the local economy in one of the provinces hardest hit by Spain's prolonged recession.
  Industry sources said that even more significant than the fiscal boon is the fact that the US has placed the upkeep of some of its most advanced military hardware in the hands of a Spanish company. ''If they are satisfied, there will be more contracts; if they are not, they will find the easiest way to avoid honoring the contract's duration,'' the sources said.
  To accommodate the US navy destroyers the existing wharfs at Rota have been extended and a new quay built, to avoid having to dislodge the Spanish navy vessels already based there. The deployment in Rota is the fourth element of the missile defense shield, which will also include radar and interceptor installations in Poland, Turkey and Romania.
  Tags: Arleigh Burke, defense, economy, military, missiles, NATO, Poland, radar, Romania, Spain, Turkey, us
Amy Goodman: This Year's Best-Kept Secret: The Next Generation of Community Radio - Truthdig
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:06
  This Year's Best-Kept Secret: The Next Generation of Community RadioPosted on Jul 10, 2013By Amy Goodman
  A microphone and a radio transmitter in the hands of a community organizer imparts power, which some liken to the life-changing impact when humans first tamed fire. That's why the prospect of 1,000 new community radio stations in the United States, for which the Federal Communications Commission will accept applications this October, is so vital and urgent.
  Workers toiling in the hot fields of south-central Florida, near the isolated town of Immokalee, were enduring conditions that U.S. Attorney Doug Molloy called ''slavery, plain and simple.'' Some worked from dawn to dusk, under the watch of armed guards, earning only $20 a week. Twenty years ago, they began organizing, forming the Coalition of Immokalee Workers. Ten years later, working with the Philadelphia-based nonprofit Prometheus Radio Project, the workers started their own radio station, Radio Consciencia, to serve the farmworker community and inform, mobilize and help the struggling workers forge better lives.
  As the largest media corporations on the planet have been consolidating during the past two decades, putting the power of the media in fewer hands, there has been a largely unreported flowering of small, local media outlets. An essential component of this sector is community radio, stations that have emerged from the Low-Power FM (LPFM) radio movement. This October, community groups in the U.S. will have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to apply to the FCC for an LPFM radio-station license. But the mainstream media are hardly reporting on this critical development.
  ''This is a historic opportunity for communities all over the country to have a voice over their airwaves,'' Jeff Rousset, national organizer of the Prometheus Radio Project, told me on the ''Democracy Now!'' news hour. ''The airwaves are supposed to belong to the public. This is a chance for groups to actually own and control their own media outlets.'' The Prometheus Radio Project formed in 1998. It was named after the Greek mythological hero who first gave fire to humans to make their lives more bearable.
  Back in the 1980s and '90s, ''pirate'' radio stations, unlicensed by the FCC, were launched in communities across the U.S. by people frustrated with the failures of the commercial and public media system, which was increasingly closed to the communities and seemingly beholden to corporate underwriters and interest groups. Harassed for their broadcasting efforts by federal agents, the pirates formed Prometheus, intent on changing the federal laws and opening the radio dial to a new generation of noncommercial, community-based stations. After 15 years of organizing, they won. Rousset said, ''We're going to turn static into sound and use that to amplify people's voices all over the country.''
  Across the U.S. from Immokalee, farmworkers in rural Woodburn, Ore., were fighting against oppressive conditions similar to the tomato and watermelon pickers in Florida. The largest Latino organization in Oregon, PCUN, Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (in English, the Northwest Treeplanters and Farmworkers United), founded an LPFM radio station, Radio Movimiento (Movement Radio). PCUN's president, Ramon Ramirez, explained: ''We've been able to use Radio Movimiento: La Voz del Pueblo ... not only to organize farmworkers, but also to provide information. ... For example, we're broadcasting in four indigenous languages from Mexico and Central America, and we're giving those folks a voice in the community that they never had.''When I was covering the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas, Mexico, in early 1994, I attended the first press conference held by the Zapatista military commanders, including Subcomandante Marcos and Comandante Ramona. They called it specifically for Mexican radio journalists. Radio, Marcos said, was the most accessible form of mass communication. Even the poorest village had at least one radio around which people could gather, he said.
  Social-media platforms like Twitter and Facebook have been rightly credited with supporting social movements like the Arab Spring in recent years. But the fact remains that most people in the U.S. receive their news from traditional sources, especially radio and television, more so in groups separated by the ''digital divide'''--the poor, immigrants and other marginalized communities.
  LPFM applications must be filed in October, and significant advanced planning is required by any applicant group that hopes to succeed. The Oregon workers knew nothing about radio. Prometheus recruited 300 media activists from around the world to help get them on the air with a radio ''barn raising'' where volunteers literally built the station from the ground up.
  The airwaves are a public treasure, and we have to take them back. The Prometheus Radio Project is waiting to hear from you.
  Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
  Amy Goodman is the host of ''Democracy Now!,'' a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 1,000 stations in North America. She is the co-author of ''The Silenced Majority,'' a New York Times best-seller.
  (C) 2013 Amy Goodman
  Distributed by King Features Syndicate
  New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
"Were You The Guy That Was Running From The Bomb Site?" (I Thought They Walked Calmly)
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 01:03
Scientists: H7N9 Avian Flu Has Pandemic Potential
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RIA Novosti
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:58
  MOSCOW, July 11 (RIA Novosti) - The H7N9 avian flu, responsible for dozens of deaths in China, has a potential to mutate into a strain that can easily pass from human to human, sparking a global pandemic, an international team of scientists said.
  The H7N9 strain infected 132 people in China, killing 43 of them as of July 10, according to a Xinhua statement quoting Chinese health authorities. A team of scientists of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Tokyo has thoroughly analyzed samples of the virus and published their findings in the Nature magazine on Wednesday.
  "H7N9 viruses have several features typically associated with human influenza viruses and therefore possess pandemic potential and need to be monitored closely," Yoshihiro Kawaoka, one of the world's leading experts on avian flu who headed the team, was quoted as saying by the Science Daily.
  The group found out that the virus is able to infect and replicate in several species of mammals, whose immune system is close to human, such as ferrets and monkeys. The study suggests that the ability of the H7N9 virus to infect and replicate in human cells may be due to just a few amino acid changes in the genetic sequence of the virus.
  They also established that approximately one third of ferrets became infected by droplet spread.
  "H7N9 viruses combine several features of pandemic influenza viruses, that is their ability to bind to and replicate in human cells and the ability to transmit via respiratory droplets," he said. "These two features are necessary, although not sufficient, to cause a pandemic."
  In monkeys, the virus could efficiently infect cells in both the upper and lower respiratory tract. Conventional human flu viruses are typically restricted to the upper airway of infected nonhuman primates.
  "If H7N9 viruses acquire the ability to transmit efficiently from person to person, a worldwide outbreak is almost certain since humans lack protective immune responses to these types of viruses," Kawaoka said.
  However, the study found that the H7N9 strains showed certain sensitivity to antiviral drugs effective against the conventional seasonal flu virus.
Knights of Malta celebrate 900th anniversary - Telegraph
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:45
  During its heyday, would-be members had to prove nobility through all eight great-grandparents. Now, such requirements are largely relaxed except in some European countries.
  Still, the order's members are drawn from some of the world's wealthiest Catholics, who fund its health clinics, homeless shelters and elderly people's homes in 120 countries and rally for special appeals when disasters strike.
  Sixty of the 13,500 members are 'professed knights' who make vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience and live like monks, albeit without being ordained priests.
  At one time Order's forces once occupied Cyprus, Rhodes, and Malta, but Napoleon expelled the order from Malta in 1798, depriving it of the final patch of land over which it ruled.
  Nevertheless, the order still enjoys many of the trappings of a small country: UN observer status and diplomatic relations with 104 countries, most of them in the developing world where such ties can smooth the delivery of humanitarian aide.
  But the US, for one, has no relations, precisely because it is a stateless state.
  Some 4,000 people, volunteers in neon orange civil protection suits, children in red berets and members draped in black cloaks with a white, eight-pointed Maltese Cross on the front, processed through St. Peter's Square and into the basilica for the Mass marking the 900th anniversary of the order's recognition by the Holy See.
  After the Mass, Pope Benedict came to the basilica for an audience during which he thanked the order for its service and urged it to continue providing health care for the world's neediest while staying true to its Christian ideals.
  But he acknowledged its peculiar nature, saying the order's guiding spirit "aims not to exercise power and influence of a worldly character, but in complete freedom to accomplish its own mission for the integral good of man, spirit and body ... with special regard for those whose need of hope and love is greater."
US diplomats cry foul as Obama donors take over top embassy jobs
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:16
  Barack Obama has rewarded some of his most active campaign donors with plum jobs in foreign embassies, with the average amount raised by recent or imminent appointees soaring to $1.8m per post, according to a Guardian analysis.
  The practice is hardly a new feature of US politics, but career diplomats in Washington are increasingly alarmed at how it has grown. One former ambassador described it as the selling of public office.
  On Tuesday, Obama's chief money-raiser Matthew Barzun became the latest major donor to be nominated as an ambassador, when the White House put him forward as the next representative to the Court of St James's, a sought-after posting whose plush residence comes with a garden second only in size to that of Buckingham Palace.
  As campaign finance chairman, Barzun helped raise $700m to fund President Obama's 2012 re-election campaign. More than $2.3m of this was raised personally by Barzun, pictured, according to party records leaked to the New York Times, even though he had only just finished a posting as ambassador to Sweden after contributing to Obama's first campaign.
  State Department veterans are increasingly concerned about the size of donations raised by political supporters who go on to take up top foreign postings. Thomas Pickering, who recently led the investigation into lethal attacks on the US embassy in Libya and represented the US at the United Nations, claimed the practice had become nothing more than "simony" '' the selling of public office.
  "All these people want to go to places where the lifestyle issues [are pleasant], and to some extent that produces this notion that life in these western European embassies is like Perle Mesta," he told the Guardian, referring to the "hostess with the mostest" who was ambassador to Luxembourg between 1949 and 1953 and who was known for her lavish parties.
  "It has the effect of diminishing perhaps the sense that the US is treating these countries with the respect they deserve," Pickering said.
  Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), which represents career US diplomats, added: "The giving of ambassadorships to people who have raised a lot of money for the campaign has increased and that's a concern to us in particular.
  "There was some thought that with Obama being such a 'change agent' that he might really do things differently '' but it has just been a bigger let down."
  Clutch of foreign appointmentsObama has made a clutch of foreign appointments recently. The 16th century Villa Taverna in Rome has just gone to John Phillips, a Washington lawyer who raised at least $500,000. John Emerson, a Los Angeles fund manger, will get to meet future contacts as ambassador to Germany after he raised $1.5m. Jane Stetson, heiress to the IBM fortune, is tipped as frontrunner for Paris after she raised $2.4m for Obama.
  In total, nine sought-after postings in Europe, the Caribbean or Asia have been given to major donors in recent weeks, with a further three in France, Switzerland and Hungary earmarked to come soon. Of these 12, the precise bundling data is available for 10. According to a Guardian analysis, using the figures leaked to the New York Times, the average amount raised by each donor is $1.79m.
  Official campaign finance records give only minimum figures for how much each donor raised among friends and family (a process known as bundling). Even using the published 'minimum' donations declared for these bundlers, the amount raised by donors rewarded with foreign postings has soared. The appointees to those same 10 embassies raised at least $5m in 2013, compared to a minimum of $3.3m in 2009, at least $1.3m under George W Bush in 2005 and at least $800,000 for Bush donors in 2001.
  Many of the capitals have grown resigned to the process. "All that really matters is that the ambassador is close to the White House '' and his top fundraiser usually is," said one British diplomat, speaking anonymously about Barzun's appointment.
  But to State Department veterans, the notion that only fundraisers can get messages through the West Wing is even more alarming. "To some extent, this question of having the ear of the president, and who has it, shows the seriousness of the issue," said Ambassador Pickering.
  Johnson, the AFSA president, said many donors have less political influence than their host countries like to imagine. "Some foreign countries like the idea that they are getting a friend of the president, but our experience has been that genuine friends are pretty small; most of these people are friends of friends; and they don't get to call the president right away," she said.
  "In a few exceptional cases they are not detracting from credibility of diplomatic service, but at the scale it's being done it is undermining the concept of a career diplomatic service and weakening the strength and capacity of the diplomatic service."
  Johnson estimates the percentage of ambassador posts given to political appointees rather than career diplomats has remained roughly steady under Obama at around 30%, but most of these are in parts of the world unattractive to wealthy donors. The share taken by political appointees in western Europe and wealthier Asian capitals has reached between 70% and 85%, the AFSA estimates.
  One factor cited by defenders of the practice is that private means are needed to fund the lifestyle led by ambassadors, but the importance of this is disputed by State Department veterans.
  "In the embassies I've been in, normally you have a representation budget," said Johnson. "Whether we skimp on it in places like London and Paris and these people add to it so they can serve the best champagne and canapes I don't know, but I don't think it's necessary to be wildly wealthy any more."
  She also said many are disappointed by the reality of embassy life. "If the dog ruins the furniture, you have to pay for it. It's like being a guest in someone's house."
  Dysfunctional leadershipThis can cause problems of its own. A report by the State Department inspector general into a crisis at the embassy in the Bahamas found that Obama campaign finance chair Nicole Avant presided over "an extended period of dysfunctional leadership and mismanagement, which has caused problems throughout the embassy". Prior to her appointment as ambassador, Avant was vice president of Interior Music Publishing and was absent from the embassy 276 days between September 2009 and November 2011, according to the report. In response to the report Avant said she "had inherited a dysfunctional embassy".
  Another official report into the Obama campaign donor appointed to Luxembourg, Cynthia Stroum, found she had been "aggressive, bullying, hostile and intimidating" and left her embassy in a "state of dysfunction". Stroum resigned after the report.
  State Department veterans say motivations vary among political donors. "Some go to pleasant islands where the climate and residence are delightful, others just want the title, like British people lust after peerages," said AFSA's Johnson. "People think: gee, I really want to call myself ambassador, so I can go buy myself one. Others are perceived to want to just meet people, broaden their contacts of future business contacts people who can help them in their day job."
  The White House insists all its ambassadors are well qualified, regardless of their campaign history. "I am proud that such experienced and committed individuals have agreed to serve the American people in these important roles," said Obama in a statement issued with Barzun's appointment.
  The Foreign Service Act of 1980, states that "contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission."
  At at time when the US is reaching the limits of its "hard power", career foreign service staff argue it is time for professional diplomacy to mount a comeback.
  "We tried a lot of military stuff and have we come to the realisation that not every problem out there can be solved by troops, no-fly zones and drones," concludes Johnson.
  "Diplomacy and managing the inter-relationships between countries is actually important, and we ought to be taking it more seriously, preparing people for it and seeing it as a long-term career '' not as just something you do for a few years while you are preparing to do something else."
VIDEO-Oliver Stone Urges Action to End 'Surveillance State' - Truthdig
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:14
  Oliver Stone Urges Action to End 'Surveillance State'Posted on Jul 10, 2013In a new video produced by the American Civil Liberties Union, Academy Award winner Oliver Stone encourages all U.S. citizens to take action in the wake of the recent revelations about the scope of the National Security Agency's massive surveillance program.
  According to Stone, the leaks exposed by NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden, whom the filmmaker has hailed as a hero, ''have given us a glimpse into our government's gigantic surveillance machine'' that ''is eating our freedom.''
  Stone says it's time for Americans to stand up for civil liberties that are being encroached upon and tell congressional representatives to roll back the NSA's spying programs by repealing section 215 of the Patriot Act and section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act.
  ''The question is not whether we have something to hide,'' he says. ''The question is whether we control the government or the government controls us.''
  Read more about the ACLU's campaign here.
  '--Posted by Tracy Bloom.Get truth delivered toyour inbox every week.
  Previous item: 'I Think I'm an Interesting Woman'
  New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Obamacare advertising to top $1 billion
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: TheBlaze.com - Blog
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:56
  Because it's just so darn popular, or something'...
  (Image: File photo)
  Via U.S. News and World Report:
  More than $1 billion will be spent on advertising for and against the Affordable Care Act, the comprehensive healthcare reform law known as Obamacare, before all is said and done, according to a media firm's analysis.
  Counting money spent on ads since debate on the measure heated up in 2009 until the most recent spending records available, the Campaign Media Analysis Group, part of Kantar Media, found more than $500 million has already been spent on trying to sway public opinion and political races tied to the issue.
  ''The law both parties now call 'Obamacare' seems due to join Social Security and Medicare in one respect: as a public policy advertising phenom, a program that is reviled and perhaps eventually revered in political advertising for billions of dollars in ad spend to come,'' said Elizabeth Wilner, vice president for strategic initiatives at CMAG in a release accompanying the analysis. ''Yet while Social Security and Medicare have been litigated on the airwaves for more than 40 years, CMAG expects the ACA to break the $1 billion mark by its fifth birthday.''
  Not surprisingly, opponents of the health care law have outspent supporters by a long-shot '-- an estimated 5-to-1 margin. But with Democrats relying on Obamacare to be a big campaign issue for them during next year's midterms, expect this number to continue climbing.
  ''We expect Democrats on the ballot in 2014 to embrace the individual mandate in TV advertising after basically forfeiting the airwaves to Republicans and other critics for the past three years,'' Wilner said. ''Once the ACA begins to impact voters, we think Democrats will have no choice but to embrace the upsides in advertising.''
  Translation: Once everyone sees what a crap bucket this thing is, Democrats are going to have to spend like crazy trying to defend it.
Suspected Colombian drug kingpin pleads not guilty in U.S. court
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Reuters: World News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:56
  Police escort Colombian drug trafficker Daniel 'El Loco' Barrera (C) as he is brought before the media, before being extradited to the U.S., at an airport in an anti-narcotics base in Bogota July 9, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/John Vizcaino
  By Bernard Vaughan
  NEW YORK | Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:00pm EDT
  NEW YORK (Reuters) - Alleged Colombian drug kingpin Daniel Barrera made his first appearance in a U.S. court on Wednesday and pleaded not guilty to conspiring to import cocaine into the United States.
  Prosecutors accuse Barrera, 44, of manufacturing upwards of 400 tons of cocaine annually in Colombia and trafficking it worldwide.
  He conspired with others to distribute cocaine "knowing and intending" that some would be imported into the United States, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenna Dabbs said at the hearing in Manhattan federal court.
  Barrera, with a light beard and wearing jeans and a black-and-white golf shirt, spoke briefly in Spanish at the hearing, confirming his attorney and that he understood the proceedings. Nicknamed "Loco," or crazy, he sat back in a chair and listened to an interpreter through earphones.
  Ruben Oliva, his lawyer, said Barrera would demand a trial by jury.
  U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said Barrera would remain in detention. If convicted, he faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.
  Barrera arrived in the United States on Tuesday after being extradited from Colombia.
  He is accused of buying raw cocaine paste from the leftist rebel group FARC and processing it in laboratories in areas controlled by the now-demobilized paramilitary group the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, or AUC.
  The AUC collected monthly taxes from Barrera, according to the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's indictment.
  Evidence against Barrera includes photographs and other documents related to the seizures of cocaine shipments off the coasts of Venezuela and Florida, Dabbs told Hellerstein.
  In 2000 Barrera provided 1.4 tons of cocaine to an unnamed co-conspirator in Guatemala via a "go-fast boat," according to the indictment.
  He also provided cocaine to the same co-conspirator to be hidden in a container of scrap metal that was being transported to Mexico from Panama in 2004, the indictment said.
  Barrera was arrested in Venezuela last September with the help of authorities there as well as British and U.S. intelligence agencies.
  Colombian authorities had been closing in on his organization in the weeks before his arrest, detaining 36 suspected members and seizing five tons of cocaine.
  Barrera's next appearance in Manhattan federal court is set for September 4. He also faces charges in federal court in Brooklyn and Miami.
  (Reporting by Bernard Vaughan; Editing by Xavier Briand)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprints
BBC News - Boston bomb accused Dzhokhar Tsarnaev denies charges
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:53
  10 July 2013Last updated at17:31 ETBoston Marathon bomb suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has pleaded not guilty to all charges in his first court appearance, as blast victims looked on.
  Mr Tsarnaev, 19, faces 30 counts of using a weapon of mass destruction in the two 15 April blasts that killed three, including an eight-year-old boy.
  He appeared in shackles and an orange prison suit, and replied "not guilty" as the charges were read to the court.
  Prosecutors could press for the death penalty for 17 counts.
  The suspect has also been charged over the death of a fourth person, a university police officer, who was allegedly shot dead by Mr Tsarnaev and his brother Tamerlan in the days after the attack.
  He is also charged in a carjacking incident and with downloading internet material from Islamist radicals some time before the blasts.
  Relatives in courtPeople appeared outside the federal courthouse in Boston as early as 07:30 EST (12:30 BST) to claim a seat inside the court and two overflow rooms for a hearing that lasted just seven minutes.
  Mr Tsarnaev arrived at court with his face swollen and his arm in a cast.
  Two of the suspect's sisters watched the proceedings. One sobbed during the hearing while the other held a baby.
  Before he was led out of the courtroom, the suspect seemed to smile and to gesture a kiss to his family members in the room.
  Among the crowd was a young friend of Mr Tsarnaev, Hank Alvarez, 19. He said: "Just knowing him, it's hard for me to face the fact that he did it."
  Mr Tsarnaev, a US citizen, was not in court last month during an indictment hearing, when a federal grand jury agreed that he should be tried on 30 charges.
  His first court appearance took place at his hospital bedside, where he was recovering from injuries suffered in a shootout with police during the manhunt. He was later transferred to a prison hospital near Boston.
  Mr Tsarnaev's older brother Tamerlan, 26, was killed days after the attack during a massive police operation. He is also suspected of carrying out the attacks.
  Authorities say the accused ran over his older brother as he fled the shootout in a hijacked car.
  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was found the next day, 19 April, hiding in a boat in a residential garden in Watertown, Massachusetts.
  According to the indictment, he wrote about his motivations for the bombing on the inside walls and beams of the boat.
  Authorities say he scrawled: "The US Government is killing our innocent civilians" and "I can't stand to see such evil go unpunished."
  The brothers are from a family of ethnic Chechen Muslims from Russia and had been living in the US for about a decade.
  More than 260 people were injured when two pressure cooker bombs packed with nails, ball bearings and other shrapnel were detonated at the finish line of the Boston Marathon.
  The bombing was the worst mass-casualty attack on US soil since 11 September 2001.
BBC News - Luxembourg PM Juncker to resign over spy scandal
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:53
  10 July 2013Last updated at16:37 ETLuxembourg will hold new elections after Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker announced he would resign following a secret service scandal.
  Mr Juncker, Europe's longest-serving head of government, told parliament he would step down on Thursday.
  The move came as his junior coalition partner called for the dissolution of parliament and early elections.
  It follows claims he failed to stop illegal security agency activity such as phone-taps and corruption.
  Mr Juncker has been prime minister since 1995 and was head of the eurozone finance ministers group between 2005 and January 2013.
  'Not my top priority'"I will convene the government tomorrow morning at 10:00 (08:00 GMT) and will go to the Palace to suggest snap elections to the Grand Duke," he said on Wednesday.
  Luxembourg's parliament had reviewed a report alleging a series of cases of misconduct by the country's SREL security agency, which the prime minister oversees.
  It included claims of illegal bugging of politicians, the purchase of cars for private use and payments in exchange for access to local officials.
  Mr Juncker has denied any wrongdoing.
  "The intelligence service was not my top priority," he told parliament in a two-hour speech.
  "Moreover, I hope Luxembourg will never have a prime minister who sees SREL as [his or her] priority."
  But there were demands for action from the Luxembourg Socialist Workers Party (LSAP), Mr Juncker's coalition partner.
  "We invite the prime minister to take full political responsibility in this context and ask the government to intervene with the head of state to clear the path for new elections," LSAP President Alex Bodry said.
  It was not immediately clear whether the outgoing prime minister and head of Luxembourg's Christian Social People's Party was planning to fight the next election, which must be held within three months.
  As the head of state, only the Grand Duke can officially dissolve parliament.
  The current government would remain until elections take place, but it would be unable to pass any new laws.
  However, with parliament due to go on its summer break, it is unlikely the government will have to face any important decision-making for some months.
US still plans to send F-16s to Egypt in coming weeks
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: ynet - News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:46
  Official says no current change in plan to deliver fighter jets to Egyptian military in AugustReuters
  The United States will go through with the delivery of four F-16 fighter jets to Egypt in the coming weeks, US officials told Reuters on Wednesday as Washington deliberated whether to call the ouster of Egypt's elected leader a military coup.
  A decision to call last week's overthrow of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi a coup would, by law, require the Obama administration to halt aid to the Egyptian army.
  Related stories:
  Egypt is the second-largest recipient of US aid behind Israel, receiving $1.5 billion a year. The jets were part of that aid package, a US defense official confirmed.
  One defense official said the delivery of the four F-16s was likely to take place in August.
  "There is no current change in the plan to deliver F-16s to the Egyptian military," a second US official said on condition of anonymity.
  Islamists who back Morsi, Egypt's first freely elected president, blame the United States for allowing what they call a military coup. The country's military and interim political leaders say Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood incited violence when Egyptians took to the streets to protest the president's policies.
  The White House also pointed out that millions of Egyptians had wanted a change in government and said it would wait before deciding how to describe Morsi's ouster.
  "We are evaluating how the authorities are responding to and handling the current situation," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Wednesday.
  The United States has already disbursed $650 million in military aid to Egypt for fiscal year 2013 which ends in September, and another $585 million is pending, the first US official said.
  Another eight F-16s were due to be delivered in December.
  Receive Ynetnews updates directly to your desktop
Nigerian leader secures $1.1bn on China trip
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: AL JAZEERA ENGLISH (AJE)
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 20:02
  Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, have presided over the signing of accords between their governments to facilitate $1.1bn in low-interest loans for much-needed infrastructure in Nigeria.
  The ceremony took place on Wednesday in Beijing at the start of Jonathan's four-day visit.
  China, which is increasingly looking to Africa for oil and other natural resources, is offering Nigeria loans to help fund airport terminals in four cities, roads, a light-rail line for its capital, a hydropower plant and oil and gas infrastructure.
  Jonathan's visit comes a few months after Xi's trip to Africa, which took him to the Republic of Congo, Tanzania and South Africa. All three countries are rich in natural resources.
  Xi said China and Nigeria had been brought together by a common task of pursuing national development.
  "China and Nigeria share the same goal of achieving prosperity for both countries, and this shared task brings our two countries together."
  Jonathan is visiting with a dozen of his cabinet ministers, including those for petroleum resources, trade and transport, as well as several state governors, senior government officials and business-people.
  "China is a very good country, has a very robust economy. And that's why when I was coming, I came with quite a number of cabinet ministers and other very senior government functionaries," Jonathan said.
  Following a meeting between Xi and Jonathan, representatives from both countries signed five deals, including a lending agreement between China's Import-Export Bank and the Nigerian finance ministry for the expansion of the airport terminals and an economic and technical cooperation pact.
  Details of the agreements were not immediately available.
  Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Nigerian finance minister, said the loans being finalised during the trip were part of $3bn approved by China at interest rates of less than 3 percent.
  Chinese companies are already building roads across Nigeria in contracts worth $1.7bn.
  China's demand for crude oil produced in Nigeria is expected to rise tenfold to 200,000 barrels a day by 2015, according to information provided by a team accompanying the Nigerian president.
  341
Public Opinion Shifts on Security-Liberty Balance - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:43
  A new Quinnipiac poll has found a significant shift in public opinion on the trade-off between civil liberties and national security. In the new survey, released on Wednesday, 45 percent of the public said they thought the government's antiterrorism policies have ''gone too far in restricting the average person's civil liberties'' '-- as compared with 40 percent who said they have ''not gone far enough to adequately protect the country.''
  By comparison, in a January 2010 Quinnipiac poll that posed the same question, only 25 percent of the public said the government had gone too far in restricting civil liberties, while 63 percent said it hadn't gone far enough to protect the country.
  Although the shift in opinion is apparent among virtually all demographic groups, it has been somewhat more pronounced among Republicans, who may be growing more skeptical about President Obama's national security policies. Whereas, in the 2010 survey, 17 percent of Republicans said the government had gone too far to restrict civil liberties while 72 percent said it had not gone far enough to protect the country, the numbers among G.O.P. voters were nearly even in the new poll, with 41 percent saying that antiterrorism programs had gone too far and 46 percent saying they haven't gone far enough.
  We generally caution against reading too much into a single poll result. But there are several reasons to think that the shift detected by the Quinnipiac poll is meaningful. First, the magnitude of the change was considerably larger than the margin of error in the poll. Second, the poll applied exactly the same question wording in both 2010 and 2013, making a direct comparison more reliable. Third, this was a well-constructed survey question, describing both the benefit (protecting the country) and the cost (restricting civil liberties) of antiterrorism programs in a balanced way.
  What is less clear how much of the shift was triggered by the recent disclosures about the National Security Administration's domestic surveillance programs, as opposed to reflecting a longer-term trend in public opinion. A Fox News poll conducted in April, just after the Boston Marathon bombings but before the N.S.A. story broke, found that only 43 percent of the public was ''willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism'' '-- considerably lower than in other instances of the survey. However, Fox News had last posed this question in 2006. Either way, it seems safe to conclude that the climate of public opinion on this issue has changed considerably since the years closely following the Sept. 11 attacks.
  The Quinnipiac poll also asked about Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor who disclosed details about the agency's programs to newspapers. The Quinnipiac poll, in contrast to other recent surveys, found ostensibly sympathetic views toward Mr. Snowden, with 34 percent of respondents describing him as ''more of a traitor'' while 55 percent said he was ''more of a whistle-blower.''
  Whereas I find Quinnipiac's broader question on national security to be quite meaningful, I'm not sure that the one about Mr. Snowden tells us very much. The problem is that the sympathetic response toward him in the poll may reflect a sympathetically worded question.
  The poll described Mr. Snowden as ''the national security consultant who released information to the media about the phone scanning program.'' However, Mr. Snowden has also released information to the news media about other N.S.A. activities, such as those it has conducted in China. Some Americans may be pleased by Mr. Snowden's disclosures about how the N.S.A. conducted surveillance against U.S. citizens '' but displeased that he has also disclosed details about its international surveillance. The Quinnipiac poll should probably have described a fuller spectrum of the information that Mr. Snowden has released.
ANH-USA Exclusive: Drug Companies Plan to Use Compounding Bill to Take Away Your Compounded Medications | The Alliance for Natural Health USA
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:39
  Here is the ''smoking gun'''--the proof of what we have been suspecting. Action Alert!
  We've been telling you about S.959, the Senate compounding pharmacy bill. We and other groups oppose it mainly because it is written in a way that would likely shut off access to important medications like bioavailable estriol and time-released natural thyroid.
  Remember the political saying, ''Never let a crisis go to waste!'' In other words, try to manipulate the political process to get what you want. We thought this was happening with the compounding bill. Now we know it is. And this scheme is fueled by powerful former politicians working for industry and even by a key lobbyist married to a key Senate staffer.
  What ANH-USA has feared in particular is that special interests in the pharmaceutical industry would try to use the call for federal regulation of compounding pharmacies to outlaw compounded estriol and thyroid and replace them with standard drugs. Compounded, bioidentical estriol became popular in the first place because the standard drug used for the same purpose was proven to be dangerous, a risk for both heart disease and cancer. It would be understandable that the drug companies would want this huge market back. Here is how some of them have gone about it.
  When the call for federal regulation of compounding arose, pharmaceutical companies formed the so-called Working Group on Pharmaceutical Safety to lobby for the bill. The group is led by Tommy Thompson, the former governor of Wisconsin and former Director of Health and Human Services under George W. Bush, and recently a failed Senate candidate, and Sarah Sellers, a former FDA official who worked on compounding pharmacy policy. The group represents some of the drug companies with vested interests in the compounding bill: the ''participants'' of the Working Group include TherapeuticsMD (a specialty pharmaceutical company), KV Pharmaceuticals, Auxilium Pharmaceuticals, and Mobius Therapeutics.
  Not coincidentally, Thompson is chairman of TherapeuticsMD. And until recently, Sellers worked for Ther-RX, the marketing and distribution arm of KV Pharmaceuticals. You may recall our article on KV's fight against the compounded version of the successful progesterone-based drug 17P, which is used to prevent premature births; KV was displeased by the FDA's decision (due to grassroots pressure) to allow compounders to continue making the inexpensive 17P when KV wants to control the market with their high-priced version of the drug, Makena.
  In other words, the Working Group on Pharmaceutical Safety and their clients have a direct financial interest in language that would allow the FDA to shut down vital compounded medications and thus a vested interest in passing S.959. Even more concerning is that TherapeuticsMD is in the process of developing a new form of the bioidentical hormones estradiol and progesterone; if these receive FDA approval and S.959 passes, it is very likely that these important hormones will no longer be available except in this new form'--of unknown safety'--and at what will almost certainly be outrageous prices.
  Under S.959, all compounded versions of FDA-approved drugs will almost certainly be banned as ''copies'' of the approved drug, depending on how strictly that term is interpreted. We expect it to be defined broadly in order to ensure market exclusivity by eliminating competition from compounding pharmacies offering natural products. Because they are natural, these products cannot be patent-protected.
  In a remarkably candid interview with Bloomberg, TherapeuticsMD CEO Robert Finizio recognized the superior safety of bioidentical hormones. This is important because FDA's main argument against estriol has been that it is by definition unsafe because it has not won FDA approval, a circular and misleading argument since the FDA knows very well that no one can afford to take an unpatentable product through the FDA process. Finizio's comment directly refutes critics who claim compounded products are dangerous. But he also admits that his company sees these hormones as a $10 to $12 billion market which they want to control by offering an FDA-approved drug.
  Even more telling, ANH-USA has obtained a document in which TherapeuticsMD, pitching itself to potential investors, describes the safety and efficacy of bioidentical hormones. They also give their investors some statistics on the bioidentical HRT market, reveal that well over three-quarters of the market is currently held by compounding pharmacies'--and state that this is the market they are going after. If this isn't a smoking gun, we don't know what one would look like.
  Certain drug companies, it seems clear, want to take advantage of what is supposed to be regulation of the compounding industry by replacing compounded products with their own. Will Congress please take note and amend this legislation before it is too late?
  Doing the lobbying for the Working Group on Pharmaceutical Safety is BGR Group, also known as Barbour Griffith & Rogers (the firm was founded by Haley Barbour, former governor of Mississippi). The connections between BGR and the federal government are myriad:
  BGR's vice president for governmental affairs is Dave Boyer, who worked for Tommy Thompson at HHS, and served as special assistant to the president for legislative affairs under George W. Bush, followed by a stint as senior director of federal affairs for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the drug companies' trade association. BGR now lobbies on behalf of PhRMA.David Boyer also represents drugmaker Eli Lilly, which has an animal drug division that would have benefited from an earlier version of the compounding bill that severely limited compounding for dogs, cats, and horses. While that provision has been dropped from the current version of the S.959, an amendment to restore these compounding restrictions is expected when the bill is considered on the Senate floor.One of PhRMA's members is Pfizer (which, you may recall, purchased Wyeth, who started the whole attack on bioidentical hormone replacement therapy with a petition to ban estriol in favor of their synthetic drug). Pfizer would benefit from the very specific language in the bill that would allow FDA to remove estriol from the market.Dave Boyer's wife, Jennifer Boyer, is the health policy advisor for Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS). She is also one of the primary staffers working on the Senate compounding bill. If you think this sounds like a conflict of interest, you're right: in meetings she has been a strident voice against compounding and has opposed both compounded 17P and estriol.Doing much of BGR's actual lobbying for the Working Group is Bob Wood, president of BGR's government affairs. Wood worked as Tommy Thompson's chief of staff when Thompson was governor of Wisconsin; he continued in the same capacity when Thompson directed HHS.In other words, TherapeuticsMD and the Working Group's other ''participants'' are following in footsteps of KV Pharmaceuticals. They're attempting to change the business playing field legislatively. Unfortunately, if they follow KV's example too far, they may wind up in trouble.
  KV Pharmaceuticals has had a lot of legal trouble'--to the extent that we're amazed any former FDA official or HHS secretary would work with them. In 2011, KV's former CEO spent time in jail (and is now banned from ever doing business in the US) for falsifying the amount of morphine that was in their pills. The company has also had to settle with numerous state attorneys general for Medicare and Medicaid fraud'--to the tune of $17 million.
  Action Alert! Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) is calling for a vote on S.959 as quickly as possible. Even if you sent Congress your message on S.959 previously, please write them again. We have added new information to the Action Alert letter, and it's vital that we fight with all our strength against the powerful lobbyists and deep-pocketed drug companies to preserve our right to safe, inexpensive, effective compounded medicines. Please take action immediately!
VIDEO-Jeff Daniels: Second Amendment 'Was a Different Time,' Wants More Background Checks | MRCTV
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:36
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  On Tuesday's Piers Morgan Live, actor Jeff Daniels pushed for universal background checks because the Second Amendment was written during a "different time."
Ironically, Obama's delay of Obamacare implementation is itself unconstitutional
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:18
  (NaturalNews) So much of what President Obama does in wielding the power of his office is unconstitutional, so it should surprise no one that action he took recently regarding the implementation timeline of his signature achievement - Obamacare - is most likely unconstitutional as well.Bypassing Congress as usual, Obama - through executive action - ordered a one-year delay in the so-called employer healthcare mandate contained within Obamacare that was set to kick in, so that Democrats who passed the unpopular act won't have to face tremendous voter backlash during the 2014 election cycle.
  In announcing the delay, the White House said it was simply "listening to businesses about the health care law," but that's pure BS. If Obama and Democrats cared about the impact this law would have on businesses, they would not have included the mandate - which requires businesses with 50 or more full-time employees to provide them with expensive health insurance coverage- in the first place.
  What is really going on, you see, is that Obama and his Democrat supporters who voted for the law are afraid of voter backlash. Americans are beginning to figure out that the so-called "Affordable Care Act" a) will not be affordable at all and, in fact, will increase coverage costs for most Americans; b) will expose lawmakers who touted its benefits as liars when the law does not deliver as promised; and c) is more likely to collapse the nation's healthcare system than "reform" it. And many of us will want to take out our frustrations on those who forced Obamacare down our throats.
  That will likely come anyway, employer mandate or not. Business owners aren't stupid; they realize that, sooner or later, the administration definitely will enforce the employer mandate. So they will make hiring decisions appropriately (reducing the number of full-time employees while increasing the number of part-time employees, among other tactics).
  Imperial president
  But what is at issue now is whether Obama's decision to do another end-run around Congress is even legal, since his job is to enforce the law of the land - and in this case, provisions of the very law he wanted.
  Not surprisingly, the administration is claiming it has all the authority in the world to implement the delay. According to Roll Call, a publication that focuses on Congress, a Treasury Department official says the administration has "longstanding administrative authority to grant transition relief when implementing new legislation like the ACA."
  Three House committees beg to differ and are already looking into the decision. And Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the decision is just "another in a string of extra legal decisions" made by this president.
  "As a former constitutional law teacher, President Obama must know that this action gets into very questionable constitutional territory," Issa said in a statement. "It also paves the way for future administrations to simply not enforce parts of Obamacare they don't believe are functioning well."
  Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., chairman of the Education and Workforce subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee, has asked the Congressional Research Service to investigate Obama's action.
  "I believe this administration has made a habit of bypassing Congress and it sets a very dangerous precedent," he said in a statement. "Both Republicans and Democrats should be very concerned, and I will continue to closely monitor these actions and hold the president accountable."
  "If President Obama wants to make changes to Obamacare, he must come to Congress. ... We are a nation governed by laws written by Congress, not memos and blog posts written by bureaucrats," adds Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.
  Obama's penchant to act as an "imperial" president is "a fascinating transformation" for him, says Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University who has become a top administration legal critic.
  "He rightfully criticized President Bush for violating the separation of powers and using signing statements to rewrite legislation, but Obama has been far more aggressive in circumventing Congress and far more successful in creating an imperial presidency," Turley told Roll Call.
  'There really isn't anything they can do'
  Some see this as a "transformation" of Obama, but those who knew him before he took office and who studied his legislative and legal positions when he was an ascending state and U.S. senator, like me, know that this is the real Obama - always has been, always will be.
  This president, like his most recent predecessor, has no respect for the rule of law and does not feel constrained by the U.S. Constitution. What's more, he has co-opted the very constitutional system he abuses. Under the very same Constitution, we the people have no legal recourse to remove this president from office because even if the House impeaches him, the Senate won't convict because it is held by a Democrat majority.
  Regarding delaying the Obamacare employer mandate, Timothy Jost, a longtime supporter of the health care law and a law professor at Washington and Lee University, summed it up when he told Roll Call: "I don't see the courts intervening here. I'm sure Congress will hold hearings but there really isn't anything they can do."
  The time has come to stop allowing "The Establishment" to spoon-feed us candidates. Washington, in its present form, is not going to fix Washington in its present form, because those who currently make up The Establishment created Washington in its present form. If that sounds like an anti-incumbent rant, maybe it is. But truth be told, we're not getting closer to liberty and freedom with the current bunch of career politicians and bureaucrats. It's time to clean house.
  Sources:
  http://cdn.rollcall.com
  http://www.forbes.com
  http://www.foxnews.com
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
  comments powered by
VIDEO-Carney to Reporter: 'Read the Federal Register, I Know That'd Be a Lot to Ask' | The Weekly Standard
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:16
  White House spokesman Jay Carney told a Fox News reporter to "read the Federal Register" in response to whether the president had the authority to change parts of the Obamacare law:
  "The ability to postpone the deadline is clear," said Carney.
  "I invite you to read the Federal Register," he said. "I know that'd be a lot to ask."
  "You'll have to ask me?" the reporter said.
  "Yes," said Carney, smirking. "Exactly."
Boston Bombing Suspect Pleads Not Guilty to All Charges
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RIA Novosti
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:10
  WASHINGTON, July 10 (RIA Novosti) '' Suspected Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Wednesday pleaded not guilty to all charges against him, including murder and using a weapon of mass destruction in connection with the deadly April 15 attack that left three people dead and more than 260 injured.
  In his first public appearance since he was detained days after the twin bombing, Tsarnaev rubbed his neck and adjusted his collar as he repeated ''not guilty'' to each of the 30 charges against him read by the clerk in a fifth-floor courtroom overflowing with media, police, victims and supporters of the suspect, the RAPSI legal news agency reported from the courtroom.
  Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler required Tsarnaev to answer each of the charges for himself, refusing to allow his attorney to respond to the charges for him. At the end of the hearing, which lasted around 10 minutes, Bowler remanded Tsarnaev to the custody of US Marshals.
  The next hearing in the case was scheduled for Sept. 23.
  Tsarnaev, whose left hand was in a cast and his face swollen, appeared relaxed throughout the hearing, The Associated Press (AP) reported.
  As he was preparing to be escorted out of the courtroom in handcuffs by three bulky officers with shaved heads, Tsarnaev looked over his shoulders at his family and made a kissing motion with his lips, according to reporters present at the hearing.
  Television cameras were not allowed inside the courtroom at the Joseph Moakley federal courthouse for Wednesday's hearing.
  Tsarnaev, 19, faces a 30-count indictment, including charges of killing a police officer at the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) as police chased him and his brother, fellow suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, in a frantic manhunt days after the bombing.
  Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed during a shootout with police in the Boston suburb of Watertown, while Dzhokhar suffered nonfatal wounds and was apprehended on April 19.
  Prosecutors in the case said they expect to call between 80 and 100 witnesses and that the trial will likely last three to four months.
  Inside the courtroom, several Tsarnaev supporters wearing T-shirts bearing the visage of the accused terrorist were told by security officials that such T-shirts would not be allowed in the courtroom in the future, the local Boston affiliate of Fox News reported prior to the hearing.
  Victims and their relatives were present in the courtroom as well Wednesday, as were members of Tsarnaev's family, including two sisters wearing Muslim garb, according to media reports. One of the sisters held a baby, while the other wiped away tears with a tissue during the hearing, the AP reported.
  Tsarnaev's parents, who have repeatedly proclaimed their son's innocence, were in the restive republic of Dagestan in southern Russia on Wednesday, US media reported.
  Tsarnaev could face the death penalty on 17 of the 30 charges in the indictment against him.
  Security officers and the international news media were swarming outside the courthouse before and after Wednesday's hearing, as were supporters of Tsarnaev who shouted encouragement and carried signs claiming the suspect is innocent.
  A group of the slain MIT policeman's fellow officers stood in a line across the street from the courthouse before Wednesday's hearing to show solidarity with their fallen colleague, Sean Collier.
  Numerous people became tangled with Tsarnaev supporters in verbal confrontations following the hearing, with one person yelling at the alleged terrorist's backers: ''If you don't like this country, go back to yours,'' RAPSI reported.
  Police officers stepped in and told both camps to calm down, the legal news agency said.
  Members of the news media and the public began lining up before 8 a.m. EDT Wednesday to secure a seat in the courtroom for the hearing. Among those hoping to get a seat were Tsarnaev's former teammates on the wrestling team at Cambridge Rindge and Latin high school.
  One of the young men, Hank Alvarez, told the AP that he had difficulty reconciling Tsarnaev's calm, apolitical nature with the violent crimes he allegedly committed.
  ''Just knowing him, it's hard for me to face the fact that he did it,'' Alvarez, 19, was quoted by the AP as saying.
  Russian law enforcement authorities have been cooperating with their US counterparts in the investigation of the brothers, ethnic Chechens whose family roots lie in the turbulent North Caucasus region of southern Russia.
  In 2011, Russia asked the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to interview Tamerlan Tsarnaev over concerns relating to his interest in ''radical Islam.'' However, an FBI statement said that it ''did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign,'' after questioning Tamerlan and members of his family at that time.
  Updated with details, quotes and background throughout.
VIDEO-ABC-CLIMATE-Catalyst: Extreme Weather - ABC TV Science
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 20:41
  download segment mp4| wmv (average size 10 MB)
  NARRATIONHeat waves that kill tens of thousands. Apocalyptic floods. Blizzards in the Middle East. How is it that a slightly warmer atmosphere can create weather that swings from one extreme to the next? From lazy jet streams to baking soils, in this report we explain the mechanisms behind some of the most catastrophic events of the decade.
  Anja TaylorUnderstanding exactly how a warmer world drives weather wild is crucial to predicting just how bumpy a ride we're in for.
  NARRATIONIn 2003, a heatwave settled over Europe. But this was no ordinary heatwave. By the time it was over, more than 40,000 people were dead.
  Dr Erich FischerSo 2003 was remarkable in many aspects. It was far warmer than ever before - two to five degrees on average over the whole summer.
  NARRATIONIt was likely the hottest weather event in Europe in 500 years. Yet, just seven years later, an even more intense heatwave hit Russia, setting the country on fire. Summer temperatures reached up to 13 degrees above average, and the death toll from heat stress and respiratory illness was estimated at more than 50,000.
  Dr Erich FischerIt was much larger in spatial extent, so it covered almost two million square kilometres. Really, we're not that used to such extremely hot summers. So it is surprising to see a clustering of such strong events. It wasn't only the two, there were three other very warm summers within the same decade.
  Anja TaylorGlobal average temperatures have only increased by 0.8 of a degree Celsius. One would think that this would just lead to slightly warmer summers. But, actually, it's greatly increasing the chances of extremely hot weather.
  NARRATIONThis past year in Australia, we've seen plenty of heat. At the Bureau of Meteorology, forecasters have been watching record after record tumble.
  Dr Karl BraganzaJanuary was the hottest month on record. The summer was the hottest on record. And the sea surface temperatures around Australia were the hottest on record. We had temperatures in Bass Strait, south of Melbourne and south of Adelaide, up to six degrees above average. But, in terms of heatwaves, what we find is the elevated ocean temperatures reduce the amount of cold outbreaks we get. And, particularly during April, we had a prolonged heatwave with very hot night-time temperatures, and those sustained night-time temperatures are indicative of warmer waters to the south of Australia, and that's what we saw.
  NARRATIONAlthough an exceptional year, it's not outside the range of what's now considered normal. If you plot temperature records, they fall in a typical bell-curve pattern, with the majority only a small deviation from the average, and the outliers representing extreme hot or cold events. With a 0.8 degree rise in temperature, a much larger portion now sits in the warmer-than-average section, and hot to extremely hot days are far more frequent.
  Dr Karl BraganzaSuddenly, you've actually doubled the frequency of those events - and, in Australia's case, up to five times an increase in the frequency of extreme heat compared to the middle of last century. And that has all sorts of implications. Just in January alone, we did about 1,600 spot-fire forecasts. That's this very detailed forecast for the firefighters. And that's the equivalent of the last several years.
  NARRATIONWorldwide, heatwaves have been increasing in duration and frequency since the 1950s.
  Dr Lisa AlexanderWhat we thought as kind of exceptional in the past has really started to become the norm.
  NARRATIONBut even in the context of global warming, the European and Russian heatwaves are way off the charts. Is this just natural variability, or is something else happening to make temperatures soar? The Swiss Institute of Technology is a world leader in climate modelling. Here, Dr Erich Fischer has focused intensive research on the causes of the 2003 scorcher and other recent severe heatwaves in Europe.
  Dr Erich FischerWhat's mainly the key factor is always the atmospheric circulations, so there needs to be a high-pressure system in place to get such an extreme heatwave.
  NARRATIONBut there was something else they all had in common - dry soils.
  Dr Erich FischerAll of them were actually preceded by very dry conditions in the spring. So we think that these conditions were already preconditioning the later heatwave.
  NARRATIONLow rainfall in the spring months led to an early and rapid loss of soil moisture. And dry soils can be a double whammy on an evolving heatwave.
  Anja TaylorWhen the sun's rays hit the land surface, a lot of their energy goes into evaporating moisture from the soil and from plants as they transpire. But when soils dry out and plants stop transpiring, the sun's energy is no longer channelled into that process. Instead, it's free to heat the surface.
  NARRATIONThe result is a jump in temperatures. It was dry soils that turned the European heatwave of 2003 into a deadly scorcher.
  Dr Erich FischerWith the very same conditions in the atmosphere, but wet soils rather than dry soils, the 2003 summer would have still been a very warm summer, but much less extreme, with much less devastating impacts.
  NARRATIONAn early snow melt and dry soils also amplified the Russian heatwave of 2010. What's disturbing is that many regions appear to be trending to patterns of lower rainfall in winter and spring months, making those areas more prone to mega heatwaves.
  Dr Erich FischerEurope and central Europe was always thought to be always humid basically. So, it was a surprise that in that event more dry conditions was actually enough to amplify the heatwave - something that usually only occurs over dry regions, such as the Mediterranean or the central US or Australia, for instance.
  Anja TaylorFrom where I'm standing, heatwaves seem a long, long way away. So do dry soils. And although this summer has been the hottest on record, it's also had some torrential downpours. So how is it that it can be getting hotter, drier and wetter at the same time?
  NARRATIONIt's simple physics. When air gets warmer, it can carry more water vapour - much more. So any rise in temperatures should lead to considerably more moisture being sucked from the Earth's surface. But what goes up must eventually come down.
  Dr Susan WijffelsRainfall, as we all know from personal experience, is really spotty. I mean, it can be raining, you know, in your suburb, and next door not raining at all. And so that spatial sort of graininess of rainfall makes it an incredibly hard thing to measure - and, in particular, to measure over larger areas accurately.
  NARRATIONTo find out if a warmer climate is cranking up the water cycle, scientists have been searching for clues in the restless, churning oceans.
  Dr Susan WijffelsMost of the evaporation and most of the rainfall in the world actually cycles through the ocean surface, not through the land. Because it covers 75 percent of the Earth, most of the action's actually happening over the ocean.
  NARRATIONEvery time rain falls or water evaporates from the sea, surface salinity changes.
  Dr Susan WijffelsWhen we look at the ocean salinity field right now, we see this beautiful reflection of what happens in the atmosphere. So the places that are very rainy - say, the Tropics, where there's a large amount of rainfall all the time - the surface salinity field is very fresh. When we go to the parts of the atmosphere where we find deserts on land, there are desert equivalents over the ocean, where evaporation dominates, and that's where we find the surface of the ocean is very, very salty.
  NARRATIONKeeping track of how salty seas change, more than 3,000 ocean robots called 'Argo floats' have been bobbing about on the global currents, beaming back data over time. The oceans are always mixing, so results are smoothed out instead of patchy like land records. Argo data and long-term records from research vessels reveal an unmistakable trend.
  Dr Susan WijffelsOver the last 50 years, that contrast has gone up quite markedly. So, for instance, the Atlantic Ocean is becoming saltier and saltier and saltier. And the Pacific is becoming fresher and fresher. Essentially translates to the fact that the wet areas have become wetter and the dry areas have become drier.
  NARRATIONThe big surprise is how fast the change is occurring. For every degree rise in air temperature, the water cycle is intensifying by percent. That's double the climate-model predictions.
  Dr Susan WijffelsThe intensity of the storms are likely to go up, because the moisture in the atmosphere is actually the feeder energy stop that drives storms. And we expect droughts and floods to amplify as well.
  NARRATIONAnd that's what's happening. These days, when it rains, it really pours. In January 2011, Toowoomba set a terrifying example of what can happen when too much water comes down too fast.
  ManThe house... We are moving!
  NARRATIONThe town experienced an inland tsunami as 100mm of rain fell in under an hour.
  Dr Lisa AlexanderYou get very intense rainfall events in a very short period of time, like you did in Toowoomba. The soil just can't absorb that much water. And then you do start getting these very large inland flooding events.
  NARRATIONBy studying over 8,000 rain gauges across the world, Australian scientists have confirmed that extreme rainfall events have also been intensifying. That means we're getting more water from a big storm than we would have 30 or 40 years ago. Around 7 percent more per degree rise in temperature.
  Dr Lisa AlexanderIt surprised us all, I have to say, that we got the answer we expected. So... Because usually, in science, you don't always end up with the answer you expect. So, to sort of see this coming out consistently in the data, was... was somewhat of a surprise.
  Dr Susan WijffelsWe're already starting to detect and see big changes in the extreme events. And we've only really warmed the Earth by 0.8 of a degree. If we were to warm the Earth by 3 or 4 degrees, the changes in the hydrological cycle could be near 30 percent. I mean, that's just a huge change, and it's very hard for us to imagine.
  Anja TaylorWell, that explains heatwaves and floods, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that higher temperatures don't set the scene for blizzards. In marked contrast to a sweltering March last year, this year the US suffered through nailbiting cold. In fact, much of the Northern Hemisphere was buried under record-breaking snowfalls. How can global warming possibly explain that?
  NARRATIONTo understand how, you need to consider the basic drivers of climate. As the sun heats the Earth unevenly, it sets up temperature gradients on many different scales. These create the winds and currents that influence weather.
  Dr Karl BraganzaAll the ocean currents are driven by basically the temperature gradient between the Equator and the Pole, and it's the same in the atmosphere.
  NARRATIONThe atmospheric gradient between the Tropics and the Poles creates the major westerly winds called 'jet streams'. Wind rushes down a slope from a warm, puffed up atmosphere to a cold, compressed atmosphere.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisThe stronger that gradient, the stronger the force that that wind is being pulled by, if you will, and then, because the Earth is spinning, instead of flowing directly from the south to the north, it actually gets turned to the right by the spinning of the Earth.
  NARRATIONThese fast-moving wavy winds encircle the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and mark the divide between cold, polar air and warm, tropical air.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisThey swing north and then they swing south, and the weather that you experience is completely related to where you are relative to one of these waves.
  NARRATIONBut what happens when you mess with a temperature gradient? It's a hotly debated topic, and, right now, we're running an extraordinary real-world experiment by turning up the thermostat in the Arctic.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisIt's hard to get your mind around how fast the Arctic is changing. It's really mind-boggling - even to someone like me, who's been studying it for decades now.
  NARRATIONThe Arctic is warming faster than anywhere on Earth, largely to do with the feedback effect of melting sea ice. White, bright ice bounces the sun's rays back into space before they have a chance to warm the surface. But when a small rise in temperatures melts some of the ice, the dark ocean below is exposed. This absorbs almost all the sun's energy, and heats up, causing more ice to melt, leading to more warming and so on.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisWhat we're seeing is the Arctic sea ice disappearing at just an amazing rate. This is the ice that's floating on top of the Arctic ocean. This past summer, it was half as big as it was only 30 years ago.
  NARRATIONResearch by Dr Jennifer Francis has shown that Arctic summers with a low sea ice extent leads to a gentler atmospheric gradient.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisThe force that's creating those winds in the jet stream is getting weaker as well.
  NARRATIONLike fast-flowing mountain rivers meander when they slowly cross the coastal plain, Jennifer predicted a weaker, slower jet stream would display a much wavier pattern.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisWe were able to determine that, in fact, these waves are actually getting larger in the north-south direction, which we know through weather theory that those waves then tend to move more slowly from west to east.
  NARRATIONAnd a lazy, meandering jet stream can have an extraordinary effect on weather.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisA big dip south, for example, will allow that cold air from the Arctic to plunge farther south. And, conversely, if you have a big swing northward in one of what we call a 'ridge', then that allows the warm, tropical air to extend farther northward. So, in both of these cases, we tend to get more unusual weather patterns setting up.
  NARRATIONThat's exactly what happened when frigid Arctic weather plunged into Europe and south-eastern US this March, bringing record snowfalls and leading many to wonder what happened to global warming. The year before, the US was caught in a jet-stream upswing. Unprecedented heat smashed over 1,000 temperature records and set the scene for a staggering drought and massive agricultural losses. This decade the Northern Hemisphere has seen some catastrophic results from a highly deformed jet stream. While a big, stagnant high settled over Russia in 2010, cold air from Siberia plunged into Pakistan, colliding with warm, wet air from the Bay of Bengal. As Russian burned, Pakistan drowned under a deluge that lasted nearly two months.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisAs the jet stream takes on this wavier character, what this means is that the weather that you're experiencing in your location is going to stick around longer. It's going to feel like those weather conditions just won't give up and bring something else. It feels like it's stuck.
  NARRATIONHow jet streams are being affected by a warming Arctic is still highly unpredictable, with many other interactions affecting their speed and movement. But one thing's certain - we'd better get used to wacky weather.
  Dr Karl BraganzaAnd we talk about climate change in the future of 1, 2, 3 degrees - that's actually hard to imagine.
  Dr Jennifer FrancisIt's going to be a difficult next few decades, I think.
  Anja TaylorWhen it comes to extreme weather, the connection is pretty clear. The warmer the world, the wilder it gets. And, with the speed that emissions still enter the atmosphere, we're right on track for an unrecognisable future.
  Reporter: Anja TaylorProducer: Anja TaylorResearcher: Anja TaylorCamera: Kevin May, Scott Ross, Jodi Silver, Anja Taylor, Dirk FrenkelSound: Steve Ravich, Markus Graber, Allen Freeman, Dave FraserEditor: Andrew GloverDr Erich FischerInstitute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH
  Dr Karl BraganzaBureau of Meteorology
  Dr Lisa AlexanderClimate Change Research Centre, UNSW
  Dr Susan WijffelsMarine and Atmospheric Research, CSIRO
  Professor Jennifer FrancisInstitute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University
  Dr Erich Fischer Heatwave Research
  Heatwaves increasing
  Water cycle intensifying
  Rainfall extremes intensifying
  Jet stream changes linked to sea ice
  Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes '' geophysical research letters
  Deformed Jet stream linked to extreme Pakistan floods/Russia Fires
  Frozen jet stream links Pakistan floods, Russian fires
  Met office meeting about jet streams
  Has global warming brought an early summer to the US?
  ^ top
VACCINE$-As Army Ducks for Cover, Document Points to Malaria Drug in Afghan Massacre - AGE OF AUTISM
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 20:12
  By Dan Olmsted
  They're getting away with it again.
  The U.S. military is ignoring documented evidence that links a violence-inducing prescription drug with the worst American war crime in decades -- the massacre last year of 16 Afghan civilians by Army Sgt. Robert Bales.
  The Army invented the drug, called Lariam or mefloquine, and has consistently avoided reckoning with the consequences, including a string of bizarre murder-suicides stretching back more than a decade.
  Officials haven't said whether Bales took Lariam, but I've just obtained a formal report filed by the drug company with the Food and Drug Administration that says he did -- the first direct evidence U.S. officials have been aware of the prospect, and for more than a year. (See event/problem narrative below.)
  I got the report from Dr. Remington Nevin, a former Army officer who has studied the drug and published peer-reviewed articles about its dangers. In fact, Nevin and former Army psychiatrist Elspeth Cameron Ritchie just published last month in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatric and the Law Online, noting the "potent psychotropic potential" of the drug. "Severe psychiatric side effects due to mefloquine intoxication are well documented," they wrote, "including anxiety, panic attacks, paranoia, persecutory delusions, dissociative psychosis, and anterograde amnesia. Exposure to the drug has been associated with acts of violence and suicide."
  Nevin told Congress last year it could become "the Agent Orange of our generation." The alarm apparently fell on deaf ears.
  "It remains possible this report was submitted by someone without first-hand knowledge," Nevin told me about the newly disclosed FDA report. "However, by any reasonable standard, the fact that this report clearly alludes to a case that can only be Bales' calls for greater transparency by DoD as to whether he was in fact taking the drug."
  Last month, Time magazine wrote about a similar report filed with the Irish drug agency, which refers to the incident as "medically confirmed." Time called that report a "smoking pillbox."
  The document reproduced here today is specific about the source -- it says the information came from a pharmacist. The report does not name Bales, but the killing of 17 [later reduced to 16] Afghanis would seem to rule out anyone else. It is hard to see how someone at the FDA could have failed to bring it to the attention of the military, or how the military in its exhaustive criminal investigation of the case could have failed to learn what drugs it had prescribed to Bales.
  The Army allowed Bales to plead guilty to the rampage last month and avoid the death penalty. A sentencing trial is scheduled for next month on whether he should receive life in prison with or without parole.
  At the time, I wrote a piece asking, "What is the death penalty for?" and wondering why it would have been taken off the table by allowing a plea deal, in the face of deep anger from of Afghan allies. I speculated the Army might want to avoid an unpleasant discussion of its own drug, in return for sparing Bales' life.
  At the plea hearing, Bales acknowledged using steroids, and there were also reports of drinking alcohol and snorting Valium. If he took Lariam, however, it could create a classic "but for" defense -- but for the drug the Army prescribed him, it's reasonable to argue the murder would not have occurred.
  Absent that, the onus was on Bales for using banned substances, even if they affected his mental state to the point he committed the atrocity. But other soldiers have used alcohol, drugs, and steroids without killing men, women and children and setting some on fire.
  As the New York Times wrote of his guilty plea:
  "But the curtain of enigma about the man himself, and his descent into darkness and murder on the night of the killings, remained firmly in place. The millions of Americans who have pondered the mechanisms of atrocity since the attacks in March 2012 were left in the dark. Even Sergeant Bales himself, finally pressed by the presiding judge, Col. Jeffery Nance, to explain more deeply what happened, seemed baffled."
  ''There's not a good reason in this world for why I did the horrible things I did,'' he said.
  Well, Lariam could be a good reason, not in the sense of an excuse but an explanation, one that might even have rendered Bales not criminally responsible. It would point a finger directly at what, in my view, amounts to a long-running coverup of the drug's toxic effects on both soldiers and civilians. I first wrote about it in 1999 and, with my reporting partner at UPI, Mark Benjamin, published a multi-part investigation.
  "A startling pattern of violence and suicide by America's most elite soldiers has followed their use of a controversial anti-malaria drug, an investigation by United Press International and CNN has found," we reported in 2004.
  Those articles clearly showed aberrant behavior by highly trained troops who had taken the drug, and included a string of murder-suicides at Fort Bragg, N.C., in 2002 among troops recently returned from Afghanistan.
  Certainly the VA is aware of the dangers, and has alerted vets it will consider disability claims based on the drug's psychiatric effects. Sen. Dianne Feinstein has written scalding letters to the Pentagon in the past trying to get it to stop - not just dial back - use of the drug, and the Bales massacre could be a direct result of ignoring those requests.
  In its report to the FDA on what appears to be the Bales case, the drug manufacturer, Roche, notes Lariam should not have been prescribed to anyone with a history of traumatic brain injury, as Bales had. But that hardly exempts the pharmaceutical company, which tracked suicides from the drug beginning in the 1990s but just used the word "depression" -- on the theory that depression can lead to suicide, so there was no need to mention the more alarming word.
  If nothing happens, and Bales is sentenced without any discussion of what role the drug may have played, our government will have basically gotten away with avoiding crucial questions that deserve answers. In less polite terms, the coverup would continue.
  It would not be the first time, and, worst of all, probably not the last; the drug company acknowledges effects that include aggression and psychosis can last "long after" someone stops taking it -- and if the manufacturer is willing to go that far, that means they can basically last forever.
  This delay and denial is a pattern that has played out not just in the military, which claims it can't understand the rate of suicide in soldiers and veterans, but across-the-board in a failure to detect, track, and acknowledge the sometimes terrible consequences of medical interventions and medicines.
  This might be a good time for Sen. Feinstein to write another letter, one marked "urgent," to the Secretary of Defense.
  --
  Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism. His reporting, with Mark Benjamin, on the severe effects of Lariam on U.S. soldiers won best wire-service reporting from the National Mental Health Association in 2005.
BBC News - Swansea measles epidemic: Worries over MMR uptake after outbreak
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 20:06
  10 July 2013Last updated at07:26 ETSome parents are still ignoring the message to immunise their children against measles, an inquiry into the Swansea outbreak has heard.
  A GP at the centre of the recent epidemic said some people had been invited to get their children vaccinated with the MMR jab 15 times.
  Ian Millington gave evidence to the Welsh assembly's health committee.
  The inquiry into the outbreak began on Wednesday, a week after it was declared over.
  More than 1,200 people fell ill, 88 visited hospital and one person died in the outbreak which began in November.
  The response cost Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board an estimated £470,000.
  The health board offered 35,000 vaccinations, including more than 5,000 for 10 to 18-year-olds - the main age group affected.
  Last month the board said 95% of children and teenagers in Swansea, Neath Port Talbot and Bridgend had received one MMR jab for the first time.
  So-called herd immunity is reached when 95% have had both doses.
  Continue reading the main story1988: Combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine is introduced to the UK1998: Dr Andrew Wakefield's now discredited research is published linking the MMR jab to autism2003: MMR uptake for two-year-olds falls from a peak of 94% in 1995 to 78% by 2003. In Swansea it fell to 67.5%November 2012: Swansea outbreak starts when a small number of children return with measles from a holiday camp in south-west EnglandNovember 28: The first outbreak control meeting takes place. Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board agrees to provide a vaccination session for susceptible pupils in schoolsEarly 2013: Around 10 to 20 suspected measles cases are reported per weekFebruary 2013: By 7 February a total of 168 notifications have been received. A nationally-led response starts and a senior team meets for the first time on 18 February. The whole of the health board area is treated as an outbreak area18 April: Gareth Colfer-Williams, 25, is found dead at home in Port Tennant, Swansea. An inquest later found he died from pneumonia after contracting measles22 April: There is a rapid increase in cases. The outbreak reaches its peak, with nearly 200 notifications in a single week22 May: Last laboratory-confirmed case3 July: Outbreak declared overDr Millington, secretary of Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Local Medical Committee, said that until the outbreak the health service had been "fighting a losing battle" because of the now discredited research linking MMR to autism.
  "There was a refusal to have immunisation in the cohort that had not been immunised despite very considerable effort. Having said that we've offered it whenever we can wherever we can," he said.
  "Some of the responses we get are really quite difficult. 'Mind your own business.'
  "People say 'Every time I come here you ask me about my child's immunisation status. Why don't you mind your own business?'
  "That's a very difficult conversation to have. I do think we've tried everything else. Once the outbreak started I think things were different and I think different methods were used and I think they were effective.
  "But it is surprising how many people did not listen to the message and it's surprising how many people have still not listened to the message - they don't want to hear it."
  A drop in the number of children getting the MMR vaccine in Swansea 10 years ago has been blamed on the coverage of a link between autism and the MMR jab in the local press at the time. The link has since been discredited.
  Uptake of the vaccine for two-year-olds in Wales fell from a quarterly peak of 94% in 1995 to 78% by 2003. In Swansea it fell to 67.5%.
  It meant the region had a "vulnerable" age group, AMs were told.
  Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board said Wales should capitalise from the boost in immunisations by launching a publicity campaign about MMR, particularly targeted at teenagers.
  In evidence to the committee, Betsi Cadwaladr health board, which covers north Wales, said it had faced costs of £90,000.
  Aneurin Bevan health board in south east Wales spent £60,000 on its emergency measles plan.
  The Welsh government has praised the response to the outbreak, saying Wales had a public health system "capable of leading and co-ordinating an intense and effective effort".
  "This enabled services to respond quickly and establish processes to deliver large numbers of vaccinations efficiently and effectively outside routine arrangements," it said.
  However, the Welsh Conservatives said a full public inquiry was needed to learn the lessons of the outbreak.
  In its evidence, the British Medical Association (BMA) said: "A lack of experience in identifying the disease, both in the population and amongst medical and nursing staff, also meant that these initial cases might not have been diagnosed swiftly."
  Consideration was given to quarantining susceptible people, but it was judged that there was unlikely to be political or public support for the move, the BMA said.
  When the outbreak reached "the explosive growth stage", the NHS "leapt to respond", it added.
VIDEO-WTF: Justin Bieber Urinates Into Mop Bucket While Yelling 'F*ck Bill Clinton' For Some Reason | Mediaite
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:24
  When the Biebs needs to go, the Biebs needs to go.
  Apparently unable to find a convenient restroom in a New York restaurant earlier this year, teen celebrity Justin Bieber relieved himself in a mop bucket.
  The singer's actions were filmed by one of his friends, during which the group is heard to tell the restaurant's employees'--who may or may not have been present'--that they should feel honored Bieber chose their establishment to befoul.
  ''That's the coolest spot to piss,'' an off-screen voice is heard to say. ''You'll forever remember that.''
  ''You're not gonna remember him pissin' in the restroom,'' says another member of the entourage. ''Like everybody does that.''
  On the way up the staircase, Bieber grabbed a bottle of Windex and sprayed a photo of former President Bill Clinton while yelling, ''F*ck Bill Clinton!'' The last sentence heard before the video cuts off is ''Who stole my beer?!''
  Bill Clinton is commonly credited with having created 21 million jobs during his presidency. Perhaps one of them was the busboy who got to clean up after Bieber.
  Watch the field trip here, courtesy TMZ:
  [h/t TMZ]
  '-->> Follow Evan McMurry (@evanmcmurry) on Twitter
More Frequent, Devastating Hurricanes Coming Due to Climate Change - AccuWeather.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:03
  More Frequent, Devastating Hurricanes Coming Due to Climate ChangeJuly 09, 2013; 8:04 AM
  Strong hurricanes could hit Asia and the U.S. East Coast more often this century, a new study finds.
  The research adds to a growing body of evidence that hurricanes are becoming more intense as global warming heats the oceans. This means Category 1, 2 and 3 storms will have fiercer winds, bumping them up to Category 3, 4 and higher. Overall, the study's modeling approach predicts a 40 percent global increase in tropical cyclones of Category 3 and higher during the 21st century.
  The findings were published in today's (July 8) issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
  The new study also projects that these strong storms will become more frequent in the North Pacific, the North Atlantic and the South Indian Oceans.
  "We see an increase, in particular, toward the middle of the century," said Kerry Emanuel, study author and an MIT climatologist. "The results surprised us, but we haven't gotten so far as to understand why this is happening."
  Scientists actively debate whether tropical cyclones (the broad name for hurricanes, typhoons and tropical storms) will become more frequent, more intense or both as a result of climate change. Global warming has heated the oceans along with the atmosphere, and sea-surface temperature is one of the most important influences on hurricane strength. But other factors - such as climate cycles, like the El Ni±o Southern Oscillation, and interactions with other storms, which can weaken or strengthen storms - also alter tropical storm strength. Hurricanes are also marvelous heat transporters, affecting climate by moving energy around the planet. [Hurricanes from Above: See Nature's Biggest Storms]
  "For scientists, this is far from a solved problem," said Emanuel, who has been a main participant in the debates on the future of hurricanes. "The main message is, we have to continue to regard there being a not-trivial risk of increasing problems from tropical cyclones because of climate change."
  Hurricane Sandy Credit: NOAA | NASA.
  How global warming fuels hurricanes
  Hurricanes feed off warm ocean water. In the ocean's hurricane nurseries, heat rising from the ocean turns into water vapor. As the vapor rises and cools, it condenses into rain. This releases heat, which helps strengthen circulating tropical cyclones. Warmer oceans mean more water vapor, and more intense storms.
  Emanuel relies on a technique called downscaling to estimate how future climate change will shift hurricane strength and frequency. In the new study, he used the latest global climate models, called CMIP5, which project future climate change but are too coarse to resolve "small" features, such as hurricanes. Emanuel ran the models at higher-resolution and randomly generated disturbances similar to tropical cyclones, and then used a theoretical model to predict how strong the storms would become. Emanuel first presented this approach, with an earlier version of the CMIP models (CMIP3), in a 2008 paper in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
  One limitation of relying on global climate models to predict future hurricanes is that these models do not capture the past decade's climate variability, such as relatively stable temperatures between 1998 and 2008, said Peter Webster, a climatologist at Georgia Tech who was not involved in the study. (The hiatus is attributed to natural variability in Earth's climate system, superimposed on the longer-term warming trend.)
  "It should be remembered that the study is a model interpretation of how things might be," Webster said. "So, elegant as [the study] is, it is not going to tilt the scales on global warming one way or the other. The scales will be tilted substantially once we understand the role of tropical cyclones in climate and how tropical cyclones, in turn, modify climate itself."
  More storms in Asia, Atlantic Coast
  In the new study, the North Pacific Ocean basin showed the strongest change in tropical-cyclone frequency and intensity. This means Asia and its global supply chains will be hit hardest by the changes, with higher-intensity storms striking more often, said Matthew Huber, a climatologist and director of the Purdue University Climate Change Research Center who was not involved in the study. [How Strong Can a Hurricane Get?]
  In addition, the model predicts that the North Atlantic and South Indian Oceans will also see an increase in storm frequency and intensity. This contradicts Emanuel's earlier research and other studies based on the previous generation of climate models, which predicted fewer but stronger hurricanes in the North Atlantic, the basin where storms that threaten the East Coast and Southeast form. However, a recent study of coastal storm surge records in the southern United States supports Emanuel's new data.
  But Huber said Emanuel's results for the East Coast are not well supported by previous research and should be viewed as less certain.
  But something the scientists do agree on is that coastal cities need to improve their defenses, as sea level rise alone will increase the vulnerability of such areas to storm surge.
  "The result represents a significant upward revision of previous estimates of tropical cyclone activity in a warmer world, so it is unlikely that communities and states are prepared for, or even preparing for, the magnitude of future risks appropriately," Huber said.
  EmailBecky Oskinor follow her@beckyoskin.Follow us@livescience,Facebook&Google+. Original article onLiveScience.com.
  Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  By Becky Oskin, Staff WriterContinue Reading on LiveScience.com >
Moundalexis.com: /bin/rm: Argument list too long.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:58
  /bin/rm: Argument list too long.After years working with BSD and Linux, this morning I was limited by rm. Apparently there is a maximum number of files that can be passed as arguments to rm. Thankfully, there's an easy workaround.
  Using rm to delete files is as natural to many as breathing, particularly in the BSD/Linux community. Whether it be removing a single named file, a directory, or a set of files using a complex regular expression; rm is generally used with ease on a daily basis. So imagine my surprise when an apparently simple rm command doesn't work.
  I use amavisd-new to perform spam/virus checks on my email. I think it's an excellent method for controlling email of questionable content, since it allows the administrator much control in what action to take when dealing with spam/virus-loaded messages. Without getting into a lot of details, one of the things I have amavisd-new configured to do is move spam/virus mail scored at a particular threshold to /var/virusmails. They aren't delivered to the end user, and they are contained in a location only available to root.
  As you can see, each message classified as spam is gzipped in a timestamp sort of fashion. The same goes for the viruses, although they aren't gzipped.
  root@mx /var/virusmails # lsrazor-agent.logspam-3398a20c9a59797df9b57fbe34feeace-20040519-084342-19051-05.gzspam-57e230b6d1dca0dadf83d858d0b10788-20040519-084400-19144-03.gzspam-6f3be6d2304f90e418db23443916101a-20040519-082357-18227-10.gzvirus-20040419-091017-12544-01virus-20040419-130621-14993-07virus-20040421-120113-57877-07virus-20040421-165651-61698-07virus-20040423-020850-90966-03virus-20040423-090733-97665-04virus-20040427-211030-99133-07virus-20040427-225312-01622-01virus-20040428-190241-18845-05virus-20040505-103654-59956-10After a time, these messages begin to fill /var rather needlessly. My /var partition isn't monstrously large. So from time to time I go in and remove the spam archives. The last example was after a recent removal, hence only three spam messages.
  So I went in and attempt to remove all the files starting with "spam-" - simple enough, right?
  root@mx /var/virusmails # rm spam-*/bin/rm: Argument list too long.Wrong. The irritating (if not slightly elusive) error message. How many files was I dealing with here?
  root@mx /var/virusmails # ls -1 | grep virus | wc -l 1667After a brief search -- checking out limitations on rm and tcsh -- the only useful information that I could find regarding maximum number of arguments was from rm's manpage. It states that "[t]he rm command uses getopt(3) to parse its arguments," which doesn't tell me a whole lot. Perhaps it can't handle more than 1024 arguments?
  The workaround is simple enough. Use find to pipe all the matching files to rm, one at a time.
  root@mx /var/virusmails # find . -name 'spam-*' | xargs rmWorks like a charm.
  May 25, 2004 - Update
  I've received a handful of emails from Slashdot readers about this article, offering more information on this issue. The most well researched one came from John Simpson, who originally saw (and answered) a similar question on the Linux Enthusiasts & Professionals mailing list. While my solution does work for the files in question (in this case), John's comments describe some of its limitations, as well as some history on why the limits are there to begin with.
  i found your site through a slashdot link, and your comment about "rm:Argument list too long" caught my eye... i have a correction and anexplanation of what the problem really is... it's not a limitation of"rm" or of your shell, it's a limit inside the kernel.first the correction: the "find | xargs rm" thing only worked correctlybecause none of the filenames involved had any spaces in them. if thefilenames involved have spaces, you will need to do use find's"-print0" option in conjunction with xargs's "-0" option. otherwise theshell that xargs uses to execute the "rm" command line will treat thespace as a token separator, thereby treating the name as two (or more)names, none of which are the thing you're trying to actually delete.the command line should look like this...find . -name 'spam-*' -print0 | xargs -0 rmand the explanation: in the linux kernel is the function execve(),which is how all of the other exec() functions (execl, execlp, execle,etc.) are actually implemented. the way it works is by creating a 128Kbuffer at the top end of the memory space and copying the command lineand environment for the new process into this space. it then loads thenew program into memory, sets its argv and envp pointers, and jumps toits entry point.there's a lot more to it than that, but the point is that there is a128K buffer which is the only thing "held" from the parent process tothe child. the "Argument list too long" error message is actually thekernel's E2BIG error code, returned when the execve() is not able tofit the supplied argument list and environment into the 128K buffer.this came up a while back on my linux user group's mailing list, withsomebody who wanted some obscenely huge number of environmentvariables. i got curious and walked the kernel source code in order tofind the answer. my post is here...http://leap-cf.org/oldarchive/2004-May/038802.htmlthe mailing list archiver didn't clean up the extra "=20" marks thatgpg put at the end of each line when it signed it, but other than thatit's pretty clear.For a more in depth technical explanation regarding the Linux kernel, read John's orginal post to the LEAP list. While I use BSD kernels, I imagine that there are similar (if not identical) limits there as well.
  Thanks John!
Obama claims broccoli is his favorite food
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:31
  Obama claims broccoli is his favorite foodTop News
  Obama claims broccoli is his favorite food
  Tue, Jul 09 18:31 PM EDT
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama likes burgers, hot dogs and such, but when it came time to answer a kid journalist's question about his favorite food, broccoli was the first word that sprang from his lips.
  This revelation came on Tuesday at a White House event that recognized children who won a healthy recipe contest, as part of first lady Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign.
  Having fun with the children, Obama agreed to take two questions from the journalists among them. The first asked what was Obama's favorite food. Broccoli was the presidential reply, according to a White House aide.
  This from a politician who has literally eaten his way across the country: Burgers in a Washington suburb with Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev; ribs in Asheville, North Carolina; hot dogs at a basketball game in Dayton, Ohio; and a tasty pastry called a kringle in Wisconsin.
  Obama's disclosure puts him starkly at odds with the culinary tastes of George H.W. Bush, who as president famously declared his dislike for broccoli.
  "And I haven't liked it since I was a little kid and my mother made me eat it. And I'm president of the United States, and I'm not going to eat any more broccoli!" Bush said in 1990.
  Steamed broccoli growers shipped thousands of pounds of broccoli to the White House in protest, and the vegetable was farmed out to homeless shelters.
  Obama was clearly enjoying the spirit of the anti-obesity event, called the "Kids' State Dinner," which recognized winning recipes like "picky eater pita pizza pockets" and "sweet potato turkey sliders."
  "Food can be fun. It can be healthy," Obama said. "You are setting up habits that are going to be great your entire life."
  He joked that he's not much of a cook. "(In) my family, when they cooked vegetables, they were all boiled." Since then, he said, he has learned that healthy food can also taste good.
  (Reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Stacey Joyce)
  Obama claims broccoli is his favorite foodTop News
  Obama claims broccoli is his favorite food
  Tue, Jul 09 18:31 PM EDT
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama likes burgers, hot dogs and such, but when it came time to answer a kid journalist's question about his favorite food, broccoli was the first word that sprang from his lips.
  This revelation came on Tuesday at a White House event that recognized children who won a healthy recipe contest, as part of first lady Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign.
  Having fun with the children, Obama agreed to take two questions from the journalists among them. The first asked what was Obama's favorite food. Broccoli was the presidential reply, according to a White House aide.
  This from a politician who has literally eaten his way across the country: Burgers in a Washington suburb with Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev; ribs in Asheville, North Carolina; hot dogs at a basketball game in Dayton, Ohio; and a tasty pastry called a kringle in Wisconsin.
  Obama's disclosure puts him starkly at odds with the culinary tastes of George H.W. Bush, who as president famously declared his dislike for broccoli.
  "And I haven't liked it since I was a little kid and my mother made me eat it. And I'm president of the United States, and I'm not going to eat any more broccoli!" Bush said in 1990.
  Steamed broccoli growers shipped thousands of pounds of broccoli to the White House in protest, and the vegetable was farmed out to homeless shelters.
  Obama was clearly enjoying the spirit of the anti-obesity event, called the "Kids' State Dinner," which recognized winning recipes like "picky eater pita pizza pockets" and "sweet potato turkey sliders."
  "Food can be fun. It can be healthy," Obama said. "You are setting up habits that are going to be great your entire life."
  He joked that he's not much of a cook. "(In) my family, when they cooked vegetables, they were all boiled." Since then, he said, he has learned that healthy food can also taste good.
  (Reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Stacey Joyce)
Getting Started With the BeagleBone Black: A 1GHz ARM Linux Machine for $45 | Linux.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:38
  The BeagleBone Black (BBB) provides a 1GHz ARM Cortex-A8 with 512Mb of RAM and 2Gb of eMMC flash from which you can run a GNU/Linux system around a 3.8 Linux Kernel. Throw ethernet, HDMI, and a load of IO pins into the mix and you have a little machine that straddles the border between embedded Linux and the Arduino world. The Black is the latest addition to the Beagle series of ARM-based, single-board computers and is based on the BeagleBone before it. The package I got with the BBB contained the board and a single USB cable. You can power the BBB over the USB cable from a HUB so a dedicated power brick is not a necessity.
  Looking at the rows of 46 pins on each side of the BBB indicates that the board is very useful for many hardware projects. Depending on how you configure your BBB you can have up to 65 general-purpose, digital IO pins, 8 PWMs, 4 timers, 7 1.8V analog inputs, some serial UARTs, 2 I2C, and 2 SPI along with access to 3.3V and 5V. Some of the pins can be used for multiple purposes. For example, pin 17 on one header serves as a digital IO pin, an I2C, and an SPI pin, so you have to choose for which purpose you want to use it. The two header blocks on the BBB are referred to as the P8 and P9.
  The HDMI output on the BBB is implemented by bringing a "cape" onto the main board. Capes are what the Beagle community calls the cards, which can be attached to the pin headers, similar to what are called Shields in the Arduino world. The HDMI output on the BBB uses a collection of the general-purpose output pins from the two headers on the BBB. Specifically, it wants 3 SPI pins on header P9 and 30 pins on the P8 header. So if you have an HDMI display then you lose about 2/3 of the pins on the P9 header. More disturbing, if you are planning to output to a 1080 display you can only get a 24Hz output at that resolution (Page 68 of the System Reference Manual). Though that limitation has changed over software revisions.
  Getting Started with the BeagleBone BlackWhen I first booted the BBB I got a graphical display over its HDMI but I couldn't get any mouse or keyboard to work on any USB port with either a passive or powered hub. That was when I decided I needed to update to the latest software before proceeding. The first step in updating the Linux distribution on the eMMC of the BBB is to download the Angstrom Distribution eMMC flasher from the Latest Images. Use unxz to uncompress the downloaded image and dd to write it to a microSD card. Many of the directions, including those that came on my BBB itself are very Windows-centric.
  Once you have written the roughly 4GB image to a microSD card, turn off the BBB, insert the card into the BBB, and apply power while holding the "boot" button which is on the opposite side of the BBB from where the microSD card plugs in. During flashing, the LEDs will flash and when done all the LEDs will remain on. For me, the flashing procedure took around an hour to complete.
  After updating the eMMC I found that if I booted the BBB with a network cable plugged in, I never got HDMI output. To get a display I had to boot without the network cable and then plug in the network cable to gain network access.
  Power wise, the BBB drew 2.7 Watts sitting idle at a 720p desktop with a passive hub, keyboard and mouse connected but without a network connection. Plugging in an ethernet cable boosted the draw to 3.2 W. Running the CPU at 100 percent moved to 3.9 W total. Disconnecting the hub (and thus keyboard and mouse) dropped the power draw by 0.8 W.
  How to Use the GPIO PinsAccess to the various pins in the headers on the left and right side of the BBB is done through the Linux kernel using its GPIO Interfaces. To demonstrate how to give this a spin I attached an LED from pin 42 (GPIO_7) to the ground pin 44 next to it. That is the red LED shown in the photo, above. The BBB booted up without the LED lit.
  To get the LED to shine you have to map the GPIO_7 pin into the filesystem. This is done by echoing the GPIO pin into the export file. As you can see, below, I created the new gpio7 link using the export file in order to control that pin. The value is initially zero but when I echo high into the direction the LED lit up!
  root@bbb:/sys/class/gpio# echo 7 > /sys/class/gpio/exportroot@bbb:/sys/class/gpio# ls -lhtotal 0--w------- 1 root root 4.0K Jun 1 10:54 exportlrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jun 1 10:54 gpio7 -> ../../devices/virtual/gpio/gpio7lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jan 1 2000 gpiochip0 -> ../../devices/virtual/gpio/gpiochip0lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jan 1 2000 gpiochip32 -> ../../devices/virtual/gpio/gpiochip32lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jan 1 2000 gpiochip64 -> ../../devices/virtual/gpio/gpiochip64lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jan 1 2000 gpiochip96 -> ../../devices/virtual/gpio/gpiochip96--w------- 1 root root 4.0K Jan 1 2000 unexportroot@bbb:/sys/class/gpio# cd gpio7root@bbb:/sys/class/gpio/gpio7# cat value 0root@bbb:/sys/class/gpio/gpio7# echo low > direction root@bbb:/sys/class/gpio/gpio7# echo high > direction To use GPIO pins that are not connected to the first gpio controller chip (which controls 32 pins), you should refer to the Expansion Header Pinout table in the System Reference Manual to calculate the correct number to echo into the exports file. For example GPIO_51 on pin 16 of the P9 header is gpio1[19]. This makes it the 19th pin on the second gpio controller so you would echo 32+19=51 into the exports file to access GPIO_51.
  One issue I encountered with the hardware design is that the large USB port on the BBB is very close to the microHDMI port which is attached to the other side of the board. The common combination of plugging in cables to both ports left the cable sleaves pushing each other slightly.
  In my next article on the BBB I'll show benchmarks for its CPU, along with performance figures for the eMMC flash that comes on the board.
Canada Day Pressure Cooker Bomb Plot Will Go Straight To Canadian Supreme Court
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:26
MSNBC's Michael Eric Dyson: Justice System Racist Against Black People, ''George Zimmermans Of The World Continue To Get Away With Killing'' Black Kids'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:16
  WARNING: Watching this video may cause your eyes to bleed.
  Via Mediaite:
  On Tuesday, Georgetown University Professor Michael Eric Dyson told MSNBC's Martin Bashir that he believes, if the racial distinctions were reversed in the case against George Zimmerman for the 2012 murder of Trayvon Martin, the public's reaction to the cases would be dramatically different. He added that the ''George Zimmermans of the world continue to get away'' with ''the killing of our children'' without facing justice. [...]
  ''Time and again, for one reason or another, young black people lose their lives and it is seen as the necessary condition for the justice system to prevail,'' Dyson insisted.
  He asked if the victim in this case were white, or if Zimmerman were black, ''would we see the same outcome?''
  ''The unfortunate and tragic reality is that our children of color pay the price for the contradictions in a justice system,'' he declared. ''And the George Zimmermans of the world continue to get away, if it is true, with the killing of our children without necessarily facing the kind of consequences that a justice system would demand.''
Pro-Abortion Fanatics Shout ''Fuck The Church'' During Chants At Texas Capitol'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:15
  Class acts.
  Via LifeNews:
  The pro-abortion madness is continuing for yet another week. On the heels of death threats from an abortion activist to the Lt. Governor comes another outrage.
  As members of the Texas legislature attempt to debate a bill that would ban late-term abortions after 20 weeks, abortion activists are shouting.
  The typical pro-abortion chant goes something like this: ''Women must decide their fate, not the church, not the state.'' Bryan Kemper of Stand True is on the scene with his staff and says many of the dozens of abortion advocates screaming tonight in the Texas capitol are replacing ''not the church'' with ''f'-- the church.''
  Keep reading'...
Fugitive Snowden is likely Venezuela bound: U.S. journalist
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Reuters: World News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:13
  Glenn Greenwald, the blogger and journalist who broke the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance scandal, uses his lapton after an exclusive interview with Reuters in Rio de Janeiro July 9, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Sergio Moraes
  By Paulo Prada
  RIO DE JANEIRO | Tue Jul 9, 2013 10:02pm EDT
  RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) - Fugitive former U.S. intelligence contractor Edward Snowden will likely accept asylum in Venezuela to escape prosecution in the United States, said Glenn Greenwald, the U.S. journalist who first published the secret documents that Snowden leaked.
  In an interview immediately after speaking to Snowden by online chat on Tuesday, Greenwald said that Venezuela - one of three Latin American countries that have offered Snowden asylum - is the one most likely to guarantee his safety, especially as the United States pressures other nations not to take him if he is able to leave his current limbo at a Russian airport.
  Nicaragua and Bolivia have also said they would accept Snowden but Venezuela is better poised "to get him safely from Moscow to Latin America and to protect him once he's there," Greenwald said. "They're a bigger country, a stronger country and a richer country with more leverage in international affairs."
  WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group that has been advising Snowden on his legal options in the search for asylum, suggested earlier on Tuesday that new developments in Snowden's search could unfold on Wednesday.
  Greenwald, though, said a resolution to the crisis is still unclear and could take "days or hours or weeks."
  Greenwald, a blogger and columnist for the London-based Guardian newspaper, said he based his opinion on an "informed guess" after recent contacts with Snowden.
  Those discussions, he said, also lead him to believe that the trove of documents that Snowden took from the U.S. National Security Agency, or NSA, remains safely out of the hands of any foreign governments.
  Greenwald returned to his home in Rio de Janeiro after a June meeting with Snowden in Hong Kong, from where Greenwald published the first of many reports that rattled the U.S. intelligence community by disclosing the breadth and depth of alleged surveillance by the NSA on telephone and internet usage of U.S. citizens.
  The reports also appear to shed light on efforts by U.S. intelligence to get similar data in Europe, Latin America and elsewhere.
  At first, Greenwald lost contact with Snowden as the former contractor traveled from Hong Kong to Russia in search of a destination that would shield him from U.S. prosecutors. On Saturday, however, Snowden reached out to Greenwald via an encrypted internet chat service the two use to communicate.
  SNOWDEN'S CHALLENGE
  Since then, Greenwald said, Snowden has explained his options but given no clear sign of how soon he might travel. While Russia has denied him entry beyond the international area of a Moscow airport terminal, Snowden has had Internet access and been able to communicate with those seeking to help him.
  "He's not in anyone's custody or detention and never has been," Greenwald said.
  Snowden's challenge, he added, is "figuring out how to get to the country that has offered him asylum" despite the efforts of the United States, which Greenwald characterized as "the rogue, lawless empire that has proven itself willing to engage in rogue behavior to prevent him physically from getting there."
  Greenwald dismissed suggestions that Snowden's passage through China and Russia had given authorities in either country the opportunity to seize the intelligence in his possession.
  "He gave no information of any kind to the Chinese government or the Russian government," Greenwald said.
  Media reports have said Snowden is traveling with numerous laptop computers but Greenwald said the former contractor is not foolish enough to store information where it could be easily seized.
  "There are all sorts of smarter and safer ways for someone who knows what they're doing - and he knows what he's doing - to store and carry large amounts of data."
  Greenwald is facing pressure of his own as he filters through the more than 5,000 documents, a sliver of the entire trove, that Snowden gave him. In addition to a media onslaught and criticism by opponents of the leaks back in the United States, Greenwald said he may have already been targeted by intelligence forces.
  While in Hong Kong, he said he told his longtime boyfriend, a Brazilian communications student, on an Internet call that he would send him some of the documents by email. Two days later, Greenwald said, his boyfriend's laptop went missing from their Rio home.
  Greenwald said he has no evidence of a break-in, but that "obviously it's a possibility."
  Now, Greenwald said, he is focused on digesting the rest of the documents and writing additional stories, a process he expects to last months. Future coverage, he said, would shed more light on how the NSA collects data and interacts with telecommunications, software companies and other intelligence agencies in the United States.
  Without giving further details, Greenwald said the bulk of his energy would go toward figuring out how to corroborate and explain what is often highly technical and arcane subject matter in the documents. "You can really alienate people with the technological and legal complexity of the stories."
  Despite Snowden's recent association with WikiLeaks, which in recent years upended intelligence circles with high-profile military leaks of its own, Greenwald said Snowden is unlikely to disclose the rest of his intelligence in the large, unprocessed quantities that WikiLeaks has used in the past.
  "If he had wanted a WikiLeaks-style document dump he could have gone to them in the first instance," Greenwald said.
  Greenwald said he has for years sought to scrutinize and draw attention to the scope of U.S. intelligence gathering.
  "I have been trying to do everything possible to expose the excesses of the NSA and the dangers of extreme secrecy behind which the U.S. government operates," he said. "So to be essentially given thousands of top secret documents that prove all the things I have been saying ... and much more ... is very invigorating."
  (Reporting by Paulo Prada; Editing by Kieran Murray and Lisa Shumaker)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprints
New Cell Phone Spying Revelations: Phones Near Targeted Individual Remotely Activated As Bugs
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dprogram.net
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:03
  July 9th, 2013
  (MarkDice) '' New Cell Phone Spying Revelations: Phones Near Targeted Individual Remotely Activated As Bugs If Their Phone's Mic is Muffled or Has the Battery Removed.
  Tags: battery removed, bugs, cell phone spying, dice, mark, mic, targeted remotelyThis entry was posted on Tuesday, July 9th, 2013 at 7:49 pm and is filed under Dictatorship, Education/Mind Control, Fascism, Film/Video, Martial Law/Police State, NWO. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Maddow: Ron Paul And Rand Paul Are RACISTS!
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:02
Re: The Decline of Shortwave Radio Means the Spread of World Conflict
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Radio Preppers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:57
  KC9TNH and geek - here's a link from the ARRL website:2012 Marks All Time High for Amateur Radio Licenses
  Here's the pertinent (for me) excerpt(s):
  "... ''This is an all-time high for Technician, General and Amateur Extra class licensees,'' she said. ''When looking at the three current license classes, the number of Technicians, Generals and Amateur Extras peaked in December at 345,369, 163,370 and 130,736, respectively...(classes that saw growth)
  "...The number of licensees increased at an average rate of 21 per day, while the number of US licensees has increased by 7 percent since 2008!'' More than 3000 new licenses were issued in 2012 than in 2011...
  The source data the article was drawn from comes from this FCC chart - check out the numbers for 2013...so far...
  Graphs of All FCC Licensees by License Class
  Oh, and if I'm reading this correctly - in just the 4 years since 2008 - there have been over 49,000 new amateur licenses issued...that's the largest increase in the last 15 years...and 2007 actually corrected a seven year decline that started in 2002...
  No, I don't think truckers can account for this trend....
  Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Abortion restrictions pass Texas House, gain votes since Wendy Davis filibuster
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Twitchy » US Politics
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:57
  It was Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis' nearly 11-hour filibuster against new abortion restrictions that brought national attention to Texas' debate over late-term abortion, but her efforts didn't sway many votes in the state House, at least in her direction. GOP consultant Matt Mackowiak and others noted that the legislation actually picked up a few votes.
  Orange-shirted abortion rights activists crowded the rotunda and met Republican representatives with a chant of ''Shame on you!''
  The bill moves to a final vote tomorrow in the House before moving to the Senate on Thursday.
Fears Syrian War Spreading Into Lebanon
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:25
Pant Suits Gets Her Own Attack Watch-Style Website'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:23
  Via National Journal:
  With Hillary Clinton already facing attacks from the right, a Democratic super PAC specializing in opposition research is expanding its mission to playing defense.
  American Bridge, which made a name for itself in the 2012 election by knocking down Republican candidates from Mitt Romney to Todd Akin, is launching a web site to defend potential Democratic presidential candidates in 2016. The web site, CorrecttheRecord2016.org, will aim to debunk attacks against Democrats while flogging gaffes and flip-flops by possible Republican contenders.
  Fueled by the Supreme Court's ruling in the Citizens United case that opened the floodgates to super PACS, the oppo wars are evolving into an arms race. The American Bridge project comes less than three weeks after a new Republican super PAC, America Rising, started an anti-Clinton initiative called StopHillary2016.org. Another super PAC, American Crossroads, unleashed an online video in May criticizing Clinton's response to the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that killed four people.
  These missives against Clinton were answered only by an unofficial collection of her supporters, since the former Secretary of State, U.S. senator and First Lady is not an elected official or a candidate. (She has not officially endorsed a super PAC, called Ready for Hillary, trying to build support for her presidential bid.) In the meantime, Democrats and Republicans are eager to use the pre-campaign period to try to define her on their own terms.
  The mudslinging against Clinton '' and other possible Democratic candidates like Vice President Joe Biden and Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley '-- is expected to intensify with each passing day as the 2016 election approaches. Last month, the New York Times reported that Republicans were testing the message that Clinton was too old to be president, eager to contrast their younger crop of prospective candidates against her.
  Keep reading'...
  HT: Rare
The Real IRS Scandal Isn't Being Reported By Anyone
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Crooks and Liars
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:21
  Even Lawrence O'Donnell isn't talking about the real IRS scandal. Yes, he's been vindicated and Salon'stimeline of events demonstrates just how badly the media blew the whole story. But still, the IRS is doing scandalous things, but no media outlets are talking about it.
  Here's the real scandal. The IRS is releasing information that is private, confidential, and includes people's Social Security numbers. It is pure incompetence and shows just how behind the times they are with regard to best practices and privacy issues.
  Here's a statement from Public Resource about it:
  Public.Resource.Org has discovered that the Internal Revenue Service has posted the Social Security Numbers of tens of thousands of Americans on government web sites. The database in question contains the filings of Section 527 political organizations such as campaign committees. This Section 527 database is an essential tool used by journalists, watchdog groups, congressional staffers, and citizens. While the public posting of this database serves a vital public purpose (and this database must be restored as quickly as possible), the failure to remove individual Social Security Numbers is an extraordinarily reckless act.
  On July 2, Public.Resource.Org discovered this systematic violation of Americans' privacy and notified the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. We documented our findings in an audit document, copies of which were furnished to I.R.S. officials and senior White House officials. On July 3, the administration removed this database from public view.
  Public.Resource.Org uncovered this serious violation of federal law in the course of an unrelated audit which was sparked when, on June 18, the I.R.S. notified Public.Resource.Org that it had sent out an improperly-vetted shipment of data on DVD for the January release of the Form 990-T, the Exempt Organization Business Income Tax Return. Because the I.R.S. had publicly released that data in February, and had not notified recipients of the bulk data subscription of this privacy breach for several months, Public.Resource.Org conducted a systematic examination of the breach and how it was handled and delivered that audit to the Inspector General on July 1, 2013.
  But wait, there's more:
  The tainted political money database run by the government on the Internet is just one symptom of a deeply broken dissemination strategy the I.R.S. has insisted on pursuing. The I.R.S.deliberately dumbs down the e-filed returns of big nonprofits, many of which are able to hide lavish compensation schemes, excessive fund-raising expenses, and other expenditures that have little to do with public benefit.
  If you read through the entire release, it appears as though Public Resource is saying that the IRS intentionally released a tainted database in order to shield non-profits from transparency and scrutiny by the public and by journalists. Because of the data breaches, they requested that the database be pulled from public view, which means none of us can actually access the data and use it properly.
  That's a scandal. A big one. And if it isn't repaired and those databases released soon, we'll all lose the ability to know who is lying to us about our politics, our politicians, and our elections.
The Rainmakers: How Human Beings Control the Weather
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: usfollowme
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:20
  http://gizmodo.com/the-rainmakers-how-human-beings-control-the-weather-707081383
The Plus Three, Minus Eight Rule Could Help You Survive a Plane Crash
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: EconomicPolicyJournal.com
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:19
  Via LifeHacker:Do you tune out as soon as you get on the plane or it's about to land? That's probably not a good idea, according to research on when most accidents happen. The "plus three, minus eight" rule can help you stay alert when you fly.
  In an article on ABC News, Ben Sherwood, author of "The Survivors Club '-- The Secrets and Science That Could Save Your Life" (and president of ABC News) says that 80 percent of all plane crashes happen within the first three minutes of takeoff or in the eight minutes before landing. These are the times you'll want to stay alert just in case. Leave your shoes on, the reading for later, etc.
VIDEO: Two flight attendants ejected on impact
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:17
  This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
CNN moves to 24/7 Zimmerman format
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The View From Falling Downs
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:16
  That's right folks, they've made it official; you don't ever again have to miss a single moment of the biggest news story in the world; the Zimmerman trial.Nevermind exploding planes in San Francisco, exploding trains in Canada, imploding governments in the Middle East.
  CNN knows that the only story you care about is the one where that white dumbshit in Florida killed that black kid.
  While young black males are by far the most likely to get shot in America, what makes this case special is that he was shot by a white civilian and not a cop or a gangsta.
  Mind you, Zimmerman was an achingly wannabe cop, but he didn't have his badge yet.
  So that must be why it's a big story.
  The hundreds of black kids who have been shot down since Trayvon Martin are merely so many footnotes.
ISI Chief: Pakistan Has 'Understanding' With US on Drone Strikes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: News From Antiwar.com
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:14
  Buried in a several-hundred page leaked report on the US raid on Abbotabad, former ISI chief Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha confirmed that the Pakistani government has a long-standing ''understanding'' with the Obama Administration about US drone strikes.
  Pasha confirmed that while the Pakistani civilian government regularly complains about the drones in public, they have privately acquiesced to the US on the strikes, believing they were ''useful'' despite being hugely unpopular.
  Recently elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has promised to revoke any ''tacit'' agreements with the US on drone strikes, but since those agreements were never written down in the first place, the US has assumed the public complaints are just part of the narrative.
  Pasha confirmed that at this point it would be difficult to convince the US that the ''understanding'' no longer applies, and that it would've been much easier if Pakistan had simply rejected the strikes in the first place instead of trying to retroactively retract a secret deal.
  Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
"Snowden Should Come Back To The US Which Is The Model Of Justice In The World!" Sen Menendez
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:14
Texas Democrat: Anti-Abortion Men Were Taught ''How To Potty'' By Women'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:12
  And pro-abortion men weren't?
  Via TPM:
  A female Texas state representative took to the state House floor on Tuesday with some sharp words for the men in the legislature who were trying to push through a bill to limit abortions.
  Texas state Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D) was answering questions about amendment she proposed, which would allow an exemption to the proposed 20-week abortion restriction in cases of rape and incest. Thompson was exasperated about the Republican effort.
  ''We were these men's first teachers. We taught them how to put their pants on, how to tie their shoes, how to potty,'' Thompson said. ''And all of a sudden when we get to be adults, then we become senile to the extent that we don't know what is good for ourselves, we cannot make decisions for ourselves, like we can't think ourselves out of a paper bag. And we can.''
Texas State Senator Responds To Wendy Davis' Sneakers With Baby Shoes'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:11
  Love it.
  Via LifeNews:
  During the hearing in the state House yesterday on the 20-week abortion ban, Texas State Senator State Senator Bob Deuell, MD held up a pair of baby shoes to represent the unborn children who are aborted.
  The shoes are a powerful visual symbol counteracting the running shoes that have been a pro-abortion symbol of the Wendy Davis filibuster against the late-term abortion ban.
  Above is the picture of Duell holding up the shoes along with a collection of tweets with pictures and commentary on the hearing yesterday and the thousands of pro-life advocates who showed up in Austin to support the bill.
Snowden has not yet accepted asylum in Venezuela: WikiLeaks
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Reuters: World News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:07
  Protesters supporting Edward Snowden, a contractor at the National Security Agency (NSA), hold a photo of Snowden during a demonstration outside the U.S. Consulate in Hong Kong June 13, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Bobby Yip
  By Steve Gutterman
  MOSCOW | Tue Jul 9, 2013 9:05pm EDT
  MOSCOW (Reuters) - Former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden has not yet formally accepted asylum in Venezuela, the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks said on Tuesday after a Russian lawmaker posted a statement to that effect on Twitter and then deleted it.
  WikiLeaks, on its own Twitter feed, said that states involved in deciding an asylum destination for Snowden, who fled the United States last month, "will make the announcement if and when the appropriate time comes."
  On its Twitter feed, Wikileaks later said: "Tomorrow the first phase of Edward Snowden's 'Flight of Liberty' campaign will be launched. Follow for further details."
  The group did not immediately provide any further information.
  Snowden, who is wanted in the United States on espionage charges after revealing details of secret surveillance programs, is believed to be holed up in the transit area at a Moscow airport where he arrived on June 23 from Hong Kong.
  Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said on Friday that he had decided to offer the 30-year-old American asylum, but his government confirmed it had heard nothing back so far.
  "He has to be on Venezuelan territory ... The reality is that he is trapped in the airport's transit zone," Foreign Minister Elias Jaua told reporters in Caracas on Tuesday.
  Nicaragua and Bolivia also have said they would take in Snowden, who has appealed to about 20 countries for asylum.
  Alexei Pushkov, the pro-Kremlin chairman of the international affairs committee in Russia's lower house of parliament, tweeted that Snowden had accepted Venezuela's asylum offer, but the tweet swiftly disappeared from his Twitter feed.
  Pushkov later tweeted that he had seen the news on state-run Russian television channel Rossiya-24, but a representative of Rossiya-24 said it had been referring to Pushkov's initial tweet.
  "Edward #Snowden has not yet formally accepted asylum in Venezuela," Wikileaks, whose British legal researcher Sarah Harrison is assisting Snowden and traveled to Moscow with him, later said on Twitter.
  Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Snowden should choose a final destination and go there as soon as possible, but it is unclear how he would get to any of the Latin American countries that have offered him asylum.
  Bolivia has accused Spain, France, Portugal and Italy of closing their skies to President Evo Morales' plane last week after being told it was carrying Snowden from Moscow to Bolivia.
  There are no direct commercial flights from Moscow to Venezuela, Nicaragua or Bolivia, and U.S. authorities have urged nations around the world not to give Snowden refuge.
  "Mr Snowden ought to be returned to the United States where he is wanted on felony charges," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Tuesday. "He should not be permitted to engage in further international travel beyond the travel necessary to return to the United States."
  "And we've communicated that position with our Russian counterparts and with every country, broadly speaking, that has been discussed as a possible either transition point or destination point for Mr Snowden," Carney told reporters at a daily briefing.
  (Additional reporting by Gabriela Baczynska in Moscow, Roberta Rampton in Washington and Daniel Wallis in Caracas; Editing by Robin Pomeroy and Stacey Joyce)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprints
Lone Ranger film review: false-flag attacks by US oligarchs for genocide, resource control
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Washington's Blog
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 02:01
  The Lone Ranger's story builds a literal bridge from past to present to understand our real-world US oligarchs' lies and false flag attacks to take land and resources. Plot:
  The movie opens with a 1933 view of the construction of a bridge: the Golden Gate. Bridges connect one area to another, but only for those who wish to make the connection. A young boy receives a story from an aged Native American; I don't know about you, but that boy would be just a few years older than my own father.The antagonists in the story are connected by birth: two brothers. One brother orders the Texas Rangers for law enforcement and is a railroad baron; the other brother is an openly sadistic criminal who enjoys murder and eating human flesh. They pretend to be enemies and unknown to each other, but always are working together.The criminal brother stages false flag attacks on ranches to blame Native Americans. The white collar criminal brother marshals the military to attack, kill, and drive Native Americans off the land.The goal of the two brothers, from their introduction together as young men, is to take silver off the land for their personal wealth.One bro is a psychopath in political and economic power who conducts press conferences and orders the military. The other bro is the terrorist who ''justifies'' the psychopath's policies. They only pretend to be enemies, but use each other's roles to further their mutual policy agenda and wealth.Our real-world US oligarchs in government, money, and media continue to lie and stage false flag attacks to war-steal land and resources. They, too, pretend that ''terrorists'' are enemies rather than their own creations to justify their wars and looting. From history to the present:
  The most elegant solution is for Americans in military and government to recognize ''emperor has no clothes'' unlawful orders, refuse them, and arrest those who issued them.
Will new production facility raise the bar for YouTube videos?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: CNET News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:59
  YouTube Space LA offers a place for creators to use high-end equipment and get technical advice from experts. CNET's Sumi Das gets a tour.
  YouTube Space.
  (Credit: CNET)If you've ever spent time on YouTube, you know that it's a mixed bag. There are the slick professional videos, the shaky (but often side-splitting) clips shot on smartphones and everything in between.
  In an effort to raise the quality of YouTube videos, the company has built YouTube Space LA, a 41,000-square-foot facility that offers practically every type of video production tool, free of charge. Of course, only serious creators need apply. Applicants must be YouTube Partners who have a track record of regularly contributing videos. But that doesn't mean they have to be churning out hits a la "Gangnam Style." The YouTube Space LA FAQ states that the goal is to help both established and emerging creators.
  YouTube offers creators free use of production facilityThe facility itself is production heaven. Liam Collins, who runs the facility, gave us a tour, showing us the various sound stages, green screen studios, editing areas, and control rooms. Equipment available for creators includes cinema cameras, DSLRs and even a Phantom camera -- a top-of-the-line high-speed camera that produces stunning slow-mo shots. The facility also runs workshops and "labs" for creators, a chance to advance their technical skills.
  Within 15 minutes of walking into YouTube Space, I ran into four friends and former co-workers. Collins said the lobby with its large video wall and comfy sofas that encourage lounging and shoulder-rubbing was designed specifically for those sorts of run-ins. Why? Because it leads to collaboration and that's a key ingredient of YouTube Space LA. The hope is that creators will work together, leveraging their individual strengths and assisting fellow partners with their videos. And if the videos look a little more polished as a result, that translates into valuable page views for YouTube.
The NSA Has Inserted Its Code Into Android OS, Bugging Three Quarters Of All Smartphones
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Zero Hedge
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:49
  Over a decade ago, it was discovered that the NSA embedded backdoor access into Windows 95, and likely into virtually all other subsequent internet connected, desktop-based operating systems. However, with the passage of time, more and more people went "mobile", and as a result the NSA had to adapt. And adapt they have: as Bloomberg reports, "The NSA is quietly writing code for Google's Android OS."
  Is it ironic that the same "don't be evil" Google which went to such great lengths in the aftermath of the Snowden scandal to wash its hands of snooping on its customers and even filed a request with the secretive FISA court asking permission to disclose more information about the government's data requests, is embedding NSA code into its mobile operating system, which according to IDC runs on three-quarters of all smartphones shipped in the first quarter? Yes, yes it is.
  Google spokeswoman Gina Scigliano confirms that the company has already inserted some of the NSA's programming in Android OS. "All Android code and contributors are publicly available for review at source.android.com." Scigliano says, declining to comment further.
  From Bloomberg:
  Through its open-source Android project, Google has agreed to incorporate code, first developed by the agency in 2011, into future versions of its mobile operating system, which according to market researcher IDC runs on three-quarters of the smartphones shipped globally in the first quarter. NSA officials say their code, known as Security Enhancements for Android, isolates apps to prevent hackers and marketers from gaining access to personal or corporate data stored on a device. Eventually all new phones, tablets, televisions, cars, and other devices that rely on Android will include NSA code, agency spokeswoman Vanee' Vines said in an e-mailed statement. NSA researcher Stephen Smalley, who works on the program, says, ''Our goal is to raise the bar in the security of commodity mobile devices.''
  See, there's no need to worry: the reason the NSA is generously providing the source code for every Google-based smartphone is for your own security. Oh but it's open-sourced, so someone else will intercept any and all attempts at malice. We forgot.
  The story continues:
  In a 2011 presentation obtained by Bloomberg Businessweek, Smalley listed among the benefits of the program that it's ''normally invisible to users.'' The program's top goal, according to that presentation: ''Improve our understanding of Android security.''
  Well one wouldn't want their bug to be visible to users now, would one...
  Vines wouldn't say whether the agency's work on Android and other software is part of or helps with Prism. ''The source code is publicly available for anyone to use, and that includes the ability to review the code line by line,'' she said in her statement. Most of the NSA's suggested additions to the operating system can already be found buried in Google's latest release'--on newer devices including Sony's Xperia Z, HTC's One, and Samsung Electronics' Galaxy S4. Although the features are not turned on by default, according to agency documentation, future versions will be. In May the Pentagon approved the use of smartphones and tablets that run Samsung's mobile enterprise software, Knox, which also includes NSA programming, the company wrote in a June white paper. Sony, HTC, and Samsung declined to comment.
  Apple appears to be immune from this unprecedented breach of customer loyalty, if only for now, although open-sourced Linux may not be as lucky:
  ''Apple (AAPL) does not accept source code from any government agencies for any of our operating systems or other products,'' says Kristin Huguet, a spokeswoman for the company. It's not known if any other proprietary operating systems are using NSA code. SE for Android is an offshoot of a long-running NSA project called Security-Enhanced Linux. That code was integrated a decade ago into the main version of the open-source operating system, the server platform of choice for Internet leaders including Google, Facebook (FB), and Yahoo! (YHOO). Jeff Zemlin, the executive director of the Linux Foundation, says the NSA didn't add any obvious means of eavesdropping. ''This code was peer-reviewed by a lot of people,'' he says.
  But that's not all:
  The NSA developed a separate Android project because Google's mobile OS required markedly different programming, according to Smalley's 2011 presentation. Brian Honan, an information technology consultant in Dublin, says his clients in European governments and multinational corporations are worried about how vulnerable their data are when dealing with U.S. companies. The information security world had been preoccupied with Chinese hacking until recently, Honan says. ''With Prism, the same accusations can be laid against the U.S. government.''
  In short: the (big brother supervised) fun never stops in Stasi 2.0 world. Just buy your 100 P/E stocks, eat your burgers, watch your Dancing With The Stars, pay your taxes, and engage in as much internet contact with other internet-addicted organisms as possible and all shall be well.
  Oh, and from this...
  To this (courtesy of @paradism_)
  Average:Your rating: NoneAverage: 5(10 votes)
Witness At Bradley Manning Trial Says NO Harm Was Done To National Security
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:47
"HEY Snowden! Don't Come Here! We've Become A Police State! They'll Lock You Up FOREVER!"
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:47
Quebec train blast: police open criminal investigation as death toll rises
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:46
  Wrecked oil tankers and debris from the runaway train in Lac-M(C)gantic, Quebec. A criminal investigation into the incident has been opened. Photograph: AP
  Canadian police said on Tuesday they had opened a criminal probe into Saturday's fatal fuel train blast in the town of Lac-M(C)gantic, an explosion they said was unlikely to have been caused by terrorism.
  Police also raised the death toll to 15 from 13 and said the total number of dead and missing was 50. Police spokesman Michel Forget gave few details of the investigation and said it was unclear whether it would lead to criminal charges being filed.
Scripting News: Housekeeping note.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:35
  BTW, I'm doing my blogging in Fargo now, and that hasn't yet been connected to scripting.com. This happens every so often, because I develop blogging software. So for now, if you want to keep up with what I'm writing, you should follow me on dave.smallpict.com. Sorry for the trouble. Dig we must! :-)
Judge: Chevron can access its critics' private user information | EarthRights International
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:16
  After more than eight months of silence, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan recently issued a long-awaited decision on the enforceability of a subpoena served by Chevron on Microsoft in connection with Chevron's lawsuit claiming that it has been the victim of a conspiracy in the $18.2 billion judgment against it for massive environmental contamination in Ecuador. But Kaplan's decision begs more questions than it answers.
  The sweeping subpoena was one of three issued to Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft, demanding IP usage records and identity information for the holders of more than 100 email accounts, including environmental activists, journalists and attorneys. Chevron's subpoena sought personal information about every account holder and the IP addresses associated with every login to each account over a nine-year period.
  This could allow Chevron to determine the countries, states, cities or even buildings where the account-holders were checking their email so as to ''infer the movements of the users over the relevant period and might permit Chevron to makes inferences about some of the user's professional and personal relationships.'' (see Order, below, p6). Confronted with this affront to their privacy and rights of speech and association, the account-holders, represented by ERI and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), brought ''motions to quash'' the subpoenas in courts in California and New York on First Amendment grounds.
  Judge Kaplan, who presides over Chevron's conspiracy lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, and who has been accused of prejudice against the Ecuadorians and their lawyers, managed to sit by ''special designation'' in the Northern District of New York so that he could decide the enforceability of the subpoena to Microsoft as well.
  And decide he did. Kaplan's decision upheld Chevron's sweeping subpoena with an argument that is as breathtaking as the subpoena itself. According to Judge Kaplan, none of the accountholders could benefit from First Amendment protections since the accountholders had ''not shown that they were U.S. citizens.''
  Now, let's break this down. The account-holders in this case were proceeding anonymously, which the First Amendment permits. Because of this, Judge Kaplan was provided with no information about the account holders' residency or places of birth. It is somewhat amazing then, that Judge Kaplan assumed that the account holders were not U.S. citizens. As far as I know, a judge has never before made this assumption when presented with a First Amendment claim. We have to ask then: on what basis did Judge Kaplan reach out and make this assumption?
  Whether or not this assumption was correct '' and whether or not it matters '' the account-holders were never given the chance to submit evidence on the question of their citizenship. Judge Kaplan is hoping he made a lucky guess, but First Amendment rights, and the account-holders they protect, are entitled to more respect than judicial guesswork.
Crystal Nix-Hines, attorney and ''Alias'' writer, tapped for UNESCO post | Variety
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 10 Jul 2013 01:00
  Crystal Nix-Hines, a Los Angeles attorney and former writer on ''Alias'' and ''The Practice,'' is being nominated to a State Department post as a representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, or UNESCO.
  The post, which must be confirmed by the Senate, carries to rank of ambassador. The White House announced on Tuesday that President Obama intended to nominate Nix-Hines to the post.
  Nix-Hines is of counsel at the law firm of Quinn Emanuel in Los Angeles, where entertainment and intellectual property are among her specialties. She previously served at Fairbank & Vincent, and in the litigation department at O'Melveny & Myers. She was assistant to the general counsel and senior vice president at Capital Cities/ABC from 1992 to 1993.
  In her pursuit of a screenwriting career, Nix-Hines also was consulting producer on ''Commander-in-Chief,'' and held the titles of co-producer and executive story editor on ''Alias.'' During the 1990s she held several positions at the State Department, including counselor to the assistant secretary for democracy, human rights and labor.
  Nix-Hines was a bundler for President Obama in the most recent election cycle, raising between $200,000 and $500,000. She was a classmate of Michelle Obama's at Princeton and graduated from Harvard Law School in 1990, a year before Barack Obama.
  UNESCO was set up in 1945 to promote international cooperation through science, education and culture and communication.
Silent Circle: Mike Janke's iPhone app makes encryption easy, governments nervous. - Slate Magazine
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 22:26
  Silent Circle logo.
  Courtesy Silent Circle.
  Lately, Mike Janke has been getting what he calls the ''hairy eyeball'' from international government agencies. The 44-year-old former Navy SEAL commando, together with two of the world's most renowned cryptographers, was always bound to ruffle some high-level feathers with his new project'--a surveillance-resistant communications platform that makes complex encryption so simple your grandma can use it.
  This week, after more than two years of preparation, the finished product has hit the market. Named Silent Circle, it is in essence a series of applications that can be used on a mobile device to encrypt communications'--text messages, plus voice and video calls. Currently, apps for the iPhone and iPad are available, with versions for Windows, Galaxy, Nexus, and Android in the works. An email service is also soon scheduled to launch.
  The encryption is peer to peer, which means that Silent Circle doesn't centrally hold a key that can be used to decrypt people's messages or phone calls. Each phone generates a unique key every time a call is made, then deletes it straight after the call finishes. When sending text messages or images, there is even a ''burn'' function, which allows you to set a time limit on anything you send to another Silent Circle user'--a bit like how ''this tape will self destruct'' goes down in Mission: Impossible, but without the smoke or fire.
  Silent Circle began as an idea Janke had after spending 12 years working for the U.S. military and later as a security contractor. When traveling overseas, he realized that there was no easy-to-use, trustworthy encrypted communications provider available to keep in touch with family back home. Cellphone calls, text messages, and emails sent over the likes of Hotmail and Gmail can just be ''pulled right out of the air,'' according to Janke, and he didn't think the few commercial services offering encryption'--like Skype and Hushmail'--were secure enough. He was also made uneasy by reports about increased government snooping on communications. ''It offended what I thought were my God-given rights'--to be able to have a free conversation,'' Janke says. ''And so I began on this quest to find something to solve it.''
  Janke assembled what he calls an ''all-star team'': Phil Zimmerman, a recent inductee to the Internet's Hall of Fame, who in 1991 invented PGP encryption, still considered the standard for email security. Jon Callas, the man behind Apple's whole-disk encryption (which is used to secure hard drives in Macs across the world), became Silent Circle's chief technology officer. Other employees were top engineers and ex-special-forces communications experts based in England, Latvia, and Germany. Together, they designed their own software, created a new encryption protocol called SCimp, registered their company offshore and outside U.S. jurisdiction, then built up their own network in Canada. (They eventually plan to expand to Switzerland and Hong Kong.)
  Though many encryption options already exist, they are often difficult to use, which is a barrier for those without the skills, patience, or time to learn. Silent Circle helps remove these hurdles. As a result, organizations that have a real need for secure communications but have maybe not understood how to implement them are coming forward and expressing interest in Silent Circle.
  Janke says he's already sold the technology worldwide to nine news outlets, presumably keen to help protect their journalists' and sources' safety through encryption. (ProPublica, for one, confirmed it's had ''preliminary discussions'' with Silent Circle.) A major multinational company has already ordered 18,000 subscriptions for its staff, and a couple of A-list actors, including one Oscar winner, have been testing the beta version. The basic secure phone service plan will cost $20 a month per person, though Janke says a number of human rights groups and NGOs will be provided with the service for free.
  The company has also attracted attention from 23 special operations units, intelligence agencies, and law enforcement departments in nine countries that are interested in using Silent Circle to protect the communications of their own employees'--particularly on the personal devices that they use at home or bring to work. Some of these same agencies, perhaps unsurprisingly, have contacted Janke and his team with concerns about how the technology might be used by bad guys. Because Silent Circle is available to just about anyone, Janke accepts there is a real risk that a minority of users could abuse it for criminal purposes. But he argues you could say the same thing about baseball bats and says if the company is ever made aware someone is using the application for ''bad illegal things'''--he cites an example of a terrorist plotting a bomb attack'--it reserves the right to shut off that person's service and will do so ''in seven seconds.''
  The very features that make Silent Circle so valuable from a civil liberties and privacy standpoint make law enforcement nervous. Telecom firms in the United States, for instance, have been handing over huge troves of data to authorities under a blanket of secrecy and with very little oversight. Silent Circle is attempting to counter this culture by limiting the data it retains in the first place. It will store only the email address, 10-digit Silent Circle phone number, username, and password of each customer. It won't retain metadata (such as times and dates calls are made using Silent Circle). Its IP server logs showing who is visiting the Silent Circle website are currently held for seven days, which Janke says the company plans to reduce to just 24 hours once the system is running smoothly.
  Almost every base seems to have been covered. Biannually, the company will publish requests it gets from law enforcement in transparency reports, detailing the country of origin and the number of people the request encompassed. And any payment a person makes to Silent Circle will be processed through third-party provider Stripe, so even if authorities could get access to payment records, Janke says, ''that in no way gives them access to the data, voice, and video the customer is sending-receiving ... nor does it tie the two together.'' If authorities wanted to intercept the communications of a person using Silent Circle, it is likely they'd have to resort to deploying Trojan-style tools'--infecting targeted devices with spyware to covertly record communications before they become encrypted.
  Among security geeks and privacy advocates, however, there's still far from consensus how secure Silent Circle actually is. Nadim Kobeissi, a Montreal-based security researcher and developer, took to his blog last week to pre-emptively accuse the company of ''damaging the state of the cryptography community.'' Kobeissi's criticism was rooted in an assumption that Silent Circle would not be open source, a cornerstone of encrypted communication tools because it allows people to independently audit coding and make their own assessments of its safety (and to check for secret government backdoors). Christopher Soghoian, principal technologist at the ACLU's Speech Privacy and Technology Project, said he was excited to see a company like Silent Circle visibly competing on privacy and security but that he was waiting for it to go open source and be audited by independent security experts before he would feel comfortable using it for sensitive communications.
  When I asked Janke about this, he said he recognized the importance of the open-source principle. He says the company, contrary to Kobeissi's assertion, will be using a noncommercial open-source license, which will allow developers to ''do their own builds'' of Silent Circle. ''We will put it all out there for scrutiny, inspection, and audit by anyone and everyone,'' he added.
  Another factor is that a number of countries are pushing for new surveillance laws that will force many communications providers to build in backdoors for wiretapping. The Silent Circle team has been following these developments closely, and it seems to have played into the decision to register offshore and locate its multimillion-dollar network outside U.S. jurisdiction. Janke says he has consulted with Canada's privacy commissioners and understands that the new push to upgrade surveillance capabilities in Canada will not affect the company because its technology is encrypted peer-to-peer (making it technically incapable of facilitating a wiretap request even if it receives one).
  But what if, one day down the line, things change and Canada or another country where Silent Circle has servers tries to force them to build in a secret backdoor for spying? Janke has already thought about that'--and his answer sums up the maverick ethos of his company.
  ''We won't be held hostage,'' he says, without a quiver of hesitation. ''All of us would rather shut Silent Circle down than ever allow a backdoor or be bullied into an 'or else' position.''
  In an age of ever-increasing surveillance, it's a gutsy stance to take. Perhaps Big Brother has finally met its match.
  This article arises from Future Tense, a collaboration among Arizona State University, the New America Foundation, and Slate. Future Tense explores the ways emerging technologies affect society, policy, and culture. To read more, visit the Future Tense blog and theFuture Tense home page. You can also follow uson Twitter.
Petition | McDonald's: Stop paying employees with debit cards loaded with fees | Change.org
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 22:22
  I was looking forward to my new job when I started working at a McDonald's location in Pennsylvania in April, but I was disappointed to find out that in order to be paid, I would have to activate a JP Morgan Chase debit card with heavy fees attached.
  I'm a young single mom. When I started my job at McDonald's, I knew that I would only be making slightly more than minimum wage. I didn't expect that the only way I would be paid would be on a debit card that would dock pay that I earned through lots of different fees. When I asked if McDonald's could pay me through direct deposit to my local credit union, which doesn't charge withdrawal fees, I was told that the debit card was the only option.
  These cards come with a lot of fees: from fees for cash withdrawals to balance inquiries to lost or stolen cards to overdrafts and even inactivity fees. The federal government has helped reduce fees on credit and debit cards that most consumers use, but those protections don't apply to the kinds of cards companies like McDonald's are using to pay employees. In the end, I feared that once all of the fees from getting my own hard-earned wages through this card were taken out, my pay would go below minimum wage.
  I decided to leave my job at McDonald's not because I didn't like the people, but because I think it's only fair that I get paid for all of my work there. Since I quit, I've found out that paying employees through these cards with fees attached is a growing trend among dozens of major employers. The New York Times reported that last year roughly 4.6 million active payroll cards were issued by companies like McDonald's.
  Like millions of other workers, I deserve to get fairly paid for my work. When I stood up and spoke out against the lack of choices for employees, the local franchise in Pennsylvania that I worked for announced that it would offer employees more options for payment. But I've seen that employees at other McDonald's franchises as far away as Milwaukee are still dealing with the same problems and that's not fair. I think everyone should be given the choice of what they want to do with their hard-earned money.
  I think McDonald's should be a leader nationwide in ensuring that employees get to keep their own wages in full and I'm concerned for other McDonald's employees who don't have that option. Will you join me in calling on McDonald's to ensure that all employees nationwide can keep their wages and chose to say no to fee-heavy cards?
  To:Don Thompson, CEO, McDonald'sRichard Floersch, Chief Human Resources Officer, McDonald'sHeidi Barker, Global External Communications VP, McDonald'sLisa McComb, Director of Global External Communications, McDonald'sDanya Proud, U.S. Media Relations Director, McDonald's
  Stop paying employees nationwide with debit cards loaded with fees and make sure that your franchisees all across the country allow employees to have more options for payment.
  Sincerely,[Your name]
Who coined the name 'United States of America'? Mystery gets new twist. - CSMonitor.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 22:05
  Historians continue to debate who came up with the formulation 'United States of America' as the name for the new nation. A new discovery could shift the discussion.
  It may seem surprising, but nobody is really sure who came up with the phrase, ''United States of America.''
  Skip to next paragraphRecent postsSubscribe Today to the Monitor
  Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS ofThe Christian Science MonitorWeekly Digital Edition
  Speculation generally swirls around a familiar cast of characters '' the two Toms (Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson), Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin, and even a gentleman named Oliver Ellsworth (a delegate from the Constitutional Convention of 1787). But every instance of those gentlemen using the name "United States of America" is predated by a recently discovered example of the phrase in the Revolutionary-era Virginia Gazette.
  So who was perhaps the first person ever to write the words "United States of America"?
  A PLANTER.
  That was how the author of an essay in the Gazette signed the anonymous letter. During that time, it was common practice for essays and polemics to be published anonymously in an attempt to avoid future charges of treason '' only later has history identified some of these authors.
  The discovery adds a new twist '' as well as the mystery of the Planter's identity '' to the search for the origin of a national name that has now become iconic.
  Several references mistakenly credit Paine with formulating the name in January 1776. Paine's popular and persuasive book, "Common Sense," uses ''United Colonies,'' ''American states,'' and ''FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES OF AMERICA,'' but he never uses the final form.
  The National Archives, meanwhile, cite the first known use of the ''formal term United States of America'' as being the Declaration of Independence, which would recognize Jefferson as the originator. Written in June 1776, Jefferson's ''original Rough draught'' placed the new name at the head of the business '' ''A Declaration by the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in General Congress assembled."
  Jefferson clearly had an idea as to what would sound good by presenting the national moniker in capitalized letters. But in the final edit, the line was changed to read, ''The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.'' The fact that ''United States of America'' appears in both versions of the Declaration may have been enough evidence to credit Jefferson with coining the phrase, but there is another example published three months earlier.
VIDEO-President Obama on Counterterrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy - C-SPAN Video Library
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 21:26
  Follow Similar Programs10
  National Defense UniversityWhite House Travel | DC EventFollow Sponsors
  President Obama spoke about a range of U.S. counterterrorism issues including controversial drone strikes, the Guantanamo Bay prison and detention of terrorist suspects, security at diplomatic missions abroad, the role of .. Read MorePresident Obama spoke about a range of U.S. counterterrorism issues including controversial drone strikes, the Guantanamo Bay prison and detention of terrorist suspects, security at diplomatic missions abroad, the role of foreign assistance in international security, and the future role of military force in efforts to counter terrorist threats.During the speech he was heckled by a woman in the audience several times before holding his remarks until she was escorted out.
  1 hour, 1 minute | 3,796 Views
  View Program TranscriptView Full Event (2 Programs)
FBI Director Nomination Hearing
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Featured Programs on C-SPAN
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:39
  Follow Similar Programs0
  Senate Committee JudiciaryFollow Sponsors
  James Comey testified about his nomination to become the director of the FBI.*Among the issues he addressed were the use of water-boarding in interrogations, National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, and the force .. Read MoreJames Comey testified about his nomination to become the director of the FBI.*Among the issues he addressed were the use of water-boarding in interrogations, National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, and the force feedings of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay detention facility.'‚He also said that the secret surveillance court that approved wiretapping requests, known as the FISA court, was ''anything but a rubber stamp.''
  2 hours, 42 minutes | 105 Views
Iran launches 'national email service'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:38
  An internet cafe in Tehran. Hassan Rouhani has expressed more liberal attitudes to social media than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA
  Iran has launched its own "national email service", requiring all citizens to sign up to it to "safely" communicate with government officials.
  Prior to use, account holders will have to provide their local post office with their full name, national identification number and postcode.
  Mohammad Hasan Nami, Iran's minister for information and communication technology, said all citizens would be assigned a national email address, but did not say whether this would affect access to other email providers.
  "For mutual interaction and communication between the government and the people, from now on every Iranian will receive a special email address along with their postcode," Nami was quoted as saying by the semi-official Mehr news agency.
  "With the assignment of an email address to every Iranian, government interactions with the people will take place electronically."
  Users will have to go to mail.post.ir to sign up to the service, which is not free, and receive an @post.ir email address. Mehr reported that the website can provide services to 100 million users and its emailing service is compatible with Farsi as well as English, French and Arabic. Each account is also said to have 50MB capacity, which can be upgraded to 2GB.
  Independent experts, however, doubt the plan will materialise across the country as the newly elected president, Hassan Rouhani, who has taken a softer line on internet and web censorship, is due to be sworn-in in August.
  Amin Sabeti, an Iranian media and web researcher, said the authorities had previously boasted about similar "national email services", including mail.iran.ir, but none has yet been come into force in earnest. Government employees are also being encouraged to use the national email providers instead of services such as Gmail or Yahoo Mail, which are popular in Iran.
  Sabeti said there are serious security problems with the new service, which he said does not encrypt data and would be easy to hack.
  Hadi Nili, an Iranian journalist, said Iranians use foreign services such as Gmail because they believe it provides anonymity and privacy, and said there is a lack of trust in the new service.
  In an echo of some of the questions about the NSA surveillance by the US government revealed by the whistleblower Edward Snowden, he added: "Iranian users are worried how much the government can access their data and also how secure the new service is in the face of cyber attacks and intrusions from other parties."
  Some 40% of Iran's 75 million population are estimated to have access to the internet and many services are provided online, such as bill payment and online banking.
  Under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran has announced various ambitious plans for its online community including an "Islamic Google Earth".
  In 2012, the authorities said they were carrying out tests to launch Iran's "national internet", a countrywide network aimed at substituting services run through the world wide web. At the time, Iran's police also imposed tighter regulations on internet cafes, requiring owners to keep detailed records of their customers each time they use their services.
  Iran has been a victim of western-backed cyber attacks against its nuclear programme and is therefore suspicious of western online services such as Google, Facebook and Twitter. In contrast to the current officials, Rouhani has said he considers Facebook a welcome phenomenon.
  At least two institutions have been set up in recent years to enforce an online crackdown. Iran's cyber police, known as Fata, is in charge of policing the country's online community, identifying bloggers and users breaking its "Islamic" laws. The supreme council of virtual space is another body tasked with blocking access to websites deemed inappropriate. At least five million websites are blocked in Iran.
  Last year the death of blogger Sattar Beheshti in jail, while he was being interrogated by Fata forces, prompted a national outcry.
Google hosts fundraiser for climate change denying US senator
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:34
  Proceeds of Google's lunch will go to US senator James Inhofe, who has called climate change a 'hoax'. Photograph: Axel Schmidt/AFP/Getty Images
  Google, which prides itself on building a "better web that is better for the environment", is hosting a fundraiser for the most notorious climate change denier in Congress, it has emerged.
  The lunch, at the company's Washington office, will benefit the Oklahoma Republican Jim Inhofe, who has made a career of dismissing climate change as a "hoax" on the Senate floor.
  Proceeds of the 11 July lunch, priced at $250 to $2,500, will also go to the national Republican Senatorial Committee.
  It's the second show of support from Google for the anti-climate cause in recent weeks.
  Last month, the Washington Post reported that the internet company had donated $50,000 for a fundraising dinner for the ultra-conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute '' topping the contributions even of the Koch oil billionaires.
  The Competitive Enterprise Institute has launched multiple law suits aimed at trying to discredit the science behind climate change '' accusing scientists of fraud. None have so far succeeded.
  The CEI also specialises in filing open records requests, demanding universities turn over email correspondence of climate scientists with journalists.
  Facebook also contributed $25,000 to the CEI dinner last month.
  Google's show of support for the leading climate contrarian in Congress was criticised by climate activists on Tuesday. "Google's motto is 'Don't Be Evil', but it is supporting one of the worst deniers of climate science in the world," said the Climate Progress website, which first reported on the story.
  Inhofe has spent more than a decade challenging the science behind climate change, and trying to stop Congress from acting on climate change. He has repeatedly dismissed climate change as a "hoax" or "hysteria", and cited the benefits of global warming for the economy and the environment.
  The campaign group Forecast the Facts launched a petition calling for Google's chief executive officer, Larry Page, to cancel the fundraiser.
  Google has been a corporate leader in fighting climate change. The company claims on its Google Green website to be creating "a better web that is better for the environment"by investing $1bn in renewable energy and making considerable savings in electricity use at its data centres.
  Google initially refused to comment on the record about its support for Inhofe.
  However, a company spokesperson noted that Google maintained data centres in Oklahoma. The spokesperson then sent an email saying: "We regularly host fundraisers for candidates, on both sides of the aisle, but that doesn't mean we endorse all of their positions. And while we disagree on climate change policy, we share an interest with Senator Inhofe in the employees and data center we have in Oklahoma."
  Google's website notes the company has invested $700m in two data centres in Oklahoma. The state is a leading oil and gas producer - and Inhofe has been a strong promoter of the industry. However, Google has contracted to power its data centres through wind energy.
  "They can probably rightfully claim that the facility is powered 100% by wind," said Gary Cook, technology campaigner for Greenpeace, which tracks greenhouse gas emissions from the IT sector. He added: "But even so, Jim Inhofe is the biggest obstacle to climate change action in the Senate so what are they doing raising money for him?"
30,000 California prisoners launch largest hunger-strike in state history
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:33
  Source: RT
  Prisoners at 11 state facilities began refusing meals early Monday after months of plotting a demonstration that they hope will bring change to a number of longstanding grievances held by inmates against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, particularly the practice of indefinitely housing some detainees in total isolation.
  In a letter obtained by the Los Angeles Times, protesters reportedly demand that the state retire its current solitary confinement policies and let inmates accused of prison gang involvement spend a maximum of only five years in isolation. Currently there is no limit to how long inmates thought to be connected to internal gangs can spend in Segregated Housing Units, or SHUs, and the Times claim 4,527 inmates at four state prisons are living like that now, including 1,180 at Pelican Bay State Prison in northern California where the latest demonstration was first hatched.
  ''The principal prisoner representatives from the PBSP SHU Short Corridor Collective Human Rights Movement do hereby present public notice that our nonviolent peaceful protest of our subjection to decades of indefinite state-sanctioned torture, via long term solitary confinement will resume today,'' reads the letter as it appears on the Prisoner Hunger Strike Solidarity website, ''consisting of a hunger strike/work stoppage of indefinite duration until CDCR signs a legally binding agreement meeting our demands, the heart of which mandates an end to long-term solitary confinement (as well as additional major reforms).''
  According to the Times, the inmates are also seeking education and rehabilitation programs and the right to make monthly phone calls.
  Prisoners in California have held similar protests before, including a hunger strike in 2011 that also originated at Pelican Bay and eventually accumulated the support of 6,000 inmates across the state.
  That hunger strike eventually led to a class-action lawsuit to be filed against the corrections department which has recently entered a mediation phase. Two years after that action sent a message to the state, though, prisoners still aren't satisfied with the response they've received.
  ''While the CDCR has claimed to have made reforms to its SHU system '-- how a prisoner ends up in the solitary units, for how long, and how they can go about getting released into the general population '-- prisoners' rights advocates and family members point out that the CDCR has potentially broadened the use of solitary confinement, and that conditions in the SHUs continue to constitute grave human rights violations,'' reads their latest letter.
  Officially the state does not recognize a hunger strike until participants have refused nine consecutive meals. On Monday, corrections spokeswoman Terry Thornton told the Los Angeles Times that 30,000 prisoners skipped breakfast and lunch, putting them on course to launch an actual strike by the middle of the week.
  Despite gearing towards what could become the largest hunger strike in state history, however, Thornton said, "Everything has been running smoothly.''
  "It was normal. There were no incidents,'' she told the Times of Monday's protest. But according to the paper's Paige St. John, around 2,300 prisoners have taken the protest beyond the realm of refusing to eat and have also started to skip work and class.
  Ms. Thornton did not immediately respond for comment when approached by RT about the status of the budding strike early Tuesday.
  According to the inmates, the California prison system currently holds over 10,000 prisoners in solitary confinement units, including dozens who have spent more than 20 years each in isolation. Gabriel Reyes has spent 16 years in the SHU, and in a letter published this week by Truth-Out, writes, ''I understand I broke the law, and I have lost liberties because of that. But no one, no matter what they've done, should be denied fundamental human rights, especially when that denial comes in the form of such torture.''
  Reyes is currently serving a sentence of 25-years-to-life for burgling an unoccupied swelling. He says that the prison's determination of a ''gang affiliation'' has left him spending 22.5 hours a day in isolation.
Saudi Arabia and UAE to lend Egypt's central bank up to $8 billion
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:33
  Source: RT
  The United Arab Emirates will give Egypt $1 billion and lend it a further $2 billion. Saudi Arabia has also said it has approved a $5billion aid package to Cairo.
  The UAE loan would be in the form of a $2 billion interest free deposit in Egypt's central bank, state news agency WAM said on Tuesday. The UAE is also to give Egypt $1 billion.
  The UAE delegation to Cairo included the Gulf country's national security adviser, foreign minister and energy minister.
  The UAE visit was to ''show full support to the people of Egypt - political support, economic support,'' Badr Abdelatty an Egyptian foreign ministry spokesman told Reuters.
  The UAE was one of the first countries to congratulate Egypt following the army's decision to oust the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohammed Morsi.
  Saudi Arabia also approved a $5 billion aid package to Egypt Tuesday, comprising a $2 billion central bank deposit, $2 billion in energy products and $1 billion in cash, Ibrahim Alassaf, the Saudi Finance Minister told Reuters.
  Meanwhile Washington has said that there will be no immediate cut off of US aid to Egypt, although the 700 million for 2013 has not yet been disbursed and aid for 2014 has not yet been discussed.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American Citizens
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:32
  Clayton Seymour, a 36-year-old IT specialist from Hilliard, Ohio, recently sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NSA, curious as to whether any data about him was being collected.
  What he received in response made his blood boil.
  ''I am a generally law abiding citizen with nothing I can think of that would require monitoring,'' Seymour wrote to me, ''but I wanted to know if I was having data collected about me and if so, what.''
  So Seymour sent in an FOIA request. Weeks later, a letter from the NSA arrived explaining that he was not entitled to any information. ''When I got the declined letter, I was furious,'' he told me. ''I feel betrayed.''
  Seymour had decided to request his NSA file after coming across a recent post of mine instructing Americans on how to properly request such files from the FBI and NSA. A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.
  The letter, which first acknowledges the media coverage surrounding its surveillance systems, quickly moves to justify why none of that data can be obtained by an American citizen in a standard FOIA request:
  Seymour isn't the only one who has recently had an FOIA request denied by the NSA '' dozens of citizens have emailed me to say they've received a similar, if not identical, letter. And it's clear from the exemption the NSA is using that every single American is having their FOIA requests similarly rejected.
  Unjustly so.
  It should be noted that there are legitimate exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act, the first of which states that documents requested may be denied if they are ''properly classified as secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy.''
  However, the central problem is this: Seymour's letter from the NSA points to Executive Order 13526, signed by President Obama in 2009, as justification for the NSA's FOIA exemption.
  This order signed by Obama established a uniform system for classifying national security information, and stipulates that ''information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.''
  This qualification appears in section 1.4 of the executive order, after which follow many categories of information which maybe marked as classified. The category the NSA points to in justifying the classification of all its data is this:
  (c) intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology
  Meaning: the NSA is classifying every single bit of data it receives from ordinary American citizens based on the premise that it has been gathered covertly.
  Meaning: the NSA's advertised justification for not granting FOIA requests is to protect our country. However, the real justification is the NSA's covert violation of Americans' Fourth Amendment right not to be subject to unwarranted searches and seizures (in this case of their personal, digital data).
  The NSA, it seems, has classified every single piece of data on American citizens that it has seized and saved, even benign data culled from people like Seymour, who are no threat to U.S. national security.
  ''I believe in the concept of America,'' Seymour told me. ''[But] not its current execution.''
  I sense the Founding Fathers would agree with him.=
VIDEO-Activist Post: Flashback: Mos Def Schools Bill Maher on 9/11
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:27
  Youtube
Don't Ever Tell Me Young Women Don't Care
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Fabulous Geezersisters’ Weblog
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 19:18
  about reproductive rights. Watch this kick-ass young woman and cheer.
  Tagged as: feminism, pro choice, reproductive rights, texas, texas legislature, women
A message from National Security Agency subject number 70900
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Northeast Intelligence Network
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 19:10
  Please comment on this article at Canada Free Press
  ''If you let them do this to me and get away with it, then you're giving them the eternal right to do the same damn thing to any one of you!'' -Buford Pusser
  By Douglas J. Hagmann
  9 July 2013: To a lie, truth is toxic. To the purveyors of lies, truth-tellers are a poisonous threat. To the corrupt men and women of government, exposure of corruption is a serious threat that cannot be permitted to see the light of day. Those seeking to expose the lies, deceit and corruption by our elected officials or those holding the reins of power are the targets of marginalization, vilification, or worse. I write these words not only under my own name, but with contempt and disgust as an American citizen known to the National Security Agency as FOIA file number 70900. More precisely, it is the number assigned to my case by the NSA, stemming from my efforts to expose criminal government overreach against every American citizen. I will wear that number as I ''walk tall'' in my continuous quest for the truth.
  Allow me to briefly take you back 40 years, as I believe you will see certain parallels that are perhaps more relevant today than they were then. And those parallels are applicable not just to my situation, but to everyone reading this.
  The original film ''Walking Tall'' was a 1973 movie based on the real life of Buford Pusser, former sheriff of McNairy County, Tennessee from 1964-1970. Anyone old enough to remember seeing the movie in theaters will likely recall the plot as well. At 6'6'" tall, Pusser was a one-time professional wrestler, although was convinced by his wife Pauline to leave the theater of professional wrestling to return home to McNairy County, Tennessee, a backwoods area located along the northern border of Mississippi to start a business with his father in the lumber industry.
  Following his return home, Pusser and a friend visited a well known gambling house known as the Lucky Spot. It was unlucky for Pusser, however, when he became a front line loser after he discovered that the craps game was rigged. His protests resulted in a near fatal stab wound that required 200 stitches. Like any other victim of attempted murder, Pusser complained to the county sheriff, who promptly did nothing and allowed his attackers to remain free and unmolested of any criminal charges.
  Undeterred by this lack of official justice, Pusser does his own investigation. He soon learns that not only were the games at the Lucky Spot rigged, the whole system in McNairy County was rigged, and the men in power were corrupt. But who do you complain to when the very men who are supposed to represent law and order are themselves corrupt? Is any of this sounding remotely familiar to today's federal government?
  And so his quest for justice began. Fashioning a club from a tree branch at his family's lumber mill, Pusser pays a visit to the men who stabbed him and left him for dead. His actions promptly caused the sheriff to arrest Pusser, and a jury trial ensued. It is here that I hope readers will see the relevance to the larger issues of today.
  During a jury trial, Pusser represented himself. At one point during the trial, he ripped open his shirt and showed the jury the hideous scar left by the stabbing and the 200 stitches needed to close the near fatal wound. At the same time, he stared at those in the jury box and emphatically stated: ''If you let them do this to me and get away with it, then you're giving them the eternal right to do the same damn thing to any one of you!'' Buford Pusser was acquitted of all charges.
  Disgusted at the rampant corruption he saw, Pusser ran for the office of sheriff of McNair County Tennessee and became Tennessee's youngest sheriff ever elected. He vowed to clean up the county, and hit the ground running to do just that.
  The cost of justice
  Buford Pusser soon learned that justice comes at a price that few are willing to pay. In his quest for ''justice for all,'' several attempts were made on his life by those in power. Some attempts nearly succeeded. Others had sad consequences. His wife of just 7 years at the time, Pauline, was murdered on August 12, 1967 in an assassination attempt meant for him. The killer, although identified by Pusser, was never brought to justice.
  Men of nearly unfathomable hubris and defiance not only to a system of laws, but to the people they enslaved by their illegal actions, ran roughshod over Pusser and continue unabated today. Has the template of injustice and oppression changed over the years? It indeed has'... it has been consolidated and refined. Some things, however, don't change. Some techniques continue to work because we allow them to work, either because of fear, general malaise by a self-absorbed populace, or the feeling that we cannot make a difference. Again, it seems that some things don't change.
  On the hot August night of August 21, 1974, Buford Pusser's life came to a tragic end in a manner that just might ring a familiar bell '' a ringing that continues today. Following an appearance at the county fair that evening, Pusser was returning home as the driver and sole occupant of his car when inexplicably, he slammed into an embankment at a high rate of speed. The force was so great that Pusser was ejected from his vehicle and, of course, the car burst into flames, leaving nothing but a pile of twisted metal and shouldering embers that prevented any forensic analysis of the vehicle for signs of tampering. Is any of this sounding familiar?
  You can find for yourself the tales associated with the final hours of Buford Pusser's life, including allegations that he was drunk at the time of the crash, although there was no autopsy ordered or performed. Interestingly enough, the Tennessee State Trooper who led the investigation of the crash and Pusser's death, Paul Ervin, later became the sheriff of McNairy County, Tennessee.
  Justice denied
  I believe that the print space devoted to Buford Pusser is necessary against the backdrop of the injustice we are seeing today. Like Buford Pusser, the very people who are attempting to expose the rampant corruption within our own government are themselves being targeted by the people in power. We are being systematically victimized by an all-powerful, out-of-control tyrannical system where, like the former Lucky Spot in McNairy County, Tennessee, all of the games are rigged and the house always wins, and wins big. Like Jon Corzine big, as it was just announced that the former New Jersey governor and former CEO of Goldman Sachs and MF Global will not face any criminal charges for his role in $1.6 billion of missing, segregated customer money that led to the demise of MF Global and ruined the lives of countless families '' members of the unwashed masses. Can't people see that ''every game in the house'' is rigged, and the people in power are laughing at you?
  The story of Buford Pusser, however, has never been as personal to me as it is today. Having seen the film in the theater shortly after its release, I can recall my disgust as a young man at the injustice portrayed in the film, and the resistance to the efforts of Buford Pusser. While I certainly make no claims being akin to his real-life persona, I understand his passionate outrage at the injustice he saw and personally experienced and wanted so badly to correct. I too am outraged, and you should be as well.
  Considering that the whole system is rigged, are we not all victims, or prospective victims like Pusser as he attempted to expose and root out corruption in the county where he lived? Like Pusser, what do we do when there is no one or no agency to right the wrongs, or even consider our grievances?
  The surveillance state
  In the grand scheme of things, I am no one special. In the files of the NSA, however, I am File number 70900. And as an American citizen, I apparently pose a national security threat due to questions no one wants to answer, and to corruption few wish to expose.
  It was made clear to a FOIA request made on my behalf by my Canada Free Press colleague Marinka Peschmann that the National Security Agency can do whatever they damn well please to me and by extension, to you and anyone else with impunity and under the cover of darkness by executive order 13526 signed by Barack Hussein Obama on December 29, 2009. How's that for the promise of transparency?
  Regardless of what you think of Edward Snowden, he exposed an unchecked surveillance apparatus that violates our Constitutional rights and civil liberties. It is that very apparatus that has created a web designed to ensnare anyone seeking the truth about the surveillance process and those behind it. It has been deliberately turned upon those who dare to expose the truth about what is really taking place in America today, and what is being planned for tomorrow.
  It was just two days ago that a fellow journalist told me that he would no longer talk to me, as I have now become ''toxic'' by my presence on the radar of the federal government. The very fact that the NSA is not only collecting information, but content, is having a chilling effect on those of us seeking to expose corruption and provide the truth to the American public. You see, it's not about metadata and other innocuous sounding information. That's the cover for what's truly taking place, which is identifying anyone who does not wish to go along with the agenda of those in power. You are being lied to, and no one in the press is questioning the lies, save for a few.
  We must not allow this process that is contrary to our Constitution to continue. With no one in congress challenging the legalities of the Executive Orders, the trampling of our rights as American citizens, and a Justice Department that is clearly in the back pocket of the Executive Branch, to whom do we turn? Shall we write our congressmen, or patiently wait for a ''regime'' change? How's that been working for us?
  Perhaps justice will not be of this world, as suggested in the words of Thomas Jefferson. ''I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.''
  For me, file number 70900, I will continue my quest for the truth and to expose the corruption and depraved indifference of those in power. I merely ask that you do the same. And pray.
  Click here to save this article in PDF format
Is the NSA Rejecting All Freedom of Information Act Requests from U.S. Citizens? | TheBlaze.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:56
  The National Security Administration campus in Fort Meade, Md. (Credit: AP)
  Clayton Seymour recently sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the National Security Agency; the IT specialist was interested in knowing if the NSA was collecting data on him.
  Weeks later, the Navy vet from Hilliard, Ohio'--who voted for President Obama in 2008 and 2012 and supported his platform of greater governmental transparency'--got a response that made him ''furious.''
  It was a letter from the NSA explaining that he was not entitled to any information. Seymour tells Tikkun Daily Blog scribe David Harris-Gershon that he ''felt betrayed.''
  The rejection letter details why ''none of that data can be obtained by an American citizen in a standard FOIA request,'' the Tikkun Daily notes:
  (Credit: Tikkun Daily Blog)
  As it turns out, according to Harris-Gershon, ''dozens of citizens have emailed me to say they've received a similar, if not identical, letter. And it's clear from the exemption the NSA is using that every single American is having their FOIA requests similarly rejected.''
  Seymour had decided to request his NSA file after coming across a recent post of Harris-Gershon's instructing Americans on how to properly request such files from the FBI and NSA.
  Harris-Gershon adds:
  It should be noted that there are legitimate exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act, the first of which states that documents requested may be denied if they are ''properly classified as secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy.''
  However, the central problem is this: Seymour's letter from the NSA points to Executive Order 13526, signed by President Obama in 2009, as justification for the NSA's FOIA exemption.
  This order signed by Obama established a uniform system for classifying national security information, and stipulates that ''information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.''
  This qualification appears in section 1.4 of the executive order, after which follow many categories of information which may be marked as classified. The category the NSA points to in justifying the classification of all its data is this:
  (c) intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology
  Meaning: the NSA is classifying every single bit of data it receives from ordinary American citizens based on the premise that it has been gathered covertly.
  Meaning: the NSA's advertised justification for not granting FOIA requests is to protect our country. However, the real justification is the NSA's covert violation of Americans' Fourth Amendment right not to be subject to unwarranted searches and seizures (in this case of their personal, digital data).
  The NSA, it seems, has classified every single piece of data on American citizens that it has seized and saved, even benign data culled from people like Seymour, who are no threat to U.S. national security.
  ''I believe in the concept of America,'' Seymour wrote to Harris-Gershon. ''[But] not its current execution.''
  NSA Rejection Letter
  (H/T: Daily Kos, Tikkun Daily Blog)
  ''
  Related Contributions:
  ''
Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information | The White House
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:56
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  December 29, 2009
  This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism. Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government. Also, our Nation's progress depends on the free flow of information both within the Government and to the American people. Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations. Protecting information critical to our Nation's security and demonstrating our commitment to open Government through accurate and accountable application of classification standards and routine, secure, and effective declassification are equally important priorities.
  NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
  PART 1 -- ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION
  Section 1.1. Classification Standards. (a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met:
  (1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;
  (2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;
  (3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and
  (4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
  (b) If there is significant doubt about the need to classify information, it shall not be classified. This provision does not:
  (1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or
  (2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
  (c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
  (d) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
  Sec. 1.2. Classification Levels. (a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels:
  (1) "Top Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
  (2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
  (3) "Confidential" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.
  (b) Except as otherwise provided by statute, no other terms shall be used to identify United States classified information.
  (c) If there is significant doubt about the appropriate level of classification, it shall be classified at the lower level.
  Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority. (a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:
  (1) the President and the Vice President;
  (2) agency heads and officials designated by the President; and
  (3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.
  (b) Officials authorized to classify information at a specified level are also authorized to classify information at a lower level.
  (c) Delegation of original classification authority.
  (1) Delegations of original classification authority shall be limited to the minimum required to administer this order. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that designated subordinate officials have a demonstrable and continuing need to exercise this authority.
  (2) "Top Secret" original classification authority may be delegated only by the President, the Vice President, or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
  (3) "Secret" or "Confidential" original classification authority may be delegated only by the President, the Vice President, an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order, provided that official has been delegated "Top Secret" original classification authority by the agency head.
  (4) Each delegation of original classification authority shall be in writing and the authority shall not be redelegated except as provided in this order. Each delegation shall identify the official by name or position.
  (5) Delegations of original classification authority shall be reported or made available by name or position to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office.
  (d) All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. Original classification authorities who do not receive such mandatory training at least once within a calendar year shall have their classification authority suspended by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order until such training has taken place. A waiver may be granted by the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official if an individual is unable to receive such training due to unavoidable circumstances. Whenever a waiver is granted, the individual shall receive such training as soon as practicable.
  (e) Exceptional cases. When an employee, government contractor, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee of an agency who does not have original classification authority originates information believed by that person to require classification, the information shall be protected in a manner consistent with this order and its implementing directives. The information shall be transmitted promptly as provided under this order or its implementing directives to the agency that has appropriate subject matter interest and classification authority with respect to this information. That agency shall decide within 30 days whether to classify this information.
  Sec. 1.4. Classification Categories. Information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security in accordance with section 1.2 of this order, and it pertains to one or more of the following:
  (a) military plans, weapons systems, or operations;
  (b) foreign government information;
  (c) intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology;
  (d) foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources;
  (e) scientific, technological, or economic matters relating to the national security;
  (f) United States Government programs for safeguarding nuclear materials or facilities;
  (g) vulnerabilities or capabilities of systems, installations, infrastructures, projects, plans, or protection services relating to the national security; or
  (h) the development, production, or use of weapons of mass destruction.
  Sec. 1.5. Duration of Classification. (a) At the time of original classification, the original classification authority shall establish a specific date or event for declassification based on the duration of the national security sensitivity of the information. Upon reaching the date or event, the information shall be automatically declassified. Except for information that should clearly and demonstrably be expected to reveal the identity of a confidential human source or a human intelligence source or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction, the date or event shall not exceed the time frame established in paragraph (b) of this section.
  (b) If the original classification authority cannot determine an earlier specific date or event for declassification, information shall be marked for declassification 10 years from the date of the original decision, unless the original classification authority otherwise determines that the sensitivity of the information requires that it be marked for declassification for up to 25 years from the date of the original decision.
  (c) An original classification authority may extend the duration of classification up to 25 years from the date of origin of the document, change the level of classification, or reclassify specific information only when the standards and procedures for classifying information under this order are followed.
  (d) No information may remain classified indefinitely. Information marked for an indefinite duration of classification under predecessor orders, for example, marked as "Originating Agency's Determination Required," or classified information that contains incomplete declassification instructions or lacks declassification instructions shall be declassified in accordance with part 3 of this order.
  Sec. 1.6. Identification and Markings. (a) At the time of original classification, the following shall be indicated in a manner that is immediately apparent:
  (1) one of the three classification levels defined in section 1.2 of this order;
  (2) the identity, by name and position, or by personal identifier, of the original classification authority;
  (3) the agency and office of origin, if not otherwise evident;
  (4) declassification instructions, which shall indicate one of the following:
  (A) the date or event for declassification, as prescribed in section 1.5(a);
  (B) the date that is 10 years from the date of original classification, as prescribed in section 1.5(b);
  (C) the date that is up to 25 years from the date of original classification, as prescribed in section 1.5(b); or
  (D) in the case of information that should clearly and demonstrably be expected to reveal the identity of a confidential human source or a human intelligence source or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction, the marking prescribed in implementing directives issued pursuant to this order; and
  (5) a concise reason for classification that, at a minimum, cites the applicable classification categories in section 1.4 of this order.
  (b) Specific information required in paragraph (a) of this section may be excluded if it would reveal additional classified information.
  (c) With respect to each classified document, the agency originating the document shall, by marking or other means, indicate which portions are classified, with the applicable classification level, and which portions are unclassified. In accordance with standards prescribed in directives issued under this order, the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office may grant and revoke temporary waivers of this requirement. The Director shall revoke any waiver upon a finding of abuse.
  (d) Markings or other indicia implementing the provisions of this order, including abbreviations and requirements to safeguard classified working papers, shall conform to the standards prescribed in implementing directives issued pursuant to this order.
  (e) Foreign government information shall retain its original classification markings or shall be assigned a U.S. classification that provides a degree of protection at least equivalent to that required by the entity that furnished the information. Foreign government information retaining its original classification markings need not be assigned a U.S. classification marking provided that the responsible agency determines that the foreign government markings are adequate to meet the purposes served by U.S. classification markings.
  (f) Information assigned a level of classification under this or predecessor orders shall be considered as classified at that level of classification despite the omission of other required markings. Whenever such information is used in the derivative classification process or is reviewed for possible declassification, holders of such information shall coordinate with an appropriate classification authority for the application of omitted markings.
  (g) The classification authority shall, whenever practicable, use a classified addendum whenever classified information constitutes a small portion of an otherwise unclassified document or prepare a product to allow for dissemination at the lowest level of classification possible or in unclassified form.
  (h) Prior to public release, all declassified records shall be appropriately marked to reflect their declassification.
  Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified, continue to be maintained as classified, or fail to be declassified in order to:(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
  (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
  (3) restrain competition; or
  (4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.
  (b) Basic scientific research information not clearly related to the national security shall not be classified.
  (c) Information may not be reclassified after declassification and release to the public under proper authority unless:
  (1) the reclassification is personally approved in writing by the agency head based on a document-by-document determination by the agency that reclassification is required to prevent significant and demonstrable damage to the national security;
  (2) the information may be reasonably recovered without bringing undue attention to the information;
  (3) the reclassification action is reported promptly to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (National Security Advisor) and the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office; and
  (4) for documents in the physical and legal custody of the National Archives and Records Administration (National Archives) that have been available for public use, the agency head has, after making the determinations required by this paragraph, notified the Archivist of the United States (Archivist), who shall suspend public access pending approval of the reclassification action by the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office. Any such decision by the Director may be appealed by the agency head to the President through the National Security Advisor. Public access shall remain suspended pending a prompt decision on the appeal.
  (d) Information that has not previously been disclosed to the public under proper authority may be classified or reclassified after an agency has received a request for it under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2204(c)(1), the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), or the mandatory review provisions of section 3.5 of this order only if such classification meets the requirements of this order and is accomplished on a document-by-document basis with the personal participation or under the direction of the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4 of this order. The requirements in this paragraph also apply to those situations in which information has been declassified in accordance with a specific date or event determined by an original classification authority in accordance with section 1.5 of this order.
  (e) Compilations of items of information that are individually unclassified may be classified if the compiled information reveals an additional association or relationship that: (1) meets the standards for classification under this order; and (2) is not otherwise revealed in the individual items of information.
  Sec. 1.8. Classification Challenges. (a) Authorized holders of information who, in good faith, believe that its classification status is improper are encouraged and expected to challenge the classification status of the information in accordance with agency procedures established under paragraph (b) of this section.
  (b) In accordance with implementing directives issued pursuant to this order, an agency head or senior agency official shall establish procedures under which authorized holders of information, including authorized holders outside the classifying agency, are encouraged and expected to challenge the classification of information that they believe is improperly classified or unclassified. These procedures shall ensure that:
  (1) individuals are not subject to retribution for bringing such actions;
  (2) an opportunity is provided for review by an impartial official or panel; and
  (3) individuals are advised of their right to appeal agency decisions to the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel (Panel) established by section 5.3 of this order.
  (c) Documents required to be submitted for prepublication review or other administrative process pursuant to an approved nondisclosure agreement are not covered by this section.
  Sec. 1.9. Fundamental Classification Guidance Review. (a) Agency heads shall complete on a periodic basis a comprehensive review of the agency's classification guidance, particularly classification guides, to ensure the guidance reflects current circumstances and to identify classified information that no longer requires protection and can be declassified. The initial fundamental classification guidance review shall be completed within 2 years of the effective date of this order.
  (b) The classification guidance review shall include an evaluation of classified information to determine if it meets the standards for classification under section 1.4 of this order, taking into account an up-to-date assessment of likely damage as described under section 1.2 of this order.
  (c) The classification guidance review shall include original classification authorities and agency subject matter experts to ensure a broad range of perspectives.
  (d) Agency heads shall provide a report summarizing the results of the classification guidance review to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office and shall release an unclassified version of this report to the public.
  PART 2 -- DERIVATIVE CLASSIFICATION
  Sec. 2.1. Use of Derivative Classification. (a) Persons who reproduce, extract, or summarize classified information, or who apply classification markings derived from source material or as directed by a classification guide, need not possess original classification authority.
  (b) Persons who apply derivative classification markings shall:(1) be identified by name and position, or by personal identifier, in a manner that is immediately apparent for each derivative classification action;
  (2) observe and respect original classification decisions; and
  (3) carry forward to any newly created documents the pertinent classification markings. For information derivatively classified based on multiple sources, the derivative classifier shall carry forward:
  (A) the date or event for declassification that corresponds to the longest period of classification among the sources, or the marking established pursuant to section 1.6(a)(4)(D) of this order; and
  (B) a listing of the source materials.
  (c) Derivative classifiers shall, whenever practicable, use a classified addendum whenever classified information constitutes a small portion of an otherwise unclassified document or prepare a product to allow for dissemination at the lowest level of classification possible or in unclassified form.
  (d) Persons who apply derivative classification markings shall receive training in the proper application of the derivative classification principles of the order, with an emphasis on avoiding over-classification, at least once every 2 years. Derivative classifiers who do not receive such training at least once every 2 years shall have their authority to apply derivative classification markings suspended until they have received such training. A waiver may be granted by the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official if an individual is unable to receive such training due to unavoidable circumstances. Whenever a waiver is granted, the individual shall receive such training as soon as practicable.
  Sec. 2.2. Classification Guides. (a) Agencies with original classification authority shall prepare classification guides to facilitate the proper and uniform derivative classification of information. These guides shall conform to standards contained in directives issued under this order.
  (b) Each guide shall be approved personally and in writing by an official who:
  (1) has program or supervisory responsibility over the information or is the senior agency official; and
  (2) is authorized to classify information originally at the highest level of classification prescribed in the guide.
  (c) Agencies shall establish procedures to ensure that classification guides are reviewed and updated as provided in directives issued under this order.
  (d) Agencies shall incorporate original classification decisions into classification guides on a timely basis and in accordance with directives issued under this order.
  (e) Agencies may incorporate exemptions from automatic declassification approved pursuant to section 3.3(j) of this order into classification guides, provided that the Panel is notified of the intent to take such action for specific information in advance of approval and the information remains in active use.
  (f) The duration of classification of a document classified by a derivative classifier using a classification guide shall not exceed 25 years from the date of the origin of the document, except for:
  (1) information that should clearly and demonstrably be expected to reveal the identity of a confidential human source or a human intelligence source or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction; and
  (2) specific information incorporated into classification guides in accordance with section 2.2(e) of this order.
  PART 3 -- DECLASSIFICATION AND DOWNGRADING
  Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification. (a) Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.
  (b) Information shall be declassified or downgraded by:
  (1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position and has original classification authority;
  (2) the originator's current successor in function, if that individual has original classification authority;
  (3) a supervisory official of either the originator or his or her successor in function, if the supervisory official has original classification authority; or
  (4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official of the originating agency.
  (c) The Director of National Intelligence (or, if delegated by the Director of National Intelligence, the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence) may, with respect to the Intelligence Community, after consultation with the head of the originating Intelligence Community element or department, declassify, downgrade, or direct the declassification or downgrading of information or intelligence relating to intelligence sources, methods, or activities.
  (d) It is presumed that information that continues to meet the classification requirements under this order requires continued protection. In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure. This provision does not:
  (1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or
  (2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
  (e) If the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office determines that information is classified in violation of this order, the Director may require the information to be declassified by the agency that originated the classification. Any such decision by the Director may be appealed to the President through the National Security Advisor. The information shall remain classified pending a prompt decision on the appeal.
  (f) The provisions of this section shall also apply to agencies that, under the terms of this order, do not have original classification authority, but had such authority under predecessor orders.
  (g) No information may be excluded from declassification under section 3.3 of this order based solely on the type of document or record in which it is found. Rather, the classified information must be considered on the basis of its content.
  (h) Classified nonrecord materials, including artifacts, shall be declassified as soon as they no longer meet the standards for classification under this order.
  (i) When making decisions under sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5 of this order, agencies shall consider the final decisions of the Panel.
  Sec. 3.2. Transferred Records. (a) In the case of classified records transferred in conjunction with a transfer of functions, and not merely for storage purposes, the receiving agency shall be deemed to be the originating agency for purposes of this order.
  (b) In the case of classified records that are not officially transferred as described in paragraph (a) of this section, but that originated in an agency that has ceased to exist and for which there is no successor agency, each agency in possession of such records shall be deemed to be the originating agency for purposes of this order. Such records may be declassified or downgraded by the agency in possession of the records after consultation with any other agency that has an interest in the subject matter of the records.
  (c) Classified records accessioned into the National Archives shall be declassified or downgraded by the Archivist in accordance with this order, the directives issued pursuant to this order, agency declassification guides, and any existing procedural agreement between the Archivist and the relevant agency head.
  (d) The originating agency shall take all reasonable steps to declassify classified information contained in records determined to have permanent historical value before they are accessioned into the National Archives. However, the Archivist may require that classified records be accessioned into the National Archives when necessary to comply with the provisions of the Federal Records Act. This provision does not apply to records transferred to the Archivist pursuant to section 2203 of title 44, United States Code, or records for which the National Archives serves as the custodian of the records of an agency or organization that has gone out of existence.
  (e) To the extent practicable, agencies shall adopt a system of records management that will facilitate the public release of documents at the time such documents are declassified pursuant to the provisions for automatic declassification in section 3.3 of this order.
  Sec. 3.3. Automatic Declassification. (a) Subject to paragraphs (b)''(d) and (g)''(j) of this section, all classified records that (1) are more than 25 years old and (2) have been determined to have permanent historical value under title 44, United States Code, shall be automatically declassified whether or not the records have been reviewed. All classified records shall be automatically declassified on December 31 of the year that is 25 years from the date of origin, except as provided in paragraphs (b)''(d) and (g)''(i) of this section. If the date of origin of an individual record cannot be readily determined, the date of original classification shall be used instead.
  (b) An agency head may exempt from automatic declassification under paragraph (a) of this section specific information, the release of which should clearly and demonstrably be expected to:
  (1) reveal the identity of a confidential human source, a human intelligence source, a relationship with an intelligence or security service of a foreign government or international organization, or a nonhuman intelligence source; or impair the effectiveness of an intelligence method currently in use, available for use, or under development;
  (2) reveal information that would assist in the development, production, or use of weapons of mass destruction;
  (3) reveal information that would impair U.S. cryptologic systems or activities;
  (4) reveal information that would impair the application of state-of-the-art technology within a U.S. weapon system;
  (5) reveal formally named or numbered U.S. military war plans that remain in effect, or reveal operational or tactical elements of prior plans that are contained in such active plans;
  (6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;
  (7) reveal information that would impair the current ability of United States Government officials to protect the President, Vice President, and other protectees for whom protection services, in the interest of the national security, are authorized;
  (8) reveal information that would seriously impair current national security emergency preparedness plans or reveal current vulnerabilities of systems, installations, or infrastructures relating to the national security; or
  (9) violate a statute, treaty, or international agreement that does not permit the automatic or unilateral declassification of information at 25 years.
  (c)(1) An agency head shall notify the Panel of any specific file series of records for which a review or assessment has determined that the information within that file series almost invariably falls within one or more of the exemption categories listed in paragraph (b) of this section and that the agency proposes to exempt from automatic declassification at 25 years.
  (2) The notification shall include:
  (A) a description of the file series;
  (B) an explanation of why the information within the file series is almost invariably exempt from automatic declassification and why the information must remain classified for a longer period of time; and
  (C) except when the information within the file series almost invariably identifies a confidential human source or a human intelligence source or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction, a specific date or event for declassification of the information, not to exceed December 31 of the year that is 50 years from the date of origin of the records.
  (3) The Panel may direct the agency not to exempt a designated file series or to declassify the information within that series at an earlier date than recommended. The agency head may appeal such a decision to the President through the National Security Advisor.
  (4) File series exemptions approved by the President prior to December 31, 2008, shall remain valid without any additional agency action pending Panel review by the later of December 31, 2010, or December 31 of the year that is 10 years from the date of previous approval.
  (d) The following provisions shall apply to the onset of automatic declassification:
  (1) Classified records within an integral file block, as defined in this order, that are otherwise subject to automatic declassification under this section shall not be automatically declassified until December 31 of the year that is 25 years from the date of the most recent record within the file block.
  (2) After consultation with the Director of the National Declassification Center (the Center) established by section 3.7 of this order and before the records are subject to automatic declassification, an agency head or senior agency official may delay automatic declassification for up to five additional years for classified information contained in media that make a review for possible declassification exemptions more difficult or costly.
  (3) Other than for records that are properly exempted from automatic declassification, records containing classified information that originated with other agencies or the disclosure of which would affect the interests or activities of other agencies with respect to the classified information and could reasonably be expected to fall under one or more of the exemptions in paragraph (b) of this section shall be identified prior to the onset of automatic declassification for later referral to those agencies.
  (A) The information of concern shall be referred by the Center established by section 3.7 of this order, or by the centralized facilities referred to in section 3.7(e) of this order, in a prioritized and scheduled manner determined by the Center.
  (B) If an agency fails to provide a final determination on a referral made by the Center within 1 year of referral, or by the centralized facilities referred to in section 3.7(e) of this order within 3 years of referral, its equities in the referred records shall be automatically declassified.
  (C) If any disagreement arises between affected agencies and the Center regarding the referral review period, the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office shall determine the appropriate period of review of referred records.
  (D) Referrals identified prior to the establishment of the Center by section 3.7 of this order shall be subject to automatic declassification only in accordance with subparagraphs (d)(3)(A)''(C) of this section.
  (4) After consultation with the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, an agency head may delay automatic declassification for up to 3 years from the date of discovery of classified records that were inadvertently not reviewed prior to the effective date of automatic declassification.
  (e) Information exempted from automatic declassification under this section shall remain subject to the mandatory and systematic declassification review provisions of this order.
  (f) The Secretary of State shall determine when the United States should commence negotiations with the appropriate officials of a foreign government or international organization of governments to modify any treaty or international agreement that requires the classification of information contained in records affected by this section for a period longer than 25 years from the date of its creation, unless the treaty or international agreement pertains to information that may otherwise remain classified beyond 25 years under this section.
  (g) The Secretary of Energy shall determine when information concerning foreign nuclear programs that was removed from the Restricted Data category in order to carry out provisions of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, may be declassified. Unless otherwise determined, such information shall be declassified when comparable information concerning the United States nuclear program is declassified.
  (h) Not later than 3 years from the effective date of this order, all records exempted from automatic declassification under paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section shall be automatically declassified on December 31 of a year that is no more than 50 years from the date of origin, subject to the following:
  (1) Records that contain information the release of which should clearly and demonstrably be expected to reveal the following are exempt from automatic declassification at 50 years:
  (A) the identity of a confidential human source or a human intelligence source; or
  (B) key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction.
  (2) In extraordinary cases, agency heads may, within 5 years of the onset of automatic declassification, propose to exempt additional specific information from declassification at 50 years.
  (3) Records exempted from automatic declassification under this paragraph shall be automatically declassified on December 31 of a year that is no more than 75 years from the date of origin unless an agency head, within 5 years of that date, proposes to exempt specific information from declassification at 75 years and the proposal is formally approved by the Panel.
  (i) Specific records exempted from automatic declassification prior to the establishment of the Center described in section 3.7 of this order shall be subject to the provisions of paragraph (h) of this section in a scheduled and prioritized manner determined by the Center.
  (j) At least 1 year before information is subject to automatic declassification under this section, an agency head or senior agency official shall notify the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, serving as Executive Secretary of the Panel, of any specific information that the agency proposes to exempt from automatic declassification under paragraphs (b) and (h) of this section.
  (1) The notification shall include:
  (A) a detailed description of the information, either by reference to information in specific records or in the form of a declassification guide;
  (B) an explanation of why the information should be exempt from automatic declassification and must remain classified for a longer period of time; and
  (C) a specific date or a specific and independently verifiable event for automatic declassification of specific records that contain the information proposed for exemption.
  (2) The Panel may direct the agency not to exempt the information or to declassify it at an earlier date than recommended. An agency head may appeal such a decision to the President through the National Security Advisor. The information will remain classified while such an appeal is pending.
  (k) For information in a file series of records determined not to have permanent historical value, the duration of classification beyond 25 years shall be the same as the disposition (destruction) date of those records in each Agency Records Control Schedule or General Records Schedule, although the duration of classification shall be extended if the record has been retained for business reasons beyond the scheduled disposition date.
  Sec. 3.4. Systematic Declassification Review. (a) Each agency that has originated classified information under this order or its predecessors shall establish and conduct a program for systematic declassification review for records of permanent historical value exempted from automatic declassification under section 3.3 of this order. Agencies shall prioritize their review of such records in accordance with priorities established by the Center.
  (b) The Archivist shall conduct a systematic declassification review program for classified records: (1) accessioned into the National Archives; (2) transferred to the Archivist pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 2203; and (3) for which the National Archives serves as the custodian for an agency or organization that has gone out of existence.
  Sec. 3.5. Mandatory Declassification Review. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all information classified under this order or predecessor orders shall be subject to a review for declassification by the originating agency if:
  (1) the request for a review describes the document or material containing the information with sufficient specificity to enable the agency to locate it with a reasonable amount of effort;
  (2) the document or material containing the information responsive to the request is not contained within an operational file exempted from search and review, publication, and disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552 in accordance with law; and
  (3) the information is not the subject of pending litigation.
  (b) Information originated by the incumbent President or the incumbent Vice President; the incumbent President's White House Staff or the incumbent Vice President's Staff; committees, commissions, or boards appointed by the incumbent President; or other entities within the Executive Office of the President that solely advise and assist the incumbent President is exempted from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section. However, the Archivist shall have the authority to review, downgrade, and declassify papers or records of former Presidents and Vice Presidents under the control of the Archivist pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 2107, 2111, 2111 note, or 2203. Review procedures developed by the Archivist shall provide for consultation with agencies having primary subject matter interest and shall be consistent with the provisions of applicable laws or lawful agreements that pertain to the respective Presidential papers or records. Agencies with primary subject matter interest shall be notified promptly of the Archivist's decision. Any final decision by the Archivist may be appealed by the requester or an agency to the Panel. The information shall remain classified pending a prompt decision on the appeal.
  (c) Agencies conducting a mandatory review for declassification shall declassify information that no longer meets the standards for classification under this order. They shall release this information unless withholding is otherwise authorized and warranted under applicable law.
  (d) If an agency has reviewed the requested information for declassification within the past 2 years, the agency need not conduct another review and may instead inform the requester of this fact and the prior review decision and advise the requester of appeal rights provided under subsection (e) of this section.
  (e) In accordance with directives issued pursuant to this order, agency heads shall develop procedures to process requests for the mandatory review of classified information. These procedures shall apply to information classified under this or predecessor orders. They also shall provide a means for administratively appealing a denial of a mandatory review request, and for notifying the requester of the right to appeal a final agency decision to the Panel.
  (f) After consultation with affected agencies, the Secretary of Defense shall develop special procedures for the review of cryptologic information; the Director of National Intelligence shall develop special procedures for the review of information pertaining to intelligence sources, methods, and activities; and the Archivist shall develop special procedures for the review of information accessioned into the National Archives.
  (g) Documents required to be submitted for prepublication review or other administrative process pursuant to an approved nondisclosure agreement are not covered by this section.
  (h) This section shall not apply to any request for a review made to an element of the Intelligence Community that is made by a person other than an individual as that term is defined by 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(2), or by a foreign government entity or any representative thereof.
  Sec. 3.6. Processing Requests and Reviews. Notwithstanding section 4.1(i) of this order, in response to a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act, the Privacy Act of 1974, or the mandatory review provisions of this order:
  (a) An agency may refuse to confirm or deny the existence or nonexistence of requested records whenever the fact of their existence or nonexistence is itself classified under this order or its predecessors.
  (b) When an agency receives any request for documents in its custody that contain classified information that originated with other agencies or the disclosure of which would affect the interests or activities of other agencies with respect to the classified information, or identifies such documents in the process of implementing sections 3.3 or 3.4 of this order, it shall refer copies of any request and the pertinent documents to the originating agency for processing and may, after consultation with the originating agency, inform any requester of the referral unless such association is itself classified under this order or its predecessors. In cases in which the originating agency determines in writing that a response under paragraph (a) of this section is required, the referring agency shall respond to the requester in accordance with that paragraph.
  (c) Agencies may extend the classification of information in records determined not to have permanent historical value or nonrecord materials, including artifacts, beyond the time frames established in sections 1.5(b) and 2.2(f) of this order, provided:
  (1) the specific information has been approved pursuant to section 3.3(j) of this order for exemption from automatic declassification; and
  (2) the extension does not exceed the date established in section 3.3(j) of this order.
  Sec. 3.7. National Declassification Center (a) There is established within the National Archives a National Declassification Center to streamline declassification processes, facilitate quality-assurance measures, and implement standardized training regarding the declassification of records determined to have permanent historical value. There shall be a Director of the Center who shall be appointed or removed by the Archivist in consultation with the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence.
  (b) Under the administration of the Director, the Center shall coordinate:
  (1) timely and appropriate processing of referrals in accordance with section 3.3(d)(3) of this order for accessioned Federal records and transferred presidential records.
  (2) general interagency declassification activities necessary to fulfill the requirements of sections 3.3 and 3.4 of this order;
  (3) the exchange among agencies of detailed declassification guidance to enable the referral of records in accordance with section 3.3(d)(3) of this order;
  (4) the development of effective, transparent, and standard declassification work processes, training, and quality assurance measures;
  (5) the development of solutions to declassification challenges posed by electronic records, special media, and emerging technologies;
  (6) the linkage and effective utilization of existing agency databases and the use of new technologies to document and make public declassification review decisions and support declassification activities under the purview of the Center; and
  (7) storage and related services, on a reimbursable basis, for Federal records containing classified national security information.
  (c) Agency heads shall fully cooperate with the Archivist in the activities of the Center and shall:
  (1) provide the Director with adequate and current declassification guidance to enable the referral of records in accordance with section 3.3(d)(3) of this order; and
  (2) upon request of the Archivist, assign agency personnel to the Center who shall be delegated authority by the agency head to review and exempt or declassify information originated by their agency contained in records accessioned into the National Archives, after consultation with subject-matter experts as necessary.
  (d) The Archivist, in consultation with representatives of the participants in the Center and after input from the general public, shall develop priorities for declassification activities under the purview of the Center that take into account the degree of researcher interest and the likelihood of declassification.
  (e) Agency heads may establish such centralized facilities and internal operations to conduct internal declassification reviews as appropriate to achieve optimized records management and declassification business processes. Once established, all referral processing of accessioned records shall take place at the Center, and such agency facilities and operations shall be coordinated with the Center to ensure the maximum degree of consistency in policies and procedures that relate to records determined to have permanent historical value.
  (f) Agency heads may exempt from automatic declassification or continue the classification of their own originally classified information under section 3.3(a) of this order except that in the case of the Director of National Intelligence, the Director shall also retain such authority with respect to the Intelligence Community.
  (g) The Archivist shall, in consultation with the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, provide the National Security Advisor with a detailed concept of operations for the Center and a proposed implementing directive under section 5.1 of this order that reflects the coordinated views of the aforementioned agencies.
  PART 4 -- SAFEGUARDING
  Sec. 4.1. General Restrictions on Access. (a) A person may have access to classified information provided that:
  (1) a favorable determination of eligibility for access has been made by an agency head or the agency head's designee;
  (2) the person has signed an approved nondisclosure agreement; and
  (3) the person has a need-to-know the information.
  (b) Every person who has met the standards for access to classified information in paragraph (a) of this section shall receive contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be imposed on an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.
  (c) An official or employee leaving agency service may not remove classified information from the agency's control or direct that information be declassified in order to remove it from agency control.
  (d) Classified information may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization.
  (e) Persons authorized to disseminate classified information outside the executive branch shall ensure the protection of the information in a manner equivalent to that provided within the executive branch.
  (f) Consistent with law, executive orders, directives, and regulations, an agency head or senior agency official or, with respect to the Intelligence Community, the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish uniform procedures to ensure that automated information systems, including networks and telecommunications systems, that collect, create, communicate, compute, disseminate, process, or store classified information:
  (1) prevent access by unauthorized persons;
  (2) ensure the integrity of the information; and
  (3) to the maximum extent practicable, use:
  (A) common information technology standards, protocols, and interfaces that maximize the availability of, and access to, the information in a form and manner that facilitates its authorized use; and
  (B) standardized electronic formats to maximize the accessibility of information to persons who meet the criteria set forth in section 4.1(a) of this order.
  (g) Consistent with law, executive orders, directives, and regulations, each agency head or senior agency official, or with respect to the Intelligence Community, the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish controls to ensure that classified information is used, processed, stored, reproduced, transmitted, and destroyed under conditions that provide adequate protection and prevent access by unauthorized persons.
  (h) Consistent with directives issued pursuant to this order, an agency shall safeguard foreign government information under standards that provide a degree of protection at least equivalent to that required by the government or international organization of governments that furnished the information. When adequate to achieve equivalency, these standards may be less restrictive than the safeguarding standards that ordinarily apply to U.S. "Confidential" information, including modified handling and transmission and allowing access to individuals with a need-to-know who have not otherwise been cleared for access to classified information or executed an approved nondisclosure agreement.
  (i)(1) Classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated to another agency or U.S. entity by any agency to which it has been made available without the consent of the originating agency, as long as the criteria for access under section 4.1(a) of this order are met, unless the originating agency has determined that prior authorization is required for such dissemination and has marked or indicated such requirement on the medium containing the classified information in accordance with implementing directives issued pursuant to this order.
  (2) Classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated by any other agency to which it has been made available to a foreign government in accordance with statute, this order, directives implementing this order, direction of the President, or with the consent of the originating agency. For the purposes of this section, "foreign government" includes any element of a foreign government, or an international organization of governments, or any element thereof.
  (3) Documents created prior to the effective date of this order shall not be disseminated outside any other agency to which they have been made available without the consent of the originating agency. An agency head or senior agency official may waive this requirement for specific information that originated within that agency.
  (4) For purposes of this section, the Department of Defense shall be considered one agency, except that any dissemination of information regarding intelligence sources, methods, or activities shall be consistent with directives issued pursuant to section 6.2(b) of this order.
  (5) Prior consent of the originating agency is not required when referring records for declassification review that contain information originating in more than one agency.
  Sec. 4.2. Distribution Controls. (a) The head of each agency shall establish procedures in accordance with applicable law and consistent with directives issued pursuant to this order to ensure that classified information is accessible to the maximum extent possible by individuals who meet the criteria set forth in section 4.1(a) of this order.
  (b) In an emergency, when necessary to respond to an imminent threat to life or in defense of the homeland, the agency head or any designee may authorize the disclosure of classified information (including information marked pursuant to section 4.1(i)(1) of this order) to an individual or individuals who are otherwise not eligible for access. Such actions shall be taken only in accordance with directives implementing this order and any procedure issued by agencies governing the classified information, which shall be designed to minimize the classified information that is disclosed under these circumstances and the number of individuals who receive it. Information disclosed under this provision or implementing directives and procedures shall not be deemed declassified as a result of such disclosure or subsequent use by a recipient. Such disclosures shall be reported promptly to the originator of the classified information. For purposes of this section, the Director of National Intelligence may issue an implementing directive governing the emergency disclosure of classified intelligence information.
  (c) Each agency shall update, at least annually, the automatic, routine, or recurring distribution mechanism for classified information that it distributes. Recipients shall cooperate fully with distributors who are updating distribution lists and shall notify distributors whenever a relevant change in status occurs.
  Sec. 4.3. Special Access Programs. (a) Establishment of special access programs. Unless otherwise authorized by the President, only the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each, may create a special access program. For special access programs pertaining to intelligence sources, methods, and activities (but not including military operational, strategic, and tactical programs), this function shall be exercised by the Director of National Intelligence. These officials shall keep the number of these programs at an absolute minimum, and shall establish them only when the program is required by statute or upon a specific finding that:
  (1) the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional; and
  (2) the normal criteria for determining eligibility for access applicable to information classified at the same level are not deemed sufficient to protect the information from unauthorized disclosure.
  (b) Requirements and limitations. (1) Special access programs shall be limited to programs in which the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved.
  (2) Each agency head shall establish and maintain a system of accounting for special access programs consistent with directives issued pursuant to this order.
  (3) Special access programs shall be subject to the oversight program established under section 5.4(d) of this order. In addition, the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office shall be afforded access to these programs, in accordance with the security requirements of each program, in order to perform the functions assigned to the Information Security Oversight Office under this order. An agency head may limit access to a special access program to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office and no more than one other employee of the Information Security Oversight Office or, for special access programs that are extraordinarily sensitive and vulnerable, to the Director only.
  (4) The agency head or principal deputy shall review annually each special access program to determine whether it continues to meet the requirements of this order.
  (5) Upon request, an agency head shall brief the National Security Advisor, or a designee, on any or all of the agency's special access programs.
  (6) For the purposes of this section, the term "agency head" refers only to the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each.
  (c) Nothing in this order shall supersede any requirement made by or under 10 U.S.C. 119.
  Sec. 4.4. Access by Historical Researchers and Certain Former Government Personnel. (a) The requirement in section 4.1(a)(3) of this order that access to classified information may be granted only to individuals who have a need to-know the information may be waived for persons who:
  (1) are engaged in historical research projects;
  (2) previously have occupied senior policy-making positions to which they were appointed or designated by the President or the Vice President; or
  (3) served as President or Vice President.
  (b) Waivers under this section may be granted only if the agency head or senior agency official of the originating agency:
  (1) determines in writing that access is consistent with the interest of the national security;
  (2) takes appropriate steps to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure or compromise, and ensures that the information is safeguarded in a manner consistent with this order; and
  (3) limits the access granted to former Presidential appointees or designees and Vice Presidential appointees or designees to items that the person originated, reviewed, signed, or received while serving as a Presidential or Vice Presidential appointee or designee.
  PART 5 -- IMPLEMENTATION AND REVIEW
  Sec. 5.1. Program Direction. (a) The Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, under the direction of the Archivist and in consultation with the National Security Advisor, shall issue such directives as are necessary to implement this order. These directives shall be binding on the agencies. Directives issued by the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office shall establish standards for:
  (1) classification, declassification, and marking principles;
  (2) safeguarding classified information, which shall pertain to the handling, storage, distribution, transmittal, and destruction of and accounting for classified information;
  (3) agency security education and training programs;
  (4) agency self-inspection programs; and
  (5) classification and declassification guides.
  (b) The Archivist shall delegate the implementation and monitoring functions of this program to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office.
  (c) The Director of National Intelligence, after consultation with the heads of affected agencies and the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, may issue directives to implement this order with respect to the protection of intelligence sources, methods, and activities. Such directives shall be consistent with this order and directives issued under paragraph (a) of this section.
  Sec. 5.2. Information Security Oversight Office. (a) There is established within the National Archives an Information Security Oversight Office. The Archivist shall appoint the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, subject to the approval of the President.
  (b) Under the direction of the Archivist, acting in consultation with the National Security Advisor, the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office shall:
  (1) develop directives for the implementation of this order;
  (2) oversee agency actions to ensure compliance with this order and its implementing directives;
  (3) review and approve agency implementing regulations prior to their issuance to ensure their consistency with this order and directives issued under section 5.1(a) of this order;
  (4) have the authority to conduct on-site reviews of each agency's program established under this order, and to require of each agency those reports and information and other cooperation that may be necessary to fulfill its responsibilities. If granting access to specific categories of classified information would pose an exceptional national security risk, the affected agency head or the senior agency official shall submit a written justification recommending the denial of access to the President through the National Security Advisor within 60 days of the request for access. Access shall be denied pending the response;
  (5) review requests for original classification authority from agencies or officials not granted original classification authority and, if deemed appropriate, recommend Presidential approval through the National Security Advisor;
  (6) consider and take action on complaints and suggestions from persons within or outside the Government with respect to the administration of the program established under this order;
  (7) have the authority to prescribe, after consultation with affected agencies, standardization of forms or procedures that will promote the implementation of the program established under this order;
  (8) report at least annually to the President on the implementation of this order; and
  (9) convene and chair interagency meetings to discuss matters pertaining to the program established by this order.
  Sec. 5.3. Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel.
  (a) Establishment and administration.
  (1) There is established an Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel. The Departments of State, Defense, and Justice, the National Archives, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Advisor shall each be represented by a senior-level representative who is a full-time or permanent part-time Federal officer or employee designated to serve as a member of the Panel by the respective agency head. The President shall designate a Chair from among the members of the Panel.
  (2) Additionally, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency may appoint a temporary representative who meets the criteria in paragraph (a)(1) of this section to participate as a voting member in all Panel deliberations and associated support activities concerning classified information originated by the Central Intelligence Agency.
  (3) A vacancy on the Panel shall be filled as quickly as possible as provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
  (4) The Director of the Information Security Oversight Office shall serve as the Executive Secretary of the Panel. The staff of the Information Security Oversight Office shall provide program and administrative support for the Panel.
  (5) The members and staff of the Panel shall be required to meet eligibility for access standards in order to fulfill the Panel's functions.
  (6) The Panel shall meet at the call of the Chair. The Chair shall schedule meetings as may be necessary for the Panel to fulfill its functions in a timely manner.
  (7) The Information Security Oversight Office shall include in its reports to the President a summary of the Panel's activities.
  (b) Functions. The Panel shall:
  (1) decide on appeals by persons who have filed classification challenges under section 1.8 of this order;
  (2) approve, deny, or amend agency exemptions from automatic declassification as provided in section 3.3 of this order;
  (3) decide on appeals by persons or entities who have filed requests for mandatory declassification review under section 3.5 of this order; and
  (4) appropriately inform senior agency officials and the public of final Panel decisions on appeals under sections 1.8 and 3.5 of this order.
  (c) Rules and procedures. The Panel shall issue bylaws, which shall be published in the Federal Register. The bylaws shall establish the rules and procedures that the Panel will follow in accepting, considering, and issuing decisions on appeals. The rules and procedures of the Panel shall provide that the Panel will consider appeals only on actions in which:
  (1) the appellant has exhausted his or her administrative remedies within the responsible agency;
  (2) there is no current action pending on the issue within the Federal courts; and
  (3) the information has not been the subject of review by the Federal courts or the Panel within the past 2 years.
  (d) Agency heads shall cooperate fully with the Panel so that it can fulfill its functions in a timely and fully informed manner. The Panel shall report to the President through the National Security Advisor any instance in which it believes that an agency head is not cooperating fully with the Panel.
  (e) The Panel is established for the sole purpose of advising and assisting the President in the discharge of his constitutional and discretionary authority to protect the national security of the United States. Panel decisions are committed to the discretion of the Panel, unless changed by the President.
  (f) An agency head may appeal a decision of the Panel to the President through the National Security Advisor. The information shall remain classified pending a decision on the appeal.
  Sec. 5.4. General Responsibilities. Heads of agencies that originate or handle classified information shall:
  (a) demonstrate personal commitment and commit senior management to the successful implementation of the program established under this order;
  (b) commit necessary resources to the effective implementation of the program established under this order;
  (c) ensure that agency records systems are designed and maintained to optimize the appropriate sharing and safeguarding of classified information, and to facilitate its declassification under the terms of this order when it no longer meets the standards for continued classification; and
  (d) designate a senior agency official to direct and administer the program, whose responsibilities shall include:
  (1) overseeing the agency's program established under this order, provided an agency head may designate a separate official to oversee special access programs authorized under this order. This official shall provide a full accounting of the agency's special access programs at least annually;
  (2) promulgating implementing regulations, which shall be published in the Federal Register to the extent that they affect members of the public;
  (3) establishing and maintaining security education and training programs;
  (4) establishing and maintaining an ongoing self inspection program, which shall include the regular reviews of representative samples of the agency's original and derivative classification actions, and shall authorize appropriate agency officials to correct misclassification actions not covered by sections 1.7(c) and 1.7(d) of this order; and reporting annually to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office on the agency's self-inspection program;
  (5) establishing procedures consistent with directives issued pursuant to this order to prevent unnecessary access to classified information, including procedures that:
  (A) require that a need for access to classified information be established before initiating administrative clearance procedures; and
  (B) ensure that the number of persons granted access to classified information meets the mission needs of the agency while also satisfying operational and security requirements and needs;
  (6) developing special contingency plans for the safeguarding of classified information used in or near hostile or potentially hostile areas;
  (7) ensuring that the performance contract or other system used to rate civilian or military personnel performance includes the designation and management of classified information as a critical element or item to be evaluated in the rating of:
  (A) original classification authorities;
  (B) security managers or security specialists; and
  (C) all other personnel whose duties significantly involve the creation or handling of classified information, including personnel who regularly apply derivative classification markings;
  (8) accounting for the costs associated with the implementation of this order, which shall be reported to the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office for publication;
  (9) assigning in a prompt manner agency personnel to respond to any request, appeal, challenge, complaint, or suggestion arising out of this order that pertains to classified information that originated in a component of the agency that no longer exists and for which there is no clear successor in function; and
  (10) establishing a secure capability to receive information, allegations, or complaints regarding over-classification or incorrect classification within the agency and to provide guidance to personnel on proper classification as needed.
  Sec. 5.5. Sanctions. (a) If the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office finds that a violation of this order or its implementing directives has occurred, the Director shall make a report to the head of the agency or to the senior agency official so that corrective steps, if appropriate, may be taken.
  (b) Officers and employees of the United States Government, and its contractors, licensees, certificate holders, and grantees shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently:
  (1) disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified under this order or predecessor orders;
  (2) classify or continue the classification of information in violation of this order or any implementing directive;
  (3) create or continue a special access program contrary to the requirements of this order; or
  (4) contravene any other provision of this order or its implementing directives.
  (c) Sanctions may include reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions in accordance with applicable law and agency regulation.
  (d) The agency head, senior agency official, or other supervisory official shall, at a minimum, promptly remove the classification authority of any individual who demonstrates reckless disregard or a pattern of error in applying the classification standards of this order.
  (e) The agency head or senior agency official shall:
  (1) take appropriate and prompt corrective action when a violation or infraction under paragraph (b) of this section occurs; and
  (2) notify the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office when a violation under paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section occurs.
  PART 6 -- GENERAL PROVISIONS
  Sec. 6.1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
  (a) "Access" means the ability or opportunity to gain knowledge of classified information.
  (b) "Agency" means any "Executive agency," as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105; any "Military department" as defined in 5 U.S.C. 102; and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information.
  (c) "Authorized holder" of classified information means anyone who satisfies the conditions for access stated in section 4.1(a) of this order.
  (d) "Automated information system" means an assembly of computer hardware, software, or firmware configured to collect, create, communicate, compute, disseminate, process, store, or control data or information.
  (e) "Automatic declassification" means the declassification of information based solely upon:
  (1) the occurrence of a specific date or event as determined by the original classification authority; or
  (2) the expiration of a maximum time frame for duration of classification established under this order.
  (f) "Classification" means the act or process by which information is determined to be classified information.
  (g) "Classification guidance" means any instruction or source that prescribes the classification of specific information.
  (h) "Classification guide" means a documentary form of classification guidance issued by an original classification authority that identifies the elements of information regarding a specific subject that must be classified and establishes the level and duration of classification for each such element.
  (i) "Classified national security information" or "classified information" means information that has been determined pursuant to this order or any predecessor order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure and is marked to indicate its classified status when in documentary form.
  (j) "Compilation" means an aggregation of preexisting unclassified items of information.
  (k) "Confidential source" means any individual or organization that has provided, or that may reasonably be expected to provide, information to the United States on matters pertaining to the national security with the expectation that the information or relationship, or both, are to be held in confidence.
  (l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, taking into consideration such aspects of the information as the sensitivity, value, utility, and provenance of that information.
  (m) "Declassification" means the authorized change in the status of information from classified information to unclassified information.
  (n) "Declassification guide" means written instructions issued by a declassification authority that describes the elements of information regarding a specific subject that may be declassified and the elements that must remain classified.
  (o) "Derivative classification" means the incorporating, paraphrasing, restating, or generating in new form information that is already classified, and marking the newly developed material consistent with the classification markings that apply to the source information. Derivative classification includes the classification of information based on classification guidance. The duplication or reproduction of existing classified information is not derivative classification.
  (p) "Document" means any recorded information, regardless of the nature of the medium or the method or circumstances of recording.
  (q) "Downgrading" means a determination by a declassification authority that information classified and safeguarded at a specified level shall be classified and safeguarded at a lower level.
  (r) "File series" means file units or documents arranged according to a filing system or kept together because they relate to a particular subject or function, result from the same activity, document a specific kind of transaction, take a particular physical form, or have some other relationship arising out of their creation, receipt, or use, such as restrictions on access or use.
  (s) "Foreign government information" means:(1) information provided to the United States Government by a foreign government or governments,an international organization of governments, or any element thereof, with the expectation that the information, the source of the information, or both, are to be held in confidence;
  (2) information produced by the United States Government pursuant to or as a result of a joint arrangement with a foreign government or governments, or an international organization of governments, or any element thereof, requiring that the information, the arrangement, or both, are to be held in confidence; or
  (3) information received and treated as "foreign government information" under the terms of a predecessor order.
  (t) "Information" means any knowledge that can be communicated or documentary material, regardless of its physical form or characteristics, that is owned by, is produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government.
  (u) "Infraction" means any knowing, willful, or negligent action contrary to the requirements of this order or its implementing directives that does not constitute a "violation," as defined below.
  (v) "Integral file block" means a distinct component of a file series, as defined in this section, that should be maintained as a separate unit in order to ensure the integrity of the records. An integral file block may consist of a set of records covering either a specific topic or a range of time, such as a Presidential administration or a 5-year retirement schedule within a specific file series that is retired from active use as a group. For purposes of automaticdeclassification, integral file blocks shall contain only records dated within 10 years of the oldest record in the file block.
  (w) "Integrity" means the state that exists when information is unchanged from its source and has not been accidentally or intentionally modified, altered, or destroyed.
  (x) "Intelligence" includes foreign intelligence and counterintelligence as defined by Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981, as amended, or by a successor order.
  (y) "Intelligence activities" means all activities that elements of the Intelligence Community are authorized to conduct pursuant to law or Executive Order 12333, as amended, or a successor order.
  (z) "Intelligence Community" means an element or agency of the U.S. Government identified in or designated pursuant to section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, or section 3.5(h) of Executive Order 12333, as amended.
  (aa) "Mandatory declassification review" means the review for declassification of classified information in response to a request for declassification that meets the requirements under section 3.5 of this order.
  (bb) "Multiple sources" means two or more source documents, classification guides, or a combination of both.
  (cc) "National security" means the national defense or foreign relations of the United States.
  (dd) "Need-to-know" means a determination within the executive branch in accordance with directives issued pursuant to this order that a prospective recipient requires access to specific classified information in order to perform or assist in a lawful and authorized governmental function.
  (ee) "Network" means a system of two or more computers that can exchange data or information.
  (ff) "Original classification" means an initial determination that information requires, in the interest of the national security, protection against unauthorized disclosure.
  (gg) "Original classification authority" means an individual authorized in writing, either by the President, the Vice President, or by agency heads or other officials designated by the President, to classify information in the first instance.
  (hh) "Records" means the records of an agency and Presidential papers or Presidential records, as those terms are defined in title 44, United States Code, including those created or maintained by a government contractor, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee that are subject to the sponsoring agency's control under the terms of the contract, license, certificate, or grant.
  (ii) "Records having permanent historical value" means Presidential papers or Presidential records and the records of an agency that the Archivist has determined should be maintained permanently in accordance with title 44, United States Code.
  (jj) "Records management" means the planning, controlling, directing, organizing, training, promoting, and other managerial activities involved with respect to records creation, records maintenance and use, and records disposition in order to achieve adequate and proper documentation of the policies and transactions of the Federal Government and effective and economical management of agency operations.
  (kk) "Safeguarding" means measures and controls that are prescribed to protect classified information.
  (ll) "Self-inspection" means the internal review and evaluation of individual agency activities and the agency as a whole with respect to the implementation of the program established under this order and its implementing directives.
  (mm) "Senior agency official" means the official designated by the agency head under section 5.4(d) of this order to direct and administer the agency's program under which information is classified, safeguarded, and declassified.
  (nn) "Source document" means an existing document that contains classified information that is incorporated, paraphrased, restated, or generated in new form into a new document.
  (oo) "Special access program" means a program established for a specific class of classified information that imposes safeguarding and access requirements that exceed those normally required for information at the same classification level.
  (pp) "Systematic declassification review" means the review for declassification of classified information contained in records that have been determined by the Archivist to have permanent historical value in accordance with title 44, United States Code.
  (qq) "Telecommunications" means the preparation, transmission, or communication of information by electronic means.
  (rr) "Unauthorized disclosure" means a communication or physical transfer of classified information to an unauthorized recipient.
  (ss) "U.S. entity" includes:
  (1) State, local, or tribal governments;
  (2) State, local, and tribal law enforcement and firefighting entities;
  (3) public health and medical entities;
  (4) regional, state, local, and tribal emergency management entities, including State Adjutants General and other appropriate public safety entities; or
  (5) private sector entities serving as part of the nation's Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources.
  (tt) "Violation" means:
  (1) any knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information;
  (2) any knowing, willful, or negligent action to classify or continue the classification of information contrary to the requirements of this order or its implementing directives; or
  (3) any knowing, willful, or negligent action to create or continue a special access program contrary to the requirements of this order.
  (uu) "Weapons of mass destruction" means any weapon of mass destruction as defined in 50 U.S.C. 1801(p).
  Sec. 6.2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall supersede any requirement made by or under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the National Security Act of 1947, as amended. "Restricted Data" and "Formerly Restricted Data" shall be handled, protected, classified, downgraded, and declassified in conformity with the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and regulations issued under that Act.
  (b) The Director of National Intelligence may, with respect to the Intelligence Community and after consultation with the heads of affected departments and agencies, issue such policy directives and guidelines as the Director of National Intelligence deems necessary to implement this order with respect to the classification and declassification of all intelligence and intelligence-related information, and for access to and dissemination of all intelligence and intelligence-related information, both in its final form and in the form when initially gathered. Procedures or other guidance issued by Intelligence Community element heads shall be in accordance with such policy directives or guidelines issued by the Director of National Intelligence. Any such policy directives or guidelines issued by the Director of National Intelligence shall be in accordance with directives issued by the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office under section 5.1(a) of this order.
  (c) The Attorney General, upon request by the head of an agency or the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, shall render an interpretation of this order with respect to any question arising in the course of its administration.
  (d) Nothing in this order limits the protection afforded any information by other provisions of law, including the Constitution, Freedom of Information Act exemptions, the Privacy Act of 1974, and the National Security Act of 1947, as amended. This order is not intended to and does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. The foregoing is in addition to the specific provisos set forth in sections 1.1(b), 3.1(c) and 5.3(e) of this order.
  (e) Nothing in this order shall be construed to obligate action or otherwise affect functions by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
  (f) This order shall be implemented subject to the availability of appropriations.
  (g) Executive Order 12958 of April 17, 1995, and amendments thereto, including Executive Order 13292 of March 25, 2003, are hereby revoked as of the effective date of this order.
  Sec. 6.3. Effective Date. This order is effective 180 days from the date of this order, except for sections 1.7, 3.3, and 3.7, which are effective immediately.
  Sec. 6.4. Publication. The Archivist of the United States shall publish this Executive Order in the Federal Register.
  BARACK OBAMA
  THE WHITE HOUSE,December 29, 2009.
  # # #
Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American Citizens
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:55
  Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American CitizensSkip to comments.
  Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American CitizensSurvival and Beyond ^ | 7/9/13 | Ed Corcoran
  Posted on 07/09/2013 11:41:17 AM PDT by Nachum
  Clayton Seymour, a 36-year-old IT specialist from Hilliard, Ohio, recently sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NSA, curious as to whether any data about him was being collected.
  What he received in response made his blood boil.
  ''I am a generally law abiding citizen with nothing I can think of that would require monitoring,'' Seymour wrote to me, ''but I wanted to know if I was having data collected about me and if so, what.''
  So Seymour sent in an FOIA request. Weeks later, a letter from the NSA arrived explaining that he was not entitled to any information. ''When I got the declined letter, I was furious,'' he told me. ''I feel betrayed.''
  Seymour had decided to request his NSA file after coming across a recent post of mine instructing Americans on how to properly request such files from the FBI and NSA. A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.
  The letter, which first acknowledges the media coverage surrounding its surveillance systems, quickly moves to justify why none of that data can be obtained by an American citizen in a standard FOIA request:
  (Excerpt) Read more at survivalandbeyond.net ...
  TOPICS:Government; News/Current EventsKEYWORDS:666; foia; nsa
  Not a bad idea. What if a few million people all demanded to see their NSA files under a FOIA, then after rejection sued in a class action suit?
  1 posted on 07/09/2013 11:41:17 AM PDT by NachumTo: Nachum
  And if they weren't collecting info on him specifically then, they are now.
  2 posted on 07/09/2013 11:45:11 AM PDT by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)To: Nachum
  3 posted on 07/09/2013 11:45:42 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)To: Nachum
  '' What if a few million people all demanded to see their NSA files under a FOIA, then after rejection sued in a class action suit? ''
  Laudable. Only problem is we are now under a dictatorship. Laws mean nothing.
  To: Nachum
  then after rejection sued in a class action suit?The employees of the agency would perjure themselves in court, refuse to cooperate with the court, claim the court has no jurisdiction over them, and rationalize it all by saying anything they do is for the Greater Good because they can't let The Enemy (roughly defined as whoever is bothering them at a particular moment) get an advantage on them.
  It's pretty clear to the populace at large that these guys now run the government for their own benefit, and consider the citizenry to be a subservient serf class.
  5 posted on 07/09/2013 11:51:05 AM PDT by RegulatorTo: Nachum
  ONLY terrorists get protection from the NSA.
  THEIR communications are ignored.THEIR Passports not needed.AND they are weaponized by Holder (Fast&Furious)and Obama/Clinton (MANPADs).
  To: Nachum
  You're ''enlightened'' if you voted for transparency. You're a racist if you're pissed off that you didn't get it.
  7 posted on 07/09/2013 11:51:50 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)To: Nachum
  two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he receivedI'm not shocked at all. obama thanks you for your vote. Think before voting next time, Seymour.
  8 posted on 07/09/2013 11:52:00 AM PDT by FoxInSocks ("Hope is not a course of action." -- M. O'Neal, USMC)To: Nachum
  It's not our government anymore.It belongs to King Zero and his Democrat Court. Oligarchy with a monarchical figurehead is our future if we can't "wake up" the American electorate (and stop Dem election theft).
  9 posted on 07/09/2013 11:53:25 AM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)To: Nachum
  A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.A Navy vet who voted twice for Zero? Wonder if he woke up yet.....
  10 posted on 07/09/2013 11:54:45 AM PDT by capydick (''Life's tough.......it's even tougher if you're stupid.'')Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
  FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
  Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American CitizensSkip to comments.
  Your Life is Now Classified: NSA Rejecting All FOIA Requests by American CitizensSurvival and Beyond ^ | 7/9/13 | Ed Corcoran
  Posted on 07/09/2013 11:41:17 AM PDT by Nachum
  Clayton Seymour, a 36-year-old IT specialist from Hilliard, Ohio, recently sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NSA, curious as to whether any data about him was being collected.
  What he received in response made his blood boil.
  ''I am a generally law abiding citizen with nothing I can think of that would require monitoring,'' Seymour wrote to me, ''but I wanted to know if I was having data collected about me and if so, what.''
  So Seymour sent in an FOIA request. Weeks later, a letter from the NSA arrived explaining that he was not entitled to any information. ''When I got the declined letter, I was furious,'' he told me. ''I feel betrayed.''
  Seymour had decided to request his NSA file after coming across a recent post of mine instructing Americans on how to properly request such files from the FBI and NSA. A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.
  The letter, which first acknowledges the media coverage surrounding its surveillance systems, quickly moves to justify why none of that data can be obtained by an American citizen in a standard FOIA request:
  (Excerpt) Read more at survivalandbeyond.net ...
  TOPICS:Government; News/Current EventsKEYWORDS:666; foia; nsa
  Not a bad idea. What if a few million people all demanded to see their NSA files under a FOIA, then after rejection sued in a class action suit?
  1 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:41:17 AM PDT by
  NachumTo: Nachum
  And if they weren't collecting info on him specifically then, they are now.
  2 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:45:11 AM PDT by
  freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)
  To: Nachum
  3 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:45:42 AM PDT by
  cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
  To: Nachum
  '' What if a few million people all demanded to see their NSA files under a FOIA, then after rejection sued in a class action suit? ''
  Laudable. Only problem is we are now under a dictatorship. Laws mean nothing.
  To: Nachum
  then after rejection sued in a class action suit?The employees of the agency would perjure themselves in court, refuse to cooperate with the court, claim the court has no jurisdiction over them, and rationalize it all by saying anything they do is for the Greater Good because they can't let The Enemy (roughly defined as whoever is bothering them at a particular moment) get an advantage on them.
  It's pretty clear to the populace at large that these guys now run the government for their own benefit, and consider the citizenry to be a subservient serf class.
  5 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:51:05 AM PDT by
  RegulatorTo: Nachum
  ONLY terrorists get protection from the NSA.
  THEIR communications are ignored.THEIR Passports not needed.AND they are weaponized by Holder (Fast&Furious)and Obama/Clinton (MANPADs).
  To: Nachum
  You're ''enlightened'' if you voted for transparency. You're a racist if you're pissed off that you didn't get it.
  7 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:51:50 AM PDT by
  tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
  To: Nachum
  two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he receivedI'm not shocked at all. obama thanks you for your vote. Think before voting next time, Seymour.
  8 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:52:00 AM PDT by
  FoxInSocks ("Hope is not a course of action." -- M. O'Neal, USMC)
  To: Nachum
  It's not our government anymore.
  It belongs to King Zero and his Democrat Court. Oligarchy with a monarchical figurehead is our future if we can't "wake up" the American electorate (and stop Dem election theft).
  9 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:53:25 AM PDT by
  jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
  To: Nachum
  A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.A Navy vet who voted twice for Zero? Wonder if he woke up yet.....
  10 posted on
  07/09/2013 11:54:45 AM PDT by
  capydick (''Life's tough.......it's even tougher if you're stupid.'')
  Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
  FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
Daily Kos: Want to See Your NSA or FBI File? Here's How...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:53
  Have you ever Tweeted a politically subversive message, attended a protest, or signed an oppositional petition? If so, you may have a dedicated file on you kept by the FBI and/or the NSA.
  With a simple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, any U.S. citizen can obtain one's NSA or FBI file, if such a file exists.
  It simply takes a few minutes to fill out the requisite forms and mail them to the appropriate address. An independent site '' www.getmyfbifile '' will, free of charge, generate the necessary forms for you already filled out.
  Of course, you can also do this directly through the NSA or FBI if you are worried about providing personal information to an independent site.
  While an appropriate level of cynicism may be warranted concerning the level of transparency one should expect from such a request '' should your file be substantial '' it is the law that your complete file be provided to you upon request.
  Demand that the law be followed, for it is your right as a citizen to know this information.
  My request is going in the mail today.
  (Load)(Load)(Load)(Load)(Load)(Load)(Load)
HILLARY CLINTON'S SECRET PLASTIC SURGERY MAKEOVER - Globe Magazine
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:48
  Hillary Clinton is finally ready to divorce her womanizing hubby Bill after undergoing a secret plastic surgery makeover to look years younger! ONLY this week's GLOBE has startling before and after photos of Hillary and reveals what finally pushed her into the $120 million divorce - including Bill's refusal to take a DNA test to determine if he's the father of a hooker's love child.
Ahmad Jarba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:28
  Ahmad Jarba, born in the Qamishli tribe in 1969, is a Syrian leader and politician, President of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces[1], the main opposition group of the Syrian Civil War, since 6 July 2013. His election took place in the second round of voting of a three days meeting organized by the Coalition in order to renew its board. He obtained 55 votes, three more than his rival Mustafa Sabbagh, who was supported by Qatar.
  Jarba holds a bachelor of law and is also member of the Revolutionary Council of Syrian Clans representing Al-Hasakah and has close ties with Saudi Arabia Government.
Syrian opposition coalition elects president - Times Of India
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:27
  ISTANBUL: The main Syrian opposition National Coalition elected Ahmad Jarba as its president on Saturday after a close runoff vote held in Istanbul, coalition members said.
  Jarba is a tribal figure from the eastern province of Hasaka who has connections with Saudi Arabia. He defeated businessman Mustafa Sabbagh, Qatar's point man in the opposition.
NSA and CIA have maintained in Brasilia staff to collect data filtered satellite - News - World - Nominuto.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:22
  Roberto Kaz e Jos(C) Casado ,O Globo, 8 de julho de 2013Funcionou em Bras­lia, pelo menos at(C) 2002, uma das esta§µes de espionagem nas quais agentes da Agªncia de Seguran§a Nacional (NSA, na sigla em inglªs) trabalharam em conjunto com a Agªncia Central de Inteligªncia (CIA) dos Estados Unidos. N£o se pode afirmar que continuou depois desse ano por falta de provas.
  Documentos da NSA a que O GLOBO teve acesso revelam que Bras­lia fez parte da rede de 16 bases dessa agªncia dedicadas a um programa de coleta de informa§µes atrav(C)s de sat(C)lites de outros pa­ses. Um deles tem o t­tulo ''Primary Fornsat Collection Operations'' e destaca as bases da agªncia.
  Sat(C)lites s£o vitais aos sistemas nacionais de comunica§µes, tanto quanto as redes de fibras "ticas em cabos submarinos. O Brasil n£o possui nenhum, mas aluga oito, todos do tipo geoestacionrio - ou seja, que permanecem estacionados sobre uma regi£o espec­fica da Terra, em geral na linha do Equador.
  H tamb(C)m um conjunto de documentos da NSA, de setembro de 2010, cuja leitura pode levar conclus£o de que escrit"rios da Embaixada do Brasil em Washington e da miss£o brasileira nas Na§µes Unidas, em Nova York, em algum momento teriam sido alvos da agªncia. N£o foi poss­vel confirmar a informa§£o e nem se esse tipo de prtica prossegue.
  Essa mesma documenta§£o expµe os padrµes da NSA para monitoramento de informa§µes em escrit"rios estrangeiros, nos EUA. S£o softwares de espionagem operados a partir de implantes f­sicos nas redes digitais privadas e em computadores: Highlands (C) o codinome de um programa de coleta direta de sinais digitais; o Vagrant funciona atrav(C)s de c"pias das telas de computadores; e o Lifesaver, via c"pia dos discos r­gidos onde ficam armazenadas as mem"rias das mquinas. Os trªs programas teriam sido usados para espionar dados brasileiros.
  Os documentos da NSA foram vazados por Edward Snowden, t(C)cnico em redes de computa§£o. Ex-empregado da CIA, ele trabalhou na agªncia nos ºltimos quatro anos como especialista subcontratado de empresas privadas. H um mªs, o jornal britnico ''The Guardian'' publicou reportagens com as primeiras revela§µes de Snowden sobre opera§µes de vigilncia de comunica§µes realizadas dentro e fora das fronteiras dos Estados Unidos.
  No domingo, O GLOBO mostrou que, na ºltima d(C)cada, a NSA espionou telefonemas e correspondªncia eletr´nica de pessoas residentes ou em trnsito no Brasil, assim como empresas instaladas no pa­s. N£o h nºmeros precisos, mas em janeiro passado, por exemplo, o Brasil ficou pouco atrs dos Estados Unidos, que teve 2,3 bilhµes de telefonemas e mensagens espionados.
  Para tanto, a agªncia contou com parceiros corporativos no uso de ao menos trªs programas de computa§£o. Um deles (C) o software Prism, que permite acesso aos e-mails, conversas online e chamadas de voz de clientes de empresas como Facebook, Google, Microsoft e YouTube, entre outras. Outro programa (C) o Boundless Informant, para rastrear registros como hora, local, etc., de e-mails enviados ou recebidos. H tamb(C)m o X-Keyscore, capaz de reconhecer uma mensagem escrita em diferentes idiomas em correspondªncia de e para o Brasil. E ainda existe o Fairview, pelo qual (C) poss­vel monitorar grandes quantidades de informa§µes trocadas por pessoas e empresas em distintos lugares.
  Bras­lia se destacou como ºnica esta§£o na Am(C)rica do Sul no mapa descritivo das opera§µes americanas de espionagem por sat(C)lites estrangeiros.
  Tamb(C)m era uma das duas cidades-base do Fornsat, que hospedaram espiµes da NSA e da CIA designados para trabalhar em conjunto nesse programa. Na linguagem caracter­stica usada na documenta§£o copiada por Snowden, eles compunham uma for§a-tarefa, a Special Collection Service (SCS). Al(C)m de Bras­lia, haveria outro grupo em Nova D(C)lhi, na ndia.
  A NSA descreve, em apresenta§£o interna datada de 2002, como opera esse cons"rcio de agªncias americanas de espionagem. O foco, segundo a documenta§£o oficial, est em "converter sinais de inteligªncia captados no exterior a partir de estabelecimentos oficiais dos Estados Unidos, como embaixadas e consulados." Acrescenta: "A NSA trabalha junto com a CIA. (...) Agentes da NSA, disfar§ados de diplomatas, conduzem o acervo". O documento foi feito uma d(C)cada atrs e n£o foi poss­vel confirmar se a prtica prossegue.
  Essas duas agªncias mantinham equipes SCS em 75 cidades, conforme o documento de 2002. N£o foi poss­vel saber se atualmente continuam. Dessas, 65 eram capitais nacionais. Mas os documentos da NSA deixam claro que apenas nas esta§µes de Bras­lia e de Nova D(C)li, existiam for§as-tarefa SCS com trabalho diretamente relacionado ao programa de espionagem atrav(C)s de sat(C)lites de outros pa­ses, o Fornsat.
  A a§£o conjunta proporciona ''inteligªncia considervel sobre comunica§£o de lideran§as'', esclarece o documento da NSA de 2002. Ela (C) facilitada, ressalta, pela ''presen§a dentro de uma capital nacional''.
  Complexo para a coleta
  O nºmero de ''alvos'' (C) grande: ''Sistemas de comunica§£o de sat(C)lites comerciais estrangeiros s£o usados no mundo inteiro por governos estrangeiros, organiza§µes militares, corpora§µes, bancos e indºstrias.'' A estrutura desse sistema de coleta de informa§µes, segundo a NSA, se baseia nas alian§as da agªncia com empresas privadas, proprietrias ou operadoras: ''A NSA, em conjunto com seus parceiros estrangeiros, acessa sinais de comunica§£o de sat(C)lites estrangeiros.''
  No mapa sobre opera§µes do sistema Fornsat aparecem de forma claramente identificveis duas importantes bases militares dos EUA.
  Uma (C) da pr"pria NSA, a de Sugar Grove - ''Timberline" (C) o seu codinome. Fica no condado de Pendleton, em West Virginia (EUA). Segundo reportagem de 2005 do jornal ''New York Times'', funciona como uma esp(C)cie de central do sistema de coleta de informa§µes por sinais digitais no lado Leste dos Estados Unidos.
  Um outro ponto-chave de coleta de dados (C) a base de Misawa, no Jap£o. Ali est£o estacionadas unidades da For§a A(C)rea dos EUA (basicamente, o 35º Fighter Wing) e um grupamento da For§a A(C)rea de Autodefesa do Jap£o.
  Como as agªncias de espionagem de outros pa­ses, a NSA sustenta grandes investimentos anuais em tecnologia. ‰ o resultado de uma obsess£o por Inteligªncia ''acabada'' - a produ§£o diria de um conjunto de informa§µes de qualidade para quem det(C)m o poder de decis£o na pol­tica governamental dom(C)stica e externa. Mas como tudo (C) segredo nesse ramo, os abusos e os fracassos jamais s£o conhecidos.
  Tags: Bras­liasat(C)lite
Researchers gas New York City Subway to prepare for terror attacks | The Verge
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:12
  At 8AM ET this morning commuters were guinea pigs for a mock chemical attack on the New York City Subway. If you were on the subway you likely didn't notice anything '-- the test was silently set off and the gas dispersed through the system was harmless, odorless, and invisible. The planned attack was carried out by the New York Police Department and Brookhaven National Laboratory, and the gas that found its way though New York's tubes (and New Yorkers' lungs) is known as perfluorocarbon tracer. Researchers set off the gas at "several dozen" subway stations around the five boroughs for a sustained 30-minute attack, and around 200 air sampling boxes placed around the subway and on street level were set to track the gas as it moved around the city.
  "It's planning for the worst and hoping we don't ever have to use it."
  The purpose of this harmless attack? You may have guessed already, but it's said that the data on how gases move through the subway system and the city will help inform officials when making emergency response plans. As NYPD deputy commissioner Paul Browne told reporters, "it's planning for the worst and hoping we don't ever have to use it." Brookhaven also notes that the data could also assist if an industrial accident introduced harmful gases to the subway system. Typically, computer models can provide enough information to help when coming up with such emergency plans, but officials say that the complexity of New York's subway system and the aboveground structures made it difficult to accurately model such an attack.
  This isn't the first time officials have launched a fake chemical attack on a public transit system '-- though today's test is the largest of its kind in the US. Similar studies have been carried out on a smaller scale in Washington, DC and Boston, and there are plans for an air flow test in London's tube this summer. Today's study will be replicated two more times through July 28th, and the project is funded by a $3.4 million grant from the US Department of Homeland Security.
  Update: This article has been modified with additional information on the study and similar tests.
VIDEO-McCain calls Morsi ouster a coup d'etat, urges blocking aid - The Hill's Video
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:50
  Comments begin at 1:13 mark.
  Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called the ouster of Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi a coup d'etat and pressed the Obama administration to suspend aid to the country on Sunday.
  "It was a coup and it was the second time in two and a half years that we have seen the military step in," McCain said on CBS's "Face the Nation."
  "Reluctantly I believe that we have to suspend aid until such time as there is a new constitution and a free and fair election,'' McCain added.The Arizona senator who has been a tough critic of Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood party, stressed that he was not excusing the deposed leader's missteps in office.
  ''Morsi was a terrible president, their economy is in terrible shape thanks to their policies but the fact is the United States should not be supporting this coup. And it's a tough call," McCain added.
  Morsi was removed from office by military leaders last week, following days of mass protests from opponents of his regime. But the move failed to settle tensions, with the Muslim Brotherhood vowing to restore him to power.
  On Friday. over 30 were killed in clashes between Morsi supporters and opponents.
  The White House is declining to call Morsi's removal a coup. Using that language could trigger laws which would block the U.S. from sending the $1.5 billion in annual aid provided to Egypt.
  On Saturday the Obama administration condemned the violence and denied charges that it was picking sides in the fight.
  "The United States categorically rejects the false claims propagated by some in Egypt that we are working with specific political parties or movements to dictate how Egypt's transition should proceed," a White House statement said Saturday. "We remain committed to the Egyptian people and their aspirations for democracy, economy opportunity, and dignity. But the future path of Egypt can only be determined by the Egyptian people."
  On Sunday, Gehan El-Haddad, a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood, urged the Obama administration to label Morsi's ouster and the military takeover of Egypt as a coup.
  "I don't understand what naivete can behold any person to see all the ingredients, political signs of a coup, and not see the coup," El-Haddad said on ABC's "This Week." "It's a military junta on TV, tanks on the streets, troops on protest. Military people shooting civilians. I mean it's every ingredient of a full police state. I mean what else are people waiting for?"
22 USC § 8422 - Authorization of assistance | Title 22 - Foreign Relations and Intercourse | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:43
  The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
  The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Thursday, June 27, 2013
  An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.
  How To UseMultiple entries for a section are listed most recent first, within the section.
  The Session Year indicates which session of Congress was responsible for the changes classified. The Congress number forms the first part of the Public Law number; each Congress has two sessions.
  Abbreviations used in the Description of Change column:
  An empty field implies a standard amendment."new" means a new section or new note, or all new text of an existing section or note."nt" means note."nt [tbl]" means note [table]."prec" means preceding."fr" means a transfer from another section."to" means a transfer to another section."omitted" means the section is omitted."repealed" means the section is repealed."nt ed change" and "ed change" - See the Editorial Classification Change Table [pdf].The Public Law field is linked to the development of the law in the Thomas system at the Library of Congress.
  The Statutes at Large field is linked to the text of the law, in the context of its volume of the Statutes at Large, at the Government Printing Office. Please note that it takes a while for these pages to get posted, so for very recent legislation, you need to look at the "enrolled" version at the Thomas site.
  The Statutes at Large references have been rendered in the format used as page numbers in the Public Law web pages to which we link, to facilitate copy-paste into browser "find on this (web) page" tools. We are still working on a more direct link facility.
  For serious comparison work, we suggest copying all or a portion of the Public Law text into your favorite text editor, for convenient content traversal and window control.
  Sections with change type "new" are a special case, still under development. All are now listed, at the title level only.
  You will find that occassionally a specific update you notice in a Public Law listed in a classification table will already have made it into the Code. We assume this is an artifact of the LRC edit process. The LII does not edit the LRC content.
  topGeneral ReferenceRefer to the LRC (Law Revision Council) for explanations about the US Code from the folks who put it all together.
  You can look for information about what it is and is not, which titles are positive law, the schedule of Supplements, etc. Under download you can find the source data we use here (GPO locator files), as well as, PDF files that look just like the paper books (these may be rather large).
  Refer to the Thomas site for changes that have not yet made it into the classification tables.
  22 USCDescription of ChangeSession YearPublic LawStatutes at Large
Law says the U.S. is required to cut aid after coups. Will it?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:42
  (Khaled Desouki/AFP/Getty Images)
  Outside observers might not have much trouble calling the events in Egypt on Wednesday a military coup. When a khaki-clad, beret-wearing general commandeers state TV to announce that the constitution is suspended and the president no longer president, ''coup'' seems like a pretty safe word.
  But it's not quite as safe for the Obama administration. According to a section of the Foreign Assistance Act, a law first enacted in 1961, the United States is required to suspend foreign aid to any country that suffers a military coup. The law, according to its text, ''restricts assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree.'' So if the U.S. determines that there was a coup in Egypt, that would seem to require an end to its aid for the country.
  The United States sends enormous amounts of aid to Egypt, much of it direct military aid contingent on the 1979 Camp David Accords that established peace between Egypt and Israel. But it's not all military: Just in March, the Obama administration announced $250 million in aid to help Egypt through its ongoing economic struggles.
  The Obama administration had suggested that it might follow through on the threat implicit in the Foreign Assistance Act. According to the Associated Press, U.S. officials told members of the Egyptian military that any coup would yield ''consequences'' for the U.S. aid they depend on.
  It is probably unlikely that the Obama administration will want to substantially cut aid to Egypt. (Put aside the Camp David money for a moment '-- it's not clear to me that this is effected by the Foreign Assistance Act, and even if it is, it's very difficult to imagine Congress or the White House being willing to jeopardize this lynchpin of peace with Israel.) Like many aid programs, the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes to Egypt is not meant as a present or a reward; it's considered to ultimately serve U.S. interests. Egypt's troubled economy has been a key contributor the political instability there. That instability is bad for everyone, including U.S. interests.
  If the Obama administration believes that its aid money to Egypt will ease its political transition, then it's unlikely to cut it substantially, even if that risks the appearance of hypocrisy. (It is possible that the U.S. might suspend some aid, perhaps in a symbolic gesture.) As University of North Carolina political science professor Greg Weeks points out on his blog, the Obama administration faced a similar dilemma during the 2009 Honduran political crisis that included a military coup. At first it called the events a coup, then it backpedaled, apparently to avoid triggering sanctions or other measures it wished to avoid. Politics superseded the letter of the law in that case and it may well happen again. But if you notice people in Washington getting on the White House's case to either label the events a ''coup'' or to not do so, this is why.
definition of coup - Google Search
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:42
  coup - definition of coup by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus ...b. A sudden appropriation of leadership or power; a takeover: a boardroom coup.3. Among certain Native American peoples, a feat of bravery performed in ...Coup - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster DictionaryDefinition of coup from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary with audiopronunciations, thesaurus, Word of the Day, and word games.Coup d'(C)tat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaA coup d'(C)tat also known as a coup, a putsch, or an overthrow, is the suddendeposition of a government, usually by a small group of the existing state ...coup: definition of coup in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/coup- CachedDefinition of coup in British and World English in Oxford dictionary. Meaning,pronunciation and example sentences. English to English reference content.Coup | Define Coup at Dictionary.coma highly successful, unexpected stroke, act, or move; a clever action oraccomplishment. 2. (among the Plains Indians of North America) a brave orreckless deed ...coup - definition of coup by Macmillan Dictionarywww.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/coup- Cached - SimilarDefine coup. What is coup? coup meaning and more by Macmillan Dictionary.coup - Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionaryoald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/coup- Cachedcoup - Clear definition, audio pronunciation, synonyms and related words, realexample sentences, English grammar, usage notes and more in Oxford ...Urban Dictionary: coupUsually done by a military - an overthrow of the current government by force.Sometimes bloody, sometimes not. Either way, the military ends up in ...Definition of Coup D'Etat | Chegg.comwww.chegg.com/homework-help/definitions/coup-detat-53- CachedDefinition of coup d'etat and related terms and concepts.palace coup noun - definition in British English Dictionary...dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/palace-coup- Cachedpalace coup noun - definition, audio pronunciation, synonyms and more forpalace coup noun: a situation in which a leader is removed from power by the ...Searches related to definition of coup
About - Global Strategy Group
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:30
  Jon SilvanFounding Partner and CEO
  Jefrey PollockFounding Partner and President
  Jeffrey PlautFounding Partner
  Britt PowerPartner
  Scott ElderPartner
  Justin LapatinePartner, Public Affairs
  Joseph Del PrioreSenior Vice President and CFO
  Nick GourevitchSenior Vice President and Director of Research
  Bill BurtonExecutive Vice President, Managing Director
  Tanya MeckSenior Vice President and Managing Director
  Jim PapaSenior Vice President and Managing Director
  Alan SextonExecutive Vice President, Communications
  Stephen SigmundOf Counsel
  Roy OcchiogrossoManaging Director
  Chris AllenVice President and Director, Competitive Intelligence
  Meira BernsteinAssociate, Communications
  Bob BibelVice President, Director of Finance
  Khristyn BrimmeierVice President, Communications
  Anna BrowerSenior Associate, Communications
  Jonathan BrownVice President and West Coast Research Director
  Allison BryanAssociate, Communications
  Jennifer BurnerDirector, Communications
  Drew CaskoVice President, Human Resources
  Carlos CorralesOffice Manager
  James DeloreyVice President, Research
  Rick FrombergVice President, Grassroots
  Mark GershSenior Adviser
  David GoldAssociate, Research
  Kevin GoldenAdministrative Assistant
  Caroline GrahamAssociate, Competitive Intelligence
  Joe HickersonVice President, Research
  Julie HootkinSenior Vice President, Research
  Alex HoweVice President, Communications
  Elissa JanofskyAdministrative Assistant to the President
  Carter JohnsonVice President, Communications
  Liana KlippelExecutive Assistant to the CEO
  Kelsey LabrotAdministrative Assistant
  Ben LeeSenior Associate, Research
  Jonathan LesserAssociate, Communications
  Shira LevyDirector, Communications
  Scott LowensteinSenior Associate, Research
  Marshall MaherVice President, Digital + Social
  Marcia MaxwellDirector, Grassroots
  Marjorie McCarthyVice President, Marketing and External Relations
  Hugh McMullenDirector, Digital + Social
  Melissa McNamaraVice President, Communications
  Will MatthewsSenior Associate, Research
  Flora MendozaAssociate, Grassroots
  Naomi MukaiAssociate, Digital + Social
  Ben NovakManager, Research
  Luke PartridgeAssociate
  Kyle PursellSenior Associate, Human Resources
  Victoria RupekaDirector, Communications
  Dori ScalletQualitative Research Manager
  Emily (Harris) StaniszewskiVice President, Communications
  Ruth ThomasAssociate, Communications
  Sarah VazquezReceptionist
  Michelle WoodruffDirector, Corporate and Advocacy Research
Global Strategy Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:26
  Global Strategy Group (GSG) is an American public affairs and research firm; specializing in research, strategic communications, digital strategy, grassroots and grasstops organizing, marketing and branding. GSG clients include political candidates, corporations and advocacy organizations worldwide. In the United States, the company works with Democratic Party candidates and office holders.
  Clients of the firm, which has been called "a ubiquitous presence in New York's circles of power" in a 2008 New York Times article, have included New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who used the firm in his successful 2006 campaign, New York state Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo and New York Governor David A. Paterson. The New York state Democratic Party also uses the firm, as do many New York state members of Congress. The firm is also one of the "top consultants to corporations and other special interests," according to an article in the Times.[1]
  "They have carved out the niche of being the premier Democratic political polling firm," William T. Cunningham, a political consultant, said in 2008.[1] Political clients include or have included Iowa Governor Chet Culver, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, New York State Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, presidential candidate Al Gore Congresswomen Loretta and Linda Snchez. The New York state Democratic Party and New York state members of Congress also consult with the firm. GSG has managed political campaigns in Albania, Aruba, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Greece, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Republic of Georgia, Trinidad and Venezuela.
  In 2008, the firm's annual revenues were said to total about $20 million, and it had 50 employees.[2] In addition to New York City, Global has offices in Washington, D.C. and Hartford, Connecticut.[3]
  Along with its political roster of clients, GSG has been retained by large corporations, nonprofits and advocacy organizations like Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Cond(C) Nast, General Electric, GlaxoSmithKline, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Scholastic, Silverstein Properties, Starwood, Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), United Way and Yale University, among others. As of 2009 GSG was using the marketing tag, "Campaign to Win."
  The firm was mentioned on the TV show The West Wing and is also referenced in a Trivial Pursuit board game question.
  History[edit]Jonathan Silvan, CEO, Jefrey Pollock, President and Jeffrey Plaut, Partner, started GSG together in 1995 as a boutique polling firm,[1] conducting market research for political and corporate clients.
  Since its founding, the firm has broadened its work beyond research and polling to include various communications services, such as public relations, planning and running political campaigns, paid media and advertising, grassroots and grasstops advocacy, and new media and interactive services and products.
  Executives[edit]The firm's top executives include:
  Jon Silvan, founding partner and CEO, has guided Global Strategy Group's growth from a boutique market research firm into a nationally recognized, full-service public affairs and research firm. Jon's clients include companies, organizations and individuals at the top of their fields, including World Trade Center developer Silverstein Properties, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), General Electric, and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA). Jon earned a dual degree in political communications and economic development from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and he currently serves on the Steering Committee of the Association for a Better New York (ABNY). Jon lives in New York City with his wife Marnie and their three children.[4]Jefrey Pollock, president and founding partner, leads the firm's research practice. He has advised several U.S. Governors '' including Brian Schweitzer (MT), Joe Manchin (WV) and Chet Culver (IA) '' Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) and Arlen Specter (PA), and many other members of Congress. He has also consulted on behalf of many of the world's leading NGOs and corporations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Goldman Sachs, Con Edison and Starwood. Jefrey earned degrees from the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University, where he is currently an Adjunct Professor of Public Policy and Administration.[5]Jeffrey Plaut, founding partner, serves as a strategic advisor and pollster to candidates and campaigns across the country. Recent clients include the New Jersey Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee, U.S. Representatives Mike McMahon (NY) and Nydia Velazquez (NY), the Empire State Pride Agenda and The Daily Show. Jeffrey also leads the firm's public affairs practice for unions, nonprofits and associations. An alumnus of Brown University, Jeffrey is a graduate of the Coro Foundation Fellowship for Public Affairs, an Adjunct Professor at Fordham University and advisory board member of the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture.[6]Britt Power, partner, specializes in developing research and positioning strategies for clients looking to extend and promote their brands. Britt's clients count on her when they are looking to launch services or products, expand their client base or gain a competitive edge within their industry. She is an experienced moderator and focus group facilitator and currently heads the firm's Qualitative Research Department. Her client list includes some of the world's most recognized brands, including Cond(C) Nast, ESPN, Scholastic, Time Inc. and Victoria's Secret. Britt earned a degree in communications from New York University.[7]Scott Elder, partner, specializes in conducting strategic research for corporations, domestic political campaigns and associations. In a project manager role, Scott oversees the research process from survey design to data collection, data processing and analysis. Recent clients include Merrill Lynch, United Water, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs and the Los Angeles Police Protective League. He also runs the firm's market research practice for the trial consulting industry. Scott earned his Bachelor's degree in Business Administration from the University of Washington in Seattle.[8]Alan Sexton, Executive Vice President for Communications. Prior to joining GSG, Alan led the public affairs practice at Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide in New York, where he oversaw all aspects of the group's work. An expert in corporate reputation, crisis management, brand positioning and influencer engagement, Alan was named one of the industry's ''40 Under 40'' leaders by PR Week in 2010. While at Ogilvy, Alan managed global and U.S. communications campaigns for some of the agency's best-known clients, including American Express, BP, the Ford Motor Company, LexisNexis and DHL. Alan's track record of crafting successful campaigns for his clients has been recognized numerous times. In 2008 he and his client, FM Global, one of the world's leading commercial property insurance companies, won the PR News Platinum award for Global Campaign of the Year. The FM Global program was also named as a Global Campaign of the Year finalist in the 2009 PR Week awards, and shortlisted for two SABRE awards in 2008. Prior to Ogilvy, Alan spent several years with The Harbour Group, a public affairs and lobbying firm based in Washington, D.C. Before that, he worked on issues management and media relations campaigns as a member of the Public Affairs Practice at Ogilvy PR in Washington, D.C. Alan began his career in communications with a small public affairs firm in Dublin, Ireland, where he worked with a diverse group of clients that included British Nuclear Fuels and the Irish Hospital Consultants Association.[9]Stephen Sigmund, senior vice president, Stephen Sigmund serves as Global Strategy Group's Senior Vice President, Managing Director of Communications. Steve most recently served as the Chief of Public and Government Affairs for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, where he was the chief communications and government affairs strategist for the nation's largest regional public authority and led the organization's public efforts on the World Trade Center redevelopment. Steve has strong experience in New York City and New Jersey government and politics. He was the Communications Director and Senior Policy Advisor for City Council Speaker Gifford Miller and Acting Communications Director for Governor Jon Corzine in New Jersey. Steve's experience extends into the private sector as well. Steve was a Vice President at Robinson Lerer & Montgomery, a nationally recognized strategic and crisis communications firm. At RLM, Steve played a leading role on key top-tier clients like America Online, EMI Music and Pfizer. He was also a Vice President at AOL Time Warner and was Senior Director for the company's Corporate Responsibility efforts, which included an ambitious initiative to improve technology literacy in public schools. In addition to his broad professional experience, Steve has written pieces for The New York Times, The New York Times Book Review, Trenton Times, and New York Observer, and he has served as an Adjunct Professor for Columbia University's Strategic Communications Program since 2003.[10]Justin Lapatine, senior vice president, manages Global Strategy Group's public affairs practice area where he develops and executes full service campaigns on behalf of corporate, advocacy and political clients. Justin has managed grassroots, grasstops and coalition building campaigns for Silverstein Properties, the YES Network and Ultimate Fighting Championship. Named a ''Rising Star'' by Campaigns & Elections in 2006 and one of ''40 Under 40'' by City Hall News, Justin serves as consultant to the New York State Senate Democrats, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer and Public Advocate Candidate Bill de Blasio. Before joining GSG, Justin worked for Gore Lieberman in the 2000 presidential race and for Mark Green in the 2001 New York City Mayor's race. Justin earned a B.A. in Political Science and History from Duke University and a Masters in Political Science from Columbia University.[11]Tanya Meck, Senior Vice President, leads Global Strategy Group's Connecticut office, based in Hartford and has extensive experience in public affairs, corporate communications and advocacy campaign coordination. Prior to joining GSG, Tanya served as Assistant Secretary of the State of Connecticut and Chief of Staff for the Secretary's office. She has worked as a corporate communications director for a Fortune 500 company, as a non-profit development director, and as a political consultant to local, state and federal elected officials. Her professional experience includes television and radio appearances, keynoting seminars and conferences, and emceeing events. A Phi Beta Kappa and Summa Cum Laude graduate of Drew University in Madison, New Jersey, she majored in Behavioral Science and was an All-American athlete. Tanya earned her Master's Degree in Public Policy Studies from Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut.[12]Clients[edit]Political clients[edit]Corporate clients[edit]Nonprofit & advocacy clients[edit]References[edit]^ abcConfessore, Nicholas, "In Consulting Group's Rise, Hints of How Albany Works", article, The New York Times, September 29, 2008, retrieved same day^Web page titled "Jefrey Pollock, 35, President, profiled in Crain's 40 under 40", quoting from a brief article in Crain's New York, retrieved September 29, 2008^Website, Global Strategy Group, retrieved November 07, 2010^Web page titled "Jon Silvan, CEO" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Jefrey Pollock, President" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Jeffrey Plaut" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Britt Power, Partner" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Scott Elder, Partner" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Alan Sexton, Executive Vice President" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved August 1, 2011^Web page titled "Stephen Sigmund, Senior Vice President" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Justin Lapatine, Senior Vice President" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved November 7, 2010^Web page titled "Tanya Meck, Senior Vice President" at Global Strategy Group website, retrieved August 1st, 2011^ abcdefghijWeb page titled "Political" (a list of political clients), at Global Strategy Group website, accessed September 29, 2008External links[edit]
Arshad Mohammed | Journalist Profile | Reuters.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:13
  Jun 13, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' Among the consequences facing U.S. President Barack Obama if he decides against arming Syria's rebels is that Arab and European states may step in more aggressively, perhaps further fracturing rebel forces.
  Having watched government forces seize the strategic town of Qusair from the rebels last week, Obama's senior national security advisers have held a series of meetings on what more, if anything, they are willing to do to help the opposition.
  Jun 10, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' The United States could decide as early as this week whether to arm Syrian rebels, U.S. officials said on Monday, as Secretary of State John Kerry put off a Middle East trip to attend meetings on the subject.
  The meetings are taking place as the battlefield has tilted against the rebels in the Syrian civil war as Lebanese Hezbollah has entered the fray on the side of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, helping his forces retake the strategic town of Qusair last week.
  Jun 10, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' The United States could make a decision as early as this week on whether to arm Syrian rebels, U.S. officials said on Monday, as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry put off a Middle East trip to attend meetings on the subject.
  However, the U.S. government has debated for months whether to provide weaponry to the rebels in their civil war against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces and has so far decided against.
  Jun 5, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' Samantha Power, who won a Pulitzer Prize for her study of U.S. failure to prevent genocide and is seen as an advocate of an activist U.S. foreign policy, would get a bigger platform for her views as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
  The former journalist, Harvard University professor and White House national security staffer was chosen on Wednesday to serve in the high-profile post as U.S. President Barack Obama weighs whether to do more to end Syria's civil war.
  Jun 2, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' Four months into his term, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is trying, simultaneously, to end two of the world's most intractable conflicts: the Syrian civil war and the struggle between Israel and the Palestinians.
  The two issues, according to an aide, have consumed the vast majority of Kerry's time and energy '' he has already flown more than 100,000 miles to 23 countries, including four trips to Israel '' since he took office February 1.
  Jun 2, 2013
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) '' Four months into his term, Secretary of State John Kerry is trying, simultaneously, to end two of the world's most intractable conflicts: the Syrian civil war and the struggle between Israel and the Palestinians.
  The two issues, according to an aide, have consumed the vast majority of Kerry's time and energy '' he has already flown more than 100,000 miles to 23 countries, including four trips to Israel '' since he took office February 1.
  May 28, 2013
  PARIS (Reuters) '' Holding a conference to end Syria's civil war will be a ''tall order'', Russia's foreign minister said on Monday after talks with his U.S. counterpart, but he saw some chance of success.
  U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said they would do their utmost to bring Syria's warring parties to the table, as fighting intensified and new allegations of chemical weapons use surfaced.
  May 27, 2013
  PARIS (Reuters) '' The U.S. and Russian foreign ministers met on Monday to discuss a planned conference aimed at ending Syria's civil war against a backdrop of widening regional violence and new allegations of chemical weapons use.
  John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov began one-on-one discussions in Paris, a U.S. official said, with such issues as when to hold the meeting on Syria, how to bring the warring parties to the table and whether to include Iran all likely to be on the table.
  May 26, 2013
  DEAD SEA, Jordan (Reuters) '' Secretary of State John Kerry sketched out a plan on Sunday to spur Palestinian growth with up to $4 billion in private investment, but did not say where the money would come from.
  Kerry drew a picture of prosperity in the West Bank that could spread to Israel and Jordan, while acknowledging it would not fully materialize without movement toward peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
  May 25, 2013
  ADDIS ABABA (Reuters) '' Secretary of State John Kerry urged Egypt to act swiftly on economic reforms to secure a $4.8 billion International Monetary Fund loan, saying the measures were needed to get further aid from the U.S. Congress, an American official said.
  Kerry met Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi for about an hour on the sidelines of an African Union summit on Saturday, discussing Syria's civil war, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, human rights in Egypt and the country's faltering economy, the official said.
VIDEO-how somebody behaves and how they govern-state psaki
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:46
  1:24 p.m. EDT
  MS. PSAKI: Hi, everyone. Elise, welcome back from Israel.
  QUESTION: Thank you, everybody.
  MS. PSAKI: Good to see you here. I don't have anything at the top. I imagine what may '' oh, and Arshad's back, too. What a day. I imagine what's probably on your minds, but why don't we start there?
  QUESTION: Well, let's '' just so you don't forget that we are, in fact, human beings, let's start with the condition of the Secretary's wife and whether there are any updates on that after the statement that '' since the statement that was put out in Glen's name earlier.
  MS. PSAKI: There are not; and you all should have seen, and if you have not we're happy to provide to any of you, the statement that was issued by Glen Johnson just about in the last hour, which stated that after conducting tests overnight and this morning, doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital determined that Mrs. Heinz Kerry is no longer in critical condition. She's undergoing further evaluation, and Secretary of State John Kerry, her son, and other family members remain with her at the hospital in Boston, as they have been since she became ill.
  As you all know, Mrs. Heinz Kerry is, of course, a private citizen, though she's married to a public official, and I will not be providing updates from here on her condition. But any updates would come from Glen Johnson who is in Boston.
  QUESTION: Do you know which son it is, or is that something you can't get into?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have that level of detail.
  QUESTION: Okay. If any '' unless anyone has more questions on that, I'd like to move to Egypt.
  QUESTION: Please.
  QUESTION: Okay. So what is the Administration's thinking about what '' the developments, the situation '' the deteriorating situation on the ground in Egypt?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, we remain, of course, deeply concerned by the increasing violence across Egypt and Egypt's dangerous level of political polarization. We strongly condemn any violence as well as any incitement to violence. We express our condolences for those who have been killed and hope those who are wounded recover quickly. We call on the military to use maximum restraint responding to protesters, just as we urge all those demonstrating to do so peacefully.
  And finally, during this transitional period which we are in and have been in for the last couple of days, Egypt's stability and democratic political order are, of course, at stake. Our focus is on returning stability to the region, returning that to the country, and we are hopeful that they will be able to emerge from this crisis. We know they will not be able to unless people of the country come together in a nonviolent and inclusive way.
  QUESTION: So have you --
  QUESTION: Do you think it might have been helpful if the Egyptian military had exercised maximum restraint last week when it ousted the democratically elected government?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Arshad, I would point you to the statement the President made just over the weekend about those steps. Of course, we remain in the same place on that, and our view is in the same place on that as is the Secretary's. But right now we're focused on the path forward. And of course this is an incredibly complex and difficult situation on the ground. You've seen, because we've read out a number of these calls, how engaged the Secretary has been, not just with officials in Egypt, but also with officials in the region who all have a stake. And that just portrays how important we think resolution is here in this case.
  QUESTION: So you can't address more directly whether it would have been better for the military not to have intervened?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think the President's statement makes pretty clear what our position is on that and where our focus is here is where we can go moving forward.
  QUESTION: But since then '' may I? But since then, President Morsy appears to be under house arrest, many members of the Muslim Brotherhood have been detained or are unaccounted for. And this seems to be part of the reason that there is all of this violence right now going on between pro-Morsy supporters and members of the opposition. So do you think, right now, the actions of the military are contributing to stability or to '' actually causing some of the chaos that's going on right now?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Elise, I mean, this is a situation where it's very volatile on the ground, there are lots of parties contributing to that volatility. We're of course paying close '' very close attention to that and are very engaged in it both on the ground and here in Washington. And we have been urging, and continue to urge both publicly and privately, the military to use maximum restraint in how they're behaving.
  QUESTION: Well, but do you see the arrest of President '' the house arrest of President Morsy, other members of the Muslim Brotherhood, as exercising maximum restraint here? I mean, could you speak to '' I understand that you want to leave '' the President said at the time about what they did with deposing him, but could you speak to what they're doing right now and whether you think that's in line with what the President called for?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, this is a situation that is very fluid every single day --
  QUESTION: I understand it's fluid, but I mean --
  MS. PSAKI: And there's a lot of volatility on the ground, there's a lot of violence on the ground, all of which we're concerned about. Our goal here is to move all sides to a political solution, a political transition. Obviously, there are a lot of factors in that. So that's why we're in touch with all the different parties and why we'll continue to be.
  QUESTION: Have you '' I'm assuming that the review as to the legal determination of what happened is not yet complete. Is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: That is correct.
  QUESTION: Do you know, one, the State Department takes the lead in this kind of thing, correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, this is obviously the policy moving forward for Egypt and how we'll approach it.
  QUESTION: I mean the legal office here takes the lead in determining whether '' making the legal determination about whether there in fact was a coup. Is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, they certainly play a significant role. In terms of the exact legal tick-tock, I don't have that in front of me.
  QUESTION: Are the developments '' are the events that are going on right now on the ground and since the actual ouster of the President, are those being factored into the review to determine whether there was a coup?
  MS. PSAKI: Certainly, the events that have happened, how things happened last week, how it's been handled since and how things will be handled moving forward are all factors being considered.
  QUESTION: In the review.
  MS. PSAKI: Absolutely.
  QUESTION: Okay. Is it '' still, is it correct that the Administration's position is is that continued U.S. military aid '' FMF '' is in the U.S. national security interest?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, that is why we have provided the aid. Of course, aid and providing that in the future is being '' is part of the review and you're very familiar, as all of you are, with the process and what it would mean if we make certain determinations.
  QUESTION: Yeah, no, I understand that. I just wanted to make sure that the Administration still believes that it continuing the assistance to the Egyptian military is in '' is a U.S. national security priority.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, broadly speaking, Matt, yes.
  QUESTION: Yes. Okay.
  MS. PSAKI: That is why we have --
  QUESTION: So second --
  MS. PSAKI: Let me just finish, because I think this is an important point you're raising '' is that broadly the reason we have provided this aid in the past doesn't mean we have supported even prior to this every action taken by the Government of Egypt. But there are security interests in the region; there are security interests for the United States, but I'm not going to predetermine for you. It's a wide-ranging, high-level interagency process determining the next steps on our policy for Egypt.
  QUESTION: But it is also correct, after you responded, ''Yes,'' that it is '' continued aid is in the U.S. national security interests. So that's one.
  Number two is a coup '' to determine a legal determination that a coup happened would require a suspension or cutoff in all non-humanitarian assistance to Egypt, including the 1.3 billion in FMF. Is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, because we're not there, we haven't made that determination.
  QUESTION: I know, but the '' that determination would trigger a cutoff or suspension of the assistance; is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I don't want to be analyzing what the legal options are here. That is being closely looked at. There are a number of factors that are being closely looked at. I know we'll continue to talk about this in the days ahead, but I'm not going to get ahead of where we are in the process.
  QUESTION: But I'm not asking you to get ahead of anything. If anything, I'm asking you just to confirm what the law says, which is that if there is a determination that a coup happened, that a democratically elected government was overthrown by unconstitutional means, that that would require a suspension or a cutoff in assistance.
  QUESTION: Or a waiver.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, that is '' there is a broad legal definition that is applicable in many cases, right, Matt? But we're also looking at what happened here on the ground. There are millions of people on the ground who do not think it was a coup. We factor lots of factors in. We're in the analysis process right now, and I'm not going to get ahead of where that may or may not go.
  QUESTION: But why does the fact that there are a lot of people on the ground in Egypt who don't think it was a coup have any bearing on this? I mean, the determination is not being made by people on the ground in Egypt; the determination, as Matt rightly points out, is normally made by the Legal Adviser's Office at the State Department.
  MS. PSAKI: And through an interagency process, Arshad, that, of course, takes a lot of factors into play here, and I just don't want to get ahead of that process and that determination.
  QUESTION: But why does it make any difference what people on the ground think? I mean presumably the people who ousted the civilian, democratically elected government have a different view.
  MS. PSAKI: Because taking a look at what happened on the ground is a factor in the process.
  QUESTION: And is it '' one more on this one, please. Historically, it is the Legal Adviser's Office, as I have understood it, that, as Matt said, takes the lead on making that determination. If in this instance they are not taking the lead, then who ultimately will make what is a legal determination here? I mean, it's not just a policy determination; it's a legal one in response to a law. If it's not the Legal Adviser's Office, who is it? Is it the White House counsel's office? Is somebody at the Justice Department? I mean, what is the legal authority within the government that ultimately will make this call if it is not the Legal Adviser's Office?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, I wasn't implying that the Legal Office at the State Department does not have a very significant role that they play and that they are continuing to play in any case like this. There are a number of determinations that are being made about our policy moving forward in Egypt. That is happening at a very high level. So I was just conveying that that decision-making process and those conversations continue to be in place and happening now.
  QUESTION: But I still don't get who makes the ultimate call on what is a legal determination. Is it the Legal Adviser? Is it the Secretary of State? Is it the President? Is it somebody else?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, there are a number of factors that go into it. I will check and see if there is a specific historical, legal tick-tock of the exact order of decision-making for you.
  QUESTION: Would you clarify something on ''
  MS. PSAKI: Sure, Said.
  QUESTION: -- something that you said? You said that you are in touch with all parties. Are you in touch with the Muslim Brotherhood? How are you in touch with them?
  MS. PSAKI: We have been in touch, and that should not be at all unexpected given we are in touch with all parties in Egypt. In those conversations we have conveyed the following message '' I'm just getting to your next question here, but then you can ask another one. We urge them to engage in the political process and to support the process to full civilian government through elections that are currently '' that's the path we're asking them to move toward.
  QUESTION: So you're saying --
  QUESTION: Okay. But you're in touch with ''
  QUESTION: -- just to clarify, so when you say that '' I'm sorry, Said. When you say that you're engaging them to accept the process towards a civilian transition of ''
  MS. PSAKI: To engage in the political process.
  QUESTION: So are you asking them to kind of abandon their fight to get Morsy back into power or to accept his ouster?
  MS. PSAKI: That's not a determination for us to make. We're asking them to engage in the process moving forward from here.
  QUESTION: But Jen, they did engage in the process ''
  MS. PSAKI: They did.
  QUESTION: -- and their candidate won, and now their candidate is not the winner; now their candidate is the loser, and he is the loser because he was ousted by the military. Why should they engage in the process again if they did it the first time and essentially got screwed?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I know I said this so many times people were tired of it on Wednesday in that a democratic process is not just about casting your ballot. There are other factors in terms of '' in addition to that, including how somebody behaves and how they govern, and this is a case where millions of people have spoken in the country. We are not judging that, but again, that's a real factor here.
  QUESTION: Millions of people spoke when they went to the polls last '' whenever it '' a year ago and elected President Morsy. It's not his fault that the opposition couldn't get their act together and present a decent candidate or present '' I just don't understand how you can tell them with a straight face to please engage in the democratic process when they did, they won, and now their guy is gone.
  MS. PSAKI: Well ''
  QUESTION: Why should they '' why should they?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, because obviously ''
  QUESTION: Because you say they should?
  MS. PSAKI: No. That's not at all what I was going to say. Millions of people in the country have spoken and have expressed some legitimate grievances, and there is an opportunity moving forward to have folks from the Muslim Brotherhood engage in the process.
  QUESTION: But millions of people participated in the democratic process before, and just because some people '' millions maybe '' were unhappy with that, they took to the streets, and it was not a democratic move that happened. So I just don't understand how the Administration expects itself to be taken seriously, by the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, when you say that you should go back and engage in a process that didn't work out for you the first time.
  QUESTION: Well, a couple of things here.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm. Go ahead.
  QUESTION: First of all, when you make this legal determination, are you '' about whether this was a coup '' so you are taking into consideration the millions of people that signed this petition and called for his '' for him to be removed from power. Is that right?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, there are a number of factors that are taken in. There are very significant consequences, I think as everybody is aware, that go along with this determination, and certainly it is relevant that this is a highly charged issue for tens of millions of Egyptians who have differing views about what happened, but we are going to take the time necessary. I know it feels urgent right now; it certainly is, but these determinations take time.
  QUESTION: I'm not saying '' I mean is it relevant that it's an emotionally charged issue, or is it relevant that millions of people '' 22 million if I'm correct '' signed a petition that called for him '' for the military to take him from power? I mean, is that relevant to your determination of whether this was a democratic act or not?
  MS. PSAKI: Again, certainly there are lots of factors that are taken into consideration here at a very high level, and those conversations are ongoing.
  QUESTION: Is that one of them though?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, certainly what's happened on the ground, where we are now, and how it's handled moving forward are all factors.
  QUESTION: When you are talking to the military about exercising restraint, are you urging them to release President Morsy and other members of the Muslim Brotherhood from house arrest?
  MS. PSAKI: We're not taking positions on specific cases. Of course, we have been very publicly and privately expressing concern about arbitrary arrests, but beyond that, we're not taking positions on individuals. We know this will be --
  QUESTION: The President of '' I mean --
  MS. PSAKI: We know this will be looked into over the '' and there will be a process for doing that.
  QUESTION: Can I go back to my question, please?
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Who is talking to who the Muslim Brotherhood? Who are you talking to in the Muslim Brotherhood leadership?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not going to get into specifics on that, just to say that we are in touch with all parties, including representatives from the '' of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party.
  QUESTION: And related to Elise's last question on the status of President Morsy, are you aware of his status, where is he, what kind of condition is he under, and so on? Are you getting any reports on his status?
  MS. PSAKI: I just don't have any update on that. We have not, of course, been in touch with him, that I'm aware of, since he was arrested last week.
  QUESTION: Do you call the interim leader to release him, like some of the leaders did over the weekend?
  MS. PSAKI: I think I just answered that question when Elise asked it.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Why has the Secretary not called for his release?
  QUESTION: Excuse me.
  QUESTION: Why not?
  MS. PSAKI: Because we're not taking positions on specific cases. I understand that he is '' has been the president, was the president, and that is a unique case. But again, I don't have a specific position on each case from the U.S. Government.
  QUESTION: Well, but it's not on each case; it's on the case of the democratically elected president of the country. It seems to me to be odd that you would not wish to take a position when the democratically elected '' odd to say the least '' when the democratically elected president of a country is removed from power. So can you explain to me how you justify not taking a position on this specific case?
  MS. PSAKI: We're just not taking a position on this specific case.
  QUESTION: You just don't want to.
  MS. PSAKI: We have not.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Yes, ma'am. A question about Brazil?
  MS. PSAKI: Oh, wait, I think there's probably more on Egypt, and we'll come back to Brazil, I promise.
  QUESTION: In the answer '' the first answer to Arshad's question, you said he was the democratically-elected president, he was the president. Does the mean that you no longer regard him as the person who was elected --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, he was elected a year ago --
  QUESTION: -- but he is no longer the president in your eyes?
  MS. PSAKI: I think there's been '' I'm not '' I think it's been pretty clear, Matt, what's happened here on the ground.
  QUESTION: So I just want to make sure --
  MS. PSAKI: And we're looking --
  QUESTION: -- I understand that the Administration no longer regards Mohamed Morsy as the president of Egypt?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not taking a specific position on that, Matt. I'm conveying that --
  QUESTION: (Inaudible) past tense, though, which is a position.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I was conveying when he was elected. That was what I was trying to convey.
  QUESTION: But when he was elected --
  QUESTION: Until a week ago '' until a week ago, you recognized him as the legitimately-elected leader of Egypt. So in the interim, a coup takes place; now he's no longer the legitimate leader of Egypt? Is that what you '' can you say that clearly?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, we're '' this is a situation where we are taking a very close look at what's happened on the ground. I understand the great level of interest in this. It's only a couple of days old. There are ongoing conversations at a very high level here in the government.
  QUESTION: Okay. In retrospect though, retroactively, do you consider Morsy to be '' to have been elected, perhaps, wrongly or not fairly or whatever?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not doing retrospectives. I think we spoke on the election at the time. I don't have anything new for you on that. Obviously, we're focused on where things are now and where we can go moving forward.
  QUESTION: So, Jen, who's in charge in Egypt right now, then?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think, as you know, there's an interim government. There are a number of players that's being worked through. Part of the Secretary's focus over the weekend has been continuing to encourage a move towards that transitional government and towards elections, but again, it's a very fluid situation on the ground.
  QUESTION: Well, there's an interim president; I don't think they've agreed on the government yet as such.
  MS. PSAKI: That's true, it's still being determined for --
  QUESTION: So who is the Secretary '' who is his counterpart that the Secretary can talk to within that structure?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, he's been in touch with a number of officials there that we read out over the course of the weekend.
  QUESTION: No, I don't '' sorry, I missed it. Who did he talk to over the weekend?
  MS. PSAKI: Let's see. I mean, I'm happy to provide you of the list that we sent out broadly. He spoke with '' I mean, he was on the phone for dozens of hours, I would say, over the course of the weekend. ElBaradei he spoke with a number of times over the course '' he also spoke with leaders in the region. Obviously, as I mentioned at the top, there is a great stake for good reason from leaders like the Qataris and the Emiratis, who he spoke with. And I'll get you the rest of the list, Jo, afterwards just so you have it.
  QUESTION: Okay.
  QUESTION: Talking about his contacts --
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: -- I mean, I '' as much as I remember, this press release of the statement was released at the end of Saturday, and almost now 48 hours passed.
  MS. PSAKI: The Secretary's statement? And the President, and the President. Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Yes, and you released the first one, which was about the contacts.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Any new contacts was done yesterday or today?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any '' he was --
  QUESTION: Because this one that you mentioned was released on Saturday, so it --
  MS. PSAKI: It was.
  QUESTION: Yeah.
  MS. PSAKI: It was. He was in touch with a number of those same officials yesterday as well.
  QUESTION: So the other question is related to the '' to being in touch with the different parties, especially Muslim Brotherhood, and it was reported today in The New York Times that there are contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood, whatever leadership if I can say, because most of them they are under house arrest or they are not there anymore, they are hiding. What kind of contacts were done in order to '' it specifically was said in The New York Times story, to accept the reality, which is whatever is the status quo now? Can you confirm or deny this report or this activity in general?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think I just confirmed earlier that we have had officials in touch with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, and I conveyed what message we're sending during those conversations.
  QUESTION: Is it correct that the last conversation anyone had with Morsy from the U.S. side was the President, late Monday a week ago? Is that correct, or do you know of a new contact?
  MS. PSAKI: I'd have to double-check on that, Matt. I'm not aware of another one, but I'm happy to check on that for all of you.
  QUESTION: Jen, do you support an early presidential elections, or do you call for an early presidential elections in Egypt?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, clearly a part of the process is the creation of the transitional government, and then, of course, elections as well.
  QUESTION: Jen, are you concerned that what's going on in Egypt right now might well happen again in countries like in Tunisia, for example? Are you reaching out to the Tunisian Government and Tunisian army, for example, to '' I mean, to avoid such a situation?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, clearly there is a focus on moving toward a resolution in Egypt, given the impact on stability there and stability in the region. And that's one of the reasons that we are so engaged, and the Secretary has been engaged with many different leaders in the region. I don't have any specific calls to the Government of Tunisia to read out to you.
  QUESTION: Yesterday was big demonstrations in Cairo regarding not just for the support of the army, and especially for the '' what the people are considering a cooperation of Americans and Muslim Brothers to whatever kind of reality was created in the last year or so, almost a year. So do you have anything to say about that? Because it was big signs of the President and Morsy together, and Patterson was part of it, and all these things.
  MS. PSAKI: Just to say that any notion that we have taken sides in this and that we are siding with one side or the other is incorrect.
  QUESTION: Jen?
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: I know you ordered the evacuation of nonessential personnel.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Could you tell us who remains in Cairo? Is the Ambassador still there? And then roughly how many staff you still have at the Embassy?
  MS. PSAKI: The Ambassador is. I'd have to get you an update on the specific number of staff or how we're characterizing that. Happy to do that.
  QUESTION: Have you talked to Ankara regarding Egypt over the weekend? It seems that the Turkish leaders are pretty upset that the Western world have not called coup what happened in Egypt.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I'm not going to comment specifically on the comments of the Turkish leaders. But I can tell you that the Secretary has been in touch on multiple occasions with Foreign Minister Davutoglu over the course of the weekend about the events in Egypt.
  QUESTION: How will this affect your relationship with the '' I mean, the neighbor countries in terms of this disappointment by your allies, especially Turkey, actually? Because the Prime Minister is accusing the Western world in this, especially U.S.A. not characterizing this incident as a coup. How your relationship will be affected from this?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, we are clearly going through the process of making our own determination, and I don't want to get ahead of that. We have been in close contact, as I mentioned the Secretary has been, with the Foreign Minister over the weekend. As you know, they have a very close working relationship on a number of issues, and they had many conversations about Egypt. But I don't want to speak for any other country, but it's clear that there are many countries in the region who have a stake in the stability of Egypt, and that's what our focus is on as well.
  QUESTION: And about the perception of '' among some Egyptians about this ''Mother America'' story which appeared on New York Times, I mean, the involvement '' about the U.S. involvement on this incident and '' et cetera --
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: -- but how did public diplomacy of U.S. with the Egyptians will be affected from in near future after this incident?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we just have to keep conveying what's accurate, which is that we're on the side of the Egyptian people. We're not taking sides, but we are in touch with all parties and our interest is in moving towards a stable Egypt, and that's why we're so engaged.
  QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about this perception within Egyptians about the U.S. involvement? I mean, is it fair, or how do you see it?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we're just working to convey what is accurate.
  QUESTION: How would you respond to people who would say that by insisting that you're not taking sides in this, that you in fact are taking a side because you're not sticking up for the person who was elected, who you recognized as a democratically elected president of a country?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, I think it's not as simple as that, and not as black-and-white as that '' I'm responding to your question '' and that there were millions of people who have expressed legitimate grievances. There have been steps that have been taken by others as well that we haven't been supportive of, including some by the military. And so we aren't taking sides because we don't think that is in the interests of Egypt and the interest of moving this process forward toward stability.
  QUESTION: Right. But generally, when there are people who are unhappy, and however many the numbers are, in a country, the United States would say, well, you can get involved politically, and if you're unhappy with your leadership, you change it at the ballot box. Is that not correct?
  In this case, did you think the situation was so bad that you could actually come to consider condoning a military coup?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, Matt, we're not condoning anything here.
  QUESTION: By not taking a position --
  MS. PSAKI: We haven't even made decision about what --
  QUESTION: -- you are condoning it in the interim.
  MS. PSAKI: -- has taken place.
  QUESTION: You do recognize that, right?
  MS. PSAKI: Well --
  QUESTION: By having no opinion, you are in essence saying that nothing was wrong, that this wasn't '' you do get that, that's what people look at it --
  MS. PSAKI: I would disagree with Matt '' what I would '' with you, Matt, on that. What I would say is that each circumstance is different. You can't compare what's happening in Egypt with what's happened in every other country, and that's how we're handling this situation.
  QUESTION: Jen? You said that you support an early election. Does this mean that you don't recognize Morsy as the Egyptian president anymore?
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I think I've been pretty clear about the steps that were taken. There have been steps that have been taken in Egypt. We're doing our own evaluation of what's happened on the ground, and I'm certain we'll continue to discuss that.
  QUESTION: But you're not doing anything about U.S. aid right now; U.S. aid to Egypt continues?
  MS. PSAKI: Correct.
  QUESTION: So just now you said you're not taking sides because you don't think that's in the interests of Egypt and Egyptians. Exactly why? Do you fear that it's going to inflame tensions even further if you do, or --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I don't think we see the benefit of inserting the U.S. view in a situation that continues to be volatile. We want to play a role in helping to move towards stability, and that's where our focus is.
  QUESTION: But, like, what '' but by doing what, though? I mean, you're not calling either side out on their actions that you would consider either excessive, undemocratic, violent, so --
  MS. PSAKI: I think we've called all sides to reduce violence --
  QUESTION: You just urge '' to urge restraint.
  MS. PSAKI: We've called all sides to increase restraint. This is a case where the situation is unfolding on the ground. And what we're doing is we are in touch with close partners in the region, we're in close touch with officials in Egypt, we are making our own determinations, but obviously, there are a lot of factors that go into that. So we have a very high level of engagement here. But our focus is on encouraging stability, reducing violence, and moving toward that.
  QUESTION: Jen. One last thing. I want to ask you about the current president --
  MS. PSAKI: Yeah.
  QUESTION: -- the temporary president of Egypt, Adly Mansour. Do you consider him to be the legitimate leader of Egypt currently?
  MS. PSAKI: He's the interim, as you know. Beyond that, I don't have a further definition for you. Obviously, they'll be '' our hope is that there are elections.
  QUESTION: So I just '' will you let us know when the heat from the flames of the burning hoops that you're jumping through to avoid taking a position on this get too hot, or will that just be obvious from what you're saying at the podium?
  MS. PSAKI: Matt, if you're having a good time today, I'll be back here tomorrow. We'll do this again.
  QUESTION: Syria?
  QUESTION: Sorry, more on Egypt.
  MS. PSAKI: Let's just see if there's any more Egypt. Dana?
  QUESTION: I just want to be clear. So part of the legal definition of a coup is whether people on the ground were in support of the ouster of a president?
  MS. PSAKI: I was not defining that as a legal definition as much as a factor that is being discussed and considered in our policy moving forward in Egypt.
  QUESTION: I mean, I know you said you can't compare other situations, but, like, for example, in 2010, there was a coup in Niger, and a week before, tens of thousands of people protested, U.S. had already even suspended aid to Niger because they found the president to be dictatorial. And yet when the military did take over, the very next day the State Department came out and said '' called it a coup.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think that just further illustrates the fact that each circumstance is different. We're going to take the time to make an evaluation here. There are a number of factors that impact our policy moving forward. Of course, the legal implications and the legal requirements are a part of that, and those are all being discussed.
  QUESTION: Could you '' do you think that you could provide us with some talking points or some of the actual standards that determine whether something is '' a situation is labeled a coup or not? Are there '' is there like a list? Are there standards that are held to as this determination is being made? Is that something you can provide to us?
  MS. PSAKI: If there is a legal definition to provide, I'm happy to provide that. I will see what we have.
  QUESTION: Yeah, I think there is (inaudible). I mean, it's well defined. You can find it.
  MS. PSAKI: Said, are you a lawyer on the side? (Laughter.)
  QUESTION: No, I'm not. I'm just saying '' (laughter).
  QUESTION: Senator McCain just issued a statement saying that while he understood that this was done with the acquiescence of millions of Egyptians, that he can only conclude that this was a coup in which the military played a decisive role and that current U.S. law is very clear about the implications of foreign aid, and he calls for a withdrawal of U.S. aid.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I know that a number of elected officials, including Senator McCain and many yesterday, have spoken out about their views, and that is certainly to be expected. But we're making our own determination and we're going to take the time to do that.
  QUESTION: And you have no comment on the African Union suspending Egypt for what they're calling a coup either?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't.
  QUESTION: Change subjects?
  MS. PSAKI: Any more on Egypt?
  QUESTION: Let me just --
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: Is it your view that the law on suspending aid if the legal determination of coup is made '' of a coup is made is able to be interpreted, that it can be '' sorry, interpreted is not the right word '' that there '' it is open to interpretation?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, the --
  QUESTION: That if a '' that it is possible under the law that if a democratically elected president is removed by a military in an unconstitutional manner, it might not meet the standard, the legal standard, of --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, let me just be very clear --
  QUESTION: I just --
  MS. PSAKI: -- that our focus is absolutely on abiding by the law. That is being analyzed and looked at right now. There are also a number of other factors that go into our policy related to Egypt, so I didn't want to do one without the other.
  QUESTION: All right, okay. So that just leads me to believe that you're not particularly '' in this case, and you say it's a case-by-case basis '' but in this case, you're not particularly interested in interpreting the law as it is written; you're interested in trying to find a way to skirt the requirements of the law that --
  MS. PSAKI: I think the Legal Office is certainly determining and analyzing the law as it is written, Matt.
  QUESTION: Right. So you'll let us know when those hoops (inaudible) --
  MS. PSAKI: But I'm not going to get ahead of their own analysis, and I'm not a lawyer and I'm not aware that you are either, but you never know.
  Do we have any more on Egypt? Okay.
  QUESTION: Can I ask a question about Brazil?
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: Could you confirm whether, with or without the consent or an agreement with the Brazilian Government, the United States Government has maintained a database of monitoring or a monitoring center in Brasilia or have ever collected data at the Embassy of Brazil in Washington or at the Embassy of Brazil in the United Nations using physical devices installed in computers and using software such as Highlands, Vagrant, and Lifesaver?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, as has been our policy, we're not going to comment publicly on every specific alleged intelligence activity. As a matter of policy, we have been clear that the United States does gather foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations. I can tell you that we have spoken with Brazilian officials regarding these allegations. We plan to continue our dialogue with the Brazilians through normal diplomatic channels, but those are conversations that, of course, we would keep private.
  QUESTION: To clarify, the physical presence of devices of the United States in consulates or embassies of Brazil anywhere in the world, can you confirm that existence or not?
  MS. PSAKI: I do not have anything more for you on that.
  Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up on Latin America --
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: -- and Mr. Snowden --
  QUESTION: No, no. Still Brazil?
  MS. PSAKI: Okay, go ahead.
  QUESTION: Yes, yes. I wonder regarding the reaction of Brazilian officials, among them the Minister of Foreign Relations Antonio Patriota, I wanted to know how much this issue can contaminate the visit of President Dilma Rousseff to United States in October.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, clearly, as I mentioned, we've been already in touch with Brazilian authorities regarding these allegations and we're planning to continue that dialogue. We work with Brazil on a wide range of issues and we are hopeful that we can continue to discuss and resolve through normal diplomatic conversations.
  QUESTION: Who's in this side of the diplomatic channel in the U.S. side? Who is talking to the Brazilian Government? Can you tell us?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any specific readout of officials for '' on that for you.
  QUESTION: Secretary Kerry has talked with Minister Antonio Patriota or --
  MS. PSAKI: Not that I'm aware of in recent days. I'm happy to check on that for you and see if there has been a call I'm just not aware of.
  QUESTION: Is that the first time that the United States have faced these sort of queries from Brazil, these sort of clarifying requests from Brazil?
  MS. PSAKI: I'd leave that to you to determine historically if this has been an issue in the past. But obviously, this is a unique case. We all know the history here. We're in close contact and we'll continue those conversations.
  QUESTION: Since 2001, has Brazil agreed to collaborate with United States in data mining or data reporting?
  MS. PSAKI: I just don't have anything more on this for you.
  QUESTION: Jen, is that (inaudible) Turkish Government --
  MS. PSAKI: Hold on, let's finish on Brazil and then we can go to you next, if that's okay.
  QUESTION: Actually, it's on Venezuela.
  MS. PSAKI: Oh, okay.
  QUESTION: Okay. It is regarding Mr. Snowden, as you probably are aware that Mr. Snowden has been granted asylum. Venezuela has granted asylum to Mr. Snowden among two other countries in Latin America. I was wondering if you have any reaction on that or if this is going to have any impact considering that the U.S. and Venezuela are trying to work on their bilateral relation.
  MS. PSAKI: So let me say first that, of course, as in all of our communications with foreign governments regarding Mr. Snowden, we have advised the Government of Venezuela of the felony charges against him and urged that he should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel other than as necessary to return him to the United States. We've had our differences with Venezuela on some issues, but we've also been able to work together on some. And this is a case where, as someone who's facing felony charges, we're hopeful that any government involved would take that into account and support his return to the United States.
  As you know, this is all, at this point, a hypothetical given he still remains in the transit room, if that's the right term, in the airport in Moscow.
  QUESTION: Is it your determination that in order for him '' that he is physically unable to make it from Russia to Venezuela or Bolivia or one of those countries without transit '' without having to refuel through a third country that wouldn't necessarily provide him with '' that wouldn't agree not to '' would agree to extradite him?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, it's speculating a few steps down the path here, because obviously we know that he would need to transfer somewhere out of there. We've been very clear to governments across the board of our desire to have Mr. Snowden returned to the United States. I don't think there's any secret of that. In terms of the paths or steps, I mean, you'd have to either look at the airport maps or talk to the various governments that could be the options.
  QUESTION: So where do things stand right now in terms of '' is your '' kind of '' I know you're casting a wide net in countries not to admit him or to extradite him and not to give him asylum, but, like, where is kind of the frontline of your diplomacy right now in this? This is with Russia, to try and urge them to send him back or --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I don't want to get into too many levels of specifics here, but obviously we have been in touch with a wide range of officials. It's no secret where he is located now. We agree with the comments of President Putin last week that we wouldn't want this to impact our relationship. We certainly feel that anyone '' any country granting asylum to Mr. Snowden would create grave difficulties in our bilateral relationship, and that's a message that we've conveyed publicly and, of course, privately in conversations as well.
  QUESTION: Jen --
  QUESTION: Specifically on Venezuela, you said we've had our disagreements with Venezuela, but we have been able to cooperate on some issues. Is that what you said?
  MS. PSAKI: I did.
  QUESTION: Can you name one issue since the election of Chavez that the United States and Venezuela have cooperated on?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, I think I was making a broad point there and making a point about the fact that the Secretary also --
  QUESTION: In other words, no.
  MS. PSAKI: Let me finish. The Secretary also had a meeting, as you know, with the Foreign Minister that was a potential opening. We're not getting ahead of where we are, but of course we would look closely and it would certainly impact our bilateral relationship if any country, including Venezuela, were to grant him asylum.
  QUESTION: Right, right. No, no. I just want to '' so you would point to the meeting that happened in Guatemala as a sign of cooperation, as one of the few areas of cooperation between Venezuela and the United States since President Chavez was elected. I realize this is now President Maduro.
  MS. PSAKI: Yes.
  QUESTION: But I'm asking you if you can '' you would say that that's evidence of cooperation, a meeting?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, I think what we're looking to do --
  QUESTION: Can you name --
  MS. PSAKI: -- is re-step our relationship here. That's where we're hoping to go.
  QUESTION: Right. And this would be a problem?
  MS. PSAKI: This would be a problem. Absolutely.
  QUESTION: Okay.
  QUESTION: Jen, can I ask '' Kommersant Daily in Russia has reported today that '' quoting State Department sources '' that the Putin administration has been told that if this is not resolved by September, this could threaten a potential state visit by President Obama.
  MS. PSAKI: I believe the White House disputed that this weekend. I would point you to them for any specific comment on that.
  QUESTION: I don't think they did, because my White House colleague said that he wasn't getting any information from the White House about this.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I would point you to them for any comment on that specifically.
  QUESTION: But, I mean, is the State Department '' is there any knowledge at the State Department that this would be the case?
  MS. PSAKI: None that I'm aware of.
  QUESTION: Can I make a follow-up on what you said regarding that you have told Venezuela about the inconvenience of granted asylum to Mr. Snowden?
  MS. PSAKI: And just to be clear, it's not '' it's broadly any country where he could move through transit --
  QUESTION: It's not specifically to Venezuela, so you have --
  MS. PSAKI: It is any country where he may be moving in transit, where he could end up, and certainly any country that were to grant asylum, that could have an impact, of course, on our bilateral relationship.
  QUESTION: But you haven't been in touch with Venezuela or with any government official in that regard?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I know we've communicated that publicly. I'm not aware of the most recent private calls or private conversations.
  QUESTION: Because I wanted to know if it's with the new person, the charge d'affaires, who is coming to Washington. Did you make that specific request to him, or --
  MS. PSAKI: I'd have to check on the channel for you and see if that's something we can share more details on.
  QUESTION: On that, do you know if there's been a second meeting between Roberta Jacobson and Venezuelans?
  MS. PSAKI: I --
  QUESTION: Has the rapprochement gone beyond --
  MS. PSAKI: Sure, Matt. I'm not aware. I'd have to check on that for you as well.
  QUESTION: If I could follow up on the question of the '' Mr. Snowden. There seems to be an indication that the Russian Government has given its blessing to his going to Venezuela. Will there be an effort by the United States and its allies to deny passage to any airplane that will carry him there?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not going to speak to that. Of course, our position here is very clear. I don't think there's any secret that we would like to see him returned. We've communicated that publicly and privately to any area where he may be stopping in transit, any area where he could possibly end up. So it's hard for me to see where there would be anybody who'd be confused about where we stand.
  QUESTION: So you're just '' so just to put a fine point on it, you will '' you don't want to characterize the lengths that the United States Government would go to to prevent Mr. Snowden from going to a '' to get asylum in Venezuela or any other country.
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not going to speculate on that. I'm not going to speculate on that. It's purely a hypothetical.
  QUESTION: But you could see though where leaders feel that you're '' especially in Latin America, when you see what happened with the President of Bolivia's plane and all the speculation that the U.S. was involved in getting '' being '' forcing it to land and being checked for whether he was on it '' you can see where the leaders of particularly Latin America think you're taking extraordinary measures.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I don't think any of that, Elise, has been validated or confirmed out there, in terms of the sources of that or the reasons for it, and I would refer you to any of those countries to speak to that. But beyond that, this is an individual who has been accused of three felony charges, who's been accused of leaking classified information. We've been clear we would like to see him returned, and I don't think it should come as a surprise that if he were granted asylum that would impact our bilateral relationship.
  QUESTION: So does this issue of Mr. Snowden kind of supersede all other interests that you have with any of these countries?
  MS. PSAKI: Certainly not. Certainly not. This is an issue where, again, we've been very clear where we stand. But we work with all of these countries on a range of different issues. It's different from country to country. But the Secretary met with Foreign Minister Lavrov, as you know, just maybe ten days ago, and this was an issue that was discussed briefly. But the thrust of their conversation was on Syria.
  QUESTION: I think it was less than ten days ago.
  MS. PSAKI: Was it less than? Maybe it's just time is taking longer than I thought. So that is a good example. But there are countless examples, country by country, on all the issues we work together on.
  QUESTION: Does the U.S. condemn explicitly that what happened with the Bolivian President? Because tomorrow is going to be a meeting to this at the OAS to this (inaudible) specifically what happened with the Bolivian President. So what will be the U.S. position on that?
  MS. PSAKI: I would just refer you to any of the countries there who were involved ''France, Spain, Italy, Portugal '' for any further comment on that.
  QUESTION: There's been a report that Snowden has obtained a second passport. Have you heard about this?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything on that for you. I haven't actually heard that.
  QUESTION: Is there concern by the State Department that the question of Snowden here is providing, as Chairman Rogers and Senator Menendez said, a way for the Latin American nations to get back at the United States because of its supposedly mining of information in Latin America?
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I think you'd have to speak to any of these individual countries. But we have broad bilateral relationships with a number of these countries. We hope that will continue. We hope to work with them on a range of issues, and our focus here is not targeted at any one country, it's targeted at having Mr. Snowden return to the United States.
  QUESTION: Do you deny though that you urged any of those countries to kind of deny airspace to the President of Bolivia's plane in order to check the plane?
  MS. PSAKI: We just haven't had any specific comment on that, Elise, and we're referred everybody to the specific countries for more details.
  QUESTION: Jen, I mean, the Turkish Government has request an explanation for these eavesdropping allegations. Do you have anything to share with us on it?
  MS. PSAKI: Just that we've been in touch bilaterally with any country that raises an issue. I mentioned that the Secretary has been in touch with Foreign Minister Davutoglu. They speak quite frequently, as you know, about a range of issues '' Egypt, Syria. I'm not aware of whether this has come up or not in any recent conversations; I would refer you to them. But certainly we take up this issue as it's brought up, we enjoy important relationships on a range of issues, including sharing of information with a number of countries, and we'll continue those conversations diplomatically.
  QUESTION: Turkey?
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: The protests are going on in Turkey as of this weekend, even today. And my first question is: What is your understanding, current understanding? I know that you have been in contact with the Turkish administration. The second is that a few weeks ago, you said that you had full confidence, I believe, in Turkish authorities to go on with the investigations against '' about police brutality. Do you have any update? Did you receive an update from Turkey at least?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, we have been following this very closely for a number of weeks. We've talked about it quite a bit in here; we continue to. We've called on all parties, and I'll call on them again, to ease tensions and resolve the situation through dialogue, and we urge all sides to exercise restraint and avoid violence. I don't have any other update. As you mentioned, they'll be looking into various incidents that have happened over the course of the last several weeks, but I would refer you to the Government of Turkey for any update on that.
  QUESTION: U.S.-China?
  MS. PSAKI: Sure, China. Mm-hmm. Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Do you have any readout on U.S.-China working group on cybersecurity? I think it's being held today.
  MS. PSAKI: It is. You're right, it is being held today. And let me just take this opportunity to remind everybody that today is the first civilian-military cyber working group meeting. The representative from the United States is '' it is being led, I should say, by State Department Coordinator for Cyber Issues Christopher Painter '' he's chairing the working group '' and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Eric Rosenbach will be the Defense Department lead. This is a working group that was announced back in April, when the Secretary was in Beijing, and this first meeting we're hopeful will enable the two sides to share perspectives on international laws and norms in cyberspace, raise concerns as needed, develop processes for future cooperation, and set the tone for future constructive and cooperative bilateral dialogues. I expect there'll be more of a readout as the meetings conclude later this afternoon.
  QUESTION: I just want to check on that. When you say that you're hoping that they'll be able to come up with or to share perspectives on international laws and norms on cybersecurity and that kind of thing, your position would be that the United States respects all international laws and norms when it comes to cybersecurity and protection of private information, correct?
  MS. PSAKI: I do, Matt.
  QUESTION: You do.
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not sure where you're going with this, but I'm interested to see.
  QUESTION: I just want to see how much you can '' I --
  MS. PSAKI: I think we've been very clear in expressing our concern.
  QUESTION: So you believe that any --
  MS. PSAKI: China has expressed their own concerns.
  MS. PSAKI: You believe that any U.S. Government programs that deal with cyber '' computers, cyber information '' comply with existing international laws and regulations and they fit the norm, the international norms. Is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Yes, Matt.
  QUESTION: Okay. Everything the U.S. Government has done with respect to computers and cybersecurity is legal under international law? You would say the Administration believes that?
  MS. PSAKI: Matt, do you have any specific program questions or specific --
  MS. PSAKI: That's '' yes. Well, no, I just wanted to know that the Administration's position is that it has respected all relevant international laws and norms when it comes to computer security and cybersecurity.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, I think we've differentiated '' this is a relevant point here, as you look at me '' we've differentiated here between our concerns we've had about steps taken by China as it relates to economic data, data threatening infrastructure. That's a concern I'm certain will be raised during these meetings, and that's the purpose of the cyber working group.
  QUESTION: Okay. But you, the Administration, does not believe that it has violated laws or '' international laws or norms as it relates to cybersecurity with this data mining that's been going on?
  MS. PSAKI: I'm not going to speak to all of our different programs, Matt, but I'm not aware of any violation.
  QUESTION: The Administration is not '' your position is that the Administration is not breaking any international laws when it comes to computer security. Is that correct?
  MS. PSAKI: Correct.
  QUESTION: All right.
  QUESTION: I have --
  QUESTION: From the --
  QUESTION: -- U.S.-China?
  MS. PSAKI: Okay. Go ahead. One more on U.S.-China.
  QUESTION: Could you characterize that meeting more? Are you going to figure out some rules or, I mean, just exchange view '' both viewpoint of the cyber issue? Or --
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, as I mentioned at the end there, there's going to be more of a readout. I know we're going to be doing a backgrounder later this afternoon on the S&ED meetings, and I expect a readout of the working group meetings today will be a part of that, and they can give you more of an overview and understanding of what was discussed and where they landed.
  QUESTION: Is that just a one day, today? The working group just meets for one day, or are they meeting for over --
  MS. PSAKI: I believe it's today, focused on today. Of course, this is an issue that '' which will be continued to be discussed.
  QUESTION: But how about tomorrow? Tomorrow, I think you have also the security dialogue between U.S. and China. Cyber issue going to be a topic?
  MS. PSAKI: It is one of the issues I'm certain will be in docket of issues discussed.
  QUESTION: Jen, can I just ask, obviously, understandably, the Secretary is with his wife at the moment. Has any determination been made yet who will lead the main U.S.-China Strategic Dialogue if he's unable to be in Washington?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we're making determinations as it relates to his schedule kind of day by day here. We haven't made any determinations that have changed his schedule yet for later this week. If we do, we will, of course, communicate that with all of you as well as what would happen in his place. But that's ahead of where we are currently.
  QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.
  QUESTION: Can we change topics?
  QUESTION: Just on more on China.
  QUESTION: Go onto Syria?
  MS. PSAKI: Oh, one more on China. Go ahead.
  QUESTION: Yes. Is that correct, Snowden's allegation on the U.S. hacks on Chinese computer is going to complicate your cyber dialogue with China?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, I'm not going to validate the range of accusations being made by Mr. Snowden. I will say that, of course, this is an open conversation and the U.S. will raise our own concerns, and certainly I would send you to the Chinese for them to talk about what their concerns may be.
  QUESTION: Can we go to Syria?
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the election of Mr. Jarba to head of the National Coalition?
  MS. PSAKI: I do.
  QUESTION: Syrian National Coalition?
  MS. PSAKI: And I believe we put something out yesterday too, but let me reiterate that here.
  QUESTION: That's just '' you're just going to repeat what you said yesterday?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I'm sure we'll have a dialogue here with questions, but I may start there. We welcome the July 6th election of Syrian Coalition President Jarba and look forward to working with him and with his team. We hope to make progress together to prevent the total collapse of Syria into chaos, and the rebuilding '' push to rebuild the social fabric, and we look to him and the new leaders to reach out to all Syrian communities and bring greater unity of purpose and further organization to the coalition as the legitimate representatives of the Syrian people.
  QUESTION: Are you aware of Mr. Jarba's reputation as an obstinate and a hardliner, who is not even liked by other members of the opposition?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, he is somebody who has been elected by the opposition. We're going to be working with him and we're eager to do that.
  QUESTION: And do you believe --
  QUESTION: Do you have a comment on the resignation of the Prime Minister, though, Ghassan Hitto, which came almost directly afterwards?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything specific for you on that. I know I saw the reports as well. Obviously there's been a transition in the leadership, or they're going through a transition in the leadership, I should say, of the opposition. So --
  QUESTION: Is this going to hinder the efforts, America's efforts to work with the opposition towards a cohesive body which can then go into some kind of negotiation in Geneva?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't '' we don't expect that it will. Obviously, the election of the coalition president was an important step forward. Obviously, there's more that needs to do '' they need to do, but we felt that was an important step and is a positive sign.
  QUESTION: You made a very strong statement --
  QUESTION: So you said you're going to work with them to help '' or to prevent the collapse of Syria into total chaos? Exactly where do you think Syria is now? Is it '' it's not total chaos? You think it's '' it could go that way?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, we've been very clear about our concerns about what's happening on the ground in Syria.
  QUESTION: You would not describe --
  MS. PSAKI: We're hopeful that they will --
  QUESTION: -- it as total chaos now? It's still --
  MS. PSAKI: We are hopeful that the new coalition president and the rest of the leadership will be partners working with us in moving towards a transition.
  QUESTION: Sorry, Jen, but I just want '' are you aware of his statement against any negotiation with the regime? Mr. Jarba?
  MS. PSAKI: We have seen that statement, of course, and our objective, as you know, is, of course, to move towards a political solution and a political transition in resolving this crisis. We've talked a bit in here about the number of factors that will go into bringing all sides to the table. And since the ground game is, of course, among '' the ground situation, I should say, is among the factors that will guide the opposition's participation in the Geneva conference, which they are a key participant, we will continue to consult closely with them and with others in determining the best time to have the conference. So yes, of course, we've seen the comments and we're going to continue to discuss and work with them.
  QUESTION: I have a new topic.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: On Syria?
  QUESTION: Sure.
  MS. PSAKI: Okay.
  QUESTION: Also, similarly, I wondered if you'd seen the reports that the Baath parties had some kind of reorganization and ousted Farouk al-Sharaa from the Baath Party leadership, although he's staying as vice president. He seems to be one of the few, if not the only person within the Baath party that had been calling for some kind of political resolution to the conflict. Again, the same question, I guess: Is this going to hinder your attempts to build some kind of reconciliation between the two sides?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, we have, of course, seen the reports of the cabinet reshuffle in the Baath -- ruling Baath Party. We '' as we've said many times before, we don't recognize the legitimacy of Assad, the legitimacy of his regime. We continue to ask him to step aside, but we know that we need to find a way to work with all parties to get back to the table.
  So I wouldn't draw a connection between the reshuffle and our ability to do that. There are a number of factors, including the ability of the opposition to feel comfortable coming to the table, coming to Geneva, the ground situation determining what participants are the most productive, and as well as the agenda that will actually move things forward.
  QUESTION: But I guess if he was one of the lone voices who was talking about a political reconciliation or a political solution to the conflict, and he's now out of the picture, that means that you're going to have a more hardline, if it's possible, leadership to deal with in Damascus.
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, we're not quite at that point yet because we're still determining when we could have a conference, how we can bring both sides together. Obviously, the Russians are our partner in this. And we will see where this goes and how it impacts things in the days and weeks ahead.
  QUESTION: On Syria.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Just two questions.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: There are recent claims again around Homs --
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: -- that there are new chemical weapon attacks. Would you be able to confirm that?
  MS. PSAKI: I can't confirm it. We have, of course, seen news reports and ground updates from opposition context '' contacts detailing the possible use of chemical weapons. We are still seeking more information and unfortunately don't have any independent confirmation at this time.
  QUESTION: So it has been about six weeks now that the U.S. Government officially declared that the redline has been crossed.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: And then the President Obama long time ago said that that would be the game-changer. Where is that game-changer step that the U.S. Government is supposed to take?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think if you remember at the time, just a couple of weeks ago, we did make an announcement that we had changed the scale and scope of our aid '' I still am not in a position to detail exactly what that means '' and that the Administration, high levels of the Administration, which includes, of course, the President and the Secretary of State, the national security team, all are considering additional options, all options aside from boots on the ground. So both of those steps have been in play, including expanding the scale and scope and continuing to consider additional options.
  QUESTION: So Syrians '' you can assure the Syrians that the game-changing step is on its way? It's coming?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think we've made steps to provide additional kinds of aid. I don't have any further detail on that for you.
  QUESTION: So you are saying that you already took the game-changing step? I cannot figure out --
  MS. PSAKI: We announced that at the time. I don't have any new update for you on any new decisions that have been made.
  QUESTION: So you've announced, but you did not take the step?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any new additional updates on the timing or status.
  QUESTION: But my question is --
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: You announced but you did not take the step? I'm trying to understand.
  MS. PSAKI: Again, I don't have any new update for you on the status. I still am not in a position to discuss specifics on that front.
  QUESTION: Can I change topic, Guyana? It's been reported that a U.S. Embassy official has been removed for allegedly being involved in a sex-for-visa scandal. Does the State Department have a comment on that?
  MS. PSAKI: I think I do have something. Just give me a moment here. Well, we are aware of the allegations of improprieties relating to a consular officer formerly assigned to Georgetown, Guyana. This Department takes all allegations of misconduct by employees seriously. We are reviewing the matter thoroughly. If the allegations are substantiated, we will work with the relevant authorities to hold anyone involved accountable.
  QUESTION: So is he '' he's back here in Washington now?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have an update on their location.
  Elise.
  QUESTION: The report also says that this gentleman is currently been suspended, or has been relieved of his actual duties while this matter has been investigated.
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have any further update on it for all of you. I'm happy to check on that and see if there's anything else --
  QUESTION: Yeah.
  MS. PSAKI: -- that I'm able to provide.
  QUESTION: ''Recently withdrawn from normal duties pending completion of an official investigation.''
  MS. PSAKI: Okay. I'm happy to check on that.
  Catherine.
  QUESTION: New topic?
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: Pakistan. They compiled a report and did a report, some 300 page report, the Abbottabad Commission about the OBL raid and the aftermath and how he could have been in the country for so long. Was the report shared with the United States at any point? Or do you have a comment on it? It also called the unilateral military action an act of war.
  MS. PSAKI: I'd have to check on that for you. I've seen, of course, the reports, but I just don't have anything new or any further comment on it.
  Arshad.
  QUESTION: A small one on Singapore. Back in May, the Singaporean authorities announced plans for new regulation of Internet --
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: -- news websites. Today, a group of U.S.-based internet companies '' Facebook, eBay, Yahoo, and Google '' essentially criticized that decision. Does the U.S. Government have any position on those regulations, and in particular on the one that I believe would require websites to take down any story '' news story which the Singaporean Government deemed to be unacceptable within 24 hours?
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm. Well, we are deeply concerned by the new restrictive Singaporean policy requiring the licensing of news websites. We raise Internet freedom regularly in bilateral and multilateral dialogues with foreign governments, including Singapore. We urge Singapore to ensure that freedom of expression is protected in accordance with its international obligations and commitments. We closely monitor and often speak out, as you all know, on both Internet freedom and media freedom throughout the world. This case is no different, and we are concerned, of course, to see Singapore applying press restrictions to the online world.
  QUESTION: So can you assure us that the reason that you push for Internet freedom and that kind of thing in all these countries around the world isn't to make it easier for this government to listen in and bug people?
  MS. PSAKI: I just '' I want to make sure --
  QUESTION: No?
  MS. PSAKI: -- that the AP and Reuters stories are available to all the people of Singapore.
  QUESTION: Thank you. I've got a small one on Cambodia.
  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
  QUESTION: Opposition leader Sam Rainsy says he's going to go back. Do you have anything '' facing arrest, I think, if he does?
  MS. PSAKI: Yeah, I think I do have something on that. Let me see here. Matt, I know I do. Let me get that to you and anyone else right after the briefing.
  QUESTION: Thank you.
  MS. PSAKI: Sure. All right. Last one here, in the red and white shirt in the back.
  QUESTION: Can I return to Snowden really quickly and ask --
  MS. PSAKI: Sure.
  QUESTION: The Government of Bolivia issued a statement, I believe, saying that the act of governments who forced President Morales' plane down was state terrorism. Do you have any response to that, given that the countries involved were close U.S. allies?
  MS. PSAKI: Well, again, I would refer you, and I continue to refer you, to the individual governments here for any further comment on the circumstances of last week.
  QUESTION: The U.S. has no response?
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything more for you on it.
  QUESTION: Okay. And just to follow up, does '' is there any more information on where the original information or the leak came from that Snowden was on that plane? Does the U.S. have any more idea --
  MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything for you on that, no.
  Thanks, everyone.
  QUESTION: Thank you.
  (The briefing was concluded at 2:30 p.m.)
  DPB # 113
Kimberly Dvorak - San Diego County Political Buzz Examiner - Government | Examiner.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:41
  It's been nearly three weeks since Michael Hastings was killed in a fiery car accident in West Los Angeles. The award-winning journalist earned his stripes as a wartime reporter and captured fame with his 2010 Rolling Stone...
VIDEO-KImberly Dvorak-San Diego 6 - Details of Reporter Hastings' Death Remain Elusive
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:38
  By Kimberly Dvorak
  Created: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 09:40:00 PST
  Updated: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 09:44:36 PST
  It's been nearly three weeks since Michael Hastings was killed in a fiery car accident in West Los Angeles. The award-winning journalist earned his stripes as a wartime reporter and captured fame with his 2010 Rolling Stone story that forced General Stanley McChrystal to resign as commander of the US forces in Afghanistan.
  According to City News Service Hastings, 33, ''was driving south on Highland Avenue when he apparently lost control of the compact (2013 Mercedes Benz CLK250) near Melrose Avenue and crashed into palm trees in the median about 4:20 a.m. Tuesday (June 18). The car's engine reportedly ended up about 200 feet away from the impact site.''
  An eyewitness at the scene, Jose, employed at nearby business ALSCO Inc said, the car was travelling very fast and he heard a couple explosions shortly before the car crashed.In fact, the explosion was so intense that it took the LA County assistant corner, Ed Winter, two days to identify the burned-beyond recognition body of Hastings. Officials confirm that an autopsy has been performed, but the cause of death is pending. LAPD media spokesperson Lieutenant Andrew Neiman said, ''it will take several weeks to get the toxicology results.'' By stark contrast, in Italy, 'Sopranos' star James Gandolfini's family received the toxicology report within a few days.
  Despite the intensity of the single car accident, an LAPD statement determined that there was ''no foul play'' involved.
  As news of the journalist's death reached family and work colleagues another story emerged, one that would seemingly contradict the LAPD's verdict. It quickly surfaced that Hastings reached out to Wikileaks attorney Jennifer Robinson just a few hours before his death claiming the FBI was investigating him.
  In an atypical response the FBI Los Angeles-based bureau spokeswoman Laura Eimiller emailed media emphatically denying their agency was looking into Mr. Hastings background.
  Once the back and forth commenced, friends of Hastings posted the last frantic email they would receive from their colleague. It read:
  ''Subject: FBI Investigation, re: NSA -Hey (redacted names) '-- the Feds are interviewing my ''close friends and associates.'' Perhaps if the authorities arrive ''BuzzFeed GQ,'' er HQ, may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news gathering practices or related journalism issues. Also: I'm onto a big story, and need to go off the rada[r] for a bit.
  All the best, and hope to see you all soon. Michael''
  After learning about Hastings death, Ben Smith, editor in chief of BuzzFeed.com, released a statement saying the staff was ''shocked and devastated by the news that Michael Hastings is gone. Michael was a great, fearless journalist with an incredible instinct for the story, and a gift for finding ways to make his readers care about anything he covered from wars to politicians.''
  One particular passage in Hastings book, ''The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan,'' revealed that a former McChrystal staff member made a death threat. ''We'll hunt you down and kill you if we don't like what you write,'' the unnamed staffer said. Hastings coolly retorted: ''Well, I get death threats like that about once a year, so no worries.''
  He later wrote; ''I wasn't disturbed by the claim. Whenever I'd been reporting around groups of dudes whose job it was to kill people, one of them would usually mention that they were going to kill me.''
  Disturbing details surrounding the actual accident
  After reading accounts of the car crash and examining the scene of the accident erroneous details were hard to overlook. Stories discussed the road as narrow, not true, it's a four-lane road with a large median dividing traffic. Some reports said there was a curve in the road, also not true; in fact it's straight freeway-to-freeway. Also, there was no damage to the median curb, only fire discoloration. But the most significant missing evidence was the absence of any skid marks'--even though the car made a 60-degree turn into a palm tree.
  Research of this topic reveals a new angle to this story, namely '--Boston Brakes.
  This theory was explained by a former Marine Gordon Duff who refers to the ''Boston Brakes'' technique, in which ''drive by wire'' cars, specifically a Mercedes Benz, can be manipulated remotely to simulate an out-of-control accident, according to his Veterans Today story (The 2010 story is a must read). The story details are eerily similar to Hastings fiery accident scene as there were no skid marks.
  Adding credence to the possible car-hacking scenario is former U.S. National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism Richard Clarke. After news broke on the Hastings car accident, he confirmed the ''drive by wire'' concept.
  Clarke told The Huffington Post that a single-vehicle crash is ''consistent with a car cyber attack. There is reason to believe that intelligence agencies for major powers -- including the United States -- know how to remotely seize control of a car.''
  Specifically, a 2010 research project conducted by the University of California at San Diego and the University of Washington Engineering Departments demonstrated how easy it was to override a vehicle's computer system and drive it remotely. A request for an on/off camera interview by this reporter was declined.
  Clarke's interview with The Huffington Post explains, ''You can do some really highly destructive things now, through hacking a car, and it's not that hard.''
  Another significant detail pointed out by some members of law enforcement, is the intensity of the fire inside the car. It's highly unusual since gasoline generally doesn't burn that hot. Reviewing video footage from the scene, the intensity of the fire resembles a ''thermite'' burn.
  No matter how you slice this highly suspicious car accident, a Mercedes is not going to explode into flames without assistance. Car aficionados say fires in new cars happen for three main reasons, ''running the engine out of oil, running the engine out of coolant, or a mammoth car mangling accident, that leaves the hot side of the battery to short out against the frame before it reaches the fuse panel.''
  First, thanks to science and mathematics accident scene re-construction analysts should be able to ''somewhat'' calculate things like the dynamic energy of the impact in addition to the gravity force required for separating the engine/transmission from the vehicle.
  The 2013 Mercedes Hastings drove that fateful night in June is equipped with MBRACE (emergency call system), SOS telephone and the Voice Control System. It is similar to the ONSTAR program, and can directly link the driver to a representative in case of emergencies. The Mercedes manual reads: ''Information about electronic data acquisition in the vehicle (Including notice pursuant to California Code § 9951). If your vehicle is equipped with MBRACE, data is transmitted in the event of an accident.''
  The manual continues: ''The wireless devices of this vehicle comply with Part 15 of the FCC Rules Operation and is subject to the following two conditions: 1) These devices may not cause harmful interference, and 2) These devices must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.
  Changes or modifications not expressly approved by the party responsible for compliance could void the user's authority to operate the equipment.''
  In a statement from Mercedes, Olivia C. states; ''At this time, the police are still conducting their investigation into this tragedy. They have not yet asked for our assistance, but we stand ready to assist if and when they do.''
  Despite the LAPD's categorization of the Hasting fatal accident as a "no (evidence of) foul play" accident, LAPD refuses to release the accident and toxicology reports, or make the Mercedes available for inspection which only fuels speculation.
  Relevant to the single car accident conclusion by LAPD, it must be noted that Michael Hastings had history that included alcohol and drug abuse, but reports from his family and friends say he kicked the habit.
  Stay tuned for further news as this reporter's investigation continues.
Report: Railway head says train in Canada tampered with - CNN.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:32
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  Train derails, explodes in Canadian town
  STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  The railroad CEO says the locomotive was shut down by responders to an earlier fireA Canadian official says there is no sign of sabotage in the Lac-Megantic crashSome residents of the town are allowed to return home, officials sayAt least 13 people are dead and about 37 are unaccounted forLac-Megantic, Quebec (CNN) -- The driverless train that barreled into a small Quebec town and derailed, unleashing a deadly inferno that killed at least 13 people, may have had its brakes inadvertently disabled, the chairman of the company operating the train said Tuesday.
  Firefighters in the nearby town of Nantes put out a blaze on the train hours before it rolled into Lac-Megantic. Ed Burkhardt, chief executive officer and president of Rail World, the parent company of the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, told media outlets there's evidence the engine powering the brakes was shut down at some point.
  Pressed to elaborate by CTV, Burkhardt wrote in an e-mail exchange, "We are now aware the firefighters shut down the locomotive. By the time (Montreal, Maine & Atlantic) people found out, it was too late."
  In earlier comments to the Montreal Gazette, he said the matter needs further investigation, and his company has begun an internal inquiry.
  "There are a number of missing pieces here," Burkhardt told the paper, saying he didn't suspect "the event was malicious or an act of terrorism."
  The company did not immediately return phone calls from CNN about the report.
  Asked during a news conference if authorities suspected sabotage, Ed Belkaloul, manager of rail operations for Canada's Transportation Safety Board's eastern region, said there was no evidence to that effect.
  The train began rolling -- unbeknownst to dispatchers and rail traffic controllers -- about an hour after the fire in Nantes was reported. It picked up speed because the track between Nantes and Lac-Megantic lies on a 1.2% downward slope, which Belkaloul said was relatively steep.
  Seventy-two tanker cars carrying crude oil jumped the track early Saturday, setting off a huge fireball. At least 37 people are missing. Officials in the town 130 miles east of Montreal say some victims were likely vaporized by the intense blaze, which burned for 36 hours after the crash.
  The fire is under control, authorities said Tuesday morning. Of the roughly 2,000 residents evacuated, about 1,200 will be permitted to return home immediately. Another 800 cannot go back yet, the officials said.
  Notices were placed on doors instructing residents how to clean and air out their homes. Officials suggested throwing out any food and boiling all water because the city's water treatment plant is not operational.
  Firefighters are now using infrared detectors to find any remaining hot spots in the wreckage. They've stopped hosing down the area because it was inhibiting the investigation, officials said.
  Rolling oil bomb?
  The train had already been on fire hours before the Saturday accident, Canadian broadcaster CBC reported, sourcing fire officials. Firefighters in the town of Nantes, 7 miles northwest of Lac-Megantic, extinguished a small blaze on the freight train.
  When they left, the train was still parked where it was supposed to stay for the night, the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway said.
  But air brakes holding it in place failed, allowing the train to barrel downhill into Lac-Megantic, the company said. It was not clear if Burkhardt was suggesting to CTV that firefighters were responsible for disabling the brakes, but he told Reuters earlier that the brakes were disabled when firefighters shut down the engine powering them.
  Investigators plan to check the brakes once the crumpled, burned tankers are accessible.
  The train rolled into town much faster than a train under an engineer's control would have.
  "Usually they're traveling between 5 and 10 miles an hour," said Quebec police officer Benoit Richard. "On that night, this train was going at least between 30 and 40 miles an hour."
  Sonia Pepin recalls hearing the train like never before. The tracks are a few feet from her home, and her whole house shook, she said.
  Investigators with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada found the locomotive event recorder, which they can analyze for information on throttle position and speed, among other data.
  Oil transport safe?
  Petroleum products have increasingly been transported via rail in the past five years, according to the railroad industry, and Canada has had multiple issues with derailments in recent months.
  Last month, four Canadian Pacific rail cars carrying flammable petrochemicals used to dilute oil derailed on a flood-damaged bridge spanning Calgary's Bow River, according to the Calgary Herald.
  In another incident involving Canadian Pacific, five tankers containing oil derailed in rural Saskatchewan in May, spilling 575 barrels of crude, the Toronto Sun reported.
  A month earlier, 22 Canadian Pacific rail cars jumped the tracks near White River, Ontario. Two of the cars leaked about 400 barrels -- almost 17,000 gallons -- of oil, The Globe and Mail in Toronto reported.
  Canadian Pacific was also involved in a stateside spill in March. Fourteen cars on a mile-long, 94-car train derailed in western Minnesota, about 150 miles northwest of Minneapolis, spilling about 30,000 gallons of crude, Reuters reported.
  A rail car can carry roughly 700 barrels of oil, with 42 gallons per barrel.
  Popular Quebec performer missing
  The runaway train rumbled toward Lac-Megantic while patrons at the Musi-Cafe were enjoying a summer night of live music. Some were sitting on the pub's front porch.
  The Musi-Cafe is no longer standing, one of an estimated 40 buildings leveled in the crash and explosions. Some of its patrons have been counted among the 13 confirmed dead.
  "We know that there will be many more," said police Lt. Michel Brunet.
  Authorities believe some of those still missing were in the pub at the time of the accident. Quebecois musician Guy Bolduc had been performing there.
  The pub's Facebook page is filling up with messages of condolence, as has a page created for the victims of the disaster. Bolduc's fans are searching for him on social media.
  "All of his fans, all over Quebec, but also his fellow singers (of whom I am one) hope to see him again alive!!! Come on my GuyBol, come out of your hiding place," one member wrote.
  A 'war zone'
  When 1,200 evacuees from the Canadian town return Tuesday, they will find Lac-Megantic gutted for blocks.
  "Hot zones" lingering more than two days after the train derailment hampered authorities' efforts to search for missing people.
  Forensic specialists have asked victims' families for hair samples, clothing, anything to help identify their loved ones.
  In a town of just 6,000 residents, most everyone is affected by the deaths and destruction.
  Prime Minister Stephen Harper has described the scene as a "war zone."
  Flash flooding traps Toronto train passengers, stalls rush hour traffic
  CNN's Holly Yan, Umaro Djau, Jonathan Mann, Pierre Meilhan and Deanna Hackney contributed to this report.
Railway air brake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:31
  An air brake is a conveyance braking system actuated by compressed air. Modern trains rely upon a fail-safe air brake system that is based upon a design patented by George Westinghouse on March 5, 1868. The Westinghouse Air Brake Company (WABCO) was subsequently organized to manufacture and sell Westinghouse's invention. In various forms, it has been nearly universally adopted.
  The Westinghouse system uses air pressure to charge air reservoirs (tanks) on each car. Full air pressure signals each car to release the brakes. A reduction or loss of air pressure signals each car to apply its brakes, using the compressed air in its reservoirs.
  Overview[edit]In the air brake's simplest form, called the straight air system, compressed air pushes on a piston in a cylinder. The piston is connected through mechanical linkage to brake shoes that can rub on the train wheels, using the resulting friction to slow the train. The mechanical linkage can become quite elaborate, as it evenly distributes force from one pressurized air cylinder to 8 or 12 wheels.
  The pressurized air comes from an air compressor in the locomotive and is sent from car to car by a train line made up of pipes beneath each car and hoses between cars. The principal problem with the straight air braking system is that any separation between hoses and pipes causes loss of air pressure and hence the loss of the force applying the brakes. This could easily cause a runaway train. Straight air brakes are still used on locomotives, although as a dual circuit system, usually with each bogie (truck) having its own circuit.
  In order to design a system without the shortcomings of the straight air system, Westinghouse invented a system wherein each piece of railroad rolling stock was equipped with an air reservoir and a triple valve, also known as a control valve.
  The triple valve is described as being so named as it performs three functions: Charging air into an air tank ready to be used, applying the brakes, and releasing them. In so doing, it supports certain other actions (i.e. it 'holds' or maintains the application and it permits the exhaust of brake cylinder pressure and the recharging of the reservoir during the release). In his patent application, Westinghouse refers to his 'triple-valve device' because of the three component valvular parts comprising it: the diaphragm-operated poppet valve feeding reservoir air to the brake cylinder, the reservoir charging valve, and the brake cylinder release valve. When he soon improved the device by removing the poppet valve action, these three components became the piston valve, the slide valve, and the graduating valve.
  If the pressure in the train line is lower than that of the reservoir, the brake cylinder exhaust portal is closed and air from the car's reservoir is fed into the brake cylinder to apply the brakes. This action continues until equilibrium between the brake pipe pressure and reservoir pressure is achieved. At that point, the airflow from the reservoir to the brake cylinder is lapped off and the cylinder is maintained at a constant pressure.If the pressure in the train line is higher than that of the reservoir, the triple valve connects the train line to the reservoir feed, causing the air pressure in the reservoir to increase. The triple valve also causes the brake cylinder to be exhausted to the atmosphere, releasing the brakes.As the pressure in the train line and that of the reservoir equalize, the triple valve closes, causing the air pressure in the reservoir and brake cylinder to be maintained at the current level.Unlike the straight air system, the Westinghouse system uses a reduction in air pressure in the train line to apply the brakes. When the engine driver applies the brake by operating the locomotive brake valve, the train line vents to atmosphere at a controlled rate, reducing the train line pressure and in turn triggering the triple valve on each car to feed air into its brake cylinder. When the engine driver releases the brake, the locomotive brake valve portal to atmosphere is closed, allowing the train line to be recharged by the compressor of the locomotive. The subsequent increase of train line pressure causes the triple valves on each car to discharge the contents of the brake cylinder to the atmosphere, releasing the brakes and recharging the reservoirs.
  Under the Westinghouse system, therefore, brakes are applied by reducing train line pressure and released by increasing train line pressure. The Westinghouse system is thus fail safe'--any failure in the train line, including a separation ("break-in-two") of the train, will cause a loss of train line pressure, causing the brakes to be applied and bringing the train to a stop, thus preventing a runaway train.
  Modern air brake systems serve two functions:
  The service brake system, which applies and releases the brakes during normal operations, andThe emergency brake system, which applies the brakes rapidly in the event of a brake pipe failure or an emergency application by the engine driver (generally referred to as the automatic brake).When the train brakes are applied during normal operations, the engine driver makes a "service application" or a "service rate reduction'', which means that the train line pressure reduces at a controlled rate. It takes several seconds for the train line pressure to reduce and consequently takes several seconds for the brakes to apply throughout the train. In the event the train needs to make an emergency stop, the engine driver can make an "emergency application," which immediately and rapidly vents all of the train line pressure to atmosphere, resulting in a rapid application of the train's brakes. An emergency application also results when the train line comes apart or otherwise fails, as all air will also be immediately vented to atmosphere.
  In addition, an emergency application brings in an additional component of each car's air brake system: the emergency portion. The triple valve is divided into two portions: the service portion, which contains the mechanism used during brake applications made during service reductions, and the emergency portion, which senses the immediate, rapid release of train line pressure. In addition, each car's air brake reservoir is divided into two portions'--the service portion and the emergency portion'--and is known as the "dual-compartment reservoir''. Normal service applications transfer air pressure from the service portion to the brake cylinder, while emergency applications cause the triple valve to direct all air in both the service portion and the emergency portion of the dual-compartment reservoir to the brake cylinder, resulting in a 20''30% stronger application.
  The emergency portion of each triple valve is activated by the extremely rapid rate of reduction of train line pressure. Due to the length of trains and the small diameter of the train line, the rate of reduction is high near the front of the train (in the case of an engine driver-initiated emergency application) or near the break in the train line (in the case of the train line coming apart). Farther away from the source of the emergency application, the rate of reduction can be reduced to the point where triple valves will not detect the application as an emergency reduction. To prevent this, each triple valve's emergency portion contains an auxiliary vent port, which, when activated by an emergency application, also locally vents the train line's pressure directly to atmosphere. This serves to propagate the emergency application rapidly along the entire length of the train.
  Use of distributed power (i.e., remotely controlled locomotive units midtrain and/or at the rear end) mitigates somewhat the time-lag problem with long trains, because a telemetered radio signal from the engine driver in the front locomotive commands the distant units to initiate brake pressure reductions that propagate quickly through nearby cars.
  Enhancements[edit]Electro-pneumatic or EP brakes are a type of air brake that allows for immediate application of brakes throughout the train instead of the sequential application. EP brakes have been in use in German high-speed trains (most notably the ICE) since the late 1980s, and in British practice since 1949, fully described in Electro-pneumatic brake system on British railway trains. Electro-pneumatic brakes are currently in testing in North America and South Africa in captive service ore and coal trains.
  Passenger trains have had for a long time a 3-wire version of the electro-pneumatic brake, which gives seven levels of braking force. In most cases the system is not fail-safe, with the wires being energized in sequence to apply the brakes, but the conventional automatic air brake is also provided to act as a fail safe, and in most cases can be used independently in the event of a failure of the EP brakes.
  In North America, WABCO supplied HSC (High Speed Control) brake equipment for several post-World War II streamlined passenger trains. This was an electrically controlled overlay on conventional D-22 passenger and 24-RL locomotive brake equipment. On the conventional side, the control valve set a reference pressure in a volume, which set brake cylinder pressure via a relay valve. On the electric side, pressure from a second straight-air trainline controlled the relay valve via a two-way check valve. This "straight air" trainline was charged (from reservoirs on each car) and released by magnet valves on each car, controlled electrically by a 3 wire trainline, in turn controlled by an "electro-pneumatic master controller" in the controlling locomotive. This controller compared the pressure in the straight air trainline with that supplied by a self lapping portion of the engineers valve, signaling all of the "apply" or "release" magnets valves in the train to open simultaneously, changing the pressure in the "straight air" trainline much more rapidly and evenly than possible by simply supplying air directly from the locomotive. The relay valve was equipped with four diaphragms, magnet valves, electric control equipment, and an axle-mounted speed sensor, so that at speeds over 60 mph full braking force was applied, and reduced in steps at 60, 40 and 20 mph, bringing the train to a gentle stop. Each axle was also equipped with anti-lock brake equipment. The combination minimized braking distances, allowing more full-speed running between stops. The "straight air" (electro-pneumatic trainline), anti-lock, and speed graduating portions of the system were not dependent on each other in any way, and any or all of these options could be supplied separately.[2]
  Later systems replace the automatic air brake with an electrical wire (in the UK, at least, known as a "round the train wire") that has to be kept energized to keep the brakes off.
  More recent innovations are electronically controlled pneumatic brakes where the brakes of all the wagons (cars) and locomotives are connected by a kind of local area network, which allows individual control of the brakes on each wagon, and the reporting back of performance of each wagon's brakes.
  Limitations[edit]The Westinghouse air brake system is very trustworthy, but not infallible. Recall that the car reservoirs recharge only when the brake pipe pressure is higher than the reservoir pressure, and that the car reservoir pressure will rise only to the point of equilibrium. Fully recharging the reservoirs on a long train can require considerable time (8 to 10 minutes in some cases[3]), during which the brake pipe pressure will be lower than locomotive reservoir pressure.
  If the brakes must be applied before recharging has been completed, a larger brake pipe reduction will be required in order to achieve the desired amount of braking effort, as the system is starting out at a lower point of equilibrium (lower overall pressure). If many brake pipe reductions are made in short succession ("fanning the brake" in railroad slang), a point may be reached where car reservoir pressure will be severely depleted, resulting in substantially reduced brake cylinder piston force, causing the brakes to fail. On a descending grade, the unfortunate result will be a runaway.
  In the event of a loss of braking due to reservoir depletion, the engine driver may be able to regain control with an emergency brake application, as the emergency portion of each car's dual-compartment reservoir should be fully charged'--it is not affected by normal service reductions. The triple valves detect an emergency reduction based on the rate of brake pipe pressure reduction. Therefore, as long as a sufficient volume of air can be rapidly vented from the brake pipe, each car's triple valve will cause an emergency brake application. However, if the brake pipe pressure is too low due to an excessive number of brake applications, an emergency application will not produce a large enough volume of air flow to trip the triple valves, leaving the engine driver with no means to stop the train.
  To prevent a runaway due to loss of brake pressure, dynamic (rheostatic) braking can be utilized so the locomotive(s) will assist in retarding the train. Often, blended braking, the simultaneous application of dynamic and train brakes, will be used to maintain a safe speed and keep the slack bunched on descending grades. Care would then be given when releasing the service and dynamic brakes to prevent draw gear damage caused by a sudden run out of the trains slack.
  Another solution to loss of brake pressure is the two-pipe system, fitted on most modern passenger stock and many freight wagons. In addition to the traditional brake pipe, this enhancement adds the main reservoir pipe, which is continuously charged with air directly from the locomotive's main reservoir. The main reservoir is where the locomotive's air compressor output is stored, and is ultimately the source of compressed air for all systems that use it.
  Since the main reservoir pipe is kept constantly pressurized by the locomotive, the car reservoirs can be charged independently of the brake pipe, this being accomplished via a check valve to prevent backfeeding into the pipe. This arrangement helps to reduce the above described pressure loss problems, and also reduces the time required for the brakes to release, since the brake pipe only has to recharge itself.
  Main reservoir pipe pressure can also be used to supply air for auxiliary systems such as pneumatic door operators or air suspension. Nearly all passenger trains (all in the UK and USA), and many freights, now have the two-pipe system.
  Accidents[edit]The air brake can fail if one of the cocks where the pipes of each carriage are joined together is accidentally closed. In this case, the brakes on the wagons behind the closed cock will fail to respond to the driver's command. This happened in 1953 to the Federal Express, a Pennsylvania Railroad train pulling into Washington DC's Union Station, causing the train to crash into the passenger concourse and fall through the floor. Similarly, in the Gare de Lyon train accident a valve was accidentally closed by the crew, reducing braking power.
  There are a number of safeguards that are usually taken to prevent this sort of accident happening. Railroads have strict government-approved procedures for testing the air brake systems when making up trains in a yard or picking up cars en route. These generally involve connecting the air brake hoses, charging up the brake system, setting the brakes and manually inspecting the cars to ensure the brakes are applied, and then releasing the brakes and manually inspecting the cars to ensure the brakes are released. Particular attention is usually paid to the rearmost car of the train, either by manual inspection or via an automated end-of-train device, to ensure that brake pipe continuity exists throughout the entire train. When brake pipe continuity exists throughout the train, failure of the brakes to apply or release on one or more cars is an indication that the cars' triple valves are malfunctioning. Depending on the location of the air test, the repair facilities available, and regulations governing the number of inoperative brakes permitted in a train, the car may be set out for repair or taken to the next terminal where it can be repaired.
  Standardisation[edit]The modern air brake is not identical with the original airbrake as there have been slight changes in the design of the triple valve, which are not completely compatible between versions, and which must therefore be introduced in phases. That said, the basic air brakes used on railways worldwide are remarkably compatible.
  Vacuum brakes[edit]The main competitor to the air brake is the vacuum brake, which operates on negative pressure. The vacuum brake is a little simpler than the air brake, with an ejector with no moving parts on steam engines or a mechanical or electrical "exhauster" on a diesel or electric locomotive replacing the air compressor. Disconnection taps at the ends of cars are not required as the loose hoses are sucked onto a mounting block.
  However, the maximum pressure is limited to atmospheric pressure, so that all the equipment has to be much larger and heavier to compensate. This disadvantage is made worse at high altitude. The vacuum brake is also considerably slower acting in both applying and releasing the brake; this requires a greater level of skill and anticipation from the driver. Conversely, the vacuum brake had the advantage of gradual release long before the Westinghouse automatic air brake, which was originally only available in the direct-release form still common in freight service. A primary fault of vacuum brakes is the inability to easily find leaks. In a positive air system, a leak is quickly found due to the escaping pressurized air; discovering a vacuum leak is more difficult, although it is easier to repair when found because a piece of rubber (for example) can just be tied around the leak and will be firmly held there by the vacuum.
  Electro-vacuum brakes have also been used with considerable success on South African electric multiple unit trains. Despite requiring larger and heavier equipment as stated above, the performance of the electro-vacuum brake approached that of contemporary electro-pneumatic brakes. However, their use has not been repeated.
  See also[edit]References[edit]^"Welcome to Saskrailmuseum.org". Contact Us. September 11, 2008. Retrieved 2008-10-03. ^Westinghouse 24RL air brake manual^EMD Enginemen's Operating ManualAAR wheel dynamometer - braking: [1]Compressed Air Operations manual, ISBN 0-07-147526-5, McGraw Hill Book CompanyExternal links[edit]Information
  Patents
  US 16220 Carson Samuel: Air engine 1856-12-09US 88929 Westinghouse George: Steam power brake 1869-04-13
Michael Hastings' wife vows to ''take down whoever did this'' | Hang The Bankers | He Who Controls the Money Supply, Controls the World
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:14
  The wife of Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings, who was killed in what many people believe was a suspicious car crash last week, has vowed to ''take down whoever did this,'' according to the man who released an email in which Hastings told friends he was being harassed by the government.
  Staff Sergeant Joseph Biggs, who yesterday told Fox News that Hastings was working on ''the biggest story yet'' about the CIA before his untimely death, was responsible for releasing an email Hastings wrote 15 hours before his car crash in which the journalist stated he was ''onto a big story'' and needed ''to go off the rada[r] for a bit.''
  Biggs tweeted that the reason he released the email was because Hastings' other friends and colleagues who received it were ''too scared'' to do so.
  After the email was released, Hastings' wife Elise Jordan thanked Biggs and vowed to ''take down whoever did this,'' according to Biggs.
  Biggs, who met Hastings when he was an embedded journalist in Afghanistan in 2008, added, ''I won't let a man die in vein [sic] because I'm too scared of what will happen to me. If I sent that email to Mike he wouldn't rest, he would fight.''
  In his interview with Fox News yesterday, Biggs also said that Hastings ''drove like a grandma'' and that it was totally out of character for him to be speeding in the early hours of the morning.
  Earlier this week, former counter-terror czar under two different presidents Richard Clarke told the Huffington Post that the fatal crash of Hastings' Mercedes C250 Coupe was ''consistent with a car cyber attack.''
  Hastings had made numerous powerful enemies as a result of his exposure of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal in 2010, receiving several death threats in the process.
  According to Hastings' colleague Cenk Uygur, the writer was, ''incredibly tense and very worried, and was concerned that the government was looking in on his material,'' and also a ''nervous wreck'' in response to the surveillance of journalists revealed by the AP phone tapping scandal and the NSA PRISM scandal.
  BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith added that Hastings had told friends and family ''he was concerned that he was under investigation.''
  Another close friend who wishes to remain anonymous said that Hastings was ''very paranoid that he was being watched by the FBI.''
  SEE ALSO:- Evidence indicates journalist Michael Hastings was assassinated- Richard Clarke: Hastings accident ''consistent with a car cyber attack''- Another whistleblower dead: journalist Michael Hastings
  Source: http://www.infowars.com/michael-hastings-wife-vows-to-take-down-whoever-did-this/
ELise Jordan transcribed McChrystal tapes personally Michael Hastings' Wife Obliterates New York Times For Dismissive Obituary
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:11
  In the 24 hours since the tragic death of journalist and author Michael Hastings was first reported on Tuesday, those who knew him, worked with him, and covered his work have offered numerous remembrances of the man best known for his Polk Award-winning Rolling Stone piece, ''The Runaway General.''
  That article, which presented a dim view of the U.S. strategy in the Afghanistan war and exposed a military command structure working to actively undermine its civilian leadership, also contained several accounts of less-than-professional behavior and comments by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the International Security Assistance Force commander, the disclosure of which led to McChrystal tendering his resignation in June 2010.
  But it's an obituary in The New York Times that has sounded a discordant note amid the rest of the encomiums. And now Hastings' widow, Elise Jordan, is firing back at Times brass.
  In its obituary of Hastings, posted online Wednesday evening, the paper of record casts doubt on the accuracy of his profile of McChrystal. Here's the salient part of the obit, penned by Margalit Fox:
  An inquiry into the article by the Defense Department inspector general the next year found ''insufficient'' evidence of wrongdoing by the general, his military aides and civilian advisers. The inspector general's report also questioned the accuracy of some aspects of the article, which was repeatedly defended by Mr. Hastings and Rolling Stone.
  (Fox also identifies Hastings' piece as a ''cover story.'' It was not. Rolling Stone featured Lady Gaga on the cover of the issue containing ''The Runaway General.'')
  But the notion that McChrystal was somehow ''cleared'' in this matter is a story to which the Times has long tried to stick. When the inspector general's report was first released, the Times headlined it: "Pentagon Inquiry Into Article Clears McChrystal and Aides." It did no such thing.
  That said, it's unclear whether the Times' reaction to Hastings' story is rooted in professional jealousy or a knee-jerk defense of the establishment. The inspector general's report said it could not confirm some elements of Hastings' reporting, but that was to be expected. Hastings quotes the general and his aides making disparaging remarks about their civilian superiors. Such people would be unlikely to acknowledge having said such things, especially considering that Hastings allowed some of them to remain nameless.
  Jordan did not take kindly to the Times' remembrance, and in an email to Times' editor Jill Abramson, asked the paper correct its report before printing it in the morning paper. Abramson sent the note to Bill McDonald, obituaries editor, who rejected the request. Both emails were provided to The Huffington Post:
  Dear Jill, I was shocked and saddened to read a blatant mischaracterization of my late husband Michael Hastings's Rolling Stone story ''The Runaway General'' in his obituary.
  The obituary states: ''An inquiry into Mr. Hastings's article by the Defense Department inspector general the next year found 'insufficient' evidence of wrongdoing by the general, his military aides and civilian advisers. The inspector general's report also questioned the accuracy of some aspects of the article, which was repeatedly defended by Mr. Hastings and Rolling Stone's editors.''
  If a reporter at the Times actually would read and properly analyze the Pentagon report, they would find exactly the opposite. The report clearly states: ''In some instances, we found no witness who acknowledged making or hearing the comments as reported. In other instances, we confirmed that the general substance of an incident at issue occurred, but not in the exact context described in the article.''
  As Rolling Stone stated in response to the Pentagon report, ''The report by the Pentagon's inspector general offers no credible source '-- or indeed, any named source '-- contradicting the facts as reported in our story, 'The Runaway General.' Much of the report, in fact, confirms our reporting, noting only that the Pentagon was unable to find witnesses 'who acknowledged making or hearing the comments as reported.' This is not surprising, given that the civilian and military advisers questioned by the Pentagon knew that their careers were on the line if they admitted to making such comments.''
  Unfortunately, the mischaracterization in the obituary reflects a longstanding -'' and ongoing ''- misrepresentation of the facts in and surrounding this story by the Times. Your archived story of the Pentagon report, for example, still carries the headline: ''Pentagon Inquiry Into Article Clears McChrystal and Aides,'' even though the report did no such thing. Insufficient evidence to prosecute is not the same as ''clearing'' someone of a misdeed. It is as if a district attorney had found no witnesses to prosecute a suspected murderer '' the only other witnesses being his accomplices -'' and the Times ran a story headlined, ''DA Clears Alleged Killer.''
  I personally transcribed and have all the tape recordings of Michael's interviews during his time with McChrystal and his staff. I can personally verify that some of the most damning comments were made by McChrystal himself, and many others made by his aides in his presence were greeted with his enthusiastic approval. Michael refused to give further evidence to the Pentagon investigators, even though he could have directly attributed a host of insubordinate comments to others on the general's staff, in part because he believed that it was not the role of a journalist to open his notebooks to the military, and in part because he felt that what was needed when it came to the war in Afghanistan was not a change in personnel, but in policy.
  I trust you'll make these corrections online and before you print tomorrow's paper.
  Here's McDonald's reply:
  Dear Ms. Jordan Jill Abramson passed along your email concerning our obituary about Mr. Hastings. First, I hope you'll accept our condolences. I must say, however, that I don't believe we've mischaracterized the Defense Department report from 2011. As the report stated, ''Not all of the events at issue occurred as reported in the article. In some instances, we found no witness who acknowledged making or hearing the comments as reported. In other instances, we confirmed that the general substance of an incident at issue occurred, but not in the exact context described in the article.'' In other words, as the obit states, ''the inspector general's report '... questioned the accuracy of some aspects of the article.'' I don't know how else you could interpret the passage quoted above (''not all of the events occurred as reported,'' incidents occurred ''not in the exact context described''). I think it's also clear that it's not The Times that is questioning the article's accuracy; it was the Defense Department. We're simply reporting what it publicly said, while noting that your husband received a Polk Award for the article and was vigorously defended by Rolling Stone. So we see no reason to change the obituary. Again, I'm very sorry about your loss.
  Jordan's letter to Jill Abramson also was sent to New York Times national news editor Sam Sifton, and to New York Times public editor Margaret Sullivan.
  Also on HuffPost:
Elise Jordan-The Phillips Foundation -
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:09
  Project: Muslim Girls and Women as Equal AmericansBio:Elise Jordan is a journalist and commentator whose writing on politics and foreign policy has been published in the Atlantic.com, Newsweek/Daily Beast, Marie Claire, National Review Online, New York Post, Wall Street Journal, and the Weekly Standard. Elise is a frequent guest on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, and has also commentated on the BBC, CTV, Fox Business Network, and National Public Radio. During the Bush administration, Elise worked at the State Department as speechwriter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and in the White House Office of Presidential Speechwriting. In 2007, she joined the National Security Council, where she worked on press and communications strategy for Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. While at the White House, Elise worked for extended periods at the U.S. Embassy Baghdad and for the Commanding General's Strategic Advisory Group at the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan. She is on the board of UNICEF's Next Generation Steering Committee, an effort to promote UNICEF's humanitarian mission among under forty year old supporters, and the advisory board to the G(irls)20 Summit, a summit for young women from G20 nations and the African Union. A 2004 graduate of Yale College with a degree in history, Elise was born and raised in Holly Springs, Mississippi.
  http://www.theatlantic.com/elise-jordan/http://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity-lifestyle/articles/living/women-soldiers-afghanistan
  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013004574517323667596310.html
  http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/017/288gfbig.asp?page=2&pg=1
  http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/negotiations_only_boost_the_taliban_gFe1VDjVNQ8ujBKy81rclJ
VIDEO-Remembering Michael Hastings '' Reliable Sources - CNN.com Blogs
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:07
  Guy MontagHere's an excerpt, ''What Burns Faster, Memories or Flames,'' from the post, ''More Lies Borne Out by Facts, If Not the Truth,'' at the Feral Firefighter blog:
  ''A woman I loved [Andi Parhamovich] was killed in Baghdad in January 2007 '' al-Qaeda in Iraq took credit for it '... The memorial service with me crying over an empty coffin.''
  - Michael Hastings, ''The Operators'' (2012). . ..
  ''Twenty-five hundred degrees Fahrenheit, fire burns down'...''
  ''I find her personal writings and her diary'... I find a note that says: 'career, death card.' Another, dated January 12, says that she and I will 'take the journey home together.'''
  ''The men cannot get the doors open. They cannot get into the car'... The grenade doesn't make a sound when it is dropped'... The explosion. In less than a second, the gas tank will catch fire.''
  ''She sees her life. It all comes at once.''
  ''There is more noise; there is a loud noise. What is faster, sound or memories?''
  ''The flames are hot. It is so hot now. What burns faster, memories or flames?''
  ''She sees what happens. '... Her father'... holding a picture of her, inconsolable. She sees her mother shaking softly in church, looking at her face, framed in a picture. '... She watches her fianc(C)e writing with tears in his eyes.''
  ''It is almost over now. ''
  ''She sees the rest of her life. She sees the ring. She sees a pure white wedding dress and an aisle. She sees her parents and brothers and sisters and friends smiling proudly. She sees the children and the house. She sees the reunions in Ohio; she feels the warmth and hears the laughter and feels the love for her.''
  ''The noise continues, but she is gone.''
  - Michael Hastings, ''I Lost My Love In Baghdad'' (2008). . .
  '''... I didn't think I could love again. I feel very blessed and fortunate that Elise [Jorndan] would have me. The fact that she was able to get past that'--I feel pretty lucky.''
  - Michael Hastings, from CNN Reliable Sources interview
VIDEO-"Daniel Ellsberg May Have Been Misguided But He Was Certainly Patriotic" Zbigniew Brzezinski - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:58
BP settlement lawyer quits amidst misconduct accusations; prompts oversight - New Orleans Environmental News | Examiner.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:41
  In the seemingly unending story that is the BPDeepwater Horizon disaster of Apr. 20, 2010, the news that an attorney would have to resign and be investigated for ethical reasons should not be shocking. What is more surprising is that for once, BP -- which has long contested the billions paid off in settlement claims -- has one legitimate gripe, at least.
  The June 22 resignation of Lafayette, La.-based Lionel H. Sutton III caused Federal Judge Carl Barbier to issue an order July 2 announcing that an independent party, the FBI-trained Louis Freeh of Freeh Group International Solutions would be a "special master" on the case.
  The judge wrote in his order, re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig ''Deepwater Horizon'' in theGulf of Mexico, on April 20, 2010 in a document applying to No. 12-970, Bon Secour Fisheries, Inc., et al. v. BP Exploration & Production Inc., et al. thaton June 25,
  the Court advised counsel for BP and the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee (''PSC'') of its intent to appoint Louis Freeh of the Freeh Group International Solutions, LLC, as a Special Master in this proceeding under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53. No one objected to this appointment. By this Order, the Court formally appoints Mr. Freeh and the Freeh Group as Special Master. This appointment is made pursuant to Rule 53 and the inherent authority of the Court...
  In 2012 counsel for BP and the PSC agreed to settle claims brought by non-governmental private claimants for economic damages arising from the spill. The Court established the Deepwater Horizon Court Supervised Settlement Program (CSSP) on June 4, 2012.
  Freeh, whom the judge says has extensive expertise in both internal and external investigations and fact finding, was brought on board because,
  "recent events have arisen that led to the resignation of a staff attorney at the CSSP. An internal investigation by the CSSP is underway. However, the Court has concluded that in order to ensure the integrity of the program for the bene fit of the parties and the public, an independent, external investigation of this matter should be performed.
  The AP and many other news outlets reported in late June that Sutton had resigned. Apparently, according to WPTV, Sutton has been accused of pocketing parts of settlement payments from a NOLA firm to which he once referred claims. This was originally reported by the AP, who spoke to a BPPLC official concerning the allegations.
  The Examiner will keep you updated as news comes in.
  Read a copy of the judge's order here.
  Bold marks are those of the Examiner's.
Lionel H. Sutton Resigns From BP Gulf Oil Spill Case After Accusations Of Misconduct
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:40
  NEW ORLEANS '-- For months, BP has complained that a Louisiana attorney who is administering its settlement with tens of thousands of Gulf Coast businesses and residents has made decisions that expose the company to what could be billions of dollars in fictitious claims arising from the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
  Now the court-appointed administrator himself is investigating allegations that could provide the London-based oil giant with fodder for its argument that it hasn't gotten a fair shake from the claims-processing team.
  Lafayette-based lawyer Patrick Juneau confirmed Friday that he has opened an internal investigation of alleged misconduct by one of his staff attorneys, Lionel H. Sutton III.
  Sutton resigned Friday morning, Juneau spokesman Nick Gagliano told The Associated Press.
  A report outlining the allegations, a copy of which was obtained by the AP, accuses Sutton of "writing polices" that benefited himself and other plaintiffs' lawyers. It does not elaborate.
  Prepared by Juneau's office, the report also says a "confidential source" who contacted Juneau's security chief accused Sutton of trying to influence a claim filed by the New Orleans-based Andry Law Firm. The same firm allegedly paid Sutton a portion of settlement proceeds for claims he had referred to it before he went to work for Juneau.
  Juneau provided the report to U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier during a meeting in his chambers Thursday. The administrator has pledged to thoroughly investigate the claims involving Sutton, who started working for his office in November 2012, according to the report.
  Both BP and claimants "rightfully expect fairness and objectivity from this claims process," Juneau wrote.
  "Our goal is to operate in an efficient, transparent and fair manner. All allegations are taken seriously and investigated thoroughly."
  But in its own statement Friday, BP said only a "comprehensive and independent investigation will ensure the integrity of the claims process."
  Sutton acknowledged in an email late Thursday that he had been told he was suspended "pending an investigation of an anonymous allegation against me."
  "I have not been made aware of the substance of the allegation or the status of the investigation," Sutton wrote. "Once this is resolved, I would be happy to discuss it all with you."
  According to the report, Sutton denied the allegations when Juneau discussed them with him.
  "Sutton advised Juneau that he did not retain any interest in the claims or clients and the allegations were 100 percent incorrect," the report says.
  But the report also cites passages from a string of email exchanges in which Sutton allegedly asks about his cut of nearly $500,000 in settlement payments to an individual who had filed several seafood-related claims.
  In response to a lawyer who emailed him in January 2013 and asked him about his fee, Sutton allegedly responded, "They sent you the check for my fee. The total fee on (the claimant) was 10k (+ or -). They sent you 5 for me and kept the other 5."
  Jonathan Andry, a lawyer at the firm that allegedly paid Sutton, didn't immediately respond to messages left at his office and with his answering service.
  BP attorney Mark Holstein, in a letter to the judge Friday, said it's possible no further investigation into the matter would have happened had the company not pushed the issue with Juneau by requesting a meeting this week.
  "It is undisputed that the CSSP first became aware of the Sutton allegations at the end of May 2013, yet it appears that Mr. Sutton's emails were not locked down, searched and reviewed for almost three weeks..." he wrote, referring to the Court Supervised Settlement Program.
  Holstein said the Andry law firm and a related entity represent clients with roughly 675 claims and has its own claim worth more than $7.5 million. But the firm's own claim has been placed on hold, according to Holstein.
  The report indicates that Juneau's security head, David Welker, notified the FBI's New Orleans division about the lawyer's alleged misconduct. Welker until recently was the special agent in charge of the FBI office in New Orleans.
  An FBI spokeswoman in New Orleans declined to comment Thursday.
  Before the allegations even surfaced, BP PLC had sued to block what could be billions of dollars in settlement payouts to businesses over the spill. The company has accused Juneau of trying to rewrite the terms of the deal and asserts that he has made decisions that expose the company to fictitious losses that were never contemplated in the settlement.
  Barbier, who is overseeing the massive settlement, appointed Juneau last year and has upheld his decisions for calculating payments. BP has appealed, and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear the case in July.
  It's unclear how much influence Sutton had over the process of evaluating and paying scores of claims spawned by the deadly Deepwater Horizon disaster, which killed 11 rig workers and led to the nation's offshore oil spill.
  The report prepared by Juneau's office Thursday doesn't elaborate on the allegation from the confidential source that Sutton was "writing policies within the (settlement program) that ultimately may benefit his friends who are attorneys and himself."
  But the revelation could strengthen BP's position as it forges ahead with a high-stakes challenge to Juneau's interpretation of the settlement terms.
  "If I'm Judge Barbier, I've got to worry about this," said Howard Erichson, a Fordham University law professor specializing in complex litigation. "Any claims settlement relies on a reliable claims process. If the integrity of the claims process is challenged, the judge is going to take that very seriously."
  The spill began in April 2010 after the BP-leased drilling rig Deepwater Horizon exploded off the Louisiana coast. Roughly 200 million gallons of crude oil were released from the Macondo well a mile under the Gulf surface. Marshes, fisheries and beaches from Louisiana to Florida were fouled by the oil until a cap was placed over the blown-out well in July 2010.
  BP set up a compensation fund for individuals and businesses affected by the spill and committed $20 billion. The claims fund initially was handled by lawyer Kenneth Feinberg but Juneau took over the processing of claims after the settlement was reached last year.
  Juneau's office announced in May that it has determined more than $3 billion in claims are eligible for payment through the settlement agreement. More than 162,000 claims were filed and more than $2 billion had been paid to claimants as of May 6.
  Also on HuffPost:
Pollution Leads to Drop in Life Span in Northern China, Research Finds - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 14:58
  BEIJING '-- Southern Chinese on average have lived at least five years longer than their northern counterparts in recent decades because of the destructive health effects of pollution from the widespread use of coal in the north, according to a study released Monday by a prominent American science journal.
  The study, which appears in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was conducted by an American, an Israeli and two Chinese scholars and was based on analyses of health and pollution data collected by official Chinese sources from 1981 to 2001.
  The results provide a new assessment of the enormous cost of China's environmental degradation, which in the north is partly a result of the emissions of deadly pollutants from coal-driven energy generation. The researchers project that the 500 million Chinese who live north of the Huai River will lose 2.5 billion years of life expectancy because of outdoor air pollution.
  ''It highlights that in developing countries there's a trade-off in increasing incomes today and protecting public health and environmental quality,'' said the American member of the research team, Michael Greenstone, a professor of environmental economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ''And it highlights the fact that the public health costs are larger than we had thought.''
  Pollution from widespread coal use in northern China has led to an average decrease in life span, research shows.
  Donald Chan / Reuters
  Mr. Greenstone said in a telephone interview that another surprising result of the study was that the higher mortality rates were found across all age groups.
  The study is the first measuring this kind of impact that relies purely on data collected within China. Its conclusions are based on analyses of population groups living in areas north and south of the Huai River. The Chinese government has for years maintained a policy of free coal for boilers to generate winter heating north of the river, which runs parallel to and between the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers. That policy and the ubiquity of northern coal-fired factories have contributed to the vast gap between the coal pollutants emitted in north and south.
  Howard Frumkin, dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Washington, said a ''strong point'' of the study was its basis in the ''natural experiment'' resulting from China's disparate coal policies. ''The results are biologically plausible, and consistent with previous research,'' he said.
  For every additional 100 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter above the average pollution levels in the south, the life expectancy at birth drops by three years, the researchers found. Mr. Greenstone said that estimate could be roughly applied to other developing nations where the baseline level of pollutants was high.
  ''This adds to the growing mountain of evidence of the heavy cost of China's pollution,'' said Alex L. Wang, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, who studies Chinese environmental policies. ''Other studies have shown significant near-term harms, in the form of illness, lost work days and even risks to children beginning in utero. This study suggests that the long-term harms of coal pollution might be worse than we thought.''
  Mr. Wang said the new study could ''help to build the case for more aggressive environmental regulation'' '-- for example, a previous order by Chinese leaders to shut down coal-fired boilers in some areas could be widened, and faster shutdown times could be required.
  The health statistics recorded through the two-decade period by Chinese officials and examined by the study's researchers showed that the 5.5-year drop in life expectancy in the north was almost entirely due to a rise in deaths attributed to cardiorespiratory diseases or related health problems.
  The pollution data, also recorded by officials, indicated that the concentration of particulates north of the Huai was 184 micrograms per cubic meter higher than in the south, or 55 percent greater.
  Several recent scientific studies have revealed the toll that China's outdoor air pollution is taking on humans. This spring, new data released from the 2010 Global Burden of Disease Study revealed that such pollution contributed to 1.2 million premature deaths in 2010, or nearly 40 percent of the global total.
  Some Chinese officials have sought to quash reports that link premature deaths to pollution. According to news reports, Chinese officials excised parts of a 2007 report called ''Cost of Pollution in China'' that had concluded that 350,000 to 400,000 people die prematurely in China each year because of outdoor air pollution. The study was done by the World Bank with the help of the Chinese State Environmental Protection Administration, the precursor to the Ministry of Environmental Protection.
  This year, many Chinese have expressed fury and frustration over the surging levels of air pollution, especially in the north, which in January had record levels of particulate matter. Pollution levels have remained high this summer, and many foreigners and middle- or upper-class Chinese with children are looking to leave the country rather than tolerate the health risks.
  Mr. Greenstone said he did not have a basis for comparing pollution levels now with those during the period covered by the study, 1981 to 2001. During that time, the method of measuring particulate matter was different. Mr. Greenstone also said he did not know how pollution in northern China affected the life expectancy for people not living there for their entire lives, or for residents of northern China who made frequent or long trips to less polluted areas.
Syrian Government Claims Massive Seizure of Toxic Chemicals ''Controlled by Anti-government Forces''
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 12:07
  Source: Global Research
  The Syrian government's ambassador to the United Nations on Monday told reporters in New York that a cache of toxic chemicals, ''enough to destroy a city'' and presumably left by opposition forces, was discovered in northwestern Syria.
  Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari said the cache included about 280 containers filled with various toxic substances, such as ethylene glycol, ethanolamine, diethanolamine and triethanolamine.
  ''This is enough to destroy a whole city, if not the whole country,'' Ja'afari said, without mentioning the date when the discovery was made. ''At the moment, an investigation is underway with regard to this batch of chemical weapons.''
  All the substances mentioned by Ja'afari are indeed harmful for humans, but are extensively used in various industrial and consumer products. None of them is considered a chemical weapon.
  The Syrian ambassador said the cache was ''controlled and supervised by armed anti-government groups.''
  Both sides in the ongoing Syrian civil war have traded allegations regarding chemical weapons in recent months, with government officials accusing opposition forces of using chemical weapons against Assad's military in a March attack outside of the northern city of Aleppo.
  The Syrian diplomat invited a UN commission investigating the use of chemical weapons in Syria and the organization's high representative for disarmament affairs, Angela Kane, to visit his country with another inspection.
  However, he said, inspections would only be possible in Aleppo, but not in other Syrian regions as previously proposed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.
  Some 93,000 people are believed to have died since fighting broke out between Syrian government forces and rebels in March 2011, according to the latest UN figures.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
We interrupt this program to warn the Emergency Alert System is hackable | Ars Technica
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 11:47
  The US Emergency Alert System, which interrupts live TV and radio broadcasts with information about national emergencies in progress, is vulnerable to attacks that allow hackers to remotely disseminate bogus reports and tamper with gear, security researchers warned.
  The remote takeover vulnerability affects the DASDEC-I and DASDEC-II application servers made by a company called Digital Alert Systems. It stems from the a recent firmware update that mistakenly included the private secure shell (SSH) key, according to an advisory published Monday by researchers from security firm IOActive. Administrators use such keys to remotely log in to a server to gain unfettered "root" access. The publication of the key makes it trivial for hackers to gain unauthorized access on Digital Alert System appliances that run default settings on older firmware.
  "An attacker who gains control of one or more DASDEC systems can disrupt these stations' ability to transmit and could disseminate false emergency information over a large geographic area," the IOActive advisory warned. "In addition, depending on the configuration of this and other devices, these messages could be forwarded and mirrored by other DASDEC systems."
  Other advisories warning of the vulnerability were published here and here by the Industry Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team and the US CERT. The US CERT advisory, which also warns against vulnerabilities in the One-Net E189 Emergency Alert System device sold by Digital Alert Systems parent company Monroe Electronics, was published two weeks ago.
  The warnings come five months after hackers took over the emergency alert system of a Montana TV station and broadcast a bogus emergency bulletin warning TV viewers of an imminent zombie apocalypse. Devices used by stations in Michigan, California, Tennessee, and New Mexico were also reportedly commandeered. "Civil authorities in your area have reported that the bodies of the dead are rising from the grave and attacking the living," at least one of the prank messages said. The advisories from IOActive and the CERT groups didn't say if the February attacks were carried out by exploiting the SSH key vulnerability.
  The Emergency Alerting System is designed to enable the US president to deliver speeches to the entire country within 10 minutes of a disaster occurring. Application servers such as the DASDEC-I and DASDEC-II interrupt regular programming broadcast by TV and radio stations and relay an emergency message, which is preceded and followed by alert tones. In addition to tampering with the delivery of legitimate emergency messages, attackers who use the SSH key to log in to vulnerable systems could make unauthorized changes to the server and glean potentially sensitive configure information that could lead to additional hacks.
  Stations that use vulnerable gear should upgrade to version 2.0-2, which is available by sending an e-mail to suport@digitalalertsystems.com.
Lac-Megantic, Quebec Train Incident '-- Roadwolf's Blog
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 11:46
  I have been loosely following this story over the past few days. And I have largely declined comment, until I gathered the information. As it turns out, it seems that the crew left the train parked, in neutral and removed the reverser handle, which is basically the key to the train. With this handle removed the train could not of been placed into powered movement. These keys are assigned to train crews when they are assigned their locomotive, and if they leave the train they are supposed to bring the reverser handle with them.
  The train may remain running however, and railroads rarely will turn off large diesels which are idle unless they are forced to by environmental regulations. It just will not be able to be put in gear, so to speak.
  Railroad air breaks operate like truck breaks. You apply pressure to release them. This means that this article here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100871020 is full of bullshit. Shutting down a locomotive would not release the breaks. If anything it may be more likely to release the air pressure, and hold the breaks on.
  The only way I could see the fire crews, possibly causing the train to roll, would be to manipulate the trains break controls to release the breaks while the engine was still on. Waiting a while for the engine to pressurize the break line, and then decouple the trainline air break hose from the cars, before shutting the engine down (if in-fact this is what they did). That way the engine shuts down and bleeds its breaks, but the cars would remain pressurized (they can remain pressurized when uncoupled) with no breaks. The engines breaks alone wouldn't of been able to hold a long train stationary on a grade.
  Alternatively; Assuming the fire crew did not shut the engine down (or shut down only one engine of a multi-engine set), and instead fumbled around inside the train cab, not understanding what the controls did; a firefighter could of inadvertently released the trains breaks without realizing it. The train wouldn't of started to show signs of movement for about a minute or so as it pressurized the line. Also note, they may have shut down the engine that was on fire, however the other engines must of been still running. The trainline air is common to the whole train, and if an engine is off, the other engines can still pressurize it.
  That is quite a mistake for a fire crew to accomplish. Another common theory is that it was more like something a 'terrorist' would do.
  Adam Curry (of No Agenda) has a theory about pipelines. Specifically that pipelines in the mid-east are the cause of much of the turmoil which is going on over there. Everyone wants to be in control of the flow of fuel. And pipelines are easy enough to target. Well, as it seems, so are freight trains.
  However, This incident smells like a 'terrorist' related incident. Perhaps not a typical one however. I wouldn't expect Al Queda to be claiming responsibility for it anytime soon. But I believe that this is perhaps either politically motivated or corporate warfare. In either case I believe it could possibly be being masked as an accident.
  It is interesting to note that I received my August 2013 issue of Trains magazine in the mail today, and on page 6, was a lengthy article proclaiming the safety and convenience of transporting crude oil by rail. The article touts rails dominance in transporting crude oil, and outlines the Keystone XL proponents as 'attacking' the railroads. The article also makes light of Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper's push for the Keystone XL pipeline, and his general distaste with transporting crude oil by rail. The article itself does not mention the incident in Quebec, and I am sure it was printed and mailed out before the incident took place. Kinda spooky how the article was placed in print just before this happened.
  Crude oil is also thick and needs to be heated by steam in order to flow as a fluid. These insulated tank cares are fitted with steam pipes which can be hooked to a steam generator at the point of delivery to warm up the crude. But without this action, the crude remains in a thick tar-like state inside the car.
  I am unsure about the properties of crude oil. I have never seen it myself, or played with it. But I do know that it has a lot of impurities which need to be refined out in order for it to become useful. I know if you throw a match into diesel, or oil, or thicker, less refined oil products, they tend not to ignite, and rather extinguish the flame. I imagine the same is true for crude oil. So how did this explode into a blaze of fire?
  This is sad because if this is true, this could raise the security around rail travel more then it is, and ruin the hobby of railfanning for good. Coincidentally, in the same issue of Trains Magazine, on page 10, there is a article about terrorism, railfans and the railroads.
  The rail transport industry is always under attack somehow, and they really aren't the multi-billion dollar ventures that other corporations are. That being said, they provide the cleanest and most convenient method for transporting bulk loads long distances. They are also union based, and generally care about their employees and safety. They can't afford not to.
  It will be interesting to see what the 'official' findings come up with, but to me, it looks quite suspicious.
  Tags: News // Add Comment >>
Quebec rail tragedy shows need for oil pipelines | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 11:14
  Wynne's wind fiasco
  There's a simple way to understand the real story of electricity generation in Ontario '-- as opposed to the bafflegab coming from Premier Kathleen Wynne and the Liberals.
  0Admired, respected, trusted!
  Those of us lucky enough to live in Canada shouldn't be surprised that for the third year in a row, our home and native land has been judged the world's most reputable country.
  0See more from Lorrie Goldstein >>
AP Interview: Ex-FBI Chief on Risk of Cyber Terror - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 09 Jul 2013 03:13
  DUBLIN '-- United States intelligence officials must do a better job analyzing the mountains of global internet, telephone and financial data they already collect to thwart the cyber terrorists of tomorrow, according to former FBI director Louis Freeh.
  Speaking to The Associated Press ahead of the Global Intelligence Forum starting Monday in Ireland, Freeh said hackers seeking to take control of, or take down, key pieces of U.S. infrastructure could do more damage than the attackers of 9/11. He said computer systems controlling power plants, the navigation of aircraft and ships, and even the switching of street lights could be hijacked to gridlock societies and kill large groups of people.
  "People traditionally think of this threat as somebody stealing their identity or their credit card number, or making it inconvenient to go to the ATM (cash machine). That's a very benign view of the potential for what cyber terrorism really is," Freeh said.
  "You could manipulate transportation systems, aviation guidance systems, highway safety systems, maritime operations systems. You could shut down an energy system in the northeast U.S. in the middle of winter. The potential for mass destruction in terms of life and property is really only limited by (the attackers') access and success in penetrating and hijacking these networks," he said.
  Freeh said people shouldn't be lulled into complacency just because hackers' attacks on government and business targets to date hadn't directly killed anybody.
  "There's a lot of technology and a lot of ability out there, particularly with state actors," he said, referring to other governments' cyber-spying operations including in China, which U.S. authorities previously have blamed for stealing American corporate trade secrets. "We went through the Cold War without anybody using a nuclear bomb, but that didn't mean the capability and threat weren't there."
  Freeh, 63, directed the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 1993 to 2001, leaving just before the al-Qaida attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. In the years since he's become a top private investigator, most recently publishing the report into the cover-up of child abuse in the Penn State University football program. Last week he was appointed to oversee a probe into alleged corruption and malpractice in the payouts of billions in compensation from BP's 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
  He said his keynote speech Monday to an annual seminar organized by Mercyhurst University's Institute for Intelligence Studies would focus on how intelligence and law-enforcement agencies need to use the internet to identify threats '-- and keep their own secrets secure. The four-day conference brings together intelligence officials worldwide, with a focus this year on combating internet-based crime.
  It takes place against the backdrop of continuing revelations from former U.S. National Security Agency analyst Edward Snowden, who is believed still to be holed up in Moscow's airport three weeks after the U.S. Justice Department charged him with espionage and theft of government property.
  Freeh questioned Snowden's description as a whistleblower '-- and why the NSA ever gave Snowden such access to its secrets without effective supervision.
  He said Snowden should "come to a forum or an arena where he can raise his whistleblower defense." He said the NSA, like other U.S. government agencies, has an internal reporting process for whistleblowers alleging wrongdoing but Snowden appears not to have used this.
  "He's said publicly that he was witnessing and participating at least indirectly in what he thought was a mass violation of U.S. rights, constitutional rights, human rights, and so was forced to publicly disclose this. It's just not accurate. It's Hollywood-esque and may be romantic for somebody to think: My God, this guy had no choice. But the reality is he had plenty of options and choices," Freeh said.
  He said the NSA gave Snowden system-wide access with "the ability to extract and copy top-secret documents detailing secured and elaborate programs." He noted that a recent PricewaterhouseCoopers survey found that employee insiders committed around a third of all breaches of sensitive data.
  And that, he said, was the biggest issue for government agencies and corporations: What should be accessible on its own internal intranet connections, and who should be cleared to see it?
  As things stand now, he said, "too many people have too much access" to sensitive documents in companies and government agencies. He suggested that a group's most confidential information might have to be left without an electronic fingerprint at all and be kept, old school, like the Coca-Cola company's recipe for its soft drinks once was under lock and key in a safe.
  But he said, conversely, everyone in the 21st century should assume that every time we click our keyboard, or thumb our smart phone, it's being put blindly into multiple databases ranging from internet aggregators to NSA hard drives.
  For law enforcement officials, he said, the challenge was whether this tsunami of information could be mined effectively before an attack. While he described U.S. collection of data as "very robust," its analysis and use in detecting crimes was not.
  "In the internet world we live in, all of our data is collected. I'm going to walk around with my cell phone today and my carrier is going to know my location on a minute-by-minute basis," he said. "So it's not really the data. It's how you protect it, how you manage it, and what people's expectations are for its utilization."
  ___
  Online:
  Mercyhurst event, http://www.globalintelligenceforum.com/
UPDATE 2-Quebec firemen cut power to runaway train's brakes, railway says
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 23:16
  By: Richard Valdmanis and P.J. Huffstutter
  (Releads with comments by railway chairman)
  LAC-MEGANTIC, Quebec, CHICAGO, July 8 (Reuters) - Airbrakes that would have prevented the Quebec train disaster failed because they were powered by an engine that was shut down by firefighters as they dealt with a fire shortly before the calamity occurred, the head of the railway that operated the train said on Monday.
  The runaway oil tanker train derailed in Lac-Megantic shortly after one o'clock in the morning on Saturday, exploding in a deadly ball of flames and killing at least five people, with another 40 still missing and feared dead.
  The train had been parked at a siding on a slope near the town of Nantes, which is 12 km (8 miles) west of Lac-Megantic. The volunteer Nantes fire service was called out late on Friday night to deal with an engine fire on one of the train's locomotives.
  Nantes Fire Chief Patrick Lambert told Reuters the crew had switched off the engine as they extinguished a "good-sized" blaze in the engine, probably caused by a fuel or oil line break in the engine.
  The problem was that the engine had been left on by the train's engineer to maintain pressure in the air brakes, Ed Burkhardt, chairman of Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway (MMA), said in an interview. As the pressure gradually "leaked off", the air brakes failed and the train began to slide downhill, he said.
  The fire service said it contacted a local MMA dispatcher in Farnham, Quebec, after the blaze was out. "We told them what we did and how we did it," Lambert said.
  Asked whether there had been any discussion about the brakes, he replied: "There was no discussion of the brakes at that time. We were there for the train fire. As for the inspection of the train after the fact, that was up to them."
  It was not immediately clear what the MMA dispatcher did after speaking with the fire service. Burkhardt said the fire service should have also tried to contact the train's operator, who was staying at a nearby hotel.
  "If the engine was shut off, someone should have made a report to the local railroad about that," he said.
  Andre Gendron, 38, lives on a wooded property next to the rail yard in Nantes. He said he was burning a campfire outside his trailer on Friday night when he heard the fire trucks.
  "About five minutes after the firemen left, I felt the vibration of a train moving down the track. I then saw the train move by without its lights on," Gendron told Reuters.
  "I found it strange its lights weren't on and thought it was an electrical problem on board. It wasn't long after that I heard the explosion. I could see the light from the fires in Lac Megantic."
  The center of Lac-Megantic, a lakeside town of 6,000 near the border with Maine, was still cordoned off on Monday morning. One of the destroyed buildings was a music bar popular with young people, and witnesses reported fleeing the area around the building as the heat and flames closed in.
  Police said they had been unable to examine much of the town center overnight because the area was still too dangerous. Dozens of rail tanker wagons, some of them destroyed, were sprawled around the accident site.
  "It's an area that is still extremely risky... The fire service decided they could not allow us to go there for security reasons. We'll see what we can do today," police spokesman Benoit Richard told reporters on Monday.
  Canadian crash investigators said they will look at the two sets of brakes on the train, the airbrakes and the handbrakes, as they probe what could turn out to be Canada's deadliest rail accident since 1956.
  Burkhardt said that after the pressure leaked out of the airbrakes, the handbrakes would not have been strong enough to keep the train in place.
  Montreal Maine & Atlantic is one of many North American railroads that have vastly stepped up shipments of crude oil as pipelines from North Dakota and from oil-producing regions in Western Canada fill to capacity, and the accident is bound to raise concern about the practice of transporting oil by rail.
  (Additional reporting by Julie Gordon in Lac-Megantic; Writing by David Ljunggren and Janet Guttsman; Editing by Peter Galloway)
  LAC-MEGANTIC, Quebec, CHICAGO, July 8- Airbrakes that would have prevented the Quebec train disaster failed because they were powered by an engine that was shut down by firefighters as they dealt with a fire shortly before the calamity occurred, the head of the railway that operated the train said on Monday.
Perry Will Not Seek Re-election as Texas Governor - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:30
  SAN ANTONIO, Tex. '-- Rick Perry, the longest-serving governor of Texas and an unsuccessful Republican presidential candidate in 2012, announced that he would not seek another term in Austin but would instead ''pray and reflect and work to determine my own future path.''
  ''The time has come to pass on the mantle of leadership,'' Mr. Perry told a crowd of supporters in a cavernous heavy equipment dealership here. ''Today I am announcing I will not seek re-election as governor of Texas.''
  As for what happens after his term is over in 18 months, he said he would remain focused on the state. He made no mention of a presidential run in 2016, but instead extolled the advances Texas had made under his leadership since 2000.
  Standing on a temporary dais against a backdrop of American and Texas flags, Mr. Perry said, ''It's been an improbable journey that has taken me from a farm in this place called Paint Creek, Texas, to the governor's office, and each day has been an honor.''
  He faced a friendly crowd of longtime supporters and employees of Holt Cat, a Caterpillar dealership. The owner, Peter Holt, also owns the San Antonio Spurs and is a major contributor to Mr. Perry's campaigns.
  ''We have created the strongest economy in the nation,'' Mr. Perry told the crowd, through encouraging growth, balancing budgets and overhauling the tort system.
  ''We have stood strong against unwise policies from Washington that would break the bank,'' he said. ''We have better protected the right to life. We have protected the sanctity of marriage.''
  Mr. Perry said he was proudest of the jobs created in the state while he has been governor, claiming 1.6 million new positions.
  ''I will truly miss serving in this capacity,'' he said, ''because it is the greatest job in modern politics.''
  Mr. Perry assumed the governorship after George W. Bush left office to become president; he was then elected to three full terms.
  He withdrew from the 2012 presidential race after a lackluster primary showing. But he recently regained the national stage when he squared off with Democrats in the State Senate who opposed a stringent anti-abortion bill, which seems headed for easy passage in the Republican-controlled Legislature.
  In particular, he took on Senator Wendy Davis, a Fort Worth Democrat, after her 11-hour filibuster halted the bill's progress, at least temporarily.
  He also spoke out against her directly at a National Right to Life convention in Texas, suggesting that Ms. Davis especially should understand that ''every life matters.'' He later explained to reporters that she had been a teen mother, and that her own mother had been a single mother and might have considered abortion.
  ''What if her mom had said, 'I just can't do this, I don't want to do this'?'' Mr. Perry said. The comments angered fans of Ms. Davis, who saw the attack as unstatesmanlike and offensive.
  The anti-abortion bill is almost certain to pass during a special legislative session called by Mr. Perry. Ms. Davis has said she will not filibuster again, and with weeks before the end of the session, a filibuster would not be humanly possible in any case.
  In an interview on ''Fox News Sunday,'' Mr. Perry predicted, ''This is going to pass.'' He added, ''I'm pretty good at counting votes.''
  He also criticized the outburst in the Senate gallery the night of Ms. Davis's filibuster, which delayed the vote on the bill until after the midnight deadline. ''Never in the history of Texas have they seen that kind of a mob rule,'' he said.
  As for his previous comments about Ms. Davis, he said they ''were meant to be a compliment for what she's accomplished in her life.''
  Outside Texas, Americans mainly remember Mr. Perry for his startling stumble as a presidential candidate in the 2012 primaries, culminating in his inability in a major debate to name the third of three federal agencies he would eliminate if elected '-- and then saying, after an agonizingly long pause, ''oops.''
Hawaii is a spot for sun, surf _ and spies
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:29
  HONOLULU (AP) '-- Clandestine agents. Foreign spies. Intelligence. Hawaii is better known for sunbathing on the beach or surfing than high-stakes sleuthing.
  But the case of a 59-year-old civilian defense contractor accused of giving military secrets to his much younger Chinese girlfriend is a reminder of the state's little-known identity as a prime target for espionage. A high concentration of important military commands means there's a great deal of information on the islands that potential adversaries want to know.
  Case in point: Most of the FBI's resources in Hawaii are concentrated on counterintelligence '-- not drug trafficking or terrorism.
  "One of the FBI's priorities in Hawaii is keeping America's secrets safe from agents of foreign powers," said Tom Simon, a special agent in Honolulu. "With the amount of military and classified material in Hawaii, it remains a top priority for the FBI."
  It helps that the state, population 1.4 million, isn't a hotbed of violent crime. That allows agents to focus much of their efforts on thwarting spooks.
  The case against Benjamin Bishop, a defense contractor working for the U.S. Pacific Command when he was arrested March 15, offers a glimpse of the information potential adversaries might be looking for.
  Bishop knows U.S. secrets on countering weapons of mass destruction, nuclear deterrence and ballistic missile defense, according to a declaration filed in court by Maj. Gen. Anthony Crutchfield, the Pacific Command's chief of staff.
  More recently, Bishop worked on cyber security and is familiar with how the U.S. would counter adversaries in electronic warfare, air combat, undersea warfare, energy security and cyberspace, the declaration says.
  Investigators say Bishop gave his girlfriend '-- a 27-year-old graduate student he met at an international military conference in Hawaii'-- classified information on nuclear weapons, war plans and missile defense.
  Bishop hasn't been charged with outright espionage, which the law defines as giving national security secrets to someone for the purpose of helping a foreign government or harming the United States. But he has been charged with two violations of the Espionage Act: communicating defense secrets to someone not entitled to receive it and unlawful retention of defense documents.
  Prosecutors haven't said they believe the girlfriend is working for the Chinese government or that she's given anything she learned from Bishop to anyone else. But an FBI affidavit filed in support of the charges speculates she may have attended the military conference specifically to target people like Bishop who work with classified information.
  Bishop has not yet entered a plea, but his lawyer says his client wouldn't do anything to harm the U.S. The attorney, Birney Bervar, says the case isn't about espionage but about two people in love.
  Spying isn't new to Hawaii.
  In the months before the attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, a Japanese vice consul in Honolulu spent much of his time monitoring and reporting back home on the comings and goings of the U.S. Navy. Takeo Yoshikawa is said to have favored the view of Pearl Harbor he would get at a tea house '-- still in business today as the Natsunoya restaurant '-- in a hilly neighborhood overlooking the naval base.
  The Soviet Union kept an intelligence collecting ship off the coast of Oahu during the Cold War to monitor U.S. military communications, said Ralph Cossa, president of Pacific Forum Center for Strategic and International Studies.
  Today, the FBI says countries from the Asia-Pacific region are the ones most likely to attempt to gather intelligence about U.S. military operations in Hawaii.
  China would have the biggest interest, followed by Russia, Cossa said. North Korea would be interested but doesn't have as many resources.
  Their targets? Pacific Command is the U.S. military's headquarters for the Asia-Pacific region. The Navy, Air Force, Army and Marine Corps also each have their own headquarters for the Pacific on Oahu. The National Security Agency keeps an intelligence center tucked away in central Oahu.
  There's a major missile defense testing site on Kauai. A high-powered missile defense radar capable of tracking a baseball-sized object 2,500 miles away '-- called the Sea-Based X-band Radar '-- visits Pearl Harbor regularly.
  These days, computer hacking and cyber espionage '-- the area Bishop was working in most recently '-- are major spying methods.
  Eyes and ears are useful too, whether they belong to undercover agents or to businessmen, tourists and students who may share what they see with their governments.
  Honolulu has nearly 1 million residents, and the state is a mecca for sun-seeking tourists from around the world. This makes Hawaii an easier place for intelligence gatherers to blend in than, say, remote parts of Wyoming where the U.S. keeps ballistic missiles.
  Pressure to gather intelligence from the islands is likely growing as the Obama administration places a greater emphasis on the region with the military's "pivot" to the Pacific. Cossa said the policy "shines a big target" on Hawaii.
  "I'm sure every intel guy in China has been told 'Get more details. What does it really mean?,'" said Cossa, who spent 26 years in the Air Force, including three tours at Pacific Command.
  The reconnaissance goes both ways. On the other side of the Pacific Ocean, the U.S. is eager to gather its own intelligence on new ships, planes and other equipment China is adding to its military.
  Cossa said allegations like those against Bishop make for flashy headlines but account for a small percentage of the spying going on.
  Most of the espionage involves people trying to listen to phone conversations and hack into email and computers, he said. It's easier for people to steal information this way and it's harder to detect.
  "Obviously if you're working with classified information in the military, in Hawaii, you should expect somebody is trying to listen, someone is trying to copy," Cossa said.
Obama Supporters Sign Petition to Repeal the BILL OF RIGHTS to Support the President - YouTube. (God help us)
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: pg.chrys news feed
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:19
Egypt interim leader sets poll plan
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Middle East
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:18
  8 July 2013Last updated at17:52 ETEgypt's interim leader has outlined his timetable for new elections, amid continuing unrest in the country.
  Adly Mansour's decree says a panel to amend the constitution must be formed within 15 days and general elections could then be held by February.
  This comes as at least 51 people were killed in the capital Cairo.
  The Muslim Brotherhood says its members were fired on at a sit-in for ousted President Mohammad Morsi. The army says it responded to an armed provocation.
  Mr Morsi, an Islamist and Egypt's first freely elected leader, was removed from office by the army last week after mass protests.
  His supporters accuse the military of staging a coup, but his opponents say the move is the continuation of the revolution that ousted President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
Lone Wolf Trading Company-LA Times - Police chief killed with rifle lost in ATF gun-tracking program
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:15
  LA Times Loading...
  The page cannot be loaded because you are currently offline. Please check your internet connection and try again, or go back to the previous page.
  The page you requested was not found.
VIDEO-himmi Bloomberg bows down to the Islamofascists AGAIN! | BARE NAKED ISLAM
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:10
  I still have a hard time with believing that all the people who rightfully resist the filthy, headbanging, butt wavind muslims still find it impossible to identify with anything remotely Jewish. It's like they're afraid they might catch something they have to scratch.We have one of the premier, NO compromise, pro-gun organizations anywhere in the world, but it is correctly named ''JEWS For The Preservation of Firearm Ownership'', or JPFO. All across the country, big ol' wool shirted guys are ignoring it because they fear somebody might think they're Jewish. Whata buncha wimps !And in New York, the melon headed electorate keep electing worthless, self serving Jews like Schumer, but would hide in a storaga locker if anyone sugessted they voted for the waste just because he was a Jew. Go figure !Now the sanity challenged voters of the Big Apple have allowed this laughingstock, law breaking, supreme egotist munchkin Bloomberg, to buy himself the mayors office and make a fool of himself and them on a National basis by supporting terrorist aiding, non assimilating, welfare draining,butt waving, head banging scabs on society muslims to grossly insult all Jews and to shatter the normal noise of the city with their ungodly yodeling five times a day. I'm not Jewish, but I know what a ''petzil'' is and Bloombrg is one !
Gov. Walker Signs Sneak Attack On Wisconsin Abortion Rights | Crooks and Liars
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:53
  So you may have heard by now that Scott Walker signed a sneak attack on Wisconsin abortion rights. It's clear that this wave of stealth legislative assaults on abortion is being driven by ALEC's corporate agenda, and it doesn't have a damned thing to do with "protecting the unborn." It's about keeping people poor, desperate and docile. It's about cheap, disposable labor -- which is what Republicans and their corporate sponsors always want, and of course they're shameless enough to manipulate people into thinking they have some noble purpose behind it. Via the Maddow blog:
  Every conceivable element of this story is offensive.
  Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed into law on Friday new abortion restrictions that opponents said could lead to the closing of two of the state's four abortion clinics. [...]The law requires women to undergo an ultrasound before they get an abortion and doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinics.
  So, in addition to forcing two of the state's four abortion providers to shut down, Walker will now require women undergo a medically unnecessary procedure before exercising their constitutional rights. What if a woman doesn't want the ultrasound? Too bad; her governor is imposing one on her anyway. What if her physician says there's no need for an ultrasound? It doesn't matter; Republican politicians in Wisconsin have decided to put themselves between patients and their doctors.
  And of course, insurance companies won't cover an ultrasound unless it's medically indicated, so the cost falls fully on the patient, who probably can't afford it! (If she could afford it, she'd fly to a sane state for her abortion.)
  This, we're told, is the result of sensible policymaking from advocates of limited government.
  But the way in which the Wisconsin governor signed this legislation into law adds insult to injury (in this case, almost literally). Scott Walker could have approved the measure in any number of ways, but he chose to do so privately, over the course of a holiday weekend, when the governor apparently thought it'd generate less attention.
  There is, in other words, a degree of cowardice here -- if Walker thought he was doing the right thing, signing a measure with broad support into law, he wouldn't have been reduced to hiding.
Decorated, wounded Marine treated 'shamefully' by security screeners | Army Times | armytimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:45
  Wearing the uniform of the Few and Proud doesn't rate preferential treatment from the Transportation Security Administration or California capitol security officers, retired Marine Cpl. Nathan Kemnitz recently found.
  Kemnitz, severely injured in 2004 in a roadside bomb attack in Fallujah, has limited use of his right arm and cannot lift it above his head. So when security guards at the state capitol building in Sacramento, Calif., asked him to remove his dress blue blouse ''because he was wearing too much metal,'' and TSA asked him to raise his arms above his head for the full-body scanner at Sacramento International Airport, he could not comply.
  ''My right arm doesn't work. It's a lot of hassle for me to do that,'' Kemntiz said.
  At the state capitol, the Marine's refusal to remove his uniform top grew into a heated exchange between Kemnitz, a friend who was accompanying him and security officers.
  At the airport, bystanders stared as the TSA security screener looked under Kemnitz's medals, ran his hands under the Marine's waistband and swabbed his shoes for explosives.
  ''What does a uniform and heroism represent if our own citizens '-- in this case employees of the TSA and security personnel '-- have no regard for them?'' wrote Kemnitz's escort, Patricia Martin, to Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki following the incidents.
  Martin took photos and disseminated them to family, friends and members of the media.
  ''I feel so strongly that you need to know just how shamefully even a Purple Heart recipient/disabled veteran can be treated by some TSA and security employees,'' she said.
  Kemnitz said after the incidents that he was not as annoyed with TSA officers as he was with a security screener at the California state capitol, whom he described as rude and unapologetic.
  Kemnitz was visiting the building to be honored as his legislative district's veteran of the year.
  ''At some places I'm treated like royalty and at some like a terrorist. There's got to be something in the middle,'' he said.
  The incident was not the first to spark similar outrage. In January, NBC journalist Luke Russert tweeted his irritation at an enhanced security screening at Reagan National Airport of a troop wearing a prosthetic.
  ''Making Wounded Warriors with prosthetic legs go through extra explosives screening. #fail,'' Russert wrote.
  In March, bystanders notified Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., about what they perceived to be maltreatment of a double amputee by TSA screeners at Phoenix's Sky Harbor Airport.
  Concurrent with that incident, TSA announced it had changed its rules to eliminate a requirement that injured troops remove their shoes, jackets or hats. But to receive the expedited service, TSA asks affected personnel to call the agency's Military Severely Injured Joint Service Operations Center before traveling.
  TSA also offers escorted ''curb-to-gate service'' for injured or ill personnel who request it as well as the TSA Pre program to service members with a military common access card at four airports: Charlotte Douglas International Airport in North Carolina, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, and Washington Dulles International Airport.
  The Senate Sergeant-At-Arms is responsible for security screenings at the California capitol building. No one was available Friday to speak with the media regarding the incident.
Obama on signing statements and fisa
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:33
  1. Does the president have inherent powers under the Constitution to conduct surveillance for national security purposes without judicial warrants, regardless of federal statutes?
  The Supreme Court has never held that the president has such powers. As president, I will follow existing law, and when it comes to U.S. citizens and residents, I will only authorize surveillance for national security purposes consistent with FISA and other federal statutes.
  2. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)
  The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
  As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.
  As for the specific question about bombing suspected nuclear sites, I recently introduced S.J. Res. 23, which states in part that ''any offensive military action taken by the United States against Iran must be explicitly authorized by Congress.'' The recent NIE tells us that Iran in 2003 halted its effort to design a nuclear weapon. While this does not mean that Iran is no longer a threat to the United States or its allies, it does give us time to conduct aggressive and principled personal diplomacy aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
  3. Does the Constitution empower the president to disregard a congressional statute limiting the deployment of troops -- either by capping the number of troops that may be deployed to a particular country or by setting minimum home-stays between deployments? In other words, is that level of deployment management beyond the constitutional power of Congress to regulate?
  No, the President does not have that power. To date, several Congresses have imposed limitations on the number of US troops deployed in a given situation. As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law.
  4. Under what circumstances, if any, would you sign a bill into law but also issue a signing statement reserving a constitutional right to bypass the law?
  Signing statements have been used by presidents of both parties, dating back to Andrew Jackson. While it is legitimate for a president to issue a signing statement to clarify his understanding of ambiguous provisions of statutes and to explain his view of how he intends to faithfully execute the law, it is a clear abuse of power to use such statements as a license to evade laws that the president does not like or as an end-run around provisions designed to foster accountability.
  I will not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law. The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation. The fact that President Bush has issued signing statements to challenge over 1100 laws '' more than any president in history '' is a clear abuse of this prerogative. No one doubts that it is appropriate to use signing statements to protect a president's constitutional prerogatives; unfortunately, the Bush Administration has gone much further than that.
  5. Does the Constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants?
  No. I reject the Bush Administration's claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain U.S. citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants.
  6. Does executive privilege cover testimony or documents about decision-making within the executive branch not involving confidential advice communicated to the president himself?
  With respect to the ''core'' of executive privilege, the Supreme Court has not resolved this question, and reasonable people have debated it. My view is that executive privilege generally depends on the involvement of the President and the White House.
  7. If Congress defines a specific interrogation technique as prohibited under all circumstances, does the president's authority as commander in chief ever permit him to instruct his subordinates to employ that technique despite the statute?
  No. The President is not above the law, and the Commander-in-Chief power does not entitle him to use techniques that Congress has specifically banned as torture. We must send a message to the world that America is a nation of laws, and a nation that stands against torture. As President I will abide by statutory prohibitions, and have the Army Field Manual govern interrogation techniques for all United States Government personnel and contractors.
  8. Under what circumstances, if any, is the president, when operating overseas as commander-in-chief, free to disregard international human rights treaties that the US Senate has ratified?
  It is illegal and unwise for the President to disregard international human rights treaties that have been ratified by the United States Senate, including and especially the Geneva Conventions. The Commander-in-Chief power does not allow the President to defy those treaties.
  9. Do you agree or disagree with the statement made by former Attorney General Gonzales in January 2007 that nothing in the Constitution confers an affirmative right to habeas corpus, separate from any statutory habeas rights Congress might grant or take away?
  Disagree strongly.
  10. Is there any executive power the Bush administration has claimed or exercised that you think is unconstitutional? Anything you think is simply a bad idea?
  First and foremost, I agree with the Supreme Court's several decisions rejecting the extreme arguments of the Bush Administration, most importantly in the Hamdi and Hamdan cases. I also reject the view, suggested in memoranda by the Department of Justice, that the President may do whatever he deems necessary to protect national security, and that he may torture people in defiance of congressional enactments. In my view, torture is unconstitutional, and certain enhanced interrogation techniques like ''waterboarding'' clearly constitute torture. And as noted, I reject the use of signing statements to make extreme and implausible claims of presidential authority.
  Some further points:
  The detention of American citizens, without access to counsel, fair procedure, or pursuant to judicial authorization, as enemy combatants is unconstitutional.
  Warrantless surveillance of American citizens, in defiance of FISA, is unlawful and unconstitutional.
  The violation of international treaties that have been ratified by the Senate, specifically the Geneva Conventions, was illegal (as the Supreme Court held) and a bad idea.
  The creation of military commissions, without congressional authorization, was unlawful (as the Supreme Court held) and a bad idea.
  I believe the Administration's use of executive authority to over-classify information is a bad idea. We need to restore the balance between the necessarily secret and the necessity of openness in our democracy '' which is why I have called for a National Declassification Center.
  11. Who are your campaign's advisers for legal issues?
  Laurence Tribe, Professor of Law, Harvard University
  Cass Sunstein, Professor of Law, University of Chicago
  Jeh C. Johnson, former General Counsel of Department of the Air Force (1998-2001)
  Gregory Craig, former Assistant to the President and Special Counsel (1998-1999), former Director of Policy Planning for U.S. Department of State (1997-1998)
  12. Do you think it is important for all would-be presidents to answer questions like these before voters decide which one to entrust with the powers of the presidency? What would you say about any rival candidate who refuses to answer such questions?
  Yes, these are essential questions that all the candidates should answer. Any President takes an oath to, ''preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." The American people need to know where we stand on these issues before they entrust us with this responsibility '' particularly at a time when our laws, our traditions, and our Constitution have been repeatedly challenged by this Administration.
  (C) Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.
Who's In Charge Of The FISA Court? John Roberts, And Apparently Just John Roberts
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:27
  When it comes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which isn't so much a Court unto itself as it is a rotating group of Federal Judges appointed to hear warrant requests and other matter designated as appropriate for secret proceedings under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, there's nobody more powerful than Chief Justice John Roberts:
  The 11 FISA judges, chosen from throughout the federal bench for seven-year terms, are all appointed by the chief justice. In fact, every FISA judge currently serving was appointed by Roberts, who will continue making such appointments until he retires or dies. FISA judges don't need confirmation '-- by Congress or anyone else.
  No other part of U.S. law works this way. The chief justice can't choose the judges who rule on health law, or preside over labor cases, or decide software patents. But when it comes to surveillance, the composition of the bench is entirely in his hands, and, as a result, so is the extent to which the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation can spy on citizens.
  ''It really is up to these FISA judges to decide what the law means and what the NSA and FBI gets to do,'' said Julian Sanchez, a privacy scholar at the Cato Institute. ''So Roberts is single-handedly choosing the people who get to decide how much surveillance we're subject to.''
  One some level, I suppose this makes sense. Like James Joyner, I accept the general idea of the need for a Court that conducts secret, or to use the precise legal terminology sealed, proceedings when dealing with matters as potentially sensitive as requests from law enforcement to conduct surveillance on people who may be agents of foreign governments or involved with foreign terrorist elements. Because all warrant requests in a normal Federal District Court are matters of public record, it would simply be impractical and unwise for those matters to be easily accessible on the public record in a manner that could potentially tip off targets of an investigation. Indeed, even in these courts there are procedures that allow law enforcement to keep their warrant requests, Criminal Complaints, and even Grand Jury Indictments under seal until its felt advisable to make them public. That works in the odd case here and there, but it's easy to see how things could fall through the cracks if FISA cases were all processed through a non-FISA Court.
  It's also easy to see how it is that the Chief Justice ended up being the person responsible for staffing the FISA Court itself.. In addition to heading the Supreme Court, Roberts, whose official title is Chief Justice of the United States, sits at the top of the entire Federal Judiciary. The Court's administrative arm reports directly to him, for example, and he directly involved in the preparation and presentation of the Judiciary Department's budget request to Congress each year, among other administrative responsibilities. When the FISA law was adopted in 1978, Congress no doubt saw the idea of the Chief Justice making these appointments, from among a group of Federal Judges who had already been confirmed to lifetime appointments by the Senate, as the best and most efficient manner in which to staff the Court. Ezra Klein, though, sees a danger of group think setting in:
  Roberts's nominations to the FISA court are almost exclusively Republican. One of his first appointees, for instance, was Federal District Judge Roger Vinson of Florida, who not only struck down the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate but the rest of the law, too. (The Supreme Court disagreed.) Vinson's term expired in May, but the partisan tilt on the court continues: Only one of the 11 members is a Democrat.
  Critics contend the FISA court is too compromised to conduct genuine oversight. It meets in secret, and the presiding judge hears only the government's argument before issuing a decision that can't be appealed or even reviewed by the public. ''Like any other group that meets in secret behind closed doors with only one constituency appearing before them, they're subject to capture and bias,'' said Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program.
  A Reuters investigation found that from 2001 to 2012, FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants while rejecting only 10. Almost 1,000 of the approved requests required modification, and 26 were withdrawn by the government before a ruling. That's a startling win rate for the government.
  ('...)
  The FISA court is composed of federal judges. All are appointed by the same man. All but one hail from the same political party. And unlike judges in normal courts, FISA judges don't hear opposing testimony or feel pressure from colleagues or the public to moderate their rulings. Under these circumstances, group polarization is almost a certainty. ''There's the real possibility that these judges become more extreme over time, even when they had only a mild bias to begin with,'' Cato's Sanchez said.
  Just as the likelihood of polarization in the FISA court is more pronounced than in normal courts, the stakes are also higher. If trial judges are unduly biased, their rulings can be overturned on appeal. But FISA judges decide the momentous questions of whom the government may spy on and how. Their power is awesome, and their word is final. As the great legal scholar Kanye West said, no one man should have all that power.
  To be fair, there are explanations other than partisanship that likely account for the largely Republican makeup of FISA Judges under Roberts tenure today. Judging from this list of recent Judges on the Court, it seems quite apparent that there is a bias toward appointing older and more experienced Judges to this Court. For example, Judge Vinson, who Klein specifically mentions in the quote above, was appointed to the Court in 2006, his 23rd year on the Federal Bench. Former members of the FISA Court Judge Thomas Hogan and Judge Claude Hilton were also appointed well into the second decade of their time on the bench. There are understandable reasons why this would be the case. Given the sensitive and complicated nature of the cases that FISA Judges it's not at all surprising that Roberts' selections for this assignment would be drawn from more senior members of the Judiciary and, right now, that is primarily made up of judges appointed between 1981 and 1989 by Presidents Reagan and George H.W Bush. So, it's likely less a conspiracy or blatant partisanship than it is a pure accident of history. The seven year length of service on the FISA Court also contributes to this to some extent. Give it 5-10 years and we'll start seeing Judges appointed by President Clinton appointed to FISA assignments.
  Leaving that aside, though, Klein does make some good points. The secret and one-sided nature of the Court's proceedings make it likely that FISA Judges are likely to be biased toward the government, but I'd be interested to see whether there's really that much of a difference between FISA proceedings and those in a normal Federal District Court. When law enforcement applies for a warrant to a U.S. District Court Judge, they don't give notice to the party they are seeking to execute it against, or any third parties that may be impacted by it. The difference, of course, is that the applications are generally public and can be subjected to further review. Nonetheless, it's largely the case that Judges grant warrant requests far more than they grant them (though admittedly not with the ''success'' rate of the FISA Court) so I'm not sure it's correct to single out the FISA Court, or the fact that the Judges on it are all appointed by one man.
VIDEO-Cameras Catch Mystery Break-In at Whistleblower's Law Firm | The Cable
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:26
  The offices of a Dallas law firm representing a high-profileState Department whistleblower were broken into last weekend. Burglars stolethree computers and broke into the firm's file cabinets. But silver bars, videoequipment and other valuables were left untouched, according to local Fox affiliate KDFW, which aired securitycamera footage of the suspected burglars entering and leaving the officesaround the time of the incident.
  The firm Schulman & Mathias represents Aurelia Fedenisn, aformer investigator at the State Department's Office of the Inspector General.In recent weeks, she raised a slew of explosive allegations against thedepartment and its contractors ranging from illicit drug use, soliciting sexual favors from minors and prostitutesand sexual harassment.
  "It's a crazy, strange and suspicious situation," attorney CarySchulman told The Cable. "It's clearto me that it was somebody looking for information and not money. My mosthigh-profile case right now is the Aurelia Fedenisn case, and I can't think ofany other case where someone would go to these great lengths to get ourinformation."
  According to the KDFW report, the firm was the only suiteburglarized in the high-rise office building and an unlocked office adjacentwas left untouched.
  The State Department, which has repeatedly disputed Fedenisn'sallegations, denied any involvement in the incident. "Any allegation that theDepartment of State authorized someone to break into Mr. Schulman's law firm isfalse and baseless," spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
  After assessing the surveillance footage, Schulman said hebelieved the motivations were likely political, but did not suspect departmentinvolvement. "It wasn't professional enough," he said. "It is possible that anObama or Hillary supporter feels that I am unfairly going after them. And thetiming of this is right after several weeks of very public media attention soit seems to me most likely that the information sought is related to that case.I don't know for sure and I want the police to do their work."
  Fedenisn's case, in particular, has gained attention not justbecause of the substance of the allegations, but for her insistence that internal investigations intomisconduct were "influenced, manipulated or simply called off" by senior StateDepartment officials. The suppression of investigations was noted in an earlydraft of an Inspector General report she gave to CBS News, but softened in thefinal version.
  Last month, her lawyers told The Cablethat the department tried to intimidate her into silence. "They had lawenforcement officers camp out in front of her house, harass her children andattempt to incriminate herself," claimed Schulman.
  Schulman said the purpose of the visit was to get Fedenisn tosign documents admitting that she stole State Department documents -- a chargeFedenisn denies.
  Schulman & Mathias represent a range ofclients on matters from fraud to wrongful death to bad faith insurancepractices to medical malpractice. Any number of those cases could've exposed thefirm to such a break in, but Schulman said he was skeptical. "I'm involved inother cases locally, but those cases are rather stale."
VIDEO-C-SPAN Callers Won't Shut Up About 9/11 Inside Job - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:25
Somali American caught up in a shadowy Pentagon counterpropaganda campaign - The Washington Post
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:12
  In MINNEAPOLIS '-- Two days after he became a U.S. citizen, Abdiwali Warsame embraced the First Amendment by creating a raucous Web site about his native Somalia. Packed with news and controversial opinions, it rapidly became a magnet for Somalis dispersed around the world, including tens of thousands in Minnesota.
  The popularity of the site, Somalimidnimo.com, or United Somalia, also attracted the attention of the Defense Department. A military contractor, working for U.S. Special Operations forces to ''counter nefarious influences'' in Africa, began monitoring the Web site and compiled a confidential research dossier about its founder and its content.
  In a May 2012 report, the contractor, the Northern Virginia-based Navanti Group, branded the Web site ''extremist'' and asserted that its ''chief goal is to disseminate propaganda supportive'' of al-Shabab, an Islamist militia in Somalia that the U.S. government considers a terrorist group. The contractor then delivered a copy of its dossier '-- including Warsame's Minnesota home address and phone number '-- to the FBI. A few days later, federal agents knocked on the webmaster's door.
  Although he did not know it, Warsame had been caught up in a shadowy Defense Department counterpropaganda operation, according to public records and interviews.
  In its written analysis of his Web site, Navanti Group identified ''opportunities'' to conduct ''Military Information Support Operations,'' more commonly known as psychological operations, or ''psy-ops,'' that would target Somali audiences worldwide. The report did not go into details, but it recommended that the U.S. military consider a ''messaging campaign'' by repeating comments posted on the United Somalia Web site by readers opposed to al-Shabab.
  Military propaganda and the spread of disinformation are as old as war itself, but commanders usually confined the tactics to war zones.
  With the Iraq war over and U.S. combat operations scheduled to finish in Afghanistan by the end of next year, however, the Pentagon has begun shifting psy-ops missions to other parts of the world to influence popular opinion. Many of the missions are overseen by the Special Operations Command, which plays a leading role in global counterterrorism efforts.
  In the past, psychological operations usually meant dropping leaflets or broadcasting propaganda on the battlefield. Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership.
  Much of the work is carried out by military information support teams that the Special Operations Command has deployed to 22 countries. The command, which is based in Tampa, also operates multilingual news Web sites tailored to specific regions.
  The Southeast European Times covers the Balkans with original news dispatches and feature stories written in 10 languages. Magharebia covers North and West Africa in Arabic, French and English. Readers have to scour the Web sites to find an acknowledgment that they are sponsored by the U.S. military.
VIDEO- REALLY? Edward Snowden: 'The US government will say I aided our enemies' '' video interview | World news | guardian.co.uk
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:51
  Glenn Greenwald on security and libertyPrevious |Next |IndexIn the second part of an exclusive interview with Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden contemplates the reaction from the US government to his revelations of top-secret documents regarding its spying operations on domestic and foreign internet traffic, email and phone use. This interview was recorded in Hong Kong on 6 June 2013
  ' Watch the first part of the exclusive interview with Edward Snowden
  ' Read the Guardian's full NSA files coverage
  Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald in Hong KongSource: Guardian USLength: 7min 07secMonday 8 July 2013Share Tweet this Email Share Autoplay settings Send to a friendSender's name
  Recipient's email address
  Your IP address will be logged
  Video play settingsAutoplay is on | Turn autoplay off
  Turn autoplay on | Autoplay is off
  When autoplay is on, videos on these pages will autoplay
  More about our videos
  Please activate cookies in order to turn autoplay off
  More about our videos
  ShareShort link for this page:http://gu.com/p/3h634StumbleUponredditTumblrDiggLinkedInGoogle Bookmarksdel.icio.uslivejournalFacebookTwitterEmbed videoCopy and paste the embed code below
  Terms and conditions of use
NSA Rejecting Every FOIA Request Made by U.S. Citizens
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:34
  Clayton Seymour, a 36-year-old IT specialist from Hilliard, Ohio, recently sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NSA, curious as to whether any data about him was being collected.
  What he received in response made his blood boil.
  ''I am a generally law abiding citizen with nothing I can think of that would require monitoring,'' Seymour wrote to me, ''but I wanted to know if I was having data collected about me and if so, what.''
  So Seymour sent in an FOIA request. Weeks later, a letter from the NSA arrived explaining that he was not entitled to any information. ''When I got the declined letter, I was furious,'' he told me. ''I feel betrayed.''
  Seymour had decided to request his NSA file after coming across a recent post of mine instructing Americans on how to properly request such files from the FBI and NSA. A Navy vet and two-time Obama voter who supported the President's platform of greater governmental transparency, Seymour was shocked by the letter he received.
  The letter, which first acknowledges the media coverage surrounding its surveillance systems, quickly moves to justify why none of that data can be obtained by an American citizen in a standard FOIA request:
  Seymour isn't the only one who has recently had an FOIA request denied by the NSA '' dozens of citizens have emailed me to say they've received a similar, if not identical, letter. And it's clear from the exemption the NSA is using that every single American is having their FOIA requests similarly rejected.
  Unjustly so.
  It should be noted that there are legitimate exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act, the first of which states that documents requested may be denied if they are ''properly classified as secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy.''
  However, the central problem is this: Seymour's letter from the NSA points to Executive Order 13526, signed by President Obama in 2009, as justification for the NSA's FOIA exemption.
  This order signed by Obama established a uniform system for classifying national security information, and stipulates that ''information shall not be considered for classification unless its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.''
  This qualification appears in section 1.4 of the executive order, after which follow many categories of information which may be marked as classified. The category the NSA points to in justifying the classification of all its data is this:
  (c) intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology
  Meaning: the NSA is classifying every single bit of data it receives from ordinary American citizens based on the premise that it has been gathered covertly.
  Meaning: the NSA's advertised justification for not granting FOIA requests is to protect our country. However, the real justification is the NSA's covert violation of Americans' Fourth Amendment right not to be subject to unwarranted searches and seizures (in this case of their personal, digital data).
  The NSA, it seems, has classified every single piece of data on American citizens that it has seized and saved, even benign data culled from people like Seymour, who are no threat to U.S. national security.
  ''I believe in the concept of America,'' Seymour told me. ''[But] not its current execution.''
  I sense the Founding Fathers would agree with him.
  Follow David Harris-Gershon on Twitter@David_EHG
Bad Bankers Face Criminal Charges And Jail
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:29
  Reckless bankers could face criminal charges and jail after the Chancellor pledged to implement most of the recommendations produced by the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards.
  George Osborne is also backing calls for tighter control of bonuses but he has rejected the Commission's recommendation that UK Financial Investments (UKFI) - the body that handles the state's holdings in the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group - be abolished.
  In a statement, the Government set out key proposals from the commission to be added to the banking reform Bill in the autumn.
  These are to include a new offence of "reckless misconduct" for senior bankers, with those found guilty facing a possible jail sentence.
  Lloyds then RBS face returns to private ownership after taxpayer bailoutsMr Osborne also backed moves to allow bonuses to be deferred for up to 10 years and enable 100% "claw back" of bonuses where banks are propped up by the state.
  Further measures, designed to improve competition, will include asking the new payments regulator to look into making it easier to switch between accounts, and beefing up the role of the new Prudential Regulation Authority.
  Labour has accused the Government of ducking radical reforms and is demanding that ministers explain how it will protect taxpayers' interests when the state-owned stakes in Lloyds and RBS are sold off.
  The commission, chaired by Conservative MP Andrew Tyrie, was set up by the Chancellor in the wake of the financial crisis and the Libor rate-rigging scandal.
  Mr Osborne said the main recommendations of its report, published last month, were being delivered.
  He said cultural reform was necessary in banking "to move the whole sector from rescue to recovery and ensure that UK banks demonstrate the highest standards, and are able to support business and drive economic growth."
  He added: "The Government is determined to raise standards across the banking industry to create a stronger and safer banking system."
  Business Secretary Vince Cable said: "If we're to get our economy back on track, we need to get the banking system back on track first.
  "Creating new powers to jail bankers who are reckless with other people's money and getting more competition into banking, is a start."
Vulnerability Note VU#662676 - Digital Alert Systems DASDEC and Monroe Electronics R189 One-Net firmware exposes private root SSH key
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 19:37
  Original Release date: 26 Jun 2013 | Last revised: 02 Jul 2013
  OverviewDigital Alert Systems DASDEC and Monroe Electronics One-Net E189 Emergency Alert System (EAS) devices exposed a shared private root SSH key in publicly available firmware images. An attacker with SSH access to a device could use the key to log in with root privileges.
  DescriptionThe Digital Alert Systems DASDEC-I and DASDEC-II and Monroe Electronics R189 One-Net/R189SE One-NetSE are Linux-based EAS encoder/decoder (ENDEC) devices that are used to broadcast EAS messages over digital and analog channels. IOActive has reported several security issues affecting these devices. The most severe of these issues is the public disclosure of the default private root SSH key. The less severe issues could also contribute to an attacker's ability to compromise a vulnerable device.
  Compromised root SSH key(CVE-2013-0137)Publicly available firmware images for these devices included a private root SSH key that was authorized to log in to the devices (CWE-798, CWE-321). The fingerprint for the compromised SSH key is 0c:89:49:f7:62:d2:98:f0:27:75:ad:e9:72:2c:68:c3. Although this key is not hard-coded, it may be impractical for less technical users to manually disable or change they key prior to firmware version 2.0-2.
  Predictable session IDIOActive reports that the administrative web server uses a predictable, monotonically increasing session ID. This finding is based on running the web server in a test environment. Testing on a variety of firmware versions on devices both at the factory and in the field, Monroe Electronics could not reproduce this finding.
  Log information disclosureLogs available via the web server provide a variety of information about the configuration, operation, and status of the device (CWE-532). Some of the log information is public and may be required by regulation.
  Predictable password generationThe dasdec_mkuser script generates passwords in a deterministic way (CWE-341), however these passwords are not for administrative access, and the script is not used for general user account configuration.
  Default passwordLike many similar devices, the DASDEC and One-Net ENDECs use default administrative credentials. Some sites fail to change the default administrative password and allow unrestricted internet access.
  ImpactAn attacker with the private key and SSH access can log in to a device with root privileges.
  Predictable session IDs could allow an attacker to take control of an existing administrative web session.
  Predictable and unchanged default passwords can allow an attacker to log in to a device with root privileges. Devices exposed to the internet are at particularly high risk, for example, see Secure EAS Codecs Prevent Zombie Attacks and US-CERT Alert TA13-175A.
  Logs may disclose configuration information that can benefit an attacker.
  SolutionApply an update
  On April 24, 2013, Monroe Electronics and Digital Alert Systems released firmware version 2.0-2 that disables the compromised SSH key, provides a simplified user option to install new unique keys, and enforces a new password policy. Monroe Electronics has taken considerable effort to provide update information to DASDEC and One-NetSE users.
  DASDEC users can obtain updated firmware and release notes by contacting . R189 One-Net users can contact .
  Disable compromised SSH key
  The compromised root SSH key should be disabled immediately, especially if the SSH service is exposed to untrusted networks such as the internet. If SSH connectivity is required, generate, install, and test new SSH keys before disabling the compromised key. The fingerprint for the compromised SSH key is 0c:89:49:f7:62:d2:98:f0:27:75:ad:e9:72:2c:68:c3.
  Manually inspect SSH keys
  To identify a compromised key, examine the authorized_keys file at /root/.ssh/authorized_keys2.dasdec and use the ssh-keygen command to show SSH key fingerprints. The following example shows the fingerprint for the compromised key:
  $ ssh-keygen -l -f authorized_keys2.dasdec1024 0c:89:49:f7:62:d2:98:f0:27:75:ad:e9:72:2c:68:c3 wood@endec1 (DSA)
  Note that ssh-keygen only shows the fingerprint for the first key/line in the file. If authorized_keys2.dasdec contains multiple keys (multiple lines, one key per line), it will be necessary to extract each key (line) to a separate file and run the ssh-keygen command on each key/file. These shell scripts can be used to list and test multiple SSH keys in an authorized_keys file:
  To generate new SSH keys, use ssh-kegen.Restrict access
  If for some reason you are not able to remove and replace the compromised SSH key, restrict access to the SSH service to highly trusted hosts and networks only. As a general good security practice, restrict access to all services to trusted hosts and networks.
  Change default passwords
  Change any default passwords, and do not deploy production systems without changing default passwords. Search engines like Shodan can index systems exposed to the internet and default passwords are usually documented and well-known. It is often trivial for an attacker to identify and access systems on the internet using default passwords.
  Vendor Information (Learn More)If you are a vendor and your product is affected, let us know.CVSS Metrics (Learn More)GroupScoreVectorBase10.0AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:CTemporal8.7E:ND/RL:OF/RC:CEnvironmental6.8CDP:LM/TD:M/CR:ND/IR:M/AR:NDReferencesCreditThanks to Mike Davis and Cesar Cerrudo of IOActive for reporting these issues. Thanks also to Monroe Electronics for their efforts to contact affected users.
  This document was written by Art Manion.
  Other InformationCVE IDs:CVE-2013-0137Date Public:24 Jun 2013Date First Published:26 Jun 2013Date Last Updated:02 Jul 2013Document Revision:86FeedbackIf you have feedback, comments, or additional information about this vulnerability, please send us email.
Hitler's National Security Court
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:04
  | Print | E-mail
  Tuesday, 16 March 2010 07:38
  by Jacob G. HornbergerLet's make no bones about it. Adolf Hitler, who served as chancellor of Germany from 1933 to 1945, could easily be the inspiration for those here in the United States now calling for the creation of a special national security court for trying terrorists. After all, it was Hitler who first established a national security court, and he did it for the same reason that U.S. proponents are now calling for such a court: the concern that regular courts would fail to convict people that government officials knew were terrorists.
  Hitler's national security court, which he established in 1934, was called the People's Court. It consisted of a tribunal of judges, both civilian and military. There was no trial by jury consisting of regular citizens. The most famous of the lead judges of the People's Court was a man named Roland Freisler, who presided over the now-famous trials of Hans and Sophie Scholl and the other members of the White Rose.
  Hitler established the People's Court after the terrorist bombing of the German parliament building, the Reichstag. After a trial in a regularly constituted German court, many of the people charged with that terrorist act were acquitted, which, needless to say, outraged Hitler as much as it would have outraged current U.S. proponents of a national security court. After all, Hitler argued, those people who were acquitted were terrorists '-- otherwise they wouldn't have been charged and prosecuted '-- and, therefore, they deserved to be convicted and punished, not acquitted and released.
  To ensure that terrorists and other criminals were never again acquitted, Hitler established the People's Court. Like the national security court that some Americans are now advocating for the United States, the purpose of the court was to create the appearance of justice while ensuring that terrorists and other criminals were convicted and punished.
  Proceedings before the People's Court would easily serve as a model for U.S. advocates of a national security. The trial of Hans and Sophie Scholl was over in less than an hour. Criminal defense lawyers were expected to remain silent during the proceedings, and did so. Defendants were presumed guilty and treated as such. Hearsay was permitted, as was evidence acquired by torture. There was no due process of law. Confessions could be coerced out of defendants. The judges on the tribunal would berate, humiliate, convict, and then swiftly issue sentences, including the death penalty.
  For a good example of how a national security court would operate here in the United States, see Part 13 and Part 14 of the great movie Sophie Scholl: The Final Days .
  Yes, I know what the American proponents of a national security court would say in response: Just because Hitler was the first to establish such a court doesn't necessarily mean that it is a bad thing. They would point out that Hitler's People's Court had an extremely high conviction rate, and they would claim that it kept the German people safe. Why, perhaps they might even recommend that a bust of Hitler be placed in America's national security court, much as the U.S. Social Security Administration has posted a bust of Otto von Bismarck, who was known as the Iron Chancellor of Germany, on its Social Security website.
  Proponents of a U.S. national security court would also undoubtedly point out that Hitler's National Socialist regime also embraced such much-vaunted American socialist programs as public (i.e., government) schooling, social security, national health care, government-business partnerships, and a military-industrial complex. And they would remind us that Hitler's socialist autobahn system served as the inspiration for America's giant boondoggle of a public-works project known as the Interstate Highway System.
  But shouldn't the fact that it was Adolf Hitler who first came up with the idea of a national security court to make sure that terrorists and other criminals were duly convicted and punished at least be enough to raise eyebrows among the American people?
  Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.
  Subscribe via RSS or Email:
Surveillance Society: If You Drive, You Get Tracked
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:27
  Source: Wolf Richter, Testosterone PitWe've been teased for weeks with tantalizing leaks about the NSA, its cohorts in corporate America, and their programs and technologies that capture, store, and mine vast amounts of our personal data obtained from the internet and telecommunications. Data is power. And money. It's for our own good, we're told incessantly.
  There are also physical aspects, like video surveillance with facial-recognition technologies and smartphone detectors to let your favorite retail store know when you '' in true name '' are looking at their display. Then there's a technology that surreptitiously captures practically everyone out on the street, combines that data with other data, and makes it available to government agencies.
  Palantir Technologies is the quintessential Silicon Valley startup. Its website is graced with photos of purposefully goofy but smart-looking young people: a guy in shorts and flips flops, feet propped against the conference-room table; a guy cradling a pooch; a guy holding a fixed-gear bike; a girl resting a saddle on a fence.... ''We're all engineers,'' it says. Theyhosted the Girl Geek Dinner #32. The kind of company that makes Silicon Valley great.
  Its mantra: ''to radically change how groups analyze information.'' Okay, it's a slightly hackneyed mantra in Silicon Valley, but hey. More concretely:
  We currently offer a suite of software applications for integrating, visualizing and analyzing the world's information. We support many kinds of data including structured, unstructured, relational, temporal and geospatial.... They are broadly deployed in the intelligence, defense, law enforcement and financial communities.
  The company sent its engineers to Oklahoma to help out after the tornado disaster, and one of its people testified at the House Subcommittee hearing on Emergency Preparedness, Response and Communications ''to discuss the importance of open data portals and information sharing in disaster scenarios.'' Their business is Big Data '' and they're putting their expertise to work for the public good. Awesome!
  One of its early investors was In-Q-Tel (IQT), the venture-capital branch of the CIA, which put $2 million into it in 2005. ''Palantir was developed to address the most complex information analysis and security challenges faced by the U.S. intelligence, military, and law enforcement communities,'' IQT explained.
  A year ago, the company signed a contract with the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center, ''one of dozens of law enforcement intelligence-sharing centers set up after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001,'' according to a report just published by the Center for Investigative Reporting. Goal: to build a database for information captured by license-plate scanners deployed by police agencies in 14 counties that ''stretch from Monterey County to the Oregon border.'' Local and state law enforcement agencies along with federal authorities can mine that database.
  In the Bay Area alone, at least 32 agencies use the technologies. Some systems are mounted on vehicles. Others are fixed, such as red-light cameras at major intersections. One town, Tiburon, a wealthy enclave in Marin County with gorgeous views of San Francisco across the Bay, placed scanners and cameras on the only two roads leading into and out of town. And they all operate automatically.
  So just how intrusive are they?
  Computer security consultant Michael Katz-Lacabe found out when he filed a California Public Records Act request in 2010 in San Leandro, a town of 80,000 souls just south of Oakland, for all records that the town's license-plate scanners had captured of his cars. He received a report with images of his two cars that had been captured on 112 occasions, dating back to 2008. The report didn't include the countless times scanners and cameras had captured his cars in other parts of the Bay Area.
  ''I was surprised there were some pictures where I could actually identify people,'' he told theWall Street Journal. ''Here's one where I'm driving,'' he said as he was looking through the report. ''Here's me in my Cal shirt.'' One image from 2009 showed him and his daughters getting out of his car in their driveway. With the technology, ''you can tell who your friends are, who you hang out with, where you go to church, whether you've been to a political meeting,'' he said. He was under surveillance, and yet, as he noted, he hadn't done anything wrong.
  Government and law enforcement agencies love it. ''It's new technology, we're learning as we go, but it works 100 times better than driving around looking for license plates with our eyes,'' said Lt. Randall Brandt of the San Leandro police. Stories abound of law-enforcement successes: locating stolen cars, identifying suspected murders as they're driving through town, or pinpointing cars of people who haven't paid a parking ticket.
  There are over 9 million residents in the Bay Area, and millions of tourists flow through it, and wherever they drive or park their car (or rental car!), the tag and location data may be captured, along with an image of the car, whoever is in it or near it, and whatever is behind it. Ever more devices are being deployed for a denser network of surveillance.
  Granted, some of them actually make life easier: all-electronic tolling at the Golden Gate Bridge, for example. You no longer need to stop to pay, even if you don't have FasTrak. As you drive through, the system captures your tag, and you'll get the bill in the mail. On Sunday evening, traffic no longer gets backed up for eight miles just to get across the bridge.
  What is new is the sheer sophistication of database and data-mining applications, such as those developed by Palantir. And as part of its agreement with In-Q-Tel, the company shares these technologies with the CIA and other agencies in the Intelligence Community.
  In Southern California, it's the same thing. ''In San Diego, 13 federal and local law enforcement agencies have compiled more than 36 million license-plate scans in a regional database since 2010 with the help of federal homeland security grants,'' found the Center for Investigative Reporting.
  There were efforts to limit it. In 2012, before he was term-limited out of office, state Senator Joe Simitian, a Democrat, introduced a bill that would have required law enforcement agencies and companies that collect license-plate data to delete it after 60 days. But the bill died under heavy fire from law enforcement and corporations.
  ''Do we really want to maintain a database that tracks personal movements of law-abiding citizens in perpetuity? That's the fundamental question here,'' wondered Simitian. ''Larger and larger amounts of data collected over longer periods of time provide a very detailed look at the personal movements of private citizens,'' he warned.
  The scanners are also used by companies, including two, as the Wall Street Journal reported, that were ''founded by 'repo men' '' specialists in repossessing cars or property from deadbeats.'' Their camera-equipped cars drive around nationwide to capture license plates, location data, and images, a less conspicuous version of Google Street View cars (Google blurs license plates and faces on Street View, but retains the data in its database).
  ''What would the 1950s Soviet Union have done with the technology we have now?''wondered Col. Lisa Shay, electrical engineering professor and tracking specialist at the US Military Academy at West Point. ''We don't have a police state in this country, but we have the technology.''
  Scary thought. As these technologies are getting ever more sophisticated and cheaper, they spread. Unlike the near-flawless surveillance of our online lives, or of our purchasing habits [my take... Perfecting The Surveillance Society '' One Payment At A Time], these systems cover us still imperfectly, but in real-life situations, out on the street, and leave behind a permanent record of each incident.
  This data is then combined into the larger data set on us. It's Big Data '' the era when data has become an asset class. A whole industry of the most creative companies is chasing after this asset class, and startups are getting funded '' by the Intelligence Community, no less '' based on its promise, and they're all working hand in glove with their respective governments to maximize their returns. Getting shafted: the people on the street.
  But, these technologies can be used to do cool things. Hashima, a speck of an island off the coast of Nagasaki, Japan, used to serve as a coal mine where 5,000 people lived and toiled. But in the 1970s, it was abandoned and the concrete structures left to decay, only to resurface in the last James Bond flick, Skyfall. Now Google captured it for Street View '' and made an awesome brief video of this eerie industrial wasteland. Check it out.... Eerie Abandoned Japanese Island Comes Alive On Google (video)
Freddie Mercury gorilla 'must go'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:25
  8 July 2013Last updated at09:10 ETA gorilla sculpture painted as Freddie Mercury has been removed because it infringes copyright.
  Organisers of Go Go Gorillas, a conservation art trail in Norwich, were contacted by Mercury Phoenix Trust, an Aids charity set up in memory of the Queen singer who died in 1991.
  The trust claimed the suit the gorilla is wearing breaches copyright.
  It asked that the sculpture, called Freddie "Radio Go Go" Gorilla, be removed and repainted.
  The sculpture, which stood on Millennium Plain outside The Forum, was painted by Mik Richardson.
  Continue reading the main storyFreddie is one of our most popular gorillas on the trail and now we've got to remove him from the streets''
  End QuoteMartin GreenBreak'Dreadful and petty'Mr Richardson, 50, of Aylsham, Norfolk, said the decision to order its removal was "absolutely shocking".
  He said: "It's dreadful. It's petty, really. The night I was told I couldn't sleep."
  Mr Richardson was paid £800 to design and paint the gorilla, which took him three days.
  "I'm a mural artist and I have to be very careful about copyright," he said.
  "I didn't copy the suit exactly. I alter enough so that it's fan art, rather than a copy of it.
  The "Radio Go Go" gorilla is one of 53 life-size gorillas decorated by Norfolk artists and displayed on the streets of Norwich over the summer.
  An additional 67 baby gorillas, painted at local schools, made up the public art trail.
  Mercury Phoenix Trust contacted Wild in Art, the company that supplied the gorilla glass-fibre canvases, according to director Charlie Langhorne.
  "They just said that they own the copyright on the suit and asked us to change it," Mr Langhorne said.
  "That's being sorted. To save any bother we will change it.
  "We do quite a few bits and pieces for them but it's no great shakes.
  "We would rather not have to do it but it's not the end of the world."
  'Enjoy a gorilla'He said the gorilla would be repainted with a "new and exciting design" and should be back in place within 10 days.
  Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  The Freddie Mercury gorilla sculpture will be repainted
  "People in Norwich will have a new gorilla to enjoy soon," he said.
  Martin Green of Break, one of two charities that will benefit from the auction of the gorillas once the exhibition is over, said: "It's a disappointing position they have put us in.
  "Freddie is one of our most popular gorillas on the trail and now we've got to remove him from the streets, but we're respecting the wishes of another charity.
  "It's a sad story, but the positive news is that we'll end up with another gorilla on the streets."
  The Born Free Foundation, which counts Queen guitarist Brian May among its celebrity supporters, was also set to benefit from the October auction of the Freddie Mercury gorilla to help support conservation projects in the Congo.
  Mercury Phoenix Trust was unavailable for comment.
  They previously commissioned a "Freddie Lion" for a Pride of Cape Town art trail in May.
Asiana Airlines Flight 214 '-- What We REALLY Know
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: R. Doug Wicker — Author
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:20
  And it ain't much.
  Speculation this early after a plane crash is nearly always incorrect because of insufficient information, yet speculation abounds on Saturday's crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214. You could write a book on what we do not currently know '-- the cockpit crew interviews, the information from the ''Black Boxes,'' witness interviews, crash damage analysis, etc., etc., etc.
  Here's what we do know about the crash: Asian Airlines Flight 214, a Boeing 777-28EER operating with two Pratt & Whitney PW4090 engines (an important detail as you'll see in a moment), landed short of Runway 28 Left at San Francisco International Airport (SFO). Aboard Flight 214 were sixteen crew and 291 passengers for a total of 307 POB (Personnel on Board). The aircraft apparently struck the seawall located short of the approach end of Runway 28L. The vertical and both horizontal stabilizers were sheared off and lay upon the runway just short of the landing threshold line and threshold markings (see images below). Landing gear parts lay between the threshold markings and the touchdown zone markings. The aircraft skidded off the runway to the left and at some point caught fire. Two passengers (both schoolgirls) died, their bodies both found outside of the wreckage (not reported is if the bodies were still strapped to their respective seats). Injuries were sustained by 181 people. Of those 181 people, forty-nine are deemed in critical condition.
  Asiana Airlines Flight 214 debris field '-- photo linked from ww2.hdnux.com
  Here's what we know leading up to the crash: The weather at SFO was VMC (Visual Meteorological Conditions) with blue skies, few clouds, good visibility, and light winds reported. The Runway 28L ILS (Instrument Landing System) was out of service, so the pilots would not have had a Glide Slope instrument indication in the cockpit to advise them of their angle of descent. They would however (provided it was working, which appears to be the case) have a good view of the Runway 28L 4-Light Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI), which was set to visually guide pilots onto a 2.85° glide path (slightly below the more normal three-degree angle most commonly used).
  Here's some expert Air Traffic Control speculation: Since the weather was clear and the ILS was out of service, it is reasonable to assume that Asiana Airlines Flight 214 was conducting what is known as a Visual Approach (See definition below) to Runway 28L at the time of the accident. If that is the case, the cockpit crew would have been responsible for maintaining the proper descent angle to the runway using visual references (including the PAPI previously mentioned) and other on-board, non-ILS derived information (radar altimeter, etc.).
  Visual Approach Definition (U.S.): An approach conducted on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan which authorizes the pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must, at all times, have either the airport or the preceding aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and under the control of the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must be ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility of 3 miles or greater
  What we know about the Boeing 777: Quite simply put, this aircraft is one of the safest in existence. Over 1,100 have been built since 1993, and the aircraft remains a bestseller for Boeing to this day. There have been a total of only three ''hull losses'' (meaning the aircraft was a total write-off) involving the Boeing 777 and only one previous fatality. The previous two hull losses and one fatality were:
  September 5, 2001 '-- Denver International Airport: British Airways Flight 2019, Boeing 777-236, suffered a mishap during a refueling operation at Terminal Gate A37. Minor, reparable damage was sustained to the left wing and the left engine cowling and thrust reverser. A ground crewman died six days after the accident from injuries sustained during the fire.January 17, 2008 '-- Heathrow Airport, London: British Airways Flight 38, a Boeing 777-200ER, landed short of Runway 27 Left. That may sound familiar, but keep in mind those Pratt & Whitney PW4090 engines I told you about above. We'll get back to that in a moment. Forty-seven people were injured; there were no fatalities. The aircraft was destroyed.July 29, 2011 '-- Cairo Airport, Egypt: Egyptair Flight 667, a Boeing 777-200 pushing back from Gate F7, Terminal 3, experienced a fire in the cockpit. The twelve crew and 307 passengers deplaned with no injuries. The aircraft was irreparably damaged.So, what's so important about those engines, and why is speculation so prone to error at this point? Here's why: Already at least one major news organization, The Daily Mail, has had one blazing headline pronouncing, ''Crash landing at San Francisco mirrors that of BA Boeing 777 crash at London Heathrow five years ago.'' Uh . . . no, guys, it really doesn't. The only similarity is that both aircraft impacted short of the runway and skidded onto it. Beyond that the crashes are in no way ''mirrored.''
  The Daily Mail speculates that, as in the British Airways 38 crash, there was something amiss with the engines on Asiana 214. The problem with British Airways 38 (and two other loss-of-power incidents involving the Boeing 777) was eventually tracked down to a flaw in the design of the fuel/oil heat exchanger used in the Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engine. That flaw allowed ice slush to reduce fuel flow to the engines, allowing enough fuel to keep them turning but restricting fuel needed to apply go-around power (powering up the engines to sufficiently and safely lift the aircraft back into the air after an aborted approach to the runway). That component has since been redesigned and flown without incident ever since that redesign was incorporated into existing fleets and subsequently manufactured aircraft. The Pratt & Whitney PW4090 has never displayed any such problem. Ever. If there was an engine problem with the engines on Asiana 214, it is unlikely to have affected both engines simultaneously and only one engine is needed to abort a landing.
  What to watch for (and what to ignore) in the coming investigation:
  It's far too early to speculate on the possibility of pilot error, but right now that appears to be the focus. Did the crew wait too long to initiate a go-around (unknown at this time, but it appears a go-around order was given only seven seconds before impact)? Did the aircraft come in too fast and/or too low (no evidence to date, but eyewitness accounts and video seem to show that the aircraft was far below normal height on the final approach)? Were the pilots under- or overcorrecting from initially coming in too high (no indication of this as yet)? These answers will come from the crew interviews and the Digital Flight Data and Cockpit Voice Recorders (DFDR and CVR '-- the orange colored ''Black Boxes'' about which you hear so much).Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) left; Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) right '-- photo linked from en.wikipedia.org
  There's been some online speculation that the left wing flaps appear to have not been extended. Sorry guys, but you're incredibly wrong here. The slats are obviously extended so the flaps would have been as well. Additionally, the right side flaps can clearly be seen in the extended position. And if the right side were somehow extended while the left side flaps remained retracted, the Boeing would have experienced an uncontrollable roll to the left such as happened in the case of American Airlines Flight 191 at Chicago O'Hare on May 25, 1979. This is not a retracted flap/slat issue. If it is a flap/slat issue, it's related to insufficient extension of the flaps and slats for that phase of flight, which is highly doubtful considering the warning devices aboard modern aircraft.Could this be a simultaneous engine problem? Such things have occurred in the past, but such events are exceeding rare and have usually been attributed to outside influences (ingestation of birds, hail or extremely heavy precipitation, volcanic ash, etc.). The few mechanical events on record were either poor design (see the Roll-Royce Trent 800 discussion above) or maintenance errors (Eastern Airlines Flight 855; Miami International Airport; May 5, 1983). So far the CVR shows no indication of an engine malfunction, and the pilot is heard calling for go-around power as if the engines were operating normally.Easter Airlines Flight 855 '-- photo linked from en.wikipedia.org
  For those with a fear of flying I would ask that you keep in mind the number of survivors in this otherwise devastating crash '-- over 99.3% of those aboard got out, and most of them with either no or only minor injuries.
  As for the rank speculation you're hearing so far, take all that guesswork from the rank amateurs and wannabe pilots for what it is '-- the rantings of people who will gladly (and in most cases anonymously) point fingers now but who won't retract unwarranted accusations later if and when they're proven wrong.
  About the author's credentials: R. Doug Wicker spent over thirty-four years as an Air Traffic Controller for both the U.S.A.F. and F.A.A. During his time in the F.A.A. he was also trained in accident/incident investigation for his duties as a Quality Assurance & Training Instructor (QATS) for El Paso International Airport from 1987 until 1996. Mr. Wicker is the author of The Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 as well as three as yet unpublished novels on aircraft sabotage.
  The Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 '-- Rosen Publishing, 2003
  About these ads
Unidentified Cosmic Radio Bursts Baffle Astronomers.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: News Weeds
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:11
  "We have uncovered four millisecond-duration radio transientsall more than 40° from the Galactic plane."
  - Dan Thornton, Ph.D., Univ. of Manchester, U. K.
  Parkes Radio Telescope, Australia, where"A Population of Fast Radio Bursts at Cosmological Distances,"was studied by astronomer Dan Thornton and international colleaguesand published in Science on July 5, 2013. The radio signals havecome from between 6 to 11 billion light-years away in this particularmatter universe aged 13.8 billion light-years. See Earthfiles Headlines for more.
  Read the original article here onEarthfiles.com Articles
'Overheid, doe eens wat aan de werkloosheid in plaats van aan het tekort'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VK: Home
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:09
  OPINIE -Peter van der Meer '' 08/07/13, 13:14
  (C) anp.
  opinie Ooit streefde de overheid volledige werkgelegenheid na. Nu is het begrotingsevenwicht het enige doel, schrijft Peter van der Meer.
  Van alle grote levensgebeurtenissen kent werkloosheid de negatiefste effecten
  Momenteel stijgt de werkloosheid in Nederland hard en de overheid doet er niets aan. Dat is heel erg. Waarom? Omdat werkloosheid (C)(C)n van de ergste dingen is die mensen kan overkomen. Het is bekend dat werklozen ongelukkiger zijn dan werkenden. Het is ook bekend dat langdurige werkloosheid littekens bij mensen achterlaat. Langdurig werklozen raken beschadigd en komen er niet meer geheel bovenop.
  Zelfs in vergelijking met andere grote levensgebeurtenissen heeft werkloosheid de meest negatieve effecten. Mensen die scheiden zijn ongelukkig op het moment van scheiden, maar zijn vijf jaar later weer even gelukkig als voorheen. Mensen die ziek worden, zijn ongelukkig maar ook zij herstellen hiervan binnen vijf jaar. Mensen krabbelen zelfs weer op na het verlies van hun man of vrouw, hoe onwaarschijnlijk dat ook klinkt. De klap van langdurige werkloosheid komen ze echter niet te boven.
  Aanvaardbaar niveauAlle reden voor de overheid om de zeilen bij te zetten om de werkloosheid niet verder omhoog te laten lopen. Na elke crisis duurt het lang voordat de werkloosheid weer tot een enigszins aanvaardbaar niveau gedaald is. De daling van de werkloosheid gaat veel langzamer dan het herstel van de economie, of het herstel van de overheidsfinancin. Dat was zo in de jaren tachtig en in de jaren dertig van de vorige eeuw. Twee crises die diepe sporen hebben getrokken en die langdurige effecten hebben gehad op het leven van mensen. En nu is zich dat aan het herhalen en de overheid doet er niks aan.
  We hebben een overheid die streng door blijft bezuinigen om maar aan de voorwaarde van 3 procent overheidstekort te voldoen. Een percentage dat ooit uit de lucht is komen vallen en nu in Brussel - en daarmee in Den Haag - heilig is verklaard. Een percentage waar we eigenlijk aan voldoen, want het structurele tekort zoals berekend door het Centraal Planbureau (CPB) is lager dan 3 procent. Bij verder bezuinigingen neemt de overheid de beschadigingen die ze aan de economie - en nog erger aan de werklozen - toebrengt voor lief.
  En dat terwijl de beste manier om het overheidstekort omlaag te brengen is de economie weer aan het groeien te krijgen. Het tekort is immers uitgedrukt als een percentage van het bruto binnenlandsproduct. Stijgt het binnenlandsprocuct dan daalt het overheidstekort en de overheidsschuld. Het huidige beleid verlaagt het binnenlandsproduct, want de bestedingen worden afgeremd, waardoor er weer een verdere noodzaak tot bezuinigen ontstaat.
  Op die manier bezuinigen we ons kapot, met alle desastreuze gevolgen van dien. We zullen zien dat als gevolg van de nieuw aangekondigde bezuinigingen volgend jaar de economie minder hard groeit dan voorspeld door het Centraal Planbureau. Deze gevolgen zullen ook langdurig negatief uitpakken. Langduriger dan de duur van de crisis en die zullen vooral gevolgen hebben voor de werklozen, de ware slachtoffers van de crisis.
  Volledige werkgelegenheidOoit deed de overheid haar best volledige werkgelegenheid na te streven, naast een stabiel prijspeil, evenwicht op de betalingsbalans, een bevredigend percentage van (selectieve) economische groei en een redelijke inkomensverdeling. Geen van deze doelstellingen lijkt meer in de belangstelling te staan.
  Het enige doel is nog begrotingsevenwicht, waarvan we weten dat dit juist geen doel op zich zou moeten zijn. Momenteel zitten we in een situatie van onderbesteding, dat zien we aan de werkloosheid en onbenutte kapitaalgoederen, zie de bouw.
  Het zijn werkgevers die niet investeren en consumenten die niet consumeren, bang als ze zijn hun kapitaal als appeltje voor de dorst nodig te hebben. In zo'n situatie zou het juist de overheid moeten zijn die de economie weer aanjaagt. Zij moet als vliegwiel fungeren en niet op de rem trappen. Op die manier bestrijd je de werkloosheid, volksvijand nummer (C)(C)n, het best.
  Het huidige beleid heeft tot gevolg dat de economie blijft steken op een niveau met veel te hoge werkloosheid. De overheid heeft haar huishoudboekje dan op orde, als het haar lukt, maar met als resultaat dat er veel huishoudens zullen zijn die hun boekje helemaal niet meer op orde kunnen krijgen.
  Wellicht hebben ze er helemaal geen meer, waarom zou je boekhouden als je toch geen inkomsten meer hebt. Waar blijven de politici die het opnemen voor de werklozen?
  Peter van der Meer is universitair docent economie en bedrijfskunde in Groningen.
Reckless bankers to face jail threat
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:58
  8 July 2013Last updated at08:30 ETThe government has said it will support most of the recommendations produced by the Parliamentary Commission for Banking Standards.
  Top of the list will be a new criminal offence of reckless misconduct by top bankers, with a possible jail term.
  Banker bonuses are to be deferred by up to 10 years, and could be repayable if the bank has to be bailed out.
  But the government did not agree to toughen limits on banks' risk-taking or to scrap its bank holding company.
  In a 571-page report issued last month, the Commission had called for a much tougher "leverage ratio" for banks - a measure that limits the total amount of loans and investments a bank can make relative to the amount of capital the bank holds to absorb losses on those assets.
  But Chancellor George Osborne has stuck steadfastly to the lower level internationally agreed and laid out by the Bank for International Settlements in Basel.
  Mr Osborne was also called on to abolish the UK Financial Investments - the government's holding company for its stakes in Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group - which the Commission described as a "fig leaf" for government intervention in the banking sector.
  Continue reading the main storyThe Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards was appointed in July 2012 following the Libor scandal and other episodes that damaged the reputation of banks in the UKIt includes MPs and peers and is chaired by Andrew Tyrie, who also heads the House of Commons' Treasury CommitteeMembers include the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin WelbyIt heard evidence from major figures in the banking sectorThe government refused, noting that "UKFI is staffed by highly expert professionals with extensive experience in the banking sector".
  However, the government did reiterate that it would consider the case for splitting Royal Bank of Scotland - currently 81%-owned by the government via UKFI - into a "good" High Street bank that could be quickly sold back to the private sector, and a "bad" bank to sit on and work out existing problematic loans.
  Burden of proofThe chancellor said that he was pleased to accept the Commission's main recommendations, promising: "Where legislative changes are required, we will amend the Banking Reform Bill, which is currently before Parliament."
  The Commission's report focused primarily on the problem of making bankers individually responsible for the performance of their institutions and business areas.
  Among the plethora of recommendations to be adopted by the government:
  there will be a new system for approving who can fill senior positions at UK banks, with senior bankers being given clear individual responsibilitiesif a bank breaks any rules, the burden of proof will be on the relevant senior bankers to show that they took all reasonable steps to stop it happeningthe time limit for regulators to bring action against miscreant bankers will be extended beyond the current three yearsThe government also threw its weight behind proposals to increase competition between the High Street banks.
  The newly-created Prudential Regulation Authority - which sits within the Bank of England and is responsible for ensuring that excess risks do not build up within the banking system - will be given an additional role in ensuring competition among the banks.
  A new "payments regulator", which has yet to be created, will be asked by the government to explore ways of making it easier for people to transfer their accounts to rival banks, and to look at whether the banks should no longer collectively control the inter-bank payments system.
This Call Is Being Recorded
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Hacker News
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:55
  We've all been stuck on hold to some call centre and heard a distant voice say "For your security, and our training purposes, your call may be recorded."
  I've always wanted to say to people "just so you know, I am also recording this call." Well, now I can.
  Around 4 years ago, I experimented with recording phone calls. It was quite a clunky process, involving conference calling in another line.
  Of course, Android has theoretically supported native call recording since its inception. However, Google have ignored all the requests to actually enable it.
  Android has a number of call recording apps. On most phones, the call recording works by putting the phone on speaker mode and using the microphone to record both sides of the conversation. That has obviously disadvantages for call quality - not to mention that you don't always want to have your conversations on speakerphone!
  Luckily the enterprising chaps at GrinZone have found a way round this limitations on some phones.
  With InCall Recorder on my Galaxy Note II, I can finally record line quality audio on my phone calls.
  Take a listen:Voice Call With Mum
  One of the great things about InCall Recorder is that it automatically upload the recorded MP3s up to DropBox - so your calls are instantly available to you and anyone else with whom you choose to share the folder.In the UK, it is perfectly legal for an individual to record their calls - and there is no need to inform the other party nor obtain consent. Individuals are exempt from having to comply with the data protection act. Interestingly, so are journalists...
  In other countries, check your local laws :-)
  Of course, it's polite to inform someone that you're recording them. More than that, for some people it really improves their attitude and their service. At the moment, I'm going through the tedious process of buying a house - I've found that with some individuals, it's very handy not only to record the call and play it back for reference, but to let the other party know that's what I'm doing.
  Listening back to some of my favourite calls over the last year has been very interesting and quite emotional - I can certainly see why our security services enjoy listening in so much!
  Like this:LikeLoading...
  We've all been stuck on hold to some call centre and heard a distant voice say "For your security, and our training purposes, your call may be recorded." I've always...
The Snowden Effect, Continued
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Politics Blog with Charles P. Pierce RSS Feed
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:52
  Can we take just a short break from the good fun we're all having trying to guess where Edward Snowden will land, and about how much of self-promoting show pony he may be, and return, however briefly, to the very serious argument within our democracy that his revelations have set off?
  In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation's surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say...The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said. Last month, a former National Security Agency contractor, Edward J. Snowden, leaked a classified order from the FISA court, which authorized the collection of all phone-tracing data from Verizon business customers. But the court's still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order, the officials said. "We've seen a growing body of law from the court," a former intelligence official said. "What you have is a common law that develops where the court is issuing orders involving particular types of surveillance, particular types of targets."
  There should be no reason to belabor this in a democracy, but you really cannot have secret courts developing a new "common law." In this country, at any rate, the common law is exactly what it says it is -- a law created in common, by the representatives elected by the people, under which we all agree openly to live. What secret courts "develop" is not a "common law" but, rather, an entire infrastructure of loopholes, exceptions, and trapdoors that allow the government to evade what we all believe is the "common law." Increasingly, and sadly, the courts that are not secret have been helping them along.
  In one of the court's most important decisions, the judges have expanded the use in terrorism cases of a legal principle known as the "special needs" doctrine and carved out an exception to the Fourth Amendment's requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures, the officials said.The special needs doctrine was originally established in 1989 by the Supreme Court in a ruling allowing the drug testing of railway workers, finding that a minimal intrusion on privacy was justified by the government's need to combat an overriding public danger. Applying that concept more broadly, the FISA judges have ruled that the N.S.A.'s collection and examination of Americans' communications data to track possible terrorists does not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment, the officials said. That legal interpretation is significant, several outside legal experts said, because it uses a relatively narrow area of the law - used to justify airport screenings, for instance, or drunken-driving checkpoints - and applies it much more broadly, in secret, to the wholesale collection of communications in pursuit of terrorism suspects. "It seems like a legal stretch," William C. Banks, a national security law expert at Syracuse University, said in response to a description of the decision. "It's another way of tilting the scales toward the government in its access to all this data."
  If you're not driving drunk, why do you care about roadblocks? If you're not doing drugs, what do you care if they test you? See how it starts? Now we're all the way to, if you're not contacting terrorists, what do you care if the NSA collects your data? And this last part of the slide was undertaken in secret, by a secret court. And this is the Snowden Effect in action. Without the revelations, the president would not have made the preposterous public claim that the rubber-stamp FISA court qualified as "oversight" by any but the most laughable definition. There then would not have been the pushback against that silliness, and then there would not have been the FISA court itself responding that it was not a rubber stamp which, I am sure, is part of what intrigued the Times enought to produce this story which brings us all the way back around to how preposterous the president's original claim was.
  Unlike the Supreme Court, the FISA court hears from only one side in the case - the government - and its findings are almost never made public. A Court of Review is empaneled to hear appeals, but that is known to have happened only a handful of times in the court's history, and no case has ever been taken to the Supreme Court. In fact, it is not clear in all circumstances whether Internet and phone companies that are turning over the reams of data even have the right to appear before the FISA court. Created by Congress in 1978 as a check against wiretapping abuses by the government, the court meets in a secure, nondescript room in the federal courthouse in Washington. All of the current 11 judges, who serve seven-year terms, were appointed to the special court by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and 10 of them were nominated to the bench by Republican presidents. Most hail from districts outside the capital and come in rotating shifts to hear surveillance applications; a single judge signs most surveillance orders, which totaled nearly 1,800 last year. None of the requests from the intelligence agencies was denied, according to the court.
  Whether he likes it or not, this is the "national conversation" that the president said he wanted. Edward Snowden, world traveler, international man of luggage, made it impossible to avoid.
Digital Arms Trade
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Open Rights Group
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:52
Secret move keeps bin Laden records in the shadows.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: DaDenMan news feed
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:46
  WASHINGTON (AP) '-- The nation's top special operations commander ordered military files about the Navy SEAL raid on Osama bin Laden's hideout to be purged from Defense Department computers and sent to the CIA, where they could be more easily shielded from ever being made public.
  The secret move, described briefly in a draft report by the Pentagon's inspector general, set off no alarms within the Obama administration even though it appears to have sidestepped federal rules and perhaps also the Freedom of Information Act.
  An acknowledgement by Adm. William McRaven of his actions was quietly removed from the final version of an inspector general's report published weeks ago. A spokesman for the admiral declined to comment. The CIA, noting that the bin Laden mission was overseen by then-CIA Director Leon Panetta before he became defense secretary, said that the SEALs were effectively assigned to work temporarily for the CIA, which has presidential authority to conduct covert operations.
  "Documents related to the raid were handled in a manner consistent with the fact that the operation was conducted under the direction of the CIA director," agency spokesman Preston Golson said in an emailed statement. "Records of a CIA operation such as the (bin Laden) raid, which were created during the conduct of the operation by persons acting under the authority of the CIA Director, are CIA records."
  Golson said it is "absolutely false" that records were moved to the CIA to avoid the legal requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
  The records transfer was part of an effort by McRaven to protect the names of the personnel involved in the raid, according to the inspector general's draft report.
  But secretly moving the records allowed the Pentagon to tell The Associated Press that it couldn't find any documents inside the Defense Department that AP had requested more than two years ago, and could represent a new strategy for the U.S. government to shield even its most sensitive activities from public scrutiny.
  "Welcome to the shell game in place of open government," said Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, a private research institute at George Washington University. "Guess which shell the records are under. If you guess the right shell, we might show them to you. It's ridiculous."
  McRaven's directive sent the only copies of the military's records about its daring raid to the CIA, which has special authority to prevent the release of "operational files" in ways that can't effectively be challenged in federal court. The Defense Department can prevent the release of its own military files, too, citing risks to national security. But that can be contested in court, and a judge can compel the Pentagon to turn over non-sensitive portions of records.
  Under federal rules, transferring government records from one executive agency to another must be approved in writing by the National Archives and Records Administration. There are limited circumstances when prior approval is not required, such as when the records are moved between two components of the same executive department. The CIA and Special Operations Command are not part of the same department.
  The Archives was not aware of any request from the U.S. Special Operations Command to transfer its records to the CIA, spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said. She said it was the Archives' understanding that the military records belonged to the CIA, so transferring them wouldn't have required permission under U.S. rules.
  Special Operations Command also is required to comply with rules established by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that dictate how long records must be retained. Its July 2012 manual requires that records about military operations and planning are to be considered permanent and after 25 years, following a declassification review, transferred to the Archives.
  Also, the Federal Records Act would not permit agencies "to purge records just on a whim," said Dan Metcalfe, who oversaw the U.S. government's compliance with the Freedom of Information Act as former director of the Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy. "I don't think there's an exception allowing an agency to say, 'Well, we didn't destroy it. We just deleted it here after transmitting it over there.' High-level officials ought to know better."
  It was not immediately clear exactly which Defense Department records were purged and transferred, when it happened or under what authority, if any, they were sent to the CIA. No government agencies the AP contacted would discuss details of the transfer. The timing may be significant: The Freedom of Information Act generally applies to records under an agency's control when a request for them is received. The AP asked for files about the mission in more than 20 separate requests, mostly submitted in May 2011 '-- several were sent a day after Obama announced that the world's most wanted terrorist had been killed in a firefight. Obama has pledged to make his administration the most transparent in U.S. history.
  The AP asked the Defense Department and CIA separately for files that included copies of the death certificate and autopsy report for bin Laden as well as the results of tests to identify the body. While the Pentagon said it could not locate the files, the CIA, with its special power to prevent the release of records, has never responded. The CIA also has not responded to a separate request for other records, including documents identifying and describing the forces and supplies required to execute the assault on bin Laden's compound.
  The CIA did tell the AP it could not locate any emails from or to Panetta and two other top agency officials discussing the bin Laden mission.
  McRaven's unusual order would have remained secret had it not been mentioned in a single sentence on the final page in the inspector general's draft report that examined whether the Obama administration gave special access to Hollywood executives planning a film, "Zero Dark Thirty," about the raid. The draft report was obtained and posted online last month by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group in Washington.
  McRaven, who oversaw the bin Laden raid, expressed concerns in the report about possible disclosure of the identities of the SEALs. The Pentagon "provided the operators and their families an inordinate level of security," the report said. McRaven also directed that the names and photographs associated with the raid not be released.
  "This effort included purging the combatant command's systems of all records related to the operation and providing these records to another government agency," according to the draft report. The sentence was dropped from the report's final version.
  Since the raid, one of the SEALs published a book about the raid under a pseudonym but was subsequently identified by his actual name. And earlier this year the SEAL credited with shooting bin Laden granted a tell-all, anonymous interview with Esquire about the raid and the challenges of his retiring from the military after 16 years without a pension.
  Current and former Defense Department officials knowledgeable about McRaven's directive and the inspector general's report told AP the description of the order in the draft report was accurate. The reference to "another government agency" was code for the CIA, they said. These individuals spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter by name.
  There is no indication the inspector general's office or anyone else in the U.S. government is investigating the legality of transferring the military records. Bridget Serchak, a spokeswoman for the inspector general, would not explain why the reference was left out of the final report and what, if any, actions the office might be taking.
  "Our general statement is that any draft is pre-decisional and that drafts go through many reviews before the final version, including editing or changing language," Serchak wrote in an email.
  The unexplained decision to remove the reference to the purge and transfer of the records "smells of bad faith," said Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. "How should one understand that? That adds insult to injury. It essentially covers up the action."
  McRaven oversaw the raid while serving as commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, the secretive outfit in charge of SEAL Team Six and the military's other specialized counterterrorism units. McRaven was nominated by Obama to lead Special Operations Command, JSOC's parent organization, a month before the raid on bin Laden's compound. He replaced Adm. Eric Olson as the command's top officer in August 2011.
  Ken McGraw, a spokesman for Special Operations Command, referred questions to the inspector general's office.
  The refusal to make available authoritative or contemporaneous records about the bin Laden mission means that the only official accounts of the mission come from U.S. officials who have described details of the raid in speeches, interviews and television appearances. In the days after bin Laden's death, the White House provided conflicting versions of events, falsely saying bin Laden was armed and even firing at the SEALs, misidentifying which of bin Laden's sons was killed and incorrectly saying bin Laden's wife died in the shootout. Obama's press secretary attributed the errors to the "fog of combat."
  A U.S. judge and a federal appeals court previously sided with the CIA in a lawsuit over publishing more than 50 "post-mortem" photos and video recordings of bin Laden's corpse. In the case, brought by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, the CIA did not say the images were operational files to keep them secret. It argued successfully that the photos and videos must be withheld from the public to avoid inciting violence against Americans overseas and compromising secret systems and techniques used by the CIA and the military.
  The Defense Department told the AP in March 2012 it could not locate any photographs or video taken during the raid or showing bin Laden's body. It also said it could not find any images of bin Laden's body on the USS Carl Vinson, the aircraft carrier from which he was buried at sea. The Pentagon also said it could not find any death certificate, autopsy report or results of DNA identification tests for bin Laden, or any pre-raid materials discussing how the government planned to dispose of bin Laden's body if he were killed. It said it searched files at the Pentagon, Special Operations Command headquarters in Tampa, Fla., and the Navy command in San Diego that controls the Carl Vinson.
  The Pentagon also refused to confirm or deny the existence of helicopter maintenance logs and reports about the performance of military gear used in the raid. One of the stealth helicopters that carried the SEALs in Pakistan crashed during the mission and its wreckage was left behind.
  The Defense Department also told the AP in February 2012 that it could not find any emails about the bin Laden mission or his "Geronimo" code name that were sent or received in the year before the raid by McRaven. The department did not say they had been moved to the CIA. It also said it could not find any emails from other senior officers who would have been involved in the mission's planning. It found only three such emails written by or sent to then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and these consisted of 12 pages sent to Gates summarizing news reports after the raid.
  The Defense Department in November 2012 released copies of 10 emails totaling 31 pages found in the Carl Vinson's computer systems. The messages were heavily censored and described how bin Laden's body was prepared for burial.
  These records were not among those purged and then moved to the CIA. Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. James Gregory said the messages from the Carl Vinson "were not relating to the mission itself and were the property of the Navy."
  ___
  AP Intelligence Writer Kimberly Dozier contributed to this report.
  ___
  Follow Richard Lardner on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rplardner
NYC cases show crooked cops' abuse of FBI database.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: DaDenMan news feed
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:46
  HomeMailNewsSportsFinanceWeatherGamesGroupsAnswersFlickrMoreomg!ShineMoviesMusicTVHealthShoppingTravelAutosHomesSearch NewsSearch WebSign InMailHelpAccount InfoHelpSuggestionsYahoo!HomeU.S.WorldPoliticsTechScienceHealthOdd NewsOpinionLocalDear AbbyComicsABC NewsY! News Originals {{/show_more}} ]]>
''Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book'': The new warrior cop is out of control - Salon.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 12:27
  Sal Culosi is dead because he bet on a football game '-- but it wasn't a bookie or a loan shark who killed him. His local government killed him, ostensibly to protect him from his gambling habit.
  Several months earlier at a local bar, Fairfax County, Virginia, detective David Baucum overheard the thirty-eight-year-old optometrist and some friends wagering on a college football game. ''To Sal, betting a few bills on the Redskins was a stress reliever, done among friends,'' a friend of Culosi's told me shortly after his death. ''None of us single, successful professionals ever thought that betting fifty bucks or so on the Virginia''Virginia Tech football game was a crime worthy of investigation.'' Baucum apparently did. After overhearing the men wagering, Baucum befriended Culosi as a cover to begin investigating him. During the next several months, he talked Culosi into raising the stakes of what Culosi thought were just more fun wagers between friends to make watching sports more interesting. Eventually Culosi and Baucum bet more than $2,000 in a single day. Under Virginia law, that was enough for police to charge Culosi with running a gambling operation. And that's when they brought in the SWAT team.
  On the night of January 24, 2006, Baucum called Culosi and arranged a time to drop by to collect his winnings. When Culosi, barefoot and clad in a T-shirt and jeans, stepped out of his house to meet the man he thought was a friend, the SWAT team began to move in. Seconds later, Det. Deval Bullock, who had been on duty since 4:00 AM and hadn't slept in seventeen hours, fired a bullet that pierced Culosi's heart.
  Sal Culosi's last words were to Baucum, the cop he thought was a friend: ''Dude, what are you doing?''
  In March 2006, just two months after its ridiculous gambling investigation resulted in the death of an unarmed man, the Fairfax County Police Department issued a press release warning residents not to participate in office betting pools tied to the NCAA men's basketball tournament. The title: ''Illegal Gambling Not Worth the Risk.'' Given the proximity to Culosi's death, residents could be forgiven for thinking the police department believed wagering on sports was a crime punishable by execution.
  In January 2011, the Culosi family accepted a $2 million settlement offer from Fairfax County. That same year, Virginia's government spent $20 million promoting the state lottery.
  The raid on Sal Culosi was merely another red flag indicating yet more SWAT team mission creep in America. It wasn't even the first time a Virginia SWAT team had killed someone during a gambling raid. In 1998 a SWAT team in Virginia Beach shot and killed security guard Edward C. Reed during a 3:00 AM raid on a private club suspected of facilitating gambling. Police said they approached the tinted car where Reed was working security, knocked, and identified themselves, then shot Reed when he refused to drop his handgun. Reed's family insisted the police story was unlikely. Reed had no criminal record. Why would he knowingly point his gun at a heavily armed police team? More likely, they said, Reed mistakenly believed the raiding officers were there to do harm, particularly given that the club had been robbed not long before the raid. Statements by the police themselves seem to back that account. According to officers at the scene, Reed's last words were, ''Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book.''
  As the Texas Hold 'Em craze picked up momentum in the mid-2000s, fans of the game started hosting tournaments at private clubs, bars, and residences. Police in many parts of the country responded with SWAT raids. In 2011, for example, police in Baltimore County, Maryland, sent a tactical unit to raid a $65 buy-in poker game at the Lynch Point Social Club. From 2006 to 2008, SWAT teams in South Carolina staged a number of raids to break up poker games in the suburbs of Charleston. Some were well organized and high-stakes, but others were friendly games with a $20 buy-in. ''The typical police raid of these games . . . is to literally burst into a home in SWAT gear with guns drawn and treat poker players like a bunch of high-level drug dealers,'' an attorney representing poker players told a local newspaper. ''Using the taxpayers' resources for such useless Gestapo-like tactics is more of a crime than is playing of the game.''
  In 2007 a Dallas SWAT team actually raided a Veterans of Foreign Wars outpost for hosting charity poker games. Players said the tactics were terrifying. One woman urinated on herself. When police raided a San Mateo, California, poker game in 2008, card players described cops storming the place ''in full riot gear'' and ''with guns drawn.'' The games had buy-ins ranging from $25 to $55. Under California law, the games were legal so long as no one took a ''rake,'' or a cut of the stakes. No one had, but police claimed the $5 the hosts charged players to buy refreshments qualified as a rake. In March 2007, a small army of local cops, ATF agents, National Guard troops, and a helicopter raided a poker game in Cary, North Carolina. They issued forty-one citations, all of them misdemeanors. A columnist at the Fayetteville Observer remarked, ''They were there to play cards, not to foment rebellion. . . . [I] wonder . . . what other minutiae, personal vices and petty crimes are occupying [the National Guard's] time, and where they're occupying it. . . . Until we get this sorted out, better not jaywalk. There could be a military helicopter overhead.''
  Police have justified this sort of heavy-handedness by claiming that people who run illegal gambling operations tend to be armed, a blanket characterization that absurdly lumps neighborhood Hold 'Em tournaments with Uncle Junior Soprano's weekly poker game. And in any case, if police know that people inside an establishment are likely to be armed, it makes even less sense to come in with guns blazing. Police have also defended the paramilitary tactics by noting that poker games are usually flush with cash and thus tend to get robbed. That too is an absurd argument, unless the police are afraid they're going to raid a game at precisely the same moment it's getting robbed. Under either scenario, the police are acknowledging that the people playing poker when these raids go down have good reason to think that the men storming the place with guns may be criminals, not cops.
  Indeed, that's exactly what happened to seventy-two-year-old Aaron Awtry in 2010. Awtry was hosting a poker tournament in his Greenville, South Carolina, home when police began breaking down the door with a battering ram. Awtry had begun carrying a gun after being robbed. Thinking he was about to be robbed again, he fired through the door, wounding Deputy Matthew May in both arms. The other officers opened fire into the building. Miraculously, only Awtry was hit. As he fell back into a hallway, other players reporting him asking, ''Why didn't you tell me it was the cops?'' The raid team claimed they knocked and announced several times before putting ram to door, but other players said they heard no knock or announcement. When Awtry recovered, he was charged with attempted murder. As part of an agreement, he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years in prison. Police had broken up Awtry's games in the past. But on those occasions, they had knocked and waited, he had let them in peacefully, and he'd been given a $100 fine.
  The poker raids have gotten bad enough that the Poker Players Alliance, an interest group that lobbies to make the game legal, has established a network of attorneys around the country to help players who have been raided and arrested.
  But the mission creep hasn't stopped at poker games. By the end of the 2000s, police departments were sending SWAT teams to enforce regulatory law. In August 2010, for example, a team of heavily armed Orange County, Florida, sheriff's deputies raided several black-and Hispanic-owned barbershops in the Orlando area. More raids followed in September and October. The Orlando Sentinel reported that police held barbers and customers at gunpoint and put some in handcuffs, while they turned the shops inside out. The police raided a total of nine shops and arrested thirty-seven people.
  By all appearances, these raids were drug sweeps. Shop owners told the Sentinel that police asked them where they were hiding illegal drugs and weapons. But in the end, thirty-four of the thirty-seven arrests were for ''barbering without a license,'' a misdemeanor for which only three people have ever served jail time in Florida.The most disturbing aspect of the Orlando raids was that police didn't even attempt to obtain a legal search warrant. They didn't need to, because they conducted the raids in conjunction with the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. Despite the guns and handcuffs, under Florida law these were licensure inspections, not criminal searches, so no warrants were necessary.
  That such ''administrative searches'' have become an increasingly common way for police to get around the Fourth Amendment is bad enough. More disturbing is the amount of force they're opting to use when they do. In the fall of 2010, police in New Haven, Connecticut, sent a SWAT team to a local bar to investigate reports of underage drinking. Patrons were lined up at gunpoint while cops confiscated cell phones and checked IDs. There have been similar underage drinking SWAT raids on college fraternities. The Atlanta City Council recently agreed to pay a $1 million settlement to the customers and employees of a gay nightclub after a heavy-handed police raid in which police lined up sixty-two people on the floor at gunpoint, searched for drugs, and checked for outstanding warrants and unpaid parking tickets. Police conducted the September 2009 raid after undercover vice cops claimed to have witnessed patrons and employees openly having sex at the club. But the police never obtained a search warrant. Instead, the raid was conducted under the guise of an alcohol inspection. Police made no drug arrests, but arrested eight employees for permit violations.
  Federal appeals courts have upheld these ''administrative searches'' even when it seems obvious that the real intent was to look for criminal activity as long as the government can plausibly claim that the primary purpose of the search was regulatory. In the case of the Orlando raids, simply noting the arrests of thirty-four unlicensed barbers would be enough to meet the test.
  But the Fourth Amendment requires that searches be ''reasonable.'' If using a SWAT team to make sure a bar isn't serving nineteen-year-olds is a reasonable use of force, it's hard to imagine what wouldn't be. At least a couple of federal appeals courts have recognized the absurdity. In 2009 the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck a small blow for common sense, allowing a civil rights suit to go forward against the sheriff's department of Rapides Parish, Louisiana, after a warrantless SWAT raid on a nightclub thinly veiled as an administrative search. And in 1995 the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit made an even broader ruling, finding that having probable cause and a warrant for the arrest of one person in a club did not justify a SWAT raid and subsequent search of the entire club and everyone inside.
  But other legal challenges to paramilitary-style administrative searches have been less successful. Consider the bizarre case of David Ruttenberg, owner of the Rack 'n' Roll pool hall in Manassas Park, Virginia. In June 2004, local police conducted a massive raid on the pool hall with more than fifty police officers, some of whom were wearing face masks, toting semi-automatic weapons, and pumping shotguns as they entered. Customers were detained, searched, and zip-tied. The police were investigating Ruttenberg for several alleged drug crimes, although he was never charged. The local narcotics task force had tried unsuccessfully to get a warrant to search Ruttenberg's office but were denied by a judge. Instead, they simply brought along several representatives of the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and claimed that they were conducting an alcohol inspection. Ruttenberg was cited only for three alcohol violations, based on two bottles of beer a distributor had left that weren't clearly marked as samples, and a bottle of vodka they found in his private office.
  In June 2006, Ruttenberg filed a civil rights suit alleging that, among other things, using a SWAT team to conduct an alcohol inspection was an unreasonable use of force. (The town's vendetta against Ruttenberg stretched on for years and is one of the strangest cases I've ever encountered. He eventually sold his bar and moved to New York.) In 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied his claim. So for now, in the Fourth Circuit, sending a SWAT team to make sure a bar's beer is labeled correctly is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment.By the end of the decade, state and local SWAT teams were regularly being used not only for raids on poker games and gambling operations but also for immigration raids (on both businesses and private homes) and raids on massage parlors, cat houses, and unlicensed strip clubs. Today the sorts of offenses that can subject a citizen to the SWAT treatment defy caricature. If the government wants to make an example of you by pounding you with a wholly disproportionate use of force, it can. It's rare that courts or politicians even object, much less impose consequences.
  Another example is the use of these tactics on people suspected of downloading child pornography.
  Because people suspected of such crimes are generally considered among the lowest of the low, there's generally little objection to using maximum force to apprehend them. But when police use force to demonstrate disgust for the crimes the target is suspected of committing, there's always a risk of letting disgust trump good judgment. In one recent case in West Virginia, police violently stormed a house after a Walmart employee reported seeing an image of a man's genitals near a child's cheek in a set of photos a customer had left at the store to be developed. After terrorizing the customer's family (he was out of town), the police learned that the cheek in the photo wasn't a child's but that of a thirty-five-year-old Filipino woman.
  Given that most child pornography investigations today involve people who use the Internet to find or distribute the offending images and videos, the investigations can be fraught with problems. There have been several instances in recent years of police waging child porn raids on people after tracing IP addresses, only to learn after the fact that the victims of the raid had an open wireless router that someone else had used to download the pornography. Inevitably, the lesson drawn by police and by the media covering these stories is not that a SWAT raid may be an inappropriate way to arrest someone suspected of looking at child porn on a computer, or that police who insist on using such tactics should probably factor the possibility of an open router into their investigation before breaking down someone's door, but rather that we should all make sure our wireless routers are password-protected'--so we too don't get wrongly raided by a SWAT team, too.
  It can also be difficult to trace an IP address to a physical address, which can lead to yet more mistaken raids. An example of that problem manifested in one of the more bizarre botched raids in recent years. It took place in September 2006, when a SWAT team from the Bedford County sheriff's department stormed the rural Virginia home of A. J. Nuckols, his wife, and their two children. Police had traced the IP address of someone trading child porn online to the Nuckols' physical address. They had made a mistake. As if the shock of having his house invaded by a SWAT team wasn't enough, Nuckols was in for another surprise. In a letter to the editor of the Chatham Star Review, he described the raid: ''Men ran at me, dropped into shooting position, double-handed semi-automatic pistols pointed at me, and made me put my hands against my truck. I was held at gunpoint, searched, taunted, and led into the house. I had no idea what this was about. I was scared beyond description.''
  He then looked up, and saw . . . former NBA star Shaquille O'Neal.
  O'Neal, an aspiring lawman, had been made an ''honorary deputy'' with the department. Though he had no training as a SWAT officer, Shaq apparently had gone on several such raids with other police departments around the country. The thrill of bringing an untrained celebrity along apparently trumped the requirement that SWAT teams be staffed only with the most elite, most highly qualified and best-trained cops. According to Nuckols, O'Neal reached into Nuckols's pickup, snatched up his (perfectly legal) rifle, and exclaimed, ''We've got a gun!'' O'Neal told Time that Nuckols's description of the raid on his home was exaggerated. ''It ain't no story,'' he said. ''We did everything right, went to the judge, got a warrant. You know, they make it seem like we beat him up, and that never happened. We went in, talked to him, took some stuff, returned it'--bada bam, bada bing.''
  Incidentally, there have been other strange incidents of SWAT teams with star power. Matt Damon accompanied SWAT officers on several raids while preparing for the movie ''The Departed.'' And after police mistakenly shot and killed immigrant and father Ismael Mena on a raid in Denver in 1999, they revealed that Colorado Rockies first baseman Mike Lansing had gone along for the ride. Denver police added that it was fairly common to take sports stars on drug raids.
  In 2010 a massive Maricopa County SWAT team, including a tank and several armored vehicles, raided the home of Jesus Llovera. The tank in fact drove straight into Llovera's living room. Driving the tank? Action movie star Steven Seagal, whom Sheriff Joe Arpaio had recently deputized. Seagal had also been putting on the camouflage to help Arpaio with his controversial immigration raids. All of this, by the way, was getting caught on film. Seagal's adventures in Maricopa County would make up the next season of the A&E TV series Steven Seagal, Lawman.Llovera's suspected crime? Cockfighting. Critics said that Arpaio and Seagal brought an army to arrest a man suspected of fighting chickens to play for the cameras. Seagal's explanation for the show of force: ''Animal cruelty is one of my pet peeves.'' All of Llovera's chickens were euthanized. During the raid, the police also killed his dog.
  In the end, while the Supreme Court has laid down some avoidable requirements for obtaining a no-knock warrant (or deciding to conduct a no-knock raid at the scene), there are few court decisions, laws, or regulations when it comes to when it is and isn't appropriate to use a SWAT team and all the bells and whistles of a dynamic entry. The decision is almost always left to the discretion of the police agency'--or in the case of the multi-jurisdictional task forces, to the SWAT team itself. The mere fact that there's actually a split in the federal court system over the appropriateness of using SWAT teams to perform regulatory alcohol inspections at bars shows just how little attention the courts pay to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement.
  In other words, if the DEA wants to stick it to medical marijuana users because they're flouting federal law, they can. If Steven Seagal wants to drive a tank into a man's living room to demonstrate his love of animals, he can. If the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) wants to send a SWAT team to a physicist's house to show that it's cracking down on illegal bottle rockets, it can. At worst, the DEA, the CPSC, and Steven Seagal will be chastised by a judge after the fact, though that seldom happens. Even on the rare occasions when someone actually gets into court and wins an excessive-force lawsuit stemming from a raid, the damages are usually borne by taxpayers, not by the cops who used excessive force. In some cases, community outrage and bad press have persuaded police agencies to change a policy here or there regarding the deployment of their SWAT teams. But if they want to reneg and go back to breaking down the doors of people suspected of stealing decorative fish, there's very little to stop them.
  * * *
  Toward the end of the 2000s there were hints that the public was beginning to want a change, though that desire could manifest in unexpected ways. A former colleague at the Cato Institute, Tim Lynch, has told me that when he gives talks about the Waco raid, he finds that people are somewhat sympathetic to the argument that the government overreacted, but that they still can't get past the weirdness of the Branch Davidians themselves'--their stockpile of weapons and the claims of sexual abuse and drug distribution in the community. Even the children who died are sometimes dismissed with guilt by association. But when he mentions that the ATF agents killed the Davidians' dogs, Lynch tells me, people become visibly angry. I have found the same thing to be true in my reporting on drug raids.
  At first, that may seem to indicate that people callously value the lives of pets more than the lives of people. But the fact that killing the dog during these raids has become nearly routine in many police agencies demonstrates just how casually those agencies have come to accept drug war collateral damage. When I started logging cop-shoots-dog incidents on my blog (under the probably sensational term ''puppycide''), people began sending me new stories as they happened. Cops are now shooting dogs at the slightest provocation. As of this writing, I'm sent accounts of a few incidents each week.
  It's difficult to say if this is happening more frequently. There are no national figures, and estimates are all over the map. One dog handler recently hired to train a police department in Texas estimates there are up to 250,000 cop-shoots-dog cases each year. That seems high. In 2009 Randal Lockwood of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that he sees 250 to 300 incidents per year in media reports, and he estimates that another 1,000 aren't reported. The Indianapolis Star reported that between 2000 and 2002 police in that city shot 44 dogs. A recent lawsuit filed by the Milwaukee owner of a dog killed by cops found that police in that city killed 434 dogs over a nine-year period, or about one every seven and a half days. But those figures aren't all that helpful. They don't say how many of those dogs were actually vicious, how many were strays, or how many were injured and perhaps killed as an act of mercy versus how many were unjustified killings of pets.
  What is clear is that police are almost always cleared of any wrongdoing in these shootings. An officer's word that he felt a dog posed a threat to his safety is generally all it takes. Whether or not the officer's fear was legitimate doesn't seem to matter. Thanks to smart phones and surveillance cameras, a growing batch of these incidents have been caught on video have shown that officers' claims that the dog was threatening often aren't matched by the dog's body language. In recent years, police officers have shot and killed chihuahuas, golden retrievers, labs, miniature dachshunds, Wheaton terriers, and Jack Russell terriers. In 2012 a California police officer shot and killed a boxer puppy and pregnant chihuahua, claiming the boxer had threatened him. The chihuahua, he said, got caught in the crossfire. Police officers have also recently shot dogs that were chained, tied, or leashed, going so far as to kill pets while merely questioning neighbors about a crime in the area, cutting across private property while in pursuit of a suspect, and after responding to false burglar alarms.
  It's possible that these incidents could just be attributed to rogue cops. But the fact that the police are nearly always excused in these cases'--even in the more ridiculous examples'--suggests there may be an institutional problem. So does the fact that only a handful of police departments give their cops any training at all when it comes to reading and handling the dogs they may encounter. In a 2012 article for the Huffington Post, my intern J. L. Greene and I looked at twenty-four recent cases of ''puppycide'' and called the relevant police departments to inquire about training. Only one department could confirm that its officers received training at the time of the incident in question. (Eleven departments did not return our phone calls.) That jibes with an earlier article I wrote for The Daily Beast in which both the ASPCA and the Humane Society told me that they offer such training to any police department that wants it, while few take advantage of the offer. Joseph Pentangelo, the ASPCA's assistant director for law enforcement, who also served twenty-one years with the NYPD, told me, ''New York is the only state I know of that mandates formalized training, and that's during academy. There are some individual departments in other parts of the country that avail themselves of our training, but not many. Not enough.''
  Given how likely it is that police officers will often interact with animals, you would think that such training would be common. It is at the US Postal Service. A spokesman for the USPS told me that while dog bites do happen on occasion, serious dog attacks on mail carriers are almost nonexistent. Postal workers are given regular training in distracting dogs with toys, subduing them with voice commands, or, at worst, incapacitating them with Mace. Mail carriers are shown a two-hour video and then given annual instruction on topics like recognizing and reading a dog's body language and differentiating between aggressive charging and playful bounding, and between a truly dangerous dog and a merely territorial one.
  The fact that the Postal Service offers such training and most police departments don't lends some credence to the theory that dog shootings are part of the larger problem of a battlefield mentality that lets police use lethal force in response to the slightest threat'--usually with few consequences. ''It's an evolving phenomenon,'' says Norm Stamper, the former Seattle police chief. ''It started when drug dealers began to recruit pit bulls to guard their supply. These dogs weren't meant to attack cops. They were meant to attack other drug dealers who came to rob them. But of course they did attack cops. And yes, that's awfully scary if one of those things latches on to your leg.''
  But Stamper says that like many aspects of modern policing, dog shootings may have had a legitimate origin, but the practice has since become a symptom of the mind-set behind a militarized police culture. ''Among other things, it really shows a lack of imagination. These guys think that the only solution to a dog that's yapping or charging is shooting and killing it. That's all they know. It goes with this notion that police officers have to control every situation, to control all the variables. That's an awesome responsibility, and if you take it on, you're caving to delusion. You no longer exercise discrimination or discretion. You have to control, and the way you control is with authority, power, and force. With a dog, the easiest way to take control is to simply kill it. I mean, especially if there are no consequences for doing so.''
  A handful of police departments do now mandate dog training, including Nashville, Omaha, and Milwaukee. Police departments in Austin, Fort Worth, and Arlington, Texas, do too. All began offering training after public backlash over one or more cop-shoots-dog incidents.
  ''In my ten years in law enforcement on the street, I can't remember one case where a police officer shot a dog,'' says Russ Jones, the former narcotics cop with the San Jose Police Department and the DEA. ''I don't understand it at all. I guess somewhere along the line a cop shot a dog under questionable circumstances and got away with it. Word got out, and now it seems like some cops are just looking for reasons to take a shot at a dog. Maybe it just comes down to that'--we can get away with it, therefore we do it.''
  * * *
  On the Friday afternoon before the 2009 G-20 summit was to begin in Pittsburgh at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center, a reader in the city sent me a photo he'd snapped moments earlier. The photo was of a police officer standing in the middle of an intersection. He was wearing a military-green top, camouflage pants, and combat boots. He had a gun strapped to his thigh and looked to be carrying another one. The camouflage in particular seemed odd'--as it does whenever it's worn by a police officer in an urban area. It was unclear why this cop would have wanted to hide, and even if he did, how camouflage would help him do so in the city. There seemed to be little purpose for it other than to mimic the military. In any case, it was a sign of what was to come.
  This is how the country that gave the world the First Amendment now handles protest. There's a disquieting ease now with which authorities are willing to crush dissent'--and at the very sorts of events where the right to dissent is the entire purpose of protecting free speech'--that is, events where influential policymakers meet to make high-level decisions with far-reaching consequences. In fact, the more important the policymakers and the more consequential the decisions they'll be making, the more likely it is that police will use more force to keep protesters as far away as possible. As Norm Stamper said, this unfortunately was the lesson the country's law enforcement agencies took from the 1999 WTO protests in Seattle.
  A number of police departments from across the country had sent officers to Pittsburgh to help police the 2009 summit. Nearly all were dressed in similar paramilitary garb. In one widely circulated video from the summit, several police officers dressed entirely in camouflage emerged from an unmarked car, apprehended a young backpack-toting protester, stuffed him into the car, then drove off. It evoked the sort of ''disappearance'' you might envision happening in a Latin American country headed by a junta, or one of the countries of the Soviet bloc. Matt Drudge linked to the video with a headline describing the officers in it as members of the military. They weren't, though it's certainly easy to understand how someone might make that mistake.
  Another video showed a police unit with a handcuffed protester. Officers surrounded the protester, propped him up, then posed with him while another officer snapped a trophy photo. (YouTube later removed the video, citing a terms of use violation.) It was later revealed that the police unit was from Chicago. They had taken vacation time to come to Pittsburgh to provide ''freelance security'' for the G-20 summit.
  As the summit went on, Twitter feeds and uploaded photos and videos claimed (and sometimes provided some evidence to prove) that police fired tear-gas canisters into dorm rooms, used sound cannons, and fired bean bags and rubber bullets. One man was arrested for posting the locations of riot police to his Twitter feed. The charges were later dropped.
  Emily Tanner, a grad student at the University of Pittsburgh who described herself as a ''capitalist'' who didn't agree with the general philosophy of the antiglobalization protesters, covered the summit, the protests, and the fallout on her blog. The most egregious police actions seemed to take place on the Friday evening before the summit, around the university, when police began ordering students who were in public spaces to disperse, despite the fact that they had broken no laws. Students who moved too slowly were arrested, as were students who were standing in front of the dormitories where they lived.
  A University of Pittsburgh spokesman later said that the tactic was to break up crowds that ''had the potential of disrupting normal activities, traffic flow, egress and the like. . . . Much of the arrests last night had to do with failure to disperse when ordered.'' Note that no one needed to have broken any actual laws to get arrested. The potential to break a law was more than enough. That standard was essentially a license for the police to arrest anyone, anywhere in the city, at any time, for any reason.
  Pennsylvania ACLU legal director Vic Walczak said the problem was that police didn't bother to attempt to manage the protests. They simply suppressed them. In the process, they rounded up not only innocent protesters but innocent students who had nothing to do with the protests at all. In all, 190 people were arrested. One of the arrestees was a reporter from the left-leaning organization Indy-Media. When they apprehended her, the police took her camera. When they returned her camera, it was broken, and the police had deleted her photos and videos of the protests and police reaction. The police presence ''seemed to focus almost exclusively on peaceful demonstrators,'' Walczak said. ''On [Friday] night they didn't even have the excuse of property damage going on or any illegal activity. It's really inexplicable.''
  Inexcusable perhaps, but not inexplicable. Since Seattle, this had become the template. At the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, police conducted peremptory raids on the homes of protesters before the convention had even started. Police broke into the homes of people known to be activist rabble-rousers before they had any evidence of any actual crime. Journalists who inquired about the legitimacy of the raids and arrests made during the convention were also arrested. In all, 672 people were put in handcuffs. The arrest of Democracy Now journalist Amy Goodman was captured on a widely viewed video. She was charged with ''conspiracy to riot.'' That charge against Goodman was later dropped. So were the charges against most of the others arrested. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported the following February that charges were dropped or dismissed for 442 of the 672 people arrested.
  There were similar problems at the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Police in Denver showed up for the protests decked out in full riot gear. One particularly striking photo from Denver ¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼¼showed a sea of cops in shiny black armor, batons in hand, surrounding a small, vastly outnumbered group of protesters. The most volatile night of the convention featured one incident in which Jefferson County, Colorado, deputies unknowingly clashed with and then pepper-sprayed undercover Denver cops posing as violent protesters. The city later paid out $200,000 to settle a lawsuit alleging that a Denver SWAT team was making indiscriminate arrests, rounding up protesters and bystanders alike.
  Perhaps the best insight into the mentality the police brought to the DNC protests could be found on the T-shirts the Denver police union had printed up for the event. The shirts showed a menacing cop holding a baton. The caption: DNC 2008: WE GET UP EARLY, TO BEAT THE CROWDS. Police were spotted wearing similar shirts at the 2012 NATO summit in Chicago. At the 1996 DNC convention in Chicago, cops were seen wearing shirts that read: WE KICKED YOUR FATHER'S ASS IN 1968 . . . WAIT 'TIL YOU SEE WHAT WE DO TO YOU!
  This default militaristic response to protest of overkill was then given an extended national stage during the Occupy protests of 2011. In the most infamous incident, now forever captured in countless Internet memes and mashups, Lt. John Pike of the University of California''Davis campus police casually hosed down a peaceful group of protesters with a pepper-spray canister. But that was far from the only incident. Police across the country met protesters in riot gear, once again anticipating'--and in too many instances seemingly even craving'--confrontation. In Oakland, the skull of Iraq War veteran Scott Olsen was fractured by a tear-gas canister that the police had fired into the crowd. In New York, NYPD officer Anthony Bologna pepper-sprayed a group of helpless protesters who had been penned in by police fencing.
  One thing the Occupy crackdowns did seem to do was focus renewed attention on police tactics and police militarization. Big-picture stories about the Pentagon buildup, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding for antiterror gear, and the proliferation of SWAT teams started streaming out of media outlets, giving the militarization issue the most coverage it had received since Kraska's studies came out in the late 1990s. Part of that was due to social media. The ubiquity of smart phones and the viral capacity of Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and blogs were already bringing unprecedented accountability to police misconduct and government oppression, be it a Baltimore cop screaming obscenities at a kid on a skateboard, a transit cop in Oakland shooting a man who lay handcuffed on his stomach, or government paramilitaries in Iran gunning down a young woman in cold blood during Arab Spring democracy protests. But the Occupiers, who tended to be young, white, and middle-to upper-middle-class, knew social media like few other demographics. They knew how to live-stream video directly to the Internet. They all had smart phones, so police couldn't suppress incriminating video by confiscating one or two or ten phones'--someone was bound to have video of not only the original incident but also of police trying to confiscate phones to cover it up.
  The political reaction to the Occupy crackdowns was interesting to watch. In the 1990s, it had been the right wing'--particularly the far right'--that was up in arms over police militarization. Recall the outrage on the right over Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the raid to seize Elin Gonzlez. The left had largely either remained silent or even defended the government's tactics in those cases. But the right-wing diatribes against jackbooted thugs and federal storm-troopers all died down once the Clinton administration left office, and they were virtually nonexistent after September 11, 2001. By the time cops started cracking heads at the Occupy protests, some conservatives were downright gleeful. The militarization of federal law enforcement certainly didn't stop, but the 9/11 attacks and a friendly administration seemed to quell the conservatives' concerns. So long as law enforcement was targeting hippie protesters, undocumented immigrants, suspected drug offenders, and alleged terrorist sympathizers, they were back to being heroes.
  Steven Greenhut, a conservative-leaning columnist for the Orange County Register and editor of the investigative journalism site CalWatchdog, was dismayed by the right's reaction. ''What's really disgusting is the natural instinct of so many conservatives to stick up for the police,'' Greenhut wrote. ''They don't like the Occupy protesters, so they willingly back brutality against them, without considering the possibility that conservatives at some point might be on the receiving end of this aggression.''
  Unfortunately, consistent voices like Greenhut's have been rare. Partisan reaction to aggressive police actions against opponents tends to fall somewhere between indifference and schadenfreude.
  After the December 2012 shooting massacre in Newtown, Connecticut put the issue of gun control back into the political discourse, some progressives again dredged up the right's criticism of the ATF in the early 1990s. In one lengthy segment, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow aired old footage from Waco and Ruby Ridge while making some tenuous connections between gun rights politicians and activists and Weaver, McVeigh, and Koresh. She referred to a ''conspiracy-driven corner of the gun world's paranoia about federal agents,'' without paying much heed to the fact that the ATF was inflicting the same sort of abuse on suspected gun offenders that Maddow herself has decried when used against suspected undocumented immigrants or Occupy protesters. More tellingly, Maddow added that there's nothing wrong with wanting to give more power to the ATF based only on the politics of the people opposed to doing so. ''Sometimes the character of the opposition defines why something ought to be the most politically viable thing in the world,'' she said.
  But even before Newtown, progressives have been advocating for the use of more government force against political factions they find unsavory. In 2009 the Department of Homeland Security issued a controversial report on what the author'--DHS analyst Daryl Johnson'--called a resurgence of right-wing extremism and the threat it posed to domestic security. The report was widely criticized on the right and was eventually criticized and revoked by DHS secretary Janet Napolitano. But after a spate of mass killings in the following years by assailants with political views that in some cases could loosely be characterized as right-wing, Johnson became something of a progressive hero. Most of the incidents involved clearly mentally ill attackers whose politics were all over the place. Even Johnson acknowledged that the incident most in line with his thesis'--the massacre at a Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, by a white supremacist named Wade Michael Page'--was the work of a ''lone wolf'' attacker and likely would not have been prevented by the recommendations in his report.
  Still, he was celebrated on the left. The progressive advocacy group Media Matters declared him ''vindicated.'' Similar sentiment popped up on progressive outlets like ThinkProgress, Salon, Rachel Maddow's MSNBC blog, and Democracy Now.
  In truth, attacks by groups on the fringes of the right wing have actually dropped in recent years, despite some claims that they've increased in response to the election of a black president. Attacks from groups on the fringes of the left wing are in decline too, as are alleged attempted terrorist attacks by fringe Muslim groups.
  In a 2012 interview with the Idaho Spokesman Review, Johnson showed why it may not have been such a great idea for progressives to embrace him simply because he wanted to shut down opinions they found distasteful. Johnson was interviewed for an article on the twentieth anniversary of the Ruby Ridge fiasco, and he took one step further Rachel Maddow's idea of supporting government force simply because you don't like the factions opposing it. Johnson in fact suggested that merely having concerns about police militarization is a worry only borne by extremists. In fact, he appeared to have suggested that even recognizing that militarization is happening is an indication of fringe extremism.
  ''For American extremists, the siege at Ruby Ridge symbolizes the 'militarized police state,''' said Johnson. The US government, through its Department of Homeland Security in particular, he said, ''has unintentionally fostered, and even solidified, Orwellian conspiracies concerning an overzealous, oppressive federal government and its perceived willingness to kill to ensure citizen compliance. . . . In the minds of modern-day extremists, [Homeland Security] has enhanced the lethal capability of many underfunded, small-town police forces through its grant programs.'' Using federal grants, state and local law enforcement agencies have been able to buy expensive equipment and training that are ''commonly associated with the military,'' he said, adding that ''extremists view such a security buildup as a continuation of the Ruby Ridge legacy.'' That legacy is a continuing drumbeat for extremists and white supremacists who recruit with the message of ''big government versus the little guy'' and ''the government set me up.'' These extremist ideas continue as messages and even recruiting themes among various radical groups in the United States, Johnson said.
  I attempted to contact Johnson to ask if he'd like to clarify his comments. He didn't return my calls. As they stand, these quotes are striking, particularly from someone who once worked for the Department of Homeland Security and now runs a consulting firm that works with law enforcement agencies. They certainly appear to dismiss police militarization'--a phenomenon documented by a wide range of media outlets and criticized by interests all across the political spectrum'--as merely a fantasy cooked up by extremists to boost their recruiting. Incidentally, the publications and advocacy groups who have recently expressed concerns about police militarization include ThinkProgress, Wired, Salon, MSNBC, and Democracy Now'-- all of them also ran articles praising Johnson.
  So long as partisans are only willing to speak out against aggressive, militarized police tactics when they're used against their own and are dismissive or even supportive of such tactics when used against those whose politics they dislike, it seems unlikely that the country will achieve enough of a political consensus to begin to slow down the trend.
  Excerpted from ''Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces'' by Radley Balko. Reprinted with permission from PublicAffairs Books.
VIDEO-Fox News Watch: Why Did Greenwald Expose NSA Leak Story?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 05:58
  Fox News Watch: Why Did Greenwald Expose NSA Leak Story? 7 Jul 2013, 10:30 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 3:39 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 2:52 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 1:52 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 12:24 PM PDT 7 Jul 2013, 9:45 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 9:30 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 9:00 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 4:59 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 1:17 PM PDT 7 Jul 2013, 10:09 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 9:41 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 8:48 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 8:47 PM PDT7 Jul 2013, 8:33 PM PDT
Margin Calls Coming On US Too-Big-To-Fail Banks
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 05:53
  TradingFloor.comby Steen Jakobsen
  This week's biggest news is not the Nonfarm Payrolls, or the European Central Bank or even Portugal's government falling. No '' this week's big deal is the openness with which the Federal Reserve is preparing a major margin call on the too-big-to-fail banks in the US.
  This has been a long time coming since the introduction of the Dodd-Frank law back in 2010 but it is a game changer. Remember all macro paradigm shifts come from policy impulses, often mistakes.
  Fed approves step one in a three step plan
  Under the final rule, minimum requirements will increase for both the quantity and quality of capital held by banking organisations. Consistent with the international Basel framework, the rule includes a new minimum ratio of common equity tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of 4.5 percent and a common equity tier 1 capital conservation buffer of 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets that will apply to all supervised financial institutions. The rule also raises the minimum ratio of tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets from four percent to six percent and includes a minimum leverage ratio of four percent for all banking organisations. In addition, for the largest, most internationally-active banking organisations, the final rule includes a new minimum supplementary leverage ratio that takes into account off-balance sheet exposures. (See the press release here)
  I know you are thinking: Wow, this is the most interesting thing I have seen in years but alas it is '' because it is in fact a major margin call on the US holding banks.
  Note how this adoption is only the first set of a series of new rules. Let me introduce you to: Daniel Tarullo, The Federal Reserve Governor in charge of regulation after the implementation of the Dodd-Frank law in 2010. (As a consequence of Dodd-Frank, the Fed got a permanent regulatory governor.)
  I had nothing else to do so I read his latest speeches which are surprisingly clear (considering that he's a policy guy).
  Governor Daniel K. Tarullo At the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C.
  May 3, 2013 Evaluating Progress in Regulatory Reforms to Promote Financial Stability
  The speech considers the ''additional charges'' which are coming and today's Basel III was only item number one:
  First, the basic prudential framework for banking organisations is being considerably strengthened, both internationally and domestically. Central to this effort are the Basel III changes to capital standards, which create a new requirement for a minimum common equity capital ratio. This new standard requires substantial increases in both the quality and quantity of the loss-absorbing capital that allows a firm to remain a viable financial intermediary. Basel III also established for the first time an international minimum leverage ratio which, unlike the traditional US leverage requirement, takes account of off-balance-sheet items.
  Second, a series of reforms have been targeted at the larger financial firms that are more likely to be of systemic importance. When fully implemented, these measures will have formed a distinct regulatory and supervisory structure on top of generally applicable prudential regulations and supervisory requirements. The governing principle for this new set of rules is that larger institutions should be subject to more exacting regulatory and supervisory requirements, which should become progressively stricter as the systemic importance of a firm increases.
  This principle has been codified in Section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires special regulations applicable with increasing stringency to large banking organizations. Under this authority, the Federal Reserve will impose capital surcharges on the eight large US banking organizations identified in the Basel Committee agreement for additional capital requirements on banking organisations of global systemic importance. The size of surcharge will vary depending on the relative systemic importance of the bank. Other rules to be applied under Section 165'--including counterparty credit risk limits, stress testing, and the quantitative short-term liquidity requirements included in the internationally-negotiated Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR)'--will apply only to large institutions, in some cases with stricter standards for firms of greatest systemic importance.
  An important, related reform in Dodd-Frank was the creation of orderly liquidation authority, under which the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation can impose losses on a failed systemic institution's shareholders and creditors and replace its management, while avoiding runs and preserving the operations of the sound, functioning parts of the firm. This authority gives the government a real alternative to the Hobson's choice of bailout or disorderly bankruptcy that authorities faced in 2008. Similar resolution mechanisms are under development in other countries, and international consultations are underway to plan for cooperative efforts to resolve multinational financial firms.
  A third set of reforms has been aimed at strengthening financial markets generally, without regard to the status of relevant market actors as regulated or systemically important. The greatest focus, as mandated under Titles VII and VIII of Dodd-Frank, has been on making derivatives markets safer through requiring central clearing for derivatives that can be standardised and creating margin requirements for derivatives that continue to be written and traded outside of central clearing facilities. The relevant US agencies are working with their international counterparts to produce an international arrangement that will harmonise these requirements so as to promote both global financial stability and competitive parity. In addition, eight financial market utilities engaged in important payment, clearing, and settlement activities have been designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council as systemically important and, thus, will now be subject to enhanced supervision.
  A margin call is coming'...
  To illustrate the case, here's several quotes and links from today's media:
  Crenews.com: Federal regulators on Tuesday are scheduled to unveil and vote on the final provisions they have set for the US's implementation of international banking standards that could result in banks pulling back on their commercial real estate activities, including lending, mortgage servicing and CMBS investments. Industry groups are lobbying to lessen the potential impact of the rules.
  See also USA Today: Most banks are already in compliance with the rule, according to the Fed, though it estimates about 100 banks will need to raise roughly USD 4.5 billion in capital by 2019.The new rules simplify the risk calculations for mortgages, a process that community lenders had argued was too complex and would limit their ability to provide home loans. Community and regional banks comprise more than 90% percent of US lenders, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp (FDIC). The Fed unanimously approved the 792-page set of standards, which were mandated by the 2010 financial overhaul law. The FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are also expected to approve the new standards
  Reuters: However, the Fed warned it was drafting four more rules that would go beyond what the Basel accord called for, including one on leverage and another on a capital surcharge. (See full version of this story here.)
  Conclusion
  Why is this important? Because part of the Fed's new remit since Dodd-Frank makes it responsible for bubbles in banking '-- it is even more interesting because clearly, to me at least, this is a major part of why Bernanke and Dudley at the FOMC are willing to ignore the lower inflation. This low inflation has both monetarist and Keynesians up in arms, and as it is often the case, the REAL reason for major macro paradigm shifts comes from policy mistakes in this case pro-cyclical regulation.
  Prepare yourself and please do read the above. If not we are doomed to focus on QE-petering while Fed gives the whole banking industry a major margin call.
  Via TradingFloor.com
10 Killed in Alaska Plane Crash
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Top Information Post
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 05:51
  An air taxi crashed Sunday at a small Alaska airport, killing all 10 people on board and leaving the aircraft fully engulfed in flames before firefighters could get to it, authorities said.
  The de Havilland DHC3 Otter air taxi crashed just after 11 a.m. at the airport in Soldotna, a community about 75 miles southwest of Anchorage and located on the Kenai Peninsula.
  ''We do have 10 fatalities, unfortunately, nine passengers, one pilot,'' National Transportation Safety Board investigator Clint Johnson told The Associated Press.
  The Federal Aviation Administration said the Otter was operated by Rediske Air, based out of another Kenai Peninsula community, Nikiski.
  Will Satathite, who was working Sunday at Rediske Air's Nikiski office, confirmed to the Peninsula Clarion newspaper that the aircraft was flown by Nikiski pilot and company owner Willy Rediske with nine passengers onboard.
  A man who didn't identify himself at the Rediske office declined comment later Sunday to the AP, saying the crash was under investigation.
  Alaska State Troopers spokeswoman Meagan Peters said the aircraft erupted in flames and the fire initially kept firefighters from reaching the wreckage. The victims have not been identified.
  The Soldotna Police Department said Sunday evening that the remains of all 10 people have been recovered and sent to the State Medical Examiner's Office in Anchorage for autopsies and positive identifications.
  Police said in a release through the Alaska State Troopers that weather at the time of the crash was reported to be cloudy with a light wind.
  Johnson said initial reports have the plane crashing after departure, but that will have to be confirmed by investigators.
  The NTSB is sending an investigative team from Washington, D.C., and they are scheduled to arrive Monday afternoon. Also taking part will be Alaska-based investigator Brice Banning, who was called back from the Asiana crash in San Francisco Sunday.
  For many Alaskans, flying across the state is common because of the limited road system, exposing residents to a litany of hazards including treacherous mountain passes and volatile weather. It's possible to drive from Anchorage to Soldotna, but it's about a four-hour trip as the highway hugs Turnagain Arm and then cuts through a mountain passage.
  Alaska has already seen a several plane crashes this year, including a June 28 crash that killed a pilot and two passengers on a commercial tour in the Alaska Range. The Soldotna crash comes a day after two teenagers were killed when the Asiana flight crashed at San Francisco's airport.
  The municipal airport is located about a mile from Soldotna's commercial business area and is adjacent to the Kenai River, according to the city's website.
  The runway is 5,000 foot long and paved
  Mirror
  Leave CommentsComments
Executive Order -- Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions | The White House
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 05:36
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 06, 2012
  EXECUTIVE ORDER
  - - - - - - -
  ASSIGNMENT OF NATIONAL SECURITY ANDEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS
  By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
  Section1. Policy. The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions. Survivable, resilient, enduring, and effective communications, both domestic and international, are essential to enable the executive branch to communicate within itself and with: the legislative and judicial branches; State, local, territorial, and tribal governments; private sector entities; and the public, allies, and other nations. Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies, and improve national resilience. The views of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and the public must inform the development of national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) communications policies, programs, and capabilities.
  Sec. 2. Executive Office Responsibilities.
  Sec. 2.1. Policy coordination, guidance, dispute resolution, and periodic in-progress reviews for the functions described and assigned herein shall be provided through the interagency process established in Presidential Policy Directive-1 of February 13, 2009 (Organization of the National Security Council System) (PPD-1).
  Sec. 2.2. The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) shall: (a) issue an annual memorandum to the NS/EP Communications Executive Committee (established in section 3 of this order) highlighting national priorities for Executive Committee analyses, studies, research, and development regarding NS/EP communications;
  (b) advise the President on the prioritization of radio spectrum and wired communications that support NS/EP functions; and
  (c) have access to all appropriate information related to the test, exercise, evaluation, and readiness of the capabilities of all existing and planned NS/EP communications systems, networks, and facilities to meet all executive branch NS/EP requirements.
  Sec. 2.3. The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP shall make recommendations to the President, informed by the interagency policy process established in PPD-1, with respect to the exercise of authorities assigned to the President under section 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 606). The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP shall also jointly monitor the exercise of these authorities, in the event of any delegation, through the process established in PPD-1 or as the President otherwise may direct.
  Sec. 3. The NS/EP Communications Executive Committee.
  Sec. 3.1. There is established an NS/EP Communications Executive Committee (Executive Committee) to serve as a forum to address NS/EP communications matters.
  Sec. 3.2. The Executive Committee shall be composed of Assistant Secretary-level or equivalent representatives designated by the heads of the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, Commerce, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), the General Services Administration, and the Federal Communications Commission, as well as such additional agencies as the Executive Committee may designate. The designees of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall serve as Co-Chairs of the Executive Committee.
  Sec. 3.3. The responsibilities of the Executive Committee shall be to: (a) advise and make policy recommendations to the President, through the PPD-1 process, on enhancing the survivability, resilience, and future architecture of NS/EP communications, including what should constitute NS/EP communications requirements;
  (b) develop a long-term strategic vision for NS/EP communications and propose funding requirements and plans to the President and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), through the PPD-1 process, for NS/EP communications initiatives that benefit multiple agencies or other Federal entities;
  (c) coordinate the planning for, and provision of, NS/EP communications for the Federal Government under all hazards;
  (d) promote the incorporation of the optimal combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications under all circumstances;
  (e) recommend to the President, through the PPD-1 process, the regimes to test, exercise, and evaluate the capabilities of existing and planned communications systems, networks, or facilities to meet all executive branch NS/EP communications requirements, including any recommended remedial actions;
  (f) provide quarterly updates to the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP, through the Co-Chairs, on the status of Executive Committee activities and develop an annual NS/EP communications strategic agenda utilizing the PPD-1 process;
  (g) enable industry input with respect to the responsibilities established in this section; and
  (h) develop, approve, and maintain a charter for the Executive Committee.
  Sec. 4. Executive Committee Joint Program Office.
  Sec. 4.1. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish an Executive Committee Joint Program Office (JPO) to provide full-time, expert, and administrative support for the Executive Committee's performance of its responsibilities under section 3.3 of this order. Staff of the JPO shall include detailees, as needed and appropriate, from agencies represented on the Executive Committee. The Department of Homeland Security shall provide resources to support the JPO. The JPO shall be responsive to the guidance of the Executive Committee.
  Sec. 4.2. The responsibilities of the JPO shall include: coordination of programs that support NS/EP missions, priorities, goals, and policy; and, when directed by the Executive Committee, the convening of governmental and nongovernmental groups (consistent with the Federal Advisory Committees Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.)), coordination of activities, and development of policies for senior official review and approval.
  Sec. 5. Specific Department and Agency Responsibilities.
  Sec. 5.1. The Secretary of Defense shall: (a) oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP communications that are directly responsive to the national security needs of the President, Vice President, and senior national leadership, including: communications with or among the President, Vice President, White House staff, heads of state and government, and Nuclear Command and Control leadership; Continuity of Government communications; and communications among the executive, judicial, and legislative branches to support Enduring Constitutional Government;
  (b) incorporate, integrate, and ensure interoperability and the optimal combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications defined in section 5.1(a) of this order under all circumstances, including conditions of crisis or emergency;
  (c) provide to the Executive Committee the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications; and
  (d) provide, operate, and maintain communication services and facilities adequate to execute responsibilities consistent with Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981, as amended.
  Sec. 5.2. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall: (a) oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP communications, including: communications that support Continuity of Government; Federal, State, local, territorial, and tribal emergency preparedness and response communications; non-military executive branch communications systems; critical infrastructure protection networks; and non-military communications networks, particularly with respect to prioritization and restoration;
  (b) incorporate, integrate, and ensure interoperability and the necessary combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications defined in section 5.2(a) of this order under all circumstances, including conditions of crisis or emergency;
  (c) provide to the Executive Committee the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications;
  (d) receive, integrate, and disseminate NS/EP communications information to the Federal Government and State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, as appropriate, to establish situational awareness, priority setting recommendations, and a common operating picture for NS/EP communications information;
  (e) satisfy priority communications requirements through the use of commercial, Government, and privately owned communications resources, when appropriate;
  (f) maintain a joint industry-Government center that is capable of assisting in the initiation, coordination, restoration, and reconstitution of NS/EP communications services or facilities under all conditions of emerging threats, crisis, or emergency;
  (g) serve as the Federal lead for the prioritized restoration of communications infrastructure and coordinate the prioritization and restoration of communications, including resolution of any conflicts in or among priorities, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense when activities referenced in section 5.1(a) of this order are impacted, consistent with the National Response Framework. If conflicts in or among priorities cannot be resolved between the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, they shall be referred for resolution in accordance with section 2.1 of this order; and
  (h) within 60 days of the date of this order, in consultation with the Executive Committee where appropriate, develop and submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, a detailed plan that describes the Department of Homeland
  Security's organization and management structure for its NS/EP communications functions, including the Government Emergency Telecommunications Service, Wireless Priority Service, Telecommunications Service Priority program, Next Generation Network Priority program, the Executive Committee JPO, and relevant supporting entities.
  Sec. 5.3. The Secretary of Commerce shall: (a) provide advice and guidance to the Executive Committee on the use of technical standards and metrics to support execution of NS/EP communications;
  (b) identify for the Executive Committee requirements for additional technical standards and metrics to enhance NS/EP communications;
  (c) engage with relevant standards development organizations to develop appropriate technical standards and metrics to enhance NS/EP communications;
  (d) develop plans and procedures concerning radio spectrum allocations, assignments, and priorities for use by agencies and executive offices;
  (e) develop, maintain, and publish policies, plans, and procedures for the management and use of radio frequency assignments, including the authority to amend, modify, or revoke such assignments, in those parts of the electromagnetic spectrum assigned to the Federal Government; and
  (f) administer a system of radio spectrum priorities for those spectrum-dependent telecommunications resources belonging to and operated by the Federal Government and certify or approve such radio spectrum priorities, including the resolution of conflicts in or among such radio spectrum priorities during a crisis or emergency.
  Sec. 5.4. The Administrator of General Services shall provide and maintain a common Federal acquisition approach that allows for the efficient centralized purchasing of equipment and services that meet NS/EP communications requirements. Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect the procurement authorities granted by law to an agency or the head thereof.
  Sec. 5.5. With respect to the Intelligence Community, the DNI, after consultation with the heads of affected agencies, may issue such policy directives and guidance as the DNI deems necessary to implement this order. Procedures or other guidance issued by the heads of elements of the Intelligence Community shall be in accordance with such policy directives or guidelines issued by the DNI.
  Sec. 5.6. The Federal Communications Commission performs such functions as are required by law, including: (a) with respect to all entities licensed or regulated by the Federal Communications Commission: the extension, discontinuance, or reduction of common carrier facilities or services; the control of common carrier rates, charges, practices, and classifications; the construction, authorization, activation, deactivation, or closing of radio stations, services, and facilities; the assignment of radio frequencies to Federal Communications Commission licensees; the investigation of violations of pertinent law; and the assessment of communications service provider emergency needs and resources; and
  (b) supporting the continuous operation and restoration of critical communications systems and services by assisting the Secretary of Homeland Security with infrastructure damage assessment and restoration, and by providing the Secretary of Homeland Security with information collected by the Federal Communications Commission on communications infrastructure, service outages, and restoration, as appropriate.
  Sec. 6. General Agency Responsibilities. All agencies, to the extent consistent with law, shall: (a) determine the scope of their NS/EP communications requirements, and provide information regarding such requirements to the Executive Committee;
  (b) prepare policies, plans, and procedures concerning communications facilities, services, or equipment under their management or operational control to maximize their capability to respond to the NS/EP needs of the Federal Government;
  (c) propose initiatives, where possible, that may benefit multiple agencies or other Federal entities;
  (d) administer programs that support broad NS/EP communications goals and policies;
  (e) submit reports annually, or as otherwise requested, to the Executive Committee, regarding agency NS/EP communications activities;
  (f) devise internal acquisition strategies in support of the centralized acquisition approach provided by the General Services Administration pursuant to section 5.4 of this order; and
  (g) provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with timely reporting on NS/EP communications status to inform the common operating picture required under 6 U.S.C. 321(d).
  Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) For the purposes of this order, the word "agency" shall have the meaning set forth in section 6.1(b) of Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009.
  (b) Executive Order 12472 of April 3, 1984, as amended, is hereby revoked.
  (c) Executive Order 12382 of September 13, 1982, as amended, is further amended by striking the following language from section 2(e): "in his capacity as Executive Agent for the National Communications System".
  (d) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
  (i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof; or
  (ii) the functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
  (e) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
  (f) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
  BARACK OBAMA
VIDEO-Teen blasted out of Rod Laver after 'Timebomb' tweet | P!ink
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 08 Jul 2013 02:46
  JESSICA WRIGHTJuly 08, 2013
  Hold on a second ... Teen's troublesome tweet was ill thought-out, but not threatening, his father says. Photo: Michael Clayton-Jones
  A teenage boy is facing criminal charges after he set off a bomb scare by tweeting some of the lyrics of a Pink song at the US pop songstress's concert on Sunday night at Rod Laver Arena.
  The 16-year-old was thrown out of the concert and subsequently arrested by police after he tweeted a reference to Pink's song "Timebomb", off her chart-topping new album, and linked the tweet to the Rod Laver Arena official twitter account.
  The tweet read:
  @Pink I'm ready with my Bomb. Time to blow up #RodLaverArena. Bitch.
  The boy's father, David King, told radio station 3AW radio on Monday that security had seriously overreacted to what was an innocent - if ill thought-out - message of teenage enthusiasm.
  ''When he wrote that, he didn't have time to put 'Timebomb', you know,'' he said.
  Mr King - who lives in Warrnambool and had to make the three-hour drive to Melbourne to collect his son - said police were prepared to be more lenient when they realised the boy was not, in fact, a terrorist.
  But at the arena's urging, the boy was arrested and charged with being a public nuisance.
  ''The policeman said to me, 'if it was up to me, I would have booted him in the backside and said go home'.''
  ''But they demanded (he) be arrested.''
  It is understood security at the concert were able to locate the boy in the 12,000-strong crowd by using his Twitter profile photo.
Wikileaks Twiiter Attack on Glenn Greenwald
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: EconomicPolicyJournal.com
  Sun, 07 Jul 2013 13:25
  A crack in the relationship between the two Snowden supporters?@GGreenwald "They have never flinched in reporting these stories," Guardian deserves much credit, but this Glenn, is simply not true.'-- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 7, 2013
  @GGreenwald Guardian didn't walk away, in the end, but it flinched and redacted repeatedly and continues to withhold vital information.'-- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 7, 2013